DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/16/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 6/16/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of Patent No. 11,343,581 and 12,238,381 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments and arguments with respect to claims 4-23 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.
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 4-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matero (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0174268) in view of Bonomi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,769,127) in further view of Brique et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0075423).
Referring to claim 4, Matero discloses receiving, at a server, a plurality of requests associated with navigation of a program guide from a service provider at a display device (see UE 104 in Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0009 and 0032), wherein the plurality of requests comprises requests for program guide structure information, and program guide content information, and wherein at least one of the plurality of requests is based at least in part on navigation to a portion of the program guide (see Paragraphs 0045-0046 and 0048).
accessing subscription information associated with the display device, wherein the subscription information comprises additional content not available to at least a subset of subscribers of the service provider (see Paragraph 0075 for allowing a user to subscribe to additional content available only to the subscribing/requesting user).
based at least in part on at least one of the plurality of requests, transmitting, from the server, a plurality of responses to the display device (see Paragraphs 0048-0053), wherein the plurality of responses comprises a) a first response comprising program guide structure information (see Paragraphs 0038-0040 for creating a visual presentation of the program guide displayed by the media device), b) a second response comprising responsive channel information and the portion of the program guide, wherein the responsive channel information is responsive to the at least one of the plurality of requests (see Paragraphs 0038-0040 for creating/managing the content flow/content displayed on the screen of display device and Paragraph 0048 for providing the program guide based on the media device requesting the information and again note Paragraph 0049 for providing multiple requests for program guide information at given time intervals), and c) a third response comprising program guide content information based at least in part on the portion of the program guide (see Paragraphs 0073-0075 for a subscribing user only receiving a portion of a program guide based on the chosen subscription).
Matero fails to teach that the responsive channel information is based at least in part on the subscription information associated with an account and that the subscription information comprises rights to additional content.
Bonomi discloses that responsive channel information is based at least in part on the subscription information associated with an account (see Column 2, Lines 36-51 and Column 18, Line 53 through Column 19, Line 33).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the program guide request and transmission system, as taught by Matero, using the subscriber account functionality, as taught by Bonomi, for the purpose of providing a flexible design that can enable subscribers to customize their program guides and service packages (see Column 3, Lines 41-55 of Bonomi).
Matero and Bonomi fail to teach that the subscription information comprises rights to additional content.
Brique discloses that subscription information comprises rights to additional content (see Paragraphs 0032-0038).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made, to modify the program guide request and transmission system, as taught by Matero and Bonomi, using the rights information, as taught by Brique, for the purpose of providing management of complex rights thus offering great flexibility of use to a distributor (see Paragraph 0019 of Brique).
Referring to claim 5, Matero discloses that the request for program guide structure information is received at a first time (see Paragraphs 0038-0040, 0045-0046 and 0048) and Cowperthwaite discloses that the request for channel information is received at a second time, and the request for guide content information is received at a third time (see requesting to display Figures 3A-3B and Paragraphs 0055-0064 and further note that the user can select multiple programs from the program guide and request additional levels of detail of the program guide information displayed to the user).
Referring to claim 6, Matero discloses that the server comprises a media content delivery server (see Paragraph 0029 and Figure 1).
Referring to claim 7, Matero, Bonomi and Brique disclose all of the limitations of claim 4, but fail to teach that the program guide structure information is transmitted prior to both (a) the responsive channel information and (b) the guide content information.
The Examiner takes Official Notice to the fact that program guide structure information, also known as a template, can be transmitted prior to the EPG channel, time and program information.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made, to modify the program guide request and transmission system, as taught by Matero, Bonomi and Brique, using the EPG template, as taught by the Examiner statement of Official Notice, for the purpose of preserving bandwidth by not transmitting the entire EPG package of data at one time.
Referring to claim 8, Brique discloses that the program guide structure information comprises a date field, time field, channel field, and a content field (see Figure 1 and Paragraph 0032).
Referring to claim 10, Bonomi discloses that a program guide can include channel information that comprises a listing of subscribed channels (see Column 2, Lines 36-51 and Column 18, Line 53 through Column 19, Line 33).
Referring to claim 11, Bonomi discloses that the channel information comprises a listing of groups of channels (see Column 2, Lines 36-51 and Column 18, Line 53 through Column 19, Line 33).
Referring to claim 12, Bonomi discloses that the response comprises program guide structure information that results in a generated display of a program guide grid (see Figures 11A-11G).
Referring to claim 13, Bonomi discloses that the responses comprise (a) the channel information and (b) the program guide content information that results in a generate display of a populated portion of the program guide (see Figures 11A-11G and Column 2, Lines 36-51 and Column 18, Line 53 through Column 19, Line 33).
Referring to claims 14-18 and 20-23, see the rejection of claims 4-8 and 10-13, respectively.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matero (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0174268) in view of Bonomi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,769,127) in further view of Brique et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0075423) in further view of Cowperthwaite (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2003/0184578).
Referring to claim 9, Matero, Bonomi and Brique disclose all of the limitations of claim 4, but fail to teach the limitations of claim 9.
Cowperthwaite discloses receiving, at the server, a second plurality of requests comprising a second request for channel information and a second request for guide content information based at least in part on navigation to a second portion of the program guide; and
based at least in part on at least one of the second plurality of requests,
transmitting, from the server, a second plurality of responses to the display device, wherein the second plurality of responses comprises (a) second responsive channel information based at least in part on the subscription information and the second portion of the program guide and (b) second guide content information based at least in part on the second portion of the program guide (see Figures 3A-3B and Paragraphs 0055-0064 and further note that the user can select multiple programs from the program guide and request additional levels of detail of the program guide information displayed to the user).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made, to modify the program guide delivery system, as taught by Matero, Bonomi and Brique, using the additional EPG request and response functionality, as taught by Cowperthwaite, for the purpose of providing a program guide that allows viewing for categorical information such as television show listings that do not require switching back and forth from the program listings page to the detailed information pages of particular selected programs (see Paragraph 0005 of Cowperthwaite).
Referring to claim 19, see the rejection of claim 9.
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 JASON P SALCE whose telephone number is (571)272-7301. The examiner can normally be reached 5:30am-10:00pm M-F (Flex Schedule).
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.
/Jason Salce/Senior Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Jason P Salce
Senior Examiner
Art Unit 2421
August 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights