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 .
Double Patenting
2. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper time wise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
3. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,036,470. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both describe the same method comprising: receiving, at a server, user action data characterizing action by a player in a game environment executing at a user client, the game environment created by the user client separate from the server; receiving data characterizing a selected viewing position, the selected viewing position characterizing a viewing location within the game environment; generating, from the user action data, a recreated game environment at the server; generating a video stream of the recreated game environment, the video stream including video of past action by the player from a perspective of the selected viewing position, the past action associated with a selected point in time; and transmitting the video stream to a viewing client (see claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,036,470).
4. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,583,764. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both describe the same method comprising: receiving, at a server, user action data characterizing action by a player in a game environment executing at a user client, the game environment created by the user client separate from the server; receiving data characterizing a selected viewing position, the selected viewing position characterizing a viewing location within the game environment; generating, from the user action data, a recreated game environment at the server; generating a video stream of the recreated game environment, the video stream including video of past action by the player from a perspective of the selected viewing position, the past action associated with a selected point in time; and transmitting the video stream to a viewing client (see claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,583,764).
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,960,306. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both describe the same method comprising: receiving, at a server, user action data characterizing action by a player in a game environment executing at a user client, the game environment created by the user client separate from the server; receiving data characterizing a selected viewing position, the selected viewing position characterizing a viewing location within the game environment; generating, from the user action data, a recreated game environment at the server; generating a video stream of the recreated game environment, the video stream including video of past action by the player from a perspective of the selected viewing position, the past action associated with a selected point in time; and transmitting the video stream to a viewing client (see claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,960,306).
6. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,421,011. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both describe the same method comprising: receiving, at a server, user action data characterizing action by a player in a game environment executing at a user client, the game environment created by the user client separate from the server; receiving data characterizing a selected viewing position, the selected viewing position characterizing a viewing location within the game environment; generating, from the user action data, a recreated game environment at the server; generating a video stream of the recreated game environment, the video stream including video of past action by the player from a perspective of the selected viewing position, the past action associated with a selected point in time; and transmitting the video stream to a viewing client (see claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,421,011).
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,016,674. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both describe the same method comprising: receiving, at a server, user action data characterizing action by a player in a game environment executing at a user client, the game environment created by the user client separate from the server; receiving data characterizing a selected viewing position, the selected viewing position characterizing a viewing location within the game environment; generating, from the user action data, a recreated game environment at the server; generating a video stream of the recreated game environment, the video stream including video of past action by the player from a perspective of the selected viewing position, the past action associated with a selected point in time; and transmitting the video stream to a viewing client (see claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,016,674).
8. Claims 1-20 of the present application, discloses every element and limitation of the claims of US Patented applications and are therefore an obvious variant thereof.
This is an obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADETOKUNBO OLUSEGUN TORIMIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-1345. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri (8am - 4pm).
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, Peter Vasat can be reached on (571)270-7625. 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.
/ADETOKUNBO O TORIMIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights