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 .
Objection to the claims
Claim 12 is 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.
Response to arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to all pending claims have been fully considered, but they are moot because of the new ground of rejection. Applicant argues that cited references failed to disclose processing by the content categorization manager to generate for each of said one
or more criteria-based categories a subset of said content assets based on said one or more category content association criteria and said meta data, wherein said subset of said content assets is less than all of said content assets; receiving into the video content catalog, one or more periodic updates to the content assets, the updates provided by the one or more content providers; receiving into the content categorization manager, one or more periodic
updates to the category content association criteria; receiving into the content categorization manager, one or more periodic updates to the criteria-based categories.
However, regarding “processing by the content categorization manager to generate for each of said one or more criteria-based categories a subset of said content assets based on said one or more category content association criteria and said meta data, wherein said subset of said content assets is less than all of said content assets”, MacDonald et al show in see fig.1 to fig.7 a system with categorization manager 116 for generating rules or criteria to create group for each category of contents and the system is capable of providing additional data or metadata related to content and the system can provide different lists of contents as disclosed in para. 0023-0024; 0027;0051; 0034;0061.
And Preston et al disclose a system being capable of providing updated digital content catalog periodically and the system is able to process request related to updated content and finally the system can redirect or forward request for getting updated catalogs as disclosed in col.3, lines 17-26; col.4, lines 50-54; col.7, lines 19-55; col.3, lines 34-39; col.4, lines 1-3. This action is made final.
Claims rejection-35 U.S.C. 112(b):
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim limitation “a video content management system workflow module configured to; content categorization manager for; video content catalog for ”of claims 8-14 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims rejections-35 U.S.C. 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) 1-11; 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preston(US.Pat.No.8924510) in view of Madriz (US.Pub.No.20080133311) and MacDonald(US.Pub.No.20120310941).
Regarding claim 1, Preston et al disclose a method for providing a plurality of content assets for delivery to a video delivery storefront(see fig.1 to fig.6 having a digital content management system for delivering video contents in a digital content storefront), the method comprising: receiving the content assets provided by a content provider, into a video content management system(see fig.1 to fig.6; col.1, lines 20-30+); each of said video contents comprising a video file and meta data containing information associated with said video file(the system is able to provide metadata associated with stored content; abstract) , the video content management system further comprising: receiving the content assets into a video content management system workflow module(see fig.1 to fig.6 with digital content management system 10;col.4, lines 23-35) , wherein the video content management system workflow module processes the content assets and sends the content assets to a video content catalog(see fig.1 to fig.6 for providing contents to a video content catalog; col.1, lines 28-35; col.1, lines 50-57); receiving into a content categorization manager, one or more criteria-based categories for organizing video assets, further receiving into the content categorization manger, one or more category content(the system is able to provide different types or categories of contents such as video, music movies, games ; and other collections of data; col.5, lines 44-61) association criteria related to each of said one or more of criteria-based categories for associating the content assets with each of said one or more criteria-based categories(the system can provide video contents based on specific criteria or rules; col.6, lines 14-20+); receiving into the video content catalog, one or more periodic updates to the content assets, the updates provided by the one or more content providers(the system can provide updated digital content catalog periodically; col.3, lines 16-26; col.3, lines 34-39; col.4, lines 50-54); receiving into the content categorization manager, one or more periodic updates to the category content association criteria(col.4, lines 1-3): receiving into the content categorization manager, one or more periodic updates to the criteria-based categories; processing by the content categorization manager, a request to dynamically refresh said subset of said content assets associated with one of said one or more criteria based categories (the system can redirect or forward request for getting updated catalogs; col.3, lines 17-26; col.4, lines 50-54); processing by the content categorization manager, a request to dynamically retresh the one or more content based categories provided to the storefront(the system is able to process request related to updated content; col.7, lines 19-55); and sending the updated subset of content assets and the updated one or more content based categories to the video storefront(the system is able to provide updated data and content to the content storefront 12; col.7, lines 48-55+; col.7, lines 19-26).
But did not explicitly disclose wherein the refreshed content assets dynamically update the storefront based on operator-defined criteria; processing by the content categorization manager to generate for each of said one or more criteria-based categories a subset of said content assets based on said one or more category content association criteria and said meta data, wherein said subset of said content assets is less than all of said content assets.
However; Madriz et al disclose wherein the refreshed content assets dynamically update the storefront based on operator-defined criteria(the system is able to update contents dynamically based on criteria or rules provided by contents owners, advertisers and others;0011).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Madriz to modify Preston by providing options to input a set of predefined criteria or rules related to video contents for the purpose of selecting video contents accordingly.
And MacDonald et al disclose processing by the content categorization manager to generate for each of said one or more criteria-based categories a subset of said content assets based on said one or more category content association criteria and said meta data, wherein said subset of said content assets is less than all of said content assets(see fig.1 to fig.7 with categorization manager 116 for generating rules or criteria to create group for each category of contents and additional data or metadata related to content can be provided and the system can provide different lists of contents; 0023-0024; 0027;0051; 0034;0061).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of MacDonald to modify Preston and Madriz by providing options to generate rules or criteria to create groups to categorize video content using categorization manager 116 of MacDonald to the system of Preston and Madriz resulting in “processing by the content categorization manager to generate for each of said one or more criteria-based categories a subset of said content assets based on said one or more category content association criteria and said meta data, wherein said subset of said content assets is less than all of said content assets” for the purpose of improving viewing experiences accordingly.
Regarding claim 2, Preston et al disclose wherein the periodic updates to the video content catalog from the content providers comprise new content assets as well as updates to existing content assets(the system is capable of updating catalogs associated with video contents; col.3, lines 16-26; col.3, lines 34-39).
Regarding claim 3, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Preston et al disclose wherein the category content association criteria used to define what content assets are candidates to be associated to a criteria-based category can be either positive criteria or negative criteria(the system can apply criteria as to filter contents from a specific category or group; col.6, lines 14-18; col.2, lines 38-63).
Regarding claim 5, Preston et al disclose wherein refreshing the video content catalog comprises interrogating the video content catalog(the system is capable of comparing or interrogating data associated with video content catalog; col.5, lines 44-50+) and applying the category content association criteria to the content assets in the video content catalog to update the subset of content assets associated with the one or more criteria-based categories m the content categorization manager(the system is able to provide different types or categories of contents such as video, music movies, games ; and other collections of data; col.5, lines 44-61; col.7, lines 48-55+; col.7, lines 19-26).
Regarding claim 6, Preston et al disclose wherein the request to refresh the content assets associated with the criteria-based category is made via the video content management system workflow module and received by the content categorization manager(the digital content management system 10 can redirect or forward request for getting updated catalogs; col.3, lines 17-26; col.7, lines 19-55 ).
Regarding claim 7, Preston et al disclose wherein the request to update the content-based categories that are provided to the video storefront(the system contains a storefront application for requesting and obtaining contents; col.3, lines 27-30) is made via the video content management system workflow module and received by the content categorization manager(the system is capable of updating catalogs associated with video contents; col.3, lines 16-26; col.3, lines 34-39).
Regarding claim 8, Preston et al disclose an apparatus for processing video files comprising: a video content management system for dynamically determining video content placement within a storefront(see fig.1 to fig.6 having a digital content management system for delivering video contents in a digital content storefront), the video content management system further comprising: a video content management system workflow module configured to receive one or more content assets from one or more content providers(see fig.1 to fig.6; col.1, lines 20-30+); each of said video contents comprising a video file and meta data containing information associated with said video file(the system is able to provide metadata associated with stored content; abstract); a video content catalog for receiving and storing the one or more content assets; a content categorization manager for receiving one or more target criteria-based categories for organizing video assets and category content association criteria associated with each of said one or more criteria-based categories (the system is able to provide different types or categories of contents such as video, music movies, games ; and other collections of data; col.5, lines 44-61); and
wherein the content categorization manager dynamically updates the criteria-based categories(the system can provide updated digital content catalog periodically; col.3, lines 16-26; col.3, lines 34-39); wherein the content categorization manager dynamically updates the content assets associated with a criteria-based category based on said one or more category
content association criteria and said meta data( the system is able to process request related to updated content; col.7, lines 19-55);
wherein the video content management system workflow module sends the updated criteria-based categories and their associated subset of content assets to the storefront(the system is able to provide updated data and content to the content storefront 12; col.7, lines 48-55+; col.7, lines 19-26).
But did not explicitly disclose a video-on-demand storefront utilizing one or more criteria-based categories to present content assets to one or more end users; the content categorization manager generating for each of said one or more criteria- based categories a subset of said content assets based on said one or more category content association criteria and said meta data, wherein said subset of said content assets is less than all of said content assets.
However; Madriz et al disclose a video-on-demand storefront utilizing one or more criteria-based categories to present content assets to one or more end users(the system is capable of providing on-demand media contents; 0001; 0003-0005).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Madriz to modify Preston by providing options to generate on-demand video contents for the purpose of increasing viewing experiences accordingly.
And MacDonald et al disclose the content categorization manager generating for each of said one or more criteria- based categories a subset of said content assets based on said one or more category content association criteria and said meta data, wherein said subset of said content assets is less than all of said content assets(see fig.1 to fig.7 with categorization manager 116 for generating rules or criteria to create group for each category of contents and additional data or metadata related to content can be provided and the system can provide different lists of contents; 0023-0024; 0027;0051; 0034;0061).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of MacDonald to modify Preston and Madriz by providing options to generate rules or criteria to create groups to categorize video content using categorization manager 116 of MacDonald to the system of Preston and Madriz resulting in “ the content categorization manager generating for each of said one or more criteria- based categories a subset of said content assets based on said one or more category content association criteria and said meta data, wherein said subset of said content assets is less than all of said content assets” for the purpose of improving viewing experiences accordingly.
Regarding claim 9, Preston et al disclose wherein the video catalog comprises titles, and categories(see fig.1 to fig.6 with catalog 30 providing description of the contents and types of contents such as movies , video music and others; col.5, lines 44-61).
Regarding claim 10, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, Preston et al disclose wherein the video content management system workflow module periodically requests the content categorization manager(the system can redirect or forward request for getting updated catalogs; col.3, lines 17-26) to query the content catalog and update said respective subsets of said content assets for each of
said one or more criteria-based categories(the system provides options to search for contents in catalogs; abstract; col.1, lines 58-65; col.2, lines 38-43).
Regarding claim 13, Preston et al disclose wherein the updated criteria-based categories are dynamically provided to the storefront(the system is able to execute search based on predefined criteria and provide browse results to the consumer storefront 20; col.5, lines 34-37).
Regarding claim 14, Preston et al disclose wherein the updates support dynamic recalculation of the subset content asset placed within a storefront(the system is able to update content with respect to time; , col.3, lines 17-26; col.3, lines 34-39).
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 JEAN D SAINT CYR whose telephone number is (571)270-3224. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at 5712727527. 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.
/JEAN D SAINT CYR/Examiner, Art Unit 2425
/Brian T Pendleton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights