DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is responsive to communication filed on 13 March 2026, with acknowledgement of an original application filed on 14 August 2024.
2. Claims 1-18 are currently pending. Claims 1, 7, and 13 are in independent forms. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 2-18 are new.
Response to Amendment
3. Applicant’s arguments filed 13 March 2026 have been fully considered however they are moot due to new grounds of rejection below initiated by applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
6. Claims 1-18 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gabriel et al. US Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0015580 (hereinafter Gabriel) in view of Vilcauskas et al. US Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0011095 (hereinafter Vilcauskas) in further view of Rothman et al. US Patent Application Publication No. 2001/0044851 (hereinafter Rothman).
Regarding claim 1, Gabriel discloses a method comprising:
“receiving a request for playback of the audio file” (see Gabriel Fig. 2, step 202, par. 0089, In step 202, a multimedia-object viewing request is received from a user via a playback device);
“verifying the request is from the first party” (see Gabriel Fig. 2, step 204, par. 0089, In step 204, a test is performed to see if the user has rights to view the object. This test can involve a query to a viewing-rights portion of a user-profile database, where a unique user identifier and a unique object identifier are passed to the database as search criteria, or alternatively, this test can involve authentication of permission (e.g., a coupon or secure token) that is passed from the user to the process as part of the viewing request);
Gabriel does not explicitly discloses storing a first copy of an audio file at a repository, wherein the first copy of the audio file is copyright-compliant, the first copy of the audio file being owned by a first party who does not have custody of the first copy of the audio file, and wherein the repository does not have a license to reproduce the first copy of the audio file.
However, in analogues art, Phillipo discloses storing a first copy of an audio file at a repository, wherein the first copy of the audio file is copyright-compliant, the first copy of the audio file being owned by a first party who does not have custody of the first copy of the audio file, and wherein the repository does not have a license to reproduce the first copy of the audio file (see Vilcauskas par. 0033, An audio unit comprises an audio composition, such as a song, an album, or a performance comprising one or more of the audio files 22 available from the server or producible from a stored audio file that may be downloaded or otherwise transferred to the users 26, 28, 30, 32 from the server 20. By way of example, the provider may have acquired rights in the nature of ownership to a song as a marketable audio unit by purchasing or otherwise licensing the right to distribute a copy of the song as a single or by purchasing a compact disk or other medium containing the song. On the other hand, by purchasing a compact disk or other medium that includes an album comprising the song or by obtaining a license to distribute the album, the provider may distribute a copy of the song as part of an audio unit comprising the album. In the alternative, the provider may have the right to distribute copies of each of the individual songs included on the album, up to the number of albums in which the provider has an ownership interest, the provider has purchased or otherwise acquired an instance of ownership to each copy of the audio content, stored in one or more audio files 22 or producible from an audio file, which may be downloaded or streamed as an audio unit from the server 20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Vilcauskas with the system of Gabriel to include audio files be physically present on the server, it is also understood the audio files may be stored on one or more remote computing and storage devices, including a user's computing device (see Vilcauskas par. 0032).
“transmitting a signal representative of the first copy of the audio file to one or more playback devices associated with the first party, (see Gabriel pars. 0036, 0045-0046, The invention is shown in the context of a subset of potential playback devices and their commonly associated networks. These include cable set-top box 118 and HFC network 120, satellite set-top box 122 and direct-to-home QPSK link 124, handheld mobile player 126 and cellular network 128, and personal-computer-based television (PCTV) 130 and IP/broadband pipe 132. a user of, for example, HD cable set-top device 118, makes a request over cable HFC plant 120, to play a movie. The application server then forwards (transmitting) the movie ID, viewing state, preferences, and device format capabilities to multimedia-object server 102. Assuming the server contains a copy of the movie in HD format, the server indexes into the movie and starts to stream the movie to the cable set-top in the HD format);
Gabriel in view of Vilcauskas does not clearly discloses the playback devices being operative to receive the signal and play the audio file without storing any portion of the audio file for longer than a minimal time that the playback devices may require to play the portion upon receiving the portion of the audio file.
However, in analogues art, Rothman discloses the playback devices being operative to receive the signal and play the audio file without storing any portion of the audio file for longer than a minimal time that the playback devices may require to play the portion upon receiving the portion of the audio file (see Rothman pars. 0040-0045, the streaming media system includes a cached disk storage subsystem. The cached disk storage substation is responsive to media prefetch commands for staging data specified by a process from a disk array of the cached disk storage subsystem to an allocated portion of the cache memory when the data are absent from the cache memory (without storing), and the cached disk storage substation is responsive to a fetch command for fetching data specified by the process from cache memory of the cached disk storage subsystem. The data specified for the prefetch command for the process are retained in the allocated portion of the cache memory from the time that the cached disk storage substation has responded to the prefetch command to the time (longer than a minimal time) that the cached disk storage substation responds to a fetch command specifying the data for the process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Rothman with the system of Gabriel and Vilcauskas to include a data specified for the prefetch command for the process are retained in the allocated portion of the cache memory from the time that the cached disk storage substation has responded to the prefetch command to the time that the cached disk storage substation responds to a fetch command specifying the data for the process (see Rothman par. 0041).
Regarding claims 2, 8, and 14, Gabriel in view of Vilcauskas in further view of Rothman discloses the method of claim 1, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 7, the repository of claim 13,
Rothman further discloses wherein transmitting the signal representative of the first copy of the audio file comprises transmitting a first sequence of portions of the first copy of the audio file at a respective first sequence of times (see Rothman pars. 0101-0102, The data specified for the prefetch command for the process are retained in the allocated portion of the cache memory from the time that the cached disk storage substation has responded to the prefetch command to the time that the cached disk storage substation responds to a fetch command specifying the data for the process. After the cached disk storage subsystem responds to the fetch command, the allocated portion of cache memory holding the specified data is freed for receiving different data so long as the cached disk storage substation has not yet processed a prefetch command in which the data have been specified by another process that has not yet fetched the data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Rothman with the system of Gabriel and Vilcauskas to include a data specified for the prefetch command for the process are retained in the allocated portion of the cache memory from the time that the cached disk storage substation has responded to the prefetch command to the time that the cached disk storage substation responds to a fetch command specifying the data for the process (see Rothman par. 0041).
Regarding claims 3, 9, and 15, Gabriel in view of Vilcauskas in further view of Rothman discloses the method of claim 2, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 8, the repository of claim 14,
Gabriel further discloses receiving a request for playback of the audio file from a second party (see Gabriel par. 0030, When the application server receives a viewing request from a playback device, the device's identifier is used to identify the device's user/owner and the viewing state of the requested object with respect to that user/owner); transmitting a second signal representative of the first copy of the audio file to the second party by transmitting the first sequence of portions of the first copy of the audio file at a respective second sequence of times (see Gabriel par. 0030, The viewing state includes, for example, the reference timecode relative to the beginning of the multimedia object that specifies the point at which, for example, the multimedia object was paused during a prior viewing. This pause point can be then be passed to the multimedia-object server so that the video server can index into the multimedia object and resume the streaming from the point where the prior viewing was paused).
Regarding claims 4, 10, and 16, Gabriel in view of Vilcauskas in further view of Rothman discloses the method of claim 3, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 9, the repository of claim 15,
Vilcauskas further discloses wherein the first sequence of times overlaps the second sequence of times, the method further comprising preventing any portion of the audio file from being transmitted at the same time to the first party and the second party (see Vilcauskas par. 0039, the user is permitted to download audio files 22 originating from a single audio unit, for which a corresponding instance of ownership is "locked out" to prevent the audio unit from being provided to another user. If the user desires to simultaneously download or otherwise maintain copies of audio files from multiple audio units then the service provider would "lock out" multiple instances of ownership, for example, one or more compact disks or instances of licenses that collectively contain or govern all of the audio files that are currently selected, downloaded, or being downloaded by the user. In this manner, the content provider's rights in this content are protected from unauthorized downloading or other appropriation without proper compensation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Vilcauskas with the system of Gabriel to include audio files be physically present on the server, it is also understood the audio files may be stored on one or more remote computing and storage devices, including a user's computing device (see Vilcauskas par. 0032).
Regarding claims 5, 11, and 17, Gabriel in view of Vilcauskas in further view of Rothman discloses the method of claim 3, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 7, the repository of claim 13,
Vilcauskas further discloses wherein the first party owns the first copy prior to storing at the repository (see Vilcauskas par. 0008, When contacted by a user seeking to acquire an audio file, the server determines whether the service provider owns a copy of a compact disk or other medium on which the audio file is recorded).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Vilcauskas with the system of Gabriel to include audio files be physically present on the server, it is also understood the audio files may be stored on one or more remote computing and storage devices, including a user's computing device (see Vilcauskas par. 0032).
Regarding claims 6, 12, and 18, Gabriel in view of Vilcauskas in further view of Rothman discloses the method of claim 5, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, the repository of claim 17,
Vilcauskas further discloses wherein the first party acquired ownership of the first copy independently of the repository (see Vilcauskas par. 0034, If the audio unit is currently downloaded, in use, or being downloaded by the same or another user, then the system determines if a sufficient number of instances of ownership; for examples, copies of media containing the audio unit or instances of licenses for the audio unit, are owned by the provider to permit another download. In this manner, for each copy of an audio unit a corresponding instance of ownership; a compact disk or other medium, instance of a license, or other establishment of ownership rights, is verified as being owned by the provider).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Vilcauskas with the system of Gabriel to include audio files be physically present on the server, it is also understood the audio files may be stored on one or more remote computing and storage devices, including a user's computing device (see Vilcauskas par. 0032).
Regarding claim 7, Gabriel discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a plurality of instructions, wherein execution of the plurality of instructions by one or more processors causes the one or more processors to perform a plurality of operations (Fig. 1, multimedia content distribution facility 100) comprising:
“receiving a request for playback of the audio file” (see Gabriel Fig. 2, step 202, par. 0089, In step 202, a multimedia-object viewing request is received from a user via a playback device);
“verifying the request is from the first party” (see Gabriel Fig. 2, step 204, par. 0089, In step 204, a test is performed to see if the user has rights to view the object. This test can involve a query to a viewing-rights portion of a user-profile database, where a unique user identifier and a unique object identifier are passed to the database as search criteria, or alternatively, this test can involve authentication of permission (e.g., a coupon or secure token) that is passed from the user to the process as part of the viewing request);
Gabriel does not explicitly discloses storing a first copy of an audio file at a repository, wherein the first copy of the audio file is copyright-compliant, the first copy of the audio file being owned by a first party who does not have custody of the first copy of the audio file, and wherein the repository does not have a license to reproduce the first copy of the audio file.
However, in analogues art, Vilcauskas discloses storing a first copy of an audio file at a repository, wherein the first copy of the audio file is copyright-compliant, the first copy of the audio file being owned by a first party who does not have custody of the first copy of the audio file, and wherein the repository does not have a license to reproduce the first copy of the audio file (see Vilcauskas par. 0033, An audio unit comprises an audio composition, such as a song, an album, or a performance comprising one or more of the audio files 22 available from the server or producible from a stored audio file that may be downloaded or otherwise transferred to the users 26, 28, 30, 32 from the server 20. By way of example, the provider may have acquired rights in the nature of ownership to a song as a marketable audio unit by purchasing or otherwise licensing the right to distribute a copy of the song as a single or by purchasing a compact disk or other medium containing the song. On the other hand, by purchasing a compact disk or other medium that includes an album comprising the song or by obtaining a license to distribute the album, the provider may distribute a copy of the song as part of an audio unit comprising the album. In the alternative, the provider may have the right to distribute copies of each of the individual songs included on the album, up to the number of albums in which the provider has an ownership interest, the provider has purchased or otherwise acquired an instance of ownership to each copy of the audio content, stored in one or more audio files 22 or producible from an audio file, which may be downloaded or streamed as an audio unit from the server 20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Vilcauskas with the system of Gabriel to include audio files be physically present on the server, it is also understood the audio files may be stored on one or more remote computing and storage devices, including a user's computing device (see Vilcauskas par. 0032).
“transmitting a signal representative of the first copy of the audio file to one or more playback devices associated with the first party, (see Gabriel pars. 0036, 0045-0046, The invention is shown in the context of a subset of potential playback devices and their commonly associated networks. These include cable set-top box 118 and HFC network 120, satellite set-top box 122 and direct-to-home QPSK link 124, handheld mobile player 126 and cellular network 128, and personal-computer-based television (PCTV) 130 and IP/broadband pipe 132. a user of, for example, HD cable set-top device 118, makes a request over cable HFC plant 120, to play a movie. The application server then forwards (transmitting) the movie ID, viewing state, preferences, and device format capabilities to multimedia-object server 102. Assuming the server contains a copy of the movie in HD format, the server indexes into the movie and starts to stream the movie to the cable set-top in the HD format);
Gabriel in view of Vilcauskas does not clearly discloses the playback devices being operative to receive the signal and play the audio file without storing any portion of the audio file for longer than a minimal time that the playback devices may require to play the portion upon receiving the portion of the audio file.
However, in analogues art, Rothman discloses the playback devices being operative to receive the signal and play the audio file without storing any portion of the audio file for longer than a minimal time that the playback devices may require to play the portion upon receiving the portion of the audio file (see Rothman pars. 0040-0045, the streaming media system includes a cached disk storage subsystem. The cached disk storage substation is responsive to media prefetch commands for staging data specified by a process from a disk array of the cached disk storage subsystem to an allocated portion of the cache memory when the data are absent from the cache memory (without storing), and the cached disk storage substation is responsive to a fetch command for fetching data specified by the process from cache memory of the cached disk storage subsystem. The data specified for the prefetch command for the process are retained in the allocated portion of the cache memory from the time that the cached disk storage substation has responded to the prefetch command to the time (longer than a minimal time) that the cached disk storage substation responds to a fetch command specifying the data for the process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Rothman with the system of Gabriel and Vilcauskas to include a data specified for the prefetch command for the process are retained in the allocated portion of the cache memory from the time that the cached disk storage substation has responded to the prefetch command to the time that the cached disk storage substation responds to a fetch command specifying the data for the process (see Rothman par. 0041).
Regarding claim 13, Gabriel discloses a repository comprising:
“memory” (Fig. 1, user profile database 104);
one or more processors (Fig. 1, multimedia-object server 102, Application server 106) configured to perform a plurality of operations comprising:
“receiving a request for playback of the audio file” (see Gabriel Fig. 2, step 202, par. 0089, In step 202, a multimedia-object viewing request is received from a user via a playback device);
“verifying the request is from the first party” (see Gabriel Fig. 2, step 204, par. 0089, In step 204, a test is performed to see if the user has rights to view the object. This test can involve a query to a viewing-rights portion of a user-profile database, where a unique user identifier and a unique object identifier are passed to the database as search criteria, or alternatively, this test can involve authentication of permission (e.g., a coupon or secure token) that is passed from the user to the process as part of the viewing request);
Gabriel does not explicitly discloses storing a first copy of an audio file at a repository, wherein the first copy of the audio file is copyright-compliant, the first copy of the audio file being owned by a first party who does not have custody of the first copy of the audio file, and wherein the repository does not have a license to reproduce the first copy of the audio file.
However, in analogues art, Vilcauskas discloses storing a first copy of an audio file at a repository, wherein the first copy of the audio file is copyright-compliant, the first copy of the audio file being owned by a first party who does not have custody of the first copy of the audio file, and wherein the repository does not have a license to reproduce the first copy of the audio file (see Vilcauskas par. 0033, An audio unit comprises an audio composition, such as a song, an album, or a performance comprising one or more of the audio files 22 available from the server or producible from a stored audio file that may be downloaded or otherwise transferred to the users 26, 28, 30, 32 from the server 20. By way of example, the provider may have acquired rights in the nature of ownership to a song as a marketable audio unit by purchasing or otherwise licensing the right to distribute a copy of the song as a single or by purchasing a compact disk or other medium containing the song. On the other hand, by purchasing a compact disk or other medium that includes an album comprising the song or by obtaining a license to distribute the album, the provider may distribute a copy of the song as part of an audio unit comprising the album. In the alternative, the provider may have the right to distribute copies of each of the individual songs included on the album, up to the number of albums in which the provider has an ownership interest, the provider has purchased or otherwise acquired an instance of ownership to each copy of the audio content, stored in one or more audio files 22 or producible from an audio file, which may be downloaded or streamed as an audio unit from the server 20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Vilcauskas with the system of Gabriel to include audio files be physically present on the server, it is also understood the audio files may be stored on one or more remote computing and storage devices, including a user's computing device (see Vilcauskas par. 0032).
“transmitting a signal representative of the first copy of the audio file to one or more playback devices associated with the first party, (see Gabriel pars. 0036, 0045-0046, The invention is shown in the context of a subset of potential playback devices and their commonly associated networks. These include cable set-top box 118 and HFC network 120, satellite set-top box 122 and direct-to-home QPSK link 124, handheld mobile player 126 and cellular network 128, and personal-computer-based television (PCTV) 130 and IP/broadband pipe 132. a user of, for example, HD cable set-top device 118, makes a request over cable HFC plant 120, to play a movie. The application server then forwards (transmitting) the movie ID, viewing state, preferences, and device format capabilities to multimedia-object server 102. Assuming the server contains a copy of the movie in HD format, the server indexes into the movie and starts to stream the movie to the cable set-top in the HD format);
Gabriel in view of Vilcauskas does not clearly discloses the playback devices being operative to receive the signal and play the audio file without storing any portion of the audio file for longer than a minimal time that the playback devices may require to play the portion upon receiving the portion of the audio file.
However, in analogues art, Rothman discloses the playback devices being operative to receive the signal and play the audio file without storing any portion of the audio file for longer than a minimal time that the playback devices may require to play the portion upon receiving the portion of the audio file (see Rothman pars. 0040-0045, the streaming media system includes a cached disk storage subsystem. The cached disk storage substation is responsive to media prefetch commands for staging data specified by a process from a disk array of the cached disk storage subsystem to an allocated portion of the cache memory when the data are absent from the cache memory (without storing), and the cached disk storage substation is responsive to a fetch command for fetching data specified by the process from cache memory of the cached disk storage subsystem. The data specified for the prefetch command for the process are retained in the allocated portion of the cache memory from the time that the cached disk storage substation has responded to the prefetch command to the time (longer than a minimal time) that the cached disk storage substation responds to a fetch command specifying the data for the process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Rothman with the system of Gabriel and Vilcauskas to include a data specified for the prefetch command for the process are retained in the allocated portion of the cache memory from the time that the cached disk storage substation has responded to the prefetch command to the time that the cached disk storage substation responds to a fetch command specifying the data for the process (see Rothman par. 0041).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL AMBAYE whose telephone number is (571)270-7635. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached at (571) 272-6798. 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.
/SAMUEL AMBAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2433
/JEFFREY C PWU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Prosecution Insights