DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims:
Claims 1 – 21 are pending.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 08/18/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 8 has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112(f), sixth 6. paragraph because it includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a forwarding engine”, “a padding adder module”, “a probing manager module”, and “a sending engine” coupled with functional language “configured to: receive a multi-quality data stream”, “configure to: add padding packets to the multi-quality data stream to determine which data stream of the multi-quality data stream to select to communicate data packets of the multi-quality data stream”, “configured to: add probing packets to the selected data stream of the multi-quality data stream to determine a bandwidth at which to communicate the selected data stream”, and “configured to: communicate the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth”.
Dependent claims 9 – 14 follow the same grounds of rejection as independent claim 8.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 4, 7 – 11, and 14 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Einarsson (US 20100121974).
As per claim 1, a method for rate control of a multi-quality data stream using multiple, combined probing techniques, comprising:
receiving a multi-quality data stream (Referring now back to FIG. 1, the encoder 40 receives video stream from the video source 50 and encodes the received data and provides the streaming server 20 with video streams encoded with different bit rates, See ¶25);
adding padding packets to the multi-quality data stream to determine which data stream of the multi-quality data stream to select to communicate data packets of the multi- quality data stream (The part of the payload section 430 includes the padded data 420 wherein the P bit 410 indicates that a padding has occurred in this RTP packet and the last octet of padding then indicates the total number of padded octets in this particular RTP packet. In accordance with the teachings of the present invention, the streaming server can probe the network for a higher bitrate availability by transmitting RTP packets padded with dummy data in order to test the network with a higher bitrate without having to actually send the actual streaming data at the higher bitrate level, See ¶31);
adding probing packets to the selected data stream of the multi-quality data stream to determine a bandwidth at which to communicate the selected data stream (After transmitting the probing data at a higher bitrate, the streaming server then enters the upswitch evaluation state 310 to determine whether the network is capable of handling the higher bandwidth, See ¶30); and
communicating the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth (During this state, round-trip delay, estimated throughput, loss fraction and other network performance and quality related parameters are evaluated to ensure that an acceptable quality is maintained for a certain period of time. If the evaluation period has passed and the transport appears sustainable, the streaming server then reverts back to the normal state 305 where the probing, increasing, and evaluation steps are repeatedly performed, See ¶30).
As per claim 2, the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, using feedback information from a communication network, whether or not a different quality data stream of the multi-quality data stream should be selected before adding padding packets to the multi-quality data stream (The streaming server 20 using a bandwidth estimator 90 determines an appropriate bitrate to be used for communicating the received streaming data and transmits the streaming video via RTP packets … RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25 … By inserting stuffing data, the streaming server is then able to increase the actual transmission rate allowing it to detect whether the bandwidth is available to actually handle the increased payload, See ¶27).
As per claim 3, the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, using feedback information from a communication network, if a bandwidth estimation process should be performed before adding probing packets to the selected data stream of the multi-quality data (The streaming server 20 using a bandwidth estimator 90 determines an appropriate bitrate to be used for communicating the received streaming data and transmits the streaming video via RTP packets … RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25 … If the network is deemed stable, the server enters into the probing state. Before probing commences, the server calculates the round-trip delay (RTD) and loss fraction and estimates other parameters such as network buffer media time and throughput for later use in the recover state, ¶28).
As per claim 4, the method of claim 2, wherein the feedback information from the communication network comprises Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP) data received from at least one of a sender or a receiver of the multi-quality data stream (RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25).
As per claim 7, the method of claim 1, wherein a last padding packet has to be added to the multi-quality data stream before a probing packet can be added (FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a data packet stuffed with dummy data … The purpose of such stuffing is to be able to probe the channel by increasing the bitrate without being forced to choose a higher content quality which will introduce a visible effect. Another advantage with stuffing the data stream is that the additional bitrate can be chosen at will and is not limited by existing encoding bitrates, See ¶27).
As per claim 8, an apparatus for rate control of a multi-quality data stream using multiple, combined probing techniques, comprising:
a forwarding engine configured to:
receive a multi-quality data stream (Referring now back to FIG. 1, the encoder 40 receives video stream from the video source 50 and encodes the received data and provides the streaming server 20 with video streams encoded with different bit rates, See ¶25);
a padding adder module configure to:
add padding packets to the multi-quality data stream to determine which data stream of the multi-quality data stream to select to communicate data packets of the multi-quality data stream (The part of the payload section 430 includes the padded data 420 wherein the P bit 410 indicates that a padding has occurred in this RTP packet and the last octet of padding then indicates the total number of padded octets in this particular RTP packet. In accordance with the teachings of the present invention, the streaming server can probe the network for a higher bitrate availability by transmitting RTP packets padded with dummy data in order to test the network with a higher bitrate without having to actually send the actual streaming data at the higher bitrate level, See ¶31);
a probing manager module configured to:
add probing packets to the selected data stream of the multi-quality data stream to determine a bandwidth at which to communicate the selected data stream (After transmitting the probing data at a higher bitrate, the streaming server then enters the upswitch evaluation state 310 to determine whether the network is capable of handling the higher bandwidth, See ¶30); and
a sending engine configured to:
communicate the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth (During this state, round-trip delay, estimated throughput, loss fraction and other network performance and quality related parameters are evaluated to ensure that an acceptable quality is maintained for a certain period of time. If the evaluation period has passed and the transport appears sustainable, the streaming server then reverts back to the normal state 305 where the probing, increasing, and evaluation steps are repeatedly performed, See ¶30).
As per claim 9, the apparatus of claim 8, further comprising a rate control module and wherein the padding adder module is further configure to: determine, using feedback information from the rate control module, whether or not a different quality data stream of the multi-quality data stream should be selected before adding padding packets to the multi-quality data stream (The streaming server 20 using a bandwidth estimator 90 determines an appropriate bitrate to be used for communicating the received streaming data and transmits the streaming video via RTP packets … RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25 … By inserting stuffing data, the streaming server is then able to increase the actual transmission rate allowing it to detect whether the bandwidth is available to actually handle the increased payload, See ¶27).
As per claim 10, the apparatus of claim 8, further comprising a rate control module and wherein the probing manager module is further configure to: determine, using feedback information from the rate control module, if a bandwidth estimation process should be performed before adding probing packets to the selected data stream of the multi-quality data (The streaming server 20 using a bandwidth estimator 90 determines an appropriate bitrate to be used for communicating the received streaming data and transmits the streaming video via RTP packets … RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25 … If the network is deemed stable, the server enters into the probing state. Before probing commences, the server calculates the round-trip delay (RTD) and loss fraction and estimates other parameters such as network buffer media time and throughput for later use in the recover state, ¶28).
As per claim 11, the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the feedback information from the rate control module comprises Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP) data received from at least one of a sender or a receiver of the multi- quality data stream (RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25).
As per claim 14, the apparatus of claim 8, wherein a last padding packet has to be added to the multi-quality data stream before a probing packet can be added (FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a data packet stuffed with dummy data … The purpose of such stuffing is to be able to probe the channel by increasing the bitrate without being forced to choose a higher content quality which will introduce a visible effect. Another advantage with stuffing the data stream is that the additional bitrate can be chosen at will and is not limited by existing encoding bitrates, See ¶27).
As per claim 15, the apparatus for rate control of a multi-quality data stream using multiple, combined probing techniques, comprising:
a processor; and
a memory coupled to the processor, the memory having stored therein at least one of programs or instructions executable by the processor to configure the apparatus to:
receive a multi-quality data stream (Referring now back to FIG. 1, the encoder 40 receives video stream from the video source 50 and encodes the received data and provides the streaming server 20 with video streams encoded with different bit rates, See ¶25);
add padding packets to the multi-quality data stream to determine which data stream of the multi-quality data stream to select to communicate data packets of the multi-quality data stream (The part of the payload section 430 includes the padded data 420 wherein the P bit 410 indicates that a padding has occurred in this RTP packet and the last octet of padding then indicates the total number of padded octets in this particular RTP packet. In accordance with the teachings of the present invention, the streaming server can probe the network for a higher bitrate availability by transmitting RTP packets padded with dummy data in order to test the network with a higher bitrate without having to actually send the actual streaming data at the higher bitrate level, See ¶31);
add probing packets to the selected data stream of the multi-quality data stream to determine a bandwidth at which to communicate the selected data stream (After transmitting the probing data at a higher bitrate, the streaming server then enters the upswitch evaluation state 310 to determine whether the network is capable of handling the higher bandwidth, See ¶30); and
communicate the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth (During this state, round-trip delay, estimated throughput, loss fraction and other network performance and quality related parameters are evaluated to ensure that an acceptable quality is maintained for a certain period of time. If the evaluation period has passed and the transport appears sustainable, the streaming server then reverts back to the normal state 305 where the probing, increasing, and evaluation steps are repeatedly performed, See ¶30).
As per claim 16, the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the apparatus is further configured to: determine, using feedback information from a communication network, whether or not a different quality data stream of the multi-quality data stream should be selected before adding padding packets to the multi-quality data stream (The streaming server 20 using a bandwidth estimator 90 determines an appropriate bitrate to be used for communicating the received streaming data and transmits the streaming video via RTP packets … RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25 … By inserting stuffing data, the streaming server is then able to increase the actual transmission rate allowing it to detect whether the bandwidth is available to actually handle the increased payload, See ¶27).
As per claim 17, the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the apparatus is further configured to: determine, using feedback information from a communication network, if a bandwidth estimation process should be performed before adding probing packets to the selected data stream of the multi-quality data (The streaming server 20 using a bandwidth estimator 90 determines an appropriate bitrate to be used for communicating the received streaming data and transmits the streaming video via RTP packets … RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25 … If the network is deemed stable, the server enters into the probing state. Before probing commences, the server calculates the round-trip delay (RTD) and loss fraction and estimates other parameters such as network buffer media time and throughput for later use in the recover state, ¶28).
As per claim 18, the apparatus of claim 16, wherein the feedback information from the communication network comprises Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP) data received from at least one of a sender or a receiver of the multi- quality data stream (RTCP feedback packets (Receiver Reports) 110 are then transmitted over the same network back to the streaming server 90 providing statistics and performance feedback on providing the streaming data to the user equipment, See ¶25).
As per claim 21, the apparatus of claim 15, wherein a last padding packet has to be added to the multi-quality data stream before a probing packet can be added (FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a data packet stuffed with dummy data … The purpose of such stuffing is to be able to probe the channel by increasing the bitrate without being forced to choose a higher content quality which will introduce a visible effect. Another advantage with stuffing the data stream is that the additional bitrate can be chosen at will and is not limited by existing encoding bitrates, See ¶27).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries 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) 5, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Einarsson (US 20100121974) and in view of Gauthier (US 7860973).
As per claim 5, Einarsson discloses all limitations of claim 1.
Einarsson however does not expressly disclose:
performing a sanity check of the selected data stream before communicating the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth.
Gauthier discloses:
the method of claim 1, further comprising: performing a sanity check of the selected data stream before communicating the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth (For example, for each of the data centers, the data stream 151 includes geographical information, memory information, CPU information, bandwidth and route information and cost information … Further, the provisioning mechanism 170 may have access to the data stream 151 to perform sanity checks or other tasks related to requests 161, placements 171 and/or confirmations 173, See Col. 5, Line 59 – Col. 6, Line 17).
It would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art before the Applicant's effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Gauthier’s teaching of performing a sanity check of a data stream, along with communicating the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth to improve Einarsson’s system. Both Einarsson and Gauthier disclose systems for calculating bandwidth of a data stream. Gauthier’s system includes a provisioning mechanism for performing a sanity check for a data stream. The combination is an improvement upon the existing system because selected data stream can be communicated to receivers using the determined bandwidth, as taught by Einarsson, where the data stream can have a sanity check performed, as taught by Gauthier, to allow the system to seamlessly perform bandwidth estimations using various methods to determine the best available quality.
As per claim 12, the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the forwarding engine is further configured to: perform a sanity check of the selected data stream having the added probing packets before communicating the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth (Gauthier, For example, for each of the data centers, the data stream 151 includes geographical information, memory information, CPU information, bandwidth and route information and cost information … Further, the provisioning mechanism 170 may have access to the data stream 151 to perform sanity checks or other tasks related to requests 161, placements 171 and/or confirmations 173, See Col. 5, Line 59 – Col. 6, Line 17).
As per claim 19, the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the apparatus is further configured to: perform a sanity check of the selected data stream before communicating the selected data stream to receivers using the determined bandwidth (Gauthier, For example, for each of the data centers, the data stream 151 includes geographical information, memory information, CPU information, bandwidth and route information and cost information … Further, the provisioning mechanism 170 may have access to the data stream 151 to perform sanity checks or other tasks related to requests 161, placements 171 and/or confirmations 173, See Col. 5, Line 59 – Col. 6, Line 17).
Claim(s) 6, 13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Einarsson (US 20100121974) and in view of Muthuswamy (US 10355810).
As per claim 6, Einarsson discloses all limitations of claim 1.
Einarsson however does not expressly disclose:
condensing the probing packets added to the selected data stream of the multi- quality data stream with probing packets previously scheduled to be added to the selected data stream into a single burst before communicating the selected data stream to receivers.
Muthuswamy discloses:
the method of claim 1, further comprising: condensing the probing packets added to the selected data stream of the multi- quality data stream with probing packets previously scheduled to be added to the selected data stream into a single burst before communicating the selected data stream to receivers (Multiple MAC PDUs can go out in a single burst, in a (type, length, value) TLV packet, such that, all MAC PDUs are concatenated into a single airframe. Probe packets may be sent as a single airframe packet and may be sent multiple times within a single airframe, See Col. 11, Lines 22 - 49).
It would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art before the Applicant's effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Muthuswamy’s teaching of condensing probing packets into a single burst, along with communicating the selected data stream to receivers to improve Einarsson’s system. Both Einarsson and Muthuswamy disclose systems for using probing packets to determine transmission rates. Muthuswamy’s system includes concatenating multiple PDUs into a single burst. The combination is an improvement upon the existing system because selected data stream can be communicated to receivers, as taught by Einarsson, where the selected data stream can include condensed probing packets, as taught by Muthuswamy, to allow the system to seamlessly perform bandwidth estimations using various methods to determine the best available quality.
As per claim 13, the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the probing manager module is further configure to: condense the probing packets added to the selected data stream of the multi- quality data stream with probing packets previously scheduled to be added to the selected data stream into a single burst before the selected data stream is communicated to receivers (Muthuswamy, Multiple MAC PDUs can go out in a single burst, in a (type, length, value) TLV packet, such that, all MAC PDUs are concatenated into a single airframe. Probe packets may be sent as a single airframe packet and may be sent multiple times within a single airframe, See Col. 11, Lines 22 - 49).
As per claim 20, the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the apparatus is further configured to: condense the probing packets added to the selected data stream of the multi- quality data stream with probing packets previously scheduled to be added to the selected data stream into a single burst before communicating the selected data stream to receivers (Muthuswamy, Multiple MAC PDUs can go out in a single burst, in a (type, length, value) TLV packet, such that, all MAC PDUs are concatenated into a single airframe. Probe packets may be sent as a single airframe packet and may be sent multiple times within a single airframe, See Col. 11, Lines 22 - 49).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZIA NAOREEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7282. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 - 6:00.
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 571-270-3037. 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.
/NAZIA NAOREEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458