Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot in light of new grounds of rejection.
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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined 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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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 eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 2 and 12 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 31 of U.S. Patent No. 12,170,826 in view of in view of Lim et al. (US 2015/0317041 A1) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 2009/0172512 A1).
Present Claims
2. A method comprising:
detecting, at a first device connected to a first communication network, consumption of a first content item;
receiving, from a second device, an indication related to a second content item, the second content item received at the second device proximate to the first device and connected to a second communication network;
determining a first priority level associated with the first content item;
determining a second priority level associated with the second content item; and
based on determining that the second priority level is higher than the first priority level:
modifying an output characteristic of the first content item; and displaying, at the first device, a notification related to the indication.
U.S. Patent No. 12,170,826
31. A computer-implemented method comprising:
detecting that first content is being played at a first computing device;
determining that the first content being played at the first computing device is of a first genre;
determining that second content of a second genre is being played at a second computing device proximate to the first computing device, wherein the first genre is different from the second genre; and
based on determining that the second content of the second genre is being played at the second computing device proximate to the first computing device while the first content of the first genre is being played at the first computing device, accessing stored data comprising indications of a plurality of genre pairs and corresponding flags, each flag indicating whether one of the genres of the respective genre pair is to be prioritized over the other genre of the genre pair when devices proximate to each other are respectively playing content of the genres of the genre pair; and
based on accessing the stored data and determining that a particular genre pair of the plurality of genre pairs corresponds to the first and second genres, causing output characteristics of the second content being played at the second computing device to be modified to prioritize the playing of the first content of the first genre over the playing of the second content of the second genre in accordance with the flag stored in association with the particular genre pair.
Claims 2 and 12 do not disclose a first device connected to a first communication network and a second device connected to a second communication network.
Lim discloses that it was known for multiple devices to connect to multiple difference communication networks (See [0022-0024] a first device as a mobile device and second device such as a STB, computer, etc. See [0028-0029] ); receiving an indication related to a content item received on a second device proximate a first device (See [0130-0140] providing notification information from notification module based indicative of a content event or content type priority) and connected to a second communication network (See [0020] The first device (interpreted as the second device) can communicate with the second device with communication path 104, such as a wireless or wired network); and displaying a notification related to the indications (See [0138-0139] content event or content type is prioritized and a corresponding notification is provided).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the known parent claim with the known methods of Lim predictably resulting in a first device connected to a first communication network and a second device connected to a second communication network by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of using multiple devices with access to multiple network types.
Claims 2 and 12 do not disclose the first priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with the first content item; and the second priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with second content.
Sakaguchi discloses that it was known to determine priority levels between different content items based at least in part on metadata associated with the content items and modifying output characteristics of a content item (See [0064] and [0062-0065]).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination further with the known methods of Sakaguchi predictably resulting in the first priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with the first content item; and the second priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with second content item by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of prioritizing output characteristics of different content genres when simultaneously viewing as suggested by Sakaguchi.
Claim 2 and 12 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 31 of U.S. Patent No. 11,722,747 in view of in view of Lim et al. (US 2015/0317041 A1) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 2009/0172512 A1).
Present Claims
2. A method comprising:
detecting, at a first device connected to a first communication network, consumption of a first content item;
receiving, from a second device, an indication related to a second content item, the second content item received at the second device proximate to the first device and connected to a second communication network;
determining a first priority level associated with the first content item;
determining a second priority level associated with the second content item; and
based on determining that the second priority level is higher than the first priority level:
modifying an output characteristic of the first content item; and displaying, at the first device, a notification related to the indication.
U.S. Patent No. 11,722,747
31. A method comprising: by using a memory and a control circuitry: detecting a first content stream consumed on a first device and a second content stream consumed on a second device; determining that the first content stream consumed on the first device is interrupting the second content stream consumed on the second device; in response to determining that the first content stream consumed on the first device is interrupting the second content stream consumed on the second device: accessing a first user identifier of a user of the first device; accessing a second user identifier of a user of the second device; determining whether the first user identifier is different from the second user identifier; performing a selected action based on whether the first user identifier is different than the second user identifier, wherein: when the first user identifier is different than the second user identifier, the selected action comprises modifying output characteristics of the first device where the first content stream is being consumed to reduce the interruption of the first content stream to the second content stream consumed on the second device, and when the first user identifier is the same as the second user identifier, the selected action comprises determining a priority device between the first device and the second device, and modifying the output characteristics of the non-priority device between the first device and the second device.
Claims 2 and 12 do not disclose a first device connected to a first communication network and a second device connected to a second communication network.
Lim discloses that it was known for multiple devices to connect to multiple difference communication networks (See [0022-0024] a first device as a mobile device and second device such as a STB, computer, etc. See [0028-0029] ); receiving an indication related to a content item received on a second device proximate a first device (See [0130-0140] providing notification information from notification module based indicative of a content event or content type priority) and connected to a second communication network (See [0020] The first device (interpreted as the second device) can communicate with the second device with communication path 104, such as a wireless or wired network); and displaying a notification related to the indications (See [0138-0139] content event or content type is prioritized and a corresponding notification is provided).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the known parent claim with the known methods of Lim predictably resulting in a first device connected to a first communication network and a second device connected to a second communication network by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of using multiple devices with access to multiple network types.
Claims 2 and 12 do not disclose the first priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with the first content item; and the second priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with second content.
Sakaguchi discloses that it was known to determine priority levels between different content items based at least in part on metadata associated with the content items and modifying output characteristics of a content item (See [0064] and [0062-0065]).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination further with the known methods of Sakaguchi predictably resulting in the first priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with the first content item; and the second priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with second content item by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of prioritizing output characteristics of different content genres when simultaneously viewing as suggested by Sakaguchi.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 2-6, 8, 10, 12-16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolph et al. (US 2008/0043996 A1) in view of Lim et al. (US 2015/0317041 A1) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 2009/0172512 A1).
Regarding claim 2 and 12, Dolph discloses a method and system comprising:
a memory; and
control circuitry configured to:
detecting, at a first device connected to a first communication network (See [0028] [0033] local area connection), consumption of a first content item (See [0011] [0024] [0032] [0034] detection of audio at devices with varying levels of priority);
determining a first priority level associated with the first content item ([0024] [0029][0032] [0034] determining a higher or lower priority for a device and by association the content played on the device is played at a higher or lower priority. For example the first device can be interpreted as lower priority device and have its volume decreased or a higher priority device and have its volume increased.);
determining a second priority level associated with the second content item ([0024] [0029][0032] [0034] determining a higher or lower priority for a device and by association the content played on the device is played at a higher or lower priority. ) the second device being proximate to the first device (See [0034] [0052] ambient noise detection; see also [0028] proximate devices plug and play ); and
based on determining that the second priority level is higher than the first priority level ([0024] [0029][0032] [0034] [0052] the second priority can be the priority device such as a television):
modifying an output characteristic of the first content item([0024] [0029][0032] [0034] [0052] the second device having higher priority such as a television results in the volume being lower on the non-priority device ); and
Dolph does not disclose receiving, from a second device, an indication related to a second content item, the second content item received at the second device proximate to the first device and connected to a second communication network; and displaying, at the first device, a notification related to the indication.
Lim discloses that it was known for multiple devices to connect to multiple difference communication networks (See [0022-0024] a first device as a mobile device and second device such as a STB, computer, etc. See [0028-0029] ); receiving an indication related to a content item received on a second device proximate a first device (See [0130-0140] providing notification information from notification module based indicative of a content event or content type priority) and connected to a second communication network (See [0020] The first device (interpreted as the second device) can communicate with the second device with communication path 104, such as a wireless or wired network); and displaying a notification related to the indications (See [0138-0139] content event or content type is prioritized and a corresponding notification is provided).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the known system of Dolph with the known methods of Lim predictably resulting in receiving, from a second device, an indication related to a second content item, the second content item received at the second device proximate to the first device and connected to a second communication network; and displaying, at the first device, a notification related to the indication by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of informing users when higher priority content is available or an operation involving higher priority content is executed.
Dolph and Lim do not explicitly disclose the first priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with the first content item; and the second priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with second content item.
Sakaguchi discloses that it was known to determine priority levels between different content items based at least in part on metadata associated with the content items and modifying output characteristics of a content item (See [0064] and [0062-0065]).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify combination further with the known methods of Sakaguchi predictably resulting in the first priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with the first content item; and the second priority level is determined based at least in part on metadata associated with second content item by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of prioritizing output characteristics of different content genres when simultaneously viewing as suggested by Sakaguchi.
Regarding claim 3 and 13, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi further disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the indication is transmitted from the second device to the first device using the second communication network (See Lim [0020-0023] mobile device communicating with computer; see [0028] the communication path can be cellular, WiFI, etc.).
Regarding claim 4 and 14, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi further disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the first communication network is different that the second communication network (See Lim [0028] the first communication network can be Wide area network, LAN, Ethernet, the second network can be cellular communication).
Regarding claim 5 and 15, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi further disclose the method of claim 4, wherein the first communication network is a local area network and the second communication network is a cellular network (See Lim [0028] the first communication network can be Wide area network, LAN, Ethernet, the second network can be cellular communication).
Regarding claim 6 and 16, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi further discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the second content item is an alert (See Lim [0043] amber alert, breaking news).
Regarding claim 8 and 18, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi further disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the output characteristic of the first device is a volume, and wherein modifying the output characteristic of the first device comprises reducing the volume of and output of the first device (See [0011] decreasing the volume of the non-priority device).
Regarding claim 10 and 20, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the second device is one of a plurality of second devices, and wherein determining the second priority level is based on whether the second content item is received by at least one other device of the plurality of second devices (See [0045] [0169] [0171] Fig 3 synchronization when the program is on another device.).
Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolph et al. (US 2008/0043996 A1) in view of Lim et al. (US 2015/0317041 A1) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 2009/0172512 A1) and in view of Brodersen et al. (US 2008/0066100 A1).
Regarding claim 9 and 19, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi disclose the method of claim 2, but do not disclose wherein the notification comprises a selectable element, the method further comprising: based on receiving a selection of the selectable element, displaying at least a portion of the second content item at the first device.
Brodersen discloses that it was known to provide a notification with selectable elements to display content (See Figs 7-11).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination with the known methods of Brodersen predictably resulting in the notification comprises a selectable element, the method further comprising: based on receiving a selection of the selectable element, displaying at least a portion of the second content item at the first device by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of providing additional information as suggested by Brodersen.
Claim(s) 11 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolph et al. (US 2008/0043996 A1) in view of Lim et al. (US 2015/0317041 A1) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 2009/0172512 A1) and in view of Laurent et al. (US 2013/0335629 A1).
Regarding claim 11 and 21, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi the method of claim 2, wherein the metadata associated with the second content item is received via the first communication network.
Laurent discloses that it was known to provide content information as metadata for content received via a second network through a first network (See [0023-0037] providing timing metadata regarding synchronizing second content with first content through the first network).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination with the known methods of Brodersen predictably resulting in the second priority level is determined based on metadata associated with the second content item by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of providing additional information as suggested by Brodersen.
Claim(s) 7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolph et al. (US 2008/0043996 A1) in view of Lim et al. (US 2015/0317041 A1) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 2009/0172512 A1) in view of Seo et al. (US 2016/0301976 A1).
Regarding claim 7 and 17, Dolph Lim and Sakaguchi further disclose the method of claim 2 and decreasing a volume of a non-priority device see Dolph [0011], but does not explicitly disclose wherein the output characteristic of the first content item a luminance of the first device.
Seo discloses that it was known to adjust a luminance of a device based on content (See [0162] when the broadcast content is a sports program the controller can increase the brightness and saturation.).
Prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify combination with the known methods of Seo predictably resulting in the output characteristic of the first content item a luminance of the first device by applying the court recognized rational of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. The modification would have the benefit of controlling an image quality of a display as suggested by Seo.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDO ALCON whose telephone number is (571)270-5668. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-7:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Pendleton can be reached at (571)272-7527. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
FERNANDO . ALCON
Examiner
Art Unit 2425
/FERNANDO ALCON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425