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 .
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 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10997985. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the readily apparent similarity as exemplified in each claim 1:
18960863
US 10997985
1. A tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium, having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution, cause performance of a set of operations comprising: capturing audio content while a ride-sharing session is active; identifying reference audio content that matches the captured audio content; and outputting a playout report associated with the identified reference audio content.
1. A computing device comprising: a microphone; one or more processors; and a non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to perform a set of acts comprising: determining that a ride-sharing session is active; in response to determining the ride-sharing session is active; using the microphone of the computing device to capture audio content; identifying reference audio content that has at least a threshold extent of similarity with the captured audio content; determining that the ride-sharing session is inactive; and outputting an indication of the identified reference audio content.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11348600. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the readily apparent similarity as exemplified in each claim 1:
18960863
US 11348600
1. A tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium, having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution, cause performance of a set of operations comprising: capturing audio content while a ride-sharing session is active; identifying reference audio content that matches the captured audio content; and outputting a playout report associated with the identified reference audio content.
1. A computing device comprising: a microphone; one or more processors; and a non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to perform a set of acts comprising: determining that a ride-sharing session is active; in response to determining the ride-sharing session is active, using the microphone of the computing device to capture audio content; and identifying reference audio content that has at least a threshold extent of similarity with the captured audio content.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11581011. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the readily apparent similarity as exemplified in each claim 1:
18960863
US 11581011
1. A tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium, having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution, cause performance of a set of operations comprising: capturing audio content while a ride-sharing session is active; identifying reference audio content that matches the captured audio content; and outputting a playout report associated with the identified reference audio content.
1. A computing device comprising: one or more processors; and a non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to perform a set of acts comprising: determining that a ride-sharing session is active; in response to determining the ride-sharing session is active, capturing audio content; identifying reference audio content that has at least a threshold extent of similarity with the captured audio content; and outputting an indication of the identified reference audio content.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11837250. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the readily apparent similarity as exemplified in each claim 1:
18960863
US 11837250
1. A tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium, having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution, cause performance of a set of operations comprising: capturing audio content while a ride-sharing session is active; identifying reference audio content that matches the captured audio content; and outputting a playout report associated with the identified reference audio content.
1. A computing device comprising: one or more processors; and a non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to perform a set of acts comprising: determining that a ride-sharing session is active; while the ride-sharing session is active, capturing audio content; identifying reference audio content that has at least a threshold extent of similarity with the captured audio content; and outputting an indication of the identified reference audio content.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12198716Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the readily apparent similarity as exemplified in each claim 1:
18960863
US 12198716
1. A tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium, having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution, cause performance of a set of operations comprising: capturing audio content while a ride-sharing session is active; identifying reference audio content that matches the captured audio content; and outputting a playout report associated with the identified reference audio content.
1. A non-transitory computer-readable medium, having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution by a computing device, cause the computing device to perform a set of operations comprising: determining that a ride-sharing session is active; while the ride-sharing session is active, capturing audio content; identifying reference audio content that matches the captured audio content; and outputting an indication of the identified reference audio content.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9, and 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sen (US 20210209151).
Regarding claim 1, Sen teaches a tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium (computer memory, [0030]), having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution, cause performance of a set of operations (instructions in memory, [0030]) comprising:
capturing audio content (captured media sample, [0007]; media may be portion of a song, [0007]; the computing device, such as a smartphone, may be configured to automatically (e.g., without requiring user input) monitor its environment for media samples (e.g., audio samples, video samples, image samples, and/or the like) periodically captured by its microphone)
while a ride-sharing session is active (as another example, the contextual information may include an activity identifier indicating an activity that was underway during capture of the media sample. In one example, the activity identifier includes transportation information (e.g., indicating that the user of the computing device was traveling in a taxi or ride-sharing service during capture of the media sample), [0011]);
identifying reference audio content that matches the captured audio content (generating a media fingerprint (e.g., an audio fingerprint) based on the media sample and identifying the media asset based on the media fingerprint, [0007], the computing device may capture an audio sample of a movie and then identify the movie based on the audio sample, [0007]); and
outputting a playout report associated with the identified reference audio content (although the query includes one or more search criteria, it lacks an identifier of the media asset. The computing device identifies the media sample in memory by matching the query criteria to the stored contextual information and generates a reply to the query. Optionally, the server may identify the media sample, generate the query reply, and communicate that reply to the computing device over the communication network. The computing device presents the query reply via its display and/or speakers, [0007]).
Regarding claim 2, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the audio content comprises music content (query may request “music that Sally heard at lunch earlier today,”, [0081]).
Regarding claim 3, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the audio content comprises audio content other than music (computing device may capture an audio sample of a movie and then identify the movie based on the audio sample, [0007]).
Regarding claim 4, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein identifying the reference audio content that matches the captured audio content comprises: sending, to a computing device, (i) at least a portion of the captured audio content (e computing device can locally store and/or process the media sample and/or can communicate the media sample to a server, [0004]; computing device locally processes the query and/or forwards the query to the server over the communication network, [0006]) and (ii) an instruction that causes the computing device to compare at least the portion of the captured audio content to a plurality of reference audio content items (computing device identifies the media sample in memory by matching the query criteria to the stored contextual information and generates a reply to the query, [0006]); and receiving, from the computing device, an indication of a particular reference audio content item of the plurality of reference audio content items that matches the captured audio content (depending on what the query requests, the reply may include the media sample itself, the media asset, an identifier of the media asset, [0007]).
Regarding claim 6, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein capturing audio content comprises (capture of media sample, [0067]), while the ride-sharing session is active (activity information from a transportation application, such as a ride-sharing application installed on computing device 202, indicating that the person was in transit in a taxi during capture of the media sample 214., [0067]), capturing audio content via a microphone (control circuitry 304 may capture an audio sample 214 by way of microphone 316, [0044]).
Regarding claim 7, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the set of operations further comprises identifying metadata associated with the identified reference audio content (identifying a media asset of the captured media sample and/or media asset metadata corresponding to the media asset; the reply may include the media sample itself, the media asset, an identifier of the media asset, the media asset metadata, and/or the like, [0007]).
Regarding claim 8, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 7, wherein the metadata comprises one or more of (i) a song title (title, [0007]), (ii) an artist (artist, [0007]), (iii) a genre, (iv) an album title (album, [0007]), or (v) a release year.
Regarding claim 9, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 8, wherein outputting the playout report associated with the identified reference audio content further comprises displaying an indication of the metadata associated with the identified reference audio content (computing device presents the query reply via its display, [0006]).
Claims 13 and 20 are each substantially similar to claim 1 and are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 14 is substantially similar to claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 15 is substantially similar to claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 18 is substantially similar to claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 19 is substantially similar to claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons.
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sen.
Regarding claim 5, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein identifying the reference audio content that matches the captured audio content comprises:
generating audio fingerprint data of the captured audio content (song may be identified by generating a media fingerprint (e.g., an audio fingerprint) based on the media sample, [0007]);
comparing the generated audio fingerprint data to a plurality of reference audio fingerprint items, wherein each respective audio fingerprint item is associated with respective reference audio content (the identifying the media asset in the database based on the media fingerprint can include identifying, in the database, an association between the video content and the audio fingerprint, [0007]);
determining that a particular reference audio fingerprint item of the plurality of reference audio fingerprint items that has at least a threshold extent of similarity with the generated audio fingerprint data (for a media fingerprint that matches the fingerprint generated at block 1102. If a match is found (“YES” at block 1106), [0078]) and identifying the reference audio content that has at least the threshold extent of similarity with the captured audio content as the respective reference audio content associated with the particular reference audio fingerprint item (At block 1108, control circuitry 304 and/or control circuitry 322 retrieve from the media asset database 330 a digital copy of the media asset that corresponds to the matched media fingerprint, metadata of that media asset, and/or the like, [0078]).
Although Sen does not explicitly teach that a match is determined by fulfilling a threshold amount of similarity, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use that as the criteria for what constitutes a “match” as disclosed in [0078] of Sen since doing so involves only the use of routine skill and creativity in the art.
Claim(s) 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sen and Brinig (US 20180102017, IDS 11/26/24).
Regarding claim 10, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1.
Although Sen does not teach wherein the set of operations further comprises determining that the ride-sharing session is active, and wherein determining that the ride-sharing session is active comprises receiving, via a ride-sharing application, a ride-sharing request, Brinig teaches a ride sharing request (pick-up request, Brinig, [0056]) and it would have been obvious to somehow associate that there was a ride sharing request with the indication that the user of the computing device was traveling in a taxi or ride-sharing service during capture of the media sample as disclosed by Sen (Sen, [0011]) since doing so is the use of a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way.
Regarding claim 11, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1.
Although Sen does not teach wherein the set of operations further comprises determining that the ride-sharing session is active, and wherein determining that the ride-sharing session is active comprises receiving, via a ride-sharing application, an indication that a driver has accepted a ride-sharing request, Brining teaches a driver confirmation the request (driver confirmation 322 of pick-up request, Brinig, [0056]) and it would have been obvious to somehow associate that there was a driver confirmation/acceptance of the ride sharing request with the indication that the user of the computing device was traveling in a taxi or ride-sharing service during capture of the media sample as disclosed by Sen (Sen, [0011]) since doing so is the use of a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way.
Regarding claim 12, Sen teaches the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1.
Although Sen does not teach wherein the set of operations further comprises determining that the ride-sharing session is active, and wherein determining that the ride-sharing session is active comprises determining that a ride-sharing application is navigating a driver to a predetermined location, Brining teaches a state for when the driver is on the way to the destination (driver application 332 initiates an on-trip sub-state while the driver transports to destination, Brinig, [0056]) and it would have been obvious to somehow associate that a ride-sharing application is navigating a driver to a predetermined location with the indication that the user of the computing device was traveling in a taxi or ride-sharing service during capture of the media sample as disclosed by Sen (Sen, [0011]) since doing so is the use of a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kile Blair whose telephone number is (571)270-3544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7503. 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.
/KILE O BLAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights