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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment filed on 12/10/2025.
Claims 1-9 and 11-16 are currently amended.
Claims 17-19 are new.
Claims 1-19 are currently pending and examined below.
Specification
The Examiner acknowledges the Substitute Specification filed on 12/10/2025 and is ok to be entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 recites the limitation “and the advertisement ranking model is configures to receive a user characteristic as an input and output a completion rate.” The Examiner suggests changing “configures” to “configured” to overcome the objection. Appropriate correction is required.
Contingent Limitations
The Examiner notes that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. For example, assume a method claim requires step A if a first condition happens and step B if a second condition happens. If the claimed invention may be practiced without either the first or second condition happening, then neither step A or B is required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim. If the claimed invention requires the first condition to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires step A. If the claimed invention requires both the first and second conditions to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires both steps A and B. Here, the claims recite the following contingent limitations that are not required to be performed:
Claim 1: “wherein the client plays the audio advertisement when playback of the audio program reaches the target advertisement slot.”
Claim 4: “wherein when the audio advertisement with the highest completion rate is the source advertisement of the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot, the method further comprises: adjusting, by the cloud apparatus, a style of the audio advertisement with the highest completion rate based on a style of the audio program and the user characteristic, to obtain the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot.”
Claim 5: Claim 5 further limits claim 4 which is not required to be performed. Therefore, claim 5 is also not required to be performed.
Claim 8: “when the time domain information is an amplitude, and a duration for which an amplitude of the audio program in the voice state is continuously less than an amplitude threshold exceeds a first threshold, determining, by the cloud apparatus as a first basic advertisement slot, the duration for which the amplitude is continuously less than the amplitude threshold; when a time interval between two adjacent terms in the text content obtained by converting the audio program is greater than a second threshold, determining, by the cloud apparatus, the time interval between the two adjacent terms as a second basic advertisement slot, wherein the time interval between the two adjacent terms is determined based on a timestamp of each term during text conversion; and determining, by the cloud apparatus, the at least one advertisement slot from a union of the first basic advertisement slot and the second basic advertisement slot.” Claim 8 is not required to be performed if the time domain information is not an amplitude and when the time interval between two adjacent terms is not greater than a second threshold.
Claim 9: Claim 9 further limits claim 8 which is not required to be performed. Therefore, claim 9 is also not required to be performed.
Claim 11: “sending, by a client, an advertisement request to a cloud apparatus when playing an audio program, wherein the advertisement request comprises information about the audio program, an identifier of a target advertisement slot, and a user characteristic, and the target advertisement slot is one of at least one advertisement slot mined from the audio program; receiving, by the client, an audio advertisement that matches the target advertisement slot and that is sent by the cloud apparatus; and playing, by the client, the audio advertisement when playback of the audio program is played reaches the target advertisement slot.” The steps of sending of the advertisement request, the receiving of the audio advertisement, and the playing of the audio advertisement are not required to be performed if the client is not playing an audio program.
Claim 12: Claim 12 further limits claim 11 which is not required to be performed. Therefore, claim 12 is also not required to be performed.
Claim 15: “when the time domain information is an amplitude, ihnd1a duration for which an amplitude of the audio program in the voice state is continuously less than an amplitude threshold exceeds a first threshold, determining, by the cloud apparatus as a first basic advertisement slot, the duration for which the amplitude is continuously less than the amplitude threshold; when a time interval between two adjacent terms in the text content obtained by converting the audio program is greater than a second threshold, determining, by the cloud apparatus, the time interval between the two adjacent terms as a second basic advertisement slot, wherein the time interval between the two adjacent terms is determined based on a timestamp of each term during text conversion; and determining, by the cloud apparatus, the at least one advertisement slot from a union of the first basic advertisement slot and the second basic advertisement slot.” Claim 15 is not required to be performed if the time domain information is not an amplitude and when the time interval between two adjacent terms is not greater than a second threshold.
Claim 16: Claim 16 further limits claim 15 which is not required to be performed. Therefore, claim 16 is also not required to be performed.
Claims 17-19: Claims 17-19 further limit claim 11 which is not required to be performed. Therefore, claims 17-19 are also not required to be performed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-8, 13-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein the audio advertisement with a highest completion rate is the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot or a source advertisement of the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot.” Claim 4 further recites “wherein when the audio advertisement with the highest completion rate is the source advertisement of the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot.” However, it is unclear what is meant by “source advertisement.” The specification fails to provide further clarification as to what is and isn’t considered as a “source advertisement.” Therefore, claims 3-4 are indefinite for failing to point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. Claim 5 is also rejected based on its dependency.
Claim 6 recites the limitations “determining, by the cloud apparatus, at least one advertisement slot based on time domain information of the audio program in a voice state and text content obtained by converting the audio program into text; and encoding, by the cloud apparatus, text content within a period of time before preceding each advertisement slot in the at least one advertisement slot, to obtain a vector representation of each advertisement slot.” However, it is unclear if the “text content” that is encoded is the same or different than the “text content” obtained by converting the audio program into text. Therefore, claim 6 is indefinite for failing to point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. Claims 7-9 are also rejected based on their dependency.
Claim 13 recites the limitations “determining, by the cloud apparatus, at least one advertisement slot based on time domain information of the audio program in a voice state and text content obtained by converting the audio program into text; and encoding, by the cloud apparatus, text content within a period of time before preceding each advertisement slot in the at least one advertisement slot, to obtain a vector representation of each advertisement slot.” However, it is unclear if the “text content” that is encoded is the same or different than the “text content” obtained by converting the audio program into text. Therefore, claim 13 is indefinite for failing to point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. Claims 14-16 are also rejected based on their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a nature phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1-19 is/are directed towards a statutory category (i.e., a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) (Step 1, Yes).
Step 2A Prong One:
Claim 1 recites (additional elements underlined):
An audio advertisement delivery method, comprising:
receiving, by a cloud apparatus, an advertisement request from a client, wherein the advertisement request comprises information about an audio program, an identifier of a target advertisement slot, and a user characteristic, the target advertisement slot is one of at least one advertisement slot mined from the audio program, and the advertisement request is triggered when the client plays in response to playback of the audio program by the client;
determining, by the cloud apparatus, a vector representation of the target advertisement slot based on the information about the audio program and the identifier of the target advertisement slot, wherein the vector representation of the target advertisement slot is used to describe content related in the audio program within a period of time before preceding the target advertisement slot;
obtaining, by the cloud apparatus based on the user characteristic and the vector representation of the target advertisement slot, an audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot; and
sending, by the cloud apparatus, the audio advertisement to the client, wherein the client plays the audio advertisement when playback of the audio program is played to reaches the target advertisement slot.
The limitations describe or set forth an advertising/marketing activity. Advertising/marketing fall within the certain method of organizing human activity enumerated grouping of abstract ideas. The limitations outlined above also describe or set forth a fundamental economic principle or practice because advertising/marketing is related to commerce and economy. The limitations outlined above also describe or set forth a commercial interaction (e.g., advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, business relations). The limitations outlined above also describe or set forth the managing of personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people. Therefore, the claim recites a certain method of organizing human activity (Step 2A Prong One, Yes).
Step 2A Prong Two:
In Step 2A Prong Two, the additional element(s) outlined above are recited at a high level of generality, and under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are generic computer(s) and/or generic computer component(s) that perform generic computer functions. The additional element(s) are merely used as tools, in their ordinary capacity, to perform the abstract idea. The additional element(s) amount adding the words “apply it” with the judicial exception. Merely implementing an abstract idea on generic computer(s) and/or generic computer component(s) does not integrate the judicial exception similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer. The Examiner notes that “the use of generic computer elements like a microprocessor or user interface do not alone transform an otherwise abstract idea into patent eligible subject matter" (see pp 10-11 of FairWarning IP, LLC. v. Iatric Systems, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)). The additional elements also amount to generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (e.g., in a computer environment). The courts have found that simply limiting the use of the abstract idea to a particular environment does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination does not add anything further than looking at the limitations individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer, improves any other technology or technical field, applies or uses the judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for disease or medical condition, applies the judicial exception with, or by use of a particular machine, effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claims as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation (Step 2A Prong Two, No).
Step 2B:
In Step 2B, the additional elements also do not amount to significantly more for the same reasons set forth with respect to Step 2A Prong Two. The Examiner notes that revised Step 2A Prong Two overlaps with Step 2B, and thus, many of the considerations need not be reevaluated in Step 2B because the answer will be the same. Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination does not add anything further than looking at the limitations individually. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation (Step 2B, No).
Claims 2-10 recite further limitations that also fall within the same abstract ideas identified above with respect to claim 1 (i.e., certain methods of organizing human activities).
Claim 2 recites the additional elements “by the cloud apparatus,” “audio,” and “library.” Claims 3-4 and 8-9 recite the additional elements “by the cloud apparatus” and “audio.” Claim 5 recites the additional elements “by the cloud apparatus,” “audio,” and “encoding.” Claim 6 recites the additional elements “by a cloud apparatus,” “by the cloud apparatus,” “audio,” and “encoding.” Claim 7 recites the additional elements “by the cloud apparatus” and “audio.” Claim 10 recites the additional element “audio.” However, these additional elements also do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more because they amount to adding the words “apply it” with the judicial exception, mere instructions to implement the idea on a computer, merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, and generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Claim 11 recites (additional elements underlined):
An audio advertisement delivery method, comprising:
sending, by a client, an advertisement request to a cloud apparatus when playing an audio program, wherein the advertisement request comprises information about the audio program, an identifier of a target advertisement slot, and a user characteristic, and the target advertisement slot is one of at least one advertisement slot mined from the audio program;
receiving, by the client, an audio advertisement that matches the target advertisement slot and that is sent by the cloud apparatus; and
playing, by the client, the audio advertisement when playback of the audio program reaches the target advertisement slot.
For the same reasons explained above with respect to claim 1, claim 11 also recites an abstract idea in Step 2A Prong One. For the same reasons explained above with respect to claim 1, claim 11 also does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more.
Claims 12 and 17-19 recites further limitations that also fall within the same abstract ideas identified above with respect to claim 11 (i.e., certain methods of organizing human activities).
Claim 12 recites the additional element “audio.” Claim 17 recites the additional elements “by the cloud apparatus” and “audio.” Claim 18 recites the additional elements “audio,” “by the cloud apparatus,” and “library.” Claim 19 recites the additional element “by the cloud apparatus.” However, this additional element also do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more because they amount to adding the words “apply it” with the judicial exception, mere instructions to implement the idea on a computer, merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, and generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Claim 13 recites (additional elements underlined):
An advertisement slot mining method, comprising:
obtaining, by a cloud apparatus, an audio program of a to-be-mined advertisement slot;
determining, by the cloud apparatus, at least one advertisement slot based on time domain information of the audio program in a voice state and text content obtained by converting the audio program into text; and
encoding, by the cloud apparatus, text content within a period of time before preceding each advertisement slot in the at least one advertisement slot, to obtain a vector representation of each advertisement slot.
For the same reasons explained above with respect to claim 1, claim 13 also recites an abstract idea in Step 2A Prong One. For the same reasons explained above with respect to claim 1, claim 13 also does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more.
Claims 14-16 recite further limitations that also fall within the same abstract ideas identified above with respect to claim 13 (i.e., certain methods of organizing human activities).
Claims 14-16 recite the additional element “by the cloud apparatus” and “audio.” However, these additional elements also do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more because they amount to adding the words “apply it” with the judicial exception, mere instructions to implement the idea on a computer, merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, and generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 11-12 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bharath et al. (US 2016/0092932 A1, hereinafter “Bharath”) in view of Wang et al. (US 2016/0086215 A1, hereinafter “Wang”) in further view of Rajaram (US 2007/0078709 A1, hereinafter “Rajaram”).
As per Claim 11, Bharath discloses An audio advertisement delivery method, comprising (¶ 2 “The present invention generally relates to creation and delivery of audio advertisements, and more specifically, to dynamically generating vocal content in audio advertisements.” ¶ 6 “method for generating an audio advertisement.”):
sending, by a client, an advertisement request to a cloud apparatus when playing an audio program … (The Examiner notes that the above italicized and underlined limitation is a contingent limitations that is not required to be performed. However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, see at least ¶ 33 “The ad selection server 137 provides advertisements to a client device 110 receiving audio content. In one embodiment, the application on the client device 110 is configured to request advertisements between items of audio content. The application queries the ad selection server 137, which selects an advertisement. The selected advertisement may be an advertisement with pre-recorded audio received from an advertiser 120, or an advertisement based on a personalized text ad from the ad construction server 135. The ad selection server 137 may also select non-audio advertisements to deliver to the client device 110 (e.g., interactive visual content, animations, images). In one embodiment, the ad selection server 137 selects advertisements whose targeting criteria (as stipulated by the advertiser 120) match one or more pieces of user information associated with the client device 110. The ad selection server 137 is described in further detail with respect to FIG. 5.” ¶ 44 “Content fragments may include slots for advertisements (e.g., zero to two advertisements). A slot for an advertisement provides instructions for retrieving an advertisement from the content server 130 and playing an audio version of the advertisement through the client device 110. Alternatively or additionally, the stored content fragment includes the content of the audio advertisement.” ¶ 75 “After playing 615 an initial item of audio content, and prior to playing a next item of content, the client device 110 executes the ad creative. For example, the ad creative includes a pointer (e.g., a Uniform Resource Locator) to the ad selection server 137 and a JavaScript command instructing the client device 110 to request 620 an advertisement using the pointer to the ad selection server 137. By executing the ad creative, the client device 110 requests 620 an advertisement.”);
receiving, by the client, an audio advertisement that matches the target advertisement slot and that is sent by the cloud apparatus (The Examiner notes that the above italicized and underlined limitation is a contingent limitations that is not required to be performed. However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, see at least ¶ 33 “the ad selection server 137 selects advertisements whose targeting criteria (as stipulated by the advertiser 120) match one or more pieces of user information associated with the client device 110. The ad selection server 137 is described in further detail with respect to FIG. 5.” ¶ 66 “The ad selector 520 may determine the score from a weighted linear combination, for example, where each term depends on a match between a characteristic of the personalized text ad and user data indicating a positive or negative inclination toward the characteristic. The weighting of different terms depends on the advertisement characteristic's importance to the advertiser 120 or usefulness for predicting the advertisement's effectiveness.” ¶ 44 “Content fragments may include slots for advertisements (e.g., zero to two advertisements). A slot for an advertisement provides instructions for retrieving an advertisement from the content server 130 and playing an audio version of the advertisement through the client device 110. Alternatively or additionally, the stored content fragment includes the content of the audio advertisement.” ¶ 67 “Scoring an advertisement depends at least in part on a match between targeting criteria and the user's user information.” ); and
playing, by the client, the audio advertisement when playback of the audio program reaches the target advertisement slot (The Examiner notes that the above italicized and underlined limitation is a contingent limitations that is not required to be performed. However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, see at least ¶ 44 “Content fragments may include slots for advertisements (e.g., zero to two advertisements). A slot for an advertisement provides instructions for retrieving an advertisement from the content server 130 and playing an audio version of the advertisement through the client device 110. Alternatively or additionally, the stored content fragment includes the content of the audio advertisement.” ¶ 75 “After playing 615 an initial item of audio content, and prior to playing a next item of content, the client device 110 executes the ad creative. For example, the ad creative includes a pointer (e.g., a Uniform Resource Locator) to the ad selection server 137 and a JavaScript command instructing the client device 110 to request 620 an advertisement using the pointer to the ad selection server 137. By executing the ad creative, the client device 110 requests 620 an advertisement” ¶ 77 “The ad selection sever 137 provides 645 an advertisement based on the personalized text ad. The advertisement may be an audio version of the personalized text ad generated by the ad selection server 137 or may be a text advertisement and vocal parameters to configure a TTS algorithm on the client device 110 to generate an audio version of the personalized text ad. The client device 110 plays 650 the audio version of the personalized text ad.” Also see at least Figure 6 which shows the audio advertisement being sent to the client device in step 645.).
While Bharath discloses the sending of an advertising request, Bharath does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the advertisement request comprises … an identifier of a target advertisement slot, and a user characteristic.
However, Wang teaches wherein the advertisement request comprises … an identifier of a target advertisement slot, and a user characteristic (The Examiner notes that the above italicized and underlined limitation is a contingent limitations that is not required to be performed. However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, see at least ¶ 60 “The ad opportunities request may come directly from the end-user device 500a-b [i.e., sending, by a client, an advertisement request] and may be forwarded by a publisher 502a-b or by an ad server 504a-b (hosted by exchanges, publisher, ad networks, or other systems).” ¶ 74 “The model can define each ad opportunity as a vector of identifiers that together uniquely identify the ad opportunity at a particular time.” ¶ 7 “the vector may include a user identifier, a media identifier, location identifier, and may include an ad spot identifier [i.e., the request comprise an identifier of a target advertisement slot].” ¶ 103 “The fact or interaction database can serve as a single source of all the data related to the media, audience, and ad opportunities. For each ad request, it may append all the relevant data about the inventory, such as user demographics [i.e., the request comprises user characteristics], behavior, intention, psychographics, location, devices, media types, content semantics and classification, ranking, pricing, as well as source meta data.” ¶ 78 “The SpotId may also refer to different positions on a Web page, an association with a Web page, a native ad location, or an audio time frame in audio media.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the advertisement request comprising an identifier of a target advertisement slot and a user characteristic as taught by Wang into Bharath. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for the benefit of enabling advertisers to target specific high value inventory. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to increase transparency by providing advertisers with detailed information on where their ads are placed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for the advantage of allowing advertisers to select ad slot that align with their target audience. The claimed invention is also merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (KSR Rationale A).
While the combination of Bharath/Wang teach all of the above limitations, they do not appear to explicitly teach [wherein the advertisement request comprises] information about the audio program; and the target advertisement slot is one of at least one advertisement slot mined from the audio program.
However, Rajaram teaches [wherein the advertisement request comprises] information about the audio program (The Examiner notes that the above italicized and underlined limitation is a contingent limitations that is not required to be performed. However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, see at least ¶ 48 “As discussed in the '900 application, ads may be targeted to documents served by content servers. Thus, one example of an ad consumer 230 is a general content server 330 that receives requests for documents (e.g., articles, discussion threads, music, audio (e.g., musical works, dramatic works, voice-mail, talk shows, etc.), video, graphics, search results, Web page listings, etc.), and retrieves the requested document in response to, or otherwise services, the request. The content server may broadcast content as well (e.g., not necessarily responsive to a request). The content server may submit a request for ads to the ad server 220/310. Such an ad request may include a number of ads desired. The ad request may also include document request information. This information may include the document itself (e.g., a page, a music file, an audio file, a segment of an audio stream, etc.), a category or topic corresponding to the content of the document or the document request (e.g., arts, business, computers, arts-movies, arts-music, etc.), part or all of the document request, content age, content type (e.g., text, graphics, video, audio, mixed media, etc.), geo-location information, document information, etc.” ¶ 104 “The winning (e.g., audio) ads are served with (e.g., inserted into) the audio stream at the right spots (e.g., specified by the audio publisher) and delivered to the user. For example, the audio publisher could specify ad spots in the beginning of the stream, 10 minutes into the stream, 20 minutes into the stream, and so on.” );
and the target advertisement slot is one of at least one advertisement slot mined from the audio program (The Examiner notes that the above italicized and underlined limitation is a contingent limitations that is not required to be performed. However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, see at least Figures 8-9 and associated paragraphs).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the advertisement request that comprises information about the audio program, and that the target advertisement slot is one of at least one advertisement slot mined from the audio program as taught by Rajaram into the combination of Bharath/Wang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for the advantage of quickly and automatically identifying ad slots in audio without having to manually do so. The claimed invention is also merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (KSR Rationale A).
As per Claim 12, while Bharath sends an advertisement request, Bharath does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the user characteristic comprises a user profile.
However, Wang teaches wherein the user characteristic comprises a user profile (The Examiner notes that the above italicized and underlined limitation is not given patentable weight because it is nonfunctional descriptive material. Claim 12 merely lists types of user characteristics with no further limitation relating to how the method of claim 11 uses these user characteristics. In other words, claim 12’s listing of user characteristics does not alter the method of claim 11. Therefore, claim 12 is not given patentable weight as it does not result in a manipulative difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, see at least ¶ 60 “The ad opportunities request may come directly from the end-user device 500a-b [i.e., sending, by a client, an advertisement request] and may be forwarded by a publisher 502a-b or by an ad server 504a-b (hosted by exchanges, publisher, ad networks, or other systems).” ¶ 103 “The fact or interaction database can serve as a single source of all the data related to the media, audience, and ad opportunities. For each ad request, it may append all the relevant data about the inventory, such as user demographics [i.e., the request comprises a user profile], behavior, intention, psychographics, location, devices, media types, content semantics and classification, ranking, pricing, as well as source meta data.” ¶ 72 “The user 602 can be associated with demographics information 618 [i.e., user profile ], intention information 620 [i.e., behavioral characteristics of a user], behavior information 622 [i.e., behavioral characteristics of a user], and/or household information 624.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the advertisement request comprising an identifier of a target advertisement slot and user characteristics as taught by Wang into Bharath. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for the benefit of enabling advertisers to target specific high value inventory. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to increase transparency by providing advertisers with detailed information on where their ads are placed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for the advantage of allowing advertisers to select ad slot that align with their target audience. The claimed invention is also merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (KSR Rationale A).
While the combination of Bharath/Wang teach the user characteristics comprising a user profile, they do not appear to explicitly teach and a behavioral characteristic of a user for a historical audio program.
However, Rajaram teaches and a behavioral characteristic of a user for a historical audio program (The Examiner notes that the above italicized and underlined limitation is not given patentable weight because it is nonfunctional descriptive material. Claim 12 merely lists types of user characteristics with no further limitation relating to how the method of claim 11 uses these user characteristics. In other words, claim 12’s listing of user characteristics does not alter the method of claim 11. Therefore, claim 12 is not given patentable weight as it does not result in a manipulative difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, see at least ¶ 10 “Embodiments consistent with the present invention may improve the serving of advertisements with (e.g., on) audio documents.”¶ 29 “When an online ad is served, one or more parameters may be used to describe how, when, and/or where the ad was served. These parameters are referred to as "serving parameters" below. Serving parameters may include, for example, one or more of the following: features of (including information on) a document on which, or with which, the ad was served, a search query or search results associated with the serving of the ad, a user characteristic (e.g., their geographic location, the language used by the user, the type of browser used, previous page views, previous behavior, user account, any Web cookies used by the system, user device characteristics, etc.), a host or affiliate site (e.g., America Online, Google, Yahoo) that initiated the request, an absolute position of the ad on the page on which it was served, an ad spot in which the ad was served (e.g., a position (spatial or temporal) of the ad relative to other ads served), an absolute size of the ad, a size of the ad relative to other ads, an absolute volume of the ad, a volume of the ad relative to other ads, an absolute temporal length of the ad, a relative temporal length of the ad, a color of the ad, a number of other ads served, types of other ads served, time of day served, time of week served, time of year served, etc. Naturally, there are other serving parameters that may be used in the context of the invention.” ¶ 42 “User information" may include user behavior information and/or user profile information.” ¶ 45 “This usage information may include measured or observed user behavior related to ads that have been served.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the behavioral characteristic of a user for a historical audio program as taught by Rajaram into the combination of Bharath/Wang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for the advantage of improving the relevancy of ads served in (or with) an audio document, as well as improving potential advertising revenue (Rajaram, ¶ 9). The claimed invention is also merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (KSR Rationale A).
As per Claim 19, Bharath discloses wherein obtaining the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot (¶¶ 33, 44, and 67) further comprises adjusting, by the cloud apparatus, a style of a source audio advertisement based on a style … of the audio program and a style … of a user preference to generate the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot (¶ 72 “To determine vocal parameters for a personalized text ad, the voice selector 530 combines inferred vocal parameter preferences. For numerical vocal parameters (e.g., speed, pitch, roughness), the voice selector 530 determines vocal parameters based on a weighted average of factors indicating a user's preferences for vocal parameters. For example, the weighting of terms corresponding to the advertisement text and the content data 412 is heavier than the weighting based on user location 411, profile data 413, and user preferences 414. For binary vocal parameters (e.g., gender) or vocal parameters selected among various alternatives (e.g., accent, overall voice, silkiness), the voice selector 530 scores the alternatives and selects the vocal parameter based on the score. The score reflects the user's predicted inclination toward the various vocal parameters. Different user data and advertiser preferences may receive varying weights used in a linear combination to determine the score. Alternatively or additionally, the voice selector 530 selects vocal parameters in accordance with preferences received from the advertiser 120 associated with the personalized text ad.” ¶ 92 “The ad selection server 137 (e.g., the voice selector 530) selects 840 a voice for the text-to-speech (TTS) algorithm based on the obtained user information about the user of the client device 110 [i.e., adjusting the style of the source audio advertisement based on a style user preference], content of the personalized text ad, and content data describing digital audio content transmitted to the client device 110. Selecting 840 may refer to selecting a preset voice and/or to selecting vocal parameters to customize a voice generated by a TTS algorithm. Example vocal parameters include a gender of the voice, an emotion of the voice, a timbre of the voice, and pitch of the voice. In one embodiment, the ad selection server 137 identifies audio features of an item of audio content provided to the client device 110 for playback immediately before or immediately after the audio advertisement. The ad selection server 137 then selects 840 the voice, where the selected voice has vocal parameters determined based on the identified audio features [i.e., adjusting a style of a source advertisement based on a style of the audio program].”).
While Bharath adjusts a style of a source advertisement based on a style of the audio program and a style of a user preference to generate the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot, Bharath does not appear to explicitly disclose a vector [of the program] and vector [of a user].
However, Wang teaches vector [of the program] (¶ 7 “the vector may include a user identifier, a media identifier, location identifier, and may include an ad spot identifier. The media identifier may be associated with at least one of a publisher, an application, a website, video source, and a media segment [i.e., vector of the audio program].” ¶ 103 “The fact or interaction database can serve as a single source of all the data related to the media, audience, and ad opportunities. For each ad request, it may append all the relevant data about the inventory, such as user demographics [i.e., the request comprises user characteristics], behavior, intention, psychographics, location, devices, media types, content semantics and classification, ranking, pricing, as well as source meta data.” ¶ 78 “The SpotId may also refer to different positions on a Web page, an association with a Web page, a native ad location, or an audio time frame in audio media.”) and
vector [of a user] (¶ 7 “the vector may include a user identifier, a media identifier, location identifier, and may include an ad spot identifier. The media identifier may be associated with at least one of a publisher, an application, a website, video source, and a media segment [i.e., vector of the audio program].” ¶ 103 “The fact or interaction database can serve as a single source of all the data related to the media, audience, and ad opportunities. For each ad request, it may append all the relevant data about the inventory, such as user demographics [i.e., the request comprises user characteristics], behavior, intention, psychographics, location, devices, media types, content semantics and classification, ranking, pricing, as well as source meta data.” ¶ 78 “The SpotId may also refer to different positions on a Web page, an association with a Web page, a native ad location, or an audio time frame in audio media.”))).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the vector of the program and the vector of the user as taught by Wang into Bharath. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to improve advertisement matching by understanding context rather than relying solely on keyword matching. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for the benefit of enabling advertisers to target specific high value inventory. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to increase transparency by providing advertisers with detailed information on where their ads are placed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for the advantage of allowing advertisers to select ad slot that align with their target audience. The claimed invention is also merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (KSR Rationale A).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bharath in view of Wang, in view of Rajaram, in further view of Liao et al. (US 2010/0125871 A1, hereinafter “Liao”).
As per Claim 17, Bharath discloses wherein the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot is an advertisement … (¶ 26 “The content server 130 provides audio advertisements (also referred to as “audio ads”), which may be interspersed with, or incorporated into, non-advertisement audio content[i.e., ad slots]. An audio advertisement refers to audio content containing a marketing communication, which is typically delivered in exchange for a consideration (e.g., monetary compensation) from a third-party. For example, the content server 130 provides a stream of audio content including audio advertisements interspersed between songs [i.e., ad slots]. Alternatively or additionally, the content server 130 incorporates audio advertisements into animation, video, or game content. “ ¶ 33 “The ad selection server 137 provides advertisements to a client device 110 receiving audio content. In one embodiment, the application on the client device 110 is configured to request advertisements between items of audio content [i.e., ad slots]. The application queries the ad selection server 137, which selects an advertisement. The selected advertisement may be an advertisement with pre-recorded audio received from an advertiser 120, or an advertisement based on a personalized text ad from the ad construction server 135. The ad selection server 137 may also select non-audio advertisements to deliver to the client device 110 (e.g., interactive visual content, animations, images). In one embodiment, the ad selection server 137 selects advertisements whose targeting criteria (as stipulated by the advertiser 120) match one or more pieces of user information associated with the client device 110.” ¶ 44 “Content fragments may include slots for advertisements (e.g., zero to two advertisements). A slot for an advertisement provides instructions for retrieving an advertisement from the content server 130 and playing an audio version of the advertisement through the client device 110.”¶ 67 “Scoring an advertisement depends at least in part on a match between targeting criteria and the user’s user information.” ).
While Bharath discloses audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot, the combination of Bharath/Wang/Rajaram do not appear to explicitly teach further comprising predicting, by the cloud apparatus, completion rates of a plurality of candidate audio advertisements based on the user characteristic and an advertisement ranking model, … [an advertisement] having a highest predicted completion rate.
However, Liao teaches further comprising predicting, by the cloud apparatus, completion rates of a plurality of candidate audio advertisements based on the user characteristic and an advertisement ranking model, … [an advertisement] having a highest predicted completion rate (¶ 6 “Disclosed herein are systems, apparatus, computer program products and methods for providing video advertisements. In one implementation, a request for video advertisements is received, and video advertisements are identified that can be provided in response to the request. Performance features associated with the video advertisements are identified. The performance features and the video advertisements are provided as input to a video advertisement performance model trained to estimate a play through rate for each of the video advertisements. The estimated play through rate is the likelihood that a video advertisement provided in response to the request is viewed at least a predetermined amount of its duration. The video advertisements are ranked based on the estimated play through rates for the video advertisements provided by the video advertisement performance model, and one or more video advertisements are provided in response to the request according to the ranking of the video advertisements [i.e., predicting completion rates of a plurality of candidate advertisements based on an advertising ranking model].” ¶ 16 “The ads may be in the form of graphical ads, such as banner ads, text only ads, image ads, audio ads, video ads, ads combining one of more of any of such components.” ¶ 17 “The advertisers 102, publishers 106 and/or user devices 108 can provide usage information to the system 104. This usage information can include measured or observed user behavior related to ads that have been served [i.e., user characteristic]. For text ads and banner ads, for example, the usage information can include whether or not a conversion or click-through related to an ad has occurred. For video ads, the usage can include whether the video ad was "clicked to play," how much of the video was viewed by a user, and whether the user browsed a landing page related to the video ad.” ¶ 18 “A "click to play" video ad is a video ad that is shown as a still frame in a browser on a user device 108 and begins playing when a user clicks on the still frame. Data indicating subsequent user actions taken at the user device 108 can be collected by the system 104. This data can be indicative of how much of the video advertisement was viewed by the user. For example, if a user of the user device 108 pauses or closes a 15-second video advertisement at five seconds, the browser on the user device 108 can send data indicative of this action to the system 104. Accordingly, the system 104 can determine that 33% of the video ad (5/15) was viewed by the user [i.e., completion rates based on user characteristic].” ¶ 44 “FIG. 2 is a block diagram of an example video ad scoring system 200. The video ad scoring system 200 can utilize a variety of inputs to predict the quality of a particular video ad. These inputs can include both those inputs derived from the actual video ad and data from users' experiences (e.g., use patterns of the video ad) [i.e., predicting completion rates based on user characteristics]. For example, the system 200 can identify features associated with each video ad. Such features include the advertiser associated with the video ad, a web property associated with the ad, play-through rates, etc. In some implementations, the system 200 can also use a predictive model trained on evaluation data to assign quality scores to the video ads.” ¶ 45 “ In an example general flow of the system 200 for producing video ad quality scores, processing can begin with a machine learning engine 202 generating evaluation data 204 that can be used to train the predictive model 206. Example evaluation data can include actual historical performance data of the video ads. Such data can include click rates on the video ad and/or play through rates of the video ads. From this actual historical data video ad quality scores can be generated. For example, if a video ad quality score is based on the function of the play through rate of the video ad, then the actual play through rate can be used to generate the quality score.” ¶ 55 “In some implementations, the video ads quality scores indicate an estimated play through rate associated with the video ad. The estimated play through rate is a likelihood that the video ad is viewed at least a predetermined amount of its duration. For example, the likelihood, or percentage, that a video ad will be watched 50% of the duration of the video. The ad selection engine 214 can rank the video ads selected based on the estimated play through rates generated by the prediction engine 212.” ¶ 57 “The ad selection engine 214 can select one or more video ads that are responsive to the request. For example, the ad selection engine 214 can select video ads that include metadata that includes words that match the keywords in the request. For these selected video ads, the estimated scores can be generated, and the resulting highest ranked ads can be provided in response to the request.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the steps of predicting of completion rates of a plurality of candidate audio advertisements based on the user characteristic and an advertisement ranking model, and identifying an advertisement having a highest predicted completion rate as taught by Liao, into the combination of Bharath/Wang/Rajaram. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to identify poor quality advertisements (Liao, ¶¶ 5 and 88). The claimed invention is also merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (KSR Rationale A).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bharath in view of Wang, in view of Rajaram, in further view of Zhang (US 2015/0206199 A1, hereinafter “Zhang”).
As per Claim 18, Bharath discloses wherein obtaining the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot further comprises … (¶ 33 “the ad selection server 137 selects advertisements whose targeting criteria (as stipulated by the advertiser 120) match one or more pieces of user information associated with the client device 110. The ad selection server 137 is described in further detail with respect to FIG. 5.” ¶ 66 “The ad selector 520 may determine the score from a weighted linear combination, for example, where each term depends on a match between a characteristic of the personalized text ad and user data indicating a positive or negative inclination toward the characteristic. The weighting of different terms depends on the advertisement characteristic's importance to the advertiser 120 or usefulness for predicting the advertisement's effectiveness.” ¶ 44 “Content fragments may include slots for advertisements (e.g., zero to two advertisements). A slot for an advertisement provides instructions for retrieving an advertisement from the content server 130 and playing an audio version of the advertisement through the client device 110. Alternatively or additionally, the stored content fragment includes the content of the audio advertisement.” ¶ 67 “Scoring an advertisement depends at least in part on a match between targeting criteria and the user's user information.”); and
audio [advertisements] (¶ 2 “audio advertisements”).
While Bharath discloses the target advertisement slot, Bharath does not appear to explicitly disclose a vector representation of the target advertisement slot.
However, Wang teaches a vector representation of the target advertisement slot (¶ 74 “The model can define each ad opportunity as a vector of identifiers that together uniquely identify the ad opportunity at a particular time.” ¶ 7 “the vector may include a user identifier, a media identifier, location identifier, and may include an ad spot identifier.” ¶ 78 “The SpotId may also refer to different positions on a Web page, an association with a Web page, a native ad location, or an audio time frame in audio media.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the vector representation of the target advertisement slot as taught by Wang into Bharath. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to improve advertisement matching by understanding context rather than relying solely on keyword matching. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for the benefit of enabling advertisers to target specific high value inventory. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to increase transparency by providing advertisers with detailed information on where their ads are placed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for the advantage of allowing advertisers to select ad slot that align with their target audience. The claimed invention is also merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (KSR Rationale A).
While the combination of Bharath/Wang/Rajaram obtain the audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot, they do not appear to explicitly teach recalling, by the cloud apparatus, a plurality of … advertisements from an … advertisement library based on [the target ad slot], and selecting the … advertisement matching the target advertisement slot from the plurality of recalled … advertisements.
However, Zhang teaches recalling, by the cloud apparatus, a plurality of … advertisements from an … advertisement library based on [the target ad slot], and selecting the … advertisement matching the target advertisement slot from the plurality of recalled … advertisements (¶ 32 “In some implementations, the data processing system 110 determines whether or not the database 140 includes information about the ad slot that is part of the web page requesting content. For example, the data processing system 110 can determine whether or not information about this ad slot already exists. The ad slot evaluation module 130 (or other data processing system component) can search the database 140 for existing historical ad slot information by matching the unique identifier with historical data about that ad slot. Continuing with this example, the data processing system 110 may have already provided content for a previous rendering of the same ad slot in a web page, and a historical unique identifier may have been generated at that time, and stored in the database. In one implementation, the same ad slot will generate the same identifier when the advertisement parameters and web page parameters remain constant. For example, the same ad slot will generate the same unique identifier each time that the data processing system 110 receives a request to provide content for that ad slot. The ad server 135 can provide content for display, and store in the database 140 information about the content that was provided. The information can indicate the type of ad slot (e.g., expanding, banner, above the fold), the location of the ad slot (e.g., X and Y coordinates on the web page), whether or not the content was clicked on or converted when it was displayed, and what content was previously provided for display in the ad slot.” ¶ 33 “Information about this previous rendering can be considered by data processing system components (e.g., the ad server 135 or the ad slot evaluation module 130) to identify suitable content to provide to the ad slot responsive to a present request for content. For example, if an ad displayed in that ad slot in the past were successful, the ad server 135 can provide the same or similar content in response to a present request. Various metrics can be used to determine the success of content displayed in ad slots, such as click through or conversion rate of the content, for example.” ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the step of recalling a plurality of advertisements from an advertisement library based on the target ad slot, and selecting the advertisement matching the target advertisement slot from the plurality of recalled advertisements into the combination of Bharath/Wang/Rajaram. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for the advantage of displaying advertisements that are likely to be successful (Zhang, ¶ 33). The claimed invention is also merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (KSR Rationale A).
Allowable Subject Matter
The Examiner notes that after a comprehensive search on claims 1-10 and 13-16, they are found to recite novel and non-obvious subject matter. The closest prior art found to date are the following:
a. Bharath et al. (US 2016/0092932 A1) discloses a content server that provides a client device with audio content including audio advertisements, which is provided in response to receiving a request for digital audio content from a client device associated with a user. Bharath also receives an advertisement request from a client device; modifies a personalized text ad score based on audio content played before the advertisement; selects advertisements whose targeting criteria match one or more pieces of user information; and sends an audio advertisement to the client device for playback. However, Bharath does not determine a vector representation of the target advertisement slot based on the information about the audio program and the identifier of the target advertisement slot, wherein the vector representation of the target advertisement slot is used to describe content related in the audio program within a period of time preceding the target advertisement slot as claimed.
b. Wang et al. (US 2016/0086215 A1) discloses the concept of creating a vector of identifiers representing an ad opportunity which includes a user identifier, a media identifier, a location identifier, and an ad spot identifier. However, Wang does not determine a vector representation of the target advertisement slot based on the information about the audio program and the identifier of the target advertisement slot, wherein the vector representation of the target advertisement slot is used to describe content related in the audio program within a period of time preceding the target advertisement slot as claimed.
c. Rajaram (US 2007/00778709 A1) discloses the concept of providing audio advertisements during playback of an audio program by a client device. Rajaram also discloses the concept of mining for ad slots. Rajaram also does not obtain, based on user characteristics and a vector representation of the target advertisement slot, an audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot, or determine a vector representation of the target advertisement slot based on the information about the audio program and the identifier of the target advertisement slot, wherein the vector representation of the target advertisement slot is used to describe content related in the audio program within a period of time preceding the target advertisement as claimed.
d. Liao et al. (US 2010/0125871 A1) discloses an ad selection engine that scores video ads and selects the highest ranked ads in response to an ad request. However, Liao also does not obtain, based on user characteristics and a vector representation of the target advertisement slot, an audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot or determine a vector representation of the target advertisement slot based on the information about the audio program and the identifier of the target advertisement slot, wherein the vector representation of the target advertisement slot is used to describe content related in the audio program within a period of time preceding the target advertisement as claimed.
While the prior art teach some of the elements of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have arrived at Applicant’s claimed invention unless one was using Applicant’s claims and specification as a roadmap, thus using impermissible hindsight. Additionally, the prior art do not disclose at least the following limitations when viewed in context of the claimed invention as a whole: “receiving, by a cloud apparatus, an advertisement request from a client, wherein the advertisement request comprises information about an audio program, an identifier of a target advertisement slot, and a user characteristic, the target advertisement slot is one of at least one advertisement slot mined from the audio program, and the advertisement request is triggered in response to playback of the audio program by the client; determining, by the cloud apparatus, a vector representation of the target advertisement slot based on the information about the audio program and the identifier of the target advertisement slot, wherein the vector representation of the target advertisement slot is used to describe content related in the audio program within a period of time preceding the target advertisement slot; obtaining, by the cloud apparatus based on the user characteristic and the vector representation of the target advertisement slot, an audio advertisement matching the target advertisement slot” as recited in claim 1, “obtaining, by a cloud apparatus, an audio program of a to-be-mined advertisement slot; determining, by the cloud apparatus, at least one advertisement slot based on time domain information of the audio program in a voice state and text content obtained by converting the audio program into text; and encoding, by the cloud apparatus, text content within a period of time preceding each advertisement slot in the at least one advertisement slot, to obtain a vector representation of each advertisement slot” as recited in claim 13, and “wherein the determining, by the cloud apparatus, at least one advertisement slot based on time domain information of the audio program in a voice state and text content obtained by converting the audio program into text comprises: when the time domain information is an amplitude, a duration for which an amplitude of the audio program in the voice state is continuously less than an amplitude threshold exceeds a first threshold, determining, by the cloud apparatus as a first basic advertisement slot, the duration for which the amplitude is continuously less than the amplitude threshold; when a time interval between two adjacent terms in the text content obtained by converting the audio program is greater than a second threshold, determining, by the cloud apparatus, the time interval between the two adjacent terms as a second basic advertisement slot, wherein the time interval between the two adjacent terms is determined based on a timestamp of each term during text conversion; and determining, by the cloud apparatus, the at least one advertisement slot from a union of the first basic advertisement slot and the second basic advertisement slot” as recited in claim 15.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
Han et al. (US 2019/0355024 A1) discloses a system, method, and computer readable medium for creating audio advertisements that are inserted into audio programs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAM REFAI whose telephone number is (313)446-4822. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-6:00pm.
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, Waseem Ashraf can be reached at 571-270-3948. 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.
/SAM REFAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621
Prosecution Insights