CTNF 18/695,611 CTNF 80150 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 07-42-04 AIA A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/12/26 has been entered. Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 03/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s arguments regarding Bodas, as indicated within the advisory action mailed 03/20/26, it is noted that Bodas explicitly discloses wherein the "media item" may be a video frame of a video sequence or an individual image (paragraph 10, 27). Thus the individual image scenario, which is not a frame of a timed video, would appear to meet the claim limitation of being "non-timed". Regarding applicant's additional arguments regarding ISOBMFF, HEIF, and the "text item" for a "media item" in the field of art, it is noted that applicant is arguing limitations which are not current claimed. In response to applicant's arguments regarding the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112, it is noted that the rejections are based on the inconsistencies in the claim language. For example, claim 55 recites "encoding of the text item for the media item" and then later recites "the text item encoded with the media item". The rejection is thus based on the swapping of the word "for" to the word "with", rendering the claim scope unclear, as the different wording would appear to alter the encoding being performed . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 55-65, 73 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 55, line 9-10, recites "for sending the text item encoded with the media item" which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear what exactly is being claimed. While claim 55, line 6, recites "encoding of the text item for the media item", there is no previous recitation of the text item encoded with the media item, and it is unclear what encoding the text item with the media item would entail and how it would different from encoding of the text item for the media item. Claim 73, line 5-6, recites "for sending the text item encoded with the media item" which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear what exactly is being claimed. While claim 73, line 3, recites "encoding of the text item for the media item", there is no previous recitation of the text item encoded with the media item, and it is unclear what encoding the text item with the media item would entail and how it would different from encoding of the text item for the media item. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 55-59, 62-63, 65-77 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Bodas et al. (Bodas) (US 2019/0069007) (of record) . As to claim 55, Bodas discloses an apparatus (Fig. 1, 102) comprising at least one processor (104-1); and at least one memory comprising program code (100-1); wherein the at least one memory and the program code are configured to, with the at least one processor (paragraph 24), cause the apparatus at least to perform: defining a text item for a media item, wherein defining of the text item comprises encoding of the text item for the media item (paragraph 10, 17, 26, 28), wherein decoding of the text item results in a textual content or text data (paragraph 30-34, 52, 58); and associating the text item with the media item (text metadata indicating associated frame to display text and location on screen; paragraph 48, 52, 58) wherein the associated is for sending the text item encoded with the media item (encoded text transmitted with the image data; paragraph 11, 17, 53-44), wherein the media item comprises an image item comprising a non-timed data (video sequence or individual image ; paragraph 10, 25-27, 51-52). As to claim 56, Bodas discloses wherein to define the text item, the apparatus is further to perform: defining at least one of a renderable item or a renderable item property, wherein the renderable item or the renderable item property comprises rendering information required to render a renderable text on a canvas, a background media item, or an overlay of the media item (paragraph 32, 45-48, 57-61). As to claim 57, Bodas discloses wherein the rendering information comprises one or more of following parameters: a language of the renderable text; a location of the renderable text on the canvas or the background media item; (paragraph 27, 30-32, 35-36); a width and a height of the renderable text; or a direction of the renderable text. As to claim 58, Bodas discloses 58. (New) The apparatus of claim 57, wherein the location is signaled by using a horizontal and a vertical offset from a top-left corner of the canvas or the background media (X-Y coordinates from origin in upper left corner; paragraph 27, 32). As to claim 59, Bodas discloses wherein the direction of the renderable text comprises left to right or right to left (this limitation modifies an alternative limitation and is thus not required based on the rejection of claim 57). As to claim 62, Bodas discloses wherein the renderable text is defined by using a text item data structure comprising one or more of the following: a reference width field for specifying a width of a reference space on which the renderable text is placed; a reference height field for specifying a height of the reference space on which the renderable text is placed; a language field comprising language tag string representing a language of the renderable text; x and y fields for specifying a top, left corner of the renderable text relatively to the reference space, and wherein a value x = 0 and y = 0 represents a position of a top-left pixel in the reference space (X-Y coordinates from origin in upper left corner; paragraph 27, 32); width and height fields for the renderable text describes a size of a rendering area in a reference area; a flag for indicting at least one of a length of the fields x, y, the width, the height, a reference height, or a reference width for the renderable text; a direction field for indicating a direction in which content of the renderable text item needs to be rendered; a text field comprising a character string comprising the renderable text; or a font field for specifying fonts to be used for rendering or display of the renderable text (paragraph 31, 34). As to claim 63, Bodas discloses wherein the apparatus is further caused to perform: defining font item for specifying fonts used for the rendering of the renderable text (paragraph 31, 34). As to claim 65, Bodas discloses wherein the fonts are defined by using a name, a size, and/or a style (font types, styles and size; paragraph 31, 34). As to claim 66, Bodas discloses an apparatus (150) comprising at least one processor (104-2); and at least one memory comprising program code (100-2); wherein the at least one memory and the program code are configured to, with the at least one processor (paragraph 24), cause the apparatus at least to perform: receiving a bitstream comprising a media item (paragraph 55, 58), wherein the media item is associated with a text item (text metadata indicating associated frame to display text and location on screen; paragraph 30-34, 48, 52, 58) encoded for the media item (paragraph 10, 17, 26, 28), wherein the media item comprises an image item comprising a non-timed data (video sequence or individual image ; paragraph 10, 25-27, 51-52). accessing the text item associated with the media item (paragraph 48, 52, 55, 58); and rendering content of the text item (rendered text overlaid on the image; paragraph 58). As to claim 67, Bodas discloses wherein the text item comprises at least one of a renderable item or a renderable item property, wherein the renderable item or the renderable item property comprises rendering information required to render a renderable text on a canvas, a background media item, or an overlay of the media item (paragraph 32, 45-48, 57-61). As to claim 68, Bodas discloses wherein the rendering information comprises one or more of following parameters: a language of the renderable text; a location of the renderable text on the canvas or the background media item; (paragraph 27, 30-32, 35-36); a width and a height of the renderable text; or a direction of the renderable text. As to claim 69, Bodas discloses wherein the location is signaled by using a horizontal and a vertical offset from a top-left corner of the canvas or the background media (X-Y coordinates from origin in upper left corner; paragraph 27, 32). As to claim 70, Bodas discloses wherein the direction of the renderable text comprises left to right or right to left (this limitation modifies an alternative limitation and is thus not required based on the rejection of claim 68). As to claim 71, Bodas discloses wherein the renderable text is defined by using a text item data structure comprising one or more of the following: a reference width field for specifying a width of a reference space on which the renderable text is placed; a reference height field for specifying a height of the reference space on which the renderable text is placed; a language field comprising language tag string representing a language of the renderable text; x and y fields for specifying a top, left corner of the renderable text relatively to the reference space, and wherein a value x = 0 and y = 0 represents a position of a top-left pixel in the reference space (X-Y coordinates from origin in upper left corner; paragraph 27, 32); width and height fields for the renderable text describes a size of a rendering area in a reference area; a flag for indicting at least one of a length of the fields x, y, the width, the height, a reference height, or a reference width for the renderable text; a direction field for indicating a direction in which content of the renderable text item needs to be rendered; a text field comprising a character string comprising the renderable text; or a font field for specifying fonts to be used for rendering or display of the renderable text (paragraph 31, 34). As to claim 72, Bodas discloses defining font item for specifying fonts used for the rendering of the renderable text (paragraph 31, 34). As to claim 73, Bodas discloses a method (Fig. 4A) comprising: defining a text item for a media item, wherein defining of the text item comprises encoding of the text item for the media item (paragraph 10, 17, 26, 28), wherein decoding of the text item results in a textual content or text data (paragraph 30-34, 52, 58); and associating the text item with the media item (text metadata indicating associated frame to display text and location on screen; paragraph 48, 52, 58) wherein the associating is for sending the text item encoded with the media item (encoded text transmitted with the image data; paragraph 11, 17, 53-44), wherein the media item comprises an image item comprising a non-timed data (video sequence or individual image ; paragraph 10, 25-27, 51-52). As to claim 74, Bodas discloses a method (Fig. 4B, 5) comprising: receiving a bitstream comprising a media item (paragraph 55, 58), wherein the media item is associated with a text item (text metadata indicating associated frame to display text and location on screen; paragraph 30-34, 48, 52, 58) encoded for the media item (paragraph 10, 17, 26, 28), wherein the media item comprises an image item comprising a non-timed data (video sequence or individual image ; paragraph 10, 25-27, 51-52); accessing the text item associated with the media item (paragraph 55, 58), rendering content of the text item (rendered text overlaid on the image; paragraph 58). As to claim 75, Bodas discloses wherein the bitstream comprises: the media item and the text item (paragraph 25-27, 51-52), or a compressed representation of the media item and metadata for the text item. As to claim 76, Bodas discloses wherein the media item includes at least one of audio tracks, video tracks (paragraph 25-27, 51-52), haptic tracks, or video games. As to claim 77, Bodas discloses wherein the text item is for use with images for at least one of: annotations (images with descriptive text; paragraph 2), providing cues, or for memes. (Furthermore, nonfunctional descriptive material cannot render nonobvious an invention that would have otherwise been obvious. In re Ngai, **>367 F.3d 1336, 1339, 70 USPQ2d 1862, 1864 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (combining printed instructions and an old product into a kit will not render the claimed invention nonobvious even if the instructions detail a new use for the product).< Cf. In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (when descriptive material is not functionally related to the substrate, the descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability). For example, if the prior art suggests storing a song on a disk, merely choosing a particular song to store on the disk would be presumed to be well within the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is simply a rearrangement of nonfunctional descriptive material. (see MPEP at 2106, Section VI) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 64 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bodas in view of Sokol et al. (Sokol) (US 2007/0039034) (of record) . As to claim 64, while Bodas discloses wherein the fonts are specified, Chen fails to specifically disclose wherein when the fonts are not specified, the fonts are present at a rendering device or the fonts are signaled by using a supported font streaming mechanism. In an analogous art, Sokol discloses a system for transporting video, audio and text from a source to a user device (paragraph 35) which will determine when the fonts are not specified (228, font configuration parameters not available; paragraph 80), the fonts are present at a rendering device (220, extra and use default font parameters; paragraph 80) so as to utilize suitable default font parameters when one is not specified (paragraph 65, 80). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bodas’ system to include wherein when the fonts are not specified, the fonts are present at a rendering device or the fonts are signaled by using a supported font streaming mechanism, as taught in combination with Sokol, for the typical benefit of utilizing an already known method of selecting a font of using a default font parameters when one is not specified . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 78 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bodas in view of Hashiura et al. (Hashiura) (US 2007/0240064) (of record) . As to claim 78, while Bodas discloses wherein the text item comprises a position of text data to be displayed or rendered that is along a reference space with a defined reference x and reference y directions (text position parameters, including x/y coordinates from upper left corner origin; Fig. 3, paragraph 27, 32), Bodas fails to specifically disclose a defined reference width and reference height. In an analogous art, Hashiura discloses a system for transporting video, audio and a text item from a source to a user device (Fig. 2-3; paragraph 21-22, 78-82, 120-121) wherein the text item comprises a position of text data to be displayed or rendered that is along a reference space with a defined reference x and reference y directions and a defined reference width and reference height (layout including text region with x/y coordinates and defined height/width; see Fig. 5, paragraph 146-152) so as to define the exact desired screen layout with specific locations and sizes for each display region (paragraph 149, 230). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bodas’ system to include wherein the text item comprises a position of text data to be displayed or rendered that is along a reference space with a defined reference x and reference y directions and a defined reference width and reference height, as taught in combination with Hashiura, for the typical benefit of providing the ability to define the exact screen layout with specific locations and sizes for each display region (paragraph 149, 230) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 60-61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bodas in view of Chen et al. (Chen) (US 2012/0042090) (of record) . As to claim 60, Bodas fails to specifically disclose defining a mime type item for the renderable text, and wherein the media item comprising value of 'mime' in an item type comprises a mime type item (paragraph 113, 116). In an analogous art, Chen discloses a system for transporting video, audio and a text item from a source to a user device (video, audio and text components of the same period sent together in the same “representation”; paragraph 63-65, 84, 88, 135-137) wherein the text item comprises a position of text data to be displayed or rendered (associating screen location and timing for the text; paragraph 63-65, 84, 88, 135-137) which will define a mime type item for the renderable text, and wherein the media item comprising value of 'mime' in an item type comprises a mime type item (paragraph 113, 116) so as to utilize a standardized identifier that specifies the nature and format of a file or data stream (paragraph 113, 116). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bodas’ system to include defining a mime type item for the renderable text, and wherein the media item comprising value of 'mime' in an item type comprises a mime type item (paragraph 113, 116), as taught in combination with Chen, for the typical benefit of utilizing a known standardized identifier that specifies the nature and format of a file or data stream (paragraph 113, 116). As to claim 61, Bodas and Chen disclose wherein data in the mime type item comprises the renderable text (see Chen at paragraph 113, 116, 137, 140). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST. 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. /James R Sheleheda/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 2 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 3 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 4 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 5 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 6 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 7 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 8 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 9 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 10 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 11 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 12 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 13 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 14 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 15 Art Unit: 2424 Application/Control Number: 18/695,611 Page 16 Art Unit: 2424
Prosecution Insights