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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to CLAIMS entered for patent application 19/202,316 filed on May 8, 2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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, 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, 15, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meikle et al. (WO 2015/092378) in view of Manzari et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0349008) and Kakuschke et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0313146).
Regarding claim 1, Meikle discloses a method comprising: receiving, over a network from a server (Fig. 1, element 60), a plurality of digital filters (Fig. 1, element 90, para. [0030]), wherein each digital filter is configured to apply a real-time special effect to a live video stream (para. [0026]), and wherein the received plurality of digital filters is one collection from multiple collections of digital filters managed by a filter management system on the server (para. [0027]; whatever filters the user decides to download, or collect, can be seen as a collection of the user); displaying a special effect selection interface, each digital filter for augmenting the live video stream by applying a real-time special effect (Fig. 3, element S2, para. [0036]); detecting a selection of a first user-selectable icon associated with a first digital filter (Fig. 3, element S2, para. [0036]).
Although Meikle discloses that users may select the special effects, it could be argued that Meikle does not explicitly disclose displaying a special effect selection interface including a plurality of user-selectable icons, each user-selectable icon representing a digital filter in the collection received from the server. However, in analogous art, Manzari discloses a filter selection interface which includes representations of a plurality of filters in a set of filters, wherein the different selectable filters are available to be applied to the representation of the image data (paras. [0021] and [0356]); and teaches the system detects a face, the facial features are taken into consideration when applying the lighting effect. As a result, the lighting effects change the appearance of the representation of the image data (e.g., 806) based on a subject's specific facial features and facial shape (para. [0319]); and discloses in FIG. 12A, the electronic device displays the filter representations 1208A- 1208G as icons (e.g., thumbnails) which depict the representation of the image data 1210 in an icon (e.g., smaller) form (para. [0377]). 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 Meikle to allow for displaying a special effect selection interface including a plurality of user-selectable icons, each user-selectable icon representing a digital filter in the collection received from the server. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for users to easily and intuitively select a desired filter using well-known techniques.
It could be further argued that the combination of Meikle and Manzari does not explicitly disclose transmitting in real-time, via the network, the live video stream having the first real-time special effect applied by the first digital filter to be displayed during a video communication session. However, in analogous art, Kakuschke teaches wherein the live image is a live video stream (para. [0048]), and teaches a live video streaming architecture, where part of the stream includes inserting a filter prior to distributing a video for playback on a streaming service or let the viewers apply the filters (para. [0047]); the special effect for augmenting a live video stream by applying an augmented reality effect to the live video stream, by tracking a user's face as detected in the live video stream; Fig. 2B; teaches a streaming service 150 providing streaming video to the viewers 170; para. [0163]: discloses As Viewers 270 select a filter to apply to the User's 350 stream on the Streaming Service 150, the Streaming Service API 130 records and converts the Viewer's 270 selection into a data format that can be easily shared with the Local Broadcast Software 240; para. [0043]; teaches a live video streaming architecture, where part of the stream includes inserting a filter prior to distributing a video for playback on a streaming service; paras [0045]-[0047]; teaches a disclosed system for interactive filters in live streaming media places the control of applying filters directly in the viewers' hands, filters change the look and feel of a live stream for everyone viewing the stream; wherein the filter might change the streamer into a crying baby, change the color of a video to an artistic black and white, or add a top hat and tobacco pipe to the streamer's face. 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 Meikle and Manzari to allow for transmitting in real-time, via the network, the live video stream having the first real-time special effect applied by the first digital filter to be displayed during a video communication session. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would result in improving user experience by adding significant depth to a stream's interactivity (para. [0015]), as well as allowing for a greater variety of applications and users of those applications to be able to take advantage of the filters disclosed by Meikle and Manzari.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein transmitting the live video stream comprises: detecting a face in the live video stream; taking facial features into consideration when applying the first real-time special effect; and modifying an appearance of the live video stream based on specific facial features and facial shape (Kakuschke, paras. [0012], [0022], [0023] and Fig. 3, para. [0158]. This claim is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses further comprising: receiving an input comprising a set of keyboard keys; associating the set of keyboard keys with the first digital filter; and wherein detecting the selection comprises detecting activation of the set of keyboard keys (Meikle, para. [0025]).
Regarding claim 8, Meikle discloses a system comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storage device storing instructions thereon, which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the system to perform operations comprising: receiving, over a network from a server (Fig. 1, element 60), a plurality of digital filters (Fig. 1, element 90, para. [0030]), wherein each digital filter is configured to apply a real-time special effect to a live video stream (para. [0026]), and wherein the received plurality of digital filters is one collection from multiple collections of digital filters managed by a filter management system on the server (para. [0027]; whatever filters the user decides to download, or collect, can be seen as a collection of the user); displaying a special effect selection interface, each digital filter for augmenting the live video stream by applying a real-time special effect (Fig. 3, element S2, para. [0036]); detecting a selection of a first user-selectable icon associated with a first digital filter (Fig. 3, element S2, para. [0036]).
Although Meikle discloses that users may select the special effects, it could be argued that Meikle does not explicitly disclose displaying a special effect selection interface including a plurality of user-selectable icons, each user-selectable icon representing a digital filter in the collection received from the server. However, in analogous art, Manzari discloses a filter selection interface which includes representations of a plurality of filters in a set of filters, wherein the different selectable filters are available to be applied to the representation of the image data (paras. [0021] and [0356]); and teaches the system detects a face, the facial features are taken into consideration when applying the lighting effect. As a result, the lighting effects change the appearance of the representation of the image data (e.g., 806) based on a subject's specific facial features and facial shape (para. [0319]); and discloses in FIG. 12A, the electronic device displays the filter representations 1208A- 1208G as icons (e.g., thumbnails) which depict the representation of the image data 1210 in an icon (e.g., smaller) form (para. [0377]). 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 Meikle to allow for displaying a special effect selection interface including a plurality of user-selectable icons, each user-selectable icon representing a digital filter in the collection received from the server. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for users to easily and intuitively select a desired filter using well-known techniques.
It could be further argued that the combination of Meikle and Manzari does not explicitly disclose transmitting in real-time, via the network, the live video stream having the first real-time special effect applied by the first digital filter to be displayed during a video communication session. However, in analogous art, Kakuschke teaches wherein the live image is a live video stream (para. [0048]), and teaches a live video streaming architecture, where part of the stream includes inserting a filter prior to distributing a video for playback on a streaming service or let the viewers apply the filters (para. [0047]); the special effect for augmenting a live video stream by applying an augmented reality effect to the live video stream, by tracking a user's face as detected in the live video stream; Fig. 2B; teaches a streaming service 150 providing streaming video to the viewers 170; para. [0163]: discloses As Viewers 270 select a filter to apply to the User's 350 stream on the Streaming Service 150, the Streaming Service API 130 records and converts the Viewer's 270 selection into a data format that can be easily shared with the Local Broadcast Software 240; para. [0043]; teaches a live video streaming architecture, where part of the stream includes inserting a filter prior to distributing a video for playback on a streaming service; paras [0045]-[0047]; teaches a disclosed system for interactive filters in live streaming media places the control of applying filters directly in the viewers' hands, filters change the look and feel of a live stream for everyone viewing the stream; wherein the filter might change the streamer into a crying baby, change the color of a video to an artistic black and white, or add a top hat and tobacco pipe to the streamer's face. 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 Meikle and Manzari to allow for transmitting in real-time, via the network, the live video stream having the first real-time special effect applied by the first digital filter to be displayed during a video communication session. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would result in improving user experience by adding significant depth to a stream's interactivity (para. [0015]), as well as allowing for a greater variety of applications and users of those applications to be able to take advantage of the filters disclosed by Meikle and Manzari.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the system of claim 8, and further discloses wherein transmitting the live video stream comprises: detecting a face in the live video stream; taking facial features into consideration when applying the first real-time special effect; and modifying an appearance of the live video stream based on specific facial features and facial shape (Kakuschke, paras. [0012], [0022], [0023] and Fig. 3, para. [0158]. This claim is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the system of claim 8, and further discloses further comprising: receiving an input comprising a set of keyboard keys; associating the set of keyboard keys with the first digital filter; and wherein detecting the selection comprises detecting activation of the set of keyboard keys (Meikle, para. [0025]).
Regarding claim 15, Meikle discloses a machine-readable medium storing instructions thereon, which, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising: receiving, over a network from a server (Fig. 1, element 60), a plurality of digital filters (Fig. 1, element 90, para. [0030]), wherein each digital filter is configured to apply a real-time special effect to a live video stream (para. [0026]), and wherein the received plurality of digital filters is one collection from multiple collections of digital filters managed by a filter management system on the server (para. [0027]; whatever filters the user decides to download, or collect, can be seen as a collection of the user); displaying a special effect selection interface, each digital filter for augmenting the live video stream by applying a real-time special effect (Fig. 3, element S2, para. [0036]); detecting a selection of a first user-selectable icon associated with a first digital filter (Fig. 3, element S2, para. [0036]).
Although Meikle discloses that users may select the special effects, it could be argued that Meikle does not explicitly disclose displaying a special effect selection interface including a plurality of user-selectable icons, each user-selectable icon representing a digital filter in the collection received from the server. However, in analogous art, Manzari discloses a filter selection interface which includes representations of a plurality of filters in a set of filters, wherein the different selectable filters are available to be applied to the representation of the image data (paras. [0021] and [0356]); and teaches the system detects a face, the facial features are taken into consideration when applying the lighting effect. As a result, the lighting effects change the appearance of the representation of the image data (e.g., 806) based on a subject's specific facial features and facial shape (para. [0319]); and discloses in FIG. 12A, the electronic device displays the filter representations 1208A- 1208G as icons (e.g., thumbnails) which depict the representation of the image data 1210 in an icon (e.g., smaller) form (para. [0377]). 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 Meikle to allow for displaying a special effect selection interface including a plurality of user-selectable icons, each user-selectable icon representing a digital filter in the collection received from the server. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for users to easily and intuitively select a desired filter using well-known techniques.
It could be further argued that the combination of Meikle and Manzari does not explicitly disclose transmitting in real-time, via the network, the live video stream having the first real-time special effect applied by the first digital filter to be displayed during a video communication session. However, in analogous art, Kakuschke teaches wherein the live image is a live video stream (para. [0048]), and teaches a live video streaming architecture, where part of the stream includes inserting a filter prior to distributing a video for playback on a streaming service or let the viewers apply the filters (para. [0047]); the special effect for augmenting a live video stream by applying an augmented reality effect to the live video stream, by tracking a user's face as detected in the live video stream; Fig. 2B; teaches a streaming service 150 providing streaming video to the viewers 170; para. [0163]: discloses As Viewers 270 select a filter to apply to the User's 350 stream on the Streaming Service 150, the Streaming Service API 130 records and converts the Viewer's 270 selection into a data format that can be easily shared with the Local Broadcast Software 240; para. [0043]; teaches a live video streaming architecture, where part of the stream includes inserting a filter prior to distributing a video for playback on a streaming service; paras [0045]-[0047]; teaches a disclosed system for interactive filters in live streaming media places the control of applying filters directly in the viewers' hands, filters change the look and feel of a live stream for everyone viewing the stream; wherein the filter might change the streamer into a crying baby, change the color of a video to an artistic black and white, or add a top hat and tobacco pipe to the streamer's face. 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 Meikle and Manzari to allow for transmitting in real-time, via the network, the live video stream having the first real-time special effect applied by the first digital filter to be displayed during a video communication session. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would result in improving user experience by adding significant depth to a stream's interactivity (para. [0015]), as well as allowing for a greater variety of applications and users of those applications to be able to take advantage of the filters disclosed by Meikle and Manzari.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the machine-readable medium of claim 15, and further discloses wherein transmitting the live video stream comprises: detecting a face in the live video stream; taking facial features into consideration when applying the first real-time special effect; and modifying an appearance of the live video stream based on specific facial features and facial shape (Kakuschke, paras. [0012], [0022], [0023] and Fig. 3, para. [0158]. This claim is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the machine-readable medium of claim 15, and further discloses further comprising: receiving an input comprising a set of keyboard keys; associating the set of keyboard keys with the first digital filter; and wherein detecting the selection comprises detecting activation of the set of keyboard keys (Meikle, para. [0025]).
Claims 2, 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meikle et al. (WO 2015/092378) in view of Manzari et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0349008), Kakuschke et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0313146) and Sehn (Pub. No.: US 2016/0182875).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the method of claim 1, but the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the filter management system comprises a curation interface that automatically curates the collections of digital filters using machine vision and content rules to detect and remove inappropriate content. However, in analogous art, Sehn discloses that “[t]he gallery module 144 may include a curation interface that allows a gallery administrator to optionally curate the gallery 506. For example, the curation interface may allow the administrator to delete inappropriate or redundant messages. Alternately, machine vision and content rules may be used to automatically curate the gallery (para. [0031]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for the filter management system to comprise a curation interface that automatically curates the collections of digital filters using machine vision and content rules to detect and remove inappropriate content. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow the system to keep inappropriate and/or undesirable content out of the system, which could improve user satisfaction.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the system of claim 8, but the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the filter management system comprises a curation interface that automatically curates the collections of digital filters using machine vision and content rules to detect and remove inappropriate content. However, in analogous art, Sehn discloses that “[t]he gallery module 144 may include a curation interface that allows a gallery administrator to optionally curate the gallery 506. For example, the curation interface may allow the administrator to delete inappropriate or redundant messages. Alternately, machine vision and content rules may be used to automatically curate the gallery (para. [0031]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for the filter management system to comprise a curation interface that automatically curates the collections of digital filters using machine vision and content rules to detect and remove inappropriate content. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow the system to keep inappropriate and/or undesirable content out of the system, which could improve user satisfaction.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the machine-readable medium of claim 15, but the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the filter management system comprises a curation interface that automatically curates the collections of digital filters using machine vision and content rules to detect and remove inappropriate content. However, in analogous art, Sehn discloses that “[t]he gallery module 144 may include a curation interface that allows a gallery administrator to optionally curate the gallery 506. For example, the curation interface may allow the administrator to delete inappropriate or redundant messages. Alternately, machine vision and content rules may be used to automatically curate the gallery (para. [0031]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for the filter management system to comprise a curation interface that automatically curates the collections of digital filters using machine vision and content rules to detect and remove inappropriate content. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow the system to keep inappropriate and/or undesirable content out of the system, which could improve user satisfaction.
Claims 3, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meikle et al. (WO 2015/092378) in view of Manzari et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0349008), Kakuschke et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0313146) and Borovoy et al. (Pub. No.: US 2013/0346877).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the method of claim 1, but the combination does not explicitly disclose further comprising: receiving user preferences from the server based on social network information associated with a user; and filtering the displayed user-selectable icons based on the received user preferences. However, in analogous art, Borovoy discloses that “[t]his process will be described in more detail below with reference to FIGS. 3-5 and can include filtering information based on publisher information from the third party server 126, filtering information based on user preference information from the social network server 124 or the search server 114, or other types of personalization of the content for the user (para. [0051]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for receiving user preferences from the server based on social network information associated with a user, and filtering the displayed user-selectable icons based on the received user preferences. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for information known about users of the system to be utilized in a manner well-known in the art to improve user satisfaction.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the system of claim 8, but the combination does not explicitly disclose further comprising: receiving user preferences from the server based on social network information associated with a user; and filtering the displayed user-selectable icons based on the received user preferences. However, in analogous art, Borovoy discloses that “[t]his process will be described in more detail below with reference to FIGS. 3-5 and can include filtering information based on publisher information from the third party server 126, filtering information based on user preference information from the social network server 124 or the search server 114, or other types of personalization of the content for the user (para. [0051]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for receiving user preferences from the server based on social network information associated with a user, and filtering the displayed user-selectable icons based on the received user preferences. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for information known about users of the system to be utilized in a manner well-known in the art to improve user satisfaction.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the machine-readable medium of claim 15, but the combination does not explicitly disclose further comprising: receiving user preferences from the server based on social network information associated with a user; and filtering the displayed user-selectable icons based on the received user preferences. However, in analogous art, Borovoy discloses that “[t]his process will be described in more detail below with reference to FIGS. 3-5 and can include filtering information based on publisher information from the third party server 126, filtering information based on user preference information from the social network server 124 or the search server 114, or other types of personalization of the content for the user (para. [0051]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for receiving user preferences from the server based on social network information associated with a user, and filtering the displayed user-selectable icons based on the received user preferences. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for information known about users of the system to be utilized in a manner well-known in the art to improve user satisfaction.
Claims 3, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meikle et al. (WO 2015/092378) in view of Manzari et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0349008), Kakuschke et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0313146) and Relan et al. (Pub. No.: US 2007/0124766).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the method of claim 1, but the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the special effect selection interface comprises a search function for searching specific digital filters within the collection using text input. However, in analogous art, Relan discloses a “user input interface 625 of the video processing system 601 supports selection of special effects and video elements via buttons 626, a touchpad 627, a pen interface 628 for a touch sensitive screen, a thumbwheel 629,a mouse 630 and a voice input mechanism 631. The user input interface 624 makes it possible for a viewer to employ one or more input devices (means) to enter their selections or to browse available choices of special effects and input sources. For example, the buttons 626 may be used by a viewer to start or stop the display, to advance forward or to reverse, etc. The touchpad 627 may be employed to enter the number of a special effect and associate it with a channel number that is keyed in using the touch pad. The pen 628 may be used to enter a name, search for saved special effects, etc. (para. [0051]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for the special effect selection interface to comprise a search function for searching specific digital filters within the collection using text input. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow users to more quickly and easily find a desired filter, which could improve user satisfaction with the system.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the system of claim 8, but the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the special effect selection interface comprises a search function for searching specific digital filters within the collection using text input. However, in analogous art, Relan discloses a “user input interface 625 of the video processing system 601 supports selection of special effects and video elements via buttons 626, a touchpad 627, a pen interface 628 for a touch sensitive screen, a thumbwheel 629,a mouse 630 and a voice input mechanism 631. The user input interface 624 makes it possible for a viewer to employ one or more input devices (means) to enter their selections or to browse available choices of special effects and input sources. For example, the buttons 626 may be used by a viewer to start or stop the display, to advance forward or to reverse, etc. The touchpad 627 may be employed to enter the number of a special effect and associate it with a channel number that is keyed in using the touch pad. The pen 628 may be used to enter a name, search for saved special effects, etc. (para. [0051]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for the special effect selection interface to comprise a search function for searching specific digital filters within the collection using text input. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow users to more quickly and easily find a desired filter, which could improve user satisfaction with the system.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the machine-readable medium of claim 15, but the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the special effect selection interface comprises a search function for searching specific digital filters within the collection using text input. However, in analogous art, Relan discloses a “user input interface 625 of the video processing system 601 supports selection of special effects and video elements via buttons 626, a touchpad 627, a pen interface 628 for a touch sensitive screen, a thumbwheel 629,a mouse 630 and a voice input mechanism 631. The user input interface 624 makes it possible for a viewer to employ one or more input devices (means) to enter their selections or to browse available choices of special effects and input sources. For example, the buttons 626 may be used by a viewer to start or stop the display, to advance forward or to reverse, etc. The touchpad 627 may be employed to enter the number of a special effect and associate it with a channel number that is keyed in using the touch pad. The pen 628 may be used to enter a name, search for saved special effects, etc. (para. [0051]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for the special effect selection interface to comprise a search function for searching specific digital filters within the collection using text input. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow users to more quickly and easily find a desired filter, which could improve user satisfaction with the system.
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meikle et al. (WO 2015/092378) in view of Manzari et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0349008), Kakuschke et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0313146) and Keng et al. (Pub. No.: US 2010/0325547).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the method of claim 1, but the combination does not explicitly disclose further comprising: displaying an icon associated with the first digital filter during transmission of the live video stream; and enabling download of the first digital filter through activation of an embedded code associated with the displayed icon. However, in analogous art, Keng discloses that “[t]he timing data of the one or more multimedia editing objects may be monitored by viewing or controlling the timing bar 611 shown. One should note that the timing bar 611 associated with video playback is synchronized with the display or highlighting of thumbnails 610, 612, 614, 616, 618, 620 as the corresponding special effect (e.g., customized text) is incorporated into the video. As described earlier, the user may drag the progression bar 605 to jump to another point in time along the timeline. While the user is dragging the progression bar 605, the edited multimedia content 402 is synchronized and displayed on the main display 602 according to location of the progression bar 605. In this regard, the viewer can fully appreciate the timing and editing techniques used by the creator (e.g., "SmithJ") without the need for first investing in video editor software. For some embodiments, the user can also download the special effects by clicking a link 613. For other embodiments, the user can download the special effects by clicking the thumbnails 610, 612, 614, 616, 618, 620. The user will then be directed to another website to download the desired special effects (para. [0047]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for displaying an icon associated with the first digital filter during transmission of the live video stream, and enabling download of the first digital filter through activation of an embedded code associated with the displayed icon. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for users to easily and intuitively acquire filters they found desirable.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke discloses the system of claim 8, but the combination does not explicitly disclose further comprising: displaying an icon associated with the first digital filter during transmission of the live video stream; and enabling download of the first digital filter through activation of an embedded code associated with the displayed icon. However, in analogous art, Keng discloses that “[t]he timing data of the one or more multimedia editing objects may be monitored by viewing or controlling the timing bar 611 shown. One should note that the timing bar 611 associated with video playback is synchronized with the display or highlighting of thumbnails 610, 612, 614, 616, 618, 620 as the corresponding special effect (e.g., customized text) is incorporated into the video. As described earlier, the user may drag the progression bar 605 to jump to another point in time along the timeline. While the user is dragging the progression bar 605, the edited multimedia content 402 is synchronized and displayed on the main display 602 according to location of the progression bar 605. In this regard, the viewer can fully appreciate the timing and editing techniques used by the creator (e.g., "SmithJ") without the need for first investing in video editor software. For some embodiments, the user can also download the special effects by clicking a link 613. For other embodiments, the user can download the special effects by clicking the thumbnails 610, 612, 614, 616, 618, 620. The user will then be directed to another website to download the desired special effects (para. [0047]).” 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 Meikle, Manzari and Kakuschke to allow for displaying an icon associated with the first digital filter during transmission of the live video stream, and enabling download of the first digital filter through activation of an embedded code associated with the displayed icon. This would have produced predictable and desirable results, in that it would allow for users to easily and intuitively acquire filters they found desirable.
Conclusion
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joshua D Taylor whose telephone number is (571)270-3755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 6 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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at 571-272-4195. 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 D Taylor/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426 September 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights