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 .
Miscellaneous
Claims pending: 1-20
Claims amended: 1, 4, 9, 13, 15, 18,
Claims cancelled: n/a
New claims: n/a
Response to Double patenting
Applicant’s mention of intent to file Terminal Disclaimer with regard to patent 12052457 can overcome the double patent issue, however to date no Terminal Disclaimer has been filed, thus the double patent issue still stands as stated in prior rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 9, 15, have been fully considered.
Regarding applicant’s remarks dated 11/20/2025, regarding none of the cited references teach the amended portions of claim(s) 1, 9, 15, especially not Schmidt due to the different way multicast address is used.
However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Badt, see below action for detailed explanation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 9, 15, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US PGPUB: 20120311635) to (Mushkatblat) in view of (US PGPUB: 20160037215) to (Cardona) in view of (20080276267) to (Badt).
Regarding claim(s) 1, 15, Mushkatblat disclose receiving, by an electronic program guide (EPG) server, a plurality of requests for an EPG from a corresponding plurality of client devices. Identifying, by the EPG server, a first subset of the plurality of client devices as corresponding to a first virtual zone, the first virtual zone associated with a first characteristic, and a second subset of the plurality of client devices as corresponding to a second virtual zone, the second virtual zone associated with a second characteristic, and generating, by the EPG server, a first EPG corresponding to the first virtual zone comprising a first media stream, and generating, by the EPG server, a second EPG corresponding to the second virtual zone, providing, by the EPG server, the first/second EPG to subsets of the plurality of devices, wherein the first subset of the plurality of client devices is distinct from the second subset of the plurality of client devices, the first virtual zone is distinct from the second virtual zone, the first characteristic is distinct from the second characteristic, the first EPG is distinct from the second EPG. (Mushkatblat P. 29, 56, 61, 85, 97, 123 displaying different EPG guides with different clients in different geographical locations based on their content geography and content availabilities, programming guide is provided to device via user request (P. 61))
Mushkatblat fails to specifically disclose an identification of a first substream comprising a plurality of chunks of a first media stream and a first one or more additional chunks of inserted content, and a first multicast address; and an identification of a second substream comprising the plurality of chunks of first media stream and a second one or more additional chunks of inserted content, and a second multicast address, the first substream is distinct from the second substream, the first one or more additional chunks of inserted content are distinct from the second one or more additional chunks of inserted content,
Cardona disclose an identification of a first substream comprising a plurality of chunks of a first media stream and a first one or more additional chunks of inserted content, and a first multicast address; and an identification of a second substream comprising the plurality of chunks of first media stream and a second one or more additional chunks of inserted content, and a second multicast address, the first substream is distinct from the second substream, the first one or more additional chunks of inserted content are distinct from the second one or more additional chunks of inserted content. (Fig. 5-7, P. 12-13, 43, 116-117 broadcast streams which are national streams (w national ads) edited into multicast streams with localized ads based on localized zip codes to be and multiplexed/multicast to corresponding groups in local zip codes, specifically local stations (RAL, CLT, etc. stations) individual multicast streams are encrypted with localized ads and serve specific zip codes, showing up on local zip code EPG as the same channel (RAL, CLT, etc. stations))
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 Mushkatblat by an identification of a first substream comprising a plurality of chunks of a first media stream and a first one or more additional chunks of inserted content, and a first multicast address; and an identification of a second substream comprising the plurality of chunks of first media stream and a second one or more additional chunks of inserted content, and a second multicast address as taught by Cardona in order to effectively provide live stream via an IPTV environment.
Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt fails to specifically disclose first multicast address is distinct from second multicast address.
Badt teach first multicast address is distinct from second multicast address. (Fig. 3-4, P. 10-12, 33, 41, 45-48, 53-54, Each sink node 130a and 130b transmits a respective subscribe message 140a and 140b towards the merge node 120 to subscribe to the multicast address associated with the TV program X 105, … subscribe message is modified to contain an additional field including the commercial source address. This results in what is, in effect, a two-part address, the program source address (i.e., the multicast group address for Program X) and the commercial source address (i.e., the multicast group address for Commercial Y) for the subscribe message, … one way is to modify the format of the subscribe packet to have a two-part address, which creates a customized multicast address for subscribe message from the sink client to view their broadcast channel with their customized ads inserted, and the different two-part addresses for different sink clients reads on (first and second multicast addresses)).
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 Mushkatblat in view of Cardona by first multicast address is distinct from second multicast address as taught by Badt in order to provide IPTV architecture that dynamically delivers different commercials to different viewers.
Regarding claim(s) 9, Mushkatblat discloses receiving, from an electronic program guide (EPG) server by a streaming server, an identification of a first media stream, receiving, by the streaming server, a plurality of chunks of a first media stream; generating, by the streaming server, a first substream, generating, by the streaming server, a second substream, streaming, the first/second substream(s) to a first plurality of client devices corresponding to a first/second virtual zone Identified by the EPG server, the first and second virtual zone associated with a first and second characteristic respectively. (Mushkatblat P. 29, 56, 85, 97, 123 displaying different EPG guides with different clients in different geographical locations (virtual zones) based on their content geography and content availabilities, programming guide is provided to device via user request (P. 61))
Mushkatblat teach first and second virtual zones.
Mushkatblat fails to specifically disclose first multicast corresponding to a first zone, single second multicast corresponding to second zone, a subset of plurality of chunks of first media stream and a first one or more additional chunks of inserted content, a second substream comprising subset of plurality of chunks of first media stream and a second one or more additional chunks of inserted content.
Cardona disclose first multicast corresponding to a first zone, single second multicast corresponding to second zone, a subset of plurality of chunks of first media stream and a first one or more additional chunks of inserted content, a second substream comprising subset of plurality of chunks of first media stream and a second one or more additional chunks of inserted content. (Fig. 5-7, P. 12-13, 43, 116-117 broadcast streams which are national streams (w national ads) edited into multicast streams with localized ads based on localized zip codes to be and multiplexed/multicast to corresponding groups in local zip codes, specifically local stations (RAL, CLT, etc. stations) individual multicast streams are encrypted with localized ads and serve specific zip codes, showing up on local zip code EPG as the same channel (RAL, CLT, etc. stations))
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 Mushkatblat by first multicast corresponding to a first zone, single second multicast corresponding to second zone, a subset of plurality of chunks of first media stream and a first one or more additional chunks of inserted content, a second substream comprising subset of plurality of chunks of first media stream and a second one or more additional chunks of inserted content as taught by Cardona in order to effectively provide live stream via an IPTV environment.
Mushkatblat in view of Cardona fails to specifically disclose first and second multicast addresses, first multicast address is distinct from second multicast address.
Badt teach first and second multicast addresses, first multicast address is distinct from second multicast address. (Fig. 3-4, P. 10-12, 33, 41, 45-48, 53-54, Each sink node 130a and 130b transmits a respective subscribe message 140a and 140b towards the merge node 120 to subscribe to the multicast address associated with the TV program X 105, … subscribe message is modified to contain an additional field including the commercial source address. This results in what is, in effect, a two-part address, the program source address (i.e., the multicast group address for Program X) and the commercial source address (i.e., the multicast group address for Commercial Y) for the subscribe message, … one way is to modify the format of the subscribe packet to have a two-part address, which creates a customized multicast address for subscribe message from the sink client to view their broadcast channel with their customized ads inserted, and the different two-part addresses for different sink clients reads on first and second multicast addresses, first multicast address is distinct from second multicast address)).
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 Mushkatblat in view of Cardona by first and second multicast addresses, first multicast address is distinct from second multicast address as taught by Badt in order to provide IPTV architecture that dynamically delivers different commercials to different viewers.
Regarding claim(s) 5, Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt disclose the method, the first subset, and the second subset.
Mushkatblat further disclose a first client device of first subset and a second client device of second subset are within a same geographic region. (Mushkatblat P. 70, different members of a household who have different EPG interfaces (content and/or layout) are part of the same geographical location, but different grouping based on how their EPG are categorized)
Claim(s) 4, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US PGPUB: 20120311635) to (Mushkatblat) in view of (US PGPUB: 20160037215) to (Cardona) in view of (20080276267) to (Badt) in view of (US PGPUB: 20080310408) to (Thompson)
Regarding claim(s) 4, Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt disclose the first and second virtual zones, the first and second characteristics, and client devices of the first and second subsets.
Thompson disclose virtual zone associated with a policy, the policy comprising the characteristics, and wherein a first client device of the first subset and a second client device of the second subset are within a same geographic region, wherein characteristics are associated with one or more of a bandwidth requirement, a device type, or a device capability of each of plurality of client devices. (Thompson P. 44, 54, 61-62 IPTV environment wherein group classification happens based on device ID and characteristic information, and Each master set-top box manager distributes (303) the received program data to other set-top box managers 28 in their respective groups 29. The program data is then segmented, compressed, encrypted and continually multicast (305) by the set-top box managers 28 to clusters 60 of set-top boxes 30 according to a bandwidth and priority schedule established by the SMS 17 and the set-top box manager 28 sending the program data, which reads on (characteristics are associated with one or more of a bandwidth requirement, a device type, or a device capability of each of plurality of client devices)).
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 Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt by virtual zone associated with a policy, the policy comprising the characteristics, and wherein a first client device of the first subset and a second client device of the second subset are within a same geographic region, wherein characteristics are associated with one or more of a bandwidth requirement, a device type, or a device capability of each of plurality of client devices as taught by Thompson in order to provide a personalized and targeted content system via an IPTV environment.
Claim(s) 6-7, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US PGPUB: 20120311635) to (Mushkatblat) in view of (US PGPUB: 20160037215) to (Cardona) in view of (US PGPUB: 20120047542) to (Lewis).
Regarding claim(s) 6-7, Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt disclose the system the first subset of the plurality of devices receives the first multicast substream, generating the first EPG, the first/second substream(s), first/second item of inserted content.
Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt fail to specifically disclose generating a stream manifest for first/second substream(s) comprising an identification of a first item of inserted content, and identification of a second, different item of inserted content.
Lewis further disclose generating a stream manifest for first/second substream(s) comprising an identification of a first item of inserted content, and identification of a second, different item of inserted content. (Lewis Fig. 1-2, P. 15-16, 18-23, 31, 37-39, dynamic manifest file server 110, customize the generation of manifest file 157, such a rule to insert advertising segments to overwrite a particular time block in the live stream, manifest file 157 may comprise a playlist file such as a M3U8 playlist file, manifest file 157 may reference live video segments and ad video segments on servers hosted in content delivery network, accessible over network 130).
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 Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt by generating a stream manifest for first/second substream(s) comprising an identification of a first item of inserted content, and identification of a second, different item of inserted content as taught by Lewis in order to providing flexible dynamic streaming media in a cost effective manner that is convenient and transparent for end users.
Claim(s) 8, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US PGPUB: 20120311635) to (Mushkatblat) in view of (US PGPUB: 20160037215) to (Cardona) in view of (20080276267) to (Badt) in view of (US PGPUB: 20110030003) to (Schmidt).
Regarding claim(s) 8, Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt disclose the system the first subset of the plurality of devices receives the first multicast substream.
Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt fail to specifically disclose device of first subset of plurality of devices receives first media stream via first multicast address, and wherein a second device of second subset of plurality of devices receives second media stream via second multicast address.
Schmidt further disclose device of first subset of plurality of devices receives first media stream via first multicast address, and wherein a second device of second subset of plurality of devices receives second media stream via second multicast address. (Schmidt P. 19-20, 25-28, 34, disclose a system for distributing TV content via an IPTV environment, wherein the channels on the personalized EPG have their corresponding multicast addresses, which reads on (first and second multicast addresses))
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 Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt by disclose device of first subset of plurality of devices receives first media stream via first multicast address, and wherein a second device of second subset of plurality of devices receives second media stream via second multicast address as taught by Schmidt in order to effectively provide a large number of users targeted advertisements without having to use unicasting via an IPTV environment.
Claim(s) 10, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US PGPUB: 20120311635) to (Mushkatblat) in view of (US PGPUB: 20160037215) to (Cardona) in view of (20080276267) to (Badt) in view of (US PGPUB: 20120047542) to (Lewis).
Regarding claim(s) 10, Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt disclose the system the first subset of the plurality of devices receives the first multicast substream, generating the first substream, the first/second substream(s), first/second item of inserted content, the first one or more additional chunks of inserted content.
Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt fail to specifically disclose generating a first stream manifest identifying first one or more additional chunks of inserted content.
Lewis further generating a first stream manifest identifying first one or more additional chunks of inserted content. (Lewis Fig. 1-2, P. 15-16, 18-23, 31, 37-39, dynamic manifest file server 110, customize the generation of manifest file 157, such a rule to insert advertising segments to overwrite a particular time block in the live stream, manifest file 157 may comprise a playlist file such as a M3U8 playlist file, manifest file 157 may reference live video segments and ad video segments on servers hosted in content delivery network, accessible over network 130).
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 Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt by generating a first stream manifest identifying first one or more additional chunks of inserted content as taught by Lewis in order to providing flexible dynamic streaming media in a cost effective manner that is convenient and transparent for end users.
Claim(s) 11-13, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US PGPUB: 20120311635) to (Mushkatblat) in view of (US PGPUB: 20160037215) to (Cardona) in view of (20080276267) to (Badt) in view of (US PGPUB: 20080310408) to (Thompson)
Regarding claim(s) 11, 12, Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt disclose the method, generating the first multicast substream, the subset of the plurality of chunks of the first media stream.
Thompson disclose replacing a plurality of chunks of first media stream with first, second set of one or more additional chunks of inserted content. (Thompson P.88, 90 IPTV environment wherein parts of the content or ads are replaced by targeted ads or portions of media)
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 Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt by replacing a plurality of chunks of first media stream with first, second set of one or more additional chunks of inserted content as taught by Thompson in order to provide a personalized and targeted content system via an IPTV environment.
Regarding claim(s) 13, Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt disclose the method, the first multicast substream, the first set of one or more additional chunks of inserted content, the first virtual zone identified by the first multicast address, the first characteristic.
Thompson disclose generating first substream by selecting first one or more additional chunks of inserted content according to a first policy corresponding to first virtual zone, the first policy comprising the first characteristic. (Thompson P.88, 90 IPTV environment wherein parts of the content or ads are replaced by targeted ads or portions of media based on criteria set for specific audience, region, or other settings based)
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 Mushkatblat in view of Cardona in view of Badt by generating first substream by selecting first one or more additional chunks of inserted content according to a first policy corresponding to first virtual zone, the first policy comprising the first characteristic as taught by Thompson in order to provide a personalized and targeted content system via an IPTV environment.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 2-3, 14, 16-20, 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, and overcome double patent rejection above.
Conclusion
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 RONG LE whose telephone number is (571)270-7637. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (9 am - 6pm).
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at 5712721915. 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.
/RONG LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights