DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
Claims 1-10 and 15-24 are pending in this Office Action.
Claims 1-10 and 15-20 are amended.
Claims 11-14 are cancelled.
Claims 21-24 are new.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 10/27/2025 has been entered.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 11-14 are withdrawn because claims 11-14 have been cancelled.
The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of claim 20 is withdrawn based on Applicant’s amendments.
The claim objections to claim 20 for minor informalities is withdrawn based on Applicant’s amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 15, and 20 have been fully considered but, are not persuasive. The reasons set forth below.
Applicant argues the applied references do not disclose or render obvious the amended claims 1, 15, and 20. Particularly, Applicant argues that Sekar does not disclose or suggest at least "determining a first video material in a plurality of material dimensions that matches an attribute characteristic of the at least one content segment,".
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Sekar teaches “Converting Books to Course Videos or Other Animations” including “Based on the subject of content being described in that section of the book, for example, the most suitable jokes, riddles, and stories may be recommended from the database for adding to the narration text of the animation video. This may be done by a comparison of keywords in that section of the book with keywords in various riddles, jokes, and stories, for example.” (col. 26, lines 31 and 44-50, Fig. 72). In other words a first video material (text used for generating a video) in a plurality of material dimensions (jokes, riddles, and stories) are determined that matches an attribute characteristic of the at least one content segment (the keywords or subject of content being described in that section of the book).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 6, 15-16, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sekar et al. (US 11,790,697) in view of Castaneda et al. (US 2019/0155949).
Regarding claims 1, 15, and 20, Sekar teaches: A video authoring method, a computer device, and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium [(abstract)], comprising:
a reading content of a first book [written text, for example, in a book 7200 (col. 26, lines 31-38, Fig. 72)]
at least one content segment in the first book [a section of the book (col. 26, lines 44-50)],
determining a first video material in a plurality of material dimensions that matches an attribute characteristic of the at least one content segment [determining material, such as text used in generating a video in dimensions, such as jokes, riddles, and stories by comparing keywords in that section of the book with keywords in various riddles, jokes, and stories to select the most suitable or best matching for the video (col. 26, lines 31-50, Fig. 72-73). Determining images or videos suitable for use by comparing keywords to narration input (col. 20, lines 17-35, Fig. 51C). Determining title and description based on the narration input (col. 20, lines 36-57, Fig. 51D)]
generating an authored video associated with the first book based on the first video material and the at least one content segment [Creating a video out of the material in book form. The most suitable jokes, riddles, and stories may be added to the narration text of the animation video. Once the narration text 7204 is prepared and the slides 7206 are obtained, the animation video may be generated using methods already described (col. 26, lines 31-60, Fig. 20 and 72). Generating a video using the determining images, title, and description (col. 20, lines 17-57, Fig. 1 and 51B-51D)].
Sekar does not explicitly disclose: displaying the reading content of the first book; and the determining the first video material is in response to a selection operation for the least one content segment in the first book.
Castaneda teaches: displaying the reading content of the first book [displaying text 140 for the ebook (par. 42, Fig. 1)] and
the determining the first video material is in response to a selection operation for the least one content segment in the first book [receive a user selection of the portion of the text 250 using a user input technique such as a touch screen or keyboard. Selection of the portion 250 may be received and used to form the basis of a query to search for content related to the ebook, in particular the selected portion of the ebook (par. 3, 45, and 47, Fig. 2 and 4). The content related to the ebook may be video material, such as a movie adaptation, book reviews from friends, video clips about the text, television series, cartoons, animated movies, songs, music videos (par. 2 and 6, Fig. 5 and 6)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sekar and Castaneda before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video authoring method of Sekar by incorporating displaying the reading content of the first book and determining the first video material in response to a selection of the content segment as disclosed by Castaneda. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow the user to easily select from the book, the particular portion of text that they are interested in finding relevant content for (Castaneda – par. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Sekar and Castaneda to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 2, 16, and 21, Sekar and Castaneda teach the video authoring method of claim 1; Sekar and Castaneda further teach: determining the first video material in the plurality of material dimensions that matches the attribute characteristic of the at least one content segment in response to the selection operation for the at least one content segment in the first book comprises: in response to the selection operation for the at least one content segment in the first book, displaying, for each of the material dimensions, a plurality of second video materials matching the attribute characteristic of the at least one content segment; determining the first video material selected by a user from each of the second video materials in the plurality of material dimensions [Sekar - recommending the top images suitable for use based on keyword relevance and recommending title and description based on the narration input. Following the recommendations, the user selecting one of the recommendations (col. 20, lines 17-57, Fig. 51C and 51D). Recommending the most suitable jokes, riddles, and stories based on keyword comparison (col. 26, lines 31-50, Fig. 72). Castaneda - receive a user selection of the portion of the text 250. Selection of the portion 250 may be received and used to form the basis of a query to search for content related to the ebook, in particular the selected portion of the ebook and the related content may be displayed for a user to select (par. 3, 45, 47, and 51, Fig. 2 and 4-5)].
Regarding claim 6, Sekar and Castaneda teach the video authoring method of claim 1; Sekar further teaches: generating the authored video associated with the first book based on the first video material and the at least one content segment which is selected comprises: adding the content segment to a background picture material in the first video material to obtain a video frame picture; generating the authored video based on at least one selected from the group consisting of a background music material, a transition special effects material, and a dubbing material corresponding to the content segment in the first video material, and the video frame picture [adding the text to a slide incorporated into the background of the video (col. 26, lines 31-60 and Fig. 2B-2D, 51C, and 72)].
Claims 3, 17, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sekar et al. (US 11,790,697) in view of Castaneda et al. (US 2019/0155949) and further in view of Kim (US 2021/0390317).
Regarding claims 3, 17, and 22, Sekar and Castaneda teach the video authoring method of claim 1; Castaneda further teaches: determining the first video material in the plurality of material dimensions that matches the attribute characteristic of the at least one content segment in response to the selection operation for the at least one content segment in the first book comprises: displaying a plurality of published videos that matches the attribute characteristic of the at least one content segment in response to the selection operation for the at least one content segment in the first book; determining a reference video selected by a user from the plurality of published videos [displaying multiple search results of related content that may be published videos, such as different published versions of Beauty and the Beast (par. 51, Fig. 5). Receiving of a user selection of the search results (par. 55)] and
Sekar and Castaneda do not explicitly disclose: extracting the first video material of the reference video at the plurality of material dimensions.
Kim teaches: extracting the first video material of the reference video at the plurality of material dimensions [extracting, from the video, a plurality of clips corresponding to the plurality of contexts, respectively, that have been set for the video (par. 31 and 36, Fig. 8)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sekar, Castaneda, and Kim before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video authoring method of Sekar and Castaneda by incorporating extracting the first video material of the reference video at the plurality of material dimensions as disclosed by Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to merge the clips to generate a video (Kim – abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Sekar and Castaneda with Kim to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claims 4-5, 7-9, 18-19, and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sekar et al. (US 11,790,697) in view of Castaneda et al. (US 2019/0155949) and further in view of Bharadwaj (US 2023/0205781).
Regarding claims 4, 18, and 23, Sekar and Castaneda teach the video authoring method of claim 1; Sekar and Castaneda do not explicitly disclose: after generating the authored video associated with the first book, the method further comprises: integrating the authored video into a video collection corresponding to the first book; wherein the video collection comprises a plurality of authored videos associated with the first book, and the plurality of authored videos is associated with different content segments of the first book.
Bharadwaj teaches: after generating the authored video associated with the first book, the method further comprises: integrating the authored video into a video collection corresponding to the first book; wherein the video collection comprises a plurality of authored videos associated with the first book, and the plurality of authored videos is associated with different content segments of the first book [gathering a set of public or private videos associated with an eBook or textbook (par. 163-170)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sekar, Castaneda, and Bharadwaj before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video authoring method of Sekar and Castaneda by incorporating integrating the authored video into a video collection corresponding to the first book as disclosed by Bharadwaj. The motivation for doing so would have been to add audiovisual content, like videos, in context integrated with previously unlinked sources like books to form an integrated learning content (Bharadwaj – 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Sekar and Castaneda with Bharadwaj to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 5, 19, and 24, Sekar, Castaneda, and Bharadwaj teach the video authoring method of claim 4; Bharadwaj further teaches: integrating the authored video into the video collection corresponding to the first book comprises: determining a first video topic matching the authored video from video topics respectively corresponding to a plurality of video collections of the first book; integrating the authored video into the video collection corresponding to the first video topic [a tutor can integrate the video into a set of videos associated with the textbook (par. 164). the tutor generates specific sets of information to go with the textbook and build learning opportunities for the student and the context may be a chapter or sub-chapter in the book (par. 136 and 170)].
Regarding claim 7, Sekar and Castaneda teach the video authoring method of claim 1; Castaneda further teaches: the method further comprises: displaying a preview identification of an authored video at a preset location in the first book [A sentence may be visually highlighted to show that there is related supplemental content. In another example, a button or selectable indicator may be included in the ebook display that may be selected to obtain supplemental content (par. 10-11, Fig. 2 and 4)].
Sekar and Castaneda do not explicitly disclose: displaying a preview identification of the authored video after generating the authored video associated with the first book.
Bharadwaj teaches: displaying a preview identification of the authored video after generating the authored video associated with the first book [displaying a preview id of the video, such as “Voltage divider video 1”, in a location in the book (par. 146-147, Fig. 8)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sekar, Castaneda, and Bharadwaj before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video authoring method of Sekar and Castaneda by incorporating displaying the preview identification of the authored video after generating the authored video associated with the first book as disclosed by Bharadwaj. The motivation for doing so would have been to add audiovisual content, like videos, in context integrated with previously unlinked sources like books to form an integrated learning content (Bharadwaj – 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Sekar and Castaneda with Bharadwaj to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 8, Sekar and Castaneda teach the video authoring method of claim 1; Castaneda further teaches: the method further comprises: displaying a preview identification of an authored video in a recommended video display region [displaying listings in a display region as a recommendation (par. 72, Fig. 10)].
Sekar and Castaneda do not explicitly disclose: displaying a preview identification after generating the authored video associated with the first book, where the recommended video display region is associated with the first book.
Bharadwaj teaches: displaying a preview identification after generating the authored video associated with the first book, where the recommended video display region is associated with the first book [displaying a preview id of the video, such as “Voltage divider video 1”, in a region in the book as a recommendation (par. 146-147, Fig. 8)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sekar, Castaneda, and Bharadwaj before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video authoring method of Sekar and Castaneda by incorporating displaying a preview identification after generating the authored video associated with the first book as disclosed by Bharadwaj. The motivation for doing so would have been to add audiovisual content, like videos, in context integrated with previously unlinked sources like books to form an integrated learning content (Bharadwaj – 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Sekar and Castaneda with Bharadwaj to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 9, Sekar and Castaneda teach the video authoring method of claim 1; Sekar and Castaneda further teach: after generating the authored video associated with the first book, the method further comprises: displaying a preview identification of the authored video in a discussion group associated with the first book.
Bharadwaj teaches: after generating the authored video associated with the first book, the method further comprises: displaying a preview identification of the authored video in a discussion group associated with the first book [the teachers may also be interacting with the student in the context of the eBooks. The use of social media in learning allows the students to interact in groups which also introduce a particular student to the material read. Displaying a preview id of the video, such as “Voltage divider video 1” (par. 146-147, 164, and 169-170, Fig. 8)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sekar, Castaneda, and Bharadwaj before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video authoring method of Sekar and Castaneda by incorporating after generating the authored video associated with the first book, displaying a preview identification of the authored video in a discussion group associated with the first book as disclosed by Bharadwaj. The motivation for doing so would have been to add audiovisual content, like videos, in context integrated with previously unlinked sources like books to form an integrated learning content (Bharadwaj – 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Sekar and Castaneda with Bharadwaj to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claims 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sekar et al. (US 11,790,697) in view of Castaneda et al. (US 2019/0155949) and further in view of Walker et al. (US 2022/0076706).
Regarding claim 10, Sekar and Castaneda teach the video authoring method of claim 1; Sekar and Castaneda do not explicitly disclose: after generating the authored video associated with the first book, the method further comprises: displaying a video editing page in response to an editing triggering operation for the authored video, the video editing page comprising a plurality of editing tools therein; acquiring a first video after editing the authored video based on the editing tool.
Walker teaches: after generating the authored video associated with the first book, the method further comprises: displaying a video editing page in response to an editing triggering operation for the authored video, the video editing page comprising a plurality of editing tools therein; acquiring a first authored video after editing the authored video based on the editing tool [Video editing tool 130 (e.g., the editor interface) includes various editing tools and functions, such as for stylistic refinements that transform content (e.g., wind noise reduction), duration-impacting refinements that hide content (e.g., “hiding” regions of footage, removing swear words, make a time lapse, shorten to n seconds), and/or contextual functions. The resulting composite video can be played back, saved, exported, or otherwise (par. 11, 118, and 135-140, Fig. 1B and 14)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sekar, Castaneda, and Walker before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video authoring method of Sekar and Castaneda by incorporating after generating the authored video associated with the first book, displaying a video editing page comprising a plurality of editing tools as disclosed by Walker. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow the user to perform editing operations on the video, such as trimming, cropping, rearranging, applying transitions and effects, etc. (Walker – par. 2-3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Sekar and Castaneda with Walker to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Boyd whose telephone number is (571)270-0676. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm PST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALEXANDER BOYD/Examiner, Art Unit 2424
/BENJAMIN R BRUCKART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights