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 .
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) 21, 27, 29, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shosan (U.S. PGPUB 2016/0317933) in view of Gurumurthy (U.S. PGPUB 2020/0269136).
Re claim 21, 27, 29, and 35: Shosan discloses a method, comprising:
receiving a recording of recorded from a game being played by a user (see paragraph [0053]: “FIG. 8 shows an example according to embodiments in which the audio/video stream is uploaded by the gameplay publisher to a remote server;” wherein uploading is synonymous is receiving), the recording comprising a video segment of gameplay (see paragraph [0053]: audio/video stream); identifying a game objective by using the recording as an input; selecting a content item based on the game objective (see paragraph [0063]: “The recommendation engine may search the database for relevant advice related to the location/situation the content consumer is in. The search may be partially based on pairing a clip having a location/situation which substantially matches that of the heuristic conclusion of the content consumer's location/situation.” Here it is inherent that an objective is identified as overcoming an obstacle related to the specific location/situation); and providing the content item to the user (see paragraph [0063]: “According to this embodiment, when the content consumer reaches a point in the game that meets his search criteria, the gameplay support module may alert the content consumer that there is an available tutorial that matches his search criteria, the alert may be in the form of a popup that will appear on the screen (e.g. at the top right corner), the popup may be for example in the form of a textbox or an icon, or the alert can be audible, or both. Upon receiving an alert, the content consumer may click the popup or some keyboard key to view the tutorial, alternatively, if there are several tutorials that meet the search criteria, a search window such as shown for example in FIG. 4 may open to enable the content consumer choose the clip he is interested watching.”).
While Shoshan discloses the use of a heuristic module and programming for determining game parameters and for identifying game objectives and game tutorials to provide to the user (see paragraph [0044, 0063]). Therefore, Shosan fails to disclose “using machine learning to identify a game objective by using the recording as an input.” However, Gurumurthy, discloses a machine learning model for video games for reviewing game data, determining and selecting advice based on said gameplay data, and offering said advice to players. Gurumurthy further disclose identifying goals from a player’s gameplay data to offer advice to the player (see paragraphs [0032, 0046]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to simply substitute the heuristic module of Shoshan for advising players, with the machine learning model of Gurumuthy, as such would have produced the predictable results of a machine learning model based system for determining advice to issue to a player.
Re claims 22, 30, and 36: Shosan discloses with respect to the method of claim 21, wherein the using machine learning to identify a game objective by using the recording as an input comprises: identifying the game objective from a game objectives database with which the machine learning interacts by comparing a gameplay audio segment in the recording with an audio segment in the game objectives database (see paragraph [0053]: “The game parameter extraction application (300) has an audio correlation module (307) which receives the audio stream (302) of the gameplay and correlates it to known streams of the game stored in a sound database (304)).
Re claims 24, 32, and 38: Shosan fails to disclose with respect to the method of claim 21, wherein the selecting a content item based on the game objective comprises: using the machine learning to identify the content item. However, Gurumurthy discloses that the machine learning identifies and selects strategies to provide to the player (see paragraph [0012, 0062]).
Re claims 28 and 40: Shosan discloses with respect to the method of claim 21, further comprising: receiving a game guide request from the user (see paragraphs [0045, 0063]).
Claim(s) 23, 26, 31, 34, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shosan in view of Gurumurthy in further view of Aghdale (U.S. Patent No. 10,279,264).
Re claims 25, 33, and 39: Shosan in view of Gurumurthy fails to disclose with respect to the method of claim 24, wherein the selecting a content item based on the game objective further comprises: selecting the content item from a game guide database with which the machine learning interacts. However, Aghdale discloses a game guide lookup table that associates specific goals with game guides wherein a game state model, i.e. machine learning model, selects from the lookup table to offer advice to the player (column 10, lines 34-46). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, the modify the model of Shosan with a machine learning supported lookup table of Aghdale for the purpose of having a retrievable set of moves that can be accessed quickly, thus using less processing power.
Re claims 26 and 34: Shosan in view of Gurumurthy fails with respect to the method of claim 25, wherein the game guide database is one or more of arranged, added to, updated, or modified via the machine learning. However, the lookup table of Aghdale teaches such (column 12, lines 4-14).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23, 31, and 37 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINALD A RENWICK whose telephone number is (571)270-1913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571)270-1344. 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.
REGINALD A. RENWICK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3714
/REGINALD A RENWICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights