DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8+, filed 03/19/2026, with respect to the rejections of Claims 15-18, 22-26, 30-34 under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Soman et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0329881).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 15-18, 22-26, 30-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tashiro (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0209145) in view of Soman et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0329881).
Regarding claim 15, Tashiro discloses a method of live stream interaction, comprising:
in response to that a first predetermined condition is satisfied (considered as record condition satisfied), displaying a first interaction component in a live stream interface of a target live stream room (see 0095, 0090-0091; the system determines whether a record condition set in association with the special gift is satisfied. See paragraph 0100-0101; displaying gift icons 614,616, 618, 620, 620 in the live-stream room);
receiving a trigger operation for the first interaction component (see paragraphs 0091, 0101-0102; tapping a gift icon/screenshot icon); and
in response to that the trigger operation for the first interaction component satisfies a second predetermined condition, displaying a target effect in the live stream interface of the target live stream room (see paragraphs 0096-0098; after the trigger operation, the system checks whether illustration is instructed (a second condition), and then generates and displays a special gift effect. See paragraphs 0093-0094, 0103-0104, 0107-0108).
However, Tashiro is silent as to presenting a competition event and displaying a target effect in the live stream interface of the target live stream room, the target effect associated with a participant of the competition event.
In an analogous art, Soman et al. discloses presenting a competition event (see paragraphs 0027, 0030-0031; watching livestreaming of a cricket match) and
displaying a target effect in the live stream interface of the target live stream room, the target effect associated with a participant of the competition event (see paragraphs 0053-0054, fig. 4 (404 - 406, 408, 410, 412, 414, 416, 418); The viewer can click on the emoticon 408 if he wants to cheer for the player when he takes on the penalty click.).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Tashiro with the teachings of Soman et al., the motivation being to provide participant-specific effects.
Regarding claim 23, claim 23 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 15.
Regarding claim 31, claim 31 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 15.
Regarding claims 16, 24 and 32, Tashiro discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 15, 23 and 31). Tashiro discloses wherein displaying the first interaction component in the live stream interface of the target live stream room in response to that the first predetermined condition is satisfied comprises:
receiving live stream information sent by a server, the live stream information representing a live stream event corresponding to the target live stream room (see paragraphs 0043-0044, 0090-0091; 0100-0101; server sending gift-related event information to the viewer terminal. The viewing terminal receiving live-stream room information including gift availability and UI elements); and
in accordance with a determination that the live stream event corresponding to the live stream information is a target event (see paragraphs 0093-0096; determination that the record condition/permission/illustration instruction is satisfied), displaying the first interaction component in the live stream interface of the target live stream room (see paragraphs 0091, 0100-0102; displaying gift icons or screenshot icons), wherein the first interaction component has a first component appearance for guiding application of the trigger operation to the first interaction component (see paragraphs 0100-0102, 0107-0108; visually distinctive gift icons and screenshot icons that prompt tapping).
Soman et al. discloses presenting a competition event (see paragraphs 0027, 0030-0031; watching livestreaming of a cricket match).
Regarding claims 17, 25 and 33, Tashiro discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 16, 24 and 32). Tashiro discloses wherein before displaying the target effect in the live stream interface of the target live stream room, the method further comprises:
determining an effect type of the target effect based on the live stream information (see paragraphs 0093-0097, 0083, 0103-0104, 0107-0108 and fig. 8; determining the effect type based on live-stream information such as screenshot content, record conditions, illustration instructions, and gift algorithms).
Regarding claims 18, 26 and 34, Tashiro discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 15, 23 and 31). Tashiro discloses wherein the live stream interface further comprises a second interaction component for displaying a trigger condition of the target effect and/or content of the target effect (see paragraphs 0102-0103, 0117, figs. 12-13, 18, 20), and displaying the first interaction component in the live stream interface of the target live stream room in response to that the first predetermined condition is satisfied (see paragraphs 0095, 0100-0101) comprises:
in response to a trigger operation for the second interaction component, displaying the first interaction component in the live stream interface of the target live stream room (see paragraphs 0096, 0102-0104, 0107-0108, figs. 20-21).
Regarding claims 22 and 30, Tashiro discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 19 and 27). Tashiro discloses wherein live stream content of the live stream room relates to a plurality of participants, and the method further comprises (see paragraphs 0038-0044, 0080-0083, fig. 1 (AU1, AU2, AU3), fig. 6):
obtaining participant information of a target participant selected by a target user corresponding to the trigger operation, the target participant being one of the plurality of participants (see paragraph 0117, fig. 20); and
determining a corresponding target effect according to the participant information of the target participant (see paragraphs 0083, 0096-0098, figs. 8, 20, 21, 23).
Soman et al. discloses presenting a competition event (see paragraphs 0027, 0030-0031; watching livestreaming of a cricket match).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 19-21, 27-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tashiro as applied to claims 15 and 23 above, and further in view of Jiang et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0129591).
Regarding claims 19 and 27, Tashiro discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 15 and 23). Tashiro discloses wherein in response to that the trigger operation for the first interaction component satisfies the second predetermined condition, displaying the target effect in the live stream interface of the target live stream room (see paragraphs 0096-0098; after the trigger operation, the system checks whether illustration is instructed (a second condition), and then generates and displays a special gift effect. See paragraphs 0093-0094, 0103-0104, 0107-0108).
However, Tashiro is silent as to in accordance with a determination that a total number of clicks on the first interaction component reaches a first predetermined number, displaying the target effect in the live stream interface of the target live stream room, the total number of clicks representing a number of times of user triggering on the first interaction component in the target live stream room.
Jiang et al. discloses in accordance with a determination that a total number of clicks on the first interaction component reaches a first predetermined number, displaying the target effect in the live stream interface of the target live stream room, the total number of clicks representing a number of times of user triggering on the first interaction component in the target live stream room (see paragraph 0162 and fig. 14).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Tashiro with the teachings of Jiang, the motivation being to improve visual experience.
Regarding claims 20 and 28, Tashiro and Jiang et al. discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 19 and 27). Tashiro discloses wherein after displaying the first interaction component in the live stream interface of the target live stream room (paragraphs 0100-0102, figs. 11, 12). However, Tashiro is silent as to
displaying a countdown component corresponding to the first interaction component, the countdown component indicating a remaining duration that the first interaction component can respond to a click; and displaying the total number of clicks when the remaining duration is less than a duration threshold.
Jiang discloses displaying a countdown component corresponding to the first interaction component (see figs. 6, 7a-7b), the countdown component indicating a remaining duration that the first interaction component can respond to a click (see fig. 6 (610-613), fig. 7a-7b (602-604)); and
displaying the total number of clicks when the remaining duration is less than a duration threshold (see figs. 9b-9d and paragraph 0037).
Regarding claims 21 and 29, Tashiro and Jiang et al. discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 19 and 27). Jiang et al. discloses wherein the method further comprises:
displaying a number of combos (see paragraph 0037, figs. 9b,9c, 9d), the number of combos representing, in a process of responding to the trigger operation multiple times, a number of times that the trigger operation is consecutively determined to be a combo operation (see paragraphs 0037, figs. 9c, 9d), and
wherein in accordance with a determination that an interval duration between a currently responded trigger operation and a previously responded trigger operation is less than a predetermined duration, the currently responded trigger operation is determined to be the combo operation (see paragraphs 0037, figs. 9c, 9d).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 NNENNA NGOZI EKPO whose telephone number is (571)270-1663. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 10:00am - 6:30pm, TH-F 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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 at 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 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.
NNENNA EKPO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2425
/NNENNA N EKPO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425 April 21, 2026.
Prosecution Insights