DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-4, 6-14 are pending.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 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) 1-4, 8, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amine et al. (US 2014/0351870) in view of Winograd et al. (US 2024/0348579).
Claim 1 and 12, Amine teaches A media receiver (103) for receiving and outputting media content and providing a plurality of different interactive services associated with the output media content (i.e. Netflix, amazon prime, etc.), the media receiver being controllable by a user by means of a remote control (102, 105, 106) arranged to transmit to the media receiver one or more interactive service selection signals (i.e. selecting content and services), each of which is transmitted in response to a corresponding predetermined user action (i.e. dedicated button), wherein the number of different interactive service selection signals is fewer than the number of different interactive services (i.e. one selection, Netflix), the media receiver including a mapping function for mapping a received interactive service selection signal to a selected one of a plurality of virtual user inputs (i.e. applications execution) corresponding to a selected one of the different interactive services (i.e. Netflix, amazon, etc.), such that a corresponding available one of the interactive services is activated (p. 0040).
Amine is silent regarding the specific feature of:
“the media receiver arranged to receive a program stream including media content together with metadata and/or program code defining a plurality of different interactive services, each of which is associated with the media content, the media receiver”.
Winograd teaches regarding the specific feature of:
“the media receiver arranged to receive a program stream including media content together with metadata (i.e. metadata) and/or program code (i.e. watermarks) defining a plurality of different interactive services, each of which is associated with the media content, the media receiver” (p. 0003, 0040-0041, 0059).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided interactive services as taught by Winograd to the system of Amine to provide interactive services associated with the content (p. 0059).
Claim 2, Amine teaches the media receiver of claim 1, wherein the predetermined user action comprises pressing a key or button on the remote control (i.e. dedicated button for service) (p. 0040).
Claim 3, Amine teaches the media receiver of claim 2, wherein the remote control includes one or more interactive services selection buttons or keys corresponding to one or more respective interactive service selection signals (i.e. dedicated button for service) (p. 0040).
Claim 4, Amine teaches the media receiver of claim 3, wherein the remote control includes a single interactive services selection button or key (i.e. Netflix dedicated button) and the mapping function maps the corresponding received interactive service selection signal to a selected one of a plurality of different interactive services (i.e. dedicated button mapped to Netflix) (p. 0040).
Claim 8, Amine teaches the media receiver of claim 1, where the mapping is based on the availability of the interactive services (i.e. dedicated buttons for available service) (p. 0040).
Claim 13 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claim 1.
Claim 14 recites “a non-transitory computer program comprising program code arranged” to perform the steps of claim 13.
Amine teaches “a non-transitory computer program comprising program code arranged” to perform the steps of claim 13 (p. 0112).
Claim(s) 6-7, 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amine et al. (US 2014/0351870) in view of Winograd et al. (US 2024/0348579), and further in view of Emmanuel et al. (US 2022/0329898).
Claim 6, Amine is silent regarding the media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping is based on contextual information available at the media receiver.
Emmanuel teaches the media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping is based on contextual information available at the media receiver (i.e. users likes or dislikes) (p. 0062).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided context mapping as taught by Emmanuel to the system of Amine to allow for intelligent mapping of buttons (p. 0062).
Claim 7, Amine is silent regarding The media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping is based on a media service currently output by the media receiver.
Emmanuel teaches The media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping is based on a media service currently output by the media receiver (i.e. point in video where exited last) (p. 0131-0132).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided context mapping as taught by Emmanuel to the system of Amine to allow for intelligent mapping of buttons (p. 0062).
Claim 9, Amine is silent regarding The media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping is based on timing information.
Emmanuel teaches The media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping is based on timing information (i.e. point in video where exited last) (p. 0131-0132).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided context mapping as taught by Emmanuel to the system of Amine to allow for intelligent mapping of buttons (p. 0062).
Claim 10, Amine is silent regarding The media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping is based on user preference or behaviur.
Emmanuel teaches The media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping is based on user preference or behaviur (i.e. users likes or dislikes) (p. 0062).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided context mapping as taught by Emmanuel to the system of Amine to allow for intelligent mapping of buttons (p. 0062).
Claim 11, Amine is silent regarding The media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping function comprises a machine learning algorithm.
Emmanuel teaches The media receiver of claim 1, wherein the mapping function comprises a machine learning algorithm (p. 0062).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided context mapping as taught by Emmanuel to the system of Amine to allow for intelligent mapping of buttons (p. 0062).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 1, Applicant argues that Independent Claim 1 is directed to a media receiver and specifies that the media receiver includes, inter alia, "a mapping function for mapping a received interactive service selection signal to a selected one of a plurality of virtual user inputs" with each virtual user input "corresponding to a selected one of the different interactive services." Accordingly, the mapping function, as recited in independent Claim 1, maps a single interactive service selection signal to a selected one of a plurality of associated virtual user inputs. Applicant respectfully submits that Amine and Winograd, taken alone or in combination, fail to teach or suggest the foregoing limitations of independent Claim 1. Independent Claims 13 and 14 include similar limitations, and are patentable for the same reasons.
The Office Action asserts that paragraph [0040] of Amine teaches the foregoing limitations of independent Claim 1. However, Applicant submits that paragraph [0040] of Amine includes no such teaching, and instead merely discloses that access to content and services from OTT providers "may be access[ed] via remote control 102, 105, 106 via dedicated buttons on the remote control 102, 105, 106 or top level menu selection " Amine, 1 [0040] (emphasis added). That is, paragraph [0040] of Amine describes a system wherein each selection signal (whether a dedicated button or a menu item) is associated with a single content provider or service. Amine does not teach or suggest a mapping function within the media receiver that dynamically maps a selection signal to one of a plurality of virtual user inputs. Instead, each selection signal in Amine is directly linked to a specific service in a one-to-one relationship, activating that service without any intermediate mapping to a plurality of virtual user inputs.
In response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Reading the claims in the broadest sense, the limitation “a mapping function for mapping a received interactive service selection signal to a selected one of a plurality of virtual user inputs” merely requires that a button is mapped to an interactive service selection signal. A dedicated button on the remote control is mapped to a particular service signal to activate that service (Netflix, Amazon prime). Because this button can have service mapped to it, is it interpreted as a virtual input. Furthermore, Anime also has disclosure throughout the reference where dedicated buttons can be mapped to URLs for faster access to websites. This is substituting many keypresses with a single keypress, this can also be interpreted as an interactive service signal mapped to a virtual input. The Applicant’s argument regarding, “mapping function within the media receiver that dynamically maps a selection signal to one of a plurality of virtual user inputs” is silent and/or not clearly described in the claims. It is suggested to Applicant to further highlight this intended feature for proper examination.
Conclusion
Claims 1-4, 6-14 are rejected.
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.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSHFIKH I ALAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1710. The examiner can normally be reached 1:00PM-9:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an nterview, 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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at 571-272-4195. 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.
MUSHFIKH I. ALAM
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2426
/MUSHFIKH I ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426 7/27/2026
Prosecution Insights