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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/7/2025 and 3/10/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
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) 1-10, 14, 17-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sullivan; Edward M. US 20200286119 A1 (hereafter Sullivan) and in further view of Mizuta; Daisuke et al. US 20220021939 A1 (hereafter Mizuta) and in further view of Shibata; Kazuto US 20220337918 A1 (hereafter Shibata).
Regarding claim 1, “a method for resource processing, applied to a viewing client, and comprising: obtaining first resource push information of a game, wherein the first resource push information is determined according to usage progress information of the viewing client on the game; and displaying the first resource push information of the game on a live streaming interface” Sullivan para 31-33, 49-51, 55-59 teaches obtaining resource push information from content providers corresponding to rewards distributed to viewers for accessing particular content comprising video content and live-streamed content; see para 50-51 tracking viewers usage progress to change reward characteristics based on amount of viewed content. Whereas Sullivan does not use to term “game”, Sullivan does disclose application of the invention is not limited to the type of video content and livestream content. In an analogous art, Mizuta teaches an invention for distributing live video wherein viewers are provided with rewards for viewing live content delivered to a game console (para 48-52 and Fig. 8 para 74-79).
The prior art to Shibata teaches a motivation for implementing a real-time video distribution in a game application wherein viewers are rewarded based on their viewing and participation with the video content (para 56, 79, 110-116).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sullivan’s invention for utilizing a live-streaming content to be pushed to viewers based on the viewer’s progress of viewing consumption of video content by further incorporating known elements of Mizuta’s invention for distributing live video wherein viewers are provided with rewards for viewing live content delivered to a game console because the prior art to Shibata’s invention teaches a real-time video distribution in a game application wherein viewers are rewarded based on their viewing and participation with the video content and the combination of elements results in known elements according to their known use which leads to predictable results for enabling viewers to engage in interactive video with incentives.
Regarding claim 2, “further comprising: displaying a resource collection interface corresponding to the game in response to a triggering operation for the first resource push information” is further rejected on obviousness grounds as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 and wherein Sullivan para 31 teaches providing user accounts and reward graphics for viewed video content; see also Mizuta para 80-82 and 87-92 teaching displaying viewer’s resource collection in relation to the viewer participating in the viewing of content. See also Shibata para 79-80 and 110-117 tracking and displaying viewer’s fan level based on viewing conditions.
Regarding claim 3, “wherein resource details corresponding to the first resource push information and a resource collection control corresponding to the first resource push information are displayed on the resource collection interface; and obtaining a resource corresponding to the first resource push information in response to a triggering operation for the resource collection control” is further rejected on obviousness grounds as discussed in the rejection of claims 1-2 and wherein Sullivan para 31 teaches providing user accounts and reward graphics for viewed video content; see also Mizuta para 80-82 and 87-92 teaching displaying viewer’s resource collection in relation to the viewer participating in the viewing of content. See also Shibata para 79-80 and 110-117 tracking and displaying viewer’s fan level based on viewing conditions.
Regarding claim 4, “further comprising: displaying a game interaction control of the game on the live streaming interface, and displaying a game presentation interface corresponding to the game in response to a triggering operation for the game interaction control; and displaying a resource collection entry corresponding to the first resource push information on the game presentation interface, wherein the resource collection entry is used for collecting a resource corresponding to the first resource push information” is further rejected on obviousness grounds as discussed in the rejection of claims 1-3 and wherein the combination of prior art teaches the viewer is able to control the viewing of video content from the viewer device for selecting content and associated rewards, for example, Sullivan para 31-33, 49-51, 55-59 teaches obtaining resource push information from content providers corresponding to rewards distributed to viewers for accessing particular content comprising video content and live-streamed content; see para 50-51 tracking viewers usage progress to change reward characteristics based on amount of viewed content. See also Mizuta teaches an invention for distributing live video wherein viewers are provided with rewards for viewing live content delivered to a game console (para 48-52 and Fig. 8 para 74-79). See also Shibata teaches a motivation for implementing a real-time video distribution in a game application wherein viewers are rewarded based on their viewing and participation with the video content (para 56, 79, 110-116).
Regarding claim 5, “wherein displaying the first resource push information of the game on the live streaming interface comprises: in response to the usage progress information being first usage progress information, displaying a first usage progress identifier on the live streaming interface; and in response to obtaining a first resource corresponding to the first usage progress information, switching the first usage progress identifier into prompt information for collecting a second resource, wherein the second resource is a resource corresponding to second usage progress information, and the second usage progress information is next progress information adjacent to the first usage progress” is further rejected on obviousness grounds as discussed in the rejection of claims 1-4 and wherein the combination of prior art teaches updating the rewards distributed to viewers based on tracking viewed content wherein, for example, Sullivan para 31-33, 49-51, 55-59 teaches obtaining resource push information from content providers corresponding to rewards distributed to viewers for accessing particular content comprising video content and live-streamed content; see para 50-51 tracking viewers usage progress to change reward characteristics based on amount of viewed content. See also Mizuta teaches an invention for distributing live video wherein viewers are provided with rewards for viewing live content delivered to a game console (para 48-52 and Fig. 8 para 74-79). See also Shibata teaches a real-time video distribution in a game application wherein viewers are rewarded based on their viewing and participation with the video content (para 56, 79, 110-116).
Regarding claim 6, “wherein displaying the first resource push information of the game on the live streaming interface comprises: in response to the usage progress information being first usage progress information, displaying a first usage progress identifier on the live streaming interface; and in response to the usage progress information being updated to second usage progress information, switching the first usage progress identifier into a second usage progress identifier” is further rejected on obviousness grounds as discussed in the rejection of claims 1-5 and wherein the combination of prior art teaches updating the rewards distributed to viewers based on tracking viewed content wherein, for example, Sullivan para 31-33, 49-51, 55-59 teaches obtaining resource push information from content providers corresponding to rewards distributed to viewers for accessing particular content comprising video content and live-streamed content; see para 50-51 tracking viewers usage progress to change reward characteristics based on amount of viewed content. See also Mizuta teaches an invention for distributing live video wherein viewers are provided with rewards for viewing live content delivered to a game console (para 48-52 and Fig. 8 para 74-79). See also Shibata teaches a real-time video distribution in a game application wherein viewers are rewarded based on their viewing and participation with the video content (para 56, 79, 110-116).
Regarding the method for resource processing applied to a server claims 7-10, the claims are grouped and rejected with the method for resource processing applied to a client device claims 1-6 because the steps of the method claims are met by the disclosure of the apparatus and methods of the reference(s) as discussed in the rejection of claims 1-6 and because the steps of the method are easily converted into elements of computer implemented methods by one of ordinary skill in the art. With respect to the rejection of claim 8 reciting elements not discussed in the rejection of claims 1-6, the prior art to Sullivan para 52 further teaches additional options for selection by the viewer, in addition to the primary video content, enabling the viewer to acquire additional resources by viewing a plurality of additional viewing content. With respect to the rejection of claim 9 reciting elements not discussed in the rejection of claims 1-6, the prior art to Sullivan para 52-53 further teaches displaying additional options for selection by the viewer, in addition to the primary video content, enabling the viewer to acquire additional resources by viewing a plurality of additional viewing content. See also Sullivan para 31-33, 49-51, 55-59 teaches obtaining resource push information from content providers corresponding to rewards distributed to viewers for accessing particular content comprising video content and live-streamed content; see para 50-51 tracking viewers usage progress to change reward characteristics based on amount of viewed content. With respect to the rejection of claim 10 reciting elements not discussed in the rejection of claims 1-6, the prior art to Sullivan para 52-53 further teaches displaying additional options as a sorted list for selection by the viewer, in addition to the primary video content, enabling the viewer to acquire additional resources by viewing a plurality of additional viewing content. See also Sullivan para 31-33, 49-51, 55-59 teaches obtaining resource push information from content providers corresponding to rewards distributed to viewers for accessing particular content comprising video content and live-streamed content; see para 50-51 tracking viewers usage progress to change reward characteristics based on amount of viewed content. See also Mizuta teaches an invention for distributing live video wherein viewers are provided with rewards for viewing live content delivered to a game console (para 48-52 and Fig. 8 para 74-79). See also Shibata teaches a motivation for implementing a real-time video distribution in a game application wherein viewers are rewarded based on their viewing and participation with the video content (para 56, 79, 110-116).
Regarding the device claims 14, 17-24, the claims are grouped and rejected with the method claims 1-10 because the steps of the method claims are met by the disclosure of the apparatus and methods of the reference(s) as discussed in the rejection of claims 1-10 and because the steps of the method are easily converted into elements of computer device by one of ordinary skill in the art. With respect to the limitations regarding “switching” corresponds to the combination of prior art teaching the viewers are able to initiate the collection of rewards for meeting the viewing and participating requirements for each video content.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFONSO CASTRO whose telephone number is (571)270-3950. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 10am to 6pm.
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. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALFONSO CASTRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights