Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 18-21 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 17-20 of U.S. Patent No. in view of12,069,344 in view of Gross (US Patent Application Publication 2009/0307722).
Claim 2-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,069,344.
Instant Application
US Patent Number 12,069,344
2. (New) A method of automating sequencing of a first video and a second video shown by a computer using different players, the method including:
accessing, from computer memory, a program code that defines at least two HTML containers in which first video content and second video content are programmed to be shown, such that programmed to be shown,
such that a first HTML container of the two HTML containers is defined to show the first video content in a first format in a first video player;
a second HTML container of the two HTML containers is defined to show the second video content in a second format in a second video player that is a different instantiation than the first video player's instantiation;
wherein the first video content in the first HTML container is initially viewable and the second video content in the second HTML container is initially not viewable;
configuring a first trigger in the program code to enable viewability of the second initially not viewable HTML container, such that when the first trigger is satisfied, the second initially not viewable HTML container becomes viewable and the first initially viewable HTML container moves behind the second initially not viewable HTML container or becomes not viewable; and
causing sequential
1. A method of automating sequencing of a requested video and a supplemental video shown by a computer using different players, the method including:
accessing, from computer memory, a program code that defines at least two HTML containers on a web page in which requested video content and supplemental video content are programmed to be shown,
such that a first HTML container of the two HTML containers is defined to show the supplemental video content in a first format in a first video player;
a second HTML container of the two HTML containers is defined to show the requested video content in a second format in a second video player that is a different instantiation than the first video player's instantiation,
wherein the second video player is invoked in accordance with the second format, separately than the first video player's instantiation;
wherein the supplemental video content in the first HTML container is initially viewable and the requested video content in the second HTML container is initially not viewable; or the requested video content in the second HTML container is initially viewable and the supplemental video content in the first HTML container is initially not viewable; and
configuring a first trigger in the program code to enable viewability of the second initially not viewable HTML container, such that when the first trigger is satisfied, the second initially not viewable HTML container becomes viewable and the first initially viewable HTML container moves behind the second initially not viewable HTML container or becomes not viewable.
wherein the supplemental video content in the first HTML container is initially viewable and the requested video content in the second HTML container is initially not viewable; or the requested video content in the second HTML container is initially viewable and the supplemental video content in the first HTML container is initially not viewable; and configuring a first trigger in the program code to enable viewability of the second initially not viewable HTML container, such that when the first trigger is satisfied, the second initially not viewable HTML container becomes viewable and the first initially viewable HTML container moves behind the second initially not viewable HTML container or becomes not viewable.
3. (New) The method of claim 2, wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 120 percent of the other HTML container.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 120 percent of the other HTML container.
4. (New) The method of claim 3, wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 125 percent of an area of the other HTML container.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 125 percent of the other HTML container.
5. (New) The method of claim 2, wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 150 percent of an area of the other HTML container.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 150 percent of an area of the other HTML container.
6. (New) The method of claim 2, wherein neither of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers cover more than half of a web page area of the web page on which the containers are positioned.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein neither of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers cover more than half of a web page area of the web page on which the containers are positioned.
7. (New) The method of claim 2, wherein the first HTML container for the first video content has a size and position that leaves video selection controls and user response choices exposed on a web page on which the HTML container that is initially viewable is positioned.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the first HTML container for the supplemental video content has a size and position that leaves video selection controls and user response choices exposed on a web page on which the HTML container that is initially viewable is positioned.
8. (New) The method of claim 2, further including dynamically specifying in the program code a link to the second video content, responsive to receiving a request.
7. The method of claim 1, further including dynamically specifying in the program code a link to the requested video content, responsive to receiving the request.
9. (New) The method of claim 8, wherein the first trigger is a timer value.
8. The method of claim 7, wherein the first trigger is a timer value.
10. (New) The method of claim 9, wherein the second video content and the first video content use separately loaded player codecs to both respectively decode and respectively display the first and second formats.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the requested video content and the supplemental video content use separately loaded player codecs to both respectively decode and respectively display the first and second formats.
11. (New) The method of claim 9, wherein the second video content and the first video content use two instances of a single player application to decode and display the second and first video contents.
10. The method of claim 8, wherein the requested video content and the supplemental video content use two instances of a single player application to decode and display the requested and supplemental video contents.
12. (New) The method of claim 9, wherein the timer value is delivered with the program code.
11. The method of claim 8, wherein the timer value is delivered with the program code.
13. (New) The method of claim 9, wherein the timer value is accessible to the program code from a source of a first message that comprises the first video content.
12. The method of claim 8, wherein the timer value is accessible to the program code from a source of a first message that comprises the supplemental video content.
14. (New) The method of claim 8, wherein a first message comprises the first video content and the first trigger is detection of an end of running the first message.
13. The method of claim 7, wherein a first message comprises the supplemental video content and the first trigger is detection of an end of running the first message.
15. (New) The method of claim 2, including: accessing program code, further including defining a third container that shows third content in a third format using a third player; setting a second timer value to enable visibility of the third container after the second timer expires; and delivering said program code, further including delivering the second timer.
14. The method of claim 1, including: accessing program code, further including defining a third container that shows third content in a third format using a third player; setting a second timer value to enable visibility of the third container after the second timer expires; and delivering said program code, further including delivering the second timer.
16. (New) The method of claim 15, further including, after receiving a request and dynamically specifying the links to the first video, dynamically determining at least one of the first and the second timer values, a first message comprising the first video content, and a second message comprising third content, all responsive to receiving the request from a user.
15. The method of claim 14, further including, after receiving the request and dynamically specifying links to the requested video, dynamically determining at least one of the first and the second timer values a first message comprising the supplemental video content, and a second message comprising third content, all responsive to receiving the request from a user.
17. (New) A
such that a first container is defined to show a first video content in a first format using a first player; a second container is defined to show a second video content in a second format using a second player and invoked separately in accordance with the second format than the first video player's instantiation,
wherein the first video content in a first HTML container is initially viewable and the second video content a second HTML container is initially not viewable;
the program code further including a first trigger to enable visibility of the initially not visible container, such that when the first trigger is satisfied, the initially not visible container becomes visible and the initially visible container is at least partially covered by the initially not visible container.
17. A non-transitory computer readable medium configured with instructions such that, when the instructions are executed on a processor, cause the processor to perform a collection of steps, the steps comprising: accessing, from computer memory, a program code that defines at least two HTML containers on a web page in which requested video content and supplemental video content are programmed to be shown,
such that a first HTML container of the at least two HTML containers is defined to show the supplemental video content in a first format in a first video player; a second HTML container of the at least two HTML containers is defined to show the requested video content in a second format in a second video player that is a different instantiation than the first video player's instantiation, and wherein the second video player is invoked in accordance with the second format, separately than the first video player's instantiation;
wherein the supplemental video content in the first HTML container is initially viewable and the requested video content in the second HTML container is initially not viewable; or the requested video content in the second HTML container is initially viewable and the supplemental video content in the first HTML container is initially not viewable;
and configuring a first trigger in the program code to enable viewability of the initially not viewable HTML container, such that when the first trigger is satisfied, the initially not viewable HTML container becomes viewable and the initially viewable HTML container moves behind the initially not viewable HTML container.
18. (New) A non-transitory computer readable medium configured with instructions such that, when the instructions are executed on a processor, cause the processor to perform a collection of steps, the steps comprising:
accessing, from computer memory, a program code that defines at least two HTML containers in which first video content and second video content are programmed to be shown, such that programmed to be shown, such that a first HTML container of the two HTML containers is defined to show the first video content in a first format in a first video player; a second HTML container of the two HTML containers is defined to show the second video content in a second format in a second video player that is a different instantiation than the first video player's instantiation;
wherein the first video content in the first HTML container is initially viewable and the second video content in the second HTML container is initially not viewable; configuring a first trigger in the program code to enable viewability of the second initially not viewable HTML container,
such that when the first trigger is satisfied, the second initially not viewable HTML container becomes viewable and the first initially viewable HTML container moves behind the second initially not viewable HTML container or becomes not viewable; and causing sequential remote display, over a network, of the first and second video content.
17. A non-transitory computer readable medium configured with instructions such that, when the instructions are executed on a processor, cause the processor to perform a collection of steps, the steps comprising:
accessing, from computer memory, a program code that defines at least two HTML containers on a web page in which requested video content and supplemental video content are programmed to be shown, such that a first HTML container of the at least two HTML containers is defined to show the supplemental video content in a first format in a first video player; a second HTML container of the at least two HTML containers is defined to show the requested video content in a second format in a second video player that is a different instantiation than the first video player's instantiation, and
wherein the second video player is invoked in accordance with the second format, separately than the first video player's instantiation;
wherein the supplemental video content in the first HTML container is initially viewable and the requested video content in the second HTML container is initially not viewable; or the requested video content in the second HTML container is initially viewable and the supplemental video content in the first HTML container is initially not viewable; and
configuring a first trigger in the program code to enable viewability of the initially not viewable HTML container, such that when the first trigger is satisfied, the initially not viewable HTML container becomes viewable and the initially viewable HTML container moves behind the initially not viewable HTML container.
19. (New) The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 18, wherein the first trigger is a timer value.
18. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 17, wherein the first trigger is a timer value.
20. (New) The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 18, wherein a first message comprises the first video content and the first trigger is detection of an end of running the first message.
19. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 17, wherein a first message comprises the supplemental video content and the first trigger is detection of an end of running the first message.
21. (New) The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 18, wherein the second video content and the first video content use two instances of a single player application to decode and display the second and first video contents.
20. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 17, wherein the requested video content and the supplemental video content use two instances of a single player application to decode and display the requested and supplemental video contents.
Claim 2
Claim 1 of the reference patent recites all of the limitations of claim I of the instant application except " remote display, over a network " However, Gross, et al. teaches another method for managing multiple video display (Gross, Abstract), including remote display, over a network (Gross, ¶0014 – pre-roll, interstitial, post-roll. ¶0025 – switching to play a different video after current video finishes. Abstract with ¶0020, ¶0024 – remotely streamed video over a network).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have included a server streaming video remotely, as disclosed in Gross, et al., within the method of claim 2 of the reference patent, to enable conservation of client computer resources and centralized storage at a server.
Claim 17
Claim 17 of the reference patent recites all of the limitations of claim 17 of the instant application except "a server that serves code " However, Gross, et al. teaches another method for managing multiple video display (Gross, Abstract), including a server that serves code (Gross, Abstract with ¶0020, ¶0024 – video remotely streamed video over a network. Fig. 3 with ¶0018, ¶0021-¶0024 – server and computer).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have included a server streaming video remotely, as disclosed in Gross, et al., within the system of claim 17 of the reference patent, to enable conservation of client computer resources and centralized storage at a server.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “the two HTML containers” and should apparently recite “the at least two HTML containers”. Similarly for claim 18.
Claim 2 should apparently recite “are programmed to be shown, .
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-16 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 2 recites “the other HTML container”. However, “at least two HTML containers” have been recited. As a result, “the other” HTML container is not clearly referring to a one of the other at least two HTML containers. As a result, the scope of the claim is rendered indefinite. Similarly for claims 3-4.
Dependent claims incorporate all of the limitations of their respective independent or intervening claim(s) and are rejected on the same basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 4 broadens the range recited in claim 3, from which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Prior Art
Listed herein below are the prior art references relied upon in this Office Action:
Gross (US Patent Application Publication 2009/0307722), referred to as Gross herein [previously cited in Applicant’s IDS dated 8/8/2024]
Zheng et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2005/0114430), referred to as Zheng herein [previously cited in Applicant’s IDS dated 8/8/2024]
Pau (US Patent Number 9,769,544), referred to as Pau herein [previously cited in Applicant’s IDS dated 8/8/2024]
Dawson (US Patent Application Publication 2008/0104267), referred to as Dawson herein [previously cited in Applicant’s IDS dated 8/8/2024]
Terry (US Patent Application Publication 2009/0327893), referred to as Terry herein.
Examiner’s Note
Strikethrough notation in the pending claims has been added by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2-9 and 12-14 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gross in view of Zheng in further view of Pao
Regarding claim 2, Gross discloses a method of automating sequencing of a first video and a second video shown by a computer using different players, the method including (Gross, ¶0024-¶0025 – user requests to view content. Supplemental content corresponding to the user is fetched along with the content for playback. ¶0026 – two video players (surfaces) are used. One is used to play the requested video content, the other to display an advertisement):
accessing, from computer programmed to be shown, such that a first
wherein the first video content in the first
and causing sequential remote display, over a network, of the first and second video content (Gross, ¶0014 – pre-roll, interstitial, post-roll. ¶0025 – switching to play a different video after current video finishes. Abstract with ¶0020, ¶0024 – remotely streamed video over a network).
However, Gross appears not to expressly disclose an HTML container. However, in the same field of endeavor, Zheng discloses internet webpage advertisements including video (Zheng, Fig. 5 with Abstract and ¶0138), including
overlapping and/or invisible HTML containers displaying the content (Zheng, Abstract with ¶0034, ¶0079, ¶0117-¶0118, ¶0123-¶0124, ¶0132. See also Claims 2 and 16 as published).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the surface players of Gross to include HTML containers based on the teachings of Zheng. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable use in a wider variety of webpage implementations (Zheng, ¶0034), using existing language support, in a manner acceptable to web page users (Zheng, ¶0006-0011).
However, Gross as modified appears not to expressly disclose a memory. However, in the same field of endeavor, Pau discloses a timed video advertisement (Pau, Abstract), including a video overlay (Pau, Fig. 1D with 3:29-39), including memory (Pau, 16:33-17:5).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the software of Gross to include a memory based on the teachings of Pau. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable and retrieval storage of software via generally available computer hardware (Pau, 16:33-17:5).
Regarding claim 3, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 120 percent of the other HTML container (Gross, ¶0026 – surfaces are located in the same position on the user’s display. In this case, the video players are the same size, occupying the same position, enabling a seamless cut effect creating the illusion that there are not two players).
Regarding claim 4, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 3 above, and further discloses wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 125 percent of an area of the other HTML container (Gross, ¶0026 – surfaces are located in the same position on the user’s display. In this case, the video players are the same size, occupying the same position, enabling a seamless cut effect creating the illusion that there are not two players).
Regarding claim 5, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses wherein one of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers has an area in a range of 100 to 150 percent of an area of the other HTML container (Gross, ¶0026 – surfaces are located in the same position on the user’s display. In this case, the video players are the same size, occupying the same position, enabling a seamless cut effect creating the illusion that there are not two players).
Regarding claim 6, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses wherein neither of the first and second containers of the at least two HTML containers cover more than half of a web page area of the web page on which the containers are positioned (Gross, ¶0026 – surfaces are located in a position (area) on the user’s display. In this case, the surfaces cover the region in which they are located. Zheng, Fig. 4 with ¶0134, ¶0137-¶0138 – more than half of the webpage is not covered by the video advertisement container).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include exposing the webpage based on the teachings of Zheng. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable users to continue to see video player web page context, thereby improving viewer retention and reducing the advertising disruption.
Regarding claim 7, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further disclose wherein the first HTML container for the first video content has a size and position that leaves video selection controls and user response choices exposed on a web page on which the HTML container that is initially viewable is positioned (Pau, Figs. 1C-1D with 5:11-17 and 7:60-8:9 – The playback window includes controls (element 125). The controls remain exposed after the advertising overlay (Fig. 1D element 110) is shown).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include exposing controls based on the teachings of Pau. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable users to continue to see video player context, thereby improving viewer retention and reducing the advertising disruption.
Regarding claim 8, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses dynamically specifying in the program code a link to the second video content, responsive to receiving a request (Gross, ¶0017 – internet delivery of the video. ¶0024-¶0025 – user requests to view content. Player is dynamically initialized with addresses of all other components including locations of corresponding videos based on the request. Zheng, ¶0034, ¶0070 – URL is used to obtain internet content).
Regarding claim 9, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 8 above, and further discloses wherein the first trigger is a timer value (Gross, ¶0025 – triggers for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video).
Regarding claim 12, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 9 above, and further discloses wherein the timer value is delivered with the program code (Gross, ¶0025 – triggers for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video).
Regarding claim 13, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 9 above, and further discloses wherein the timer value is accessible to the program code from a source of a first message that comprises the first video content (Gross, ¶0025 – triggers from the content broadcaster for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video).
Regarding claim 14, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 8 above, and further discloses wherein a first message comprises the first video content and the first trigger is detection of an end of running the first message (Gross, ¶0025 – triggers for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video).
Claim(s) 10-11 and 15-16 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gross in view of Zheng in further view of Pao in further view of Dawson.
Regarding claim 10, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 9 above. However, Gross as modified appears not to expressly disclose wherein the second video content and the first video content use separately loaded player codecs to both respectively decode and respectively display the first and second formats.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dawson teaches a first video and a second video that uses separately loaded player codecs to decode and display different formats (Dawson, Fig. 1 with ¶0004, ¶0024-¶0026).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include separately loaded players codecs based on the teachings of Dawson. The motivation for doing so would have been to properly decode content from different coding formats (Dawson, ¶0004, ¶0026), enabling proper display of a wider variety of advertisements and videos.
Regarding claim 11, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 9 above, and further discloses wherein the second video content and the first video content use two instances of a single player application to
However, Gross as modified appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Dawson teaches a first video and a second video that uses separately loaded player codecs to decode and display different formats (Dawson, Fig. 1 with ¶0004, ¶0024-¶0026).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include decoding based on the teachings of Dawson. The motivation for doing so would have been to properly decode content from different coding formats (Dawson, ¶0004, ¶0026), enabling proper display of a wider variety of advertisements and videos.
Regarding claim 15, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses accessing program code, further including defining a third container that shows third content in a container after the second timer expires; and delivering said program code, further including delivering the second timer (Gross, ¶0025 – triggers for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video. ¶0024-¶0025 – after the advertisement completes, a new advertisement is loaded in to the invisible container and used to display the next advertisement (third container and player)).
However, Gross as modified appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Dawson teaches a first video and a second video that uses separately loaded player codecs to decode and display different formats (Dawson, Fig. 1 with ¶0004, ¶0024-¶0026).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include decoding other formats based on the teachings of Dawson. The motivation for doing so would have been to properly decode content from different coding formats (Dawson, ¶0004, ¶0026), enabling proper display of a wider variety of advertisements and videos.
Regarding claim 16, Gross as modified discloses the elements of claim 15 above, and further discloses after receiving a request and dynamically specifying the links to the first video, dynamically determining at least one of the first and the second timer values, a first message comprising the first video content, and a second message comprising third content, all responsive to receiving the request from a user (Gross, ¶0017 – internet delivery of the video. ¶0024-¶0025 – user requests to view content. Player is dynamically initialized with addresses of all other components including locations of corresponding videos based on the request. ¶0025 – triggers from the content broadcaster for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video. Zheng, ¶0034, ¶0070 – URL is used to obtain internet content).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gross in view of Zheng in further view of Beaton in further view of Dawson in further view of Terry.
Regarding claim 17, Gross discloses a server that serves code adapted to display a first video and a second video and shown by a computer using different players, the server including (Gross, ¶0024-¶0025 – user requests to view content. Supplemental content corresponding to the user is fetched along with the content for playback. ¶0026 – two video players (surfaces) are used. One to play the requested video content, the other to display an advertisement. Fig. 3 with ¶0018, ¶0021-¶0024 – server and computer):
wherein the first video content in a first players are switched back to show the requested video while rendering the advertising player invisible. ¶0025 – triggers for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video).
However, Gross appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Zheng discloses internet webpage advertisements including video (Zheng, Fig. 5 with Abstract and ¶0138), including
overlapping and/or invisible HTML containers displaying the content (Zheng, Abstract with ¶0034, ¶0079, ¶0117-¶0118, ¶0123-¶0124, ¶0132. See also Claims 2 and 16 as published).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the surface players of Gross to include HTML containers based on the teachings of Zheng. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable use in a wider variety of webpage implementations (Zheng, ¶0034), using existing language support, in a manner acceptable to web page users (Zheng, ¶0006-0011).
However, Gross as modified appears not to expressly disclose a window and a processor executing instructions stored in memory. However, in the same field of endeavor, Beaton discloses an advertising video overlay (Beaton, Abstract with ¶0042), including
presenting the advertising as an overlay within the web-browser window (Beaton, Fig. 1 with ¶0077), and
a server computer including a processor and memory executing software components (Beaton, ¶0032-¶0041, ¶0063).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include a browser window, processor, and memory based on the teachings of Beaton. The motivation for doing so would have been to realize implementation of the playback system via commonly known and available software and hardware elements (Beaton, ¶0063).
However, Gross as modified appears not to expressly disclose a second format. However, in the same field of endeavor, Dawson teaches an internet browser with first and second videos that use different formats (Dawson, Fig. 1 with ¶0004, ¶0024-¶0026, ¶0032) including disclose a processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory (Dawson, ¶0016-¶0017).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include a second format based on the teachings of Dawson. The motivation for doing so would have been to properly decode content from different coding formats (Dawson, ¶0004, ¶0026), enabling proper display of a wider variety of advertisements and videos.
However, Gross as modified appears not to expressly disclose invoked separately. However, in the same field of endeavor, Terry discloses displaying multiple video content instances, including overlapping video for advertising content (Terry, Abstract with Fig. 4A-4C with ¶0004, ¶0021, ¶0200-¶0201, ¶0272), including
second player instance invoked separately (Terry, Fig. 4A-4C with ¶0107, ¶0200-¶0201 – overlapping video player instances are invoked separately).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include separately invoked instances based on the teachings of Terry. The motivation for doing so would have been to realize the second video surface in the event that one is not present, and to conserve hardware resources when the surface is not being used or needed for extended periods.
Claim(s) 18-21 i is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gross in view of Zheng in further view of Dawson.
Regarding claim 18, Gross discloses a
wherein the first video content in the first
causing sequential remote display, over a network, of the first and second video content (Gross, ¶0014 – pre-roll, interstitial, post-roll. ¶0025 – switching to play a different video after current video finishes. Abstract with ¶0020, ¶0024 – remotely streamed video over a network).
However, Gross appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Zheng discloses internet webpage advertisements including video (Zheng, Fig. 5 with Abstract and ¶0138), including
overlapping and/or invisible HTML containers displaying the content (Zheng, Abstract with ¶0034, ¶0079, ¶0117-¶0118, ¶0123-¶0124, ¶0132. See also Claims 2 and 16 as published).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the surface players of Gross to include HTML containers based on the teachings of Zheng. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable use in a wider variety of webpage implementations (Zheng, ¶0034), using existing language support, in a manner acceptable to web page users (Zheng, ¶0006-0011).
However, Gross as modified appears not to expressly disclose a processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory a processor executing instructions stored in memory. However, in the same field of endeavor, Dawson teaches a media player within a browser window (Dawson, Fig. 1 with ¶0004, ¶0024-¶0026, ¶0032), including disclose a processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory (Dawson, ¶0016-¶0017).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include a hardware processor and memory based on the teachings of Dawson. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable storage and execution of software via generally available computer hardware.
Regarding claim 19, Gross discloses the elements of claim 18 above, and further discloses wherein the first trigger is a timer value (Gross, ¶0025 – triggers for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video).
Regarding claim 20, Gross discloses the elements of claim 18 above, and further discloses wherein a first message comprises the first video content and the first trigger is detection of an end of running the first message (Gross, ¶0025 – triggers for switching include a timer within the player or the end of a video).
Regarding claim 21, Gross discloses the elements of claim 18 above, and further discloses wherein the second video content and the first video content use two instances of a single player application to decode and display the second and first video contents (Gross, ¶0026 – two video instances (surfaces) are used. One to play the requested video content, the other to display an advertisement. Dawson, Fig. 1 with ¶0004, ¶0024-¶0026 - video players that use separately loaded player codecs to decode and display different formats).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the players of Gross as modified to include decoding based on the teachings of Dawson. The motivation for doing so would have been to properly decode content from different coding formats (Dawson, ¶0004, ¶0026), enabling proper display of a wider variety of advertisements and videos.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL W PARCHER whose telephone number is (303)297-4281. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm, Mountain Time.
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, William Bashore can be reached at (571)272-4088 (Eastern Time). 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.
/DANIEL W PARCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights