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 without traverse of 1-11 and 16-20 in the reply filed on 3/24/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 12-15 have been cancelled by Applicant.
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 1, 2, 4-6, 8 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romanenko et al (US 2017/0337692) and further in view of Choi (US 2007/0269183).
For claim 1, Romanenko et al teach a method for creating a video file including verified time information using appended video metadata, the method comprising:
at a video source (e.g. paragraph 57:smartphones capture videos) or a device associated with the video source:
recording or streaming a raw video file (e.g. paragraph 57:smartphones capture videos); and
generating a time-stamped video file by appending metadata associated with the raw video file with the time information (e.g. paragraph 57: metadata including timestamps and geolocation is appended to the video files).
Romanenko et al do not further disclose: communicating with a remote time source to determine time information for a plurality of portions of the raw video file. Choi teaches communicating with a remote time source to determine time information for a plurality of portions of the raw video file (e.g. paragraphs 5, 27: the recording device accesses the reference time to reset to match the reference time, such as by accessing the NTP server. Figures 1- 2 and paragraph 30 teach recording device is connected to reference time server 206 via a network 207. Paragraph 28 teach time stamp is reset to match reference time). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Choi into the teaching of Romanenko et al to have utilized a reference time from server to improve the accuracy of the recording.
For claim 16, Romanenko et al teach a method for creating a video file, the method comprising:
receiving, from a video source, a raw video file comprising original video information (e.g. paragraph 57:smartphones capture videos);
generating a time-stamped video file by appending metadata associated with the raw video file with the plurality of timestamps (e.g. paragraph 57: metadata including timestamps and geolocation is appended to the video files).
Romanenko et al do not further disclose determining, based at least on a remote time source, time information associated with the raw video file;
determining, based at least on the time information, a plurality of timestamps associated with a plurality of frames that comprise the raw video file.
Choi teaches determining, based at least on a remote time source, time information associated with the raw video file (e.g. paragraphs 5, 27: the recording device accesses the reference time to reset to match the reference time, such as by accessing the NTP server. Figures 1- 2 and paragraph 30 teach recording device is connected to reference time server 206 via a network 207).
determining, based at least on the time information, a plurality of timestamps associated with a plurality of frames that comprise the raw video file (figure 1, Paragraphs 27- 28 teach time stamp is reset to match reference time). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Choi into the teaching of Romanenko et al to have utilized a reference time from server to improve the accuracy of the recording.
For claim 2, Romanenko et al teach the raw video file contains unmodified video information (e.g. paragraph 57:smartphones capture videos. The images of the video are not modified).
For claim 4, Romanenko et al do not further disclose the remote time source is a public network time protocol (NTP) server. Choi teaches the remote time source is a public network time protocol (NTP) server (e.g. paragraphs 5, 27: the recording device accesses the reference time to reset to match the reference time, such as by accessing the NTP server. Figures 1- 2 and paragraph 30 teach recording device is connected to reference time server 206 via a network 207). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Choi into the teaching of Romanenko et al to have utilized a reference time from server to improve the accuracy of the recording.
For claim 17, Romanenko et al do not further disclose the remote time source provides the time information, the time information provided by the remote time source being verified time information. Choi teaches the remote time source provides the time information, the time information provided by the remote time source being verified time information (e.g. paragraphs 5, 27: the recording device accesses the reference time to reset to match the reference time, such as by accessing the NTP server. Figures 1- 2 and paragraph 30 teach recording device is connected to reference time server 206 via a network 207. Paragraph 28 teach time stamp is reset to match reference time). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Choi into the teaching of Romanenko et al to have utilized a reference time from server to improve the accuracy of the recording.
For claim 18, Romanenko et al do not further disclose the time information is verified time information associated with an error interval less than a predetermined interval. Choi teaches the time information is verified time information associated with an error interval less than a predetermined interval (e.g. paragraphs 5, 27: the recording device accesses the reference time to reset to match the reference time, such as by accessing the NTP server. Figures 1- 2 and paragraph 30 teach recording device is connected to reference time server 206 via a network 207. Paragraph 28 teach time stamp is reset to match reference time). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Choi into the teaching of Romanenko et al to have utilized a reference time from server to improve the accuracy of the recording.
For claim 19, Romanenko et al teach the time-stamped video file comprises at least the raw video file and the metadata (e.g. paragraph 57: metadata including timestamps and geolocation is appended to the video files).
For claim 5, Romanenko et al teach the time information includes a timestamp associated with each frame of the raw video file (e.g. paragraph 57: metadata including timestamps and geolocation is appended to the video files).
For claim 8, Romanenko et al teach saving the time-stamped video file locally, uploading the time-stamped video file to a cloud platform(e.g. paragraph 57: the videos are independently uploaded to a central server), or streaming the time-stamped video file to a remote device.
For claim 6, Romanenko et al do not further disclose the time information includes a timestamp calculated by interpolating between one or more reference frames. Choi teaches the time information includes a timestamp calculated by interpolating between one or more reference frames (e.g. paragraph 54: “in order to facilitate interpolation of the samples.” and figure 1).
Claims 3, 7, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romanenko et al and Choi, as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8 and 16-19 above, and further in view of Deshpande (US 2020/0162767).
For claim 3, Romanenko et al and Choi do not further disclose appending the metadata includes adding one or more fields. Deshpande teaches appending the metadata includes adding one or more fields (e.g. Figure 1, paragraph 201: MMTP packet may include timestamp field that represents the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) time). It would have been obvious to one ordinary kill in the prior arts to incorporate the teaching of Deshpande into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi have utilize the MPEG protocol to include timestamps to improve convenience for the designer of the system.
For claim 7, Romanenko et al teach the time information includes an estimate of a local time associated with the video file being recorded or streamed (e.g. paragraph 57: Additional metadata including timestamps and geolocation information is also included, which is available via the smartphone operating system.). Romanenko et al do not further disclose the estimate being associated with Coordinated Universal Time and verified by the remote time source server to within a predetermined interval.
Choi teaches verified by the remote time source server to within a predetermined interval. (e.g. paragraphs 5, 27: the recording device accesses the reference time to reset to match the reference time, such as by accessing the NTP server. Figures 1- 2 and paragraph 30 teach recording device is connected to reference time server 206 via a network 207. Paragraph 28 teach time stamp is reset to match reference time). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Choi into the teaching of Romanenko et al to have utilized a reference time from server to improve the accuracy of the recording.
Romanenko et al and Choi do not further disclose Coordinated Universal Time. Deshpande the estimate being associated with Coordinated Universal Time (e.g. Figure 1, paragraph 201: MMTP packet may include timestamp field that represents the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) time). It would have been obvious to one ordinary kill in the prior arts to incorporate the teaching of Deshpande into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi have utilize the MPEG protocol to include timestamps to improve convenience for the designer of the system.
For claim 20, Romanenko et al and Choi do not further disclose appending the metadata with the plurality of timestamps comprises adding one or more fields to the metadata that associated individual timestamps of the plurality of timestamps with individual frames of the plurality of frames. Deshpande teaches appending the metadata with the plurality of timestamps comprises adding one or more fields to the metadata that associated individual timestamps of the plurality of timestamps with individual frames of the plurality of frames. (e.g. Figure 1, paragraph 201: MMTP packet may include timestamp field that represents the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) time). It would have been obvious to one ordinary kill in the prior arts to incorporate the teaching of Deshpande into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi have utilize the MPEG protocol to include timestamps to improve convenience for the designer of the system.
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romanenko et al and Choi, as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8 and 16-19 above, and further in view of O’Toole, Jr. et al (US 7508941).
For claim 9, Romanenko et al teach, see paragraph 57, The metadata is appended to the video file using the standard MPEG wrappers. Romanenko et al and Choi do not further disclose encrypting the time-stamped video file and the metadata immediately upon recording or creation, the metadata including the time information. O’Toole, Jr. et al teach encrypting the time-stamped video file and the metadata immediately upon recording or creation, the metadata including the time information (e.g. column 9, lines 10-20: raw video is compressed using MPEG compressor, then encrypted by encryption processor 537. column 11, lines 28-35: encryption processor 537 encrypts video stream 573). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of O’Toole, Jr. et al into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi to encrypt the video to improve security to prevent the video from illegal copying.
For claim 10, Romanenko et al teach, see paragraph 57, video files are uploaded to a central server. Romanenko et al and Choi do not further disclose the time-stamped video file is encrypted when transmitted from the video source to a cloud platform. O’Toole, Jr. et al teach the time-stamped video file is encrypted when transmitted from the video source to a cloud platform (e.g. column 9, lines 10-20: raw video is compressed using MPEG compressor, then encrypted by encryption processor 537. column 11, lines 28-35: encryption processor 537 encrypts video stream 573). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of O’Toole, Jr. et al into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi to encrypt the video to improve security to prevent the video from illegal copying.
For claim 11, Romanenko et al teach, see paragraph 57, video files are uploaded to a central server. Romanenko et al and Choi do not further disclose the video file is encrypted when stored by a cloud platform. O’Toole, Jr. et al teach the video file is encrypted when stored by a cloud platform (e.g. column 9, lines 10-20: raw video is compressed using MPEG compressor, then encrypted by encryption processor 537. column 11, lines 28-35: encryption processor 537 encrypts video stream 573). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of O’Toole, Jr. et al into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi to encrypt the video to improve security to prevent the video from illegal copying.
Claims 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romanenko et al and Choi, as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8 and 16-19 above, and further in view of Hassbring et al (US 2025/0184500).
For claim 21, Romanenko et al and Choi do not further disclose the time-stamped video file is configured to provide the raw video file as a first presentation layer and the time information as a second presentation layer. Hassbring et al teach the time-stamped video file is configured to provide the raw video file as a first presentation layer and the time information as a second presentation layer (e.g. figure 1, paragraph 3: For example, an overlay can display information such as time stamps and camera locations directly on the footage). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hassbring et al into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi to enhance effectiveness of key feature by overlaying (e.g. paragraph 3, Hassbring et al).
For claim 22, Romanenko et al and Choi do not further disclose the second presentation layer is independent from the first presentation layer. Hassbring et al teach the second presentation layer is independent from the first presentation layer. (e.g. figure 1, paragraph 3: For example, an overlay can display information such as time stamps and camera locations directly on the footage). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hassbring et al into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi to enhance effectiveness of key feature by overlaying (e.g. paragraph 3, Hassbring et al).
For claim 23, Romanenko et la and Choi do not further disclose the second presentation layer is overlaid onto the first presentation layer such that at least a first portion of the first presentation layer is obscured by at least a second portion of the second presentation layer. Hassbring et al teach the second presentation layer is overlaid onto the first presentation layer such that at least a first portion of the first presentation layer is obscured by at least a second portion of the second presentation layer. (e.g. figure 1, paragraph 3: For example, an overlay can display information such as time stamps and camera locations directly on the footage). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hassbring et al into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi to enhance effectiveness of key feature by overlaying (e.g. paragraph 3, Hassbring et al).
For claim 24, Romanenko et al and Choi et al do not further disclose the second presentation layer mobile relative to the first presentation layer such that the first portion of the first presentation layer is revealed by moving the second portion of the second presentation layer. Hassbring et al teach the second presentation layer mobile relative to the first presentation layer such that the first portion of the first presentation layer is revealed by moving the second portion of the second presentation layer. (e.g. figure 1, paragraph 3: For example, an overlay can display information such as time stamps and camera locations directly on the footage). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hassbring et al into the teaching of Romanenko et al and Choi to enhance effectiveness of key feature by overlaying (e.g. paragraph 3, Hassbring et al).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAQUAN ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-1119. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur: 7:00 am-5:00 pm.
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 on 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.
Email: daquan.zhao1@uspto.gov.
Phone: (571)270-1119
/DAQUAN ZHAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights