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 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.
Claims 1, 6-7, 9, 11-12, 18-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO Publication 2021/052041 to Jiang (hereafter US PG Pub 2022/0279253 will be used as a certified translation) in view of WO Publication 2022/033321 to Sun (hereafter US PG Pub 2022/0382797 will be used as a certified translation).
Regarding claim 1, “A video display method” reads on the video pushing method/apparatus (abstract) disclosed by Jiang and represented in Fig. 1.
As to “comprising: receiving search information, wherein the search information comprises search intentions of a plurality of search dimensions” Jiang discloses (¶0031, ¶0036-¶0038) that the search keyword is provided to a server where the keyword have different interpretations in different fields/scenarios.
As to “displaying a plurality of first videos corresponding to the search information and video preview information corresponding to each of the first videos on a search result page” Jiang discloses (¶0037, ¶0149, claim 1) that the device receives preview information for at least two first videos matching the search keyword and displays the first video preview information on a first display interface.
As to “wherein the plurality of first videos match the search intentions of the search dimensions, and the video preview information of the first videos is used for representing the search dimensions corresponding to the first videos” Jiang discloses (¶0038-¶0040) that the server finds first videos based on the search keyword where the at least two first videos include at least two types of videos correspond to the video preview information in one-to-one correspondence; for example, if the user searches for a keyword “apple”, the server retrieves videos involving the Apple mobile phone as well as videos involving the fruit apple; the first display interface of the terminal displays the preview information of the videos involving the Apple mobile phone and the preview information of the videos involving the fruit apple as represented in Fig. 1 (element S102).
As to “determining a plurality of second videos in response to a trigger operation for a target video among the plurality of first videos, wherein the second videos are determined based on a search dimension corresponding to the target video” Jiang discloses (¶0042-¶0044) that in response to receiving a play-triggering operation for first target preview information in the first video preview information, a video-obtaining request carrying identification information of a first target video corresponding to the first target preview information is transmitted to the server; (¶0045-¶0047) after the server receives the request, the server determines at least two second videos matching to the selected target video as represented in Fig. 1 (elements S103, S104); (¶0048) the at least two second videos include a video of a same video type as the first target video and having a video similarity with the first target video satisfying a first predetermined condition.
As to “playing the target video, and in response to a switching operation for the target video, playing the second videos…” Jiang discloses (¶0110-¶0117) that the device displays the first video preview information and upon triggering operation on the first target preview information, the server provides second videos and corresponding preview information where the device receives the user’s sliding/switching operation to display second target video from the at least two second video.
Jiang meets all the limitations of the claim except “in response to a switching operation for the target video, playing the second videos in a target order.” However, Sun discloses (¶0092, ¶0095, ¶0112, claim 5) that after user performs a triggering operation on the cover image of the multimedia content set, the multimedia contents included in the set is played in a form of a multimedia content stream; after playing the multimedia contents included in the multimedia content set is completed, the multimedia contents includes in the multimedia content set matching to different set subsequently played in response to a triggering operation as represented in Fig. 2. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Jiang’s system by playing second videos in a target order in response to switching operation as taught by Sun in order to continuously playing multimedia content included in the set as content stream (Sun - ¶0016).
Regarding claim 6, “The video display method of claim 1, wherein the displaying the plurality of first videos on the search result page, comprises: arranging and displaying each of the first videos in multi-column display mode on the search result page” Sun discloses (¶0100) that the multiple multimedia content sets are displayed as multi-column display as represented in Figs. 2 (b1,b2,b3).
Regarding claim 7, “The video display method of claim 1, wherein the video preview information corresponding to the first videos is determined by: determining description information related to each of the search dimensions from the first videos; and integrating each of the description information determined from the first videos to obtain the video preview information corresponding to the first videos” Sun discloses (¶0042) that for each multimedia content set, obtaining description information of multimedia content included in the set, and searching description information with a maximum matching degree from the at least one piece of description information as a text description content of the multimedia content set based on a matching degree between the at least one piece of obtained description information and each of the extension subtags corresponding to the multimedia content set; (¶0087-¶0089) obtaining description information for multimedia content associated with an extended subtag and using that information to generate/display the text description associated with the content set.
Regarding claim 9, “The video display method of claim 1, wherein the display order of the plurality of first videos is determined by: determining a dimension number of at least one search dimension represented by the video preview information of each of the first videos; and sorting the plurality of first videos with the dimension number determined for each of the first videos, and using a sorting result as the display order of the plurality of first videos” Sun discloses (¶0128-¶0132) that when the search query word, such as a city, is used, attribute information of the city name might includes multiple categories; after sorting, a universal extension tag and corresponding extension subtags are determined for each type of extensive query word set; for example, when the extensive query word set is the first type of extensive query word set, a XX city having 1-49 scenic spots, the key words in the corresponding historical search information may include a XX food guide, a XX scenery and the like as represented in Fig. 2; (¶0071) by clustering multimedia content sets corresponding to different multimedia content cards, search results relevant to a search word provided by a user may be clustered and displayed from various search dimensions, and the user may directly find contents relevant to a search intention of the user.
Regarding claim 11, see rejection similar to claim 1. Furthermore, Jiang discloses (¶0138) that the method/system can be implemented as a computer software program stored on a non-transitory CRM executed by the processor to perform the method.
Regarding claim 12, see rejection similar to claim 1. Furthermore, Jiang discloses (¶0138) that the method/system can be implemented as a computer software program stored on a non-transitory CRM executed by the processor to perform the method.
Regarding claim 18, see rejection similar to claim 6.
Regarding claim 19, see rejection similar to claim 7.
Regarding claim 21, see rejection similar to claim 9.
Claims 2-5 and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang in view of Sun, and further in view of US PG Pub 2016/0173925 to Gordon (“Gordon”).
Regarding claim 2, “The video display method of claim 1, wherein the target order is dynamically determined by: obtaining first consumption data obtained with authorization of a user for playing a current second video and obtaining second consumption data obtained with authorization of the user for a historical second video played on a full-screen play page before the current second video, in a process of playing the current second video on the full-screen play page; and determining a next video to be played on the full-screen play page from a plurality of candidate videos based on trigger browsing behaviors for each of the first videos on the search result page and the first consumption data obtained with authorization of the user as well as the second consumption data obtained with authorization of the user” Jiang discloses (¶0081-¶0082, ¶0085) that after server determines second videos, the server ranks the second videos based on the user preference where the user preference is determined from historical viewing record; (¶0110-¶0117) the device displays the first video preview information and upon triggering operation on the first target preview information, the server provides second videos and corresponding preview information where the device receives the user’s sliding/switching operation to display second target video from the at least two second video.
Combination of Jiang and Sun meets all the limitations of the claim except “obtaining first consumption data obtained with authorization of a user for playing a current second video and obtaining second consumption data obtained with authorization of the user for a historical second video…; and determining a next video to be played…based on trigger browsing behaviors for each of the first videos on the search result page and the first consumption data obtained with authorization of the user as well as the second consumption data obtained with authorization of the user.” However, Gordon discloses (¶0095, ¶0099) that the personalized video feed selects videos for subsequent play where filtering/sequencing is based on viewing behavior that includes user’s current/past actions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Jiang and Sun’s systems by obtaining current/past consumption data and determining subsequent videos to be played as taught by Gordon in order to properly rank second videos according to user’s current and historical consumption behavior.
Regarding claim 3, “The video display method of claim 2, wherein the determining the next video to be played on the full-screen play page from the plurality of candidate videos based on the trigger browsing behaviors for each of first videos on the search result page and the first consumption data obtained with authorization of the user as well as the second consumption data obtained with authorization of the user, comprises: determining a target search dimension from a plurality of search dimensions corresponding to the first videos based on the trigger browsing behaviors” combination of Jiang and Sun teaches this limitation, where Jiang discloses (¶0106-¶0113) that based on the user’s search keyword, the system determines first videos matching to the keywords and provides it to the user where the user interacts and selects first video where the system identifies videos matching to the selected video and obtains subsequent videos as represented in Fig. 5; (¶0081-¶0082, ¶0085) that after server determines second videos, the server ranks the second videos based on the user preference where the user preference is determined from historical viewing record, and Sun discloses (¶0020, ¶0104) that the multimedia content sets corresponding to the extension subtags are generated and obtained, where the sets are ranked and preferentially displayed.
As to “determining first video features corresponding to each of the second videos played on the full-screen play page based on the first consumption data obtained with authorization of the user and the second consumption data obtained with authorization of the user; and determining the next video to be played on the full-screen play page from the plurality of candidate videos based on the first video features and second video features, the second video features being indicated by the target search dimension” combination of Jiang and Gordon teaches this limitation, where Jiang discloses (¶0097, ¶0131-¶0132, claim 10) that the system determines candidate videos having a specified video similarity with the target video satisfying the condition that includes determining coordinates of videos in a similarity model and selecting candidate videos based on the calculated similarity, and Gordon discloses (¶0095, ¶0099) that the personalized video feed selects videos for subsequent play where filtering/sequencing is based on viewing behavior that includes user’s current/past actions.
Regarding claim 4, “The video display method of claim 3, wherein the plurality of candidate videos are determined by: obtaining videos, associated with at least one selected from the group consisting of the search information and the first video features, as the plurality of candidate videos, wherein the first video features correspond to the current second video played on the full-screen play page” Jiang discloses (¶0097, ¶0131-¶0132, claim 10) that the system determines candidate videos having a specified video similarity with the target video satisfying the condition that includes determining coordinates of videos in a similarity model and selecting candidate videos based on the calculated similarity.
Regarding claim 5, “The video display method of claim 3, wherein the determining the next video to be played on the full-screen play page from the plurality of candidate videos based on the first video features and the second video features, the second video features being indicated by the target search dimension, comprises: sorting the plurality of candidate videos based on correlations between video features corresponding to each of the candidate videos and at least one selected from the group consisting of the first video features and the second video features; and selecting the next video to be played on the full-screen play page from the plurality of candidate videos based on a sorting result of the plurality of candidate videos” combination of Jiang and Gordon teaches this limitation, where Jiang discloses (¶0097, ¶0131-¶0132, claim 10) that the system determines candidate videos having a specified video similarity with the target video satisfying the condition that includes determining coordinates of videos in a similarity model and selecting candidate videos based on the calculated similarity, and Gordon discloses (¶0095, ¶0099) that the personalized video feed selects videos for subsequent play where filtering/sequencing is based on viewing behavior that includes user’s current/past actions.
Regarding claim 13, see rejection similar to claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, see rejection similar to claim 2.
Regarding claim 15, see rejection similar to claim 3.
Regarding claim 16, see rejection similar to claim 4.
Regarding claim 17, see rejection similar to claim 5.
Claims 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang in view of Sun, and further in view of US PG Pub 2011/0258188 to AbdAlmageed (“Abd”).
Regarding claim 8, “The video display method of claim 7, wherein the description information related to each of the search dimensions is determined from the first videos by: determining text information associated with the first videos, wherein the text information comprises at least one of: introduction information of the first videos and text information identified from the first videos; performing semantic segmentation on the text information…” Sun discloses (¶0042) that for each multimedia content set, obtaining description information of multimedia content included in the set, and searching description information with a maximum matching degree from the at least one piece of description information as a text description content of the multimedia content set based on a matching degree between the at least one piece of obtained description information and each of the extension subtags corresponding to the multimedia content set; (¶0087-¶0089) obtaining description information for multimedia content associated with an extended subtag and using that information to generate/display the text description associated with the content set; (¶0158-¶0160) for each of the screened images, the semantic meaning of the frame is extracted, a vector of the semantic meaning is determined, a matching degree between each key frame image and each extension subtag may be determined by calculating the similarity between the vector of the semantic meaning and a vector of a key word under the extension subtag; the text description contents for the multimedia content sets is determined based on analysis on the multimedia content sets; description information corresponding to the multimedia contents included in the multimedia content sets is determined first, then, the description information is screened, and thus, the text description contents of the multimedia content sets are obtained.
Combination of Jiang and Sun meets all the limitations of the claim except “performing semantic segmentation on the text information to obtain a plurality of candidate keywords; and determining, from the plurality of candidate keywords, at least one candidate keyword, corresponding semantic information of which matches the search dimensions, as description information related to the search dimensions.” However, Abd discloses (¶0016) that the system extracts textual content from the media; (¶0026) the system analyzes the incoming textual information in order to detect the semantic topics covered in the media where it generates a set of topics that are covered in the text; these topics are referred to as "tags" where each tag is represented by a set of semantically coherent words that best represent the specific topic; (¶0036) the semantic tags are represented as vectors; a similarity score between the vector representing the textual content of the segment and every vector representing a semantic tag is computed; the tags with the highest scores are selected and their scores are normalized and used as weights; (¶0047) the tag expansion process expands semantic tags in order to increase the likelihood that the semantic tags associated with a segment cover the textual information content in that segment; for example, the tag expansion operation adds additional keywords to the tag if they have similar meanings to existing keywords. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Jiang and Sun’s systems by performing semantic segmentation on the text information and determining keywords corresponding semantic information to match the search dimension as taught by Abd in order to automatically generate descriptive information for a video content based on the semantic content of the video.
Regarding claim 20, see rejection similar to claim 8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2024/0045898 to Zhu
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PINKAL R CHOKSHI whose telephone number is (571)270-3317. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am-5pm.
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 T 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.
/PINKAL R CHOKSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
