DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in response to application 18/914,610 filed 10/14/2024.
Claims 2-21 are presented for examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based e-Terminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An e-Terminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about e-Terminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Instant Application 18/914,610 independent claims 2, 13, 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over independent claims 2, 13, 21 of U.S. Patent No. 12155889, independent claims 2, 12, 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11818418, independent claims 1, 15, 20 of U.S. Patent No. 10728607, independent claims 21, 34, 40 of U.S. Patent No. 10334308, and independent claims 1, 14, 17 of U.S. Patent No. 9912980 in combination with dependent claims (see table below). Instant Application 18/914,610 independent claims 2, 13, 21 are not patentably distinct from claims 2, 13, 21 of U.S. Patent No. 12155889, independent claims 2, 12, 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11818418, independent claims 1, 15, 20 of U.S. Patent No. 10728607, independent claims 21, 34, 40 of U.S. Patent No. 10334308, and independent claims 1, 14, 17 of U.S. Patent No. 9912980. The claims of the instant application are not patentable distinct from the claims of the parent application U.S. Patent No. 12155889. Independent claim 2 of the parent for monitoring user actions with respect to content programs, analyzing those actions to determine a level relative to a threshold, automatically adding and removing content programs from a user profile based on the threshold, generating a favorites list in response to a request, and presenting the favorites list to the user. The only difference in wording- referring to content programs “playable on a viewing device” rather than “accessible via a digital receiver”- does not change the scope of the claim, as both phrases describe the content access and playback environment disclosed throughout the specification. In addition, dependent claims 3-12 of the instant application are identical to dependent claims 3-12 of parent U.S. Patent No. 12155889 No additional structure or technical limitations is introduced in the instant application. Accordingly, the claims are not patentably distinct (see table below).
Instant Application 18/914,610
Parent Pat 12155889
Not Patentably Distinct
Independent Claims 2, 13, 21:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs playable on a viewing device;
analyzing, using one or more hardware processors, the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program;
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store;
automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold;
in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and
causing presentation of the favorites list to the user.
Claim 3
Claim 4,14
Claim 5,15
Claim 6,16
Claim 7,17
Claim 8,18
Claim 9,19
Claim 10,20
Independent Claims 2, 13, 21:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs accessible via a digital receiver;
analyzing, using one or more hardware processors, the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program;
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store;
automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold;
in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and
causing presentation of the favorites list to the user.
Claim 3
Claim 4,14
Claim 5,15
Claim 6,16
Claim 7,17
Claim 8,18
Claim 9,19
Claim 10,20
Analysis:
The wording difference reflects the same content access and playback environment and does not alter claim scope.
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Identical wording
Instant Application 18/914,610
Parent Pat 11818418
Not Patentably Distinct
Independent Claims 2, 13, 21:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs playable on a viewing device;
analyzing, using one or more hardware processors, the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program;
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store;
automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold;
in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and
causing presentation of the favorites list to the user.
Independent Claims 2, 12, 21:
detecting, using one or more hardware processors, actions performed by a user with respect
to one or more content programs;
based on the detecting, determining whether levels of the actions meet or transgress both a first threshold and a second threshold, the first threshold for recording episodes of a first content program during a first predetermined period of time and the second threshold for viewing one or more recorded episodes of the first content program during a second predetermined period of time, the first predetermined period of time being a different length of time than the second predetermined period of time; and
based on the determining that the levels of the actions with respect to the first content program meet or transgress both the first threshold and the second threshold, updating a data store to indicate that the first content program is a favorites content program.
Analysis
Instant is broader, monitoring encompasses detecting user actions.
Instant is broader, parent two-threshold/time-window determination falls within the instant level/threshold analysis.
Instant is broader, indicating a favorite in a data store is encompassed by adding the program to the user profile.
Instant adds an addition step (removal). Does not provide patentable distinction over parent’s favorite-indication scheme.
Instant adds downstream favorites-list retrieval/generation. Does not provide patentable distinction where the underlying favorite-identification is already determined/stored.
Instant adds presentation, routine output of stored favorites and not a distinct invention over parent.
Instant Application 18/979,910
Parent Pat 10728607
Not Patentably Distinct
Independent Claims 2, 13, 21:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs playable on a viewing device;
analyzing, using one or more hardware processors, the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program;
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store;
automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold;
in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and
causing presentation of the favorites list to the user.
Independent Claims 1, 15, 20
monitoring, using one or more hardware processors, based on data obtained from a media device, one or more actions performed with respect to one or more content programs;
based on monitoring the one or more actions performed with respect to the one or more content programs, detecting whether the one or more actions with respect to each of the one or more content programs satisfies one or more thresholds:
based on detecting that the one or more actions with respect to a first content program of the one or more content programs satisfies a first threshold, automatically updating a data store to store first data indicating that the first content program is a favorites content program; and
based on determining that the one or more actions with respect to a second content program of the one or more content programs does not satisfy a second threshold, automatically updating the data store to store second data indicating that the second content program is not a favorites content program.
Analysis
Instant is broader, monitoring actions encompasses monitoring based on data obtained from a media device.
Instant is broader, determining a level of actions encompasses detecting whether actions satisfy one or more thresholds.
Instant is broader, adding to a user profile encompasses storing data indicating a favorites content program.
Same favorite status update concept, wording difference does not provide patentable distinction.
Instant adds favorites list retrieval/generation, downstream use of stored favorites does not provide patentable distinction.
Instant adds presentation, routine output step does not provide patentable distinction.
Instant Application 18/914,610
Parent Pat 10334308
Not Patentably Distinct
Independent Claims 2, 13, 21:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs playable on a viewing device;
analyzing, using one or more hardware processors, the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program;
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store;
automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold;
in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and
causing presentation of the favorites list to the user.
Independent Claims 21, 34, 40
monitoring, using one or more hardware processors, one or more actions performed by a user with respect to one or more content programs;
automatically, without human intervention, analyzing, using one or more hardware processors, the one or more actions performed by the user with respect to the one or more content programs, the analyzing including detem1ining whether a level of the one or more actions with respect to any of the one or more content programs satisfies a threshold;
based on determining that the level of the one or more actions with respect to a first content program of the one or more content programs satisfies the threshold, automatically updating a data store to indicate that the first content program is a favorites content program; and
based on determining that the level of the one or more actions with respect to a second content program of the one or more content programs does not satisfy the threshold, automatically updating the data store to indicate that the second content program is not a favorites content program.
Analysis
Same monitoring of user actions, processor wording does not alter scope.
Instant is broader, parent’s automatic analysis and threshold determination fall within the instant analysis.
Same favorites designation, wording difference does not provide patentable distinction.
Same favorites removal, wording difference does not provide patentable distinction.
Instant adds favorites list retrieval, downstream use of scored favorites does not provide patentable distinction.
Instant adds favorites list retrieval, downstream use of scored favorites does not provide patentable distinction.
Instant Application 18/914,610
Parent Pat 9912980
Not Patentably Distinct
Independent Claims 2, 13, 21:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs playable on a viewing device;
analyzing, using one or more hardware processors, the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program;
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store;
automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold;
in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and
causing presentation of the favorites list to the user.
Independent claims 1, 14, 17
monitoring, using one or more hardware processors, actions performed by a user at a digital receiver with respect to a plurality of content programs;
automatically without human intervention analyzing, using one or more hardware processors, the actions performed with respect to the plurality of content programs, the analyzing including determining that a level of the actions with respect to a first content program of the plurality of content programs meets or transgresses a threshold;
based on the level of the actions with respect to a first content program meeting or transgressing the threshold, storing, in a data store, an indication that the first content program is a favorites content program;
detecting a change in a level of actions with respect to a second content program previously indicated to be a favorites content program, the change in the level of the actions with respect to the second content program indicating a reduction in the level of the actions with respect to the second content program that results in the level of the actions with respect to the second content program no longer transgressing the threshold; and
in response to the detecting that the level of the actions with respect to the second content program no longer transgresses the threshold, automatically removing an indication that the second content program is a favorites content program from the data store.
Analysis
Instant is broader, monitoring actions encompasses monitoring at a digital receiver.
Instant is broader, parent’s automatic analysis and threshold determination fall within the instant analysis.
Same favorites designation, wording difference does not provide patentable distinction.
Same favorites removal, wording difference does not provide patentable distinction.
Instant adds favorites list retrieval, downstream use of stored favorites does not provide patentable distinction.
Instant adds presentation, routine output step does not provide patentable distinction.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 2, 4, 9-11, 13-14 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michael Florence, Pat No US 7,434,246 (hereafter Florence) and further in view Dunn et al., Pat No US 5,861,906 (hereafter Dunn).
Regarding Claim 2, Florence discloses a method comprising:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs playable on a viewing device [FIG.1: Discloses a TV (element 154 - a viewing device); and col.10, lines 15-21: Discloses a notification indicates that a channel activity has occurred, such as a viewer selecting and/or viewing a new channel. The notification includes the new channel and the time of the change to the new channel. The notification and viewer ID are then forwarded to a storage device, such as remote server. Selecting and viewing channels constitutes monitoring user actions with respect to content program.];
analyzing, using one or more hardware processors [col.9 lines 13-14: Discloses the server includes a processor.], the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program [col.10, lines 15-21: Discloses a viewer selecting and/or viewing a new channel (a level of actions) triggers a notification includes the new channel and the time of the change to the new channel. The notification and viewer ID are then forwarded to a storage device; and col.10 lines 37-40: Discloses storing a channel name, a channel number, a time the channel was viewed, and incrementing a counter indicating the number of times (determine a level of the actions) the channel was viewed. Viewing time and frequency counters represent levels of user actions];
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store [col.10 lines 34-36: Discloses if the calculated time difference is greater than the defined amount (a threshold), then the channels favorite table is updated (a data store). Threshold comparison automatically adds content to favorites.];
Florence does not explicitly disclose automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold; in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and causing presentation of the favorites list to the user. However, in analogous art, Dunn discloses programs are automatically removed when criteria are no longer satisfied. A table is disclosed that has a field for an expiration date associated with the listed program. The expiration date marks when the video content program will be automatically removed from the customized list [col.8 lines 46-49]. Further disclosed is the server accessing the storage medium to retrieve the viewer-configured customized list of preferred video content programs that corresponds to the viewer identified in the message and transmitting the customized list of preferred video content programs to the particular user interface unit that sent the message so that the viewer can review their customized list [claim 1, col.14 lines 22-29]. Thus, favorites list is generated and presented to the user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence with these features, as taught by Dunn in order to yield predictable result such as providing an interactive media system that automatically derives, stores, and presents user favorites based on observed viewing behavior allowing viewers to easily identify movies of interest [Dunn: col.2 lines 20-21].
Regarding Claim 4, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method of claim 2, and Florence further discloses wherein:
the actions comprise view commands to view a content program [col.7 lines 50-51: Discloses channel selection (view command); and col.8 lines 23-25: Discloses if a viewer watched CBS for 20 minutes, then, in table 400 of tables 365b (FIG. 4b), cumulative time for CBS would be updated. Watching a channel involves selecting viewing channel (view commands).]; and
the threshold comprises an amount of time that the view commands were in effect for the content program [col.6 lines 35-38: Discloses the generation engine (element 355) determines an amount of time that a channel has been viewed as measured by using time from clock (element 330). Explicitly determination of viewing time for threshold comparison.].
Regarding Claim 9, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method of claim 2, and Florence further discloses wherein the level of the actions with respect to each content program comprises an amount of time that a particular command is in effect with respect to each content program [col.6 line 67, col.7 line 1: Discloses cumulative viewing time over a predefined time. Level is expressly defined as time duration].
Regarding Claim 10, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method of claim 2, and Florence further discloses wherein the level of the actions with respect to each content program comprises a number of times that a particular command is received with respect to each content program [col.7 lines 7-9, col8, lines 25-26: Discloses frequency counter (element 414) … is the number of times that the viewer has watched a Channel.]].
Regarding Claim 11, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method of claim 2, and Florence further discloses wherein the analyzing the actions comprises aggregating the actions with respect to each content program for a predetermined period of time [col.6 lines 66-67, col.7 lines 1-2, col.8, lines 22-26: Discloses cumulative time (element 413) … over a predefined time. Cumulative time values are calculated over a predefined time period, which corresponds to aggregating actions over a predetermined period of time.].
Regarding Claim 13, Florence discloses a system comprising:
one or more processors [FIG(s).3,7 item 310, FIG.8 item 820, FIG.13 item 1300, col.5 line 6, col.9 lines 13-14: Discloses a processor.]; and
a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the one or more processors to perform operations [col.5, lines 18-22: Discloses processor (controller) (element 310) executes instructions stored in memory (element 162), specifically, generation engine (element 355), which generates a channel favorites table, and display engine (element 360), which displays the channel favorites table per a viewer's preference.] comprising:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs playable on a viewing device [FIG.1: Discloses a TV (element 154 - a viewing device); and col.10, lines 15-21: Discloses a notification indicates that a channel activity has occurred, such as a viewer selecting and/or viewing a new channel. The notification includes the new channel and the time of the change to the new channel. The notification and viewer ID are then forwarded to a storage device, such as remote server. Selecting and viewing channels constitutes monitoring user actions with respect to content program.];
analyzing the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program [col.10, lines 15-21: Discloses a viewer selecting and/or viewing a new channel (a level of actions) triggers a notification includes the new channel and the time of the change to the new channel. The notification and viewer ID are then forwarded to a storage device; and col.10 lines 37-40: Discloses storing a channel name, a channel number, a time the channel was viewed, and incrementing a counter indicating the number of times (determine a level of the actions) the channel was viewed. Viewing time and frequency counters represent levels of user actions];
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store [col.10 lines 34-36: Discloses if the calculated time difference is greater than the defined amount (a threshold), then the channels favorite table is updated (a data store). Threshold comparison automatically adds content to favorites.];
Florence does not explicitly disclose automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold; in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and causing presentation of the favorites list to the user. However, in analogous art, Dunn discloses programs are automatically removed when criteria are no longer satisfied. A table is disclosed that has a field for an expiration date associated with the listed program. The expiration date marks when the video content program will be automatically removed from the customized list [col.8 lines 46-49]. Further disclosed is the server accessing the storage medium to retrieve the viewer-configured customized list of preferred video content programs that corresponds to the viewer identified in the message and transmitting the customized list of preferred video content programs to the particular user interface unit that sent the message so that the viewer can review their customized list [claim 1, col.14 lines 22-29]. Thus, favorites list is generated and presented to the user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence with these features, as taught by Dunn in order to yield predictable result such as providing an interactive media system that automatically derives, stores, and presents user favorites based on observed viewing behavior allowing viewers to easily identify movies of interest [Dunn: col.2 lines 20-21].
Regarding Claim 14, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the system of claim 13, and Florence further discloses wherein:
the actions comprise view commands to view a content program [col.7 lines 50-51: Discloses channel selection (view command); and col.8 lines 23-25: Discloses if a viewer watched CBS for 20 minutes, then, in table 400 of tables 365b (FIG. 4b), cumulative time for CBS would be updated. Watching a channel involves selecting viewing channel (view commands).]; and
the threshold comprises an amount of time that the view commands were in effect for the content program [col.6 lines 35-38: Discloses the generation engine (element 355) determines an amount of time that a channel has been viewed as measured by using time from clock (element 330). Explicitly determination of viewing time for threshold comparison.].
Regarding Claim 19, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the system of claim 13, and Florence further discloses wherein the level of the actions with respect to each content program comprises an amount of time that a particular command is in effect with respect to each content program [col.6 line 67, col.7 line 1: Discloses cumulative viewing time over a predefined time. Level is expressly defined as time duration].
Regarding Claim 20, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the system of claim 13, and Florence further discloses wherein the level of the actions with respect to each content program comprises a number of times that a particular command is received with respect to each content program [col.7 lines 7-9, col8, lines 25-26: Discloses frequency counter (element 414) … is the number of times that the viewer has watched a Channel.].
Regarding Claim 21, Florence discloses a non-transitory machine-readable storing instructions [col.4 lines 25-26: Discloses the storage unit (element 162) can include a machine-readable storage medium.] that, when executed by one or more processors of a machine [col.5, lines 18-22: Discloses processor (controller) (element 310) executes instructions stored in memory (element 162).], causes the machine to perform operations comprising:
monitoring actions performed by a user with respect to content programs playable on a viewing device [FIG.1: Discloses a TV (element 154 - a viewing device); and col.10, lines 15-21: Discloses a notification indicates that a channel activity has occurred, such as a viewer selecting and/or viewing a new channel. The notification includes the new channel and the time of the change to the new channel. The notification and viewer ID are then forwarded to a storage device, such as remote server. Selecting and viewing channels constitutes monitoring user actions with respect to content program.];
analyzing the actions performed by the user with respect to the content programs to determine a level of the actions with respect to each content program [col.10, lines 15-21: Discloses a viewer selecting and/or viewing a new channel (a level of actions) triggers a notification includes the new channel and the time of the change to the new channel. The notification and viewer ID are then forwarded to a storage device; and col.10 lines 37-40: Discloses storing a channel name, a channel number, a time the channel was viewed, and incrementing a counter indicating the number of times (determine a level of the actions) the channel was viewed. Viewing time and frequency counters represent levels of user actions];
automatically adding a first content program that has a level of the actions that meets a threshold to a user profile of the user stored on a data store [col.10 lines 34-36: Discloses if the calculated time difference is greater than the defined amount (a threshold), then the channels favorite table is updated (a data store). Threshold comparison automatically adds content to favorites.];
Florence does not explicitly disclose automatically removing a second content program from the user profile of the user that has a level of the actions that no longer meets the threshold; in response to receiving a request for a favorites list, accessing indications of content programs from the user profile of the user and generating the favorites list based on the indications; and causing presentation of the favorites list to the user. However, in analogous art, Dunn discloses programs are automatically removed when criteria are no longer satisfied. A table is disclosed that has a field for an expiration date associated with the listed program. The expiration date marks when the video content program will be automatically removed from the customized list [col.8 lines 46-49]. Further disclosed is the server accessing the storage medium to retrieve the viewer-configured customized list of preferred video content programs that corresponds to the viewer identified in the message and transmitting the customized list of preferred video content programs to the particular user interface unit that sent the message so that the viewer can review their customized list [claim 1, col.14 lines 22-29]. Thus, favorites list is generated and presented to the user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence with these features, as taught by Dunn in order to yield predictable result such as providing an interactive media system that automatically derives, stores, and presents user favorites based on observed viewing behavior allowing viewers to easily identify movies of interest [Dunn: col.2 lines 20-21].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michael Florence, Pat No US 7,434,246 (hereafter Florence) and further in view Dunn et al., Pat No US 5,861,906 (hereafter Dunn) and further in view Gregory James Lundell, Pub No US 2014/0258481 (hereafter Lundell).
Regarding Claim 3, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method of claim 2, the combined teachings do not explicitly disclose wherein the data store resides within a cloud server. However, in analogous art, Lundell discloses a cloud computing environment to access cloud services [para.0071]. Lundell further discloses including one or more servers [para.0085] … providing cloud-based services [para.0071-0072]. Thus, under BRI, storing user data within a cloud computing environment implemented by servers reasonably reads on a data store residing within a cloud server. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence and Dunn with the data store resides within a cloud server, as taught by Lundell in order to yield predictable result such as allowing centralized storage and access to user preferences information across multiple client devices [Lundell: para.0066].
Claims 5-6, 8, 15-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michael Florence, Pat No US 7,434,246 (hereafter Florence) and further in view Dunn et al., Pat No US 5,861,906 (hereafter Dunn) and further in view Levin et al., Pub No US 2011/0283209 (hereafter Levin).
Regarding Claims 5 (and 15), the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method (and system - claim 15) of claim 2, and Florence further disclose wherein:
the threshold comprises a number of times the recording commands were received for the content program [col.8 lines 16-17: Discloses incrementing a counter indicating the number of times the channel was viewed.].
the combined teachings do not explicitly disclose the actions comprise recording commands to record a content program; However, in analogous art, Levin discloses features related to program listings may include searching for other air times or ways of receiving a program, recording a program (command), enabling series recording of a program [para.0044]. Under BRI, Levin discloses counting user action occurrences (a counter indicating “number of times” an action occurred) supports using a count-based measure as a threshold. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence and Dunn with comprise recording commands to record a content program, as taught by Levin in order to yield predictable result such as providing more effectively share information between content sources and between applications, in order to more effectively tailor how content is provided to the user [Levin: para.0002].
Regarding Claims 6 (and 16), the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method (and system - claim 16) of claim 2, and Florence further disclose wherein:
the threshold comprises a number of times the commands to set the reminder were received for the content program [col.8 lines 16-17: Discloses incrementing a counter indicating the number of times the channel was viewed.].
the combined teachings do not explicitly disclose the actions comprise commands to set a reminder to view a content program; However, in analogous art, Levin discloses features related to program listings may include … set a reminder for the program [para(s).0005, 0031, 0096]. Under BRI, Levin discloses counting occurrences of user’s actions via a counter. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence and Dunn with the threshold comprises a number of times the commands to set the reminder were received for the content program, as taught by Levin in order to yield predictable result such as providing more effectively share information between content sources and between applications, in order to more effectively tailor how content is provided to the user [Levin: para.0002].
Regarding Claims 8 (and 18), the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method (and system - claim 18) of claim 2, and Florence further disclose wherein:
the threshold comprises a number of times the commands to purchase or subscribe to the content program was received [col.8 lines 16-17: Discloses incrementing a counter indicating the number of times the channel was viewed.].
the combined teachings do not explicitly disclose the actions comprise commands to purchase or subscribe to a content program; However, in analogous art, Levin discloses features related to program listings may include … purchase or rent the program [para(s).0032]. Under BRI, Levin discloses counting occurrences of user’s actions via a counter. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence and Dunn with commands to purchase or subscribe to a content program, as taught by Levin in order to yield predictable result such as providing more effectively share information between content sources and between applications, in order to more effectively tailor how content is provided to the user [Levin: para.0002].
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michael Florence, Pat No US 7,434,246 (hereafter Florence) and further in view Dunn et al., Pat No US 5,861,906 (hereafter Dunn) and further in view Levin et al., Pub No US 2011/0283209 (hereafter Levin) and further in view Taber H. Haveliwala, Pat No US 7,756,887 (hereafter Haveliwala).
Regarding Claims 7 (and 17), the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method (and system - claim 17) of claim 2, the combined teachings do not explicitly disclose wherein: the actions comprise commands to search or browse for a content program; However, in analogous art, Levin discloses the user may search for the program [para(s).0044, 0075, 0097]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence and Dunn with commands to search or browse for a content program, as taught by Levin in order to yield predictable result such as providing more effectively share information between content sources and between applications, in order to more effectively tailor how content is provided to the user [Levin: para.0002].
the combined teachings of Florence, Dunn and Levin do not explicitly disclose the threshold comprises an amount of time a search result or browsing result for the content program is displayed for review by the user. However, in analogous art, Haveliwala discloses a length of time that a user hovers a user-controlled pointer over a display region occupied by a respective search result [claims 7, 8]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence, Dunn and Levin with comprises an amount of time a search result or browsing result for the content program is displayed for review by the user, as taught by Haveliwala in order to yield predictable result such as providing capability to collect user feedback with respect to informational items presented in response to a search query and adjusting the relevancy values of the items in accordance with the user feedback [Haveliwala: col.1 lines 56-59].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michael Florence, Pat No US 7,434,246 (hereafter Florence) and further in view Dunn et al., Pat No US 5,861,906 (hereafter Dunn) and further in view Schlack et al., Pub No US 2002/0129368 (hereafter Schlack).
Regarding Claim 12, the combined teachings of Florence and Dunn discloses the method of claim 11, the combined teachings do not explicitly disclose further comprising:
reanalyzing the actions to determine an updated level of the actions with respect to each content program as the predetermined period of time shifts by a predefined amount, the reanalyzing comprising using updated monitored actions corresponding to an updated predetermined period of time. However, in analogous art, Schlack discloses a sliding window is a window of specific duration, which is continually translated forward in time along a time axis. As the sliding window moves along the time axis, data within the sliding window are monitored [para.0207]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Florence and Dunn with comprises this feature, as taught by Schlack in order to yield predictable result such as providing a reliable way of automatically, detecting or inferring, which specific individual or individuals, are actually watching the TV in a household comprising more than one individuals at a particular time, and for generating one or more profiles per each individual [Schlack: para.0068].
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
• Dale Llewelyn Mountain (US 9,681,176) – Discloses automatically populating the list with the second television channel without end-user input includes monitoring usage data and determining that the second television channel is tuned to, by an
end-user, more frequently than other television channels [col.3 lines 45-49, claim 14]. Mountain further determines whether a number of available tuners is less than, or greater than or equal to, a total number of entries within a favorite listing as accessed at step 104 of figure 1 [col.4 lines 36-38]. The television receiver determines that a number of available tuners is greater than or equal to a total number of entries within the favorites listing, Step 106 Determine number of tuners available to record favorite channels.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADIL OCAK whose telephone number is (571) 272-2774. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached on 571-272-4195. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system; contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ADIL OCAK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426