DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s submission of Information Disclosure Statements on 3/18/2025, 12/22/2025, and 4/8/2026 have been received and considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 7 recites a “third game video” without earlier referencing a second game video. Claim 7 depends from claim 1, which recites a “first game video” but neither claim 1 nor claim 7 recite a second game video. It appears that the recited “third game video” should be replaced with “second game video” to reduce any confusion of whether two or three game videos are claimed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 8, the recitation “determining recommendation scores” appears in line 2 and the recitation “determining a recommendation score” appears in line 6. It is unclear if each video has one or two scores. Clarification is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
2019 PEG Analysis
Step 1: Are the claims directed to a statutory category (e.g., a process, machine, etc.)
Claims 14-20 are directed to an apparatus. Claims 1-13 are directed to a process.
Step 2A (Prong 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature or natural phenomenon?
Yes, the claims recite an abstract idea. The following specific limitations in the claims under examination recite an abstract idea:
Determining/Generating an account tag (i.e., a profile) based on play activity (e.g., claims 1, 2, 14, and 15)
Determining/Selecting a key frame or a second key frame (i.e., a thumbnail image or snippet preview) (e.g., claims 4-6 and 17-19)
Canceling a video to play different video (e.g., claim 7)
Determining a recommendation score for a video (e.g., claims 8 and 10)
Weighting account tags (e.g., claims 9, 10)
Purchasing virtual items (e.g., claims 11-13)
The above listed identified limitations fall within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in the 2019 PEG:
Mental Processes: concepts performed in the human mind (including on observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion).
Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity: managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions or relationships of interaction between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions.
The claims are primarily directed to selecting videos to display including determining a recommendation score and then offering items for purchase, wherein all of these features may be performed by a human mind. That is, a person can generate a video playlist relevant to a game player profile. Additionally, the recited abstract ideas can also be considered a certain metho of organizing human activity by building relationships between a game player and someone teaching the player via recommending game play assist videos or someone selling something via offering virtual items for purchase in the videos.
Step 2A (Prong 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
Overall, the following additional claim limitations appear to merely implement the abstract idea, add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, or generally link the judicial exception to a particular environment or field of use, as outlined below:
Displaying information, including a video interface and video preview information (e.g., claims 1, 3, 12, 14, 16, insignificant extra-solution activity);
Playing a video (e.g., claim 1, insignificant extra-solution activity),
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
With regard to claims 1-20 the claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. The above listed additional claim limitations display and process game data in a well-understood, routine, and conventional way. Further, the computer hardware of claim 1 (e.g., a processor and presentation assembly) are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
In order to satisfy the Berkheimer factual determination of conventional elements in the art, U.S. Patent No. 7,819,742 to Chamberlain is cited for disclosing the conventional features of a game machine including processors (e.g., see at least column 11, lines 14-16) and displays (e.g., see column 7, lines 12-25). Therefore, claims 1-20 are not patent eligible under 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7, 8, 14-18 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0146250 Sherwani.
Regarding claim 1, Sherwani discloses a method for playing a first game video (e.g., see at least paragraph 7 that discloses playing a video file over a portion of video game content of a video game), the method comprising: displaying a video playing interface in a game application (e.g., see Figs. 6-10 for images of video playing interfaces in a game application; see also paragraph for discussion of graphical user interface for a video game player and a video game platform); displaying preview information of at least one game video of a game video library (e.g., see at least Fig. 10 that shows a help video including a preview information including text “Change tires on the care to go faster”), the preview information including description information that is determined based on an account tag of a user account and content of the first game video from the at least one game video (e.g., see at least paragraphs 75 and 76 for discussion of user profiles which are equivalent to an account tag of a user account), the account tag being determined based on game play activity information of the user account associated with the game application (e.g., see at least paragraphs 75 and 76 for discussion of user profiles which are equivalent to an account tag of a user account; see also paragraph 36 and 52 for discussion of activity identifiers); and based on a user operation being performed on the first game video from the at least one game video, playing the first game video in the video playing interface (e.g., see at least paragraph 97 that discuses “playing the audio-visual content”; see also Fig. 11 for image of a video playing interface);
[claim 2] further comprising: generating the account tag based on the game play activity information (e.g., see at least paragraphs 75 and 76 for discussion of user profiles which are equivalent to an account tag of a user account), the game play activity information indicating at least one of: a number of times a virtual character has been used (e.g., see at least paragraph 78, that events are triggered based on “character statistics”), a number of times a virtual item has been used, a number of games played in different game positions, or achievement scores associated with different virtual characters (e.g., see at least paragraph 78, that events are triggered based on “score”);
[claim 3] wherein the description information is displayed in at least one of a recommendation tag format associated with the first game video; a video title format associated with the first game video (e.g., see at least Fig. 10 that shows a help video including a preview information including text “Change tires on the care to go faster”); or a preview image format associated with the first game video ((e.g., see at least Fig. 10 that shows a help video including a preview information including text “Change tires on the care to go faster”);
[claim 4] wherein the playing the first game video comprises: determining a first key frame from at least one key frame in the first game video (e.g., see at least Fig. 10 that shows a help video including a preview information including text “Change tires on the care to go faster”); and playing the first game video from the first key frame (e.g., see at least paragraph 97 that discuses “playing the audio-visual content”; see also Fig. 11 for image of a video playing interface);
[claim 5] wherein the determining the first key frame comprises: selecting, as the first key frame, a key frame from the at least one key frame that matches the account tag based on content information of each of the at least one key frame in the first game video (e.g., see at least Fig. 10 that shows a help video including a preview information including text “Change tires on the care to go faster”, based on game play data);
[claim 7] wherein the displaying the video playing interface comprises: selecting a video channel in the game application; displaying the video playing interface of the game application; playing a third [second] game video in a full screen mode in the video playing interface (e.g., see at least paragraph 97 discloses playing a video in “full screen” mode), the third game video being selected from the game video library based on the account tag (e.g., see also Fig. 12 that shows multiple videos, 1.) Change tires and 2.) Drop spikes); based on the user operation being performed on the first game video, cancelling the playing of the third game video in the video playing interface (any video can be closed); and playing the first game video in the video playing interface (e.g., see at least paragraph 97 that discuses “playing the audio-visual content”; see also Fig. 11 for image of a video playing interface); and
[claim 8] further comprising: determining recommendation scores for a plurality of game videos in the game video library by, for each game video of the plurality of game videos (e.g., see at least paragraphs 8 and 13 that discusses ranking mechanic/video content “based on the score”): determining a correlation between video information for the respective game video and the account tag of the user account, and determining a recommendation score for the respective game video based on the correlation (e.g., see at least paragraph 8 that discusses using an activity identifier to related to offered video content); selecting at least one recommended game video from the game video library based on the recommendation scores (e.g., see at least paragraphs 8 and 13 that discusses ranking mechanic/video content “based on the score”); and displaying the preview information for the selected at least one recommended game video in the video playing interface (e.g., see at least Fig. 10 that shows a help video including a preview information including text “Change tires on the care to go faster”).
Regarding claims 14-18 and 20, Sherwani discloses an apparatus as set forth above in detail for claims 1-5, 7, and 8, which are similar in scope.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherwani in view of U.S. Patent No. 9,715,901 to Singh.
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Sherwani discloses all of the recited features but is silent regarding a video playback that includes first and second key frames that play first and second video segments.
Reasonably pertinent to the problem face, Singh teaches a video playback that includes first and second key frames that play first and second video segments (e.g., see at least column 20, lines 3-13 that discusses first and second snippet preview videos that can be played in a continuous or sequential order).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify Sherwani with first and second video preview segments as taught by Singh in order to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. In this case, providing multiple video preview segments provides the user with multiple preselected snippets to view to increase the user’s ability to determine if watching the entire video is warranted.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shewani in view of Singh as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0146244 to Sherwani (hereinafter Sherwani ‘244).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Sherwani discloses all of the recited features but is silent regarding a video playback that includes weights associated with the account tags and adjusting the account tags/weights based on game play activity.
Reasonably pertinent to the problem face, Sherwani ‘244 teaches a video playback that includes weights associated with the account tags and adjusting the account tags/weights based on game play activity (e.g., see at least paragraphs 102 and 103 that discusses in-game characteristics scores that can be weighted that are personalized/adjusted by the user).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify Sherwani with weighted scores as taught by Sherwani ‘244 in order to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. In this case, weighting scores allows the recommendation system to better reflect the factors that are most important, thereby leading to better video content recommendations.
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherwani in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0172098 to Singh in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0172098 to Lewis.
Regarding claims 11-13, Sherwani in combination with Singh make obvious all of the recited features but are silent regarding purchasing virtual items in a video including after a predetermine timestamp.
Reasonably pertinent to the problem face, Lewis purchasing virtual items in a video including after a predetermined timestamp (e.g., see at least Fig. 5, including a purchase of a virtual item from a user in Step 512; see also Step 504 that indicates that the purchase is part of video content; see also paragraph 28 for discussion of the purchase opportunity “presented at any suitable time” including a break in presentation).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify Sherwani with virtual object purchase in video content as taught by Lewis in order to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. In this case, allowing a user to purchase video objects in video content allows the game publisher to generate income.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0260475 to Dzjind discusses customized video content previews (e.g., see at least paragraphs 5 and 38)
U.S. Patent No. 10,104,403 to Ekambaram discusses snippet augmentation for videos (e.g., see at least Fig. 5)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0378863 to Shlens discusses selecting representative video frames for videos (e.g., see at least Figs. 1 and 2)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0265737 to Issa discusses publishing key frames of a video content item (e.g., see at least Figs. 1 and 2)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0006368 to Mei discusses automatic video recommendation with weights (e.g., see at least Fig. 1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES S MCCLELLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:30AM-5:00PM).
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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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.
/James S. McClellan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights