Detailed Action
1. This Office Action is responsive to the Preliminary Amendment filed 12/16/2024. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 2-20 have been added as new claims. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Priority
2. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
Double Patenting
3. 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 §§ 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/patent/patents-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 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
4. Claims 1-20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 5, 7-11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,438,394.
Instant Application 18/940,643
U.S. Patent No. 11,438,394
Claim 1. A method for controlling delivery of content through a server, the method comprising:
receiving, on a server, a plurality of new requests for blocks of content, wherein the plurality of new requests is received through a connection over one or more communication networks;
determining a plurality of service characteristics for at least one previous request received using the connection, wherein, for each previous request of the at least one previous request: the previous request is for a particular block of content; and
the plurality of service characteristics for the previous request comprise:
a bandwidth that corresponds to a rate of delivery for the particular block of content; and
a time differential, from when the previous request was first sent, to when the previous request was received by the server;
characterizing the connection, wherein characterizing the connection comprises estimating a plurality of underflow constraints for the plurality of new requests, based on the plurality of service characteristics; and
updating a maximum value for a measurement quantity corresponding to transmitted responses to the plurality of new requests, wherein updating the maximum value: is based on the plurality of underflow constraints; and
is performed such that the maximum value is inversely proportional to the bandwidth.
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising processing the plurality of new requests until the maximum value is reached, wherein, when the maximum value is reached, at least some of the plurality of new requests are cancelled.
Claim 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the maximum value corresponds to a cap on the plurality of new requests that can be outstanding.
Claim 4. The method of claim 2, wherein an underflow constraint of the plurality of underflow constraints accounts for delays in processing the plurality of new requests.
Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the content comprises at least one of video content; or live content.
Claim 6. The method of claim 1, wherein each block of content requested in the plurality of new requests is a fragment of a larger content file.
Claim 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of new requests that are outstanding are stored in a memory buffer.
Claim 1. A method for controlling delivery of content, the method comprising:
transmitting, to a server, a plurality of requests for blocks of the content;
while an actual number of outstanding requests is at least one:
measuring a latency of a connection between a system and the server, wherein the latency includes a time differential between a transmission of a request for a block of content from the system to the server and receipt of a first network packet associated with the block of content at the system;
measuring a bandwidth of the connection between the system and the server, wherein the bandwidth includes a size of the block divided by a time differential between the receipt of the first network packet and receipt of a last network packet associated with the block of content;
detecting a change of a service characteristic of the connection between the system and the server, where the service characteristic is based on the latency and the bandwidth;
determining a preferred number of outstanding requests based upon the service characteristic and the size of the block of content; and
adjusting the actual number of outstanding requests based on the preferred number and a count of the requests from the plurality that are still outstanding.
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the preferred number of requests is evaluated using the following expression:
PNG
media_image1.png
19
240
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where tiatency is the latency and ttransmission is a transmission time.
Claim 10. The method of claim 1 further comprising: determining whether an underflow condition has occurred; and when an underflow condition has occurred, reducing the number of outstanding requests in response to the underflow condition.
Claim 8. The method of claim 1, wherein adjusting the actual number of outstanding requests comprises cancelling at least one request of the outstanding requests.
Claim 9. The method of claim 1, wherein adjusting the actual number of outstanding requests comprises transmitting a set of one or more requests.
Claim 10. The method of claim 1 further comprising: determining whether an underflow condition has occurred; and when an underflow condition has occurred, reducing the number of outstanding requests in response to the underflow condition.
Claim 7. The method of claim 6, wherein the streaming content is from a live performance.
Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein each block of content in the plurality of requested blocks of content is a fragment of a larger content file.
Claim 11. The method of claim 1 further comprising: determining whether a buffer level exceeds a threshold; and when the buffer level exceeds the threshold, reducing the number of outstanding requests in response to the threshold being exceeded.
5. Claims 8-20 are corresponding non-transitory computer-readable medium and server claims that recite similar limitations as of method claims 1-7 and do not contain any additional limitations with respect to novelty and/or inventive steps; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
6. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-2, 5, 7-11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,438,394 substantially contains limitations of claims 1-20 of the instant application, hence, the claims 1-20 of the instant application is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over the reference claim(s). Claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the earlier patent claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. A later application claim is not patently distinct from an earlier claim if the later claim is anticipated by the earlier claim.
“A later patent claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier patent claim if the later claim obvious over, or anticipated by, the earlier claim. In re Longi, 759 F.2d at 896, 225 USPQ at 651 (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting because the claims at issue were obvious over claims in four prior art patents); In re Berg, 140 F.3d at 1437, 46 USPQ2d at 1233 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (affirming a holding obviousness-type double patenting where a patent application claim to a genus is anticipated by a patent claim to a species within that genus)”. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY vs. BARR LABORATORIES INC., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (DECIDED: May 30, 2001).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
8. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gao et al. (US 2013/0227122 A1), hereinafter “Gao”.
9. As to claim 1, Gao teaches a method for controlling delivery of content through a server, the method comprising:
receiving, on a server, a plurality of new requests for blocks of content, wherein the plurality of new requests is received through a connection over one or more communication networks (Gao, Fig. 2 shows the request accelerator send multiple requests to the server);
determining a plurality of service characteristics for at least one previous request received using the connection, wherein, for each previous request of the at least one previous request: the previous request is for a particular block of content ([0366]: the playback rate can be selected to be the same as the previous playback rate when the previous playback rate is between the lower proportional factor times the estimated download rate and the upper proportional factor times the download rate estimate); and the plurality of service characteristics for the previous request comprise: a bandwidth that corresponds to a rate of delivery for the particular block of content; and a time differential, from when the previous request was first sent, to when the previous request was received by the server (Gao, [0246]: the connection to a web server bandwidth limited to 2 mbps, the round trip time was 150 ms, and there was 0.1% packet loss);
characterizing the connection, wherein characterizing the connection comprises estimating a plurality of underflow constraints for the plurality of new requests, based on the plurality of service characteristics (Gao, [0367-0369] describes determining whether to continue or cancel the request comprises monitoring the presentation buffer, …, storing an indication of a buffer level, …, determining whether there will be enough time to complete a download for the request before the first media data should be played out, and if there is not enough time, cancelling the request); and
updating a maximum value for a measurement quantity corresponding to transmitted responses to the plurality of new requests, wherein updating the maximum value: is based on the plurality of underflow constraints; (Gao, [0367-0369]: where the download rate unexpectedly falls, the receiver decides whether to cancel its current request for lower playback rate media or let the current request play out. Cancelling a high playback rate request and replacing it with a lower playback rate request may result in the contents of the sensation buffer lasting longer); and is performed such that the maximum value is inversely proportional to the bandwidth (Gao, [0362-0363]: the duration of the estimation period might be taken to be proportional to the number of bytes of unconsumed media data in the presentation buffer at a measuring time, and/or a function of an addition rate at which media is added to the presentation buffer, and/or proportional to a time used to download a predetermine portion of the presentation buffer).
10. As to claim 2, Gao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising processing the plurality of new requests until the maximum value is reached, wherein, when the maximum value is reached, at least some of the plurality of new requests are cancelled (Gao, [0367-0369]).
11. As to claim 3, Gao teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the maximum value corresponds to a cap on the plurality of new requests that can be outstanding (Gao, [0367-0369]).
12. As to claim 4, Gao teaches the method of claim 2, wherein an underflow constraint of the plurality of underflow constraints accounts for delays in processing the plurality of new requests (Gao, [0006]: If the fill level is above a high fill threshold, the receiver does not make further requests and eventually the fill level goes down. If the fill level is below a low fill threshold, the receiver starts the downloading and updates the fill level as media data is consumed by the presentation element).
13. As to claim 5, Gao teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the content comprises at least one of video content; or live content (Gao, [0065]: a user requests a particular media content, such as a live sports broadcast).
14. As to claim 6, Gao teaches the method of claim 1, wherein each block of content requested in the plurality of new requests is a fragment of a larger content file (Gao, [0002] and [0306]: a content provider formats content into segments, fragments, representations, adaptations and the like).
15. As to claim 7, Gao teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of new requests that are outstanding are stored in a memory buffer (Gao, [0004]: The request accelerator comprises a request data buffer for buffering requests).
16. As to claims 8-20, claims 8-20 are corresponding non-transitory computer-readable medium and server claims that recite similar limitations as of method claims 1-7 and do not contain any additional limitations with respect to novelty and/or inventive steps; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
17. Further references of interest are cited on Form PTO-892, which is an attachment to this Office Action.
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANG N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-3886.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s SPE, Wing Chan, can be reached at (571) 272-7493. The fax phone number for the organization 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.
/QUANG N NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2441