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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Some of the closet prior art found was 2018/0182398, 20130317635 and 2010/0041443. However, none of the prior art found teaches or discloses alone or in combination the highlighted below.
A first playback device comprising:
at least one processor;
at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium; and
program instructions stored on the at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the first playback device to:
before a loss of power from a power supply of the first playback device, play back media content in synchrony with at least one second playback device, wherein the first playback device and the at least one second playback device are members of a first group of playback devices configured to play back media content in synchrony; and
after the loss of power from the power supply and resumption of power from the power supply of the first playback device:
based on a determination that a configuration state of the first
playback device corresponds to a first configuration state, automatically rejoin the first group for synchronous playback of media content with the at least one second playback device; or
based on a determination that the configuration state of the
playback device corresponds to a second configuration state different from the first configuration state, forgo automatically rejoining the first group.
11. 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 first playback device to:
before a loss of power from a power supply of the first playback device, play back media content in synchrony with at least one second playback device, wherein the first playback device and the at least one second playback device are members of a first group of playback devices configured to play back media content in synchrony; and
after the loss of power from the power supply and resumption of power from the
power supply of the first playback device:
based on a determination that a configuration state of the first playback
device corresponds to a first configuration state, automatically rejoin the first group for synchronous playback of media content with the at least one second playback device; or
based on a determination that the configuration state of the
playback device corresponds to a second configuration state different from the first configuration state, forgo automatically rejoining the first group.
20. A method carried out by a first playback device, the method comprising:
before a loss of power from a power supply of the first playback device, playing back media content in synchrony with at least one second playback device, wherein the first playback device and the at least one second playback device are members of a first group of playback devices configured to play back media content in synchrony; and
after the loss of power from the power supply and resumption of power from the power supply of the first playback device:
(i) based on a determination that a configuration state of the first playback device corresponds to a first configuration state, automatically rejoining the first group for synchronous playback of media content with the at least one second playback device; or
(ii) based on a determination that the configuration state of the playback device corresponds to a second configuration state different from the first configuration state, forgoing automatically rejoining the first group.
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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,220,454. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the instant claims and the patented claims are claiming playback devices to playback content in synchrony. In addition, both speak to power loss and resumption of power and rejoining a group after resumption of power among other things. Additionally, many of the claims only differ by obvious word and/or phrase changes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note the Figs and Abstracts of the additional references cited on the accompanying 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William Deane whose telephone number is 571 - 272- 7484. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - FRIDAY from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ahmad Matar, can be reached on 571-272-7488.
The official fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -273-8300. However, unofficial faxes can be direct to the examiner's computer at 571 273 -7484.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://pair-direct.uspto.gov.
Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
26Jun2026
/WILLIAM J DEANE JR/
Prosecution Insights