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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to an AMENDMENT entered on April 20, 2026 for patent application 18/729,155 filed on July 15, 2024.
Claims 1-13 and 15-21 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-13 and 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The independent claims now require “wherein the target first video sticker is added to frames of a target first video when the first video is edited (emphasis added by Examiner).”
First, there are only 2 mentions of a version of the word “edit” in Applicant’s specification; both in para. [0043], and there is only 1 mention of the word “frame,” in para. [0039]. Thus, in the specification as originally filed, Applicant does not discuss adding video stickers to frames in the context of the video being edited.
Second, when looking at the language of paragraph [0039], Applicant states that “the electronic device may play the target video based on a video playing operation by the current user for the target video, and when a video frame to which the target video sticker 20 is added is played, show the target video sticker 20, as shown in FIG. 2 (emphasis added by Examiner).”
The specification spells out that when a frame is played, a sticker should be shown. This indicates, or at least suggests, that the sticker is not a part of the frame, i.e. is still a ‘separate entity’ from the frame. Otherwise, there would be no reason to describe the process as Applicant does. If the sticker was a part of the frame, and had been added “when the first video is edited,” then there would be no choice but to displayed the sticker when the frame was played, as said sticker would be a part of said frame.
For the instant rejection, Examiner will just read the limitation in question to mean that video frames corresponding to the period in time when stickers are displayed can be said to be edited when said stickers are displayed.
Thus, Examiner does not find support in the specification as originally filed for the newly amended claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 11-13, 15-18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xiao et al. (Pub. No.: US 2023/0326115).
Regarding claim 1, Xiao discloses an interaction method, comprising: displaying a content input panel in response to a matching operation for a first content comprised in a first video sticker (Fig. 4, element 102c, para. [0083]), wherein the first video sticker is added to frames of a first video when the first video is edited (paras. [0076]-[0080]), and the content input panel is configured for a current user to input a second content matching the first content (Fig. 5, elements 101d and 102d, paras. [0095]-[0098]); and in response to an inputting completion operation, obtaining the second content input by the current user in the content input panel and displaying a first matching message, wherein the first matching message comprises the first content and the second content (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]; the three different images in figure 5 show different versions of a “message” which includes both the first content (the Topic) and the second content (user replies)). and wherein the first content is a content to be matched that is comprised in the first video sticker, and the second content is a content input by the current user (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]; the three different images in figure 5 show different versions of a “message” which includes both the first content (which can be seen as “content to be matched,” as any comment or question, when responded to or answered, can be seen as being matched) and the second content (content input by the current user)).
Regarding claim 2, Xiao discloses the method according to claim 1, after the obtaining the second content input by the current user in the content input panel, further comprising: stopping displaying the content input panel and showing a matching result of matching the second content with the first content (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]).
Regarding claim 8, Xiao discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: showing a matching message of the first video in a playing process of the first video, wherein the matching message comprises the first matching message, and a second matching message sent by a user other than the current user, and the first matching message and the second matching message are bullet-screen comment messages (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]).
Regarding claim 11, Xiao discloses the method according to claim 8, wherein the matching operation comprises at least one of a triggering operation acting on the first video sticker, a triggering operation acting on a first matching control corresponding to any matching message, and a triggering operation acting on a re-input control that is displayed in a matching result window (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]).
Regarding claim 12, Xiao discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: showing a matching message of the first video in a comment showing region of the first video, wherein the matching message comprises the first matching message and a second matching message sent by a user other than the current user, and the matching message is a comment message (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]).
Regarding claim 13, Xiao discloses the method according to claim 12, wherein the matching operation comprises a triggering operation acting on a second matching control corresponding to any matching message (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]).
Regarding claim 15, Xiao discloses an electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; and a memory, configured to store one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to implement an interaction method, wherein the interaction method comprises: displaying a content input panel in response to a matching operation for a first content comprised in a first video sticker (Fig. 4, element 102c, para. [0083]), wherein the first video sticker is added to a first video (paras. [0076]-[0080]), and the content input panel is configured for a current user to input a second content matching the first content (Fig. 5, elements 101d and 102d, paras. [0095]-[0098]); and in response to an inputting completion operation, obtaining the second content input by the current user in the content input panel and sending a first matching message, wherein the first matching message comprises the first content and the second content (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]; the three different images in figure 5 show different versions of a “message” which includes both the first content (the Topic) and the second content (user replies)).
Regarding claim 16, Xiao discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium on which a computer program is stored, wherein the computer program, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to implement the interaction method according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1, above).
Regarding claim 17, Xiao discloses a computer program product which, when executed by a computer, causes the computer to implement the interaction method according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1, above).
Regarding claim 18, Xiao discloses the electronic device according to claim 15, wherein, after the obtaining the second content input by the current user in the content input panel, the method further comprises: stopping displaying the content input panel and showing a matching result of matching the second content with the first content (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]).
Regarding claim 21, Xiao discloses the electronic device according to claim 15, wherein the method further comprises: showing a matching message of the first video in a playing process of the first video, wherein the matching message comprises the first matching message, and a second matching message sent by a user other than the current user, and the first matching message and the second matching message are bullet-screen comment messages (Fig. 5, elements 100d, 103d and 104d, paras. [0095]-[0098]).
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.
Claims 3 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (Pub. No.: US 2023/0326115) in view of Qianqun (Pub. No.: CN 111274370).
Regarding claim 3, Xiao discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein the showing the matching result of matching the second content with the first content comprises: playing a first showing animation of the first video sticker and displaying a matching result window, wherein the first content and the second content are shown in the first showing animation, and the matching result window is configured to show the matching result of matching the second content with the first content (Fig. 5, element 103d, “Confrontation animation,” paras. [0094]-[0097]).
However, Xiao does not perform the above step in response to a matching degree between the second content and the first content being greater than or equal to a preset matching degree threshold, nor does Xiao require that in response to the matching degree between the second content and the first content being less than the preset matching degree threshold, displaying the matching result window. However, in analogous art, Qianqun discloses a system that can “[r]ecord the voice upload time corresponding to the target question and the target answer as the start time and end time respectively, and remove non-answer barrages from all the text data of the barrage generated between the start time and the end time Obtain the suspicious answer barrage, calculate the similarity value of each suspected answer barrage with the target answer, and screen out the suspect answer barrage corresponding to the one with the largest similarity value as the correct answer barrage, and remove the correct answer The barrage of other suspected answers is used as the barrage of wrong answers (page 3, lines 8-13).” 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 Xiao to allow for performing the above step in response to a matching degree between the second content and the first content being greater than or equal to a preset matching degree threshold, wherein in response to the matching degree between the second content and the first content being less than the preset matching degree threshold, displaying the matching result window. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for a most correct response to be selected, which could increase the accuracy of the content displayed to users.
Regarding claim 19, Xiao discloses the electronic device according to claim 18, wherein the showing the matching result of matching the second content with the first content comprises: playing a first showing animation of the first video sticker and displaying a matching result window, wherein the first content and the second content are shown in the first showing animation, and the matching result window is configured to show the matching result of matching the second content with the first content (Fig. 5, element 103d, “Confrontation animation,” paras. [0094]-[0097]).
However, Xiao does not perform the above step in response to a matching degree between the second content and the first content being greater than or equal to a preset matching degree threshold, nor does Xiao require that in response to the matching degree between the second content and the first content being less than the preset matching degree threshold, displaying the matching result window. However, in analogous art, Qianqun discloses a system that can “[r]ecord the voice upload time corresponding to the target question and the target answer as the start time and end time respectively, and remove non-answer barrages from all the text data of the barrage generated between the start time and the end time Obtain the suspicious answer barrage, calculate the similarity value of each suspected answer barrage with the target answer, and screen out the suspect answer barrage corresponding to the one with the largest similarity value as the correct answer barrage, and remove the correct answer The barrage of other suspected answers is used as the barrage of wrong answers (page 3, lines 8-13).” 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 Xiao to allow for performing the above step in response to a matching degree between the second content and the first content being greater than or equal to a preset matching degree threshold, wherein in response to the matching degree between the second content and the first content being less than the preset matching degree threshold, displaying the matching result window. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for a most correct response to be selected, which could increase the accuracy of the content displayed to users.
Claims 4, 5, 7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (Pub. No.: US 2023/0326115) in view of Qianqun (Pub. No.: CN 111274370) and Lewis et al. (Pat. No.: US 9,628,575).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Xiao and Qianqun discloses the method according to claim 3, but it could be argued that the combination does not explicitly disclose after the playing the first showing animation of the first video sticker and displaying the matching result window, further comprising: showing a share poster comprising the first content and the second content in response to a share poster showing operation; and sharing the share poster in response to a share operation for the share poster. However, in analogous art, Lewis discloses that “FIG. 7 illustrates an example screenshot of a sharing promotion UI 700 provided to a user viewing a content item via a media player 710 at a client device. The sharing promotion UI 700 includes the media player 710 playing back the content item, a content item information section 730, a ‘Share’ tab 740, and a comments section 750. The sharing promotion UI 700 also includes the ‘share’ tab 740 displaying enhanced sharing promotion information 720. In one implementation, the sharing tab 740 with enhanced sharing promotion information 720 is shown as the default tab during the entire playback of the content item. The sharing promotion information 720 may include a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) 722 of the content item to be shared, a pop-up instruction arrow 724 guising the user to select the share buttons 726 of one or more of the highest scoring SNs of the SN scores computed for the user/content item pair (col. 11, ln. 54 – col. 12, ln. 3).” 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 Xiao and Qianqun to allow for after the playing the first showing animation of the first video sticker and displaying the matching result window, further comprising: showing a share poster comprising the first content and the second content in response to a share poster showing operation; and sharing the share poster in response to a share operation for the share poster. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow users to share information they found interesting with other users.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Xiao, Qianqun and Lewis discloses the method according to claim 4, and further discloses wherein when the share poster is triggered, a client triggering the share poster is instructed to play the first video with a time node corresponding to the first video sticker in the first video as a playing starting point (Xiao, para. [0108]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Xiao, Qianqun and Lewis discloses the method according to claim 4, and further discloses wherein a view control is displayed in the matching result window, the method further comprises: playing a second showing animation of the first video sticker in response to a triggering operation for the view control and displaying a share control in response to finishing the playing of the second showing animation, wherein the share control is configured for the current user to perform the share poster showing operation (Lewis, col. 11, ln. 54 – col. 12, ln. 3. This claim is rejected on the same grounds as claim 4.).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Xiao and Qianqun discloses the electronic device according to claim 19, but it could be argued that the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein, after the playing the first showing animation of the first video sticker and displaying the matching result window, the method further comprises: showing a share poster comprising the first content and the second content in response to a share poster showing operation; and sharing the share poster in response to a share operation for the share poster. However, in analogous art, Lewis discloses that “FIG. 7 illustrates an example screenshot of a sharing promotion UI 700 provided to a user viewing a content item via a media player 710 at a client device. The sharing promotion UI 700 includes the media player 710 playing back the content item, a content item information section 730, a ‘Share’ tab 740, and a comments section 750. The sharing promotion UI 700 also includes the ‘share’ tab 740 displaying enhanced sharing promotion information 720. In one implementation, the sharing tab 740 with enhanced sharing promotion information 720 is shown as the default tab during the entire playback of the content item. The sharing promotion information 720 may include a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) 722 of the content item to be shared, a pop-up instruction arrow 724 guising the user to select the share buttons 726 of one or more of the highest scoring SNs of the SN scores computed for the user/content item pair (col. 11, ln. 54 – col. 12, ln. 3).” 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 Xiao and Qianqun to allow for after the playing the first showing animation of the target video sticker and displaying the matching result window, further comprising: showing a share poster comprising the first content and the second content in response to a share poster showing operation; and sharing the share poster in response to a share operation for the share poster. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow users to share information they found interesting with other users.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (Pub. No.: US 2023/0326115) in view of Qianqun (Pub. No.: CN 111274370), Lewis et al. (Pat. No.: US 9,628,575) and Hooper (Pub. No.: US 2020/0159802).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Xiao, Qianqun and Lewis discloses the method according to claim 4, but does not disclose before the sharing the share poster in response to the share operation for the share poster, further comprising: saving the share poster to an album of the current user. However, in analogous art, Hooper discloses that “[i]n an example, posts that are saved to the favorites albums and sub albums can be tagged with the confirmed answer, which can appear below the photo with the date and time stamp of when the image was saved and/or confirmed. A user can select the saved image/post in the user's albums with the tagged answer, wherein upon selection, the user can be taken to that relevant website and/or search result to easily and efficiently find the relevant information relating to the image (para. [0057]).” 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 Xiao, Qianqun and Lewis to allow for before the sharing the share poster in response to the share operation for the share poster, further comprising: saving the share poster to an album of the current user. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for users to be able to save memorable or important information into an album to be able to easily access at a later time, which could increase user satisfaction with the system.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (Pub. No.: US 2023/0326115) in view of Sakamoto et al. (Pub. No.: US 2017/0270539).
Regarding claim 9, Xiao discloses the method according to claim 8, but does not disclose wherein the showing the matching message of the first video in the playing process of the first video comprises: when a bullet-screen comment showing function of a client is in an on state, showing the matching message of the first video in the playing process of the first video; the method further comprises: when the bullet-screen comment showing function of the client is in an off state, showing a first matching message of the first video in the playing process of the first video, wherein the first matching message of the first video is a matching message having a number of likes greater than a preset number threshold. However, in analogous art, Sakamoto discloses that “[o]ne or more filters may be utilized to limit the trending looks that are displayed on the GUI 100. For example, trending looks that are in a particular category (e.g., summer looks, fall looks, etc.) may be selected for display. In an embodiment, the one or more filters may be, for example, a checkbox or other selectable feature displayed on the GUI 100. In an embodiment, a trending look may not be displayed if it has less than a threshold number of likes. In an embodiment, trending looks in certain categories, such as out of season, may not be shown (para. [0041]).” 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 Xiao to allow for the showing the matching message of the first video in the playing process of the first video to comprise: when a bullet-screen comment showing function of a client is in an on state, showing the matching message of the first video in the playing process of the first video; the method further comprises: when the bullet-screen comment showing function of the client is in an off state, showing a first matching message of the first video in the playing process of the first video, wherein the first matching message of the first video is a matching message having a number of likes greater than a preset number threshold. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow users to better control when matching messages were shown, and for only messages of a certain popularity to be shown in certain scenarios, which could increase user satisfaction with the system.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (Pub. No.: US 2023/0326115) in view of Orlova et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0018386).
Regarding claim 10, Xiao discloses the method according to claim 8, but does not disclose wherein the showing the matching message of the first video comprises: for each matching message, showing the matching message in a first showing style in response to a matching degree between the second content and the first content comprised in the matching message being greater than or equal to a preset matching degree threshold; and showing the matching message in a second showing style in response to the matching degree between the second content and the first content comprised in the matching message being less than the preset matching degree threshold. However, in analogous art, Orlova discloses that “the second interactive display further includes a graphical indication of a threshold for values in each of the single parameter charts or graphs. In some embodiments, the graphical indication of the threshold includes a line. In some embodiments, the graphical indication of the threshold includes a different style of display for data falling below the threshold than for data above the threshold in each of the plurality of single parameter charts or graphs (para. [0040]).” 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 Xiao to allow for the showing the matching message of the first video to comprise: for each matching message, showing the matching message in a first showing style in response to a matching degree between the second content and the first content comprised in the matching message being greater than or equal to a preset matching degree threshold; and showing the matching message in a second showing style in response to the matching degree between the second content and the first content comprised in the matching message being less than the preset matching degree threshold. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for more relevant information to be shown in a more noticeable manner, which could increase user satisfaction with the system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 20, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. First, as shown above, Examiner has rejected the claims under 35 USC § 112, and thus some of Applicant’s arguments are moot, as the claims do not necessarily require what Applicant is arguing that said claims require.
Second, as shown in the above rejection, when the newly added limitation of “wherein the target first video sticker is added to frames of a target first video when the first video is edited” is read as supported in Applicant’s specification, the disclosure of Xiao still reads on it, as is also the case with the newly added limitation “wherein the first content is a content to be matched that is comprised in the first video sticker, and the second content is a content input by the current user,” which, when read in a broad but reasonable manner, is disclosed by Xiao, which discloses three different images in figure 5, which show different versions of a “message” which includes both the first content (which can be seen as “content to be matched,” as any comment or question, when responded to or answered, can be seen as being matched) and the second content (content input by the current user). Therefore, Examiner maintains the rejection in view of Xiao, though the rejection has been modified in order to address the newly amended claim language.
Conclusion
Claims 1-13 and 15-21 are rejected.
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 Joshua D Taylor whose telephone number is (571)270-3755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 6 pm.
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, 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.
/Joshua D Taylor/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426 April 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights