Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This is in response to the applicant's communication filed on 05/06/2026, wherein: Claims 1-38 are pending. However, claims 23-38 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See details of the restrictions below. Claims 1, 7 and 16 have been amended. Claims 23-38 are new.
The Examiner’s Notes:
2. As previously indicated, Independent claims 1 and 16 as a whole recites a combination of limitations that has been found as define over prior art of record.
For the amended independent claim 1, the combination of Loheide et al; (US 2022/0368967 A1), Mills et al; (US 10,217,138 B1), Long et al; (US 2010/0205049 A1), Macaulay et al; (US 2014/0365491 A1) and Loeheide et al; (2020/0413117 A1)} teaches elements of the claimed invention. However, it would be hind-sight reasoning to combine the individual elements disclosed in the prior-art in order to achieve Applicant's claimed invention.
For the amended independent claim 16, the combination of Loheide et al; (US 2022/0368967 A1), Mills et al; (US 10,217,138 B1), Long et al; (US 2010/0205049 A1), Macaulay et al; (US 2014/0365491 A1) and Pressnell et al; (US 11,659,259 B1)} teaches elements of the claimed invention. However, it would be hind-sight reasoning to combine the individual elements disclosed in the prior-art in order to achieve Applicant's claimed invention.
Also, rejection under 103 for amended independent claim 7 and their dependency has been withdrawn since the amended independent claim 7 as a whole recites a combination of limitations that has been found as define over prior art of record {The combination of Loheide et al; (US 2022/0368967 A1), Long et al; (US 2010/0205049 A1), Loeheide et al; (2020/0413117 A1), and Kummer; (US 2015/0358688 A1)} teaches elements of the claimed invention. However, it would be hind-sight reasoning to combine the individual elements disclosed in the prior-art in order to achieve Applicant's claimed invention.
Please notes that claims 1-22 are still rejected under 101 below.
Election/Restrictions
3. Newly added claims Group II {Claims 23-29, and 30-36} and newly added claims Group III {Claims 37-38} directed to inventions that are independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed Group I {Claims 1-6, 7-15, and 16-22} for the following reasons:
The original claims 1, 7 and 16 (dated 09/19/24) or amended claims 1, 7 and 16 (dated 05/26/25) of Group I and the new added claims Group II {Claims 23-29, and 30-36) are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. The subcombinations are distinct from each other if they are shown to be separately usable. In the instant case, invention of group I (original claims 1-6, 7-15, and 16-22) has separate utility such as invention of group I deals with a method comprising: {“a player receiving a manifest for playing a media item, the manifest comprising: first content break segment locator information for a first content break in the media item, the first content break segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of content break segments, the first content break segment locator information comprising: i) a first set of segment identifiers (SIDs) or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the first set of SIDs, the first set of SIDs comprising a first SID and a second SID; first media item segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of media item segments of the media item, the first media item segment locator information comprising: i) a second set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the second set of SIDs; and second content break segment locator information for a second content break in the media item, the second content break segment locator information for enabling the player to request a second set of content break segments, the second content break segment locator information comprising: i) a third set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the third set of SIDs; after receiving the manifest, sending a content break information request for content break information regarding the first content break; and receiving a response to the content break information request, the response comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a set of content items selected for the first content break or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items selected for the first content break, wherein the response to the content break information request does not include 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a second set of content items, if any, selected for the second content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items, if any, selected for the second content break; and after receiving the response: i) determining, based on the information included in the response, to use first SID to obtain a media segment; and ii) determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID; after determining to use the first SID to obtain a media segment: sending a request comprising the first SID: after transmitting the request, receiving a response comprising a media segment; and after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and as a result of determining to skip the second SID: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment, or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (claim 1)….. based on information included in the response to the content break information request, determining that the content break should be shortened; after determining that the content break should be shortened: sending a request comprising the first SID; after transmitting the request comprising the first SID, receiving a response comprising a media segment; after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and skipping the second SID, wherein skipping the second SID comprises: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (claim 7)…… after receiving the response responsive to the content break selection request, creating a mapping that maps a SID included in the second set of SIDs to the first ad SID; after sending the content break selection request, providing to the player content break information for the content break, the content break information comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of all of the content items selected for the content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration; receiving from the player a first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID; in response to receiving the first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID, using the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID to obtain the first ad SID; and after obtaining the first ad SID: using the first ad SID to retrieve a first ad segment and then providing to the player the first ad segment, or providing to the player a redirect message comprising the first ad SID (claim 16)”} while invention of group II (new added claims 23-29, and 30-36) deals with a method and system comprising {“transmitting a request for a server-side ad insertion (SSAI) enabled manifest for a video-on-demand (VOD) session for VOD content, wherein the VOD session includes at least one ad break; after transmitting the request for the manifest, receiving the manifest; after receiving the manifest, transmitting a request for a segment of the VOD content for the VOD session; after transmitting the request for a segment of the VOD content, receiving a segment of the VOD content; the video player playing the received segment of the VOD content; and while playing the segment of the VOD content, receiving from a server a message comprising ad break information for the ad break, wherein the ad break information for the ad break comprises ad duration information for enabling the device to determine whether the ad break is at least partially unfilled, a set of ads are selected for the ad break while the video player plays a segment of the VOD content, the set of ads comprising a last ad for the ad break, the ad break is partially unfilled, and the method further comprises: the video player determining, based on the ad break information for the ad break, that the ad break is partially unfilled; and as a result of determining that the ad break is partially unfilled, the video player automatically skipping to the end of the ad break after playing the last ad for the ad break”}. This separate use patentably distinguishes the invention of group I from group II, since a player of group I {“receiving a manifest for playing a media item, the manifest comprising: first content break segment locator information for a first content break in the media item, the first content break segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of content break segments, the first content break segment locator information comprising: i) a first set of segment identifiers (SIDs) or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the first set of SIDs, the first set of SIDs comprising a first SID and a second SID; first media item segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of media item segments of the media item, the first media item segment locator information comprising: i) a second set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the second set of SIDs; and second content break segment locator information for a second content break in the media item, the second content break segment locator information for enabling the player to request a second set of content break segments, the second content break segment locator information comprising: i) a third set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the third set of SIDs; after receiving the manifest, sending a content break information request for content break information regarding the first content break; and receiving a response to the content break information request, the response comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a set of content items selected for the first content break or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items selected for the first content break, wherein the response to the content break information request does not include 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a second set of content items, if any, selected for the second content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items, if any, selected for the second content break; and after receiving the response: i) determining, based on the information included in the response, to use first SID to obtain a media segment; and ii) determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID; after determining to use the first SID to obtain a media segment: sending a request comprising the first SID: after transmitting the request, receiving a response comprising a media segment; and after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and as a result of determining to skip the second SID: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment, or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (claim 1)….. based on information included in the response to the content break information request, determining that the content break should be shortened; after determining that the content break should be shortened: sending a request comprising the first SID; after transmitting the request comprising the first SID, receiving a response comprising a media segment; after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and skipping the second SID, wherein skipping the second SID comprises: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (claim 7)…… after receiving the response responsive to the content break selection request, creating a mapping that maps a SID included in the second set of SIDs to the first ad SID; after sending the content break selection request, providing to the player content break information for the content break, the content break information comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of all of the content items selected for the content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration; receiving from the player a first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID; in response to receiving the first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID, using the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID to obtain the first ad SID; and after obtaining the first ad SID: using the first ad SID to retrieve a first ad segment and then providing to the player the first ad segment, or providing to the player a redirect message comprising the first ad SID (claim 16)”} can be used without the need of {“transmitting a request for a server-side ad insertion (SSAI) enabled manifest for a video-on-demand (VOD) session for VOD content, wherein the VOD session includes at least one ad break; after transmitting the request for the manifest, receiving the manifest; after receiving the manifest, transmitting a request for a segment of the VOD content for the VOD session; after transmitting the request for a segment of the VOD content, receiving a segment of the VOD content; the video player playing the received segment of the VOD content; and while playing the segment of the VOD content, receiving from a server a message comprising ad break information for the ad break, wherein the ad break information for the ad break comprises ad duration information for enabling the device to determine whether the ad break is at least partially unfilled, a set of ads are selected for the ad break while the video player plays a segment of the VOD content, the set of ads comprising a last ad for the ad break, the ad break is partially unfilled, and the method further comprises: the video player determining, based on the ad break information for the ad break, that the ad break is partially unfilled; and as a result of determining that the ad break is partially unfilled, the video player automatically skipping to the end of the ad break after playing the last ad for the ad break”}, as recited in the independently claimed invention (group II). Therefore; inventions of group I and group II are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. See MPEP § 806.05(d).
