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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/03/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-final rejection on 02/10/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Claims 3-4, 7, 9-12, 15, 17-18, 21 and 25 have been cancelled.
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 8, 13-14, 16, 19-20 and 22-24 are pending.
The object to the Specification has been withdrawn in light of the submitted new title of the invention.
The claim objection has been withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendment.
Applicant’s arguments in the Remarks filed on 05/11/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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, 6, 8, 13-14, 16, 20 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al (CN 112616089 A) in view of Schwartz et al (US 2019/0324775).
Regarding claim 1, Sun discloses a live-stream display processing method (¶ [0005] and ¶ [0051]), comprising:
acquiring a combined live-stream and image position information corresponding to the combined live-stream from a first server (¶ [0041], ¶ [0052] and ¶ [0056]); wherein, the combined live-stream is obtained by combining at least two live-streams, and the image position information is configured for identifying respective positions of the at least two live-streams in the combined live-stream (¶ [0044]-[0050]);
separating the at least two live-streams from the combined live-stream respectively, based on the image position information (¶ [0041]-[0042], ¶ [0053]-[0056] and ¶ [0064]); and
displaying the at least two live-streams based on a preset live-stream layout (¶ [0041]-[0042], ¶ [0056] and ¶ [0064]),
wherein the at least two live-streams comprises a first live stream and a second live stream, the first live stream is a live stream acquired by a streamer stream, and the second live stream is a live stream acquired using a local live terminal by the streamer (¶ [0028], ¶ [0042] and ¶ [0056]).
Sun is silent about a live stream acquired using a local camera, and also silent about drawing the at least two live streams on different canvases respectively and displaying the canvases drawn with the at least two live streams.
Schwartz discloses a system in which at least two live-streams comprises a first live stream and a second live stream, the first live stream is a live stream acquired using a local camera, and the second live stream is a live stream acquired from a server (¶ [0042], ¶ [0050], ¶ [0072], ¶ [0084] and ¶ [0090]-[0093]), and drawing the at least two live streams on different canvases respectively and displaying the canvases drawn with the at least two live streams based on a preset live-stream layout (¶ [0013]-[0016] and ¶ [0146]-[0152]).
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 Sun system with the teaching of Schwartz, so to provide an alternative way of obtaining live streams from different sources and of processing live streams for simultaneously display as a matter of designed choices.
Regarding claim 2, Sun in view of Schwartz discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. The combined system further discloses wherein, displaying the at least two live-streams based on the preset live-stream layout (taught by Sun; ¶ [0042] and ¶ [0055]-[0056]; and taught by Schwartz; ¶ [0052] and ¶ [0089]), comprises:
displaying the first live stream in a first area indicated by the preset live-stream layout, and displaying the second live stream in a second area indicated by the preset live-stream layout; wherein there is no overlap between the first area and the second area (taught by Sun; ¶ [0056] and ¶ [0063]-[0064]; and Schwartz’s Figures 12-14).
Regarding claim 6, Sun discloses a live stream processing method, comprising:
combining at least two live streams to obtain a combined live stream; obtaining respective position information of the at least two live streams on the combined live stream, as image position information corresponding to the combined live stream (¶ [0011]-[0015] and ¶ [0042]-[0046]);
pushing the combined live stream and the image position information corresponding to the combined live stream to a first server (¶ [0013], ¶ [0016], ¶ [0040]-[0042] and ¶ [0047]-[0050]); wherein, the image position information is configured for separating the at least two live streams from the combined live stream (¶ [0019]-[0021] and ¶ [0053]-[0056]),
wherein, combining the at least two live streams to obtain the combined live stream, comprises: acquiring a first live stream and a second live stream from a local live terminal; and combining the first live stream and the second live stream to obtain the combined live stream (¶ [0028], ¶ [0042] and ¶ [0056]).
Sun is silent about a live stream acquired using a local camera.
Schwartz discloses a system in which at least two live-streams comprises a first live stream and a second live stream, the first live stream is a live stream acquired using a local camera, and the second live stream is a live stream acquired from a server (¶ [0042], ¶ [0050], ¶ [0072], ¶ [0084] and ¶ [0090]-[0093]).
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 Sun system with the teaching of Schwartz, so to provide an alternative way of obtaining live streams from different sources as a matter of designed choices.
Regarding claim 8, Sun in view of Schwartz discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 6. The combined system further discloses the combining the at least two live streams to obtain the combined live stream, comprises:
combining the at least two live streams by using a target combining template to obtain the combined live stream; wherein, the target combining template is defined with the respective position information of the at least two live streams on the combined live stream (taught by Sun; ¶ [0011]-[0015] and ¶ [0042]-[0046]; and taught by Schwartz; ¶ [0035]-[0038] and ¶ [0068]-[0070]);
obtaining the respective position information of the at least two live streams on the combined live stream, as image position information corresponding to the combined live stream, comprises:
obtaining the respective position information of the at least two live streams on the combined live stream from the target combining template, as the image position information corresponding to the combined live stream (taught by Sun; ¶ [0038]-[0050]).
Regarding claims 13-14, all limitations of claims 13-14 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, all limitations of claim 16 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claim 2.
Regarding claims 20 and 22, all limitations of claims 20 and 22 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claims 6 and 8 respectively.
Regarding claim 23, all limitations of claim 23 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claim 6.
Regarding claim 24, all limitations of claim 24 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claim 2.
Claims 5 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al (CN 112616089 A) in view of Schwartz et al (US 2019/0324775) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (CN 111541930 A).
Regarding claim 5, Sun in view of Schwartz discloses the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. The combined system is silent about image coordinate information corresponding to the combined live stream is carried in Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) information.
Chen discloses image coordinate information corresponding to the live-stream merged display is carried in Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) information (¶ [0017] and ¶ [0088]-[0090]).
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 Sun in view of Schwartz system with the teaching of Chen, so to provide an alternative way of providing additional information of live streams as a matter of designed choices.
Regarding claim 19, all limitations of claim 19 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claim 5.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIGI L DUBASKY whose telephone number is (571)270-5686. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00.
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at 571-272-1915. 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.
/GIGI L DUBASKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights