DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 13 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 5 and 13 recites, “in response to a target decrease value among the decrease values being greater than a decrease threshold, obtaining an interval duration between the target decrease values.” Claim recites “a target decrease value” and then claims “an interval duration” between “the target decrease values”, it is unclear from this limitation that though a signal decrease target value was determined it later it later is referred to as plural “the target decease values”. Therefore, claim lacks proper antecedent basis, that makes its scope unclear and indefinite.
Claims 5 and 13, further recites, “the interval duration” and number of occurrence times of “the target decrease value”, it is unclear here whether “the decrease value” refers to a singular “the decrease value” or plural “the decrease values.” Therefore, it makes the scope of the claim unclear and indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 9, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Joliveau et al. (US 10666698).
Regarding claim 1, Joliveau discloses, a method for controlling a code rate of live streaming, comprising:
obtaining code rate information of a stream push of live streaming in an application layer of a terminal (col. 1, line 56-57, a media distribution service distributing a live stream of content. Col. 5, line 62-67, line 1-The manifest generation service 217 may determine the bit rate for the sequentially next content fragment 114 according to an aggregate value, such as a running average, an exponential weighted average, or another aggregate value of a plurality of data points, i.e. obtain bit rate or code rate information of fragment of live streaming by media distribution service which is an application level software application);
obtaining a target bandwidth estimation value obtained by a transport layer of the terminal (col. 5, line 42-44, the manifest generation service 217 may be configured to obtain and aggregate estimated bandwidths 251 from the client 104, i.e. receiving estimated bandwidth from client device = receiving bandwidth information over network = obtained by a transport layer such as TCP connection, internet or intranet); and
adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the code rate information, and determining a target code rate of the terminal based on the adjusted target bandwidth estimation value (col. 13, line 22-25 the manifest generation service 217 may modify the estimated bandwidth 251 to a greater or lesser value included in the range of bit rates for the sequentially next content fragment 114, i.e. based on bit rate information of the next content fragment adjusting estimated bandwidth to higher or lower value).
Regarding claim 9, Joliveau meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, Joliveau meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 2, 10, and 18 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joliveau et al. (US 10666698), in view of Lin et al. (US 11871061), in further view of Mallika (US 20120102521).
Regarding claim 2, The method according to claim 1,
Joliveau discloses, wherein adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the code rate information comprises:
obtaining a target resolution corresponding to a video frame to be transmitted (col. 3, line 60-65, for a given segment 234 would correspond to similar time codes, frames, or other portions of the media item 219. Col. 9, line 64-67, col, 10, line 1-4 client application select quality level of next segment to be transmitted, quality level is defined as resolution, i.e. obtaining specific or target resolution of next frame to be transmitted).
Joliveau does not disclose, obtaining a target code table corresponding to the target resolution, wherein the target code table comprises an upper code rate limit value and a lower code rate limit value, and different resolutions correspond to different code tables; and
in response to the target bandwidth estimation value being less than the lower code rate limit value, adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the lower code rate limit value.
Lin discloses, obtaining a target code table corresponding to the target resolution, wherein the target code table comprises an upper code rate limit value and a lower code rate limit value, and different resolutions correspond to different code tables (Col. 7, line 10-25, showing code table with different resolutions having code table showing mx bit rate and min bit rate).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Joliveau, by teachings of obtaining a target code table corresponding to the target resolution, wherein the target code table comprises an upper code rate limit value and a lower code rate limit value, and different resolutions correspond to different code tables, as taught by Lin, to determine the possible bitrate that can be used for a given resolution in order to determine number of renditions of content in range of bit-rates and resolutions, as disclosed in in Lin, col. 1, line 25-29.
Joliveau in view of Lin does not disclose, in response to the target bandwidth estimation value being less than the lower code rate limit value, adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the lower code rate limit value.
Mallika discloses, in response to the target bandwidth estimation value being less than the lower code rate limit value, adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the lower code rate limit value (Par. 0011, The content is encoded according to a number of parameters such as resolution, streaming bit rate, frame rate, Par. 0030, application determines if the bandwidth has increased such that the player application signals the content retransmitter 102 to increase the resolution level to a level that is not below the minimum resolution level, i.e. estimating that higher bandwidth is required in response to determining that resolution (i.e. minimum bitrate level of resolution) level is not below the minimum resolution level).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Joliveau in view of Lin, by teachings of in response to the target bandwidth estimation value being less than the lower code rate limit value, adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the lower code rate limit value, as taught by Mallika, so that content at intended resolution can be played and avoid content disruption, as disclosed in in Mallika par. 0001.
Regarding claim 10, Joliveau in view of Lin in further view of Mallika meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 18, Joliveau in view of Lin in further view of Mallika meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 2.
Claims 3, 11, and 19 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joliveau, in view of Forman et al. (US 20180205778).
Regarding claim 3, The method according to claim 1,
Joliveau does not discloses, wherein adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the code rate information comprises: obtaining a first code rate corresponding to (i-1)th period, wherein the target bandwidth estimation value is obtained within ith period, and i is a positive integer greater than 1; obtaining a code rate change value based on the first code rate and the target bandwidth estimation value; and in response to the code rate change value being not greater than a change threshold, using the first code rate as the adjusted target bandwidth estimation value.
Forman discloses, wherein adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the code rate information comprises: obtaining a first code rate corresponding to (i-1)th period, wherein the target bandwidth estimation value is obtained within ith period, and i is a positive integer greater than 1; obtaining a code rate change value based on the first code rate and the target bandwidth estimation value; and in response to the code rate change value being not greater than a change threshold, using the first code rate as the adjusted target bandwidth estimation value (Par. 0025, complexity (i.e. bitrate) of the media content from frame to frame change in a cartoon with the solid color background is typically less complex (i.e. variations between two period of cartoon movie is less than certain value (i.e. to be determined as less complex) needs less bandwidth to encode fragments, therefore bandwidth allocated to next fragment remain same or not increased, therefore using the same bandwidth (i.e. first segment and what is targeted bandwidth needed for next segment remain same) used for each fragments or periods of media content).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Joliveau, by teachings wherein adjusting the target bandwidth estimation value based on the code rate information comprises: obtaining a first code rate corresponding a period, wherein the target bandwidth estimation value is obtained within first period, obtaining a code rate change value based on the first code rate and the target bandwidth estimation value; and in response to the code rate change value being not greater than a change threshold, using the first code rate as the adjusted target bandwidth estimation value, as taught by Forman, to adjust bandwidth requirement based on complexity of media content , as disclosed in in Forman par. 0003.
Regarding claim 11, Joliveau in view of Forman meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 19, Joliveau in view of Forman meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 3.
Claims 4, 7, 8, 12, 15, 16, and 20 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joliveau, in view of Hunkins et al. (US 20140071141).
Regarding claim 4, The method according to claim 1,
Joliveau further discloses, comprising: obtaining an initial bandwidth estimation value estimated during the stream push of live streaming (col. 1, line 56-57, a media distribution service distributing a live stream of content. Col. 5, line 62-67, line 1-The manifest generation service 217 may determine the bit rate for the sequentially next content fragment 114 according to an aggregate value, such as a running average, an exponential weighted average, or another aggregate value of a plurality of data points, i.e. obtain bit rate or code rate information of fragment of live streaming by media distribution service which is an application level software application).
Joliveau does not discloses, in response to determining that a bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered based on the bandwidth estimation value, performing filtering processing on the initial bandwidth estimation value to obtain the target bandwidth estimation value, wherein the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode represents a decrease situation of the bandwidth estimation value within a unit time period.
Hunkins discloses, in response to determining that a bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered based on the bandwidth estimation value, performing filtering processing on the initial bandwidth estimation value to obtain the target bandwidth estimation value, wherein the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode represents a decrease situation of the bandwidth estimation value within a unit time period (Par. 0050, The adjustment should also respond to the maximum/minimum bandwidth change faster (i.e. bandwidth oscillation fluctuation), to account for the short-term bandwidth fluctuation. If the maximum bandwidth measurement is detected for some amount of time, the adjustment to the bandwidth should be conducted accordingly. If the maximum bandwidth reduces over time (i.e. a decrease situation of the bandwidth within a unit time period), the adjustment should bring the system to operate at or near the predefined average bandwidth. Hysteresis may be needed to smooth (i.e. filtering the bandwidth after bandwidth fluctuation is detected) out the instantaneous adjustments from happening too frequently).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Joliveau, by teachings of in response to determining that a bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered based on the bandwidth estimation value, performing filtering processing on the initial bandwidth estimation value to obtain the target bandwidth estimation value, wherein the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode represents a decrease situation of the bandwidth estimation value within a unit time period, as taught by Hunkins, to maintain the bandwidth utilization at or near the predefined average bandwidth most of the time, as disclosed in in Hunkins par. 0050.
Regarding claim 7, The method according to claim 4,
Joliveau in view of Hunkins further discloses, wherein performing filtering processing on the initial bandwidth estimation value to obtain the target bandwidth estimation value comprises: obtaining a current code rate of the stream push of live streaming (Joliveau col. 1, line 56-57, a media distribution service distributing a live stream of content. Col. 5, line 62-67, line 1-The manifest generation service 217 may determine the bit rate for the sequentially next content fragment 114 according to an aggregate value, such as a running average, an exponential weighted average, or another aggregate value of a plurality of data points, i.e. obtain bit rate or code rate information of fragment of live streaming by media distribution service which is an application level software application); and determining the target bandwidth estimation value based on the current code rate, the initial bandwidth estimation value (Joliveau col. 13, line 22-25 the manifest generation service 217 may modify the estimated bandwidth 251 to a greater or lesser value included in the range of bit rates for the sequentially next content fragment 114, i.e. based on bit rate information of the next content fragment determining estimated bandwidth to higher or lower value for coming frame), and a preset bandwidth smoothing factor coefficient (Hunkins Par. 0050 If the maximum bandwidth reduces over time (i.e. a decrease situation of the bandwidth within a unit time period), the adjustment should bring the system to operate at or near the predefined average bandwidth. Hysteresis may be needed to smooth (i.e. filtering the bandwidth after bandwidth fluctuation is detected) out the instantaneous adjustments from happening too frequently. Hunkins Par. 0055, An algorithm to smooth the results and avoid false triggers and too frequent adjustments may be used, In one example implementation, the algorithm does not respond to the first bandwidth increase, but responds to the average of several samples. The algorithm may respond on the high side or the low side, depending on prior patterns, i.e. smoothing factor is predetermined algorithm (i.e. variables or coefficient for making smoothing of bandwidth is preset).
Regarding claim 8, The method according to claim 4,
Joliveau in view of Hunkins further discloses, further comprising: in response to the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode being not entered, using the initial bandwidth estimation value as the target bandwidth estimation value (Hunkins Par. 0055, The parameter settings would then return to the desired average. Assuming that the system indicated a return to "normal" usage, the settings would eventually be adjusted back to the starting level, i.e. as system is experiencing normal mode therefore not being in oscillation fluctuations mode, using the settings (i.e. initial bandwidth measurement for optimum setting as disclosed in par. 0041-0042) that was set at starting level).
Regarding claim 12, Joliveau in view of Hunkins meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 4.
Regarding claim 15, Joliveau in view of Hunkins meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 7.
Regarding claim 16, Joliveau in view of Hunkins meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 8.
Regarding claim 20, Joliveau in view of Hunkins meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 4.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joliveau, in view of Hunkins et al. (US 20140071141), in further view of Brailovskiy et al. (US 12041303), in further view of Schmidt et al. (US 20150381690).
Regarding claim 5, The method according to claim 4,
Joliveau in view of Hunkins further discloses, wherein the initial bandwidth estimation value comprises a plurality of bandwidth estimation values obtained according to a time sequence (Joliveau col. 1, line 56-57, a media distribution service distributing a live stream of content. Col.3, line 57-60, Media items 219 may be divided into segments 234, each segment 234 corresponding to a portion of time of the media item 219. Col. 5, line 62-67, line 1-The manifest generation service 217 may determine the bit rate for the sequentially next content fragment 114 according to an aggregate value, such as a running average, an exponential weighted average, or another aggregate value of a plurality of data points, i.e. obtain bit rate or code rate information of fragment of live streaming by media distribution service which is an application level software application);
the method further comprises:
obtaining decrease values between every two adjacent bandwidth estimation values among the plurality of bandwidth estimation values (Hunkins Par. 0050, The adjustment should also respond to the maximum/minimum bandwidth change faster (i.e. bandwidth oscillation fluctuation), to account for the short-term bandwidth fluctuation. If the maximum bandwidth measurement is detected for some amount of time, the adjustment to the bandwidth should be conducted accordingly. If the maximum bandwidth reduces over time (i.e. a decrease bandwidth values from first value to second value over time = adjacent reduction of bandwidth or actively reducing) situation of the bandwidth within a unit time period), the adjustment should bring the system to operate at or near the predefined average bandwidth. Hysteresis may be needed to smooth (i.e. filtering the bandwidth after bandwidth fluctuation is detected) out the instantaneous adjustments from happening too frequently).
Joliveau in view of Hunkins does not disclose, in response to a target decrease value among the decrease values being greater than a decrease threshold, obtaining an interval duration between the target decrease values;
in response to the interval duration being less than a threshold duration, obtaining a number of occurrence times of the target decrease value within a unit time; and
in response to the number of occurrence times being greater than a threshold of the number of occurrence times, determining that the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered.
Brailovskiy discloses, in response to a target decrease value among the decrease values being greater than a decrease threshold, obtaining an interval duration between the target decrease values (Col. 10, if a short-term decrease in bandwidth is large (e.g., the bandwidth decreases by more than a threshold percentage (e.g., >50% decrease) of the short-term running average, i.e. decrease value being more than threshold such as being more than 50%, obtain the interval duration which is being short term interval).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Joliveau in view of Hunkins, by teachings of in response to a target decrease value among the decrease values being greater than a decrease threshold, obtaining an interval duration between the target decrease values, as taught by Brailovskiy, to provide optimal solutions change in network condition, as disclosed in in Brailovskiy col. 1, line 6-17.
Joliveau in view of Hunkins in further view of Brailovskiy does not disclose,
in response to the interval duration being less than a threshold duration, obtaining a number of occurrence times of the target decrease value within a unit time; and
in response to the number of occurrence times being greater than a threshold of the number of occurrence times, determining that the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered.
Schmidt discloses, in response to the interval duration being less than a threshold duration, obtaining a number of occurrence times of the target decrease value within a unit time; in response to the number of occurrence times being greater than a threshold of the number of occurrence times, determining that the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered (Par. 0114, FBW measurements consistently exceed the AOT by some hysteresis value (e.g., the 400 kbps discussed above) a threshold number of times in a row, the transcoder 220 is permitted to enter the video state and use the new filtered bandwidth values FBWi)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Joliveau in view of Hunkins in further view of Brailovskiy, by teachings of in response to the interval duration being less than a threshold duration, obtaining a number of occurrence times of the target decrease value within a unit time; in response to the number of occurrence times being greater than a threshold of the number of occurrence times, determining that the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered, as taught by Schmidt, adaptive bit encoding of digital media streams, and in particular to a system and method for server-side adaptive bit encoding of such streams, as disclosed in in Schmidt, par. 0003.
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joliveau, Hunkins et al. (US 20140071141), in further view of Chen (US 20240022623).
Regarding claim 6, The method according to claim 4,
Joliveau in view of Hunkins doe not discloses, wherein the method further comprises: determining, based on the initial bandwidth estimation value, whether a current stage is in a starting stage, wherein the starting stage comprises that the initial bandwidth estimation value is in a consecutively increasing state; and in response to the current stage being not in the starting stage, determining whether the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered.
Chen discloses, wherein the method further comprises: determining, based on the initial bandwidth estimation value, whether a current stage is in a starting stage, wherein the starting stage comprises that the initial bandwidth estimation value is in a consecutively increasing state; and in response to the current stage being not in the starting stage, determining whether the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered (Par. 0065, the bit rate may switch a couple of times during the initial portion of the media content item, e.g., due to the computational capacity of the user device 102, and then settle to a steady bit rate (and continued streaming at a target resolution). In such cases where the determined number of bitrate switches is less than the threshold switching value, the QoE is not activated, i.e. it is determined that initial bandwidth requirement is increasing at the start of the media content item. the QoE module determines whether one or more jumps in the quality of the display of the media content item are frequent and/or large enough to warrant the activation of the QoE module. In this manner, activation of the QoE module may be reserved for circumstances where the QoE of the viewing of the media content item is likely to be significantly affected by fluctuation in the available bandwidth, i.e. if the variation in the bitrate (i.e. bandwidth required) is frequent that is likely due to fluctuation in the available bandwidth, hence bandwidth fluctuation mode has been entered as it is not same as steady bit rate like in initial stage).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Joliveau in view of Hunkins, by teachings of wherein the method further comprises: determining, based on the initial bandwidth estimation value, whether a current stage is in a starting stage, wherein the starting stage comprises that the initial bandwidth estimation value is in a consecutively increasing state; and in response to the current stage being not in the starting stage, determining whether the bandwidth oscillation fluctuation mode is entered, as taught by Chen, to improving viewing QoE when streaming media content, as disclosed in in Chen par. 0065.
Regarding claim 14, Joliveau in view of Chen meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKSHAY DOSHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2736. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM to 6:00 PM.
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, JOHN W MILLER can be reached at (571)272-7353. 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.
/A.D./Examiner, Art Unit 2422
/JOHN W MILLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2422
Prosecution Insights