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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that the cited reference fail to teach or suggest “determine that a configuration setting associated with the player profile and that authorizes the broadcast receiver device to implement updated recording schedules for live events is enabled by a user associated with the player profile;" and "generate, based on determining that the configuration setting is enabled, instructions for the broadcast receiver device that are configured to cause the broadcast receiver device to initiate recording of the broadcast of the live event at the start time”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Klappert is cited to disclose generate, instructions for the broadcast receiver device that are configured to cause the broadcast receiver device to initiate recording of the broadcast of the live event at the start time. For example, Klappert discloses that the recording instructions is updated and recording is performed; see at least Fig. 8 and paragraphs 0075-0077 and 0084-0085).
Webster is cited to disclose a configuration setting that authorizes a receiver device to implement updated recording schedules. For example, Webster discloses that a DVR scheduler may receive metadata update from a server indicating that a broadcast time for broadcast content included in a customer’s DVR recording list has been changed and an updated DVR recording list may be generated for the customer; see at least the Abstract and paragraphs 0077-0078.
Milgramm, previously cited in the rejection of claim 7, discloses a configuration setting is enabled by a user and generating, based on determining that the configuration setting is enabled, instruction for a broadcast receiver. For example, Milgramm discloses receiving user registration information and video data preference information from the user and based on the this information, generating instructions to the receiver, such as displaying a reminder; see at least paragraphs 0027, 0030-0033, 0038, 0060 and 0071.
For at least the above reasons, the present claimed invention is not patentable over the cited reference(s).
Claims 1, 5, 11 and 15 have been amended. The Double Patenting rejection is maintained until allowable subject matter is identified.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being obvious over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,200,311 in view of Klappert (US 2012/0033943).
Patent No. 12,200,311 discloses most of the claim except receiving an indication that a broadcast receiver device associated with a player profile is to record a broadcast of a live event.
Klappert discloses receiving an indication that a broadcast receiver device associated with a player profile is to record a broadcast of a live event. (recording instruction is received by processing circuitry and stored in storage; see at least paragraph 0064, wherein storage may be used to store guidance application data, including program information, guidance application setting, user preferences or profile information; see at least paragraph 0042).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Patent No. 12,200,311 by the teachings of Klappert by having the above limitation so to be able to update information in real time for use in a media guidance application; see at least the Abstract.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because at least one examined application claim is not patentable distinct from the reference claims(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s).
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 1-9, 11-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klappert (US 2012/0033943) in view of Webster (US 20170064378) and further in view of Milgramm (US 2013/0247120).
Regarding claim 1, Klappert discloses a system, comprising:
one or more processors coupled to non-transitory memory, the one or more processors profile
configured to:
receive an indication that a broadcast receiver device associated with a player profile is to record a broadcast of a live event (recording instruction is received by processing circuitry and stored in storage; see at least paragraph 0064, wherein storage may be used to store guidance application data, including program information, guidance application setting, user preferences or profile information; see at least paragraph 0042);
determine that a start time of the live event satisfies a deviation condition corresponding to a broadcast schedule (detection of significant differences between stored media information and media update information; see at least Fig. 11 and paragraphs 0084-0085);
generate, instructions for the broadcast receiver device that are configured to cause the broadcast receiver device to initiate recording of the broadcast of the live event at the start time (the recording instructions is updated and recording is performed; see at least Fig. 8 and paragraphs 0075-0077 and 0084-0085); and
transmit the instructions to the broadcast receiver device, causing the broadcast receiver device to initiate recording of the broadcast of the live event at the start time (instructions is updated and recording is performed; see at least Fig. 8 and paragraphs 0075-0077 and 0084-0085).
Klappert discloses the player profile, the broadcast receiver device and the recording schedules for live events, as above, but is not clear about a configuration setting that authorizes a receiver device to implement updated recording schedules is enabled by a user and generating, based on determining that the configuration setting is enabled, instruction for a broadcast receiver.
Webster discloses a configuration setting that authorizes a receiver device to implement updated recording schedules; a DVR scheduler may receive metadata update from a server indicating that a broadcast time for broadcast content included in a customer’s DVR recording list has been changed and an updated DVR recording list may be generated for the customer; see at least the Abstract and paragraphs 0077-0078.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Klappert to include the teachings of Webster so to detect a change in a DVR recording list associated with a customer and generate and updated DVR recording list based on the changed; see at least the Abstract.
Klappert in view of Webster are not clear about a configuration setting is enabled by a user and generating, based on determining that the configuration setting is enabled, instruction for a broadcast receiver.
Milgramm discloses the above missing limitation; receiving user registration information and video data preference information from the user and based on this information, generating instructions to the receiver, such as displaying a reminder; see at least paragraphs 0027, 0030-0033, 0038, 0060 and 0071.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Klappert in view of Webster to include the teachings of Milgramm so to detect live video data satisfying user specified criteria and consolidate live broadcasting management, analysis of detected video data, and notification of potential viewers; see at least the Abstract.
Regarding claim 2, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to determine that the start time of the live event has deviated based on a message from an external computing system (Klappert; from a media guidance data source; see at least paragraph 0084).
Regarding claim 3, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to receive the indication from a broadcast provider system in communication with the broadcast receiver device (Webster; a DVR scheduler may receive metadata update from a server).
Regarding claim 4, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to receive the indication from an application executing on the broadcast receiver device (Klappert; recording instruction is received by processing circuitry from the user’s device; see at least paragraph 0064).
Regarding claim 5, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the configuration setting is a first configuration setting, and wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
determine that a second configuration setting associated with the player profile and that
authorizes the broadcast receiver device to present notifications for display with broadcast content is enabled by the user associated with the player profile (Webster; presenting an update notification; see at least Fig. 7 and paragraphs 0078-0079); and
generate the instructions based on determining that the first configuration setting is enabled and that the second configuration setting is enabled (the player profile of Klappert in combination with Webster’s configuration settings and Milgramm’s setting; as above).
Regarding claim 6, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
identify a plurality of data sources for live event information, each of the plurality of data
sources associated with a respective priority score (media sources are assigned a reliability score; see at least paragraphs 0005, 0072 and claim 5); and
determine that the start time of the live event has deviated from the broadcast schedule
based on a plurality of messages from a subset of the plurality of data sources and the respective
priority score of each data source of the subset (if a source is determined to be reliable, using its media update information and if not reliable, not using its media updated information; see at least paragraphs 0005, 0072 and claim 5).
Regarding claim 7, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to generate the instructions to cause the broadcast receiver device to include a notification indicating that the live event has started at the start time (Milgramm; see at least Fig. 6 and paragraph 0071).
Regarding claim 8, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 7, wherein the notification further comprises an actionable object that causes the broadcast receiver device displaying the notification to display the broadcast of the live event (Milgramm; see at least Fig. 6 and paragraph 0071).
Regarding claim 9, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to maintain a plurality of player profiles corresponding to players consuming a service of the one or more processors, each of the plurality of player profiles associated with a respective broadcast receiver device of a plurality of broadcast receiver devices (Klappert; see at least paragraphs 0037 and 0042).
Claim 11 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 12 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 2.
Claim 13 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 3.
Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 4.
Claim 15 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 5.
Claim 16 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 6.
Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 7.
Claim 18 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 8.
Claim 19 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 9.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm and further in view of Pleiman (US 2020/0213678).
Regarding claim 10, Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm disclose the system of claim 1, and disclose the live event, but are not clear about determine a duration of the event; and generate the instructions to further include an indication of the duration of the event.
Pleiman discloses the above missing limitation; table 200 containing TV event schedule including a duration; see at least paragraph 0022.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Klappert in view of Webster and further in view of Milgramm to include the teachings of Pleiman so to automatically select TV channels based on wager information; see at least the Abstract.
Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 10.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 YASSIN ALATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5683. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7-4 ET.
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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at 571-272-4195. 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.
/YASSIN ALATA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights