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 .
Claims 1-19 are currently pending and prosecuted.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 13 July 2026, with respect to claims 1-9 and 11-19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 102 rejection of claims 1-9 and 11-19 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 13 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding independent claim 10, Applicant contends the amendments overcomes the prior art of record. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
With regards to Claim 10, [0070] notes “The video controls are available in a web browser and can provide the streamer with the following capabilities: automatically show replays of top performing competitors; select and stream gameplay of individual competitors based upon; player seed; round; matches that have gone into a tiebreaker; whether or not the player's opponent has finished; sort video play order by round and/or seed; and display video replays of multiple players side-by-side for real time comparison.” This shows the front end comprises a web view element in the form of a web browser as described in [0070].
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(b) because they are incomplete. 37 CFR 1.83(b) reads as follows:
When the invention consists of an improvement on an old machine the drawing must when possible exhibit, in one or more views, the improved portion itself, disconnected from the old structure, and also in another view, so much only of the old structure as will suffice to show the connection of the invention therewith.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show any structural component described in the specification that allows the claimed subject matter to function as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 –
(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.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Paradise et al., US PG-Pub 2017/0266552, hereinafter Paradise.
Regarding Claim 10, Paradise teaches a method of transmitting a remote competition of a game (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0028], “FIG. 1 is a process flow diagram illustrating a process 100 enabling a tournament lobby and player access to event streaming.”), said method comprising:
capturing (S310) a video feed of the remote competition in the game (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0042]-[0047], [0066]-[0075]);
storing (S320) one of pictures or video snippets based on the video feed (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0069]-[0075]);
providing (S330) the pictures or video snippets to a frontend (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0069]-[0075]), wherein the frontend comprises a web view element (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0069]-[0075], specifically, [0070], noting “The video controls are available in a web browser and can provide the streamer with the following capabilities: automatically show replays of top performing competitors; select and stream gameplay of individual competitors based upon; player seed; round; matches that have gone into a tiebreaker; whether or not the player's opponent has finished; sort video play order by round and/or seed; and display video replays of multiple players side-by-side for real time comparison”);
playing (S340) a video feed reconstructed from the pictures or video snippets in the front end (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0069]-[0075]);
generating (S350) a video stream based on the reconstructed video feed in the frontend (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0069]-[0075]), wherein the video stream is generated based on content displayed within the web view element (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0069]-[0075], specifically, [0070], noting “The video controls are available in a web browser and can provide the streamer with the following capabilities: automatically show replays of top performing competitors; select and stream gameplay of individual competitors based upon; player seed; round; matches that have gone into a tiebreaker; whether or not the player's opponent has finished; sort video play order by round and/or seed; and display video replays of multiple players side-by-side for real time comparison”); and
transmitting (S360) the video stream (Figs. 1-3 and 5-7, and corresponding descriptions, [0069]-[0075]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 and 11-19 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Applicant’s amendments, and corresponding arguments, overcome the prior art of record. Specifically, the limitation, “determining (S140) a result of the match based on match values, wherein the match values are obtained by grabbing display content of the game, and wherein optical character recognition (OCR) is performed on a screenshot or screencast retrieved to identify the match values” is considered novel. Support for the amendment can be found in [0098] of the original disclosure. The closest prior art of record, Paradise, teaches controlling, scoring and recording a remote match using a video streaming platform but fails to teach the use of an OCR program on a screenshot or screencast in order to identify match values, and, as according to [0098], be used to identify the results of the match in order to avoid tampering.
As such, modification of the prior art of record can only be motivated by hindsight reasoning, or by changing the intended use and function of the prior art themselves. Therefore, it is not clear that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention would have made the necessary modifications to the prior art of record to encompass the limitations set forth in the present application. Moreover, none of the prior arts of record, taken either alone or in combination, anticipate nor render obvious the claimed inventions. Hence, claims 1-9 and 11-19 are allowable over the prior arts of record.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 STEPHEN T REED whose telephone number is (571)272-7234. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 0800-1800.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. 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.
STEPHEN T. REED
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2627
/Stephen T. Reed/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
Prosecution Insights