Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 19/030,657

CHANNEL BAR USER INTERFACE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 17, 2025
Priority
Dec 10, 2012 — provisional 61/735,399 +6 more
Examiner
SALTARELLI, DOMINIC D
Art Unit
2421
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Apple Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
679 granted / 859 resolved
+21.0% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
872
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.2%
-33.8% vs TC avg
§103
46.8%
+6.8% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 859 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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 pre-AIA 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 – (e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language. Claims 1-7 and 10-12 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Hayden (10,051,300). Regarding claims 1, 11, and 12, Hayden discloses a method, electronic device, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device in communication with one or more input devices and a display, cause the electronic device to perform a method comprising: while displaying, via the display, a first episode of a first content series that is being played at the electronic device via a first content pathway, detecting a change in a playback position in the first episode of the first content series; and in response to detecting the change in the playback position in the first episode of the first content series: in accordance with a determination that the changed playback position satisfies one or more criteria relative to an end of the first episode, initiating display, via the display, of a second episode of the first content series via a second content pathway, different from the first content pathway (col. 8 lines 1-13, where each episode is retrieved via a different content pathway through the use of unique URLs associated with each episode, col. 4 lines 26-38 and col. 6 lines 21-36). Regarding claim 2, Hayden discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the display of the second episode is initiated from a beginning of the second episode (col. 8 lines 1-13). Regarding claim 3, Hayden discloses the method of claim 1, wherein initiating display of the second episode includes displaying an information screen associated with the first content series (fig. 3). Regarding claim 4, Hayden discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the information screen corresponds to the second episode of the first content series (episodes are presented sequentially, fig. 3). Regarding claim 5, Hayden discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the information screen includes one or more indications that additional information screens for the first content series are available for display (col. 7 lines 33-47). Regarding claim 6, Hayden discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising: while displaying the information screen, receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input changing the displayed information screen; and in response to detecting the input changing the displayed information screen, replacing the information screen with a respective information screen, different from the information screen (such as returning to main user interface of fig. 2). Regarding claim 7, Hayden discloses the method of claim 1, wherein initiating display of the second episode includes displaying an indication that the second episode is a next episode in the first content series (fig. 3). Regarding claim 10, Haydien discloses the method of claim 1, wherein: the first content pathway corresponds to a first media provider, and the second content pathway corresponds to a second media provider, different from the first media provider (each URL for each episode points to a unique network address, col. 6 lines 21-36). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim 8 and 9 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hayden in view of McClements, IV (2012/0151346) [McClements]. Regarding claims 8 and 9, Hayden discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising displaying an indication of the playback position while displaying the first episode, wherein the indication of the playback position is displayed in a scrubber bar (fig. 3, scrubber bar 305) Hayden fails to disclose the method further comprises in response to detecting the changed playback position, and in accordance with the determination that the first playback position satisfies the one or more criteria relative to the end of the first episode, and in accordance with a determination that input is not detected for a period of time greater than a threshold period of time, ceasing display of the scrubber bar including the indication of playback position. In an analogous art, McClements teaches it was known in the art at the time of invention to remove display of a scrubber bar if there is no input detected from a user after a threshold period of time, freeing up display space for the desired video content (paragraph 0072). It would have been obvious at the time of invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Hayden to include in response to detecting the changed playback position, and in accordance with the determination that the first playback position satisfies the one or more criteria relative to the end of the first episode, and in accordance with a determination that input is not detected for a period of time greater than a threshold period of time, ceasing display of the scrubber bar including the indication of playback position, as suggested by McClements, for the conventional benefit of freeing up display space for the desired video content. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC D SALTARELLI whose telephone number is (571)272-7302. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST. 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. /DOMINIC D SALTARELLI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12706625
SIGNAL DETECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12707091
METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR SIGNALING OF SYNTAX ELEMENTS IN VIDEO CODING
2y 0m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12701260
MOTION VECTOR PREDICTION FOR VIDEO CODING
2y 6m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12701288
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATIC CHANNEL LINEUP DETERMINATION
2y 3m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12700884
NOISE CANCELING CIRCUITS
1y 7m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+15.2%)
2y 6m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 859 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month