DETAILED ACTION
Priority
This action is in response to the U.S. filing dated 12 December 2024 which is a national stage entry of PCT/CN2023/119653, dated 19 September 2023, which claims a foreign priority date, of 20 September 2022. A preliminary amendment was submitted on 12 December 2024. Claims 1, 4, 12 and 13 are amended. Claims 11 and 14 have been cancelled. Claims 15-22 have been added. Claims 1-10, 12, 13 and 15-22 are pending and have been considered below.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02 January 2025, 21 July 2025, 09 March 2026 and 01 September 2026 have been received, entered into the record, and considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities: these claims recite “and/or” terminology. Examiner does however note that, “A and/or B” does have a meaning and that meaning is A alone, B alone, or A and B together. The “preferred verbiage” should be more simply “at least one of A and B.” Further, giving the claim limitation the broadest reasonable interpretation, the examiner will use the broader “or” recitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4, 7, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 4 and 17 recite the limitation “the first one in the first arrangement order”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 7 and 20 recite the limitation “the first one in the second arrangement order”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 20 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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 12, 13, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kummer (US 2009/0199238 A1) in view of Coenen et al. (US 2019/0191208 A1).
As for independent claim 1, Kummer teaches a method comprising:
displaying a live streaming video page [(e.g. see Kummer paragraphs 0017, 0028) ”video window 122 is also provided for display of motion video. This video may be the current contents of any particular channel … simply be the live feed from the channel”].
displaying an object aggregation interface on the live streaming video page in response to a first operation triggered for the live streaming video page, wherein at least one first candidate object corresponding to first category description information is displayed on the object aggregation interface, the first candidate object is used to describe a first candidate live streaming video [(e.g. see Kummer paragraphs 0016, 0019, 0020 and Fig. 1) ”When the user requests an EPG display, controller 108 further reacts to user inputs to create and adjust the display as desired by the user … mode indication 126 can be used to indicate an operating mode of the EPG. Examples of operating modes may include, without limitation, automatic or manual scrolling, displaying all channels, displaying all subscribed channels, displaying only favorite channels, displaying only programs of a particular criteria (e.g., high-definition, sports, news, movies, drama and comedy) … users often have the capability to navigate within the program listing 117 to filter results by category (e.g., "news", "sports", "movies", and "hi-def"), by actor/actress name, and/or according to any other criteria”].
a first control is displayed on the object aggregation interface, and the first category description information is displayed on the first control [(e.g. see Kummer paragraph 0019 and Fig. 1) ” an EPG mode indication 126 … mode indication 126 can be used to indicate an operating mode of the EPG. Examples of operating modes may include, without limitation, automatic or manual scrolling, displaying all channels, displaying all subscribed channels, displaying only favorite channels, displaying only programs of a particular criteria (e.g., high-definition, sports, news, movies, drama and comedy”]. Examiner notes that, as depicted in Fig. 1, the mode is set to “favorite list: all channels” (numeral 126).
Kummer does not specifically teach and displaying at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the first control. However, in the same field of invention, Coenen teaches:
and displaying at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the first control [(e.g. see Coenen paragraphs 0094, 0095 and Fig. 11a) ”A channel filter column 174 shows a menu of channel filters to be applied to the full EPG … The user may cause the channel filter column 174 to reappear by navigating to the status column 170 and selecting the channel filter indicated therein”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Kummer and Coenen, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add and displaying at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the first control, as taught by Coenen, to the teachings of Kummer because this allows quick navigation through a long menu with precise selection of the menu item (e.g. see Coenen paragraph 0080).
As for dependent claim 2, Kummer and Coenen teach the method as described in claim 1 and Kummer further teaches:
wherein after the displaying at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface, the method further comprises: displaying at least one second candidate object corresponding to target category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the target category description information in the at least one piece of second category description information, wherein the second candidate object is used to describe a second candidate live streaming video [(e.g. see Kummer paragraph 0019) ”mode indication 126 can be used to indicate an operating mode of the EPG … displaying only programs of a particular criteria (e.g., high-definition, sports, news, movies, drama and comedy”].
As for dependent claim 5, Kummer and Coenen teach the method as described in claim 2 and Kummer further teaches:
wherein the displaying at least one second candidate object corresponding to target category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the target category description information in the at least one piece of second category description information comprises: switching the at least one piece of second category description information displayed on the object aggregation interface to the at least one second candidate object corresponding to the target category description information in response to the trigger operation for the target category description information in the at least one piece of second category description information, and switching the first category description information displayed on the first control in the object aggregation interface to the target category description information [(e.g. see Kummer paragraphs 0019, 0020, 0021 and Fig. 1) ”the user's actions with respect to the EPG can be used to trigger information to be displayed in window 120 … an EPG mode indication 126, and a channel indicator 128 as appropriate. In this embodiment, mode indication 126 can be used to indicate an operating mode of the EPG. Examples of operating modes may include, without limitation, automatic or manual scrolling, displaying all channels, displaying all subscribed channels, displaying only favorite channels, displaying only programs of a particular criteria (e.g., high-definition, sports, news, movies, drama and comedy) or the like … users often have the capability to navigate within the program listing 117 to filter results by category (e.g., "news", "sports", "movies", and "hi-def")”]. Examiner notes that the mode indication (numeral 126) can display the current filter mode selected by the user.
As for dependent claim 10, Kummer and Coenen teach the method as described in claim 2, but Kummer does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Coenen teaches:
comprising at least one of the following: vertically displaying the at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface; vertically displaying the at least one first candidate object on the object aggregation interface; and vertically displaying the at least one second candidate object on the object aggregation interface [(e.g. see Coenen paragraph 0059, 0094 and Fig. 11a) ”The UI components 142 are used to display the EPG in a grid format, and various … vertical menus … A channel filter column 174 shows a menu of channel filters to be applied to the full EPG”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for independent claim 12, Kummer and Coenen teach a device. Claim 12 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 1.
As for independent claim 13, Kummer and Coenen teach a non-transitory computer-readable medium. Claim 13 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 1.
As for dependent claim 15, Kummer and Coenen teach the device as described in claim 12; further, claim 15 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 2. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 2.
As for dependent claim 18, Kummer and Coenen teach the device as described in claim 15; further, claim 18 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 5. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 5.
Claims 3, 4, 8, 16, 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kummer (US 2009/0199238 A1) in view of Coenen et al. (US 2019/0191208 A1), as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Thomas et al. (US 2016/0066021 A1).
As for dependent claim 3, Kummer and Coenen teach the method as described in claim 2, but do not specifically teach the following limitation. However, in the same field of invention, Thomas teaches:
wherein a first live streaming video is displayed on the live streaming video page; and the displaying at least one second candidate object corresponding to target category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the target category description information in the at least one piece of second category description information comprises: switching the at least one piece of second category description information displayed on the object aggregation interface to the at least one second candidate object corresponding to the target category description information in response to the trigger operation for the target category description information in the at least one piece of second category description information, and switching the first live streaming video played in the live streaming video page to a second live streaming video corresponding to the target category description information [(e.g. see Thomas paragraphs 0123, 0130, 0131 and Figs. 38-39) ”In step 3074, gamer 949 interacts with channel surfer 3027 to cycle through the filters 947 on the channel surfer. In step 3075, gamer 949 interacts with channel surfer 3027 to select one of the filters 947 on the channel surfer. … FIG. 38 is a screen shot showing an exemplary “sports” filter screen. “English . . . ” is showing on the full screen as seen at 3841. The channel surfer is seen at 943. The channel surfer indexes off “English . . . ” as seen at 3845, where the corresponding panel is highlighted. As seen at 947, this user has selected the “Sports” filter such that sports channels are shown in the channel surfer carousel 943; the user can surf right from the highlighted “English . . . ” panel 3845 … FIG. 39 is a screen shot showing an exemplary “TV Shows” filter screen. “Evil Minds” is showing on the full screen as seen at 3941. The channel surfer is seen at 943. The channel surfer indexes off “Evil Minds” as seen at 3945, where the corresponding panel is highlighted. As seen at 947, this user has selected the “TV Shows” filter such that TV Shows are shown in the channel surfer carousel 943; the user can surf right from the highlighted “Evil Minds” panel 3945”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Kummer, Coenen and Thomas, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the above identified limitation, as taught by Thomas, to the teachings of Kummer and Coenen because it allows the user to easily navigate to desired content (e.g. see Thomas paragraph 0160).
As for dependent claim 4, Kummer, Coenen and Thomas teach the method as described in claim 3 and Kummer further teaches:
wherein at least one second candidate live streaming video corresponding to the at least one second candidate object comprises the second live streaming video; and the at least one second candidate object is displayed in a first arrangement order on the object aggregation interface, the second candidate object corresponding to the second live streaming video corresponds to the first one in the first arrangement order [(e.g. see Kummer paragraphs 0019, 0020 and Fig. 1) ”Channel indicator 128 may indicate the last channel viewed, a favorite channel, a channel that is being displayed in window 122 … users often have the capability to navigate within the program listing 117 to filter results by category (e.g., "news", "sports", "movies", and "hi-def")”]. Examiner notes that, as depicted in Fig. 1, the program listing is arranged by channel numbers and the first channel number in the program listing (numeral 270) is being displayed (numeral 122) while the program listing is filtered by a specific mode (numeral 126).
As for dependent claim 8, Kummer and Coenen teach the method as described in claim 1, but do not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Thomas teaches:
wherein the displaying at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface comprises: switching the at least one first candidate object on the object aggregation interface to the at least one piece of second category description information; and after the switching the at least one first candidate object on the object aggregation interface to the at least one piece of second category description information, the method further comprises: switching the at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface to the at least one first candidate object in response to the trigger operation for the first control [(e.g. see Thomas paragraphs 0121, 0123 and Figs. 38-39) ”In step 3074, gamer 949 interacts with channel surfer 3027 to cycle through the filters 947 on the channel surfer. In step 3075, gamer 949 interacts with channel surfer 3027 to select one of the filters 947 on the channel surfer … filters may be, for example, content based or channel based. For example, the “News,” “Sports,” and “Kids” filters are constructed by a set of channels as described with regard to steps 3034-3042. Now consider content-based filters. In step 3067, from the EPG, look at the TMS (Tribune Media Services) ID of the currently aired program. If that ID begins with “EP,” then the channel is included into the “TV Shows” filter. In step 3068, app 953 builds the “TV Shows” filter from the EPG data. In step 3069, from the EPG, look at the TMS (Tribune Media Services) ID of the currently aired program. If that ID begins with “MV,” then the channel is included into the “Movies” filter. In step 3070, app 953 builds the “Movies” filter from the EPG data. In step 3071, app 953 retrieves a Recent Channels list from local storage (e.g., memory 806 or persistent storage such as a hard disk drive coupled to chip 808) and builds the “Recent Channels” filter from the EPG data”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 3.
As for dependent claim 16, Kummer and Coenen teach the device as described in claim 15; further, claim 16 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 3. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 3.
As for dependent claim 17, Kummer, Coenen and Thomas teach the device as described in claim 16; further, claim 17 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 4. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 4.
As for dependent claim 21, Kummer and Coenen teach the device as described in claim 12; further, claim 21 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 8. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 8.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kummer (US 2009/0199238 A1) in view of Coenen et al. (US 2019/0191208 A1), as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Skeen et al. (US 2014/0344294 A1).
As for dependent claim 6, Kummer and Coenen teach the method as described in claim 5, but do not specifically teach wherein after the switching the first category description information displayed on the first control in the object aggregation interface to the target category description information, the method further comprises: displaying the first category description information, and other information in the at least one piece of second category description information except the target category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to the trigger operation for the first control. However, in the same field of invention, Skeen teaches:
wherein after the switching the first category description information displayed on the first control in the object aggregation interface to the target category description information, the method further comprises: displaying the first category description information, and other information in the at least one piece of second category description information except the target category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to the trigger operation for the first control [(e.g. see Skeen paragraphs 0661, 0662 and Figs. 41A-B) ”In at least one embodiment, the Genre Selection GUI 4001 may be configured or designed include functionality for facilitating the user in selectively choosing and/or inputting genre-related and/or tag-related filtering criteria to be used as part of the user-specified search criteria … FIGS. 41A and 41B show an example screenshots of different embodiments illustrating the Genre Selection GUI (e.g., FIG. 38) may provide the user with the ability to input and/or to select one or more genres or genre groups via use of manual input interfaces and/or dynamic drop-down menus (e.g., 4110)”]. Examiner notes that, as depicted in Figs. 41A-B, the item currently selected for the drop down (numeral 4110, “World/Latin/Reggae”) does not appear again in the expanded selection list under the control (numerals 4153-4157).
Therefore, considering the teachings of Kummer, Coenen and Skeen, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein after the switching the first category description information displayed on the first control in the object aggregation interface to the target category description information, the method further comprises: displaying the first category description information, and other information in the at least one piece of second category description information except the target category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to the trigger operation for the first control, as taught by Skeen, to the teachings of Kummer and Coenen because it allows a user to quickly select a group of genres (e.g. see Skeen paragraph 0661).
As for dependent claim 19, Kummer and Coenen teach the device as described in claim 18; further, claim 19 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 6. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 6.
Claims 9 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kummer (US 2009/0199238 A1) in view of Coenen et al. (US 2019/0191208 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stallings et al. (US 2009/0165045 A1).
As for dependent claim 9, Kummer and Coenen teach the method as described in claim 1, but do not specifically teach wherein the displaying at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the first control comprises: displaying the at least one piece of second category description information in a first area of the object aggregation interface in response to the trigger operation for the first control, and displaying a search control and/or a history browse control in a second area of the object aggregation interface. However, in the same field of invention, Stallings teaches:
wherein the displaying at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the first control comprises: displaying the at least one piece of second category description information in a first area of the object aggregation interface in response to the trigger operation for the first control, and displaying a search control and/or a history browse control in a second area of the object aggregation interface [(e.g. see Stallings paragraph 0086 and Fig. 7) ”As shown in FIG. 7, palette 774 may include a program guide filter tool 776. Filter tool 776 may enable a user to provide one or more parameters (e.g., keywords, genres, etc.) for filtering program guide data. In certain embodiments, filter tool 776 may enable the user to spell out keywords or other filter parameters. In other embodiments, filter tool 776 may enable the user to select from a group of predetermined filter parameters. In some examples, content processing subsystem 110 may be configured to dynamically filter program guide data based on user input that is provided via the filter tool 776. Accordingly, the content displayed in the program guide GUI 660 may be dynamically updated as the user provides filter parameters”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Kummer, Coenen and Stallings, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the displaying at least one piece of second category description information on the object aggregation interface in response to a trigger operation for the first control comprises: displaying the at least one piece of second category description information in a first area of the object aggregation interface in response to the trigger operation for the first control, and displaying a search control and/or a history browse control in a second area of the object aggregation interface, as taught by Stallings, to the teachings of Kummer and Coenen because it allows the user to perform a search without requiring a user to leave the program guide which saves the user time (e.g. see Stallings paragraph 0003).
As for dependent claim 22, Kummer and Coenen teach the device as described in claim 12; further, claim 22 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 9. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. PGPub 2011/0167385 A1 issued to Charrue et al. on 07 July 2011. The subject matter disclosed therein is pertinent to that of claims 1-10, 12, 13 and 15-22 (e.g. filtering a program guide using drop-down menus).
U.S. Patent 7,941,819 B2 issued to Stark et al. on 10 May 2011. The subject matter disclosed therein is pertinent to that of claims 1-10, 12, 13 and 15-22 (e.g. filtering a channel guide using a drop-down selections).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J FIBBI whose telephone number is (571)-270-3358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (8am-6pm).
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, William Bashore can be reached at (571)-272-4088. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J FIBBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights