DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Double Patenting
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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 8,332,905. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 8,332,905 lists the plurality of management components as an inclusive list (“and” rather than “or”).
Application No. 19/096,217 Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 8,332,905 Claim 1
A set-top box emulation system for presenting IPTV content to a user on an electronic device, said emulation system comprising
A set-top box emulation system for presenting IPTV content to a user on an electronic device, said emulation system comprising:
i) a middleware component;
a middleware component;
ii) a plurality of management components arranged and configured to emulate the capabilities of a physical set-top box, wherein the plurality of management components comprises at least one of a presentation manager, a codec manager and/or a conditional access manager; and
a plurality of management components arranged and configured to emulate the capabilities of a physical set-top box, wherein the plurality of management components comprising a presentation manager, a codec manager and a conditional access manager,
iii) a plurality of interfaces to enable communication between said plurality of management components and said middleware, wherein the plurality of interfaces comprises at least one of a graphics interface, a MUX interface, a Conditional Access interface, a Media interface, and Events Interface, a System Settings interface and/or a Persistent Storage interface.
a plurality of interfaces to enable communication between said plurality of management components and said middleware, wherein the plurality of interfaces comprises a graphics interface, a MUX interface, a Conditional Access interface, a Media interface, and Events Interface, a System Settings interface and/or a Persistent Storage interface.
Claims 2-20 are similarly unpatentable over claims 2-19 of U.S. Patent No. 8,332,905.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 8,683,543. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 8,683,543 generally states the function of the plurality of interfaces rather than listing them.
Application No. 19/096,217 Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 8,683,543 Claim 1
A set-top box emulation system for presenting IPTV content to a user on an electronic device, said emulation system comprising
A set-top box emulation system for presenting IPTV content to a user on a general purpose electronic device, said emulation system comprising:
i) a middleware component;
a middleware component associated with a provider of the IPTV content,
ii) a plurality of management components arranged and configured to emulate the capabilities of a physical set-top box, wherein the plurality of management components comprises at least one of a presentation manager, a codec manager and/or a conditional access manager; and
a plurality of management components arranged and configured to emulate the capabilities of the physical set-top box to the middleware component, wherein the plurality of management components comprises at least one of a presentation manager, a codec manager and/or a conditional access manager;
iii) a plurality of interfaces to enable communication between said plurality of management components and said middleware, wherein the plurality of interfaces comprises at least one of a graphics interface, a MUX interface, a Conditional Access interface, a Media interface, and Events Interface, a System Settings interface and/or a Persistent Storage interface.
and a plurality of interfaces to enable communication between said plurality of management components and said middleware component to thereby allow the middleware component to operate on the general purpose electronic device as if the general purpose electronic device was the physical set top box.
Claims 2-20 are similarly unpatentable over claims 2-20 of U.S. Patent No. 8,683,543.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 10,616,646. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 10,616,646 states in detail the function of the plurality of interfaces.
Application No. 19/096,217 Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 10,616,646 Claim 1
A set-top box emulation system for presenting IPTV content to a user on an electronic device, said emulation system comprising
A computer-implemented method of emulating a physical set-top box (STB), comprising:
i) a middleware component;
executing by the electronic device a middleware component
ii) a plurality of management components arranged and configured to emulate the capabilities of a physical set-top box, wherein the plurality of management components comprises at least one of a presentation manager, a codec manager and/or a conditional access manager; and
providing a plurality of STB emulation components to create an emulated STB environment within said electronic device; and executing the middleware component within the emulated STB environment via a plurality of interfaces of the emulated STB environment that enables communication between the plurality of STB emulation components and the middleware component
iii) a plurality of interfaces to enable communication between said plurality of management components and said middleware, wherein the plurality of interfaces comprises at least one of a graphics interface, a MUX interface, a Conditional Access interface, a Media interface, and Events Interface, a System Settings interface and/or a Persistent Storage interface.
managing access by the electronic device to the IPTV content using a Conditional Access (CA) manager and a CA interface between the middleware component and the CA manager;
Claims 2-20 are similarly unpatentable over claims 2-11 of U.S. Patent No. 10,616,646.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,952. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 11,831,952 is drawn to the corresponding method for using the outstanding claimed system.
Application No. 19/096,217 Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,831,952 Claim 1
A set-top box emulation system for presenting IPTV content to a user on an electronic device, said emulation system comprising
A method for presenting internet protocol television (IPTV) content on a software platform executing on an electronic device of an end user that receives the IPTV content via a network, the method comprising:
i) a middleware component;
executing, by the end user's electronic device a cross-platform middleware component to process the selected IPTV content,
ii) a plurality of management components arranged and configured to emulate the capabilities of a physical set-top box, wherein the plurality of management components comprises at least one of a presentation manager, a codec manager and/or a conditional access manager; and
translating, by the cross-platform middleware component, one or more of the DOM requests into an application programming interface (API) request for managing access to the selected IPTV content using the Conditional Access (CA) interface;
iii) a plurality of interfaces to enable communication between said plurality of management components and said middleware, wherein the plurality of interfaces comprises at least one of a graphics interface, a MUX interface, a Conditional Access interface, a Media interface, and Events Interface, a System Settings interface and/or a Persistent Storage interface.
a plurality of interfaces for enabling communication between at least a graphics interface and a conditional access (CA) interface, and a dynamic video source selection (DVSS) mechanism that is configured to select a source of the selected IPTV content from a plurality of different content source providers
Claims 2-20 are similarly unpatentable over claims 2-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,952.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,273,592. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 12,273,592 is drawn to the corresponding method for using the outstanding claimed system.
Application No. 19/096,217 Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 12,273,592 Claim 1
A set-top box emulation system for presenting IPTV content to a user on an electronic device, said emulation system comprising
A method for streaming video media on an end user device, comprising:
i) a middleware component;
providing a plurality of management components to create a set-top box (STB) execution environment for a vendor application within the end user device, wherein: the vendor application is associated with a provider of streaming video media;
ii) a plurality of management components arranged and configured to emulate the capabilities of a physical set-top box, wherein the plurality of management components comprises at least one of a presentation manager, a codec manager and/or a conditional access manager; and
he plurality of management components comprises a conditional access (CA) component, a codec component, a decryption component, and a player component;
iii) a plurality of interfaces to enable communication between said plurality of management components and said middleware, wherein the plurality of interfaces comprises at least one of a graphics interface, a MUX interface, a Conditional Access interface, a Media interface, and Events Interface, a System Settings interface and/or a Persistent Storage interface.
providing, to the vendor application, a plurality of interfaces, wherein each interface is an interface to one of the plurality of management components; executing, by the end user device, the vendor application within the STB execution environment; managing access, via the CA component, to the streaming video media of the provider according to the vendor application via a CA interface of the plurality of interfaces;
Claims 2-20 are similarly unpatentable over claims 2-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,273,592.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1-6 and 8-13 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Koved et al. (USPGPUB 2002/0161996) [Koved].
Regarding claims 1, 8-10, and 11-12, Markel discloses a set-top box emulation system for presenting IPTV content to a user on an electronic device, said emulation system comprising
i) a middleware component (Java Runtime Environment or JRE, paragraph 0036);
ii) a plurality of management components arranged and configured to emulate the capabilities of a physical set-top box, wherein the plurality of management components comprises at least one of a presentation manager, a codec manager and/or a conditional access manager (conditional access, paragraph 0038); and
iii) a plurality of interfaces to enable communication between said plurality of management components and said middleware, wherein the plurality of interfaces comprises at least one of a graphics interface, a MUX interface, a Conditional Access interface, a Media interface, and Events Interface, a System Settings interface and/or a Persistent Storage interface (conditional access, paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 2, Koved discloses the set-top box emulation system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the pluralities of interfaces connects to at least one interface provided by the middleware component (paragraph 0039).
Regarding claim 3, Koved discloses the set-top box emulation system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of management components also includes a browser, said browser being configured for integration with said middleware component (paragraph 0036).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Koved discloses the set-top box emulation system and method of claims 3 and 12, wherein said middleware component is inserted into the DOM of said browser (paragraph 0036).
Regarding claim 5, Koved discloses the set-top box emulation system of claim 4, wherein said middleware component integrates with said browser via a second plurality of interfaces (paragraph 0039).
Regarding claim 6, Koved discloses the set-top box emulation system of claim 1, wherein a user interface is managed by said middleware component (player app, fig. 5a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Koved in view of Markel et al. (provided by applicant) [Markel].
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Koved disclose the method of claim 11, but fails to disclose the IPTV content is video content, and wherein the emulated hardware capabilities includes at least one of video processing of the video content, user interface (UI) layout generation, and remote-control key handling, and wherein the video processing comprises at least one of decoding the IPTV content, video scaling of the IPTV content, video positioning of the IPTV content, chroma keying of the IPTV content, and alpha blending of the IPTV content and wherein the emulated hardware capabilities includes generating a user interface (UI) layout to be presented on the display of the electronic device.
In an analogous art, Markel teaches it was known at the time to emulate an entire STB environment on a separate device for the purpose of physically displaying content in the same manner as the original STB, including video positioning and the user interface layout (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious at the time of invention to include the IPTV content is video content, and wherein the emulated hardware capabilities includes at least one of video processing of the video content, user interface (UI) layout generation, and remote-control key handling, and wherein the video processing comprises at least one of decoding the IPTV content, video scaling of the IPTV content, video positioning of the IPTV content, chroma keying of the IPTV content, and alpha blending of the IPTV content and wherein the emulated hardware capabilities includes generating a user interface (UI) layout to be presented on the display of the electronic device, as suggested by Markel, providing benefits such as remote testing or review of interface elements (see Markel paragraph 0009).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 14-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Said claims are directed towards the specific embodiments previously found allowable over the prior art available at the time of invention, namely that of active source selection and remote provisioning of the interface.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC D SALTARELLI whose telephone number is (571)272-7302. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathan Flynn can be reached at (571) 272-1915. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DOMINIC D SALTARELLI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights