DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This communication is in response to the amendment filed on 05/06/2026. Claims 1-28 are rejected. Claims 12-13 and 19-20 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 05 /06 /2016, have been fully considered, but the arguments were not found persuasive. Applicants are arguing in substance the following:
Argument(s) to Claim 1, 8, 15, and 22:
The prior art does not explicitly teach sending… via an out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network, a second signal comprising the request.
Response to argument(s) of Claim 1:
As set forth in the Non-Final office action, Banks teaches generating and transmitting a request for a second content associated with the first content presented on a television. The rejection relies on Stern for teaching the claimed use of an “out-of-band (OOB)” communication path. Specifically, Stern teaches that customer premises equipment communicates using OOB or DOCSIS channels and associated protocols ([0087]). Thus, Stern teaches the use of an OOB communication channel separate from the primary content delivery channel. Applicant’s argument improperly focuses on Stern’s disclosure out-of-band communications are not for “sending a request to receive second content." However, since Banks already taught “sending a request to receive second content via non-packetized network” by discloses transmitting a request associated with the content delivery, the teaching of Stern is for the use of the OOB communication channel. The rejection does not require Stern independently to disclose the identical request transmitted by Banks. Rather, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Stern’s OOB communication channel in the system of Banks for transmitting the request taught by Banks in order to provide communication through a dedicated signaling path and facilitate delivery of content and services within the content distribution network.
Applicant’s further argued that the Office has not provided an adequate rationale for combining the references. However, this argument is also unpersuasive. The Office Action sets forth a reasoned rationale that it would have been obvious to incorporate Stern’s out-of-band communication channel techniques into the content distribution system of Banks to facilitate signaling and service delivery through a dedicated communication channel. Such a modification merely involves the predictable use of known communication techniques to improve a similar content distribution environment and would have been well within the level of ordinary skill in the art (KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
The rejection is maintained accordingly based on the reasons noted above.
The Terminal Disclaimer has been filed and approved by the USPTO. The Double Patenting rejection has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 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.
Claims 1, 3-6, 8, 10-13, 15, 17-20, 22, and 24-27 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banks (US 20110321107 A1) in view of Stern et al (US 20110265116 A1), hereafter Stern.
Regarding claim 1, Banks teaches a method comprising:
causing, by a first computing device, first content to be displayed on a display device ([0033] User input from remote control 106 to STB 102 based on content displayed; [0051], fig. 4, TV 104 displays TV frames 120 (first content));
receiving, by the first computing device, a first signal indicating a request to receive second content associated with the first content at a user device ([0051] A first frame 120 includes content ("Press SEL For More") informing a user that he or she can request more information by pressing the select button (first signal) on the remote control. In response to selection of the select button, the second screen 122 (second content associated with the first content) is displayed); and
sending, by the first computing device and to a second computing device via an out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network, a second signal comprising the request to receive the second content associated with the first content at the user device ([0057] Selection of the "Music" category in frame 152 by interactive use of the remote control 106, causes navigation to proceed to frame 160 (second content) depicted in FIG. 8, which lists titles of songs that can be purchased. Selection of a song title ("Hey, Soul Sister-Train" by interactive use of the remote control 106, as described above, causes a request for the song to be transmitted to server 101, along with other information, e.g., information described above. Content sent to the mobile device comprises the song).
Banks does not explicitly teach
out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network
Stern teaches
out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network ([0087] the CPE 106 may use the out-of-band (OOB) or DOCSIS channels and associated protocols).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Banks disclosure, the out-of-bank communication in television network , as taught by Stern. One would be motivated to do so to delivering such services and content to particular subsets or groupings within the user base of a content distribution network via non-packet enabled device of the subscriber.
Regarding claim 8, Banks teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:
cause first content to be displayed on a display device ([0033] User input from remote control 106 to STB 102 based on content displayed; [0051], fig. 4, TV 104 displays TV frames 120 (first content));
receive a first signal indicating a request to receive second content associated with the first content at a user device ([0051] A first frame 120 includes content ("Press SEL For More") informing a user that he or she can request more information by pressing the select button (first signal) on the remote control. In response to selection of the select button, the second screen 122 (second content associated with the first content) is displayed); and
send, to a computing device via an out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network, a second signal comprising the request to receive the second content associated with the first content at the user device ([0057] Selection of the "Music" category in frame 152 by interactive use of the remote control 106, causes navigation to proceed to frame 160 (second content) depicted in FIG. 8, which lists titles of songs that can be purchased. Selection of a song title ("Hey, Soul Sister-Train" by interactive use of the remote control 106, as described above, causes a request for the song to be transmitted to server 101, along with other information, e.g., information described above. Content sent to the mobile device comprises the song).
Banks does not explicitly teach
out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network
Stern teaches
out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network (the CPE 106 may use the out-of-band (OOB) or DOCSIS channels and associated protocols).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Banks disclosure, the out-of-bank communication in television network , as taught by Stern. One would be motivated to do so to delivering such services and content to particular subsets or groupings within the user base of a content distribution network via non-packet enabled device of the subscriber.
Regarding claim 15, Banks teaches an apparatus comprising:
one or more processors; and memory storing processor-executable instructions ([0035] processor and memory) that, when executed by the one or more
processors, cause the apparatus to:
cause first content to be displayed on a display device ([0033] User input from remote control 106 to STB 102 based on content displayed; [0051], fig. 4, TV 104 displays TV frames 120 (first content));
receive a first signal indicating a request to receive second content associated with the first content at a user device ([0051] A first frame 120 includes content ("Press SEL For More") informing a user that he or she can request more information by pressing the select button (first signal) on the remote control. In response to selection of the select button, the second screen 122 (second content associated with the first content) is displayed); and
send, to a computing device via an out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network, a second signal comprising the request to receive the second content associated with the first content at the user device ([0057] Selection of the "Music" category in frame 152 by interactive use of the remote control 106, causes navigation to proceed to frame 160 (second content) depicted in FIG. 8, which lists titles of songs that can be purchased. Selection of a song title ("Hey, Soul Sister-Train" by interactive use of the remote control 106, as described above, causes a request for the song to be transmitted to server 101, along with other information, e.g., information described above. Content sent to the mobile device comprises the song).
Banks does not explicitly teach
out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network
Stern teaches
out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network (the CPE 106 may use the out-of-band (OOB) or DOCSIS channels and associated protocols).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Banks disclosure, the out-of-bank communication in television network , as taught by Stern. One would be motivated to do so to delivering such services and content to particular subsets or groupings within the user base of a content distribution network via non-packet enabled device of the subscriber.
Regarding claims 3, 10, 17, 24, Banks and Stern teach all limitations of parent claims 1, 8, 15, and 22 , wherein Banks further teaches the processor-executable instructions, Banks does not explicitly teach when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to:
receive, via the non-packetized network, one or more trigger elements associated with the first content ([0033] User input from remote control 106 to STB 102 based on content displayed on TV 104 provides consumer information such as a telephone number to the STB 102, which provides the information to server 101); and
cause the one or more trigger elements to be displayed with the first content on the display device ([0033] The server 101 in turn transmits content related to the advertising campaign data 110 to mobile device 108, e.g., via a cell phone network based on the consumers telephone number.).
Regarding claims 4, 11, 18, and 25, Banks and Stern teach all limitations of parent claims 1, 8, 15, and 22, wherein Banks further teaches the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to:
send a request for an application configured to execute one or more trigger elements associated with the first content ([0051] A first frame 120 includes content ("Press SEL For More") informing a user that he or she can request more information by pressing the select button on the remote control.); and
receive the application, wherein the first signal comprises at least one trigger element selected via the application ([0051] In response to selection of the select button, the second screen 122 is displayed, which includes interactive content for entering a telephone number).
Regarding claims 5, 12, 19, and 26, Banks and Stern teach all limitations of parent claims 1, 8, 15, and 22, wherein Banks further teaches the first signal comprises a first device identifier associated with a first computing device comprising the at least one processor ([0033] User input from remote control 106 to STB 102 based on content displayed on TV 104 provides consumer information such as a telephone number to the STB 102, which provides the information to server 101).
Regarding claim 6, 13, 20, and 27, Banks and Stern teach all limitations of parent claims 1, 8, 15, and 22, wherein Banks further teaches a first computing device comprises one of a set-top-box or a television comprising the at least one processor ([0032] System 100 includes server 101 for handling advertising, text messaging, and multimedia messaging, STB 102, TV 104).
Regarding claim 22, Banks teaches a system comprising:
a first computing device configured to:
cause first content to be displayed on a display device ([0033] User input from remote control 106 to STB 102 based on content displayed; [0051], fig. 4, TV 104 displays TV frames 120 (first content));
receive a first signal indicating a request to receive second content associated with the first content at a user device ([0051] A first frame 120 includes content ("Press SEL For More") informing a user that he or she can request more information by pressing the select button (first signal) on the remote control. In response to selection of the select button, the second screen 122 (second content associated with the first content) is displayed); and
send, to a second computing device via an out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network, a second signal comprising the request to receive the second content associated with the first content at the user device ([0057] Selection of the "Music" category in frame 152 by interactive use of the remote control 106, causes navigation to proceed to frame 160 (second content) depicted in FIG. 8, which lists titles of songs that can be purchased. Selection of a song title ("Hey, Soul Sister-Train" by interactive use of the remote control 106, as described above, causes a request for the song to be transmitted to server 101, along with other information, e.g., information described above. Content sent to the mobile device comprises the song); and
the second computing device configured to:
receive, from the first computing device, the second signal ([0057] Content sent to the mobile device comprises the song. Examples of purchased items that can be delivered to a mobile or other device comprise ring tones, software, electronic maps, electronic games).
Banks does not explicitly teach
out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network
Stern teaches
out-of-band portion of a non-packetized network (the CPE 106 may use the out-of-band (OOB) or DOCSIS channels and associated protocols).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Banks disclosure, the out-of-bank communication in television network , as taught by Stern. One would be motivated to do so to delivering such services and content to particular subsets or groupings within the user base of a content distribution network via non-packet enabled device of the subscriber.
Claims 2, 9, 16, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banks (US 20110321107 A1) in view of Stern (US 20110265116 A1) and further in view of Pattison (US 8886748 B1).
Regarding claim 2, 9, 16, 23, Banks and Stern teach all limitations of parent claims 1, 8, 15, and 22, Banks does not explicitly teach wherein the request to receive the second content associated with the first content at the user device comprises a trigger signal, wherein the trigger signal further comprises a linkage message and one or more respective indices associated with one or more trigger elements associated with the first content.
Pattison teaches
wherein the request to receive the second content associated with the first content at the user device comprises a trigger signal (col. 2, lines 13-14, the content to include an action trigger), wherein the trigger signal further comprises a linkage message and one or more respective indices associated with one or more trigger elements associated with the first content (col. 2, lines 18-20, preparing, at the content proxy computer, a message containing the content in a format suitable for viewing by a target device; and sending the message to the target device; col. 2, lines 29-35, the method the action trigger comprises a menu of one or more items, a hot key, or a button. The step of receiving an indication from the client device that content is to be captured comprises one or more of receiving an indication that a menu item was selected, receiving an indication that the hot key was selected and receiving an indication that the button was selected).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the teaching of Pattison into the teaching of Banks, the second content comprises a trigger element. One would be motivated to do so to identify multiple action triggers may be associated with the content where each of the action triggers may be associated with different functionality or different portions of the presented content.
Claims 7, 14, 21, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banks (US 20110321107 A1) in view of Stern (US 20110265116 A1) and further in view of Dasher (US 20120096499).
Regarding claims 7, 14, 21, and 28, Banks and Stern teach all limitations of parent claims 1, 8, 15, and 22, Banks does not explicitly teach wherein the non-packetized network comprises a quadrature amplitude modulation network.
Dasher teaches
the non-packetized network comprises a quadrature amplitude modulation network ([0030], non-IP (non-packetized) based VOD server 50, [0044], the VOD server 50 may then deliver or transmit the stored VOD content to the set-top box 96 (and, hence, to the television 38) via an MPEG-2 Transport Stream (TS) using a Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM)-based protocol).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include in the Banks disclosure, the non-packetized network comprises a QAM, as taught by Dasher. One would be motivated to do so to integrate functionality of the OTV server to provide non-IP based VOD content delivery to facilitate VOD catalog search and content distribution in a user-friendly manner, which does not require extensive user inputs or tedious remote control-based clicks.
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 ANH NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0657. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 5712703037. 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.
/ANH NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Prosecution Insights