Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/697,247

Method for managing the rendering of an item of audio content

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 29, 2024
Examiner
MENDOZA, JUNIOR O
Art Unit
2424
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Orange
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allow Rate
333 granted / 512 resolved
+7.0% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
536
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.6%
-34.4% vs TC avg
§103
49.9%
+9.9% vs TC avg
§102
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
§112
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 512 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/19/2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 01/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1, 8 and 11, applicant argues that Phillips in view of Chen does not teach that “the audio part has several corresponding selectable audio tracks associated to respective qualities”, remarks page . However, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. Phillips discloses a CDN 140 distributing audio/video content that varies in quality to audio/visual devices 112-1 to 112-N, said audio/video chunks/segments encoded at different encoding rates; paragraphs [0029] [0048] figure 1. Phillip further discloses that an optimal version based on the received capabilities is select by the server for transmission, wherein the audio/video content is distributed based on the audio decoding/rendering capabilities of the receiving device; paragraphs [0031] [0042]. Chen is merely introduced to further point out that it is known in the art to treat audio parts and video parts independent from each other and correlating them in order to map an audio component to the selected video component; Paragraphs [0069] [0107] [0118] [0119] figure 3. Additionally, Chen also recites that the various components, e.g. audio components 142A, 142B, etc., may be encoded in various ways and with various qualities; paragraph [0075] figure 3. The examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude that the various audio components 142A, 142B, etc. encoded a different qualities would reasonably read on “the audio part has several corresponding selectable audio tracks associated to respective qualities”, as amended. Therefore, claims 1, 8 and 11 are rejected as shown and mapped on the instant office action. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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 1-4, 8-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips et al. (Pub No US 2015/0074232) in view of Chen et al. (Pub No US 2012/0013746). Hereinafter, referenced as Phillips and Chen, respectively. Regarding claim 1, Phillips discloses a management method comprising: managing, by a management entity, audio/video rendering of an audio/video content on a rendering device (e.g. audio/visual devices 112-1 to 112-N) connected to a receiving device (e.g. UE device 102) capable of receiving contents from a content server (e.g. CDN 140), wherein the audio video content comprises an audio part and a video part (Paragraph [0029]; audio/video content), the video part is received in the form of video segments available in several possible representations (Paragraphs [0029] [0048]; e.g. video chunks/segments encoded at different encoding rates), and the management entity performs the following: obtaining audio decoding capabilities of the rendering device (Paragraphs [0030] [0031] figure 1; UE device obtains audio decoding capabilities, e.g. EDID, of audio/visual devices 112-1 to 112-N); requesting access to a multimedia content intended for the content server (Paragraph [0031] figures 1 and 2; request 206 for content based on decoding capabilities is sent to the server, e.g. CDN 140); receiving an audio stream matched to the audio decoding capabilities (Paragraphs [0032] [0033] figures 1 and 2; an optimal version based on the received capabilities is select by the server for transmission, wherein the audio/video content is distributed based on the audio decoding/rendering capabilities of the receiving device; paragraphs [0031] [0042]); and transmitting the matched audio stream to the rendering device (Paragraphs [0006] [0029]; pointers pointing to a plurality of manifest content segments of the audio/video content). However, it is noted that Phillips is silent to explicitly disclose that the audio part has several corresponding selectable audio tracks associated to respective qualities; wherein the quality of the matched audio stream varies in time depending on a chosen representation of the several possible representations of the video part. Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Chen discloses that the audio part has several corresponding selectable audio tracks (Paragraphs [0007] [0158] figures 3 and 4; multiple audio tracks, e.g. audio components) associated to respective qualities (Paragraph [0075] figure 3; the various components, e.g. audio components 142A, 142B, etc., may be encoded in various ways and with various qualities); wherein the quality of the matched audio stream varies in time depending on a chosen representation of the several possible representations of the video part (Paragraphs [0069] [0107] [0118] [0119] figure 3; correlating the mapped audio component to the selected video component). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Phillips by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Chen, for the predictable result of selecting and synchronizing the correct audio component to the appropriate video component, and presenting the correct content to the viewer without interruptions. Regarding claim 2, Phillips and Chen disclose the management method as claimed in claim 1; moreover, Phillips discloses that the access request is followed by receiving a file including at least one datum for access to at least one of the selectable audio tracks, selecting at least one track of the several corresponding selectable audio tracks, which is matched to the audio decoding capabilities, and requesting access to said selected at least one track (Paragraphs [0034] [0042] figures 1 and 7; the client device 102 retrieves manifest files 746 containing encoding bit rates and URL pointers to the content segments of the selected optimum version based on audio/visual device 112-1 to 112-N capabilities 724). Regarding claim 3, Phillips and Chen disclose the management method as claimed in claim 1; moreover, Phillips discloses that the access request includes a datum representative of the audio decoding capabilities of the rendering device (Paragraphs [0032] [0042] [0043] figures 1 and 3; the request for a particular content may also include decoding capabilities for specific A/V device 112-1 to 112-N for rendering). Regarding claim 4, Phillips and Chen disclose the management method as claimed in claim 1; moreover, Phillips discloses that, when several rendering devices (e.g. audio/visual devices 112-1 to 112-N) are connected to the receiving device (e.g. UE device 102), the rendering devices having respective decoding capabilities, the datum includes all or part of the obtained audio decoding capabilities (Paragraphs [0032] [0042] [0043] figures 1 and 3; the request for a particular content may also include decoding capabilities for specific A/V device 112-1 to 112-N for rendering). Regarding claim 8, Phillips and Chen disclose all the limitations of claim 8; therefore, claim 8 is rejected for the same reasons stated in claim 1. Regarding claim 9, Phillips and Chen disclose a device which comprises the management entity as defined in claim 8 (Figure 1; e.g. UE device 102). Regarding claim 11, Phillips and Chen disclose all the limitations of claim 11; therefore, claim 11 is rejected for the same reasons stated in claim 1. Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips and Chen in view of Gala et al. (Pub No US 2021/0044850). Hereinafter, referenced as Gala. Regarding claim 6, Phillips and Chen disclose the management method as claimed in claim 1; however, it is noted that Phillips and Chen are silent to explicitly disclose that a priority is defined beforehand so as to prioritize a quality of the audio part rather than the video part, or vice versa, and wherein the quality chosen for the audio part is a maximum possible quality. Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Gala discloses that a priority is defined beforehand so as to prioritize a quality of the audio part rather than the video part, or vice versa, and wherein the quality chosen for the audio part is a maximum possible quality (Paragraph [0084]; video playback quality is prioritized over audio playback quality. Audio playback and video playback quality are also balanced with each other, and in some embodiments audio playback quality is prioritized over video playback quality). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Phillips and Chen by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Gala, for the predictable result of implementing different prioritization schemes where the bandwidth of a distribution infrastructure is limited and/or variable (Gala – paragraph [0084]). Regarding claim 7, Phillips, Chen and Gala disclose the management method as claimed in claim 6; moreover, Phillips discloses that a bandwidth varies on a link linking receiving device and the content server, and wherein the maximum possible quality is dependent on a bandwidth available between the receiving device and the content server (Paragraphs [0029] [0033] [0044] [0045]; select an optimum profile of each segment so as to maximize quality without risking buffer underflow and stalling). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUNIOR O MENDOZA whose telephone number is (571)270-3573. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10am-6pm EST.. 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. JUNIOR O. MENDOZA Primary Examiner Art Unit 2424 /JUNIOR O MENDOZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 29, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 22, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 24, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 19, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587692
METHODS AND SYSTEMS TO SYNERGIZE CONTEXT OF END-USER WITH QUALITY-OF-EXPERIENCE OF LIVE VIDEO FEED
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581140
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR CONTENT STORAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12537997
SHOPPING INTERFACE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12536569
MEDIA SHARING AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12532051
Dynamic Content Allocation And Optimization
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
65%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+22.8%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 512 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