DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to the following communication: Request for Continued Examination filed on 9 April 2026.
Claim(s) 21-40 is/are pending and present for examination. Claim(s) 21, 38, and 40 is/are in independent form.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9 March 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 21, 22, 26, and 38-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nielsen et al, U.S. Patent No. 10,516,911, filed on 27 September 2016, and issued on 24 December 2019, in view of Ebert et al, USPGPUB No. 2016/0313957, filed on 19 April 2016, and published on 27 October 2016, in further view of Kedenburg, III, USPGPUB No. 2018/0146217, filed on 22 November 2016, and published on 24 May 2018, and in further view of Fleischman et al, U.S. Patent No. 10,445,368, filed on 2 May 2016, and issued on 15 October 2019.
As per independent claims 21, 38, and 40, Nielsen, in combination with Ebert, Kedenburg, and Fleischman, discloses:
A computer-implemented method, the computer-implemented method comprising:
monitoring, by a computing system with one or more processors, publicly available data via a communication network {See Nielsen, column 9, lines 43-59, wherein this reads over “In the example situation 400 illustrated in FIG. 4, there is an event or occurrence for which multiple users may want to capture and/or obtain content. In some instances this will be a pre-planned event, such as a concert or performance, while in other instances this will be a spontaneous or otherwise unofficial event, such as a public street performance. For either instance there can be determined start and end times for the performance. For scheduled events this can be determined in advance, while for other types of events the times of the video and/or capture of the event can be used to determine appropriate start and end times. Such information can also be utilized for scheduled events that may not have started or ended at the scheduled times. As will be discussed in more detail later herein, a user in some embodiments can sign up in advance to provide content for a planned event, while users can select during an unplanned event to start uploading media content, among other such options.”};
determining, by the computing system, a currently occurring live event based on the publicly available data {See Nielsen, column 9, line 60-column 10, line 2, wherein this reads over “In either situation, the triggering of a recognized “event,” such as the uploading of audio, video, or other media content from a location, where that uploading is tagged or otherwise indicated to correspond to an event or occurrence, can enable content from other users to be received and associated with that event. In some embodiments the event identification can occur after the fact, such as upon analyzing media content that was captured from multiple devices in a same general location over a same general period of time, etc.”};
determining, by the computing system, an importance score for the currently occurring live event {See Ebert, [0037], wherein this reads over “In some examples, server device 12 can decrement the popularity score by the popularity decrement value in response to determining that the corresponding event satisfies threshold atrophy criteria, such as a threshold popularity score, a threshold elapsed time since a start of the event, or other criteria corresponding to the event. The atrophy criteria can be predetermined, or can be determined and/or modified via user input. Server device 12 can refrain from decrementing the popularity score by the popularity decrement value in response to determining that the event does not satisfy the threshold atrophy criteria. For example, server device 12 can compare the determined popularity score for an event to the threshold popularity score, and can determine that the event satisfies the threshold atrophy criteria when the determined popularity score is greater than (or equal to) the threshold popularity score.”} based, in part, on event descriptions gathered from publicly available social media posts {See Fleischman, column 5, lines 26-34, wherein this reads over “An exemplary list of social interest domains for which time-based media is used according to the present invention includes broadcast video such as television programs, such as sports, news, episodic television, reality/live event shows, movies, and advertising in conjunction with any of these domains. More specific domains also are possible, e.g., football games, entertainment news, specific reality TV shows, etc., each of which may have their own domain-specific ontology.”; and column 7, lines 43-52, wherein this reads over “The social interest estimator 250 aggregates information from the annotated event store 290 and the mapping store 275 to estimate social interest in a given media event using a social interest score, and is one means for doing so. The social interest score is estimated by the social interest estimator 250 by cycling through all (or selected) annotated events, and for each event, taking a weighted sum of the confidence scores for each social media content item that exceeds a given threshold. The resulting social interest score is stored in the social interest store 285.”}; and
in accordance with a determination that the importance score for the currently occurring live event satisfies a threshold importance score {See Ebert, [0037], wherein this reads over “In some examples, server device 12 can decrement the popularity score by the popularity decrement value in response to determining that the corresponding event satisfies threshold atrophy criteria, such as a threshold popularity score, a threshold elapsed time since a start of the event, or other criteria corresponding to the event. The atrophy criteria can be predetermined, or can be determined and/or modified via user input. Server device 12 can refrain from decrementing the popularity score by the popularity decrement value in response to determining that the event does not satisfy the threshold atrophy criteria. For example, server device 12 can compare the determined popularity score for an event to the threshold popularity score, and can determine that the event satisfies the threshold atrophy criteria when the determined popularity score is greater than (or equal to) the threshold popularity score.”}:
requesting, by the computing system, media data associated with the currently occurring live event {See Kedenburg, [0021], wherein this reads over “ In one or more embodiments, the video presentation system gathers or otherwise receives event information from one or more sources, and dynamically provides the event information within a video enhancement overlay associated with a live video stream. For example, in one or more embodiments, the video presentation system receives event information from a third party server device (e.g., a webserver that hosts information about sporting events).”};
selecting, by the computing system, one or more page templates from a plurality of page templates based on the currently occurring live event {See Kedenburg, [0041], wherein this reads over “As mentioned above, and as will be described in further detail below, upon obtaining event information, the video presentation system 112 generates an enhanced live video presentation by generating a video enhancement overlay for display in conjunction with a live video stream display. In particular, in one or more embodiments, the video presentation system 112 identifies a video overlay template that includes one or more fields corresponding to portions of the event information. Based on the identified video overlay template, the video presentation system 112 generates a video enhancement overlay for the live video stream by populating the fields of the video overlay template.”};
generating, by the computing system, one or more content pages based on the media data and the one or more page templates {See Kedenburg, [0041], wherein this reads over “As mentioned above, and as will be described in further detail below, upon obtaining event information, the video presentation system 112 generates an enhanced live video presentation by generating a video enhancement overlay for display in conjunction with a live video stream display. In particular, in one or more embodiments, the video presentation system 112 identifies a video overlay template that includes one or more fields corresponding to portions of the event information. Based on the identified video overlay template, the video presentation system 112 generates a video enhancement overlay for the live video stream by populating the fields of the video overlay template.”}; and
transmitting, by the computing system, the one or more content pages to a plurality of users {See Kedenburg, [0043], wherein this reads over “Alternatively, in one or more embodiments, the video presentation system 112 provides the event information (or discrete portions of the event information) as well as an identification of a video overlay template to enable the viewer client devices 104a-n to generate a presentation of the live video stream that includes both the live video stream and the video enhancement overlay. For example, in one or more embodiments, the various client devices (e.g., broadcasting client devices 102a-n and viewer client devices 104a-n) include or otherwise have access to a database of video overlay templates. In one or more embodiments, the video presentation system 112 provides an identifier of a template stored on a respective client device to enable the video presentation application 106 to identify a video overlay template and populate fields of the identified video overlay template with received event information. In particular, in one or more embodiments, the video presentation application 106 receives event information and locally generates the video enhancement overlay using a locally accessed video overlay template and based on event information received from the server device 108.”}.
Nielsen is directed to the invention of crowd-sourced media generation wherein uploaded media can be associated with an event and analyzed. Specifically, Nielsen discloses scheduled and planned events (i.e., publicly available data) which are available of users to upload data for. See Nielsen, column 9, lines 43-59. Additionally, Nielsen discloses the uploading of media data may occur from the location at which the event is occurring (i.e., a currently occurring live event). See Nielsen, column 9, line 60-column 10, line 2.
Nielsen fails to expressly disclose the claimed features of “determining, by the computing system, an importance score for the currently occurring live event” and “in accordance with a determination that the importance score for the currently occurring live event satisfies a threshold importance score.”
Ebert is directed to the invention of real-time event management. Specifically, Ebert discloses that “server device 12 can decrement the popularity score by the popularity decrement value in response to determining that the corresponding event satisfies threshold atrophy criteria, such as a threshold popularity score, a threshold elapsed time since a start of the event, or other criteria corresponding to the event” and “[s]erver device 12 can refrain from decrementing the popularity score by the popularity decrement value in response to determining that the event does not satisfy the threshold atrophy criteria” wherein “server device 12 can compare the determined popularity score for an event to the threshold popularity score, and can determine that the event satisfies the threshold atrophy criteria when the determined popularity score is greater than (or equal to) the threshold popularity score.” See Ebert, [0037]. That is, Ebert discloses an invention wherein event popularity scores (i.e., an importance score) may be determined, and said event popularity score may be compared against a threshold popularity score (i.e., a threshold importance score). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art of Nielsen with that of Ebert such that the events of Nielsen may be analyzed for importance via a score determination. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that only specific events deemed important are further managed.
The prior art combination of Nielsen and Ebert fails to expressly disclose the claimed features of “requesting, by the computing system, media data associated with the currently occurring live event,” “selecting, by the computing system, one or more page templates from a plurality of page templates based on the currently occurring live event,” “generating, by the computing system, one or more content pages based on the media data and the one or more page templates,” and “transmitting, by the computing system, the one or more content pages to a plurality of users.”
As per the claimed feature of “requesting, by the computing system, media data associated with the currently occurring live event,” Kedenburg discloses that “the video presentation system gathers or otherwise receives event information from one or more sources, and dynamically provides the event information within a video enhancement overlay associated with a live video stream” and “the video presentation system receives event information from a third party server device (e.g., a webserver that hosts information about sporting events).” See Kedenburg, [0027]. That is, Kedenburg discloses the retrieval of event information (i.e., media data) associated with a live video stream (i.e., a currently occurring live event).
As per the claimed feature of “selecting, by the computing system, one or more page templates from a plurality of page templates based on the currently occurring live event,” Kedenburg discloses that “upon obtaining event information, the video presentation system 112 generates an enhanced live video presentation by generating a video enhancement overlay for display in conjunction with a live video stream display” wherein “the video presentation system 112 identifies a video overlay template that includes one or more fields corresponding to portions of the event information” and “[b]ased on the identified video overlay template, the video presentation system 112 generates a video enhancement overlay for the live video stream by populating the fields of the video overlay template.” See Kedenburg, [0041]. That is, Kedenburg discloses the selection of a video overlay template to generate a video enhancement (i.e., selecting one or more page templates based on the currently occurring live event).
As per the claimed feature of “generating, by the computing system, one or more content pages based on the media data and the one or more page templates,” Kedenburg discloses the generation of an enhance live video presentation using the video enhancement overlay (i.e., generating a content page based on the media data and page template. See Kedenburg, [0041].
As per the claimed feature of “transmitting, by the computing system, the one or more content pages to a plurality of users,” Kedenburg discloses that “the various client devices (e.g., broadcasting client devices 102a-n and viewer client devices 104a-n) include or otherwise have access to a database of video overlay templates” and “the video presentation application 106 receives event information and locally generates the video enhancement overlay using a locally accessed video overlay template and based on event information received from the server device 108.” See Kedenburg, [0043]. That is, Kedenburg discloses that the enhanced live video presentation may be provided to various client devices (i.e., transmitting content pages to a plurality of users). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art combination of Nielsen and Ebert with that of Kedenburg such that the live event data of Nielsen and Ebert may be further enhanced using the templates of Kedenburg. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that live event data may be better presented to users for consumption.
Lastly, as per the claimed feature of “based, in part, on event descriptions gathered from publicly available social media posts,” the prior art combination of Nielsen, Ebert, and Kedenburg fails to disclose said feature. Fleischman is directed to the invention of estimating social interest in time-based media. Specifically, Fleischman, discloses that “[a]n exemplary list of social interest domains for which time-based media is used according to the present invention includes broadcast video such as television programs, such as sports, news, episodic television, reality/live event shows, movies, and advertising in conjunction with any of these domains” wherein “[m]ore specific domains also are possible, e.g., football games, entertainment news, specific reality TV shows, etc., each of which may have their own domain-specific ontology.” See Fleischman, column 5, lines 26-34. That is, Fleischman is directed to evaluating time-based media which includes live event shows. Additionally, Fleischman discloses “[t]he social interest estimator 250 aggregates information from the annotated event store 290 and the mapping store 275 to estimate social interest in a given media event using a social interest score, and is one means for doing so” wherein “[t]he social interest score is estimated by the social interest estimator 250 by cycling through all (or selected) annotated events, and for each event, taking a weighted sum of the confidence scores for each social media content item that exceeds a given threshold” such that “[t]he resulting social interest score is stored in the social interest store 285.” See Fleischman, and column 7, lines 43-52. That is, Fleischman discloses utilizing annotated event data (i.e., event descriptions) related to media events which may be published as social media content items (i.e., gathered from publicly available social media posts). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art combination of Nielsen, Ebert, and Kedenburg, with that of Fleischman such that the scores related to the event data of Ebert may be determined based upon social media data related to said event data. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that social media data may be used to improve the relevancy of scoring and accuracy related to live event data.
As per dependent claims 22 and 39, Nielsen, in combination with Ebert, Kedenburg, and Fleischman, discloses:
The computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein monitoring, by a computing system with one or more processors, publicly available data via a communication network further comprises:
determining, by the computing system, one or more popular topics based on the publicly available data {See Nielsen, column 9, lines 45-53, wherein this reads over “In some instances this will be a pre-planned event, such as a concert or performance, while in other instances this will be a spontaneous or otherwise unofficial event, such as a public street performance. For either instance there can be determined start and end times for the performance. For scheduled events this can be determined in advance, while for other types of events the times of the video and/or capture of the event can be used to determine appropriate start and end times.”}; and
determining, by the computing system, that one of the one or more popular topics is associated with a current occurring live event {See Nielsen, column 10, lines 9-17, wherein this reads over “In at least some embodiments a list of one or more suggested portals can be provided based at least in part upon the current location of the user, as may be determined using a GPS device or other such positioning mechanism, and the events identified near that location at, or near, a time of the upload. The data uploaded data received to the portal can be stored to a determined location and/or tagged or identified with certain information enabling that data to be associated with that event.”}.
As per dependent claim 26, Nielsen, in combination with Ebert, Kedenburg, and Fleischman, discloses:
The computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein requesting, by the computing system, media data associated with the currently occurring live event further comprises:
automatically submitting, by the computing system, a query to third-party media content provider {See Nielsen, column 4, lines 39-46, wherein this reads over “In the system of FIG. 2, a client computing device 202 can submit a request for content across at least one network 204 to be received by a content provider environment 208. As mentioned, in at least some embodiments the request can include a request for content to be displayed on the computing device 202, and in many cases will include video or other media content that is encoded for presentation on the client device 202.”}, and
receiving, by the computing system from the third-party media provider, a stream of media content associated with the query {See Nielsen, column 4, line 59-column 5, line 3, wherein this reads over “An interface layer 208, when receiving a request or call, can determine the type of call or request and cause information to be forwarded to the appropriate component or sub-system. For example, a request for content might be forwarded to a media server 212 while a request to specify encoding parameters might be forwarded to a encoding manager 216, among other such options. These calls or requests can also come from third parties, although third party providers 506 can also provide at least some of the media content to be stored to a media repository 212 and encoded for display on the client device 202 as discussed herein”}.
Claim(s) 24 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nielsen et al, in view of Ebert et al, Kedenburg et al, and Fleischman, and in further view of Applicant-Admitted Prior art.
As per dependent claims 24 and 25, the Examiner previously took Official Notice of the feature “wherein the publicly available data comprises posts on one or more publicly available social meeting feeds.” That is, the elements directed to posts found on social meeting feeds and articles posted from public news sources would have been widely-known and obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art combination of Nielsen, Ebert, and Kedenburg, with posts on publicly available social meeting feeds and articles posted from public news sources such that the determination of specific live events may encompass posts from users and news sources. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that data from confirmed events may be utilized providing content to users. It is noted that as Applicant failed to traverse the aforementioned Official Noticed feature, said feature is taken as Applicant-Admitted prior art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 27-37 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot in view of the newly-cited prior art rejection made in response to Applicant’s Amendment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2737. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM.
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, Neveen Abel-Jalil can be reached on (571) 270-0474. 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.
/Paul Kim/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2152
/PK/
Prosecution Insights