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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Bagga et al. (US Pub. No. 2016/0142783 A1).
In respect to Claim 1, Bagga teaches:
a computer-implemented method comprising: receiving, by a media content source, a query for media content; (Bagga teaches [0045] a query for media content.)
determining that the media content is not stored in a data structure associated with the media content source; (Bagga teaches [0084] a determination of content that is stored based on search filtering, thus any content not provided is not stored in the associated data structure.)
based at least in part on the determining, retrieving metadata of the media content; (Bagga teaches [0044] retrieving metadata of media content.)
identifying a plurality of media content items stored in the data structure, wherein each respective media content item of the plurality of media content items is associated with metadata that corresponds to at least a portion of the metadata of the media content; (Bagga teaches [0044] metadata identification associated with media content items.)
and based at least in part on the identifying, providing for display a plurality of identifiers respectively corresponding to the plurality of media content items (Bagga illustrates [FIG. 3A] identifiers corresponding to media content items.)
As per Claim 2, Bagga teaches:
modifying the query to include one or more terms indicated in the metadata of the media content; and using the modified query to identify the plurality of media content items (Bagga teaches [0045, 0048, 0062, 0084] filtering of a query, wherein filtering is analogous to modification of the query.)
As per Claim 3, Bagga teaches:
wherein the query comprises at least one term that is present in the metadata, and the one or more terms of the modified query are distinct from the at least one term (Bagga teaches [0045, 0048, 0062, 0084] filtering of a query, wherein filtering is analogous to modification of the query.)
As per Claim 5, Bagga teaches:
based at least in part on determining that the media content is not stored in the data structure associated with the media content source, transmitting, for display at a device from which the query is received, an indication that the media content is not available (Bagga teaches [0084] a determination of content that is stored based on search filtering, thus any content not provided is not stored in the associated data structure.)
As per Claim 6, Bagga teaches:
wherein the at least a portion of the metadata of the media content indicates at least one genre of the media content and at least one actor of the media content, and wherein identifying the plurality of media content items is based at least in part on determining that metadata of each respective media content item of the plurality of media content items corresponds to one or more of the at least one genre or the at least one actor (Bagga [0040])
As per Claim 7, Bagga teaches:
receiving, from a device associated with a user, an input to generate the query; accessing preferences indicated in a profile of the user; (Bagga teaches [0017] preferences and profiles associated with a user.)
based at least in part on determining that the media content is not stored in the data structure, automatically modifying the query based at least in part on the preferences; (Bagga teaches [0017] preferences and profiles associated with a user.)
and using the modified query to identify the plurality of media content items (Bagga teaches [0045, 0048, 0062, 0084] filtering of a query, wherein filtering is analogous to modification of the query.)
As per Claim 8, Bagga teaches:
wherein the data structure comprises a plurality of fields indicating metadata of the plurality of media content items, respectively, and wherein the identifying the plurality of media content items comprises comparing a value associated with the at least a portion of the metadata of the media content to respective values of corresponding fields of the plurality of media content items (Bagga teaches [0044] metadata identification associated with media content items.)
As per Claim 9, Bagga teaches:
wherein the metadata of the media content is retrieved from a source that is distinct from the media content source (Bagga teaches [0044] metadata identification associated with media content items.)
As per Claim 10, Bagga teaches:
automatically modifying the query based at least in part on an age of a user or users associated with a device at which the query is received; and using the modified query to identify the plurality of media content items (Bagga teaches [0045, 0048, 0062, 0084] filtering of a query, wherein filtering is analogous to modification of the query.)
As per Claim 11, Bagga teaches:
wherein the at least a portion of the metadata of the media content indicates at least one genre of the media content, and wherein identifying the plurality of media content items is based at least in part on determining that metadata of each respective media content item of the plurality of media content items corresponds to the at least one genre (Bagga [0040])
As per Claim 12, Bagga teaches:
wherein the at least a portion of the metadata of the media content indicates at least one actor of the media content, and wherein identifying the plurality of media content items is based at least in part on determining that metadata of each respective media content item of the plurality of media content items corresponds to the at least one actor (Bagga [0040])
Claims 13-15 & 17-20 are the system claims corresponding to method claims 1-3, 5-7, & 9 respectively, therefore are rejected for the same reasons noted above.
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.
Claim(s) 4 & 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bagga in view of Raz et al. (US Pub. No. 2015/0269221 A1).
As per Claim 4, Bagga does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the query comprises a Boolean operator, and wherein the modifying the query further comprises modifying the Boolean operator to be a different Boolean operator
However, Raz teaches:
wherein the query comprises a Boolean operator, and wherein the modifying the query further comprises modifying the Boolean operator to be a different Boolean operator (Raz teaches [0047] modification of a query using a Boolean operator.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date invention to incorporate the teachings of Raz into the system of Bagga. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide a system for enabling users to select portions of the initial search results and in response to a user selection identifying metadata associated with selected portions, while also giving the user the ability to add one or more elements to the initial query. (Raz [0008])
Claim 16 is the system claim corresponding to method claim 4, therefore is rejected for the same reason noted above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA BULLOCK whose telephone number is (571)270-1395. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:00 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, Kavita Stanley can be reached at 571-272-8352. 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.
/JOSHUA BULLOCK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2153 March 3, 2026