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 .
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that § 112(f) (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that § 112(f) (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke § 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke § 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 1:
Claim limitations “first means for encrypting video data”, “second means for disseminating video data” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use “means for”.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 1 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation. First means for: Fig 2, Steps 201-202, Para. 30, 32. Second means for: Fig. 3, Steps 301-302, Para. 31, 32.
Claim 8:
Claim limitations “third means for initiating a video playback request”, “fourth means for receiving a response”, “Decryption means for decrypting the encrypted video data” and “Playback means for playing the raw video data” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use “means for”.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 1 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation. Third means for: Fig.5, 510, Para. 58. Fourth means for: Fig. 5, 520, Para. 58. Decryption means for: Fig. 5-6, 530, Para. 58, 60-73. Playback means for: Fig. 5, 540, Para. 58
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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 1-10 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.
In claim 1 limitations “first means” and “second means” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification merely describes the functionality and uses the identical means, so that one of ordinary skill in the art would not recognize what structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function the claimed invention is directed to for these means for. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
In claim 8 limitations “third means”, “fourth means”, “playback means for” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification merely describes the functionality and uses the identical means, so that one of ordinary skill in the art would not recognize what structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function the claimed invention is directed to for these means for. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Dependent claims are also rejected for same reasons.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 include limitations “decryption means” without reciting a proper function. The examiner suggests applicant to add proper function so limitation is interpretated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph OR amend the claim limitations so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim 8 include limitations “second means” without reciting a proper function. The examiner suggests applicant to add proper function so limitation is interpretated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph OR amend the claim limitations so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nair et al (US PG Pub No. 2012/0144195), in view of Wang et al (US PG Pub No. 2018/0007013).
Regarding claim 1, Nair et al teaches a secure video dissemination system (Figure 1), comprising:
first means for encrypting video data according to a preset encryption method (Abstract, 0015), the preset encryption method comprising:
receiving raw video data transmitted by a video publisher (i.e. the content from a content publisher 16 is ingested via an ingestion engine 18) (Figure 1; Para. 13) and generating encrypted video data and an encrypted video access symbol (i.e. a content encryption/decryption key from a digital rights management (DRM) server 22 and uses it to encrypt the content for storage and later delivery in encrypted form)(Para. 13); and
storing the encrypted video data to an object storage (i.e. a digital rights management (DRM) server 22 and uses it to encrypt the content for storage), (Para. 13); and
second means for disseminating video data according to a preset dissemination method (i.e. encrypts media content and publishes and stores it on a content delivery server (CDS), such as a server in a content distribution network (CDN)) (Abstract, Para. 13), the preset dissemination method comprising:
receiving a video playback request sent by a video playback client device [10] (Figure 1; Abstract, Para. 39) and acquiring an encrypted video access symbol corresponding to the video playback request (Para. 0032-33); and
responding the encrypted video data corresponding to the encrypted video access symbol to the video playback client device (Para. 32-33), so that the video playback client device [110] can call decryption means with a preset decryption method to decrypt the encrypted video data to obtain the raw video data, the decryption means being preinstalled in the video playback client (Abstract, Para. 0032-33, 39, 61-64, Claims 18-20).
The reference is unclear with respect to a raw video access symbol and returning the encrypted video access symbol to the video publisher.
In similar field of endeavor, Wang et al teaches a raw video access symbol and returning the encrypted video access symbol to the video publisher (Figure 1; Para. 56, 67-68). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reference before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of increasing data security and user privacy in systems and devices connected to public networks.
Regarding claim 5, Nair and Wang, the combination teaches the receiving the raw video data and the raw video access symbol transmitted by the video publisher and generating the encrypted video data and the encrypted video access symbol comprises:
determining a preset second key according to the raw video access symbol; and encrypting the raw video access symbol according to the second key and a default encryption algorithm to generate the encrypted video access symbol, the default encryption algorithm for encrypting the video access symbol being prestored in the first means (Nair: Para. 15, 31-34 and Wang: Figure 1; Para. 56, 67-68, 83, 0110).
Claim 6 is rejected wherein Nair et al teaches the default encryption algorithm is AES (Para. 15, 31-33).
Regarding claim 7, Nair and Wang, the combination teaches the secure video dissemination system according to claim 1, wherein the method of responding the encrypted video data corresponding to the encrypted video access symbol to the video playback client device comprises:
confirming whether the encrypted video data corresponding to the encrypted video access symbol is stored in the object storage according to the encrypted video access symbol (i.e. a digital rights management (DRM) server 22 and uses it to encrypt the content for storage) (Nair: Para. 13);
if so, responding the encrypted video data stored in the object storage to the video playback client device (Nair: Abstract, Para. 0032-33, 39, 61-64, Claims 18-20); and if not, confirming the raw video access symbol corresponding to the encrypted video access symbol based on the encrypted video access symbol, acquiring the encrypted video data based on the raw video access symbol, and responding to the video playback client device (Nair: Abstract, Para. 13, 0032-33, 39, 61-64, Claims 18-20 and Wang: Figure 1; Para. 56, 67-68, 83, 0110).
Regarding claim 8, Nair and Wang, the combination teaches a video playback client device applied to a secure video dissemination system as discussed with respect to claim 1 (Nair: Abstract, Para. 13), comprising:
third means for initiating a video playback request to second means in a secure video dissemination system according to a preset requesting video method (Nair: Figure 1; Abstract, Para. 13, 39), the preset requesting video method comprising:
in response to a video playback instruction initiated by a user (Nair: Figure 1; Abstract, Para. 39), transmitting a video playback request corresponding to the video playback instruction to the second means in the secure video dissemination system (Nair: Figure 1, Abstract, 32-33), the video playback request being used for the video playback client device to pull encrypted video data corresponding to the video playback instruction from the second means in the secure video dissemination system (Nair: Para. 32-33 and Wang: Figure 1; Para. 56, 67-68, 83, 0110);
fourth means for receiving a response from the second means of the secure video dissemination system (Nair: Para. 32-33)
decryption means for decrypting the encrypted video data according to a preset decryption method to obtain raw video data; and playback means for playing the raw video data (Nair: Abstract, Para. 0032-33, 39, 61-64, Claims 18-20 and Wang: Figure 1; Para. 56, 67-68, 83, 0110).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUNAL LANGHNOJA whose telephone number is (571)270-3583. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM - 5:00PM ET.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at (571) 272-7527. 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.
/KUNAL LANGHNOJA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights