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 .
This Final Office Action is in response to the application 19/060,612 filed on 04/07/2026.
Status of claims:
Claims 1, 3, 5, 13, and 20 are amended in this Office Action.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this Office Action.
Response to Arguments
CLAIM OBJECTIONS
After reviewing the Applicant’s remarks filed 04/07/2026 (pg.7) and the amendment made to claim 3, the Examiner respectfully submits that the objection made to claim 3 in the previous office action is now withdrawn.
CLAIM REJECTIONS UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 102/103
Applicant’s arguments filed on 04/07/2026 (pages 7-10) regarding claim rejections under 35 U.S.C 102/103 have been fully considered. However, after further examination, the Examiner respectfully submits that the arguments are partially not persuasive.
The applicant argues that the cited references do not teach or suggest “providing, in the item search page, a generation entry in association with the search control, wherein the generation entry is configured to present guidance information for guiding a model to generate one or more media items” of claims 1, 13, and 20.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant; the Examiner respectfully submits that Zeiler discloses “Fig. 2B-C & [0021] The digital media item tag field may be configured to receive user selections of individual digital media item tags… [0022] The digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field may be determined based on a prediction of user-provided search queries. For example, an incomplete entry in the digital media item search query field may result in one or more possible digital media item tags based on the prediction. By way of non-limiting illustration, in FIG. 2B, the letters “co” are entered into digital media item search query field 208 and possible corresponding tags “coffee,” “Colorado,” “computer,” and “cooking” are presented in digital media item tag field 210… [0024] The presented digital media items may correspond to digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field…[0040] At an operation 312, visual previews of digital media items may be presented via the digital media item preview frame. The digital media items may be one or both of local digital media items or connected digital media items. The digital media items may correspond to digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field”. The system of Zeiler is directed to generating digital media item tags based on the user-provided search queries wherein the digital media item tags can help users to narrow down to the media items with specific content related to the digital media item tags. The digital media item tags can correspond to generation entry of the application wherein both are generated based on the user queries and can provide the model guidance to generate one or more media items. For example, in fig. 2B of Zeiler, the letters “co” are entered into digital media item search query field and corresponding tags can be generated such as “coffee,” “Colorado,” “computer,” and “cooking”. Once the user selects a tag such as coffee, the tag can provide guidance information for guiding a model to generate media items that have associations with coffee such as presented in fig. 2C. Therefore Zeiler at least teaches “providing, in the item search page, a generation entry in association with the search control, wherein the generation entry is configured to present guidance information for guiding a model to generate one or more media items” of claims 1, 13, and 20.
The applicant argues that the cited references do not teach or suggest “generating a set of media items based on the search term and displaying the set of media items in the item search page” of claims 1, 13, and 20.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant; the Examiner respectfully submits that Zeiler discloses “[0039] At an operation 310, user selections of individual digital media item tags may be received via the digital media item tag field… [0040] At an operation 312, visual previews of digital media items may be presented via the digital media item preview frame. The digital media items may be one or both of local digital media items or connected digital media items. The digital media items may correspond to digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field.”. The system of Zeiler presents the media items based on the query of a user and the selected tags in a space such as a digital media item preview frame. Thus, the media items can be generated based on search terms and displayed in a page. Therefore, Zeiler at least teaches “generating a set of media items based on the search term and displaying the set of media items in the item search page” of claims 1, 13, and 20.
Applicant’s remaining arguments filed on 04/07/2026 have been fully
considered. However, after further examination, new grounds of rejection are presented
necessitated by applicant’s amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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, 5-6, 12-14, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeiler et al. (US PGPUB 20210326040) "Zeiler" in view of Wang et al. (US PGPUB 20210397645) “Wang”.
Regarding claim 1, Zeiler teaches a method ([0033]) of generating media items, comprising: displaying an item search page comprising a search control, the item search page being configured to provide an item search result corresponding to received input information (Fig. 2A & [0018]: “The digital media item search query field subcomponent may be configured to provide a digital media item search query field for presentation via user computing platform. The digital media item search query field may be configured to receive input from the on-screen keyboard, another keyboard, and/or other sources”…[0023]: “The digital media item preview frame subcomponent may be configured to provide a digital media item preview frame for presentation via user computing platform. The digital media item preview frame may be configured to present visual previews of digital media items.”); receiving a search term inputted in the search control (Fig. 2B & [0018]: “The digital media item search query field subcomponent may be configured to provide a digital media item search query field for presentation via user computing platform. The digital media item search query field may be configured to receive input from the on-screen keyboard, another keyboard, and/or other sources. In some implementations, a user may cut and paste information into the digital media item search query field…A non-limiting example of a digital media item search query field is illustrated in FIGS. 2A, 2B, and 2E by digital media item search query field 208”.); providing, in the item search page, a generation entry in association with the search control ([0020]: “The digital media item tags may be presented based on input received by the digital media item search query field”…[0022]: “The digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field may be determined based on a prediction of user-provided search queries. For example, an incomplete entry in the digital media item search query field may result in one or more possible digital media item tags based on the prediction. By way of non-limiting illustration, in FIG. 2B, the letters “co” are entered into digital media item search query field 208 and possible corresponding tags “coffee,” “Colorado,” “computer,” and “cooking” are presented in digital media item tag field 210”… Examiner’s note: The media item tags are equivalent to generation entries where the tags can be associated with the search query.), wherein the generation entry is configured to present guidance information for guiding a model to generate one or more media items ([0040]: “At an operation 312, visual previews of digital media items may be presented via the digital media item preview frame. The digital media items may be one or both of local digital media items or connected digital media items. The digital media items may correspond to digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field”… Examiner’s note: The item tags can correspond to generation entry that when one is selected, it can provide information to a model to generate one or more media items); generating a set of media items based on the search term and displaying the set of media items in the item search page (Fig. 2C & [0039]: “At an operation 310, user selections of individual digital media item tags may be received via the digital media item tag field”… [0040]: “At an operation 312, visual previews of digital media items may be presented via the digital media item preview frame. The digital media items may be one or both of local digital media items or connected digital media items. The digital media items may correspond to digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field”… Examiner’s note: Digital media item tags or generation entries can be selected by the user and corresponding media items can be displayed).
Zeiler does not explicitly teach in response to a selection of the generation entry, displaying a process of performing media item generation.
Wang teaches in response to a selection of the generation entry, displaying a process of performing media item generation ([0080]: “Therefore, the method further includes: displaying the input image and a search result loading icon on a search loading page of the IM client”… [0082]: “For example, referring to FIG. 1c, when the user selects the input sticker, the terminal displays a sticker search loading page 1c3. The search loading page 1c3 includes an input sticker selected or determined by the user, and a search reset loading icon. The search result loading icon can be set, according to actual needs, to, for example, a circular loading icon or a long-strip loading icon (e.g., a progress bar)”… Examiner’s note: The system displays a loading page that can correspond to a process of performing media item generation when an input is selected and particular outputs such as similar stickers are generated. This limitation is a contingent limitation. Please see MPEP § 2111.04). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Wang teachings in the Zeiler system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate displaying a process of media generation taught by Wang in the Zeiler system to prevent user experience from being degraded by the anxiety of the user waiting, as recognized by Wang ([0080]). In addition, the display can also provide the user with helpful information while the media is generating, thus can improve user experience with the system. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, Zeiler in view of Wang teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zeiler further teaches in response to receiving the search term at the search control, providing the generation entry, wherein the generation entry presents first guidance information, wherein the first guidance information is updated as the search word changes (Fig. 2B-E & [0022]: The digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field may be determined based on a prediction of user-provided search queries. For example, an incomplete entry in the digital media item search query field may result in one or more possible digital media item tags based on the prediction. By way of non-limiting illustration, in FIG. 2B, the letters “co” are entered into digital media item search query field 208 and possible corresponding tags “coffee,” “Colorado,” “computer,” and “cooking” are presented in digital media item tag field 210”… [0024]: “The presented digital media items may correspond to digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field”… Examiner’s note: Queries can be received by the system and corresponding tags can be provided to the user. The media items can be displayed based on the media item tags. Each media item tags can presents guidance information because it present media items in association with the tag and the tags can be updated based on the search word changes as explained in paragraph [0022]. This limitation is a contingent limitation. Please see MPEP § 2111.04).
Regarding claim 5, Zeiler in view of Wang teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zeiler further teaches wherein the set of media items comprise a first set of media items, and the method further comprises: displaying the first set of media items generated based on the search term and a second set of media items obtained through a searching using the search term in the item search page (Fig. 2C-E & [0021]: “The digital media item tag field may be configured to receive user selections of individual digital media item tags. The user may input multiple digital media item tags. In some implementations, the digital media item tag field may be configured to present an option to add a digital media item tag responsive to receipt of a user selection of a given digital media item tag (see, e.g., 210 in FIGS. 2C and 2D)”… Examiner’s note: A user can select one tag and receive corresponding media items such as in fig. 2C. A user can also be presented with second set of media items with search terms from plurality of tags such as in fig. 2E).
Regarding claim 6, Zeiler in view of Wang teaches all of the limitations of claim 5. Zeiler further teaches wherein the second set of media items comprise: a media item matching the search term in a local media item library or a remote media item library ([0023]: “The digital media item preview frame may be configured to present visual previews of digital media items. The digital media items may be one or both of local digital media items or connected digital media items”…Examiner’s note: Digital media items of both local digital media items or connected digital media items can be equivalent to a media item matching the search term in a local media item library or a remote media item library).
Regarding claim 12, Zeiler in view of Wang teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zeiler further teaches wherein the set of media items are generated through: generating an input content to a model based on the search term; and obtaining the set of media items generated by the model based on the input content (Fig. 2C & [0024]: “The presented digital media items may correspond to digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field. In some implementations, the digital media item preview frame may be configured to present recently acquired digital media items absent user selections of individual digital media item tags in the digital media item tag field”… Examiner’s note: The system is based on a model where input can be received such as tags based on the search term inputted by the user. Corresponding media items are then generated based on the input terms and tags).
Regarding claim 13, note the rejections of claim 1. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under the same prior-art teachings.
Regarding claim 14, note the rejections of claim 2. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under the same prior-art teachings.
Regarding claim 17, note the rejections of claim 5. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under the same prior-art teachings.
Regarding claim 18, note the rejections of claim 6. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under the same prior-art teachings.
Regarding claim 20, note the rejections of claim 1. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under the same prior-art teachings.
Claims 3-4 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeiler et al. (US PGPUB 20210326040) "Zeiler" in view of Wang et al. (US PGPUB 20210397645) “Wang” and Whitnah et al. (US PGPUB 20170249307) “Whitnah”.
Regarding claim 3, Zeiler in view of Wang teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zeiler further teaches receiving a request of searching for a media item based on the search term ([0018]: “The digital media item search query field subcomponent may be configured to provide a digital media item search query field for presentation via user computing platform(s) 104. The digital media item search query field may be configured to receive input from the on-screen keyboard, another keyboard, and/or other sources. In some implementations, a user may cut and paste information into the digital media item search query field… The search queries may relate to one or more of people, objects, locations, dates, and/or other queries. A non-limiting example of a digital media item search query field is illustrated in FIGS. 2A, 2B, and 2E by digital media item search query field 208”).
Zeiler in view of Wang does not explicitly teach in response to the number of media items matching the search word being less than a threshold, providing the generation entry in the item search page.
Whitnah teaches in response to the number of media items matching the search word being less than a threshold, providing the generation entry in the item search page ([0107]: “In response to a first structured query, the social-networking system may generate one or more second structured queries to broaden the structured query. These may be referred to as broadening queries. These broadening queries may be variations of the first structured query, where the broadening query uses less query tokens than the first structured query, or replaces particular query tokens in order to generate more search results... In this case, the alternative query tokens may be determined by identifying query tokens that, if substituted into the first structured query, would produce more search results than the original query token. In particular embodiments, broadening structured queries may be generated when the search results corresponding to the first structured query are below a threshold number of search results. Structured queries with too many limitations, or that use query tokens that do not match many social-graph entities, may produce few or no results. When a structured query produces too few results, it may be useful to provide suggests for how to modify that query to generate additional result. The social-networking system may analyze the first structured query and provide suggestion for how to modify the query so that it produces more results.”… Examiner’s note: This limitation is a contingent limitation. Please see MPEP § 2111.04). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Whitnah teachings in the Zeiler and Wang system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate providing suggestions to modify query for query with search results below a threshold taught by Whitnah in the Zeiler and Wang system to increase in number of results, speed up searches, reduce errors, and improve user experience. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
Regarding claim 4, Zeiler in view of Wang and Whitnah teaches all of the limitations of claim 3. Zeiler further teaches wherein the generation entry presents second guidance information determined based on the search term (Fig. 2C-E & [0021]: “The digital media item tag field may be configured to receive user selections of individual digital media item tags. The user may input multiple digital media item tags. In some implementations, the digital media item tag field may be configured to present an option to add a digital media item tag responsive to receipt of a user selection of a given digital media item tag (see, e.g., 210 in FIGS. 2C and 2D)”... Examiner’s note: A user can further add additional tags to obtain particular preview of the images, thus is equivalent to a generation entry that presents second guidance information determined based on the search term).
Regarding claim 15, note the rejections of claim 3. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under the same prior-art teachings.
Regarding claim 16, note the rejections of claim 3. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under the same prior-art teachings.
Claims 7-8, 10-11, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeiler et al. (US PGPUB 20210326040) "Zeiler" in view of Wang et al. (US PGPUB 20210397645) “Wang” and Guggenberger et al. (US PGPUB 20230298629) “Guggenberger”.
Regarding claim 7, Zeiler in view of Wang teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zeiler in view of Wang does not explicitly teach based on a selection of at least one of the set of media items, adding the at least one media item in a media editing window.
Guggenberger teaches based on a selection of at least one of the set of media items, adding the at least one media item in a media editing window ([0066]: “GUI 416 illustrates a selected sticker 28 (e.g., sticker 406) of the plurality of stickers 24 (e.g., stickers 406, 408, 410, 414) generated by the sticker generating component 18 to add in the video 16. The user 104 may rotate the sticker 406 and place the sticker 406 at an angle on the video 16. In addition, the user 104 may place the same sticker 406 at different times and/or scenes in the video 16. The video consumption component 36 (FIG. 1) may place the sticker 406 in an overlay 42 on the video 16 when the video 16 is played at the placement 32 and the time selected by the user 104”… Examiner’s note: A sticker or a media item can be selected by a user and it can be edited in an editing space such as presented in fig. 4C-D.). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Guggenberger teachings in the Zeiler and Wang system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate adding selected media item to an editing space taught by Guggenberger in the Zeiler and Wang system to boost user engagement and intent. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
Regarding claim 8, Zeiler in view of Wang and Guggenberger teaches all of the limitations of claim 7. Zeiler further teaches storing the at least one added media item in association with the search term ([0024]: “The presented digital media items may correspond to digital media item tags presented in the digital media item tag field. In some implementations, the digital media item preview frame may be configured to present recently acquired digital media items absent user selections of individual digital media item tags in the digital media item tag field”… Examiner’s note: Media items can correspond to respective digital media item tags so this is equivalent to media items stored in association with the search terms).
Regarding claim 10, Zeiler in view of Wang and Guggenberger teaches all of the limitations of claim 7. Zeiler in view of Wang does not explicitly teach posting a media content item based on the at least one media item added in the media editing window.
Guggenberger teaches posting a media content item based on the at least one media item added in the media editing window (Fig. 5A-C & [0077]: “At 610, the method includes receiving a placement of the at least one sticker in the video. The user 104 may select a placement 32 for the at least one sticker. The placement 32 may include a time in the video 16 or a scene in the video 16 where the at least one sticker is positioned. In addition, the placement 32 may indicate a position for the at least one sticker on a screen of the display 110 . The placement 32 may also indicate a size of the at least one sticker. As such, the placement 32 may also indicate a rotation of the at least one sticker and a scale of the at least one sticker”… [0078]: “Upon completing the video 16 creation process, the video platform 12 may store the video 16 and the associated metadata 34 in one or more datastores 108”… [0079]: “The metadata 34 includes sticker information 30 with the content 26 and the placement 32 for the at least one sticker (e.g., the selected sticker 28”). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Guggenberger teachings in the Zeiler and Wang system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate posting of media items taught by Guggenberger in the Zeiler and Wang system to promote a user’s product and increase user’s connection with other users in a network. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
Regarding claim 11, Zeiler in view of Wang and Guggenberger teaches all of the limitations of claim 10. Zeiler in view of Wang does not explicitly teach wherein a playback interface of the media content item is configured to present an indication element in association with the at least one media item, the indication element being configured to direct to an item generation panel, the item generation panel being configured to provide a media item generated based on the received input information.
Guggenberger teaches a playback interface of the media content item is configured to present an indication element in association with the at least one media item, the indication element being configured to direct to an item generation panel, the item generation panel being configured to provide a media item generated based on the received input information ([0066]: “The user 104 and/or other viewers of the video 16 may add one or more comments 420 to the video 16. The comments 420 may be related to the content 26 included in the sticker 406”… Examiner’s note: A space provided for comments associated to the sticker can be equivalent to playback interface of the media content item configured to present an indication element in association with the at least one media item. The comments applied to a sticker can be equivalent to received input information where they are configured to provide a media item generated). Please refer to claim 10 for the motivational statement.
Regarding claim 19, note the rejections of claim 7. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under the same prior-art teachings.
Claims 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeiler et al. (US PGPUB 20210326040) "Zeiler" in view of Wang et al. (US PGPUB 20210397645) “Wang”, Guggenberger et al. (US PGPUB 20230298629) “Guggenberger” and Ohmori et al. (US PGPUB 20020059303) “Ohmori”.
Regarding claim 9, Zeiler in view of Wang and Guggenberger teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Zeiler further teaches wherein the search term is a first search word(Fig. 2C & [0021]: “The digital media item tag field may be configured to receive user selections of individual digital media item tags. The user may input multiple digital media item tags. In some implementations, the digital media item tag field may be configured to present an option to add a digital media item tag responsive to receipt of a user selection of a given digital media item tag”).
Zeiler in view of Wang and Guggenberger does not explicitly teach receiving a search request associated with a second search term; and in response to the second search term matching the first search term, providing the at least one media item stored in association with the first search term as a search result.
Ohmori teaches receiving a search request associated with a second search term; and in response to the second search term matching the first search term, providing the at least one media item stored in association with the first search term as a search result ([0064]: “In the first embodiment, a search is performed every time when an instruction of a search is issued. However, when the same query as the query which executed at the past was carried out and data is not updated from the time point of the past, the search results generated in executing the query at the past and stored may be output as search results”… Examiner’s note: Limitation “in response to the second…” is a contingent limitation. Please see MPEP § 2111.04). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Ohmori teachings in the Zeiler, Wang and Guggenberger system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate providing similar results for same queries taught by Ohmori in the Zeiler, Wang and Guggenberger system to reduce latency and cost. This close relation between the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAO DANG VUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-1812. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30-5 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, Kavita Stanley can be reached at (571) 272-8352. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.D.V./ Examiner, Art Unit 2153 05/29/2026
/KAVITA STANLEY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2153
Prosecution Insights