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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 3, 10-11, 13, 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 17, 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,902,623 in view of Vartakavi et al. (US Pub. 2016/0196105), herein referenced as Vartakavi.
Instant Application Claim 1
US Pat. 11,902,623 Claims 1 and 3
A method comprising: determining a first goal mood score for a first time period; selecting one or more first content items from a first plurality of content items, wherein the one or more first content items have a first cumulative mood score that meets or exceeds the first goal mood score; adding the one or more first content items to a content playlist;
A method comprising: …wherein the video playlist comprises a first plurality of video segments, each video segment associated with a mood score; …calculating a cumulative mood score based on the mood scores of the first plurality of video segments; (Claim 1)
wherein the cumulative mood score is calculated based on a predetermined period. (Claim 3)
The claim in the instant application recites the additional limitation of causing to be provided at a device, during the first time period, the one or more first content items of the content playlist; determining a second goal mood score for a second time period, wherein the first goal mood score is different than the goal second mood score, and wherein the first time period starts before the second time period; selecting one or more second content items from a second plurality of content items, wherein the one or more second content items have a second cumulative mood score that meets or exceeds the second goal mood score; adding the one or more second content items to the content playlist; and causing to be provided at the device, during the second time period, the one or more second content items of the content playlist.
Nevertheless, Vartakavi discloses causing to be provided at a device, during the first time period, the one or more first content items of the content playlist ([0059], Fig. 8, i.e., selection of the candidate media file may include adding an identifier of the candidate media file to a playlist, initiating a playback of the candidate media file (e.g., as the selected media file), causing presentation of a suggestion that the candidate media file be played); determining a second goal mood score for a second time period, wherein the first goal mood score is different than the goal second mood score, and wherein the first time period starts before the second time period ([0021], [0040]-[0041], [0051], Fig. 6, i.e., selection of a target arousal score based on contextual data that describes an activity in which the user is engaged (e.g., driving a car to work, working, or driving the car home). It is also noted, that “driving a car to work” occurs in a first time period before “working” which occurs in a second time period); selecting one or more second content items from a second plurality of content items, wherein the one or more second content items have a second cumulative mood score that meets or exceeds the second goal mood score ([0053], i.e., the media file is selected based on the target arousal score); adding the one or more second content items to the content playlist; and causing to be provided at the device, during the second time period, the one or more second content items of the content playlist ([0059], Fig. 8, i.e., selection of the candidate media file may include adding an identifier of the candidate media file to a playlist, initiating a playback of the candidate media file (e.g., as the selected media file), causing presentation of a suggestion that the candidate media file be played).
It would have been obvious to include causing to be provided at a device, during the first time period, the one or more first content items of the content playlist; determining a second goal mood score for a second time period, wherein the first goal mood score is different than the goal second mood score, and wherein the first time period starts before the second time period; selecting one or more second content items from a second plurality of content items, wherein the one or more second content items have a second cumulative mood score that meets or exceeds the second goal mood score; adding the one or more second content items to the content playlist; and causing to be provided at the device, during the second time period, the one or more second content items of the content playlist in claim 1 of patent 11,902,623 for the benefit of providing a system to facilitate machine-led mood changes appropriate for the current state of a person ([0003]).
Claim 3 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 9.
Claim 10 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 7.
Claim 11 of the instant application corresponds to patented claims 11 and 13.
Claim 13 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 19.
Claim 20 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 6-7, 11, 13, 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vartakavi et al. (US Pub. 2016/0196105), herein referenced as Vartakavi.
Regarding claim 1, Vartakavi discloses “A method comprising: determining a first goal mood score for a first time period ([0021], [0040]-[0041], Fig. 6, i.e., a machine selects a target arousal score for the user based on contextual data that describes an activity in which the user is engaged (e.g., driving a car to work, working, or driving the car home));
selecting one or more first content items from a first plurality of content items, wherein the one or more first content items have a first cumulative mood score that meets or exceeds the first goal mood score ([0043], [0053], i.e., the media file is selected based on the target arousal score);
adding the one or more first content items to a content playlist; causing to be provided at a device, during the first time period, the one or more first content items of the content playlist ([0059], Fig. 8, i.e., selection of the candidate media file may include adding an identifier of the candidate media file to a playlist, initiating a playback of the candidate media file (e.g., as the selected media file), causing presentation of a suggestion that the candidate media file be played);
determining a second goal mood score for a second time period, wherein the first goal mood score is different than the goal second mood score, and wherein the first time period starts before the second time period ([0021], [0040]-[0041], [0051], Fig. 6, i.e., selection of a target arousal score based on contextual data that describes an activity in which the user is engaged (e.g., driving a car to work, working, or driving the car home). It is also noted, that “driving a car to work” occurs in a first time period before “working” which occurs in a second time period);
selecting one or more second content items from a second plurality of content items, wherein the one or more second content items have a second cumulative mood score that meets or exceeds the second goal mood score ([0053], i.e., the media file is selected based on the target arousal score);
adding the one or more second content items to the content playlist; and causing to be provided at the device, during the second time period, the one or more second content items of the content playlist.” ([0059], Fig. 8, i.e., selection of the candidate media file may include adding an identifier of the candidate media file to a playlist, initiating a playback of the candidate media file (e.g., as the selected media file), causing presentation of a suggestion that the candidate media file be played).
Regarding claim 3, Vartakavi discloses “identifying a first context of the one or more first content items; and wherein the one or more second content items have a second context different from the first context.” ([0078]-[0079], i.e., music is identified by genre and energy levels).
Regarding claim 6, Vartakavi discloses “accessing a viewing history associated with the device, wherein the viewing history comprises a previous plurality of content items previously provided at the device during a time period corresponding to the first time period, and wherein the previous plurality of content items is associated with respective mood scores; and determining, based at least in part on the respective mood scores, the first goal mood score for the first time period.” ([0042]-[0043], [0053], i.e., the media file selected in operation 630 may be selected from among a group (e.g., collection or library) of familiar media files previously played for the user 132 (e.g., media files having play counts above a threshold number of playbacks)).
Regarding claim 7, Vartakavi discloses “wherein determining the second goal mood score for the second time period comprises: accessing a viewing history associated with the device, wherein the viewing history comprises a previous plurality of content items previously provided at the device during a time period corresponding to the second time period, and wherein the previous plurality of content items is associated with respective mood scores; and determining, based at least in part on the respective mood scores, the second goal mood score for the second time period.” ([0042]-[0043], [0053], i.e., the media file selected in operation 630 may be selected from among a group (e.g., collection or library) of familiar media files previously played for the user 132 (e.g., media files having play counts above a threshold number of playbacks)).
Regarding claim 11, Vartakavi discloses “A system comprising: one or more input/output (I/0) paths configured to provide content; and control circuitry ([0109]-[0110], Figs. 1-3, 24) configured to: determine a first goal mood score for a first time period ([0021], [0040]-[0041], Fig. 6, i.e., a machine selects a target arousal score for the user based on contextual data that describes an activity in which the user is engaged (e.g., driving a car to work, working, or driving the car home));
select one or more first content items from a first plurality of content items, wherein the one or more first content items have a first cumulative mood score that meets or exceeds the first goal mood score ([0043], [0053], i.e., the media file is selected based on the target arousal score);
add the one or more first content items to a content playlist; cause to be provided at a device, via the one or more I/O paths and during the first time period, the one or more first content items of the content playlist ([0059], Fig. 8, i.e., selection of the candidate media file may include adding an identifier of the candidate media file to a playlist, initiating a playback of the candidate media file (e.g., as the selected media file), causing presentation of a suggestion that the candidate media file be played);
determine a second goal mood score for a second time period, wherein the first goal mood score is different than the goal second mood score, and wherein the first time period starts before the second time period ([0021], [0040]-[0041], [0051], Fig. 6, i.e., selection of a target arousal score based on contextual data that describes an activity in which the user is engaged (e.g., driving a car to work, working, or driving the car home). It is also noted, that “driving a car to work” occurs in a first time period before “working” which occurs in a second time period);
select one or more second content items from a second plurality of content items, wherein the one or more second content items have a second cumulative mood score that meets or exceeds the second goal mood score ([0043], [0053], i.e., the media file is selected based on the target arousal score);
add the one or more second content items to the content playlist; and cause to be provided at the device, via the one or more I/O paths and during the second time period, the one or more second content items of the content playlist.” ([0059], Fig. 8, i.e., selection of the candidate media file may include adding an identifier of the candidate media file to a playlist, initiating a playback of the candidate media file (e.g., as the selected media file), causing presentation of a suggestion that the candidate media file be played).
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is interpreted and thus rejected for the reasons set for above in the rejection of claim 3.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is interpreted and thus rejected for the reasons set for above in the rejection of claim 6.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is interpreted and thus rejected for the reasons set for above in the rejection of claim 7.
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 2, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vartakavi in view of O’Konski et al. (US Pub. 2019/0155840), herein referenced as O’Konski.
Regarding claim 2, Vartakavi discloses providing a mood-based playlist to users during various activities or time periods ([0003], [0021], [0040], [0090]), however Vartakavi fails to explicitly disclose “wherein a portion of the first time period overlaps with the second time period.”
O’Konski teaches the technique of providing wherein a portion of the first time period overlaps with the second time period ([0074], [0079], [0093], i.e., a playlist is modified dynamically based on the change in the condition of a user activity and location. A progression format can be selected to order media tracks in the playlist along a transitional path from the user's current mood to the target mood. In other words, media tracks are ordered to provide a transition or progression format, and thus one time period or activity overlaps the other).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the technique of providing wherein a portion of the first time period overlaps with the second time period as taught by O’Konski, to improve the machine-led mood change system of Vartakavi for the predictable result of preventing abrupt changes in the playlist and thus providing smoother, gradual transitions for an improved experience.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is interpreted and thus rejected for the reasons set for above in the rejection of claim 2.
Claims 8, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vartakavi in view of Archibong et al. (US Pub. 2014/0067828), herein referenced as Archibong.
Regarding claim 8, Vartakavi fails to disclose “wherein the content playlist comprises one or more social media content items.”
Archibong teaches the technique of providing wherein the content playlist comprises one or more social media content items ([0258], Claim 12, i.e., determining trending media content on the social-networking system, wherein the playlist further comprises the trending media content). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the technique of providing wherein the content playlist comprises one or more social media content items as taught by Archibong, to improve the machine-led mood change system of Vartakavi for the predictable result of providing a variety of new media content to further enhance or affect the mood.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is interpreted and thus rejected for the reasons set for above in the rejection of claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 9-10, 14-15, 19-20 are 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 Alexander Q Huerta whose telephone number is (571)270-3582. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-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, 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.
/ALEXANDER Q HUERTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425 May 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights