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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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, 3-10, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Page US 20210037273.
Referring to claim 1, Page discloses a method for providing a relay content by a server, comprising:
providing a source content to a first user terminal (see Fig. 1 and Paragraphs 0014-0015, 0037, and 0040-0041 for disclosing providing an initiator video/source content as part of a collaborative video to a first user terminal (e.g., user 25’s mobile device 35));
identifying that the first user terminal plays the source content, satisfying a relay content playback condition (see Paragraph 0037 for disclosing the first of the plurality of videos that make up the collaborative video that has been stitched together in a sequence with each video starting at a respective timestamp, wherein when the first/source video content ends, it is interpreted that a “relay content playback condition” is met in that the first video is handing of progress of the collaborative video to the start of the second video/relay content in the series of videos of the collaborative video); and
providing at least one relay content to the first user terminal (see the above description of the “relay content”/second video in the series of stitched videos of the collaborative video),
wherein the at least one relay content is subordinate to the source content (see the above description of the “relay content” and its relationship to the source content, wherein the second video content is interpreted as being subordinate (i.e., secondary) to the first video content), and
wherein the source content and the at least one relay content are provided by different users (see the above description and Paragraphs 0040-0041 for the example of each of users 20 (the initiator and first/source video content provider), 21, 22, 23, and 24 provide respective videos that are stitched together to create the collaborative video).
Referring to claim 3, Page discloses the relay content playback condition is associated with whether the first user terminal plays a predetermined relay point in the source content (see the rejection of claim 1 wherein the first video is handing of progress of the collaborative video to the start of the second video/relay content in the series of videos of the collaborative video, or relay content playback condition, is associated with the user 25 playing the video to the point where the first video in the series of videos ends, interpreted as the predetermined relay point in the source content/first video).
Referring to claim 4, Page discloses the predetermined relay point is associated with at least one of a specific point and a specific segment in the source content (see the rejection of claim 3, wherein the point/segment is defined as the end of the source/first video content in the series of videos of the collaborative video).
Referring to claim 5, Page discloses providing the at least one relay content comprises:
providing a playback interface for the at least one relay content to the first user terminal and in response to receiving an interaction with the interface from the first user terminal, providing the at least one relay content to the first user terminal (see Fig. 3T and Paragraphs 0040-0041 for disclosing a playback interface for the relay (and all) video content of the collaborative video to the first/user 25 terminal and in response to receiving an interaction to view the video (i.e., visible play button), providing at least the relay/second video content to the device display).
Referring to claim 6, Page discloses the interface is a selection interface for selecting one of multiple choices, and the relay content is associated with the choice selected by the interaction (see Fig. 3T and Paragraphs 0040-0041 for disclosing the interface allows for the selection of multiple choices (e.g., play (via play button), share, save), and the relay/second video content is associated with the choice selected by the interaction of selecting the play button).
Referring to claim 7, Page discloses the selection interface comprises profile information for at least one of users providing relay contents associated with the multiple choices (see Fig. 3S and 3T and Paragraphs 0019 and 0022-0023 for disclosing the interface comprises profile information (e.g., “Jamie”, a name one of the video authors) for one of the users providing relay contents (interpreted as any of the videos in the series of sequential videos) associated with the choices in that the choices all are in regard to the video Jamie had a part in creating and sending to the recipient).
Referring to claim 8, Page discloses the profile information is determined based on a relationship between a first user and the at least one user corresponding to the profile information, wherein the relationship is established in relation to a service through which the server provides contents (see Paragraphs 0015, 0019, 0022-0023, 0037, and 0040-0041 for disclosing the profile information is determined based on a relationship between a first user/the recipient and the at least one user correspond to the profile information, wherein the relationship is established in relation to a an interaction with a contacts application by a collaborative video application service through which the server provides the video content).
Referring to claim 9, Page discloses in providing the at least one relay content, the server sequentially provides multiple relay contents, and the multiple relay contents are subordinate to the source content (see the rejection of claim 1 and Paragraphs 0040-0041 for the example of each of users 20 (the initiator and first/source video content provider), 21, 22, 23, and 24 provide respective videos that are stitched together to create the collaborative video, wherein videos from users 21-24 can are all subordinate/secondary to the initiator/first video and can be sequentially presented).
Referring to claim 10, Page discloses a playback order of the multiple relay contents is determined based on a relationship between a first user and users providing the multiple relay contents, wherein the relationship is established in relation to a service through which the server provides contents (see Paragraphs 0015, 0019, 0022-0023, 0037, and 0040-0041 for disclosing a playback order of all of the contents is determined based on a relationship between a first user (e.g., the initiator, user 20) and the users providing the videos that come after the initiator’s first/source video (e.g., users 21-24), wherein the relationship is established in relation to a an interaction with a contacts application by a collaborative video application service through which the server provides the video content.
Referring to claim 14, Page discloses after providing the at least one relay content:
determining whether the first user terminal plays a specific relay content while meeting a secondary relay content playback condition, and providing at least one secondary relay content to the first user terminal, wherein the secondary relay content is subordinate to the specific relay content, and wherein the specific relay content and the secondary relay content are provided by different users (see the rejection of claim 1, further noting that when the first/user 25’s terminal plays a specific relay content (i.e., the 2nd video in the series of stitched videos in the collaborative video) while meeting a secondary relay content playback condition (i.e., reaches the end point of the 2nd video), a secondary relay content/the 3rd video in the series of stitched videos in the collaborative video is displayed, wherein all the videos in the collaborative video are provided by different respective users 20-24).
Referring to claim 16, Page discloses a server (Fig. 1, server 40) providing a relay content, comprising:
a memory storing instructions, and a processor connected to the memory (see Paragraph 0042) and configured to execute the instructions to perform the method as seen in the rejection of claim 1.
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, 12-13, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Page in view of non-patent literature “How to Stitch on TikTok – With Ideas & (Hilarious) Examples” by Martha Kendall Custard, published on March 11, 2022 (hereinafter Custard).
Referring to claim 2, Page discloses the limitations as seen in the rejection of claim 1, further noting the citations in the rejection claim 1 disclose a server in communication with all of the user devices/terminals.
Page is unclear as to the relay content is received form a second user terminal after the source content is provided to the second user terminal.
Custard discloses the at least one relay content is received from a second user terminal after the server provides at least a part of the source content to the second user terminal (see page 2 for disclosing the second user terminal that is adding a recorded video to stitched content receives the source content at their device running the TikTok app before the additional/secondary/relay content is created).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the stitched/relay content of Custard with the system of Page in order to allow users to easily reference another person’s content and either comment on it or reinterpret the idea altogether, thereby expanding the conversation to a wider audience while automatically crediting the original creator (see Custard, pages 1-2).
Referring to claim 12, Page discloses the limitations as seen in the rejection of claim 1, further noting the citations in the rejection claim 1 disclose a server in communication with all of the user devices/terminals.
Page is unclear as to after providing the source content, providing the first user terminal with an interface for providing a new relay content subordinate to the source content.
Custard discloses after providing the source content, providing the first user terminal with an interface for providing a new relay content subordinate to the source content (see pages 2-6 for disclosing after the TikTok video is provided, the first user is provided with an interface for providing a stitch/new relay content that is subordinate/secondary to the TikTok video).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the stitched/relay content of Custard with the system of Page in order to allow users to easily reference another person’s content and either comment on it or reinterpret the idea altogether, thereby expanding the conversation to a wider audience while automatically crediting the original creator (see Custard, pages 1-2).
Referring to claim 13, Custard discloses the interface is a selection interface for selecting one of multiple choices, and the new relay content is associated with a choice selected through an interaction with the selection interface (see pages 3-4 for disclosing the interface is a selection interface for selecting one of multiple choices and the stitch content is associated with a choice (e.g., “Stitch”) selected through an interaction with the selection interface).
Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 12.
Claim 18 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 13.
Claims 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Page in view of non-patent literature “How to Stitch on TikTok? 5 Best examples for marketers” by Adedoyin Jesutofunmi, published on June 29, 2022 (hereinafter Jesutofunmi).
Referring to claim 11, Page discloses the source content and relay content as seen in the rejection of claim 1.
Page is unclear as to providing the at least one relay content comprises providing information about the source content along with the at least one relay content.
Jesutofunmi discloses providing the at least one relay content comprises providing information about the source content along with the at least one relay content (see page 3 for disclosing the stitch/relay content comprises information about the creator of the source content and a link back to the initial creator’s video within the stitched video).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the relay content providing information about source content of Jesutofunmi with the system of Page in order to use collaborative tools like TikTok’s Stitch as a foolproof way to improve marketing engagements and reach without worrying about competitors stealing creative ideas since TikTok would always give credit to the original video in a stitch (see Jesutofunmi, page 19).
Referring to claim 15, Page discloses providing at least one secondary relay content among the other limitations as seen in the rejection of claim 14.
Page is unclear as to providing secondary relay content comprises providing information about at least one of the source content and the relay content being played, along with the secondary relay content.
Page is unclear as to providing secondary relay content comprises providing information about the source content, along with the secondary relay content.
Jesutofunmi discloses providing secondary relay content comprises providing information about the source content, along with the secondary relay content (see page 3 for disclosing the stitch/relay content comprises information about the creator of the source content and a link back to the initial creator’s video within the stitched video, further noting pages 4-11 describe the process of stitching one video into another can continue as long as the user’s posting the video permit stitching and do not revoke the stitching privilege, therefore creating as many secondary videos as permitted stitched onto the original video, then the first stitched video, then the second, and so forth).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the relay content providing information about source content of Jesutofunmi with the system of Page in order to use collaborative tools like TikTok’s Stitch as a foolproof way to improve marketing engagements and reach without worrying about competitors stealing creative ideas since TikTok would always give credit to the original video in a stitch (see Jesutofunmi, page 19).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Page in view of Custard, and further in view of Gossweiler et al (hereinafter Gossweiler) US 20080271078.
Referring to claim 19, Page in view of Custard discloses the source content and relay content as seen in the rejection of claim 17.
Page in view of Custard is unclear as to in response to displaying source content while meeting a relay content playback condition, displaying a relay content playback interface and in response to receiving an interaction with the relay content playback interface, displaying at least one relay content.
Gossweiler discloses in response to displaying source content while meeting a second content playback condition, displaying a relay content playback interface and in response to receiving an interaction with the relay content playback interface, displaying at least one relay content (see Fig. 1C and Paragraphs 031, 0036-0037, and 0061-0062 for disclosing in response to displaying source content (i.e., the current running program) while meeting a relay content playback condition (nearing the end or reaching the end of the current running program), displaying a relay content playback interface (Fig. 1C, 144) and in response to receiving an interaction with the relay content playback interface, displaying relay content (content to be displayed following the end of the current program)).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the known technique of presenting an interface regarding relay or content to be shown next of Gossweiler with the known system of Page in view of Custard in order to predictably improve the system by notifying the viewer of the closely related upcoming content and providing the user with choice regarding whether it is displayed immediately after the currently viewed content or not.
Referring to claim 20, Gossweiler discloses the playback interface is a selection interface for selecting one of multiple choices (see Fig. 1C for disclosing the yes and no choices), and the relay content is associated with a choice selected through the interaction (see Paragraph 0062 for disclosing the relay content (content to be displayed following the end of the current program) is associated with the yes choice selected through the interaction).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Haley et al US 20210312948 for disclosing compiling user-generated videos making mention of TikTok’s Stitch feature;
Butler et al US 20210314655 for disclosing a video stitching system to upload videos to a social networking platform;
Kim et al US 11004471 for disclosing editing and appending video clips to the end of a series of appended video clips; and
Roberts et al US 20130083906 for disclosing sharing of the video content including stitching together multiple video messages included in the thread to form a single video via any suitable video sharing service or platform, such as a social media service or platform.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS T CORBO whose telephone number is (571)270-5675. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 11am-7pm.
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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NICHOLAS T CORBO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
04/29/2026
Prosecution Insights