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 .
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 8-9, of applicant’s response, applicant states that “As understood from the above, the event indicators in Law are events that can occur in or during the program being presented, for example, the first appearance of a particular actor and a particular song during the program. The event indicators in Law are not the object identifiers corresponding to a plurality of explanation objects associated with the target video.”
In response to applicant’s arguments, it is first noted that applicant has only provided a general statement that “The event indicators in Law are not the object identifiers…” with no specific argument as to why this would be the case.
It is further noted that Law specifically discloses, as seen at Fig. 10 and paragraph 95-97, that the interactive layer includes a plurality of events, with an indication of the ID, timing and description of the event. The defined layer maps code for an event indicator and content items associated with the event (paragraph 96-97). These content items may include a web page, audio content, video content, image content, additional code for performing further interaction, games (e.g., video games), or other service. (see Fig. 8, paragraph 92).
The object identifiers are configured to trigger a preset interaction event of a corresponding explanation object (Fig. 1C; paragraph 31, 44), and the object identifiers include an object identifier corresponding to target explanation objects, and a display state of the first target explanation object satisfies a preset condition (as each event includes an event ID and corresponding event indicator, interactive content to display and a conditional triggering event code; see Fig. 10, paragraph 31, 34-35, 92-97).
Thus, the interactive layer corresponding to the video includes a set of plural event identifier (corresponding to the claimed object identifiers) which are each associated with plural content items (corresponding to the claimed explanation objects).
Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not convincing, as Law discloses the claimed language as currently written. Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art and applicant’s “technical solution” are no more than a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention and do not provide any arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims patentable over the applied references.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-7, 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Law et al. (Law) (US 2012/0159327) (of record).
As to claim 1, Law discloses a page display method, comprising:
playing a target video in a preset page (video content presented and displayed on interface; see Fig. 1A-2; paragraph 25, 27, 37, 46, 85);
displaying an object identifier set associated with the target video in the preset page (see Fig. 1A-C, event indicators; paragraph 26), wherein the object identifier set includes object identifiers respectively corresponding to a plurality of explanation objects associated with the target video (Fig. 1A-C, event indicators 18, 20, associated with additional content related to the event; paragraph 26-31,106-107), and the object identifier set includes a first object identifier (interface layer with plural event IDs for different events during the video; Fig. 8, 10, paragraph 92-97) displayed in a first display mode and a second object identifier displayed in a second display mode (event 20, shown differently based upon the program timeline or user selection; Fig. 1B-C; paragraph 27, 31, 106-107), the first object identifier is configured to trigger a preset interaction event of a corresponding explanation object (Fig. 1C; paragraph 31, 44), and the first object identifier includes an object identifier corresponding to a first target explanation object, and a display state of the first target explanation object satisfies a preset condition (each event including event ID, content to display and triggering event code; see Fig. 10, paragraph 31, 34-35, 92-97).
As to claim 2, Law discloses wherein the preset condition includes that the display state of the first target explanation object is in an explaining state, or the first target explanation object has entered the explaining state because the object identifier corresponding to the first target explanation object is triggered by a user (paragraph 31, 40);
a target explanation object with a display state being an explaining state is determined according to a triggering operation of the user for a corresponding object identifier (user selection to display options; paragraph 31), or according to current play progress of the target video (automatically provided when the timeline reaches the event; paragraph 40).
As to claim 3, Law discloses wherein the target video includes a live broadcast playback video (live broadcast; paragraph 24, 44).
As to claim 4, Law discloses wherein differences between the first display mode and the second display mode include: different display styles and/or different display positions (events have different positions and shading based on timeline; Fig. 1B-C; paragraph 26-27, 31).
As to claim 5, Law discloses wherein the first object identifier includes an associated image (paragraph 27), associated text information (Fig. 1B-2; paragraph 27, 31, 35, 38) and a first preset control of the corresponding explanation object, the first preset control is configured to trigger the preset interaction event (triggering code for event ID, time and additional content; paragraph 27, 34-35, 102-106);
the second object identifier includes an associated image of a corresponding explanation object (other events at the same or different time on the timeline; Fig. 1A-C; paragraph 27, 35-36, 106-107),
a display area of the first object identifier is larger than a display area of the second object identifier (sized based on options/text; see Fig. 1C-2, paragraph 32, 92, 96).
As to claim 6, Law discloses wherein, in response to the object identifier set not including an object identifier triggered by the user, a current first object identifier is an object identifier corresponding to the first target explanation object (an event automatically provided when the timeline reaches the event; paragraph 40).
As to claim 7, Law discloses wherein, in response to the object identifier set including at least one object identifier triggered by the user, a current first object identifier is an object identifier recently triggered by the user (user selection to display options; paragraph 31, 106-107).
As to claim 10, Law discloses
in response to a preset operation, switching the object identifier set being displayed in the preset page to a hidden state (hidden display of timeline/events when not near an event; paragraph 26);
determining a second target explanation object according to the current play progress of the target video (next event in timeline approaching; paragraph 26-29, 35);
in response to the object identifier set being in the hidden state (paragraph 26), displaying the object identifier corresponding to the second target explanation object in the preset page in a target display mode, wherein the target display mode is different from the first display mode and the second display mode (Fig. 8, 10; paragraph 27-35, 92, 95-97), and the target display mode is associated with a display mode of the second target explanation object in a live broadcast process (interactive events for live content, such as a sporting event; paragraph 43-44, 86), a displaying style in the live broadcast process includes a presentation in a form of an explanation card in a preset area of the live broadcast page, and the explanation card displays explaining state information, explanation object associated information and a second preset control, and the second preset control is configured to trigger the preset interaction event (Fig. 1A-C, next event indicator for a particular time event associated with additional content related to the event; paragraph 26-31,106-107).
As to claim 11, Law discloses wherein displaying an object identifier set associated with the target video in the preset page comprises: in response to a triggering operation of a user for a preset expansion control in the preset page, displaying the object identifier set associated with the target video in the preset page (timeline and events are displayed onscreen in response to user command; paragraph 26).
As to claim 12, Law discloses a page display device (200; Fig. 3, 7; paragraph 42-43, 46, 85-88), comprising:
a video play module (play engine, 600; paragraph 85-88), configured to play a target video in a preset page (video content presented and displayed on interface; see Fig. 1A-2; paragraph 25, 27, 37, 46, 85);
an object identifier display module (play engine, 600; paragraph 85-88), configured to display an object identifier set associated with the target video in the preset page (see Fig. 1A-C, event indicators; paragraph 26), wherein the object identifier set includes object identifiers respectively corresponding to a plurality of explanation objects associated with the target video (Fig. 1A-C, event indicators 18, 20, associated with additional content related to the event; paragraph 26-31,106-107), and the object identifier set includes a first object identifier (interface layer with plural event IDs for different events during the video; Fig. 8, 10, paragraph 92-97) displayed in a first display mode and a second object identifier displayed in a second display mode (event 20, shown differently based upon the program timeline or user selection; Fig. 1B-C; paragraph 27, 31, 106-107), the first object identifier is configured to trigger a preset interaction event of a corresponding explanation object (Fig. 1C; paragraph 31, 44), and the first object identifier includes an object identifier corresponding to a first target explanation object, and a display state of the first target explanation object satisfies a preset condition (each event including event ID, content to display and triggering event code; see Fig. 10, paragraph 31, 34-35, 92-97).
As to claim 13, Law discloses an electronic device (Fig. 6, 500; paragraph 71) comprising:
at least one processor (501, paragraph 71-78);
a storage device (506, 543; paragraph 71, 74), configured to store at least one program, wherein, the at least one program upon execution by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:
play a target video in a preset page (video content presented and displayed on interface; see Fig. 1A-2; paragraph 25, 27, 37, 46, 85);
display an object identifier display module (play engine, 600; paragraph 85-88), configured to display an object identifier set associated with the target video in the preset page (see Fig. 1A-C, event indicators; paragraph 26), wherein the object identifier set includes object identifiers respectively corresponding to a plurality of explanation objects associated with the target video (Fig. 1A-C, event indicators 18, 20, associated with additional content related to the event; paragraph 26-31,106-107), and the object identifier set includes a first object identifier (interface layer with plural event IDs for different events during the video; Fig. 8, 10, paragraph 92-97) displayed in a first display mode and a second object identifier displayed in a second display mode (event 20, shown differently based upon the program timeline or user selection; Fig. 1B-C; paragraph 27, 31, 106-107), the first object identifier is configured to trigger a preset interaction event of a corresponding explanation object (Fig. 1C; paragraph 31, 44), and the first object identifier includes an object identifier corresponding to a first target explanation object, and a display state of the first target explanation object satisfies a preset condition (each event including event ID, content to display and triggering event code; see Fig. 10, paragraph 31, 34-35, 92-97).
As to claim 14, Law discloses wherein the preset condition includes that the display state of the first target explanation object is in an explaining state, or the first target explanation object has entered the explaining state because the object identifier corresponding to the first target explanation object is triggered by a user (paragraph 31, 40);
a target explanation object with a display state being an explaining state is determined according to a triggering operation of the user for a corresponding object identifier (user selection to display options; paragraph 31), or according to current play progress of the target video (automatically provided when the timeline reaches the event; paragraph 40).
As to claim 15, Law discloses wherein the target video includes a live broadcast playback video (live broadcast; paragraph 24, 44).
As to claim 16, Law discloses wherein differences between the first display mode and the second display mode include: different display styles and/or different display positions (events have different positions and shading based on timeline; Fig. 1B-C; paragraph 26-27, 31).
As to claim 17, Law discloses wherein the first object identifier includes an associated image (paragraph 27), associated text information (Fig. 1B-2; paragraph 27, 31, 35, 38) and a first preset control of the corresponding explanation object, the first preset control is configured to trigger the preset interaction event (triggering code for event ID, time and additional content; paragraph 27, 34-35, 102-106);
the second object identifier includes an associated image of a corresponding explanation object (other events at the same or different time on the timeline; Fig. 1A-C; paragraph 27, 35-36, 106-107),
a display area of the first object identifier is larger than a display area of the second object identifier (sized based on options/text; see Fig. 1C-2, paragraph 32, 92, 96).
As to claim 18, Law discloses wherein, in response to the object identifier set not including an object identifier triggered by the user, a current first object identifier is an object identifier corresponding to the first target explanation object (an event automatically provided when the timeline reaches the event; paragraph 40).
As to claim 19, Law discloses wherein, in response to the object identifier set including at least one object identifier triggered by the user, a current first object identifier is an object identifier recently triggered by the user (user selection to display options; paragraph 31, 106-107).
As to claim 20, Law discloses a non-transitory storage medium containing computer-executable instructions (506, 543; paragraph 71, 74), wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by a computer processor (501, paragraph 71-78) are configured to perform the page display method according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Law in view of Ohliger et al. (Ohliger) (US 11,432,046) (of record).
As to claim 8, while Law discloses in response to a triggering operation of a user for a target object identifier, determining a target progress corresponding to an explanation object to which the target object identifier belongs in the target video (triggering an event invokes the appropriate code based upon the event timestamp; paragraph 102-106), wherein the target object identifier is a second object identifier before being triggered (triggering a previous event the viewer originally missed or ignored; paragraph 36), Law fails to specifically disclose adjusting current play progress of the target video to the target progress.
In an analogous art, Ohliger discloses a system which will display a video with a set of object identifies (video content displayed with interactive layer of time synchronized selectable objects; Fig. 1, column 11, line 50-column 12, line 50, column 23, line 18-24), wherein in response to a triggering operation of a user for a target object identifier, determining a target progress corresponding to an object to which the target object identifier belongs in the video, wherein the target object identifier is a second object identifier before being triggered and adjusting current play progress of the target video to the target progress (user selection of a previously shown object will jump the video back to the scenes in which the object appeared; column 23, line 62-column 24, line 20) so as to allow the viewer to easily navigate and view the scene containing the desired object (column 24, line 11-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Law’s system to include adjusting current play progress of the target video to the target progress, as taught in combination with Ohliger, for the typical benefit of allowing the viewer to easily navigate and view the scene containing the desired object (column 24, line 11-20).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Law in view of Conte (US 2015/0245103) (of record).
As to claim 9, while Law discloses displaying at least two page entries of the preset page in a target page, wherein different page entries correspond to different initial play progress of the target video after entering the preset page (Fig. 1A-C, event indicators 18, 20, associated with different events occurring at different times; paragraph 26-35,106-107),
wherein the at least two page entries include a first page entry and/or a second page entry (Fig. 1A-C, paragraph 26-31,106-107),
an initial play progress corresponding to the first page entry is a starting point of the target video (paragraph 101-104);
an initial play progress corresponding to the second page entry is an initial explaining time corresponding to a preset explanation object among the plurality of explanation objects (event starting later in the program; paragraph 26-35,101-106),
Law fails to specifically disclose wherein the preset explanation object is an explanation object whose popularity property satisfies a preset requirement.
In an analogous art, Conte discloses a system which will display a video with a set of object identifies (video content displayed with interactive layer of time synchronized selectable objects; Fig. 2-3; paragraph 56-64, 70), wherein a preset explanation object is an explanation object whose popularity property satisfies a preset requirement (items reaching relative popularity “heat” levels are modified; paragraph 40, 71, 75) so as to allow the viewer to easily identify the relative popularity of different items (paragraph 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Law’s system to include wherein the preset explanation object is an explanation object whose popularity property satisfies a preset requirement, as taught in combination with Conte, for the typical benefit of allowing the viewer to easily identify the relative popularity of different items (paragraph 40).
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 James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at (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.
/James R Sheleheda/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424