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 .
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.
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 1-2, 5-9, 12-16, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thiemert et al. (Thiemert) (US 2011/0222787).
As to claims 1, 15, Thiemert discloses a system, and corresponding method, for performing signature comparison (Fig. 1-2, paragraph 50-53), the system comprising:
a processor (212; paragraph 54-55); and
a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor (paragraph 5, 54-55), cause the system to perform operations comprising:
comparing first initial groups of monitored signatures from a sequence of monitored signatures representative of media presented by a media device with second initial groups of reference signatures from respective sequences of reference signatures representative of corresponding different reference media to determine a first initial sequence of signature match results for an observation period (comparing segments from two different streams to attempt to find matches; Fig. 9, paragraph 72-74), the first initial groups and the second initial groups to have a first size corresponding to a first number of signatures (segment comparison between two streams, using window of default initial size; Fig. 9, paragraph 72-74);
in response detecting an initial discontinuity in the first initial sequence of signature match results (“For example, if the video segment comparison module 217 does not identify any matches or below a match threshold number for a segment within the adaptive window 930”; paragraph 73), comparing third initial groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with fourth initial groups of reference signatures from the respective sequences of reference signatures to determine a second initial sequence of signature match results for the observation period, the third initial groups and the fourth initial groups to have a second size corresponding to a second number of signatures greater than the first number of signatures (video segment comparison with adaptive window increased in size; paragraph 73-74);
outputting the second initial sequence of signature match results (output of threshold # of matches, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73);
determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures (continuing the comparison matching with the next segments in the stream; paragraph 72-74), the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures (“After the video segment comparison module 217 identifies the match threshold number and/or exceeds a maximum size for the adaptive window 930, the size of the adaptive window 930 can be reset to the initial size; paragraph 73); and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results (outputting threshold, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73).
As to claim 8, Thiemert discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions (paragraph 5, 54-55) that, upon execution by a processor (212; paragraph 54-55), cause performance of a set of operations comprising:
comparing first initial groups of monitored signatures from a sequence of monitored signatures representative of media presented by a media device with second initial groups of reference signatures from respective sequences of reference signatures representative of corresponding different reference media to determine a first initial sequence of signature match results for an observation period, the first initial groups and the second initial groups to have a first size corresponding to a first number of signatures (segment comparison using window of default initial size; Fig. 9, paragraph 72-74);
in response detecting an initial discontinuity in the first initial sequence of signature match results (“For example, if the video segment comparison module 217 does not identify any matches or below a match threshold number for a segment within the adaptive window 930”; paragraph 73), comparing third initial groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with fourth initial groups of reference signatures from the respective sequences of reference signatures to determine a second initial sequence of signature match results for the observation period, the third initial groups and the fourth initial groups to have a second size corresponding to a second number of signatures greater than the first number of signatures (video segment comparison with adaptive window increased in size; paragraph 73-74);
outputting the second initial sequence of signature match results (output of threshold # of matches, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73);
determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures (continuing the comparison matching with the next segments in the stream; paragraph 72-74), the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures (“After the video segment comparison module 217 identifies the match threshold number and/or exceeds a maximum size for the adaptive window 930, the size of the adaptive window 930 can be reset to the initial size; paragraph 73); and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results (outputting threshold, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73)).
As to claim 2, 9, 16, Thiemert discloses wherein at least one of the initial discontinuity or the alternative discontinuity corresponds to discontinuous timestamps included in the respective sequence of signature match results (matching stream segments with different reference times; Table 3, paragraph 66, 71).
As to claim 5, 12, 19, Thiemert discloses wherein i) the sequence of monitored signatures includes a plurality of packets of monitored signatures reported by a device meter (Fig. 1, 21, paragraph 50-52, 96-97), and
ii) the device meter is configured to generate the plurality of packets of monitored signatures from the media presented by the media device (Fig. 1, 21, paragraph 50-52, 96-97).
As to claim 6, 13, 20, Thiemert discloses: detecting the initial discontinuity based on whether at least one match result in the first initial sequence of signature match results indicates no match was found (“For example, if the video segment comparison module 217 does not identify any matches or below a match threshold number for a segment within the adaptive window 930”; paragraph 73)
As to claim 7, 14, Thiemert discloses wherein the operations further comprise: detecting the initial discontinuity based on whether at least a portion of the first initial sequence of signature match results oscillates between at least two different reference media identifiers (requiring additional analysis to determine “best” matching when multiple are detected; Table 2-3, paragraph 70-71, 79-81).
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,160,624 in view of Thiemert.
As to claims 1, 8, 15, of the instant application, claims 1, 7, 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,160,624 disclose every limitation except for
determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results.
In an analogous art, Thiemert discloses a system for performing signature comparison (Fig. 1-2, paragraph 50-53) which will compare larger size groups of signatures for an observation period in response detecting an initial discontinuity in the first initial sequence of signature match results (increasing adaptive window size when matches are not found; paragraph 73), and
determine an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures (continuing the comparison matching with the next segments in the stream; paragraph 72-74), the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures (“After the video segment comparison module 217 identifies the match threshold number and/or exceeds a maximum size for the adaptive window 930, the size of the adaptive window 930 can be reset to the initial size; paragraph 73), and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results (outputting threshold, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73) so as to adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,160,624 to include determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results, as taught in combination with Thiemert, for the typical benefit of adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
Claims 2-3, 9-10, 16-17, correspond to claims 1, 7, 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,160,624.
Claims 4-5, 11-12, 18-19, correspond to claims 2, 8, 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,160,624.
As to claim 6, 13, 20, Thiemert discloses: detecting the initial discontinuity based on whether at least one match result in the first initial sequence of signature match results indicates no match was found (“For example, if the video segment comparison module 217 does not identify any matches or below a match threshold number for a segment within the adaptive window 930”; paragraph 73)
As to claim 7, 14, Thiemert discloses wherein the operations further comprise: detecting the initial discontinuity based on whether at least a portion of the first initial sequence of signature match results oscillates between at least two different reference media identifiers (requiring additional analysis to determine “best” matching when multiple are detected; Table 2-3, paragraph 70-71, 79-81).
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,477,501 in view of Thiemert.
Claims 1-20 of the instant application correspond to claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,477,501 except for
determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results.
In an analogous art, Thiemert discloses a system for performing signature comparison (Fig. 1-2, paragraph 50-53) which will compare larger size groups of signatures for an observation period in response detecting an initial discontinuity in the first initial sequence of signature match results (increasing adaptive window size when matches are not found; paragraph 73), and
determine an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures (continuing the comparison matching with the next segments in the stream; paragraph 72-74), the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures (“After the video segment comparison module 217 identifies the match threshold number and/or exceeds a maximum size for the adaptive window 930, the size of the adaptive window 930 can be reset to the initial size; paragraph 73), and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results (outputting threshold, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73) so as to adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,477,501 to include determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results, as taught in combination with Thiemert, for the typical benefit of adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,931,987 in view of Thiemert.
Claims 1-20 of the instant application correspond to claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,931,987 except for
determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results.
In an analogous art, Thiemert discloses a system for performing signature comparison (Fig. 1-2, paragraph 50-53) which will compare larger size groups of signatures for an observation period in response detecting an initial discontinuity in the first initial sequence of signature match results (increasing adaptive window size when matches are not found; paragraph 73), and
determine an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures (continuing the comparison matching with the next segments in the stream; paragraph 72-74), the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures (“After the video segment comparison module 217 identifies the match threshold number and/or exceeds a maximum size for the adaptive window 930, the size of the adaptive window 930 can be reset to the initial size; paragraph 73), and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results (outputting threshold, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73) so as to adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,931,987 to include determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results, as taught in combination with Thiemert, for the typical benefit of adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,321,171 in view of Thiemert.
Claims 1-20 of the instant application correspond to claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,321,171 except for
determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results.
In an analogous art, Thiemert discloses a system for performing signature comparison (Fig. 1-2, paragraph 50-53) which will compare larger size groups of signatures for an observation period in response detecting an initial discontinuity in the first initial sequence of signature match results (increasing adaptive window size when matches are not found; paragraph 73), and
determine an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures (continuing the comparison matching with the next segments in the stream; paragraph 72-74), the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures (“After the video segment comparison module 217 identifies the match threshold number and/or exceeds a maximum size for the adaptive window 930, the size of the adaptive window 930 can be reset to the initial size; paragraph 73), and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results (outputting threshold, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73) so as to adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,321,171 to include determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results, as taught in combination with Thiemert, for the typical benefit of adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 9,900,636 in view of Thiemert.
Claims 1-20 of the instant application correspond to claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 9,900,636 except for
determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results.
In an analogous art, Thiemert discloses a system for performing signature comparison (Fig. 1-2, paragraph 50-53) which will compare larger size groups of signatures for an observation period in response detecting an initial discontinuity in the first initial sequence of signature match results (increasing adaptive window size when matches are not found; paragraph 73), and
determine an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures (continuing the comparison matching with the next segments in the stream; paragraph 72-74), the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures (“After the video segment comparison module 217 identifies the match threshold number and/or exceeds a maximum size for the adaptive window 930, the size of the adaptive window 930 can be reset to the initial size; paragraph 73), and
in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results (outputting threshold, see Tables 2-3, paragraph 69-71, 73) so as to adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,900,636 to include determining an alternative sequence of signature match results for the observation period by comparing first alternative groups of monitored signatures from the sequence of monitored signatures with second alternative groups of reference signatures, the first alternative groups and the second alternative groups to have the first size corresponding to the first number of signatures of monitored signatures, and in response to detecting an absence of an alternative discontinuity in the alternative sequence of signature match results, outputting the alternative sequence of signature match results, as taught in combination with Thiemert, for the typical benefit of adaptively reduce the processing requirements and number of comparisons performed for each segment (paragraph 70, 72-74).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 10-11, 17-18 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and upon proper filing of a terminal disclaimer so as to overcome the outstanding nonstatutory Double Patenting rejections.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at (571) 272-3982. 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 R Sheleheda/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424