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 .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments filed 07/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claims 1-2, of the last office action, Applicant amends claim 1 and presents new claims 3-21 and further argues that the prior art of record (PARs or AARON et al (2016/0295216) in view of SWENSON et al (2014/0025837) do not meet claim limitations of claim 1 (see Applicant’s Remarks)
In response, Examiner notes Applicant arguments, however Examiner disagrees for these reasons, AARON discloses techniques for optimizing bitrates and resolution during encoding, segments
a video file into a set of video segments (generates Buckets 1+ defines a bitrate/resolution and estimates a quality score (PSNR values), compares the complexity bucketing bitrate to the bitrate ranges of the buckets and selects a bucket, see figs.1-6, [0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), each video segment in the set of video segments comprising a portion of the video file; generating a manifest file for the video file, the manifest file representing a set of renditions, each rendition in the set of renditions associated with a bitrate and a resolution; publishing the manifest file prior to transcoding the video file (see [0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), generates Buckets 1+ defines a bitrate/resolution and estimates a quality score (PSNR values), compares the complexity bucketing bitrate to the bitrate ranges of the buckets and selects a bucket; in response to receiving a request for a first playback segment in a first rendition, in the set of renditions, from a playback device based on the manifest file: initiating transcoding of the first playback segment into the first rendition; and initiating a stream of the first playback segment in the first rendition to the first playback device ([0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), Buckets 1+ defines a bitrate/resolution and estimates a quality score (PSNR values), compares the complexity bucketing bitrate to the bitrate ranges of the buckets and selects a bucket; initiating transcoding of the first playback segment; in response to receiving the first request for the first playback segment in the first rendition; AARON discloses distributing to users and further discusses encoding Buckets of bitrate/resolution for storage within the available resources including a processor for processing the files in response to a request ([0024-0029], [0041-0053] and [0060-0063]), BUT appears silent as to storing in rendition cache(s) the playback segment; and playback from rendition(s) cache in response to a request from the playback device; However, in the same field of endeavor, SWENSON discloses just-in-time distribution of video cached and further discloses Storing (see figs.1-3, Video Optimizers “VOs” 150 incudes Cache 155/160 of and [0014-0016]) a set of mezzanine segments of the audio-video (AV) file, each mezzanine segment in the set of mezzanine segments comprising a portion of the AV file (see [0020-0021], [0023], [0032], [0034-0035], [0051-0053], [0053-0060], [0062] and [0064-0073]), the VOs-150 cache or store plurality of small segments/Clips or previews of the source file, the smaller segment or previews may be retrieved and stitched to optimized portions of the source files; UD sends playback request to the VO(s) via the SD/NC, where the request includes UD capabilities and other conditions, the SD/NC associates an ID key with the playback request that enables the VOs to query the cache database (to identify error(s), processes, transcodes, etc., the requested playback segment into a desired optimized format or version of the segment(s); the VO(s) transcodes the segments and initiates a stream including the small segments and portions of the file between the VO(s), upon receiving the playback request segment from the UD via the SD/NC; while transcoding the playback segment into the first rendition at the first worker; VO further queries the local cache/cache database, transcode the segment(s) or re-direct the segment(s) to other VOs storing different versions, predicts and identifies subsequent subset of segments across the VOs that matches the playback segment, processes the playback segment including stitching and processing the segment(s) to match the requested playback segment including transcoding to desired format and/or playback length, note UD may pause, resume, trick plays, etc., (second, third, etc., request) of the streaming media as desire to receive optimized version(s) of the streaming media; as discussed below. Hence the rejection is proper, meets all the claims limitations as discussed below. This office is made FINAL
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
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.
4. Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AARON et al (2016/0295216) in view of SWENSON et al (2014/0025837)
As to claims 1-2, AARON discloses techniques for optimizing bitrates and resolution during encoding and further discloses a method (figs.1-6, Abstract) comprising:
segmenting a video file into a set of video segments, each video segment in the set of video segments comprising a portion of the video file; generating a manifest file for the video file, the manifest file representing a set of renditions, each rendition in the set of renditions associated with a bitrate and a resolution; publishing the manifest file prior to transcoding the video file (figs.1-6, [0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), generates Buckets 1+ defines a bitrate/resolution and estimates a quality score (PSNR values), compares the complexity bucketing bitrate to the bitrate ranges of the buckets and selects a bucket;
in response to receiving a request for a first playback segment in a first rendition, in the set of renditions, from a playback device based on the manifest file: initiating transcoding of the first playback segment into the first rendition; and initiating a stream of the first playback segment in the first rendition to the first playback device ([0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), Buckets 1+ defines a bitrate/resolution and estimates a quality score (PSNR values), compares the complexity bucketing bitrate to the bitrate ranges of the buckets and selects a bucket; initiating transcoding of the first playback segment; in response to receiving the first request for the first playback segment in the first rendition:
AARON discloses distributing to users and further discusses encoding Buckets of bitrate/resolution for storage within the available resources including a processor for processing the files in response to a request ([0024-0029], [0041-0053] and [0060-0063]), BUT appears silent as to storing in rendition cache(s) the playback segment; and playback from rendition(s) cache in response to a request from the playback device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, SWENSON discloses just-in-time distribution of video cached and further discloses Storing (figs.1-3, Video Optimizers “VOs” 150 incudes Cache 155/160 of and [0014-0016]) a set of mezzanine segments of the audio-video (AV) file, each mezzanine segment in the set of mezzanine segments comprising a portion of the AV file ([0020-0021], [0023], [0032], [0034-0035], [0051-0053], [0053-0060], [0062] and [0064-0073]), the VOs-150 cache or store plurality of small segments/Clips or previews of the source file, the smaller segment or previews may be retrieved and stitched to optimized portions of the source files; UD sends playback request to the VO(s) via the SD/NC, where the request includes UD capabilities and other conditions, the SD/NC associates an ID key with the playback request that enables the VOs to query the cache database (to identify error(s), processes, transcodes, etc., the requested playback segment into a desired optimized format or version of the segment(s); the VO(s) transcodes the segments and initiates a stream including the small segments and portions of the file between the VO(s), upon receiving the playback request segment from the UD via the SD/NC; while transcoding the playback segment into the first rendition at the first worker; VO further queries the local cache/cache database, transcode the segment(s) or re-direct the segment(s) to other VOs storing different versions, predicts and identifies subsequent subset of segments across the VOs that matches the playback segment, processes the playback segment including stitching and processing the segment(s) to match the requested playback segment including transcoding to desired format and/or playback length, note UD may pause, resume, trick plays, etc., (second, third, etc., request) of the streaming media as desire to receive optimized version(s) of the streaming media;
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of SWENSON into the system of AARON to cache plurality of versions or segments on a plurality of storage devices or servers for efficiently processing and streaming to user(s), in response to requests from user(s).
As to claims 3-5, AARON further discloses in response to detecting absence of the first playback segment in the first rendition from a rendition cache: identifying a first subset of video segments, in the set of video segments, corresponding to the first playback segment; transcoding the first subset of video segments into a set of rendition segments corresponding to the first playback segment in the first rendition; receiving a second request for the first playback segment in the first rendition from a second playback device; and in response to detecting presence of the first playback segmenting the first rendition in a rendition cache, transmitting the first playback segment in the first rendition to the second playback device and in response to receiving the first request for the first playback segment in the first rendition: identifying a second subset of video segments, in the set of video segments, corresponding to a subsequent playback segment succeeding the first playback segment in the video file; initiating transcoding of the second subset of video segments into the subsequent playback segment in the first rendition; and in response to detecting deteriorating viewing conditions of the first playback segment at the first playback device, initiating transcoding of the second subset of video segments into the subsequent playback segment in a second rendition, in the set of renditions, the second rendition associated with a second bitrate and a second resolution falling below a first bitrate and a first resolution of the first rendition ([0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), note remarks in claim 1.
As to claims 6-9, AARON further discloses receiving a second request for the first playback segment in the first rendition from a second playback device; and in response to detecting transcoding of the first playback segment into the first rendition, initiating a second stream of the first playback segment to the second playback device; identifying a second subset of video segments, in the set of video segments, corresponding to a subsequent playback segment succeeding the first playback segment in the video file; and initiating transcoding of the second subset of video segments into the subsequent playback segment in the first rendition; and in response to receiving a second request for the subsequent playback segment in the first rendition from the first playback device, serving the subsequent playback segment in the first rendition to the first playback device and identifying a set of keyframes in the video file; and segmenting the video file into the set of video segments based on the set of keyframes and in response to completion of transcoding of the first playback segment into the first rendition, storing the first playback segment in the first rendition in a rendition cache; and in response to a quantity of viewing instances of the first rendition during a time interval within a population of viewing devices falling below a threshold quantity, deleting the first playback segment in the first rendition from the rendition cache ([0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), note remarks in claim 1.
As to claims 10-12, AARON further discloses in response to completion of transcoding of the first playback segment into the first rendition, storing the first playback segment in the first rendition in a rendition cache; during a first time period and in response to a first request frequency for the first playback segment in the first rendition falling below a threshold frequency, deleting the first playback segment in the first rendition from the rendition cache; during a second time period succeeding the first time period: re-transcoding a first subset of video segments, in the set of video segments, into a second set of rendition segments in the first rendition based on a predicted video demand; and in response to receiving a second request for a second playback segment from a second playback device, serving the second set of rendition segments to the second playback device; wherein segmenting the video file into the set of video segments, each video segment in the set of video segments comprising the portion of the video file comprises segmenting the video file of a first file size into the set of video segments; and further comprising partially decoding a first video segment, in the set of video segments, to generate a proxy video representation of the video file, the proxy video representation characterized by a second file size less than the first file size; and wherein generating the manifest for the video file comprises: accessing a model associated with a first resolution, the first model configured to derive target bitrates based on target viewing qualities; passing a video segment, in the set of video segments, to the model; and receiving a first target bitrate for the first resolution returned by the first model; defining the first rendition, for the first video, characterized by the first resolution and the first target bitrate; and generating the manifest identifying the first rendition ([0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), note remarks in claim 1.
As to claims 13-15, AARON further discloses wherein generating the manifest for the video file comprises: accessing a target viewing quality associated with playback of the video file; extracting a set of video features from a video segment in the set of video segments; generating a set of bitrate-resolution pairs based on the set of video features via a model, each bitrate-resolution pair in the set of bitrate-resolution pairs defining a bitrate, a resolution, and a predicted quality score estimating a viewing quality of the video file encoded according to the bitrate-resolution pair; identifying, in the set of bitrate-resolution pairs, a subset of bitrate-resolution pairs characterized by predicted quality scores greater than the target viewing quality; and generating the manifest identifying the set of renditions that correspond to the subset of bitrate-resolution pairs; deriving a set of video features for a first video segment in the set of video segments, the set of video features including a set of visual complexity features; generating a set of bitrate-resolution pairs based on the set of video features via a model, each bitrate-resolution pair in the set of bitrate-resolution pairs defining a bitrate and a resolution estimated to maximize a quality score characterizing the video file encoded at the bitrate; selecting a subset of the set of bitrate-resolution pairs based on a distribution of audience bandwidths; and generating the manifest for the video file, the manifest representing the set of renditions based on the subset of bitrate-resolution pairs and accessing a set of metadata for the video file; identifying a set of historical videos corresponding to the video file based on the set of metadata; accessing a distribution of audience bandwidths based on the set of historical videos; estimating a count of renditions for the set of renditions based on the distribution of audience bandwidths; and generating the manifest for the video file, the manifest identifying the count of renditions ([0026-0033]-quality score, [0035-0046], [0049-0059] and [0061-0063]), note remarks in claim 1.
As to claim 16, the claimed “A method comprising…”, is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed with respect to claim 1.
Claims 17-18 are met as previously discussed in claims 3-5.
As to claim 19, the claimed “A method for streaming comprising…”, is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed with respect to claim 1.
Claims 20-21 are met as previously discussed in claims 3-5.
Conclusion
5. 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 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.
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 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, BRUCKART BENJAMIN 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 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.
/ANNAN Q SHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
ANNAN Q. SHANG