Also, the original claims 1, 7 and 16 (dated 09/19/24) or amended claims 1, 7 and 16 (dated 05/26/25) of Group I and the new added claims Group III {Claims 37-38) are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. The subcombinations are distinct from each other if they are shown to be separately usable. In the instant case, invention of group I (original claims 1-6, 7-15, and 16-22) has separate utility such as invention of group I deals with a method comprising: {“a player receiving a manifest for playing a media item, the manifest comprising: first content break segment locator information for a first content break in the media item, the first content break segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of content break segments, the first content break segment locator information comprising: i) a first set of segment identifiers (SIDs) or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the first set of SIDs, the first set of SIDs comprising a first SID and a second SID; first media item segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of media item segments of the media item, the first media item segment locator information comprising: i) a second set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the second set of SIDs; and second content break segment locator information for a second content break in the media item, the second content break segment locator information for enabling the player to request a second set of content break segments, the second content break segment locator information comprising: i) a third set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the third set of SIDs; after receiving the manifest, sending a content break information request for content break information regarding the first content break; and receiving a response to the content break information request, the response comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a set of content items selected for the first content break or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items selected for the first content break, wherein the response to the content break information request does not include 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a second set of content items, if any, selected for the second content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items, if any, selected for the second content break; and after receiving the response: i) determining, based on the information included in the response, to use first SID to obtain a media segment; and ii) determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID; after determining to use the first SID to obtain a media segment: sending a request comprising the first SID: after transmitting the request, receiving a response comprising a media segment; and after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and as a result of determining to skip the second SID: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment, or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (claim 1)….. based on information included in the response to the content break information request, determining that the content break should be shortened; after determining that the content break should be shortened: sending a request comprising the first SID; after transmitting the request comprising the first SID, receiving a response comprising a media segment; after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and skipping the second SID, wherein skipping the second SID comprises: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (claim 7)…… after receiving the response responsive to the content break selection request, creating a mapping that maps a SID included in the second set of SIDs to the first ad SID; after sending the content break selection request, providing to the player content break information for the content break, the content break information comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of all of the content items selected for the content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration; receiving from the player a first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID; in response to receiving the first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID, using the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID to obtain the first ad SID; and after obtaining the first ad SID: using the first ad SID to retrieve a first ad segment and then providing to the player the first ad segment, or providing to the player a redirect message comprising the first ad SID (claim 16)”} while invention of group III (new added claims 37-38) deals with a method comprising {“receiving a first message transmitted by a video player device, wherein the first message is a request for a server-side ad insertion (SSAI) enabled manifest for a video-on-demand (VOD) session for VOD content, wherein the VOD session includes at least one ad break; after receiving the request for the manifest, transmitting the manifest to the video player device; after transmitting the manifest to the video player device, receiving a second message transmitted by the video player device while the video player device was playing a segment of the VOD content; and in response to receiving the second message from the video player device, performing a process comprising: i) requesting ads for the ad break, and ii) after ads for the ad break have been selected, transmitting to the video player a message comprising ad break information for the ad break, wherein the ad break information for the ad break comprises ad duration information for enabling the video player device to determine whether the ad break is at least partially unfilled”}. This separate use patentably distinguishes the invention of group I from group III, since a player of group I {“receiving a manifest for playing a media item, the manifest comprising: first content break segment locator information for a first content break in the media item, the first content break segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of content break segments, the first content break segment locator information comprising: i) a first set of segment identifiers (SIDs) or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the first set of SIDs, the first set of SIDs comprising a first SID and a second SID; first media item segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of media item segments of the media item, the first media item segment locator information comprising: i) a second set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the second set of SIDs; and second content break segment locator information for a second content break in the media item, the second content break segment locator information for enabling the player to request a second set of content break segments, the second content break segment locator information comprising: i) a third set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the third set of SIDs; after receiving the manifest, sending a content break information request for content break information regarding the first content break; and receiving a response to the content break information request, the response comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a set of content items selected for the first content break or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items selected for the first content break, wherein the response to the content break information request does not include 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a second set of content items, if any, selected for the second content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items, if any, selected for the second content break; and after receiving the response: i) determining, based on the information included in the response, to use first SID to obtain a media segment; and ii) determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID; after determining to use the first SID to obtain a media segment: sending a request comprising the first SID: after transmitting the request, receiving a response comprising a media segment; and after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and as a result of determining to skip the second SID: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment, or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (claim 1)….. based on information included in the response to the content break information request, determining that the content break should be shortened; after determining that the content break should be shortened: sending a request comprising the first SID; after transmitting the request comprising the first SID, receiving a response comprising a media segment; after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and skipping the second SID, wherein skipping the second SID comprises: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (claim 7)…… after receiving the response responsive to the content break selection request, creating a mapping that maps a SID included in the second set of SIDs to the first ad SID; after sending the content break selection request, providing to the player content break information for the content break, the content break information comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of all of the content items selected for the content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration; receiving from the player a first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID; in response to receiving the first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID, using the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID to obtain the first ad SID; and after obtaining the first ad SID: using the first ad SID to retrieve a first ad segment and then providing to the player the first ad segment, or providing to the player a redirect message comprising the first ad SID (claim 16)”} can be used without the need of {“receiving a first message transmitted by a video player device, wherein the first message is a request for a server-side ad insertion (SSAI) enabled manifest for a video-on-demand (VOD) session for VOD content, wherein the VOD session includes at least one ad break; after receiving the request for the manifest, transmitting the manifest to the video player device; after transmitting the manifest to the video player device, receiving a second message transmitted by the video player device while the video player device was playing a segment of the VOD content; and in response to receiving the second message from the video player device, performing a process comprising: i) requesting ads for the ad break, and ii) after ads for the ad break have been selected, transmitting to the video player a message comprising ad break information for the ad break, wherein the ad break information for the ad break comprises ad duration information for enabling the video player device to determine whether the ad break is at least partially unfilled”}, as recited in the independently claimed invention (group III). Therefore; inventions of group I and group II are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. See MPEP § 806.05(d).
Furthermore, note that newly added claims Group II (Claims 23-29, and 30-36) and newly added claims Group III {Claims 37-38} are also related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. The subcombinations are distinct from each other if they are shown to be separately usable. In the instant case, invention of group II (Claims 23-29, and 30-36) has separate utility such as invention of group II deals with a method and system comprising {“transmitting a request for a server-side ad insertion (SSAI) enabled manifest for a video-on-demand (VOD) session for VOD content, wherein the VOD session includes at least one ad break; after transmitting the request for the manifest, receiving the manifest; after receiving the manifest, transmitting a request for a segment of the VOD content for the VOD session; after transmitting the request for a segment of the VOD content, receiving a segment of the VOD content; the video player playing the received segment of the VOD content; and while playing the segment of the VOD content, receiving from a server a message comprising ad break information for the ad break, wherein the ad break information for the ad break comprises ad duration information for enabling the device to determine whether the ad break is at least partially unfilled, a set of ads are selected for the ad break while the video player plays a segment of the VOD content, the set of ads comprising a last ad for the ad break, the ad break is partially unfilled, and the method further comprises: the video player determining, based on the ad break information for the ad break, that the ad break is partially unfilled; and as a result of determining that the ad break is partially unfilled, the video player automatically skipping to the end of the ad break after playing the last ad for the ad break”} while invention of group III (new added claims 37-38) deals with a method comprising {“receiving a first message transmitted by a video player device, wherein the first message is a request for a server-side ad insertion (SSAI) enabled manifest for a video-on-demand (VOD) session for VOD content, wherein the VOD session includes at least one ad break; after receiving the request for the manifest, transmitting the manifest to the video player device; after transmitting the manifest to the video player device, receiving a second message transmitted by the video player device while the video player device was playing a segment of the VOD content; and in response to receiving the second message from the video player device, performing a process comprising: i) requesting ads for the ad break, and ii) after ads for the ad break have been selected, transmitting to the video player a message comprising ad break information for the ad break, wherein the ad break information for the ad break comprises ad duration information for enabling the video player device to determine whether the ad break is at least partially unfilled”}. This separate use patentably distinguishes the invention of group II from group III, since a video player of group II {“transmitting a request for a server-side ad insertion (SSAI) enabled manifest for a video-on-demand (VOD) session for VOD content, wherein the VOD session includes at least one ad break; after transmitting the request for the manifest, receiving the manifest; after receiving the manifest, transmitting a request for a segment of the VOD content for the VOD session; after transmitting the request for a segment of the VOD content, receiving a segment of the VOD content; the video player playing the received segment of the VOD content; and while playing the segment of the VOD content, receiving from a server a message comprising ad break information for the ad break, wherein the ad break information for the ad break comprises ad duration information for enabling the device to determine whether the ad break is at least partially unfilled, a set of ads are selected for the ad break while the video player plays a segment of the VOD content, the set of ads comprising a last ad for the ad break, the ad break is partially unfilled, and the method further comprises: the video player determining, based on the ad break information for the ad break, that the ad break is partially unfilled; and as a result of determining that the ad break is partially unfilled, the video player automatically skipping to the end of the ad break after playing the last ad for the ad break”} can be used without the need of {“receiving a first message transmitted by a video player device, wherein the first message is a request for a server-side ad insertion (SSAI) enabled manifest for a video-on-demand (VOD) session for VOD content, wherein the VOD session includes at least one ad break; after receiving the request for the manifest, transmitting the manifest to the video player device; after transmitting the manifest to the video player device, receiving a second message transmitted by the video player device while the video player device was playing a segment of the VOD content; and in response to receiving the second message from the video player device, performing a process comprising: i) requesting ads for the ad break, and ii) after ads for the ad break have been selected, transmitting to the video player a message comprising ad break information for the ad break, wherein the ad break information for the ad break comprises ad duration information for enabling the video player device to determine whether the ad break is at least partially unfilled”}, as recited in the independently claimed invention (group III). Therefore; inventions of group II and group III are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. See MPEP § 806.05(d).
Because these inventions are independent or distinct for the reasons given above, because the search required for Invention group I, is not necessarily required for Invention group II and/or Invention group III due to their different scope and subject, and vice versa, restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper since it’s a serious burden for the examiner to examine all of these amended claims.
Again, restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all these inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because the inventions require a different field of search, restriction for examination purposes as indicated above is proper
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, the newly added claims Group II {Claims 23-29, and 30-36} and newly added claims Group III {Claims 37-38} are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention.
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.
4. The claimed invention (Claims 1-22) are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) abstract ideas including “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity”, and/or “Mental Process”, which has/have been identified/found by the courts as abstract ideas in MPEP 2106.04(a). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because It/they is/are recited at a high level of generality and/or are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in the computer applications:
5. Step 1: Does the Claim Fall within a statutory Category?
Claims 1-6, 7-15 and 16-22: Yes, these claims are method, and therefore are directed to the statutory class of process.
6. Step 2A prong 1, Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B:
Independent claims 1, 7 and 16 (Step 2A, Prong I): are directed to an abstract idea of “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” ; and/or “Mental Process”:
Independent claim 1 (Step 2A Prong I):
In claim 1, steps 1-6 of receiving a manifest for playing a media item, the manifest comprising: first content break segment locator information for a first content break in the media item, the first content break segment locator information for enabling to request a first set of content break segments, the first content break segment locator information comprising: i) a first set of segment identifiers (SIDs) or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the first set of SIDs; first media item segment locator information for enabling to request a first set of media item segments of the media item, the first media item segment locator information comprising: i) a second set of SIDs or 11) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the second set of SIDs; and second content break segment locator information for a second content break in the media item, the second content break segment locator information for enabling to request a second set of content break segments, the second content break segment locator information comprising: i) a third set of SIDs or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the third set of SIDs, the first set of SIDs comprising a first SID and a second SID (step 1); after receiving the manifest, sending a content break information request for content break information regarding the first content break (step 2); and receiving a response to the content break information request, the response comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a set of content items selected for the first content break or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items selected for the first content break, wherein the response to the content break information request does not include 1) duration information specifying a total duration of a second set of content items, if any, selected for the second content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration of the content items, if any, selected for the second content break (step 3); after receiving the response: i) determining, based on the information included in the response, to use first SID to obtain a media segment; and ii) determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID (step 4); after determining to use the first SID to obtain a media segment: sending a request comprising the first SID; after transmitting the request, receiving a response comprising a media segment; and after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment (step 5); and as a result of determining to skip the second SID: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment, or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (step 6) fall within “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract idea because these steps mainly describe the concepts of commercial or legal interactions (relating to agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations).
Further, step 4 mentioned above of “after receiving the response: i) determining, based on the information included in the response, to use first SID to obtain a media segment; and ii) determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID” also fall within the abstract “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas since this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a human being can observing/evaluating/analyzing the information included in the response in order to determine whether to use first SID to obtain a media segment and whether to skip the second SID.
Independent claim 7 (Step 2A prong I):
Claim 7, Steps 1-4 of “receiving a manifest for playing a media item, the manifest comprising: segment locator information for a content break in the media item, the segment locator information for enabling to request a set of content break segments, the segment locator information comprising: i) a set of segment identifiers (SIDs) or ii) SID template information that can be used to generate the set of SIDs, and the content break having a duration (step 1); after receiving the manifest, sending a content break information request for content break information regarding the content break (step 2); receiving a response to the content break information request (step 3); and based on information included in the response to the content break information request, determining that the content break should be shortened (step 4); and after determining that the content break should be shortened: sending a request comprising the first SID; after transmitting the request comprising the first SID, receiving a response comprising a media segment; after receiving the response comprising the media segment, playing the media segment; and skipping the second SID, wherein skipping the second SID comprises: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID (step 5) fall within “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract idea because these steps mainly describe the concepts of commercial or legal interactions (relating to agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations).
In addition, in claim 7, step 4 mentioned above of “based on information included in the response to the content break information request, determining that the content break should be shortened” also fall within the abstract “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas since this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a human being can observing/evaluating/analyzing the information included in the response to the content break information request in order to determine that the content break should be shortened.
Independent claim 16 (Step 2A prong I):
Claims 16, steps 1-4 of a manifest for playing a media item is provided to the player, the manifest comprising: first segment locator information for enabling the player to request a first set of media item segments of the media item, the first segment locator information comprising: i) a first set of segment identifiers (SIDs) or ii) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the first set of SIDs; and second segment locator information for a content break in the media item, the second segment locator information for enabling the player to request a set of content break segments, the second segment locator information comprising: i) a second set of SIDs or 11) SID template information that can be used by the player to generate the second set of SIDs, the second segment locator information following the first segment location information in the manifest (step 1); after the manifest is provided, receiving a request for a media item segment included in the first set of media item segments, wherein the request for the media item segment comprises one of the SIDs included in the first set of SIDs (step 2); after receiving the request, sending a content break selection request to another party, wherein a set of zero or more content items are selected for the content break (step 3); receiving a response responsive to the content break selection request, wherein the response comprises a first ad SID or information from which the first ad SID can be derived (step 4); after receiving the response responsive to the content break selection request, creating a mapping that maps a SID include in the second set of SIDs to the first ad SID (step 5); providing content break information for the content break, the content break information comprising: 1) duration information specifying a total duration of all of the content items selected for the content break and/or 2) information that can be used to derive the total duration (step 6); receiving from the player a first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID (step 7); in response to receiving the first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID, using the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID to obtain the first ad SID (step 8); and
after obtaining the first ad SID: using the first ad SID to retrieve a first ad segment and then providing to the player the first ad segment, or providing to the player a redirect message comprising the first ad SID (step 9) fall within “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract idea because these steps mainly describe the concepts of commercial or legal interactions (relating to agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations).
Further, in claim 16, step 8 mentioned above of “in response to receiving the first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID, using the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID to obtain the first ad SID (step 8)” also fall within the abstract “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas since this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a human being can observing/evaluating/analyzing the SID mapped to the first ad SID in the received first segment request and observing/evaluating/analyzing the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID in order to obtain the first ad SID.
Independent claim 1, Step 2A (Prong II): Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea(s) as pointed out above. This judicial exception(s) is/are not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites additional element (i.e., a player/the player) to perform abstract steps/limitations 1-6 mentioned above. The additional element(s) in all of the steps is/are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception(s) using a generic computer component(s) (i.e., a player/the player ….); thus, it does not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, in claim 1, the receiving and sending data steps of (e.g., sending a request/transmitting a request…; receiving a response…./receiving the response…..) are merely receiving data and sending/transmitting/displaying data, which are considered as “insignificant extra solution activity”; thus, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Again, these above additional element(s) does/do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. For the above-mentioned reasons, viewed the claim as a whole, the additional elements/additional limitations individually and in combination do not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself.
Independent claim 7, Step 2A (Prong II): Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea(s) as pointed out above. This judicial exception(s) is/are not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites additional element (i.e., a player/the player) to perform abstract steps/limitations 1-4 mentioned above. The additional element(s) in all of the steps is/are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception(s) using a generic computer component(s) (i.e., a player/the player ….); thus, it does not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, in claim 7, the receiving and sending data steps of (e.g., sending a request/transmitting a request…; receiving a response…./receiving the response…..) are merely receiving data and sending/transmitting/displaying data, which are considered as “insignificant extra solution activity”; thus, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Again, these above additional element(s) does/do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. For the above-mentioned reasons, viewed the claim as a whole, the additional elements/additional limitations individually and in combination do not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself.
Independent claim 16, Step 2A (Prong II): Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea(s) as pointed out above. This judicial exception(s) is/are not integrated into a practical application. In particular, please note that there is no recitation of any structure (e.g., a processor ...) to perform the steps 1-4 in claim 16 at all. The additional element (e.g., a player/the player) is merely recited as destination and/or source, where information (e.g., a manifest, and content break information for the content break) are being sent to, and where information (e.g., a request for a media item segment….) is being received from, which is considered as general link to technological environment; thus, it does not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Similarly, another additional element in claim 16 (e.g., a server) is merely recited as a destination, wherein information (e.g., content break selection request) is being sent to, which is considered as general link to technological environment; thus, it does not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Further, in claim 16, the receiving and sending data steps of (e.g., receiving a response…; receiving from the player a first segment….; providing to the player the first ad segment; providing to the player a redirect message….etc….,) are merely receiving data and sending/transmitting/displaying data, which are considered as “insignificant extra solution activity”; thus, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Again, these above additional element(s) does/do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. For the above-mentioned reasons, viewed the claim as a whole, the additional elements/additional limitations individually and in combination do not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself.
Independent claim 1 (step 2B): The additional element in claim 1 “i.e., a player/the player ….) is/are recited at a high level of generality and/or are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in the computer applications; thus, they are not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. In other word, the underlined additional elements “i.e., a player/the player ….…” is/are amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception(s) of steps/limitations 1-4 mentioned above; thus, they are not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. see MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, in claim 1, the receiving and sending data steps of (e.g., sending a request/transmitting a request…; receiving a response…./receiving the response…..) are merely receiving data and sending/transmitting/displaying data, which are considered as “insignificant extra solution activity”; they are not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
When revaluating the receiving and sending data steps in claim 1 mentioned above of (e.g., sending a request/transmitting a request…; receiving a response…./receiving the response…..) in step 2B here, the receiving data and sending data/transmitting data/ displaying data are also well-understood, routine and conventional activities. The use of generic computer to store information, transmit/display information/data and receive/gather information/data through an unspecified generic computer does not impose any meaningful limit on the computer implementation of the abstract idea, and is/are considered as well-understood, routine, conventional activity. According to MPEP 2106.05 (d), elements that the Courts have recognized as well-understood, routine, conventional activity in particular fields are e.g., "Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93”. Thus, evidences has been provided to show these additional elements are well-understood, routine, conventional activity according to MPEP 2106.07 (a) (III). Therefore, for the above mentioned reasons, viewed as a whole, even in combination, the above additional steps/additional elements/additional limitations do not amount to significantly more/do not provide an inventive concept. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself.
Independent claim 7 (step 2B): The additional element in claim 7 “i.e., a player/the player ….) is/are recited at a high level of generality and/or are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in the computer applications; thus, they are not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. In other word, the underlined additional elements “i.e., a player/the player ….…” is/are amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception(s) of steps/limitations 1-4 mentioned above; thus, they are not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. see MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, in claim 7, the receiving and sending data steps of (e.g., sending a request/transmitting a request…; receiving a response…./receiving the response…..) are merely receiving data and sending/transmitting/displaying data, which are considered as “insignificant extra solution activity”; they are not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
When revaluating the receiving and sending data steps in claim 7 mentioned above of (e.g., sending a request/transmitting a request…; receiving a response…./receiving the response…..) in step 2B here, the receiving data and sending data/transmitting data/ displaying data are also well-understood, routine and conventional activities. The use of generic computer to store information, transmit/display information/data and receive/gather information/data through an unspecified generic computer does not impose any meaningful limit on the computer implementation of the abstract idea, and is/are considered as well-understood, routine, conventional activity. According to MPEP 2106.05 (d), elements that the Courts have recognized as well-understood, routine, conventional activity in particular fields are e.g., "Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93”. Thus, evidences has been provided to show these additional elements are well-understood, routine, conventional activity according to MPEP 2106.07 (a) (III). Therefore, for the above mentioned reasons, viewed as a whole, even in combination, the above additional steps/additional elements/additional limitations do not amount to significantly more/do not provide an inventive concept. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself.
Independent claim 16 (step 2B): Again, please note that there is no recitation of any structure (e.g., a processor ...) to perform the steps 1-4 in claim 16 at all. In claim 16, The additional element (e.g., a player/the player) is merely recited as destination and/or source, where information (e.g., a manifest, and content break information for the content break) are being sent to, and where information (e.g., a request for a media item segment….) is being received from, which is considered as general link to technological environment; thus, it is not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Similarly, another additional element in claim 16 of (e.g., a server) is merely recited as a destination, wherein information (e.g., content break selection request) is being sent to, which is considered as general link to technological environment; thus, it is not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Further, in claim 16, the receiving and sending data steps of (e.g., receiving a response…; receiving from the player a first segment….; providing to the player the first ad segment; providing to the player a redirect message….etc….,) are merely receiving data and sending/transmitting/displaying data, which are considered as “insignificant extra solution activity”; thus, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
When revaluating the receiving and sending data steps in claim 16 mentioned above of (e.g., receiving a response…; receiving from the player a first segment….; providing to the player the first ad segment; providing to the player a redirect message….etc.,.) in step 2B here, the receiving data and sending data/transmitting data/ displaying data are also well-understood, routine and conventional activities. The use of generic computer to store information, transmit/display information/data and receive/gather information/data through an unspecified generic computer does not impose any meaningful limit on the computer implementation of the abstract idea, and is/are considered as well-understood, routine, conventional activity. According to MPEP 2106.05 (d), elements that the Courts have recognized as well-understood, routine, conventional activity in particular fields are e.g., "Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93”. Thus, evidences has been provided to show these additional elements are well-understood, routine, conventional activity according to MPEP 2106.07 (a) (III). Therefore, for the above mentioned reasons, viewed as a whole, even in combination, the above additional steps/additional elements/additional limitations do not amount to significantly more/do not provide an inventive concept. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8-15 and 17-22 are merely add further details of the abstract steps/elements recited in claims 1, 7 and 16 without including an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, looking at the limitations as an ordered combinations adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself. Therefore, dependent claims 2-6, 8-15 and 17-22 are also non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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.
8. Rejection under 103 for amended independent claim 7 and their dependency has been withdrawn since the amended independent claim 7 as a whole recites a combination of limitations that has been found as define over prior art of record.
Prior Art that is pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure
9. The prior art made of record is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Loheide et al; (US 2022/0368967 A1), wherein teaches A system is provided for publishing a plurality of disparate live media output stream manifests using live input streams and pre-encoded media assets. A first instruction, comprising input manifest locations, is allocated to a first worker based on an instruction type and a priority level. At least one of a first manifest data or a second manifest data is read by the first worker from a corresponding input manifest location. A second instruction is allocated to a second worker. A next manifest segment is inserted to a disparate live output stream manifest by the second worker based on reading an ingested manifest metadata. Accordingly, a plurality of disparate live media output stream manifests is generated for each of a plurality of channels based on the disparate live output stream manifest.
Long et al; (US 2010/0205049 A1), wherein teaches Managing advertisements for multimedia content delivered over the Internet for a live event. In one embodiment, the method receives the multimedia content over a network connection for playback on a media player, and receives a first advertisement marker that indicates a first start time and a first scheduled duration of a first advertisement break. The method adjust the first scheduled duration to a first adjusted portion, and selects one or more advertisements for playback on the media player to fill the first adjusted duration of the first advertisement break, instead of the first scheduled duration.
Mills et al; (US 10,217,138 B1), wherein teaches Aspects of server-side advertisement injection are described. In one embodiment, a computing device includes logic that receives a request for content from a client device. The logic identifies a targeted advertisement for a user of the client device based on information in the request. The logic further obtains a manifest file associated with the requested content, generates a second manifest file based on a combination of the first manifest file and the targeted advertisement, and transmits the second manifest file to the client device. Because the second manifest file includes references to clips of the content and the targeted advertisement, the client device can play back the content and advertisement without the necessary processing overhead required to manage client-side buffering and insertion of the advertisement within the content.
Leheide et al; (US 2021/0368221 A1), wherein teaches A system is provided for managing a pre-encoded media asset for immediate playback. The system generates, based on a receipt of an initial manifest request from a first client device, an initial pre-encoded media asset manifest that comprises an initial set of programming content segments. The generated initial pre-encoded media asset manifest, as a first disparate live media output stream manifest, is communicated to a media player of the first client device via a content delivery system for an immediate playback of a pre-encoded media asset. The system assigns a unique SID to the first client device to record a session of the first client device for a subsequent manifest request or a final manifest request associated with the initial manifest request. A final pre-encoded media asset manifest is generated upon a receipt of the subsequent manifest request from the first client device based on a defined criterion.
Macaulay et al; (US 2014/0365491 A1), wherein teaches A first splicer manages a get-list request coming (1-1) from a player and parameterized with an identifier of a first content and a group identifier. It obtains (1-2, 1-3) an initial playlist comprising a first URI template (pointing towards a first server and pre-parameterized with the identifier of the first content) and a first list of segment identifiers (each, when used as a parameter of the first template, making it possible to generate an URI pointing towards a segment of the first content). It builds and transmits (1-4 to 1-9) a final playlist to the player comprising a second URI template (pointing to a second splicer, possibly coinciding with the first splicer and pre-parameterized with the identifier of the first content and the group identifier) and a second list of virtual segment identifiers (each making it possible, when used as a parameter of the second template, to generate an URI pointing to one of the virtual segments). Each virtual segment is associated with a segment of the first content or of an alternative content).
Kummer; (US 20150358688 A1), wherein teaches Various arrangements, including systems, methods, apparatuses, and computer-readable mediums for incentivizing content viewer feedback are detailed herein. In some embodiments, a first television program with at least one commercial break is output. At least one television commercial for presentation during a first commercial break may be output. For the at least one television commercial, a rating from a viewer may be received. An incentive value determined based on at least the rating of the at least one commercial may be calculated. A second duration may be selected from a group comprising a first duration and a second duration based on the calculated incentive value, wherein the second duration is shorter than the first duration. A second commercial break of the selected second duration may be output.
Pressnell et al; (US 11,659,259 B1), wherein teaches A method that includes receiving a manifest associated with a video, wherein the manifest indicates an insertion point for a first ad break and the manifest comprises first ad break duration information indicating a duration of the first ad break. The method also includes: generating a modified manifest, wherein generating the modified manifest comprises inserting into the manifest at the insertion point first segment locator information for causing a player to request a number of segments, wherein the first segment locator information comprises a first uniform resource locator (URL) or URL template information for generating the first URL, and wherein the first URL includes a segment identifier, and further wherein the modified manifest comprises segment duration information specifying a segment duration associated with the segment identifier. The method also includes providing the modified manifest to a player; receiving from the player a segment request comprising the segment identifier; and, in response to receiving the segment request comprising the segment identifier, providing to the player a segment or a redirect message for causing the player to request the segment, wherein the segment is either a segment identified by the segment identifier or another segment, and the duration of the segment is less than the segment duration associated with the segment identifier.
Biordammen et al; (US 2015/0067722 A1), wherein teaches An adaptive bit rate system uses adaptive streaming to deliver content to client devices capable of adaptive bit rate streaming. Techniques for averting or inhibiting ad skipping by an adaptive bit rate client device that receives media chunks from the adaptive bit rate system may include techniques for both live content and on demand content. Techniques include modifying a buffer size for access to trick plays and/or constructing a manifest file with limited content based on ad breaks.
Loheide et al; (US 2020/0204834 A1), wherein teaches Provided are a system and method for publishing a disparate live media output stream manifest that includes one or more media segments corresponding to key events. The system comprises one or more processors that generate a programming schedule, based on a synchronization of one or more disparate sub-systems in the system, includes one or more key events that occurred from a starting point until a current live point in a live input stream. Further, a reference clock provides a reference time to synchronize the one or more disparate sub-systems. Based on the programming schedule, one or more processors insert the current live point and one or more media segments corresponding to the one or more key events that occurred prior to the current live point included in a live input stream manifest into a disparate live media output stream manifest, which is further published based on the insertion.
Czeck et al; (US 2017/0085933 A1), wherein teaches A method of handling advertisements in an adaptive bitrate stream is provided. The method includes the steps of receiving an adaptive bitrate stream playlist listing chunk identifiers pointing to a plurality of media chunks, analyzing the playlist to find one or more advertising chunks, modifying the adaptive bitrate stream playlist with a client device when the client device has been set to skip advertisements by deleting chunk identifiers associated with advertising chunks from the playlist, retrieving and playing back media chunks according to the playlist, and setting a no-trick-play flag at the client device during playback of the one or more advertising chunks when the client device has not been set to skip advertisements, such that trick-plays through and over media chunks are allowed when the no-trick-play flag is not set and are not allowed when the no-trick-play flag is set.
Further, see additional references cited in PTO-892.
Response to Arguments
10. Regarding 103: Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 for independent claim 7 and its dependency has been withdrawn because amended independent claim 7 as a whole recites a combination of limitations that has been define over prior art of record.
Regarding 101: Applicant’s arguments regarding 101 (claims 1, 7 and 16) on pages 16-18 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Please see the response below. Also, the Office respectfully submits that if the Applicant has questions regarding the 101 rejection, please contact the Examiner for the interview.
11. Responding back to Applicant regarding 101 on pages 16-18 in the Applicant’s remarks:
Regarding independent claim 1:
On page 16, Applicant argued: “In an effort to achieve compact prosecution and move claim 1 to allowance, claim 1 is amended to require: determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID; [and] as a result of determining to skip the second SID: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content
segment, or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID. This specific feature added to claim 1 provides a technological improvement because either: 1) processing resources and battery resources are saved because the content will not be played or 2) processing resources and network resources will be saved because the player will refrain from sending a request.”
The Office’s response: However, the Office respectfully submits that looking at Applicant arguments, many of these claimed features/limitations {e.g., determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID; and as a result of determining to skip the second SID: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment, or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID} that were called “Abstract Idea(s)” as indicated in the previous office action and also under 101 rejection above (in step 2A prong 1) are said to be “technical features/technical improvement” (step 2A prong 2 and/or step 2B) by the Applicant. In other word, Applicant seems to use the “Abstract idea” steps/limitations in arguing for technical improvement, which is not persuasive. Under Alice, the claim must include additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (step 2A prong II) or amount to significantly more than the exception (step 2B). Here, in claim 1, the additional element (i.e., a player/the player) is merely recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception(s) (identified in step 2A prong 1 under 101’s rejection above). Thus, this additional element does not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application, and is not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
The Office respectfully submits that the solution that asserted by the Applicant above {e.g., 1) processing resources and battery resources are saved because the content will not be played or 2) processing resources and network resources will be saved because the player will refrain from sending a request} are not specifically reflected/ recited in the claim. For example, in claim 1, there is no recitation of specific technical details of how “skip the second SID based on the information included in the response” is determined/ accomplished by a player/the player that result in the solution that asserted above by the Applicant. In claim 1, “a player/the player” is only merely the idea of a solution or outcome. According to MPEP 2106.05(f), “Whether the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished”. Again, the additional element (e.g., a player/the player) is merely instruction that apply the identified abstract idea, which is not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. Therefore, the Office respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s assertion that “claim 1 provides a technological improvement”.
On pages 16-17, Applicant further argued: “According to M.P.E.P. § 2106.04, an additional claim element or a combination of claim elements that is directed to "[a]n improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field" integrates a judicial exception into a practical application. Moreover, Applicant directs the Office's attention to the recent precedential decision in Ex parte Desjardins, Appeal No. 2024-000567, which reversed a § 101 rejection for claims involving mathematical concepts in machine learning. In Ex parte Desjardins, Director Squires found that the claims integrated the abstract idea into a practical application by improving machine learning technology, and in particular, by addressing the technical problem of "catastrophic forgetting" in continual learning systems through specific limitations that reduced storage requirements and preserved task performance. Because the claimed invention provides an improvement to video streaming technology by saving processing resources, batter resources, and/or network resources claim 1 is directed to "an improvement to the technology or technical field," and thus amended claim 1 is not directed to an abstract idea”
The Office’s response: However, the Office respectfully submits again that in the claimed invention (e.g., claim 1), the additional element (i.e., a player/the player) is merely recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception(s) (identified in step 2A prong 1 under 101’s rejection above). Thus, this additional element does not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application, and is not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Therefore, again, viewed the claim 1 as a whole, the additional element/additional limitation individually and in combination do not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application and do not provide inventive concept. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself as asserted by the Applicant.
Also, Applicant seems to rely on Ex parte Desjardins in arguing that the claims integrated the abstract idea into a practical application. However, the Office respectfully submits that in Desjardins, an additional element (e.g., machine learning model) that is directed to "an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field" integrates a judicial exception into a practical application because: In Step 2A Prong Two, the Appeal Review Panel (ARP) determined that the specification identified improvements as to how the machine learning model itself operates, including training a machine learning model to learn new tasks while protecting knowledge about previous tasks to overcome the problem of “catastrophic forgetting” encountered in continual learning systems. Importantly, the ARP evaluated the claims as a whole in discerning at least the limitation “adjust the first values of the plurality of parameters to optimize performance of the machine learning model on the second machine learning task while protecting performance of the machine learning model on the first machine learning task” reflected the improvement disclosed in the specification. Accordingly, the claims as a whole integrated what would otherwise be a judicial exception instead into a practical application at Step 2A Prong Two, and therefore the claims were deemed to be outside any specific, enumerated judicial exception.
There is no similarity between the claimed invention (e.g., claim 1) and Desjardins. Again, in the claimed invention (e.g., claim 1), the additional element (i.e., a player/the player) is merely recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the identified judicial exception(s) of {e.g., determining, based on the information included in the response, to skip the second SID; and as a result of determining to skip the second SID: i) sending a request comprising the second SID, receiving a response comprising a content segment associated with the second SID, and refraining from playing the content segment, or ii) refraining from sending the request comprising the second SID}. The solution that asserted by the Applicant above (e.g., provides an improvement to video streaming technology by saving processing resources, batter resources, and/or network resources ) are not specifically reflected/ recited in the claim. For example again, in claim 1, there is no recitation of specific technical details of how “skip the second SID based on the information included in the response” is determined/ accomplished by a player/the player that result in the solution that asserted above by the Applicant. In claim 1, “a player/the player” is only merely the idea of a solution or outcome. According to MPEP 2106.05(f), “Whether the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished”. Again, the additional element (e.g., a player/the player) is merely instruction that apply the identified abstract idea, which is not significantly more than the identified abstract idea. Therefore, the Office respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s assertion that the claimed invention “is directed to "an improvement to the technology or technical field” as in Desjardins.
For the above mentioned reasons, the Office respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s assertion that the claimed invention is similar with Desjardins and disagrees with the Applicant’s assertion that: “the claimed invention provides an improvement to video streaming technology by saving processing resources, batter resources, and/or network resources claim 1 is directed to "an improvement to the technology or technical field," and thus amended claim 1 is not directed to an abstract idea””.
On page 17, Applicant asserted: “Lastly, Applicant points out that Director Squires has stated that "§§ 102, 103 and 112 are the appropriate tools to limit patent protection to its proper scope, and that these sections "should be the focus of examination." Ex parte Desjardins, Appeal 2024-000567, Application 16/319,040 (Sept. 26, 2025).
The Office’s response: While the Office respectfully agrees with the Applicant’s assertion that “"§§ 102, 103 and 112 are the appropriate tools to limit patent protection to its proper scope…”, the Office respectfully submits that 101 is also as an important tool as 102, 103 and 112 in determining patentability. MPEP 2013 requires that 101, 102, 103 and 112 have to be performed in order to determine whether the claimed invention complies with 101, 102, 103 and 112 requirements. According to MPEP 2013 VI. “Once examiners have completed the above analyses of the claimed invention under all the statutory provisions, including 35 U.S.C. 101, 35 U.S.C. 112, 35 U.S.C. 102, and 35 U.S.C. 103, they should review all the proposed rejections and their bases to confirm that a prima facie case of unpatentability exists. Only then should any rejection be imposed in an Office action”.
Further, the Office respectfully submits that even though, the claimed invention (claims 1, 7 and 16) as a whole recite a combination of limitations (abstract idea) that have been found as novelty. Please note that specific/narrow/novel abstract idea is still an abstract idea. See the July 2015 update page 3, the Courts indicate: "When identifying abstract ideas, examiners should keep in mind that judicial exceptions need not be old or long-prevalent, and that even newly discovered judicial exceptions are still exceptions, despite their novelty. For example, the mathematical formula in Flook, the laws of nature in Mayo and the isolated DNA in Myriad were all novel, but nonetheless were considered by the Supreme Court to be judicial exceptions because they were ‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ that lie beyond the domain of patent protection”. Please also see at least Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 112 USPQ2d 1750 (Fed. Cir. 2014) as an example. Further, please see buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 112 USPQ2d 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2014), which stated that “in defining the excluded categories, the Court has ruled that the exclusion applies if a claim involves a natural law or phenomenon or abstract idea, even if the particular natural law or phenomenon or abstract idea at issue is narrow. Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1303”. In other word, buySAFE , Flook, Myriad, and Ultramercial are examples of where a narrow/specific abstract or novel abstract idea are still considered abstract ideas. Furthermore, see the recent case: SAP America v. Investpic (Fed Cir, 2017-2081, 5/15/2018), wherein the Court indicates a new or novel abstract idea is not enough to pass 101. Inaddition, see MPEP 2106.05(a) further explains this when it state “It is important to note, the judicial exception alone cannot provide the improvement” and MPEP 2106.05(a)(II) where it states “However, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology”.
For the above mentioned reasons, rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 for independent claim 1 still remain and/or given. Dependent claims are dependent of their base claim 1. Applicant did not have any further argument for the dependent claims beyond their dependency on the independent claim, which have been addressed above. Therefore, the rejections on these claims remain and/or given.
Regarding independent claim 7:
Claim 7 recite similar features/limitations as in claim 1; thus, are still rejected under 101 for the same/similar reasons as in claim 1. Dependent claims are dependent of their base claim 7. Applicant did not have any further argument for the dependent claims beyond their dependency on the independent claim, which have been addressed above. Therefore, the rejections on these claims remain and/or given.
Regarding independent claim 16:
On pages 17-18, Applicant argued: “In an effort to achieve compact prosecution and move claim 16 to allowance, claim 16 is amended to require: receiving a response responsive to the content break selection request wherein the response comprises a first ad SID or information from which the first ad SID can be derived; after receiving the response responsive to the content break selection request, creating a mapping that maps a SID included in the second set of SIDs to the first ad SID; receiving from the player a first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID; in response to receiving the first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID, using the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID to obtain the first ad SID; and after obtaining the first ad SID: using the first ad SID to retrieve a first ad segment and then providing to the player the first ad segment, or providing to the player a redirect message comprising the first ad SID. These specific feature added to claim 16 provide a technological improvement because the content for the content break does not need to be obtained at the time the manifest is sent to the player, but is obtained later in response to a request from the player, which means that if the user stops watching the video before the player sends that request, then processing and network resources will be saved because the system will not have unnecessarily obtained the content for the contact break. Accordingly, amended claim 16 is not directed to an abstract idea.”
The Office’s response: However, the Office respectfully submits that what Applicant are referring above (e.g., the content for the content break does not need to be obtained at the time the manifest is sent to the player, but is obtained later in response to a request from the player, which means that if the user stops watching the video before the player sends that request, then processing and network resources will be saved because the system will not have unnecessarily obtained the content for the contact break) are not specifically reflected/recited in the claim 16. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Again, the Office respectfully submits that looking at Applicant arguments, many of these claimed features/limitations {e.g., receiving a response responsive to the content break selection request wherein the response comprises a first ad SID or information from which the first ad SID can be derived; after receiving the response responsive to the content break selection request, creating a mapping that maps a SID included in the second set of SIDs to the first ad SID; receiving from the player a first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID; in response to receiving the first segment request comprising the SID mapped to the first ad SID, using the mapping that maps the SID to the first ad SID to obtain the first ad SID; and after obtaining the first ad SID: using the first ad SID to retrieve a first ad segment and then providing to the player the first ad segment, or providing to the player a redirect message comprising the first ad SID} that were called “Abstract Idea(s)” as indicated in the previous office action and also under 101 rejection above (in step 2A prong 1) are said to be “technical features/technical improvement” (step 2A prong II and/or step 2B) by the Applicant. In other word, Applicant seems to use the “Abstract idea” in arguing for technical improvement, which is not persuasive. Please note again that under Alice, the claim must include additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (step 2A prong II) or amount to significantly more than the exception (step 2B). Here, in claim 16, the additional element (e.g., a player/the player) is merely recited as destination and/or source, where information (e.g., a manifest, and content break information for the content break) are being sent to, and where information (e.g., a request for a media item segment…., a first segment request….. etc.,…) is being received from, which is considered as general link to technological environment; thus, it does not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Similarly, another additional element in claim 16 (e.g., a server) is merely recited as a destination, wherein information (e.g., content break selection request….etc.,…) is being sent to, which is considered as general link to technological environment; thus, it does not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Therefore, again, viewed the claim 1 as a whole, the mentioned additional elements/additional limitations individually and in combination do not integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application and do not provide inventive concept. Furthermore, there is neither improvement to another technology or technical field nor an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself as asserted by the Applicant.
For the above mentioned reasons, rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 for independent claim 16 still remain and/or given. Dependent claims are dependent of their base claim 16. Applicant did not have any further argument for the dependent claims beyond their dependency on the independent claim, which have been addressed above. Therefore, the rejections on these claims remain and/or given.
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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thuy Nguyen whose telephone number is 571-272-4585 and fax number is 571-273-4585. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thurs, 8:30 am to 5: 00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Ilana Spar can be reached on 571-270-7537. The FAX 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.
/THUY N NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3622.
Prosecution Insights