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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to communications filed 05/12/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot due to new grounds of rejection.
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)(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, 9-11, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Grouf et al (US 11,395,038 and hereafter referred to as “Grouf”).
Regarding Claim 1, Grouf discloses a cloud-based computing system comprising:
at least one processor (Column 13, 15-30, Figure 1C, 170);
at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium (Column 13, 15-40, Figure 1C, 173, 176); and
program instructions stored on the at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium that, when executed by the at least one processor (Column 13, lines 15-45), cause the cloud-based computing system to:
maintain (i) a scheduled playlist of media items for playback by one or more playback devices and (ii) a current playback position within the scheduled playlist of media items (Figure 1B-1C, Figure 2A, Column 14, lines 14-51); and
while the current playback position within the scheduled playlist of media items is advancing (Figure 2A, Column 17, lines 8-26):
at a first time, receive, from a first playback device associated with a first user account, a first request to play back the scheduled playlist of media items (Column 17, lines 8-26);
determine a first priority media item for playback by the first playback device (Column 18, lines 19-22, pre roll advertisement);
transmit the first priority media item to the first playback device for playback beginning before playback of any media item from the scheduled playlist of media items by the first playback device (Column 18, lines 19-22, pre roll advertisement);
at a second time different from the first time, receive, from a second playback device associated with a second user account, a second request to play back the scheduled playlist of media items (Figure 2D, Figure 2J, Column 21, lines 51-60, I am watching this channel/playlist…please watch along..”);
determine a second priority media item for playback by the second playback device (Column 38, lines 35-44); and
transmit the second priority media item to the second playback device for playback beginning before playback of any media item from the scheduled playlist of media items by the second playback device (Column 38, lines 35-44).
Regarding Claim 11, Grouf discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium, wherein the non-transitory computer-readable medium is provisioned with program instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause a cloud-based computing system to:
maintain (i) a scheduled playlist of media items for playback by one or more playback devices and (ii) a current playback position within the scheduled playlist of media items (Figure 1B-1C, Figure 2A, Column 14, lines 14-51); and
while the current playback position within the scheduled playlist of media items is advancing (Figure 2A, Column 17, lines 8-26):
at a first time, receive, from a first playback device associated with a first user account, a first request to play back the scheduled playlist of media items (Column 17, lines 8-26);
determine a first priority media item for playback by the first playback device (Column 18, lines 19-22, pre roll advertisement);
transmit the first priority media item to the first playback device for playback beginning before playback of any media item from the scheduled playlist of media items by the first playback device (Column 18, lines 19-22, pre roll advertisement);
at a second time different from the first time, receive, from a second playback device associated with a second user account, a second request to play back the scheduled playlist of media items (Figure 2D, Figure 2J, Column 21, lines 51-60, I am watching this channel/playlist…please watch along..”);
determine a second priority media item for playback by the second playback device (Column 38, lines 35-44); and
transmit the second priority media item to the second playback device for playback beginning before playback of any media item from the scheduled playlist of media items by the second playback device (Column 38, lines 35-44).
Regarding Claim 20, Grouf discloses a method implemented by a cloud-based computing system, the method comprising:
maintaining (i) a scheduled playlist of media items for playback by one or more playback devices and (ii) a current playback position within the scheduled playlist of media items (Figure 1B-1C, Figure 2A, Column 14, lines 14-51); and
while the current playback position within the scheduled playlist of media items is advancing (Figure 2A, Column 17, lines 8-26):
at a first time, receiving, from a first playback device associated with a first user account, a first request to play back the scheduled playlist of media items (Column 17, lines 8-26);
determining a first priority media item for playback by the first playback device (Column 18, lines 19-22, pre roll advertisement);
transmitting the first priority media item to the first playback device for playback beginning before playback of any media item from the scheduled playlist of media items by the first playback device (Column 18, lines 19-22, pre roll advertisement);
at a second time different from the first time, receiving, from a second playback device associated with a second user account, a second request to play back the scheduled playlist of media items (Figure 2D, Figure 2J, Column 21, lines 51-60, I am watching this channel/playlist…please watch along..”);
determining a second priority media item for playback by the second playback device (Column 38, lines 35-44); and
transmitting the second priority media item to the second playback device for playback beginning before playback of any media item from the scheduled playlist of media items by the second playback device (Column 38, lines 35-44).
Regarding Claim 9 and 18, Grouf discloses all the limitations of Claim 1 and 11 respectively. Grouf discloses wherein: the program instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the cloud- based computing system to determine the first priority media item comprise program instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the cloud-based computing system to determine the first priority media item based on operational data associated with the first playback device (Column 17, lines 27-65); and the program instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the cloud- based computing system to determine the second priority media item comprise program instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the cloud-based computing system to determine the second priority media item based on operational data associated with the second playback device (Column 17, lines 27-65).
Regarding Claim 10 and 19, Grouf discloses all the limitations of Claim 9 and 18 respectively. Grouf discloses wherein the operational data associated with the first playback device comprises at least one of (i) a listening history corresponding to the first user account or (ii) an indication of user presence, and wherein the operational data associated with the second playback device comprises at least one of (i) a listening history corresponding to the second user account or (ii) an indication of user presence (Column 17, lines 27-44).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6-8 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grouf in view of Hou et al (US 2018/0014077 and hereafter referred to as “Hou”).
Regarding Claim 6 and 15, Grouf discloses all the limitations of Claim 1 and 11 respectively. Grouf discloses wherein the second priority media item is the first priority media item (when the user is playing a requested program a pre-roll advertisement is played in regard to tag of the playlist, Column 18, lines 14-25) and that advertainments can be substituted or edited for catch up of the user. Grouf does not explicitly state the same priority media item. Hou discloses wherein the second priority media item is the first priority media item (paragraph 0243, all end users or all end users in the same geographical area). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Grouf to include the missing limitations as taught by Hou in order for the advertiser to make the maximum impact for a promotion.
Regarding Claim 7 and 16, Grouf and Hou disclose all the limitations of Claim 1 and 15respectively. Grouf discloses maintain the first priority media item for a first period of time, wherein the first time and the second time are both within the first period of time (Figure 2D, Figure 2J, Column 21, lines 51-60, I am watching this channel/playlist…please watch along..”). Hou discloses: maintain the first priority media item for a first period of time, wherein the first time and the second time are both within the first period of time; and after the first period of time, maintain a third priority media item instead of the first priority media item for a second period of time (paragraph 0244, 0246, amount of time for an advertisement to be played and changing the schedule every half hour or hour). Same motivation as above.
Regarding Claim 8 and 17, Grouf and Hou disclose all the limitations of Claim 7 and 16 respectively. Grouf discloses further comprising program instructions stored on the at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the cloud-based computing system to: at a third time within the second period of time, receive, from a third playback device associated with a third user account, a third request to play back the scheduled playlist of media items; and transmit the third priority media item to the third playback device for playback beginning before playback of any media item from the scheduled playlist of media items by the third playback device (Figure 2D, Figure 2J, Column 21, lines 51-60, I am watching this channel/playlist…please watch along..” – a third friend is sent the invitation, see Figure 2C for list of friends or Figure 2H, Christine + 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 and 12-14 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARZANA HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5943. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 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, Christopher Kelley can be reached at 571-272-7331. 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.
/FARZANA HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
June 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights