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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0379516) in view of Kara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2025/0142178).
Referring to claim 1, Kwon discloses method for video decoding, the method performed by at least one processor (see Paragraph 0007) and comprising:
generating, by a trusted distribution network (DN) (see Paragraph 0634 for DN being considered a trusted DN) of a mobile network operator (MNO) (see Paragraph 0634 for the DN being configured in a network operated by a mobile network operator), at least one 5GM Media Downlink Streaming (5GM Sd) instance (see Paragraph 0634 for a 5GMSd instance) configured to deliver at least part of a content to a user equipment (UE) comprising a 5GM Sd-aware application and a 5GMSd client (see Paragraph 0634), the at least part of the content comprising video data (see Paragraph 0084);
obtaining, by the trusted DN (see Paragraph 0634), a presentation manifest published by a 5GMSd Application Provider (AP) of an external DN (see Paragraph 0634) that is external to both the trusted DN and the UE (see Paragraph 0634 for if the DN is configured outside of the MNO, the DN may be considered to be an external DN); and
streaming the content to the UE based on the presentation manifest and decoding the content at the UE (see Paragraph 0756 for a content unpackaging subfunction extracting elementary stream data from an obtained transport object and provide the elementary stream to a content decryption subfunction and a content decoding subfunction).
While Kwon teaches a trusted DN and 5GMSd client (see above), Kwon fails to teach manipulating, by a DN, the presentation manifest by adding BaseURLs and steering server information before providing the presentation manifest to a client.
Kara discloses manipulating, by a DN, the presentation manifest by adding BaseURLs and steering server information before providing the presentation manifest to a client (see Paragraphs 0020-0023, Paragraph 0034 and Paragraph 0037) and providing the presentation manifest to the client device (see Paragraph 0019).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the content delivery system, as taught by Kwon, using the presentation manifest and steering server information functionality as taught by Kara, for the purpose of implementing load balancing that meets the CDNs’ needs (see the bottom of Paragraph 0003 of Kara).
Referring to claim 2, Kwon discloses that the presentation manifest is obtained by the trusted DN from the 5GMSdAP through an M 2d application programming interface (API) (see Paragraph 0648 for M2d (5GMSd ingest API): an optional external API exposed by the 5GMSd AS used when the 5GMSd AS in a trusted DN is selected to host content for a streaming service).
Referring to claim 3, Kwon also discloses that streaming the content comprises streaming the at least part of the content to the UE through an M 4d application programming interface (API) from the 5GMSd AS to the UE (see Paragraph 0184 for a multicast server and a multicast gateway configured for multicast transmission between the 5GMSd AS and the media player and an interface M4d_L between the multicast gateway and the media player implemented by an interface within a UE).
Referring to claim 4, Kwon also disclose that the MNO provides multiple 5GMSd instances, including the at least one of the 5GMSd instance, configured to collectively deliver the content to the UE (see Paragraph 0634 for 5G media streaming, a 5GMSd aware application and a 5GMSd client being configured for a UE, and a 5GMSd AF and a 5GMSd AS being configured for a DN and if the DN is configured in a network operated by a mobile network operator, the DN may be considered to be a trusted DN).
Referring to claim 5, Kwon also discloses that the external DN provides at least one other 5GM Sd instance configured to, with the at least one 5GMSd instance of the trusted DN, collectively deliver the content to the UE (see Paragraphs 0634 and 0648 for an optional API exposed by the 5GMSd AS used when the 5GMSd AS in a trusted DN is selected to host content for a streaming service).
Referring to claim 6, Kara also discloses that content steering of streaming the content to the UE is directed by a steering server of the DN (see Paragraphs 0020-0023). The Examiner notes that Kwon teaches a trusted DN (see the rejection of claim 1).
Referring to claim 7, Kara also discloses that content steering of delivering the content to the UE is directed by a steering server of the external DN (see Paragraphs 0020-0023, Paragraph 0034 and Paragraph 0037).
Referring to claims 8-14, see the rejection of claims 1-7, respectively.
Referring to claim 15, see the rejection of claim 1 and further note that Kwon also discloses performing a conversion, between a visual media file of the content and a bitstream of a visual media data of the content according to a format rule (see Paragraphs 0689-0690).
Referring to claims 16-20, see the rejection of claims 2-5, respectively and claims 6-7.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON P SALCE whose telephone number is (571)272-7301. The examiner can normally be reached 5:30am-10:00pm M-F (Flex Schedule).
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at 571-272-1915. 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.
/Jason Salce/Senior Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Jason P Salce
Senior Examiner
Art Unit 2421
August 31, 2026
Prosecution Insights