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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 20 recites “The system of claim 1”, however claim 1 refers the method. For examination purposes, claim 20 is interpreted to depend from claim 11.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-2, 7, 11-12, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Funk et al. (US Pub. 2015/0066913), herein referenced as Funk.
Regarding claim 1, Funk discloses “A method comprising: identifying a first news content item related to a topic ([0026], [0031], Figs. 3, 6, i.e., a user conducts a search on a person in the news);
based on monitoring at least one database for news content items related to the topic, identifying a plurality of future news content items related to the topic and published after publication of the first news content item ([0005]-[0006], [0030], [0033], Figs. 4-5, 7, i.e., automatically performing a subsequent search using the stored at least one keyword upon the occurrence of a trigger event, wherein the trigger event can be trending events or a news event);
identifying a subset of the plurality of future news content items that comprise new information not present in the first news content item ([0005]-[0006], [0030], [0033], Figs. 4-5, 7, i.e., the trigger event is generated by remote server 510 whenever it detects new content relevant to one of the saved searches); and
generating for display on a user interface a timeline (search results area 640) for the topic comprising: a first identifier of the first news content item adjacent to a date of publication of the first news content item; and for each respective news content item of the subset of the plurality of future news content items that comprise new information not present in the first news content item: a respective identifier for the respective news content item; a respective date of publication of the respective news content item; and wherein identifiers of the timeline are arranged sequentially based on publication dates.” ([0031]-[0033], Figs. 6-7, i.e., search interface 600 also includes a persistent search results area 640, which is made up of a plurality of panels 650-680 positioned in a timeline-based manner. Panels 650-680 are visual representation of search results performed on Sept. 1st, Sept. 8th, Sept. 10th, and the current date, respectively, using one of the previously saved searches. In one aspect, every time a trigger event occurred, another search is performed and displayed in persistent search display area 640. It is noted that the searches are performed based on trigger events such as trending events or news events. Thus, the date of the searches corresponds to publication dates when the trigger event occurs).
Regarding claim 2, Funk discloses “wherein: the monitoring at least one database for news content items related to the topic is performed based on determining that a time period since the date of publication of the first news content item exceeds an update period.” ([0006], [0027], i.e., a trigger event may be a predetermined amount of time since the first search).
Regarding claim 7, Funk discloses “wherein the timeline for the topic is generated for display on the user interface based on receiving a user selection tagging the first news content item related to the topic.” ([0026], [0031], Figs. 3, 6, i.e., a user conducts a search on a person in the news. In other words, the search query “tags” the news content).
Regarding claim 11, Funk discloses “A system comprising: a memory; control circuitry ([0041]-[0042], Fig. 11) configured to: identify a first news content item related to a topic ([0026], [0031], Figs. 3, 6, i.e., a user conducts a search on a person in the news);
based on monitoring at least one database for news content items related to the topic, identify a plurality of future news content items related to the topic and published after publication of the first news content item ([0005]-[0006], [0030], [0033], Figs. 4-5, 7, i.e., automatically performing a subsequent search using the stored at least one keyword upon the occurrence of a trigger event, wherein the trigger event can be trending events or a news event);
identify a subset of the plurality of future news content items that comprise new information not present in the first news content item ([0005]-[0006], [0030], [0033], Figs. 4-5, 7, i.e., the trigger event is generated by remote server 510 whenever it detects new content relevant to one of the saved searches); and
input/output circuitry configured to generate for display on a user interface a timeline (search results area 640) for the topic comprising: a first identifier of the first news content item adjacent to a date of publication of the first news content item; and for each respective news content item of the subset of the plurality of future news content items that comprise new information not present in the first news content item: a respective identifier for the respective news content item; a respective date of publication of the respective news content item; and wherein identifiers of the timeline are arranged sequentially based on publication dates.” ([0031]-[0033], Figs. 6-7, i.e., search interface 600 also includes a persistent search results area 640, which is made up of a plurality of panels 650-680 positioned in a timeline-based manner. Panels 650-680 are visual representation of search results performed on Sept. 1st, Sept. 8th, Sept. 10th, and the current date, respectively, using one of the previously saved searches. In one aspect, every time a trigger event occurred, another search is performed and displayed in persistent search display area 640. It is noted that the searches are performed based on trigger events such as trending events or news events. Thus, the date of the searches corresponds to publication dates when the trigger event occurs).
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is interpreted and thus rejected for the reasons set forth above in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is interpreted and thus rejected for the reasons set forth 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 8, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Funk in view of Gross (US Pub. 2018/0199102), herein referenced as Gross.
Regarding claim 8, Funk fails to explicitly disclose “wherein the timeline for the topic further comprises, for each respective news content item of the subset of the plurality of future news content items that comprise new information not present in the first news content item: a respective identifier of a type of update corresponding to the respective news content item.”
Gross teaches the technique of providing a respective identifier of a type of update corresponding to the respective news content item ([0026], [0028], [0030], [0034]-[0037], Fig. 3, i.e., timeline 300 can include events 304a-304d based on detected metrics associated with the video content. The metrics can be external to, but associated with, the video content. For example, the metrics can be based social media (e.g., instances of associated keywords or hashtags), activity on website associated with the video content, phone activity (e.g., text messages received through a system or phone calls), viewership information (e.g., total count of viewers or viewer demographics), etc. In other words, the timeline includes identifiers for types of updates (i.e., events) for news content items).
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 a respective identifier of a type of update corresponding to the respective news content item as taught by Gross, to improve the multimedia searching system of Funk for the predictable result of providing the user with easy-to-understand graphical identifiers correlating to different events.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is interpreted and thus rejected for the reasons set forth above in the rejection of claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 9-10, 13-16, 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 June 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights