Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/682,676

MULTI-PERSON COLLABORATION-BASED RESOURCE PROCESSING METHOD, APPARATUS AND SYSTEM

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Feb 09, 2024
Examiner
SAINT CYR, JEAN D
Art Unit
2425
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Shanghai Hode Information Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
68%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
355 granted / 590 resolved
+2.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
629
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
§103
69.9%
+29.9% vs TC avg
§102
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
§112
5.7%
-34.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 590 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to all pending claims have been fully considered, but moot because of the new ground of rejection. Applicant argues that cited references failed to disclose receiving information indicative of editing the target story from the plurality of client devices and obtaining receipt time points for the information; determining a processing sequence based on the receipt time points; editing the server resource based on the processing sequence and a preset conflict policy. However, Knapp et al disclose a system being able to provide options to edit story and the system can calculate or track progress percentage during processing as disclosed in para. 0093; 0101; 0103; 0039;0109. And Yach et al disclose a system being capable of updating or editing server resource based on the detected conflict as disclosed in para.0054-0055. This action is made final. Claims rejections-35 U.S.C. 103 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. Claim(s) 1; 13-14; 16; 18-19; 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knapp(US.Pub.No.20130006687) in view of Nimri(US.Pub.No.20180095709) and Yach(US.Pub.Non.20050177632). Regarding claim 1, Knapp et al disclose a method of processing resources based on multi-person collaboration, applied to a server device , and the method comprises(see fig.1 to fig.2 for processing data associated with multiple client devices; 0049); creating a target story(story can be created by the system; 0043; 0006) and generating a target story identifier of identifying the target story(the system is able to assign identifier to story; 0096;0117;0109); receiving connection instructions with respect to the target story from a plurality of client devices(the system allows user devices to be connected to network based on logging information, 0075); wherein each of the connect instructions comprises a user identifier of identifying a user associated with each of the plurality of client devices establishing communication connections with the plurality of client devices in response to receiving the connection instructions from the plurality of client devices(users are able to access the network based on authentication; 0097; 0075;0095); establishing an association relationship between the target story identifier and the plurality of user identifiers(the system is able to identify owner of story by linking the collected data; 0077; 0089); receiving client resources of the target story from the plurality of client devices(see fig.1 to fig.2 for allowing client devices 220 to create and provide story content to the servers 210; 0049), wherein a client resource from one of the plurality of client devices comprises a material resource that is shot for the target story using a storyboard video editor by the one of the plurality of client devices(the system provides options to edit content or story; 0028; 0076-0077); generating a server resource of the target story based on the client resources received from the plurality of client devices(the server is capable of providing content or resources to the user devices connected to the network based on request; 0064) ; and receiving information indicative of editing the target story from the plurality of client devices and obtaining receipt time points for the information(see fig.4 for providing time related to story being created and received and the system allows owner of story to track data;0074;0109; 0101; 0103; 0093; 0108; 0118); determining a processing sequence based on the receipt time points(the system can calculate progress percentage during processing;0039;0109); sending the server resource to the plurality of client devices, wherein the plurality of client devices are configured to simultaneously shoot or edit material resources for the target story(the system provides options to edit story; 0091; 0093) using respective storyboard video editors(stories on a story board,0044;0066-0067); But did not explicitly disclose wherein the material resource comprises a video, a picture, audio and text; editing the server resource based on the processing sequence and a preset conflict policy. However, Nimri et al disclose wherein the material resource comprises a video, a picture, audio and text(the system is capable of displaying different type of contents or resources; 0069;0085). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Nimri to modify Knapp by providing options to display different types of contents for the purpose of improving viewing experiences accordingly. And Yach et al disclose editing the server resource based on the processing sequence and a preset conflict policy(the system is able to update or edit server resource based on the detected conflict; 0054-0055). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Nimri to modify Knapp and Nimri by providing options to update server resource according to detected conflict for the purpose of improving the capability of the network accordingly. Regarding claim 13, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1. Regarding claim 14, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1. Regarding claim 16, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1. Regarding claim 18, Knapp et al disclose the operations further comprising: editing the server resource in the processing sequence to generate the target resource of the target story(the system provides options to edit story; 0091; 0093); and sending the target resource to the plurality of client devices for further collaboratively working on the target story by the plurality of client devices(see fig.1 to fig.2 for allowing user devices to share content or story across the network; 0108; 0118). Regarding claim 19, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1. Regarding claim 21, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 18. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knapp(US.Pub.No.20130006687) in view of Nimri(US.Pub.No.20180095709) and Yach(US.Pub.Non.20050177632) and Wang(US.Pub.No.20180184346). Regarding claim 6, Knapp and Nimri and Yach et al did not explicitly disclose further comprising: breaking, a communication connection with a first client device in response to receiving a disconnection instruction, wherein the first client device is among the plurality of client devices. However, Wang et al disclose further comprising: breaking, a communication connection with a first client device in response to receiving a disconnection instruction, wherein the first client device is among the plurality of client devices(the system has capability of sending disconnection instruction or request in order to break connection or communication among devices across the network; abstract; 0009; 0020; 0025). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Wang to modify Knapp and Nimri by providing options to send disconnection request for the purpose of managing the capability of the network accordingly. 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 JEAN D SAINT CYR whose telephone number is (571)270-3224. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at 5712727527. 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. /JEAN D SAINT CYR/Examiner, Art Unit 2425 /Brian T Pendleton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 09, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 04, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 18, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604245
Data Caching Method and Related Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604064
METHOD AND SERVER FOR PROVIDING CONTENT RECOMMENDATION LIST
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604069
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MEDIA PLAN GENERATION FOR A CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12585333
SYSTEMS AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING VIDEO ON DEMAND IN AN INTELLIGENT TELEVISION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12563248
REDUCING ACTIVE USER BIAS FOR CONTENT RECOMMENDATION MODELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
60%
Grant Probability
68%
With Interview (+8.3%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 590 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month