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 .
Claim Objections
The limitations and punctuation make claim 4, 14 unclear. It is unclear as to whether the “transmitting an alert” limitation is dependent upon the (a) and (b) step or the first “determining step”. Clarification is required to make the limitation more clear.
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.
Claim(s) 4, 6-8, 11-14, 16-18, 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Narasimhan (US 2013/0159876) in view of Kuncl (US 2014/0282721).
Regarding claim 4, 14, Narasimhan discloses A method comprising:
identifying a first device associated with a user wherein the first device is displaying a first media asset ([0038, 0039, 0049] The television (first device) is displaying media);
determining that the user is not engaged with the first device that is displaying the first media asset based at least in part on ([0023, 0038, 0039, 0049] The system monitors a viewer’s attention between a television and phone):
determining that the user is consuming at least one second media asset using a
second device associated with the user([0003, 0004, 0023, 0038, 0039, 0049], claim 1 The smartphone (second device) is a media consumption device that displays media and interactive content); and
based at least in part on (a) the determining that the user is not engaged with the first device([0023, 0038, 0039, 0049] It can be determined that a user is paying more attention to their phone and less on the television).
Narasimhan does not specifically disclose based at least in part on(b) determining that the first device is displaying media matching a profile of the user: transmitting an alert to the second device.
However, Kuncl discloses based at least in part on(b) determining that the first device is displaying media matching a profile of the user: transmitting an alert to the second device ([00148, 0154, 0158, 178, 197, 202, 215, 219, 224] an alert notification is sent to a device based on the user context, user profile, and actual content data). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the alert of Kuncl into the system of Narasimhan in order to notify a distracted viewer of desired content on a television.
Regarding claim 6, 16, Nara in view of Kuncl discloses wherein the determining that the user is consuming the at least one second media asset using the second device associated with the user comprises at least one of:
(a) monitoring interactions of the user with the second device ([0038, 0039, 0049] of Nara); or
(b) monitoring, using a biometric instrument, a level of attention of the user toward the second device.
Regarding claim 7, 17, Nara in view of Kuncl discloses wherein the transmitting the alert to the second device is carried out via one of:
(a) a short-range point-to-point communication scheme; or
(b) indirect paths through a hub provided on a home network ([0025, 0034, 0036] of Kuncl).
Regarding claim 8, 18, Nara in view of Kuncl discloses wherein the alert transmitted to the second device is based on the first media asset ([0025, 0034, 0036] of Kuncl).
Regarding claim 11, 21, Nara in view of Kuncl discloses wherein the determining that the first device is displaying media matching the profile of the user comprises:
comparing metadata of the first media asset to the profile of the user; and
in response to determining that attributes of the first media asset match attributes stored in the profile of the user:
determining that the first media asset matches the profile of the user ([0154, 0161, 0162, 0165] of Kuncl).
Regarding claim 12, 22, Nara in view of Kuncl discloses wherein the method further comprises transmitting a second alert to the first device based at least in part on determining that the user is consuming at least one second media asset using a second device associated with the user ([0038, 0039, 0049] of Nara, [0148, 0154, 0202, 0215] of Kuncl).
Regarding claim 13, 23, Nara in view of Kuncl discloses wherein the metadata of the first media asset is determined based on at least one of:
(a) information available in a media guidance system; (b) sampling voices from the first media asset; (c) sampling images from the first media asset; or (d) sampling characters from the first media asset ([0154, 0161, 0162, 0165] of Kuncl).
Claim(s) 5, 10, 15, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Narasimhan (US 2013/0159876) in view of Kuncl (US 2014/0282721) in view of Woods (US 2014/0078039).
Regarding claim 5, 15, Nara in view of Kuncl does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one second media asset is access by a social media application on the second device.
However, Woods discloses wherein the at least one second media asset is access by a social media application on the second device ([0018, 0030]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the social media of Woods into the system of Nara in view of Kuncl in order to incorporate social media into the device usage.
Regarding claim 10, 20, Nara in view of Kuncl in view of Woods discloses wherein the method further comprises:
buffering a portion of the first media asset into a memory of the first device; and
based on detecting that the user becomes re-engaged with the first device, causing display of the first media asset to resume using the portion of the first media asset stored in the memory of the first device ([0110] of Woods).
Claim(s) 9, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Narasimhan (US 2013/0159876) in view of Kuncl (US 2014/0282721) in view of Kandekar (US 2009/0288112).
Regarding claim 9, 19, Nara in view of Kuncl does not specifically disclose wherein the alert further comprises a preview of the first media asset.
However, Kandekar discloses wherein the alert further comprises a preview of the first media asset ([0037]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the preview of Kandekar into the system of Nara in view of Kuncl in order to allow the user to determine whether they want to fully view a content after seeing a preview.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL HYUN HONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1553. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30.
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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at (571)272-4195. 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.
/MICHAEL H HONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426