DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 timewise 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 obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent 12,052,455. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
The current application (18/748,941) …equates to…U.S. Pat. (12,052,455).
As to claim 1, the claimed “A method…” equates to “A method…” of Pat ‘455 (col.15, lines 9-47);
the claimed “at a first time: receiving…transcoding…at second time… generating…transcoding and storing” equates to “at a first time: receiving…transcoding…at second time… generating…transcoding and storing” of Pat ‘455 (col.20, lines 7-30);
Claims 2-11 are met in claims 2-11 of Pat ‘455.
As to claims 12, the claimed “A method…” is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed with respect to claims 1.
Claims 13-16 are met as discussed in claims 2-11.
As to claims 17, the claimed “A method…” is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed with respect to claims 1.
Claims 18-20 are met as discussed in claims 2-11
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other; i.e., the current claims are broader in scope than the parent allowed claims. Allowance of claims 1-20 of the instant application would result in an unjustified timewise extension of the monopoly defined by patent claim Y.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
5. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MUFTI (2015/0221316) in view of RAMALEY (2017/0280181)
As to claims 1-2, MUFTI discloses media content marking and tracking method and apparatus and further discloses a method comprising:
at first time: receiving, from a first viewer population, a first request for a first playback segment of a video in a first rendition, the first playback segment: corresponding to a first mezzanine segment in a first mezzanine; and " comprising a first set of frames; transcoding the first mezzanine segment into a first rendition segment in the first rendition; storing the first rendition segment for access by the first viewer population; accessing a first set of viewership data for the first playback segment; and generating a first viewership count based on the first set of viewership data, the first viewership count representing a first quantity of views of the first playback segment during a first period (figs.1-17 [0024-0030], [0042-0057], [0061-0080], [0090-0109] and [0120-0130]), Server receives ratings, rankings, etc., associated with content and consumer or consumers request to play segments of media content, generates first, second, third to nth portions of the content are identified and set of audio codes (playlist queue) are embedded or encodes; stores segments of media content to a database for multicast broadcast and/or unicast transmission per request from consumer device; presents for consumption for a specific type of video player; the video player or server Identifies the codes or generates an event(s) within the segments of the video and plays the portions accordingly; consumer devices or server may detect an event: detects object code or ID (Global object: standard code, third-party code, etc., e.g. ID or code such as EIDR, Ad-ID and/or SMPTE-UNID, etc. or watermark, signatures and/or other environment signals) associated audio codes of the content; the event signals playout of the content at the consumer or server, to playout segments of the content: audio, video, image, etc. using the playlist codes or queued codes of the content segments; embedded ID codes may include predefined audio watermark or audio signatures which are tracked and Identified, may be associated with a content and plurality or set of ID codes and based on the identifier associated with the object or content, the audio or video segment may be playback accordingly; stores various ID codes including thirty-party ID codes to generate various segments of the content accordingly; accessible by various video players on-demand and
at a second time: succeeding the first period: receiving a second request from a second viewer population for a second playback segment of the video in the first rendition, the second playback segment: corresponding to a second mezzanine segment in the first mezzanine; and " comprising a second set of frames; generating a second modified rendition segment in the first rendition by, for
each frame in the second set of frames transcoding the frame into a modified frame, of the second modified rendition segment, based on the first viewership count; and storing the second modified rendition segment for access by the second viewer population ([0024-0030], [0042-0057], [0061-0080], [0090-0109] and [0120-0130]), generates dynamic streaming or content based on device type and various conditions associated with devices within a geographic location during specific identified events associated with the stream; accessing a second set of viewership data for the second playback segment; and generating a second viewership count based on the second set of viewership data, the second viewership count representing a second quantity of views of the second playback segment during a second period; and at a third time: receiving a third request for a third playback segment in the first rendition from a third viewer population, the third playback segment: corresponding to a third mezzanine segment; and comprising a third set of frames; for each frame in the third set of frames: generating a frame of a third rendition segment by transcoding a frame of the third mezzanine segment into the first rendition; and executing a script on the frame of the third rendition segment based on the second viewership count to generate a modified frame of a third modified rendition segment; and storing the third modified rendition segment for access by the third viewer population ([0024-0030], [0042-0057], [0061-0080], [0090-0109] and [0120-0130]), consumer devices or server may detect an event: detects object code or ID (Global object: standard code, third-party code, etc., e.g. ID or code such as EIDR, Ad-ID and/or SMPTE-UNID, etc. or watermark, signatures and/or other environment signals) associated audio codes of the content; the event signals playout of the content at the consumer or server, to playout segments of the content: audio, video, image, etc. using the playlist codes or queued codes of the content segments; embedded ID codes may include predefined audio watermark or audio signatures which are tracked and Identified, may be associated with a content and plurality or set of ID codes and based on the identifier associated with the object or content, the audio or video segment may be playback accordingly; stores various ID codes including thirty-party ID codes to generate various segments of the content accordingly; accessible by various video players on-demand.
MUFTI discloses ranking aggregated content, tracks and monitors, which consumer or consumers viewed media content and how the media content was viewed; i.e. consumption of various segments of the content and update consumer or consumers request accordingly based of the results (Abstract and [0084-0097]), BUT appears silent as to generating plurality of playlist and/or manifest based viewership score or using other viewing data during streaming of content media.
However, in the same field of endeavor, RAMALEY discloses systems and methods for content and/or ad continuity and further discloses generating playlist and/or manifest based viewership score or using other viewing data during streaming of content media (figs.1-8, Abstract, [0002-0003], [0023-0039], [0041-0049] and [0055-0061]).
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of RAMALEY into the system of MUFTI to use other viewing statistics to generate additional playlist as desired for specific application(s)
Claims 3-5 are meet as previously discussed in claims 1-2.
Claims 6-10 are meet as previously discussed in claims 1-2.
As to claims 12-13, the claimed “A method is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed in claims 1-2.
Claims 14-16 are meet as previously discussed in claims 1-2.
As to claims 17-18, the claimed “A method is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed in claims 1-2.
Claims 19-20 are meet as previously discussed in claims 1-2.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNAN Q SHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7355. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4.
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, BRUCKART BENJAMIN can be reached on 571-272-3982. 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.
/ANNAN Q SHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
ANNAN Q. SHANG