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 references listed in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on September 08, 2025 have been considered by the examiner (see attached PTO-1449 form).
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.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchner et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2010/0208082) in view of Krikorian et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0198532).
Regarding claim 1, Buchner et al. discloses a computerized method for producing digital content, comprising the steps of (see paragraphs 0009-0011, 0023-0029):
providing virtual access to a physical location from a remote site to a user (see paragraphs 0023-0027; a remote end user with multiple synchronized views of an event occurring at a physical venue. The user may watch the event up close, from many camera angles, from anywhere in the world, and in real time. Paragraphs 0024-0027 discloses cameras and microphones positioned at the event capture video and audio, the signals are transmitted to the internet, and a remote computer), wherein an access request from said user is received and, in response to said access request, said user is logged in (see paragraphs 0033, 0052, 0056; end user logging on to view the event, fee-based and pay-per-access);
upon allowance of said virtual access, providing sources to said user from said physical location from at least some media, said media capturing storable electronic content from said sources for consumption by said user (see paragraphs 0024-0028; venue includes multiple cameras positioned to capture or record different views and one or more microphones that capture or record venue audio. The resulting synchronized video/audio signals are transmitted through the internet and retrieved by the remote media player for simultaneous display and consumption. The signals are storable because the media player’s memory enables recording of both the video signals and the end user’s personalized production);
generating an interface to allow said user at said remote site to select from said sources at said physical location in real-time (see paragraphs 0010, 0028-0029, 0035, 0038, 0042; remote media player generates a user interface that simultaneously displays synchronized video images and allows selection of a desired view), wherein one or more of said storable electronic content is selected by said user to thereby form curated content (see paragraphs 0035, 0038; multiple views are available so each user may orchestrate them according to personal wishes, enables the user to become the producer, and permits selection among the supplied views at any time. The media player records the end user’s “personalized production generated from the multiple video images); and
recording said curated content into a memory as said user forms said curated content, thereby generating a customized package (see paragraphs 0028, 0029, 0038- and 0042; memory that enables the end user to record the personalized production generated from the multiple video images), wherein said customized package can be further deployed (see paragraph 0052, 0056).
However, Buchner et al. is silent as to said user is allowed, or disallowed, virtual access to said physical location; recording stored production into a data file.
Krikorian et al. discloses said user is allowed, or disallowed, virtual access to said physical location (see paragraphs 0070, 0080-0081; the community website 610 will allow users 640 to access a media content unit only if the associated restrictions set by the content owners are satisfied);
recording stored production into a data file (see paragraphs 0033-0039; display with a record control, continuous capture/cache while the stream plays, creation of a media clip based on user selections, storage as a larger media file or clip, and saving locally or remotely), wherein said customized package can be further deployed (see paragraphs 0020-0021, 0039-0043; uploading the recorded media clip to a community website, saving it locally or remotely, attaching it to an email, sending it to selected recipients, and sharing it for others to access or download).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Buchner et al. with the teachings of Krikorian et al. the motivation being predictably prevent unauthorized access.
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claims 2, 8 and 14, Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 1, 7 and 13). Krikorian et al. discloses wherein prior to the step of providing said virtual access to said physical location, said user is credentialed (see paragraphs 0080, 0081, 0057-0061).
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.
Claims 3, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. as applied to claims 1, 7 and 13 above, and further in view of Naik et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0022391).
Regarding claims 3, 9 and 15, Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 1, 7 and 13). Buchner et al. allows the remote user to select and manipulate live camera and audio feeds (see paragraphs 0028-0029, 0035, 0038, 0042).
However, Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. are silent as to user using standard protocol command relays including commands communicating with said media.
Naik et al. discloses user using standard protocol command relays including commands communicating with said media (see paragraphs 0010-0014, 0026-0035).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. with the teachings of Naik et al. the motivation being so the remote user could adjust the chosen venue camera and thereby improve interactive coverage.
Claims 4, 5, 10, 11, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. as applied to claims 1, 7 and 13 above, and further in view of Meaney et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0121668).
Regarding claims 4, 10 and 16, Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 1, 7 and 13). Krikorian et al. discloses user selected content as a stored media file (see paragraphs 0033-0043).
However, Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. are silent as to said user journey file including a time of choice of said curated content by said user such that said user journey file includes a timeline of said sources being selected by said user.
Meaney et al. discloses said user journey file including a time of choice of said curated content by said user such that said user journey file includes a timeline of said sources being selected by said user (see paragraphs 0342-0344, 0312-0316, 0360-0365).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Buchner et al. and Krikorian et al. with the teachings of Meaney et al. the motivation being to preserve which synchronized source the user selected at each time and permits accurate reconstruction, later editing, and export.
Regarding claims 5, 11 and 17, Buchner et al., Krikorian et al. and Meaney et al. discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 4, 10 and 16). Meaney et al. discloses wherein said user journey file can be supplemented, edited or played back by either said user or a third party such that said third party can experience said customized package generated by said user (see paragraphs 0312-0318, 0339-0365).
Claims 6, 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchner et al., Krikorian et al. and Meaney et al. as applied to claims 5, 11 and 18 above, and further in view of Stetson (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0273359).
Regarding claims 6, 12 and 18, Buchner et al., Krikorian et al. and Meaney et al. discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claims 5, 11 and 17). However, Buchner et al., Krikorian et al. and Meaney et al. are silent as to wherein said physical location is a surgical suite, wherein said media is within said surgical suite, thereby forming a virtual surgical suite; and, wherein said user journey file sourced by said user is a recorded surgery available for deployment.
Stetson discloses wherein said physical location is a surgical suite, wherein said media is within said surgical suite, thereby forming a virtual surgical suite; and, wherein said user journey file sourced by said user is a recorded surgery available for deployment (see paragraphs 0028-0041).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Buchner et al., Krikorian et al. and Meaney et al. with the teachings of Stetson the motivation being to provide remote surgical teaching.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NNENNA NGOZI EKPO whose telephone number is (571)270-1663. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 10:00am - 6:30pm, TH-F 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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.
NNENNA EKPO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2425
/NNENNA N EKPO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425 August 13, 2026.
Prosecution Insights