Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/974,621

MEDIA CONTROL METHOD AND VEHICLE-MOUNTED TERMINAL

Non-Final OA §101§102§103
Filed
Dec 09, 2024
Examiner
BANTAMOI, ANTHONY
Art Unit
2422
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
BYD Company Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
424 granted / 573 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+30.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
585
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.9%
-33.1% vs TC avg
§103
52.2%
+12.2% vs TC avg
§102
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
§112
7.4%
-32.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 573 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §103
Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/09/2025, 11/06/2025, 12/09/2025 are compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1, 9, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of (content coordination and information transmission) without significantly more. Claim 9 for example recites at a high level: Sending a content identifier and a media source identifier from a second media application system to a server The server sends push information to a first converged media application system The first converged media application system integrates multiple media interfaces The first converged media application system uses identifiers to map correct interfaces and retrieve correct content from media server Conceptually, this is about coordinating content selection and delivering across systems using identifiers and servers. Which is more or less a type of: Information exchange Content selection/routing Using identifiers to retrieve content These are a classic data processing and communication ideas. So, the claim is directed towards an abstract idea, such as: Organizing and transmitting information, or Selecting and retrieving content based on identifiers, or Coordinating media delivery using generic network communication These fits within “certain methods of organizing human activity”/”data transmission”/”content delivery” line of cases. Technically, “sending” identifiers a “Server end” “Push information” “Integrated interfaces of multiple media sources” “Obtaining target content” “Media server” Are all purely functional and result oriented which can be done using generic computer components. There is no new network protocol, or unconventional server behavior, or any specific interface architecture, or technical improvement to the media retrieval itself and there is no change to how the computer operates. Courts have consistently held that : Using a server to push information Using identifiers to select content Integrating multiple interfaces at the application level Does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of (content coordination and information transmission). Similar rational applies to the other independent claims 1, 12 and 14 with 14 further reciting processor and memory which are generic computer components performing routine computer functions. The dependent claims add detail to the independent claims in terms of particularity, however the limitations taken alone or in combination with the independent claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of (content coordination and information transmission). Therefore claims 1-20 are not statutory under 35. USC. 101 as claimed. 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. (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. Claims 1, 2, 5, 9, 12, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)and/or(a)(2) as being anticipated by Oliver, USPG_Pub. 20150046939. Regarding claim 1, Oliver discloses a media control method, applied to a first converged media application system, comprising: determining target content from a target media source, and obtaining a content identifier of the target content and a media source identifier of the target media source (fig. 4, 430 (subscription information which meets push information stored at TV everywhere servers and sent to content partner application 140 which is the first converged media application system-see Para. 9-10 of originally filed specification for definition of push information as it relates to user signing into account)); obtaining a target interface corresponding to the media source identifier, and obtaining a target media server of the target media source (fig. 8, 10; Para. 41, 43); and obtaining the target content from the target media server based on the content identifier through the target interface (fig. 11; Para. 43). Regarding claim 2, Oliver explicitly discloses the media control method, before the obtaining a content identifier of the target content and a media source identifier of the target media source, the method further comprising: in response to a first input of a user, determining the target media source in multiple media sources (Oliver: fig. 10; Para. 43); displaying a content list of the target media source (fig. 10; Para. 43 (HBO content list can be browsed)); and in response to a second input of the user, determining the target content from the content list (fig. 11). Regarding claim 5, Oliver discloses the media control method, wherein the obtaining a content identifier of the target content and a media source identifier of the target media source comprises: obtaining push information in a target account from a server end after the target account is logged in (fig. 4, 430 (subscription information which meets push information stored at TV everywhere servers and sent to content partner application 140 which is the first converged media application system-see Para. 9-10 of originally filed specification for definition of push information as it relates to user signing into account)); and obtaining the content identifier of the target content and the media source identifier of the target media source from the push information (fig. 8, 10; Para. 41, 43). Regarding claims 9, 12 Oliver discloses a media control method, applied to a second media application system, the method comprising: sending a content identifier of target content and a media source identifier of a target media source to a server end, for the server end to deliver push information to a first converged media application system (fig. 4, 430 (subscription information which meets push information stored at TV everywhere servers and sent to content partner application 140 which is the first converged media application system-see Para. 9-10 of originally filed specification for definition of push information as it relates to user signing into account)), wherein interfaces of multiple media sources are integrated in the first converged media application system (fig. 8; Para. 20 (content partner application 140 integrates interfaces of multiple media sources-see fig. 8)), and the push information comprises the content identifier of the target content and the media source identifier of the target media source (Abstract Para. 14 (subscription permits user access to content and channels-so subscription information includes channels identifiers and channel identifiers as well as authorization keys etc.)), the first converged media application system obtains the target content from a target media server based on the content identifier through a target interface of the first converged media application system (fig. 8; Para. 41), the target interface corresponds to the media source identifier, and the target media server is a media server of the target media source (fig. 7-8; Para. 25-26, 43 (see how content is retrieved from a specific or target source based on channel/content ID available in the user subscription information)). 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 6, 7, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oliver, USPG_Pub. 20150046939, in view of Cansino, USPG_Pub. 20200142661. Regarding claims 6, 19 Oliver discloses the media control method, wherein the push information is generated by the server end based on the content identifier of the target content and the media source identifier of the target media source that are submitted by a second media application system, and the target account is logged in on the second media application system (fig. 4, 430 (subscription information which meets push information stored at TV everywhere servers and sent to content partner application 140 which is the first converged media application system-see Para. 9-10 of originally filed specification for definition of push information as it relates to user signing into account)), and the second media application system is installed on a mobile terminal (fig. 1, 105 (see application 140)). Oliver does not explicitly disclose first converged media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal. Cansino discloses first converged media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal (Cansino: Para. 163-164; fig. 18B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Oliver to include first converged media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal as disclosed by Cansino in order to allow driver to monitor content watched by passengers on their mobile phones. Regarding claims 7, 20 Oliver in view of Cansino discloses the media control method, wherein the first converged media application system is installed on the vehicle-mounted terminal (Cansino: Para. 163-164; fig. 18B) or on the mobile terminal (Cansino: fig. 18B). Regarding claim 11, Oliver does not explicitly disclose the media control method, wherein the first converged media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal and the second media application system is installed on a mobile terminal, or the first converged media application system is installed on a mobile terminal and the second media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal. Cansino discloses the media control method, wherein the first converged media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal and the second media application system is installed on a mobile terminal, or the first converged media application system is installed on a mobile terminal and the second media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal (Cansino: Para. 163-164; fig. 18B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Oliver to include the media control method, wherein the first converged media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal and the second media application system is installed on a mobile terminal, or the first converged media application system is installed on a mobile terminal and the second media application system is installed on a vehicle-mounted terminal as disclosed by Cansino in order to allow driver to monitor content watched by passengers on their mobile phones. Regarding claim 14, Oliver discloses the method of claim 1, however, Oliver does not explicitly disclose a vehicle-mounted terminal, comprising a processor and a memory, the memory storing computer instructions, wherein the processor executes the computer instructions to perform the media control method according to claim 1. Cansino discloses a display mounted in a vehicle including processor and memory with instructions when executed can perform a method (Para. 44). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Oliver to include a vehicle-mounted terminal, comprising a processor and a memory, the memory storing computer instructions, wherein the processor executes the computer instructions to perform the media control method as disclosed by Cansino in order to support seamless multichannel television everywhere sign in for automobiles. Regarding claims 15, Oliver in view of Cansino discloses vehicle-mounted terminal (Cansino: fig. 18A-B), before the obtaining a content identifier of the target content and a media source identifier of the target media source, the method further comprising: in response to a first input of a user, determining the target media source in multiple media sources (Oliver: fig. 10; Para. 43); displaying a content list of the target media source (Oliver: fig. 10; Para. 43 (list of content available at HBO can be browsed and selected)); and in response to a second input of the user, determining the target content from the content list(Oliver: fig. 11). Regarding claim 18, Oliver in vie of Cansino discloses the media control method, wherein the obtaining a content identifier of the target content and a media source identifier of the target media source comprises: obtaining push information in a target account from a server end after the target account is logged in (Oliver: fig. 4, 430 (subscription information which meets push information stored at TV everywhere servers and sent to content partner application 140 which is the first converged media application system-see Para. 9-10 of originally filed specification for definition of push information as it relates to user signing into account)); and obtaining the content identifier of the target content and the media source identifier of the target media source from the push information (Oliver: fig. 8, 10; Para. 41, 43). Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oliver, USPG_Pub. 20150046939, in view of Jannard, USPG_Pub. 20140196079. Regarding claim 8, Oliver does not explicitly disclose the media control method, wherein an interface of each of multiple media sources comprises a Software Development Kit (SDK) interface or an Application Programming Interface (API). Jannard discloses the media control method, wherein an interface of each of multiple media sources comprises a Software Development Kit (SDK) interface or an Application Programming Interface (API) (Para. 39). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Oliver to include the media control method, wherein an interface of each of multiple media sources comprises a Software Development Kit (SDK) interface or an Application Programming Interface (API) as disclosed by Jannard in order to manage restrictions for any asset encoded and encrypted with the content distributor's identification, thereby enabling digital rights management of assets from distributors. Claims 3, 4, 10, 13, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oliver, USPG_Pub. 20150046939, in view of Curtis, USPG_Pub. 20120278844. Regarding claims 3, 4, 10, 13, Oliver discloses the media control method, wherein the interfaces of multiple media sources are integrated in the second media application system (fig. 8; Para. 41). Oliver does not explicitly disclose before the sending a content identifier of target content and a media source identifier of a target media source to a server end, the method further comprises: receiving a search keyword entered by a user in a converged search window of the second media application system; submitting, to a media server of each of the multiple media sources of the second media application system through an interface of each of the multiple media sources, a search request comprising the search keyword, and receiving a search result corresponding to the search keyword from the media server of each of the multiple media sources; and in response to a third input of the user, determining the target content in the search results. Curtis discloses before the sending a content identifier of target content and a media source identifier of a target media source to a server end, the method further comprises: receiving a search keyword entered by a user in a converged search window of the second media application system (fig. 4, 404; Para. 49); submitting, to a media server of each of the multiple media sources of the second media application system through an interface of each of the multiple media sources, a search request comprising the search keyword (fig. 4, 410; Para. 51), and receiving a search result corresponding to the search keyword from the media server of each of the multiple media sources (fig. 4, 412; Para. 53-see fig. 5 for search results with aggregated interface for each service provider carrying the content associated with the search)); and in response to a third input of the user, determining the target content in the search results (Para. 54 (user can select to play content form the contents associated source from the result)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Oliver to include before the sending a content identifier of target content and a media source identifier of a target media source to a server end, the method further comprises: receiving a search keyword entered by a user in a converged search window of the second media application system; submitting, to a media server of each of the multiple media sources of the second media application system through an interface of each of the multiple media sources, a search request comprising the search keyword, and receiving a search result corresponding to the search keyword from the media server of each of the multiple media sources; and in response to a third input of the user, determining the target content in the search results as disclosed by Curtis in order to support content discovery by identifying instances of con that are available from different sources thereby increasing user convenience in making content selections. Claims 16, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oliver, USPG_Pub. 20150046939, Cansino, USPG_Pub. 20200142661 and further in view of Curtis, USPG_Pub. 20120278844. Regarding claims 16, 17 Oliver discloses the media control method, wherein the interfaces of multiple media sources are integrated in the second media application system (fig. 8; Para. 41). Oliver in view of Cansino do not explicitly disclose before the sending a content identifier of target content and a media source identifier of a target media source to a server end, the method further comprises: receiving a search keyword entered by a user in a converged search window of the second media application system; submitting, to a media server of each of the multiple media sources of the second media application system through an interface of each of the multiple media sources, a search request comprising the search keyword, and receiving a search result corresponding to the search keyword from the media server of each of the multiple media sources; and in response to a third input of the user, determining the target content in the search results. Curtis discloses before the sending a content identifier of target content and a media source identifier of a target media source to a server end, the method further comprises: receiving a search keyword entered by a user in a converged search window of the second media application system (fig. 4, 404; Para. 49); submitting, to a media server of each of the multiple media sources of the second media application system through an interface of each of the multiple media sources, a search request comprising the search keyword (fig. 4, 410; Para. 51), and receiving a search result corresponding to the search keyword from the media server of each of the multiple media sources (fig. 4, 412; Para. 53-see fig. 5 for search results with aggregated interface for each service provider carrying the content associated with the search)); and in response to a third input of the user, determining the target content in the search results (Para. 54 (user can select to play content form the contents associated source from the result)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Oliver in view of Cansino to include before the sending a content identifier of target content and a media source identifier of a target media source to a server end, the method further comprises: receiving a search keyword entered by a user in a converged search window of the second media application system; submitting, to a media server of each of the multiple media sources of the second media application system through an interface of each of the multiple media sources, a search request comprising the search keyword, and receiving a search result corresponding to the search keyword from the media server of each of the multiple media sources; and in response to a third input of the user, determining the target content in the search results as disclosed by Curtis in order to support content discovery by identifying instances of con that are available from different sources thereby increasing user convenience in making content selections. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY BANTAMOI whose telephone number is (571)270-3581. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 EST.. 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, John Miller can be reached at 571-272-7353. 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. /ANTHONY BANTAMOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2422
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 09, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604060
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR GENERATING NOTIFICATIONS BASED ON THE INTERESTS OF GUESTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598343
DISPLAY APPARATUS AND DATA PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587719
METHOD, DEVICE, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR DYNAMICALLY ENCAPSULATING MEDIA CONTENT DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581151
Broadcast Translator for Receiving Off-Air RF Signals and Retransmitting RF Signals
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574592
VIDEO PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 573 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month