DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
2. 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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
3. Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-27 of U.S. Patent 10,264,322. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
The current application (19/068,959)…equates to…U.S. Pat. (10,264,322).
As to claim 21, the claimed “A method…” equates to “A method…” of Pat ‘322 (col.12, lines 25+);
the claimed “identifying…”; “acquiring…” and "generating….” equates to "generating….”; and “providing…wherein…” of Pat ‘322 (col.12, lines 36-65); the current claim limitations are broader without other features of establishing connections between the content server provider and media aggregation system, however the claim limitations are similar in scope, i.e., generating, for display, a user interface (UI), where the UI comprises…” are similar in scope same for all the steps as in Pat’322, except the last feature thumbnail as discussed
Claims 22-30 are met in claims 2-15 of Pat’322 (col.12, line 66-col.13, line 38).
As to claim 31, the claimed “A system…” is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed with respect to claim 21.
Claims 32-40 are met as previously discussed in claims 1-10
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other; i.e., the current claims are broader in scope than the parent allowed claims. Allowance of claims 21-40 of the instant application would result in an unjustified timewise extension of the monopoly defined by patent claim Y.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 21-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HOSHEN et al (2002/0154892) in view of ODRYNA et al (2016/0119678).
As to claims 21-27, HOSHEN discloses system for distributing video and content on demand and further discloses a method comprising:
A processor and memory (figs.2, 5, 10-12, SSTB server or Internet Server, OTT, SSTB-Internet Server users can request for content on demand, videos, music, et.,[0024-0026] an [0061-0071]); the memory storing instructions for execute a method comprising:
Identifying, by an aggregator service (SSTB/server), a plurality of content service provider applications for a unified playlist; for each content service provider application of the plurality of content service provider applications, retrieving program information comprising a respective plurality of content items that are available on the respective content service provider application; acquiring, from each content service provider application, for each content item of the respective plurality of content items (a) a respective thumbnail corresponding to the respective content item and (b) a corresponding timestamp corresponding to the respective content item, wherein the timestamp indicates a timepoint where the respective content item will begin playing from the respective content service provider application when the content item is selected ([0060-0071], [0162-0165] and [0172-0197]); each SSTB(s) within a cluster generates a viewable list (Content on demand, TV internet, email, music on demand, etc) includes a list of all broadcast without a schedule and furthermore SSTBs within a cluster locally generated viewable list including streaming requested from two or more SSTBs; furthermore includes Central Unit or Management System “MS” 57 which establishes a connection between the SSTB system and the OTT content service provider and a cable/satellite/terrestrial (CST) content service provider, where the OTT content service provider and the CST content service providers are different providers note that the MS-57 manages SSTBs within a cluster or geographical region, registers the SSTBs, establishes connections with the SSTBs and broadcasts a viewable list or titles to all STB/SSTB and where the SSTBs receives and stores and generates the viewable list or titles specific to the geographical region or cluster. MS-57 further updates accordingly, by encoding the updates and broadcasting the updates to appropriate or designated SSTB(s);
and generating, for display, a user interface (UI), wherein the UI comprises at least a portion of the acquired thumbnails associated with the plurality of content service provider applications, wherein each thumbnail includes the corresponding timestamp acquired from the respective content service provider application; ([0024-0026], [0064-0071], [0085-0089] and [0162-0165]); the MS-57 manages SSTBs within a cluster or geographical region, registers the SSTBs, establishes connections with the SSTBs and broadcasts a viewable list or titles to all STB/SSTB and where the SSTBs receives and stores and generates the viewable list or titles specific to the geographical region or cluster. MS-57 further updates accordingly, by encoding the updates and broadcasting the updates to appropriate or designated SSTB(s); HOSHEN discloses generates a viewable list (Content on demand, TV internet, email, music on demand, etc) includes a list of all broadcast without a schedule and furthermore SSTBs within a cluster locally generated viewable list including streaming requested from two or more SSTBs., BUT appears silent as to where the Unified playlist includes clips or thumbnails that a user can discover live and on-demand content without accessing separate feeds, search live and on-demand content together instead of separately and save and access movies and shows using only the unified playlist and providing media content directly through the unified playlist without launching a separate application even if different pieces of the media content are sourced from different content providers and play the content as desired on the SSTB/STB; playing the thumbnails or clips and interacting as desired.
However, in the same field of endeavor, ODRYNA discloses multi source and destination media discovery and management platform and further discloses generating a Merged Playlist (MP), where the MP includes clips or thumbnails, configured such that a user can discover live and on-demand content without accessing separate feeds, search live and on-demand content together instead of separately and save and access movies and shows using only the unified playlist and providing media content directly through the unified playlist without launching a separate application even if different pieces of the media content are sourced from different content providers; where each thumbnail comprises respective image corresponding to the respective content item and where the image for the thumbnail is based at least in part on the content service provider application providing the respective content item; where the timestamp further indicates a timepoint where playback of the corresponding content item was paused in the respective content service provider application; wherein the timepoint corresponds to a recommended portion of the content item of the respective content service provider application of the plurality of content service provider applications; wherein the thumbnail comprises a video clip preview of the content item; wherein the video clip preview is further based at least in part on the content service provider application providing the respective content item; wherein the UI further comprises an indicator, for each thumbnail, of the respective content service provider application providing the content item corresponding to the thumbnail (figs.1-5, 9, 10, 16, 17, 24-26, 32, Abstract, [0021], [0078-0085] and [0092-0095]), the merged listing of available content is co-mixed to display a limited available content providers as if from a single provider and generate based on profile(s) of user(s)
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of ODRYNA into the system of HOSHEN to generate merged single user interface/an application (UI) or platform that co-mixed content providers, where the UI that enables a user to view/interact with the UI to search/view various available content from various content providers.
As to claims 28-30, HOSHEN further discloses determining that the plurality of content items of a content service provider application of the plurality of content service provider applications has been updated; based at least in part on the determining, updating the UI such that the thumbnails reflect the updated plurality of content items of the content service provider application; wherein each of the plurality of content items comprise at least one of content items selected by a user or content items recommended by the respective content service provider application and providing, by way of the UI, a user selectable option to sort the thumbnails chronologically ([0067-0069], [0162-0165] and [0173-0174]).
As to claims 31-37, the claimed “A system..." is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed in claims 1-2.
Claims 38-40 are met as previously discussed in claims 28-30.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNAN Q SHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7355. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7-4.
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, BENJAMIN BRUCKART can be reached on 571-272-3982. 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 http://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). 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.
/ANNAN Q SHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Annan Q. Shang