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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to application No. 18/830,112 filed on 01/29/2026. Claim(s) 2 and 16 have been cancelled. Claim(s) 1, 3-15, and 17-20 is/are pending and have been examined.
Oath or Declaration
A properly executed inventor’s oath or declaration has not been received for the following inventor(s): Donghui ZHANG. Please see Miscellaneous Communication to Applicant dated 09/19/2024
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 3, 5-7, 10, 12-14, 17, and 19 is/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 filed 01/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A) Applicants assert on P.14-15 that “Firstly, Stoyanov does not disclose the above-captioned features of claim 1… Stoyanov does not disclose the concepts of maximum buffer and minimum buffer. Stoyanov merely discloses watermarks, not maximum/minimum buffers… Furthermore, Stoyanov does not disclose or suggest a technical solution for determining a buffer based on a network quality level. Stoyanov discloses in paragraphs [0023] and [0027] the use of ping and traceroute for bandwidth discovery. However, Stoyanov does not synthesize bandwidth and round-trip time into a network quality level. Stoyanov only uses raw bandwidth data to determine content quality type and calculate the initial buffer, and does not disclose or involve grading and evaluating network quality. Therefore, Stoyanov does not disclose or suggest at least "determining a network quality level based on the network bandwidth and the round-trip time" and "determining the first buffer for the live stream during the playing starting stage based on the network quality level, the maximum buffer, and the minimum buffer," as recited in claim 1.”
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicants claim only recites maximum buffer and minimum buffer, and has not further defined nor narrowed what they pertain too, and does not recite maximum/minimum buffers are system-preset capacity boundaries for the buffer as asserted by Applicant. Thus, until Applicant further clarifies and narrows the claim limitation(s) as such, under broadest reasonable interpretation, it does not preclude the interpretation taken where limitation(s) are met by Stoyanov.
Note that Stoyanov alone was not used to teach the entirety of the claim limitation(s). Stoyanov was used to teach “determining the first buffer for the live stream during the playing starting stage based on the maximum buffer, and the minimum buffer” (see Office Action below). Stoyanov was not used to teach determining a buffer based on a network quality level. Nor was it used to teach “determining a network quality level based on the network bandwidth and the round-trip time” and “determining the first buffer for the live stream during the playing starting stage based on the network quality level”. Ickin and LeComte was used to teach these limitation(s) (see Office Action below).
B) Applicants assert on P.15 that “...However, the "level" defined in claim 1 of the present application is a comprehensive, graded evaluation of the current or recent network connection status (e.g., it can be divided into multiple levels such as "excellent", "good", "fair", "poor"). It is a status description, not an event prediction. The two are fundamentally different…”
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicants claim only recites “determining network quality level based on the network bandwidth and the round-trip time”, and has not further defined nor narrowed what they pertain too, and does not recite “level”, is a comprehensive, graded evaluation of the current or recent network connection status (e.g., it can be divided into multiple levels such as “excellent”, “good”, “fair”, “poor”), as asserted by Applicant. Thus, until Applicant further clarifies and narrows the claim limitation(s) as such, under broadest reasonable interpretation, it does not preclude the interpretation taken where limitation(s) are met by Ickin.
C) Applicants assert on P.15-16 that “…Throughout LeComente, there is no disclosure or mention of any technical solution for dynamically determining or setting an initial buffer size based on a network quality level. Thus, LeComente does not disclose or suggest at least "determining a network quality level based on the network bandwidth and the round-trip time" and "determining the first buffer for the live stream during the playing starting stage based on the network quality level, the maximum buffer, and the minimum buffer," as recited in claim 1.”
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. LeComente alone was not used to teach the entirety of the claim limitation(s). LeComente was only used to teach “determining the first buffer based on the network quality level”. Where in LeComeneta, including, but not limited to, paragraph 0216 teaches length of buffer depends on the quality of the network.
Therefore, based on the above, and the Office Action below, as the Applicant has not further defined and/or narrowed the limitation(s) according to Applicant’s assertions above, the combination of Stoyanov, Ickin, and LeComte continue to teach the claimed limitation(s).
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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 nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 8, 9, 15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stoyanov (US 2010/0281142), in view of Ickin (US 2020/0304885), and further in view of LeComente (US 2002/0026636).
Consider claims 1, 15, and 20 Stoyanov, Ickin, and LeComte teach live stream processing method, a terminal device, comprising a processor and a memory, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing computer-executable instructions, wherein a processor, when executing the computer-executable instructions, implements a live stream processing method, and the live stream processing method comprises: wherein the memory is configured to store computer-executable instructions; and the processor is configured to execute the computer-executable instructions stored in the memory to implement a live stream processing method, and the live stream processing method (Fig.8, Paragraph 0078-0081, 0086-0088) comprises:
acquiring a network bandwidth and a round-trip time (Paragraph 0023, 0027 teaches incoming data management component 161 can discover an available bandwidth, e.g., data rate or capacity, supported for streaming a particular item of content from a content feed 110 to the playback device 130 and/or 131 via network 105. Conventional ping and traceroute functions can be used to accomplish bandwidth discovery in a particular embodiment);
acquiring a maximum buffer and a minimum buffer preset for a live stream when playing is started (Paragraph 0023 teaches an initial buffer size (B) needed to ensure uninterrupted playback of the selected item of content on the playback device 130. Initial buffer size (B) is allocated at the beginning of a streaming operation. The incoming data management component 161 can also compute and set an initial content buffer high and low watermark to track the capacity level of the buffer currently consumed by the streamed and un-played content. The criterion for starting to play the content item is when the buffer is filled to, or over the high watermark);
determining a first buffer for the live stream during a playing starting stage based on the network bandwidth, the round-trip time, the maximum buffer, and the minimum buffer (Paragraph 0023, 0027 teaches incoming data management component 161 can discover an available bandwidth, e.g., data rate or capacity, supported for streaming a particular item of content from a content feed 110 to the playback device 130 and/or 131 via network 105. Conventional ping and traceroute functions can be used to accomplish bandwidth discovery in a particular embodiment. Once the available bandwidth and content quality type for streaming a particular item of content are determined, the incoming data management component 161 can compute and set an initial incoming data speed (Si), an initial playback speed (Sp), and an initial buffer size (B) needed to ensure uninterrupted playback of the selected item of content on the playback device 130 and/or 131. The initial buffer size (B) can be calculated from the difference between Sp and Si and the length of the content item being streamed. The initial buffer size (B) is allocated at the beginning of a streaming operation. The incoming data management component 161 can also compute and set an initial content buffer high and low watermark to track the capacity level of the buffer currently consumed by the streamed and un-played content. The criterion for starting to play the content item is when the buffer is filled to (or over) the high watermark. Once the incoming data management component 161 determines or computes the various parameters described above, the incoming data management component 161 can signal the content server 120 to begin streaming the selected item of content); and
starting to play the live stream based on the first buffer (Paragraph 0023 teaches once the incoming data management component 161 determines or computes the various parameters described above, the incoming data management component 161 can signal the content server 120 to begin streaming the selected item of content. Paragraph 0028 teaches content fill process continues until a location in the content buffer 152 indicated by the high watermark is reached. Once the high watermark is reached and the integration time is satisfied, the playback device 130 can begin to play the received content),
wherein the determining the first buffer for the live stream during the playing starting stage based on the network bandwidth, the round-trip time, the maximum buffer, and the minimum buffer comprises: determining the first buffer for the live stream during the playing starting stage based on the maximum buffer, and the minimum buffer (Paragraph 0023, 0027 teaches incoming data management component 161 can discover an available bandwidth, e.g., data rate or capacity, supported for streaming a particular item of content from a content feed 110 to the playback device 130 and/or 131 via network 105. Conventional ping and traceroute functions can be used to accomplish bandwidth discovery in a particular embodiment. Once the available bandwidth and content quality type for streaming a particular item of content are determined, the incoming data management component 161 can compute and set an initial incoming data speed (Si), an initial playback speed (Sp), and an initial buffer size (B) needed to ensure uninterrupted playback of the selected item of content on the playback device 130 and/or 131. The initial buffer size (B) can be calculated from the difference between Sp and Si and the length of the content item being streamed. The initial buffer size (B) is allocated at the beginning of a streaming operation. The incoming data management component 161 can also compute and set an initial content buffer high and low watermark to track the capacity level of the buffer currently consumed by the streamed and un-played content. The criterion for starting to play the content item is when the buffer is filled to (or over) the high watermark. Once the incoming data management component 161 determines or computes the various parameters described above, the incoming data management component 161 can signal the content server 120 to begin streaming the selected item of content).
Stoyanov does not explicitly teach determining a network quality level based on the network bandwidth and the round-trip time; and
determining the first buffer based on the network quality level.
In an analogous art, Ickin teaches determining a network quality level based on a network bandwidth and a round-trip time (Paragraph 0027).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Stoyanov to include determining a network quality level based on a network bandwidth and a round-trip time, as taught by Ickin, for the advantage of providing a better overall picture and state of the network, in order to better determine how fast and responsive a network is, to provide content to client(s).
Stoyanov and Ickin do not explicitly determining the first buffer based on the network quality level.
In an analogous art, LeComte teaches determining the first buffer based on the network quality level (Paragraph 0216, 0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Stoyanov and Ickin to include determining the first buffer based on the network quality level, as taught by LeComte, for the advantage of ensuring there is enough content for viewing/playback without unduly burdening available resource(s), so that resource(s) or utilized optimally and efficiently.
Consider claim 8, Stoyanov, Ickin, and LeComte teach wherein the starting to play the live stream based on the first buffer comprises: acquiring a current buffer of the live stream; in response to the current buffer of the live stream being greater than or equal to the first buffer, starting to play the live stream; and in response to the current buffer of the live stream being less than the first buffer, waiting until the current buffer of the live stream is equal to the first buffer, or waiting for a fourth preset duration, before starting to play the live stream (Stoyanov - Paragraph 0023, 0028).
Consider claim 9, Stoyanov, Ickin, and LeComte teach wherein the starting to play the live stream based on the first buffer comprises: acquiring a current buffer of the live stream; in response to the current buffer of the live stream being greater than or equal to the first buffer, starting to play the live stream; and in response to the current buffer of the live stream being less than the first buffer, waiting until the current buffer of the live stream is equal to the first buffer, or waiting for a fourth preset duration, before starting to play the live stream (Stoyanov - Paragraph 0023, 0028).
Claim(s) 4, 11, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stoyanov (US 2010/0281142), in view of Ickin (US 2020/0304885), in view of LeComente (US 2002/0026636), and further in view of Speicher et al. (US 2008/0172441).
Consider claims 4 and 18, Stoyanov, Ickin, and LeComte teach wherein the determining the first buffer for the live stream during the playing starting stage based on the network quality level, the maximum buffer, and the minimum buffer; calculating a buffer based on the network quality level, the maximum buffer, and the minimum buffer (Stoyanov - Paragraph 0023, 0027 teaches incoming data management component 161 can discover an available bandwidth, e.g., data rate or capacity, supported for streaming a particular item of content from a content feed 110 to the playback device 130 and/or 131 via network 105. Conventional ping and traceroute functions can be used to accomplish bandwidth discovery in a particular embodiment. Once the available bandwidth and content quality type for streaming a particular item of content are determined, the incoming data management component 161 can compute and set an initial incoming data speed (Si), an initial playback speed (Sp), and an initial buffer size (B) needed to ensure uninterrupted playback of the selected item of content on the playback device 130 and/or 131. The initial buffer size (B) can be calculated from the difference between Sp and Si and the length of the content item being streamed. The initial buffer size (B) is allocated at the beginning of a streaming operation. The incoming data management component 161 can also compute and set an initial content buffer high and low watermark to track the capacity level of the buffer currently consumed by the streamed and un-played content. The criterion for starting to play the content item is when the buffer is filled to (or over) the high watermark. Once the incoming data management component 161 determines or computes the various parameters described above, the incoming data management component 161 can signal the content server 120 to begin streaming the selected item of content; Ickin - Paragraph 0027; LeComte - Paragraph 0216, 0051).
Stoyanov, Ickin, and LeComte do not explicitly teach acquiring live stream information of the live stream, wherein the live stream information comprises information regarding whether the live stream is a first live stream and information regarding whether a playing retrying request is made to the live stream;
calculating a second buffer; and
determining the first buffer based on the live stream information and the second buffer.
In an analogous art, Speicher teaches acquiring live stream information of a live stream, wherein the live stream information comprises information regarding whether the live stream is a first live stream and information regarding whether a playing retrying request is made to the live stream; calculating a second buffer; and determining the first buffer based on the live stream information and the second buffer (Paragraph 0013 teaches live stream of media content received. Paragraph 0024 teaches consistent video output is dependent on the decoder 222 receiving sufficient data from the media transmission 208. Failure to do so will cause the decoder 222 to starve, also referred to as “data starvation”, which results in a visible disruption to the media output. Starvation causes playback of the media by the media player 204 to stop until enough incoming data is stored to reach a preroll duration 218. At that point playback of the media by the media player 204 will be resumed. The result then of a starvation effect is an interruption in the playback of the media. Paragraph 0044 teaches another adjustment threshold event may be premised on the decoder starving or on the jitter buffer reaching the starvation threshold. If it is found that the jitter buffer did starve in a previous period, the process 400 may increase the preroll allocation in a preroll increasing operation 410. If jitter buffer has starved, this may indicated that the total jitter buffer memory allocation may be insufficient to is insufficient to allow enough data to fill the jitter buffer to maintain seamless playback of the media file. In this situation, it may be appropriate to increase the total jitter buffer allocation in a memory increasing operation 414).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Stoyanov, Ickin, and LeComte to include acquiring live stream information of a live stream, wherein the live stream information comprises information regarding whether the live stream is a first live stream and information regarding whether a playing retrying request is made to the live stream; calculating a second buffer; and determining the first buffer based on the live stream information and the second buffer, as taught by LeComte, for the advantage of providing dynamic adjustment of storage parameters for the jitter buffer (Speicher – Paragraph 0002), allowing for the client to better adapt to changing network conditions, in order to provide a better playback experience to user(s).
Consider claim 11, Stoyanov, Ickin, LeComte, and Speicher teach wherein the starting to play the live stream based on the first buffer comprises: acquiring a current buffer of the live stream; in response to the current buffer of the live stream being greater than or equal to the first buffer, starting to play the live stream; and in response to the current buffer of the live stream being less than the first buffer, waiting until the current buffer of the live stream is equal to the first buffer, or waiting for a fourth preset duration, before starting to play the live stream (Stoyanov - Paragraph 0023, 0028).
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 extension fee 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 JASON K LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1446. The examiner can normally be reached on 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, Brian Pendleton can be reached on 571-272-7527. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JASON K LIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights