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 § 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 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Patterson et al., US 2011/0321072 in view of Bulmer et al., US 2025/0379844.
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, Patterson discloses a system comprising: a memory device; and a processing device coupled to the memory device (figures 1-3), the processing device to perform operations comprising:
receiving a request of a first channel owner of a plurality of channel owners of a content sharing platform, the request pertaining to a creation of a channel membership for a channel of the first channel owner (paragraph 6 and 8);
identifying one or more channel owners of the plurality of channel owners to derive features of corresponding one or more channel memberships for the channel membership for the channel of the first channel owner (paragraph 6 and 8), wherein identifying the one or more channel owners comprises:
identifying a plurality of channel characteristics pertaining to a plurality of channels of the plurality of channel owners (paragraph 8 and 32);
determining, for each channel owner of the plurality of channel owners, a respective channel owner similarity ranking based on the plurality of channel characteristics (paragraph 8 and 32); and
identifying, based on the channel owner similarity rankings, a subset of the plurality of channel owners that satisfies a channel owner similarity criterion, the subset of the plurality of channel owners comprising the one or more channel owners (paragraph 88-91); and
causing a channel user interface (UI) of the content sharing platform to be presented to the first channel owner, the channel UI providing information about the features of the corresponding one or more channel memberships associated with the identified one or more channel owners (figures 9-10).
Patterson is silent about recommending a subset of channels when a threshold is satisfied.
In an analogous art, Bulmer discloses recommending a subset of channels when a threshold is satisfied (paragraph 21, 80, 98 and 107).
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 Patterson’s system with the teachings of Bulmer. The motivation would have been to recommend the most relevant media for the benefit of providing the most desired content.
Regarding claims 2, 10 and 16, Patterson and Bulmer disclose the system of claim 9, wherein the plurality of channel characteristics pertaining to the plurality of channels of the plurality of channel owners comprises at least one or more of: a number of subscribers of a channel of the plurality of channels of a channel owner of the plurality of channel owners, a content type of a channel of the plurality of channels of a channel owner of the plurality of channel owners, a language of a channel of the plurality of channels of a channel owner of the plurality of channel owners, a geographic region in which one or more subscribers of a channel of the plurality of channels of a channel owner of the plurality of channel owners resides, a good standing status of a channel of the plurality of channels of a channel owner of the plurality of channel owners, a content quality of a channel of the plurality of channels of a channel owner of the plurality of channel owners, or a number of channel memberships of a channel owner of the plurality of channel owners (Patterson paragraph 38).
Regarding claims 3, 11 and 17, Patterson and Bulmer disclose the system of claim 9, wherein to determine the respective channel owner similarity ranking, the processing device is to perform operations further comprising:
comparing a channel characteristic of the channel of the first channel owner to a channel characteristic of a second channel of a second channel owner of the plurality of channel owners (Patterson paragraph 38 and 88-91); and
determining, based on the comparing, a channel owner similarity ranking of the second channel owner of the plurality of channel owners (Patterson paragraph 38 and 88-91).
Regarding claims 4, 12 and 18, Patterson and Bulmer disclose the system of claim 9, wherein to identify the subset of the plurality of channel owners that satisfies the threshold channel owner similarity criterion, the processing device is to perform operations further comprising:
determining, for a second channel owner of the plurality of channel owners, that the respective channel owner similarity ranking of the second channel owner exceeds a threshold channel owner similarity value (Patterson paragraph 38 and 88-91; Bulmer paragraph 21, 80, 98 and 107); and
in response to determining that the respective channel owner similarity ranking of the second channel owner exceeds the threshold channel owner similarity value, associating the second channel owner with the subset of the plurality of channel owners that satisfies the threshold channel owner similarity criterion (Patterson paragraph 38 and 88-91; Bulmer paragraph 21, 80, 98 and 107).
Regarding claims 5, 13 and 19, Patterson and Bulmer disclose the system of claim 9, wherein the processing device is to perform operations further comprising:
in response to identifying the plurality of channel characteristics pertaining to the plurality of channels of the plurality of channel owners, removing, based on one or more channel characteristics of the plurality of channel characteristics, one or more channel owners from the plurality of channel owners (Patterson paragraph 65).
Regarding claims 7, 14 and 20, Patterson and Bulmer disclose the system of claim 9, wherein to cause the channel UI of the content sharing platform to be presented to the first channel owner, the processing device is to perform operations further comprising:
displaying the identified one or more channel owners (Patterson figures 9-10);
receiving, from the first channel owner, a selection of one or more UI elements of the channel UI, wherein the one or more UI elements are selectable to allow the first channel owner to select any of the identified one or more channel owners (Patterson paragraph 55-65); and
in response to receiving the selection, causing the channel UI to be modified to display a subset of channel features for a channel membership of the selected channel owner (Patterson paragraph 68).
Regarding claim 6, Patterson and Bulmer disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the channel UI displays one or more visual representations of the one or more channel owners (Patterson figure 10).
Regarding claim 8, Patterson and Bulmer disclose the method of claim 7, further comprising:
receiving a selection of one or more features of the subset of channel features for the channel membership of the selected channel owner (Patterson paragraph 55-65 and 68); and
integrating the selected features into the channel membership of the channel of the first channel owner (Patterson paragraph 55-65 and 68).
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSCHTA I MONTOYA whose telephone number is (571)270-1192. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8 am - 5 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathan Flynn can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
OM
Oschta Montoya
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2421
/OSCHTA I MONTOYA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights