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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/22/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Status
Claims 1-18 are pending in this Office Action.
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.
Claims 7-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitations "the video content" and “the video player” in line 6 and “the user device” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claims 8-12 are rejected as being dependent on indefinite claim 7.
Claim 13 recites the limitations "the video content" and “the video player” in line 4 and “the user device” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claims 14-18 are rejected as being dependent on indefinite claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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, 11, 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ghavami (US 2022/0038757).
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 13, Ghavami teaches: A method, performed by a user device, for dynamic reconfiguration of a video player when pausing a video content item, a user device, and one or more non-transitory, computer-readable media [dynamically resizing the video stream player window on the user’s device triggered by a content pause (par. 26, Fig. 1 and 7-8)], the method comprising:
playing the video content item in the video player while the video player is arranged in a first region of a display associated with the user device [content playback, such as a video stream being viewed on a device (for example, a CTV, smartphone, or desktop) in a video stream player window (par. 26, Fig. 7)]
detecting an indication of a pause event [using real-time event listeners and triggers for content or activity-based events, such as detecting a content pause, for example pressing pause by mouse click, touch screen, or remote control (par. 26)] and
responsive to the indication of the pause event, pausing the video content item, rearranging the video player to be in a second region of the display that is smaller than the first region, and presenting one or more supplemental content items in one or more respective content slots of the display that do not overlap the second region [the detection of the content pause may trigger displaying a commercial on screen, such as a commercial break window that is dynamically integrated into the display area. The dynamic commercial break dynamically resizes the video stream player window, making it smaller, for display of a non-linear multimedia commercial. The commercial does not obstruct the video stream (par. 26, Fig. 7-10)].
Regarding claims 5, 11, and 17, Ghavami teaches the method of claim 1; Ghavami further teaches: rearranging the video player is responsive to the user device completing loading at least one of the one or more supplemental content items [displaying a commercial on-screen may be triggered by content pause (par. 26). The creative asset is downloaded and stored locally (par. 45, 50, 57, and 59-60, Fig. 4 and 7-9)].
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 2, 8, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghavami (US 2022/0038757) in view of Fernandes et al. (US 8,606,955).
Regarding claims 2, 8, and 14, Ghavami teaches the method of claim 1; While Ghavami teaches a creative asset can be overlaid on the screen (par. 33), Ghavami does not explicitly disclose: the one or more content slots overlap the first region.
Fernandes teaches: the one or more content slots overlap the first region [secondary content 36 as initially rendered in FIG. 2A is shown in an overlay positioned with the second portion of the display 40 within the first portion of the display 30. This is initiated by a user sending a pause command. The second portion of the display 40 can overlap the first portion of the display 30 (col. 4, line 60 through col. 5, line 12 and col. 5, lines 25-33, Fig. 2A and 2B)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Ghavami and Fernandes before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Ghavami by incorporating the one or more content slots overlap the first region as disclosed by Fernandes. The motivation for doing so would have been to significantly increase the click-through rate (CTR) to the secondary content 36 over methods that render the secondary content 36 in different portions of the display 28 (Fernandes - col. 5, lines 25-31). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Ghavami and Fernandes to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claims 3, 9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghavami (US 2022/0038757) in view of Gargi et al. (US 2008/0262912).
Regarding claims 3, 9, and 15, Ghavami teaches the method of claim 1; Ghavami further teaches: responsive to a user input, removing the one or more supplemental content items from the display, rearranging the video player to be in the first region [the user may have an option to interact with the dynamically integrated commercial frame or to close the commercial break window before completion of the commercial content. FIGS. 10 and 11 represent the adjunct window for the dynamic commercial break gradually being removed from display until the main streaming content occupies the principal areas of the display (par. 26, Fig. 7-11)].
Ghavami does not explicitly disclose: resuming the playing of the video content item.
Gargi teaches: resuming the playing of the video content item [upon reaching an ad slot, the video 102 is paused and reduced in size to a fraction of the screen or browser area, and the ad 172 is played at full size of the screen or browser area. When the ad ends, the video 102 resumes and is played at the normal size (par. 79-80)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Ghavami and Gargi before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Ghavami by incorporating resuming the playing of the video content item as disclosed by Gargi. The motivation for doing so would have been because the user closing the commercial window suggests the user is finished watching the commercial and ready to resume viewing the main video content (Ghavami – par. 26, Fig. 11 and Gargi – par. 79-80). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Ghavami and Gargi to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claims 4, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghavami (US 2022/0038757) in view of Barton et al. (US 2021/0297747).
Regarding claims 4, 10, and 16, Ghavami teaches the method of claim 1; Ghavami further teaches: responsive to a user input, removing the one or more supplemental content items from the display, rearranging the video player to be in the first region [the user may have an option to interact with the dynamically integrated commercial frame or to close the commercial break window before completion of the commercial content. FIGS. 10 and 11 represent the adjunct window for the dynamic commercial break gradually being removed from display until the main streaming content occupies the principal areas of the display (par. 26, Fig. 9-11)].
Ghavami does not explicitly disclose: maintaining the pause of the video content item.
Barton teaches: maintaining the pause of the video content item [advertisements and/or menu options may be presented during the time that a playing program has been paused. A freeze-frame image of the program is displayed until the program is unpaused, such as by using a trickplay bar (par. 6, 92, and 147-148, Fig. 9-11)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Ghavami and Barton before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Ghavami by incorporating maintaining the pause of the video content item as disclosed by Barton. The motivation for doing so would have been because the program may be paused while one of two or more viewers are temporarily absent or unable to watch the program, leaving the remaining viewers unable to continue watching the program until the other viewer returns (Barton – par. 148). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Ghavami and Barton to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claims 6, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghavami (US 2022/0038757) in view of McClendon et al. (US 2022/0201369).
Regarding claims 6, 12, and 18, Ghavami teaches the method of claim 1; Ghavami further teaches: the pause event is a first pause event [a pause event, such as pressing pause by mouse click, touch screen, or remote control (par. 26)].
While Ghavami teaches controlling the video content, such as pausing using a remote control (par. 26), which suggests other controls would be available to the user including a play button, Ghavami does not explicitly disclose: wherein the method further comprises: responsive to a user input, resuming the playing of the video content item; and responsive to an indication of a second pause event, presenting the indication of a supplemental content item on the display, wherein the supplemental content item was presented on the display during the first pause event, a pause event before the first pause event, or a previous scheduled break event.
McClendon teaches: responsive to a user input, resuming the playing of the video content item [in response to a user input that resumes playback of the primary content stream: pausing playback of the first video advertisement at a third frame; and resuming playback of the primary digital video content stream (par. 14 and 62)] and
responsive to an indication of a second pause event, presenting the indication of a supplemental content item on the display, wherein the supplemental content item was presented on the display during the first pause event, a pause event before the first pause event, or a previous scheduled break event [during a second pause event that pauses playback of the primary content stream, initiate playback of the first advertisement from the third frame (par. 15 and 62)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Ghavami and McClendon before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Ghavami by incorporating the resuming the playing of the video content and responsive to a second pause event, presenting the indication of a supplemental content item on the display, wherein the supplemental content item was presented on the display during the first pause event as disclosed by McClendon. The motivation for doing so would have been to continue playback of the same video advertisement to increase the likelihood of achieving a target outcome (e.g., brand lift, video completion, conversion) for this user with this video advertisement (McClendon – par. 62). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Ghavami and McClendon to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lorrain et al. (US 9,307,181) - Time-based Triggering Of Related Content Links.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Boyd whose telephone number is (571)270-0676. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm PST.
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.
/ALEXANDER BOYD/ Examiner, Art Unit 2424
/BENJAMIN R BRUCKART/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2424