DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the application filed 11/21/2024.
Claims 1-15, 18, 19 and 22-24 are pending. Claims 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 18 and 19 are currently amended by preliminary amendment. Claims 16, 17, 20 and 21 are canceled, and Claims 22-24 are new.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 19 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are directed to a computer readable storage medium. The broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “storage medium” includes transitory signals and propagating waves, as these media store information during transmission. Transitory signals or propagating waves are not considered to be a process, machine, manufacture, or article of matter within the scope of the statute. As the broadest reasonable interpretation of these claims includes non-statutory embodiments, the claims must be rejected.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12, 18, 19 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by 2022/0075505 (“Herzog”).
With regard to Claim 1, Herzog teaches a multimedia playing method, comprising:
acquiring, in response to a first operation instruction in a player interface, first-type multimedia content stream data or second-type multimedia content stream data ([0101]-[0102] describe an operation of selecting an initial queue of content items, where the selection can be an individual song, or a multi-song item such as a playlist or album; wherein
the first-type multimedia content stream data comprises a single multimedia content, and the second-type multimedia content stream data comprises a multimedia content collection ([0101]-[0102], the initially selected queue can be an individual song, or a collection such as an album, playlist, or other collection);
displaying, in response to acquiring the second-type multimedia content stream data, a multimedia content collection playing interface in the player interface, and playing multimedia contents in the second-type multimedia content stream data in a preset order ([0102] describes that the selected media is retrieved and played through the playback device, where [0088] describes that playlists identify a group of media content items in a particular order); and
switching to and playing, in response to a second operation instruction in the multimedia content collection playing interface, another multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data, wherein an operation mode corresponding to the second operation instruction is different from an operation mode corresponding to the first operation instruction ([0108] describes that as media is playing back, options are available to skip to a next or previous song, shuffle playback, or otherwise select different media content from the queue. [0100]-[0101] describe that prior to an initial selection, the device is in a mode enabling a user to start playback, while [0108] and Fig. 5 show a GUI operating in a different mode, where the media is being played).
Claim 18 recites a device comprising a processor and memory, wherein the memory stores instructions (Fig. 2) that cause the processor to carry out the method of Claim 1, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 19 recites a computer-readable storage medium having stored therein computer- executable instructions (Fig. 2) which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to implement the method according to Claim 1, and is likewise rejected.
With regard to Claim 2, Herzog teaches that the multimedia content collection playing interface comprises an interface component corresponding to each multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data; the switching to and playing, in response to a second operation instruction in the multimedia content collection playing interface, another multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data, comprises: switching, in response to a trigger instruction to an interface component corresponding to any target multimedia content in the multimedia content collection playing interface, to the target multimedia content and playing the target multimedia content. [0108] and Fig. 5 describe a playback interface, which includes skip buttons for switching between songs. As these interface elements are present for each played song, they are interface elements corresponding to each multimedia content.
Claim 22 recites a device comprising a processor and memory, wherein the memory stores instructions (Fig. 2) that cause the processor to carry out the method of Claim 2, and is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 4, Herzog teaches exhibiting, when playing any multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data, relevant information of a multimedia content being played currently in a preset region of the multimedia content collection playing interface. Fig. 5 shows that the playback display includes the song title and artist of the media being played.
With regard to Claim 5, Herzog teaches acquiring, in response to the first operation instruction in the multimedia content collection playing interface, a next first-type multimedia content stream data or a next second-type multimedia content stream data again; and switching from a current multimedia content collection playing interface to a playing interface corresponding to the next first-type multimedia content stream data or the next second-type multimedia content stream data. [0100] describes that an interface can include an icon selectable to select a different media content queue.
With regard to Claim 7, Herzog teaches that the acquiring the first-type multimedia content stream data or the second-type multimedia content stream data, comprises: determining, according to a preset recommendation algorithm, first-type multimedia content stream data to be recommend or second-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended; wherein the determining, according to a preset recommendation algorithm, first-type multimedia content stream data to be recommend or second-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended comprises: determining, according to the preset recommendation algorithm, the first-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended and the second-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended, respectively; determining recommendation scores for the first-type multimedia content stream data and the second-type multimedia content stream data, respectively; and selecting, according to the recommendation scores, from the first-type multimedia content stream data and the second-type multimedia content stream data.
Herzog teaches at [0028]-[0030] that a new autoplay queue can be generated based on an initial song, album, or playlist selected by a user. Algorithms and user vectors are used to select content items using the initial song, album, or playlist as a seed and personalized to the particular user’s vector, thereby selecting from among songs, albums and playlists for adding to an additional autoplay queue according to values generated by algorithms.
Claims 11 and 12 together recite a method substantially the same as the method of Claim 7, and the claims are similarly rejected.
Claim 23 recites a device comprising a processor and memory, wherein the memory stores instructions (Fig. 2) that cause the processor to carry out the method of Claim 7, and is likewise rejected.
Claim 24 recites a computer-readable storage medium having stored therein computer- executable instructions (Fig. 2) which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to implement the method according to Claim 7, and is likewise rejected.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herzog, in view of Otsu, U.S. PGPUB No. 2014/0198065 (“Otsu”).
With regard to Claim 3, Otsu teaches that the switching to and playing, in response to a second operation instruction in the multimedia content collection playing interface, another multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data, comprises: switching to and playing, in response to a sliding operation in a specified direction in the multimedia content collection playing interface, another target multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data. [0067] describes buttons which can be manipulated to go to a next or previous song. [0071]-[0072] describe that this can also be accomplished by right or left drag movements, respectively, on the playback interface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Herzog to enable navigating to a next or previous song using a drag/swipe input as described in Otsu. One of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by adding gesture inputs of commands, thereby enabling more convenient input methods for users who prefer gesture inputs to using interface controls.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herzog, in view of Radloff, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2006/0267995 (“Radloff”).
With regard to Claim 6, Herzog, in view of Radloff teaches before the switching from a current multimedia content collection playing interface to a playing interface corresponding to the next first-type multimedia content stream data or the next second-type multimedia content stream data, further comprising: recording current playing progress information of the second-type multimedia content stream data; and after the switching from a current multimedia content collection playing interface to a playing interface corresponding to the next first-type multimedia content stream data or the next second-type multimedia content stream data, further comprising: switching, in response to a return operation instruction in the playing interface corresponding to the next first-type multimedia content stream data or the next second-type multimedia content stream data, back to the current multimedia content collection playing interface, and continuing, according to the playing progress information of the second-type multimedia content stream data, to play the multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data.
Herzog teaches switching between playlists at [0100]. Radloff teaches at Table 18 that an on-demand multimedia server can maintain a plurality of playlists, and can maintain a record of the last playback position from the last time a playlist was played. A playlist can subsequently be played back from the stored last playback position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Herzog to allow for the recording of last playback position and the resumption of playback at that position for playlists, as described in Radloff. One of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by allowing users to browse and play back other media assets without losing a playback position from another playlist they wish to return to in the future.
Claims 8-10 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herzog, in view of Beaupre, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2006/0195790 (“Beaupre”).
With regard to Claim 8, Herzog, in view of Beaupre teaches that after determining the second-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended, further comprising: determining whether the second-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended is duplicated with historical second-type multimedia content stream data already recommended within a predetermined time period; and re-determining, when it is determined that the second-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended is duplicated with the historical second-type multimedia content stream data already recommended within the predetermined time period, the second-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended.
Herzog teaches at [0028]-[0030] that an auto-play queue can be generated to play after a current play list or album is finished playing. Beaupre teaches at [0185]-[0186] that a playlist generation process can ensure that particular songs or songs by a particular artist are separated by a minimum number of songs. When a playlist is generated, the system can attempt to place a song into a slot; if the song cannot be placed there because the slot is not available according to the rules, the song is placed in a different slot instead.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Herzog to ensure autoplay queues do not repeat songs within a threshold distance from both others in the autoplay as well as the originally selected queue, as suggested by Beaupre. One of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by ensuring autoplay and selected queues.
Claim 13 recites a method substantially the same as the method of Claim 8, and the claim is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 9, Herzog, in view of Beaupre teaches after determining the first- type multimedia content stream data to be recommended, further comprising: determining whether a multimedia content in the first-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended is duplicated with a multimedia content in historical second-type multimedia content stream data already recommended within a predetermined time period; and re-determining, when it is determined that the multimedia content in the first-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended is duplicated with the multimedia content in the historical second-type multimedia content stream data already recommended within the predetermined time period, the first-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended; or re-determining, when it is determined that the multimedia content in the first-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended is duplicated with the multimedia content in the historical second-type multimedia content stream data already recommended within the predetermined time period, and the multimedia content in the historical second-type multimedia content stream data has been played, the first-type multimedia content stream data to be recommended.
Herzog teaches at [0028]-[0030] that a new autoplay queue can be generated based on an initial song, album, or playlist selected by a user. Algorithms and user vectors are used to select content items using the initial song, album, or playlist as a seed and personalized to the particular user’s vector, thereby selecting from among songs, albums and playlists for adding to an additional autoplay queue according to values generated by algorithms. Beaupre teaches at [0185]-[0186] that a playlist generation process can ensure that particular songs or songs by a particular artist are separated by a minimum number of songs. When a playlist is generated, the system can attempt to place a song into a slot; if the song cannot be placed there because the slot is not available according to the rules, the song is placed in a different slot instead.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Herzog to ensure autoplay queues do not repeat songs within a threshold distance from both others in the autoplay as well as the originally selected queue, as suggested by Beaupre. One of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by ensuring autoplay and selected queues.
Claim 14 recites a method substantially the same as the method of Claim 9, and the claim is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 10, Beaupre teaches before recommending the second-type multimedia content stream data, further comprising: acquiring a recommendation score for each multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data, and sorting, according to the recommendation score, each multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data; and/or postponing, when any multimedia content in the second-type multimedia content stream data is duplicated with a multimedia content in historical first-type multimedia content stream data already recommended within a predetermined time period, and/or is duplicated with a multimedia content in historical second-type multimedia content stream data already recommended within a predetermined time period, and the multimedia content has been played, the multimedia content in the sorting. Beaupre teaches at [0186] that when a media file is placed in a slot in a play list, but is not allowed in the slot because it is too close to another instance of the media file according to the rules, the file is instead placed in the next available slot in the queue.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Herzog to ensure autoplay queues do not repeat songs within a threshold distance from both others in the autoplay as well as the originally selected queue, as suggested by Beaupre. One of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by ensuring autoplay and selected queues.
Claim 15 recites a method substantially the same as the method of Claim 10, and the claim is similarly rejected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH D BLOOMQUIST whose telephone number is (571)270-7718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30-5 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, Kieu Vu can be reached at 571-272-4057. 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.
/KEITH D BLOOMQUIST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
8/21/2026
Prosecution Insights