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 communications filed 09/15/2026. Claims 1, 3-7, 10-11, 13-17, 20-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Claim 1, the applicant argues First, Huang in view of Wang does not teach or suggest transforming the prompt information from a first display state to a second display state that has a smaller display area after a duration threshold. The applicant states Huang states: "playing a segment of a first playing object on the first interface, where the first interface includes prompt information, and the prompt information is used to prompt that the segment of the first playing object is being played." Huang, at [0008], [0037], and [0066]. This passage shows that Huang displays prompt information while a restricted segment is played.
In response to the applicant’s arguments the examiner respectfully disagrees. The method claims with contingent limitations are not required. The limitation states transforming from the first display state to a second display state in response to a duration ….being greater than a first duration threshold….. Therefore, the method claim does not require transformation if the contingency is not met. Wang discloses in response to a duration of displaying the prompt information of the first display state being greater than a first duration threshold, wherein a display area of the prompt information of the second display state is smaller than a display area of the prompt information of the first display state (Page 5, 7th paragraph, Figure 1, the determining the display time reaches the preset display time and the wheel cast strip is converted to thumbnail – if the time is less than preset display time (threshold), then it is playing and no conversion, it is also noted that reaching the display time is equal to the threshold and is not greater than the threshold). The limitations “displaying a resource transfer interface in response to a selection of the prompt information of the second display state; and removing the playback restriction to play the video in its entirety in response to completing a resource transfer operation through the resource transfer interface” are not required to be met as they only are required if the transforming step occurs.
Note this applies to method claims only.
Claim Interpretation
Note that the limitations in claim 1-8 “in response to a duration of displaying the prompt information of the first display state being greater than a first duration threshold, wherein a display area of the prompt information of the second display state is smaller than a display area of the prompt information of the first display state” and “displaying a resource transfer interface in response to a selection of the prompt information of the second display state; and removing the playback restriction to play the video in its entirety in response to completing a resource transfer operation through the resource transfer interface” are contingent limitations and are not required in method claims. Therefore, any limitations which refers to these steps are not required to be met. See MPEP 2111.04, II.
Please note that dependent claims 3-8 are not required to be met as they depend from the contingent limitations.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-8, 10-14, 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al (US 2022/0327154 and hereafter referred to as “Huang”) in view of Wang (CN 114630136 cited in IDS filed 06/25/2025, English translation provided with this office action)
Regarding Claim 1, Huang discloses a playback method, comprising:
Detecting a video as a first type of video(Figure 5, 501, Page 2-3, paragraph 0038);
displaying prompt information of a first display state on a video playback interface in response to a video as a first type of video, wherein the first type of video is provided with a playback restriction, and the prompt information is used to prompt the removal of the playback restriction (Figure 5, 501, Page 2-3, paragraph 0038 – interface for playing multimedia including video, with a prompt, see Figure 1, Figure 2, 10); and
displaying the prompt information on the first display state on the video playback interface (Figure 7).
Huang does not explicitly disclose transforming the prompt information from the first display state to a second display state on the video playback interface, in response to a duration of displaying the prompt information of the first display state being greater than a first duration threshold, wherein a display area of the prompt information of the second display state is smaller than a display area of the prompt information of the first display state, displaying a resource transfer interface in response to a selection of the prompt information of the second display state; and removing the playback restriction to play the video in its entirety in response to completing a resource transfer operation through the resource transfer interface.
Wang discloses transforming the prompt information from the first display state to a second display state on the video playback interface, in response to a duration of displaying the prompt information of the first display state being greater than a first duration threshold, wherein a display area of the prompt information of the second display state is smaller than a display area of the prompt information of the first display state (Page 5, 7th paragraph, Figure 1, the determining the display time reaches the preset display time and the wheel cast strip is converted to thumbnail – if the time is less than preset display time (threshold), then it is playing and no conversion), displaying a resource transfer interface in response to a selection of the prompt information of the second display state; and removing the playback restriction to play the video in its entirety in response to completing a resource transfer operation through the resource transfer interface (the limitations are not required to be met as they are required for there to be transforming to the second display state). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Huang to include the missing limitation as taught by Wang in order to improve the real time relevance between information card and the video content (Page 4, last paragraph) as disclosed by Wang.
Regarding Claim 3-8, Huang and Wang disclose all the limitations of Claim 1. Claim 1. Claims 3-8 are met as they are depending on contingent limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11, 13-17, and 20-21 are allowed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARZANA HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5943. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, Christopher Kelley can be reached at 571-272-7331. 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.
/FARZANA HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
September 26, 2026
