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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 2, corresponding to Figure 2, in the reply filed on 07/02/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that Species, 1, Species 2 and Species 3 share “inventive technical features as recited in independent claim 1. For example, S110 and S120 of Fig. 1, S210 and S220 of Fig. 2, and S610 and S620 of Fig. 6 fully correspond to one another. In addition, S140 of Fig. 1 and S260 of Fig. 2 fully correspond to one another, and S230-S250 of Fig. 2 are further limitations of S230 of Fig. 1. Moreover, S140 of Fig. 1 and S660 of Fig. 6 substantially correspond to one another, and S630-S650 of Fig. 6 are further limitations of S230 of Fig. 1. Therefore, independent claim 1 is a generic claim, while dependent claims 2-13 are all further limitations of independent claim 1, and the differences among Species 1- Fig. 1, Species 2- Fig. 2, and Species 3- Fig. 6 do not render them independent and distinct invention.” This is not found persuasive because although it is noted that some of the Steps, in the example above provided by the Applicant (S110 and S120 of Fig. 1, S210 and S220 of Fig. 2, and S610 and S620 of Fig. 6 fully correspond to one another. In addition, S140 of Fig. 1 and S260 of Fig. 2 fully correspond to one another, and S230-S250 of Fig. 2 are further limitations of S230 of Fig. 1. Moreover, S140 of Fig. 1 and S660 of Fig. 6 substantially correspond to one another), correspond to one another, not all the steps correspond to each other. The steps, the orders, and/or the features in their entirety do not correspond with one another. There is a search and Examination burden for the patentability distinct species. Furthermore, Applicant stated the features of S630-S650 of Figure 6 are further limitations of S230 of Figure 1. It is noted this is a typo because figure 1 does not have S230 and S230 is disclosed in figure 2. Nonetheless, first, if Applicant meant to type “S630-S650 of Figure 6 are further limitations of S230 of Figure 2”, the Examiner disagrees because S630-S650 discloses features corresponding to ‘variable-speed effect’ whereas S230 of figure 2 discloses ‘beat sync effects,’ and the steps to reach S630 and S260 are distinct. Second, if Applicant meant to type “S630-S650 of Figure 6 are further limitations of S130 of Figure 1”, the Examiner still disagrees because S130 of figure 1 is distinct from S630 of figure 6.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 2 and 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 07/02/2026.
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.
Claim 1 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US Pat. No. 11,978,485).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a video processing method, comprising:
creating a target video editing task corresponding to a target video material (see col. 11 lines 13-17 obtaining video materials; lines 60-65 an upload page is loaded on a client and at least two candidate video materials are presented in the upload page for the user to select; video materials uploaded by a user are obtained; see col. 12 lines 1-13 cropping the selected video material into at least two video materials);
in response to a first editing operation for triggering the target video editing task, placing a target video clip formed from the target video material on a video editing track of a video editing interface (see figure 5A; col. 12 lines 40-51 multiple candidates video materials are presented, and ‘next step’ jump entry 511 is shown; the user may select the candidate video material, and triggers the jump entry after the selection is completed, to load a next page on the client; see col. 20 lines 17-42 the edit page is loaded after the user triggers an edit entry; the user clicks the preview image of one of the video materials in the edit page to perform the replacement operation; see figure 5C-5D);
in response to a second editing operation for the target video clip, determining a target video editing result of adding video effects corresponding to the second editing operation to the target video clip, wherein the video effects corresponding to the second editing operation at least include video beat sync effects or video variable-speed effects (see col. 20 lines when the selected video exceed the minimum duration, the music is selected; music points are obtained; see col. 1 lines 30-51 a beat sync video is composed of at least two video segments; see col. 20 line 43-col. 21 line 28 operations such as cropping, adding music to the audio track, and tone adjustment are performed to obtain the target video, and the target video is displayed; after the video and music are obtained, the target video with the best effect is obtained according to the solution of obtaining music points and extracting and scoring frames, thereby improving the efficiency and reducing the cost of producing the beat sync video; see col. 22 lines 4-10 clipping multiple video segments to obtain synthesized video, imports mp3 file into an audio track of the synthesized video to obtain a target video; see also figure 7 and see col. 22 lines 11-19); and
presenting a new video corresponding to the target video editing result (see col. 15 lines 42-53 and col. 21 lines 18-21).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, the Prior Art fails to teach or suggest the method of claim 1 including “in response to the first target video editing result corresponding to the target video clip not being present in the first cache, determining target beat sync information matching with the target video clip, wherein the target beat sync information is provided for indicating a position point or a time point in need of beat sync in the target video clip, to produce a visual effect for a sense of rhythm and movement for the target video clip at the position point or the time point in need of beat sync; performing a curve speed change on the target video clip according to the target beat sync information, to generate the first target video editing result of adding the video effects corresponding to the second editing operation to the target video clip; and in response to the first target video editing result corresponding to the target video clip being present in the first cache, reading from the first cache the first target video editing result corresponding to the target video clip.”
Regarding claims 4-10, claims 4-10 are objected as being dependent upon the objected claim 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jia et al. (US PG PUB 2025/0252975); Hayashi et al. (US Pat. No. 10,332558) and Lanahan et al. (US Pat. No. 11,373028).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN SHIBRU whose telephone number is (571)272-7329. The examiner can normally be reached M-TR 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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, THAI TRAN can be reached at 571 272 7382. 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.
/HELEN SHIBRU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484 July 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights