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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/20/2024 and 07/02/2025 filed on or after the effective filing date of the instant application on 11/20/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “an initiation module”, “an obtaining module” and “an insertion module” in claim 8.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 limitations “an initiation module”, “an obtaining module” and “an insertion module” in claim 8 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 2-6, 8 and 10-16 are 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.
Claims 2, 4, 11 and 13 recite “and/or” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the following features are part of the claim. See MPEP 2173.05(d).
For the purpose of examination, Examiner interprets “and/or” as “or”.
Claim 2 and claim 11 also recites the limitation "the first unreached" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 6 and claim 15 recites the limitation "the group consistent of" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites “An electronic device, comprising:… the storage apparatus to implement an insertion method, wherein the insertion method comprises:…”, which corresponds to an improper hybrid claim.
MPEP 2173.05(p) states: a single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See in re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, 639 F.3d 1305, 1318, 97 USFQ2dd 1737, 1748-49 (Fed. Cir. 2011). In Katz, a claim directed to "[a] system with an interface means for providing automated voice messages...to certain of said individual callers, wherein said certain of said individual callers digitally enter data” was determined to be indefinite because the italicized claim limitation is not directed to the system, but rather to actions of the individual callers, which creates confusion as to when direct infringement occurs. Katz, 639 F.3d al 1278, 97 USPQ2d at 1749 (citing JPXL Holdings v. Amazon.com, Inc., 430 F.3d 1377, 1384, 77 USPQ2d 1740, 1145 (Fed. Cir. 2005), in which a system claim that recited "an input means” and required a user to use the input means was found to be indefinite because it was unclear “whether infringement... occurs when one creates a system that allows the user [to use the input means], or whether infringement occurs when the user actually uses the input means."); Ex parte Lyell, 17 USPO2d 1548 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990) (claim directed to an automatic transmission workstand and the method of using it held ambiguous and properly rejected under 35 U.S.C 112, second paragraph).
Other dependent claims are rejected the same.
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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grover (US 2022/0036399).
Regarding claim 1, Grover discloses an insertion method (Figures 3 and 5), comprising:
initiating a data request in response to determining that a request moment is reached in a process of playing a target media file, wherein the data request is used for obtaining a target promotion file (¶ [0156]-[0159] for determining a time point of upcoming modification opportunity starts in timeline of playing a received content; and ¶ [0163]-[0164] for transmitting a supplement content request in response to determining an upcoming modification opportunity start-time);
obtaining a target request sequence and a display moment of the target promotion file in response to the target promotion file being successfully obtained (¶ [0167]-[0175] for receiving a linear sequence of content segments including supplemental content with modification start-time; ¶ [0199]-[0200] and ¶ [0207]-[0208] for receiving a second replacement advertisement segment with a modification start-time in response to the first replacement advertisement segment being received and a re-evaluation request being sent), wherein the target request sequence comprises a plurality of target moments arranged in time order, the plurality of target moments comprise a first target moment and a second target moment, the first target moment is used for representing a request moment at which the target promotion file is successfully requested, the second target moment is used for representing an estimated request moment for requesting other target promotion file for the first time after the target promotion file is successfully obtained this time (Figures 3 and 5 for received linear sequence of content segments having a timeline with a plurality of time points comprising a modification start-time for representing a display time of received supplemental content, and an modification end-time for representing a next estimated or modifiable request time for other advertisement segment; and ¶ [0207]-[0208] for repeatedly sending re-evaluation request on a periodic basis prior to a detected upcoming modification opportunity start-time), and the target request sequence is a candidate sequence with a highest promotional value among at least one candidate sequence that satisfies a user experience constraint (¶ [0149], ¶ [0165]-[0166], ¶ [0196] and ¶ [0203]-[0206] for the linear sequence of content segments that includes selected supplement content segments with a highest CPM and a remaining number of impressions that are more targeted to end-user and satisfy a probability constraint); and
inserting and playing the target promotion file in the process of playing the target media file based on the display moment of the target promotion file (Figures 3 and 5; and ¶ [0175]-[0181] for inserting and playing the received supplement content or the replacement advertisement based on the modification start-time of the supplement content or the replacement advertisement).
Regarding claim 2, Grover discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Grover further discloses wherein the obtaining a target request sequence, comprises:
generating the at least one candidate sequence that satisfies the user experience constraint, with each candidate sequence comprising at least the first target moment, wherein the user experience constraint comprises that a time difference between any two initial candidate moments in a candidate sequence is greater than a first preset difference (¶ [0203]-[0206]), and/or that a difference between the first unreached second target moment in the candidate sequence and the display moment is greater than a second preset difference (and/or being interpreted as or, therefore, the limitations after that are not considered to be met);
determining a promotional value of each candidate sequence; and determining the candidate sequence with the highest promotional value as the target request sequence (¶ [0165]-[0166] and ¶ [0196]).
Regarding claim 3, Grover discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 2. Grover further discloses wherein the generating the at least one candidate sequence that satisfies the user experience constraint, with each candidate sequence comprising at least the first target moment, comprises:
generating a plurality of initial candidate moments, wherein the plurality of initial
candidate moments comprise at least the first target moment; determining a search range in the plurality of initial candidate moments according to a filtering rule, wherein remaining initial candidate moments after filtering comprises at least the first target moment; and searching for the at least one candidate sequence that satisfies the user experience constraint in the search range, with each candidate sequence comprising at least the first target moment (¶ [0203]-[0206]).
Regarding claim 4, Grover discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 3. Grover further discloses wherein the filtering rule comprises a first filtering rule, the first filtering rule is used for representing filtering out an initial candidate moment of which a first attribute value does not satisfy a corresponding condition (¶ [0203]) and/or a second filtering rule, the second filtering rule is used for representing filtering out any initial candidate moment in a target initial candidate moment pair, wherein two adjacent initial candidate moments with a time interval less than a third preset difference are the target initial candidate moment pair (and/or being interpreted as or, therefore, the limitations after that are not considered to be met).
Regarding claim 5, Grover discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 2. Grover further discloses wherein the determining a promotional value of each candidate sequence, comprises: obtaining a second attribute value corresponding to each initial candidate moment in each candidate sequence; and determining a promotional value corresponding to each candidate sequence based on the second attribute value corresponding to each initial candidate moment in each candidate sequence (¶ [0022]-[0023], ¶ [0166], ¶ [0191] and ¶ [0196]).
Regarding claim 6, Grover discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 5. Grover further discloses wherein the second attribute value comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of an effective cost per mille, an interruption rate of ending the playback of the target media file caused by inserting the target promotion file corresponding to the initial candidate moment, a probability value of the target media file being played to the initial candidate moment, and content understanding information (¶ [0022]-[0023], ¶ [0166], ¶ [0191], ¶ [0196] and ¶ [0203]-[0206]).
Regarding claim 7, Grover discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Grover further discloses wherein the request moment comprises a first request moment and a second request moment, the first request moment is a first request moment for requesting each target promotion file, the second request moment is a moment at intervals of a first preset duration with the first request moment as a start moment (Figures 3 and 5), and the initiating a data request in response to determining that a request moment is reached, comprises:
initiating the data request in response to determining that the request moment is reached (¶ [0156]-[0164]); and initiating the data request in response to arriving at the second request moment and the target promotion file being still not successfully obtained, until the target promotion file is successfully requested and obtained (¶ [0208]).
Regarding claims 8-9, all limitations of claims 8-9 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, all functionalities of an electronic device in claim 10 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claim 1. Grover discloses an electronic device, comprising: a storage apparatus having a computer program stored thereon; and a processing apparatus (Figure 2).
Regarding claims 11-16, all limitations of claims 11-16 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claims 2-7 respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIGI L DUBASKY whose telephone number is (571)270-5686. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00.
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at 571-272-1915. 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.
/GIGI L DUBASKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421