DETAILED ACTION
The Action is responsive to Applicant’s Application filed June 27, 2025.
Please note claims 2-21 are pending.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings, filed June 27, 2025 are considered in compliance with 37 CFR 1.81 and accepted.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2, 6, 9, 13, 16, 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5 of U.S. Patent No. 8,595,781. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Instant Application 19/252068
US Patent No. 8,595,781
2. A system comprising:
one or more processors; and
one or more non-transitory machine-readable storage media containing instructions which when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations including:
generating a cue from a video frame of an unknown media segment wherein the
unknown media segment is associated with a particular channel;
identifying the unknown media segment by matching the cue to a reference cue
associated with a known media segment;
identifying a substitute media segment based on an identifier of the known media
segment; and
transmitting, to a set of media devices associated with the particular channel, a
notification associated with the substitute media segment, wherein the notification
synchronizes a presentation of the substitute media segment by the set of media devices.
5. A system for providing contextually targeted content to a television system comprising a video screen while a video segment is being displayed on the video screen, said system comprising a database and a processing system,
wherein said database contains a respective reference cue data set for each of a multiplicity of reference video segments, each data set comprising: (i) a respective sample set of reference data points derived from television signals for respective portions of a respective reference video segment having respective offset times relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment; and (ii) a respective set of associated location data, each set of associated location data comprising segment identity data identifying said respective reference video segment and offset time data comprising a respective offset time of a respective portion relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment; and
wherein said processing system is programmed to perform the following operations while the video segment is being displayed on the video screen: (a) receiving cue points and respective time stamps from the television system during display of a video segment on the video screen, each cue point comprising a respective sample set of data points derived from television signals for a respective portion of said video segment being displayed on said video screen;
(b) for each received cue point, searching the database for sample sets of reference data points which are a sufficiently close match to the received cue point using a path pursuit algorithm; (c) storing suspect location data in a history data structure, said suspect location data comprising segment identity data and time offset data associated with the sufficiently close sample sets of reference data points found by operation (b), and said data history structure comprising respective bins associated with respective reference video segments identified by said suspect location data;
(d) calculating a respective certainty probability for each of said suspect locations, each certainty probability representing a degree of certainty that a respective portion of a reference video segment corresponding to a respective suspect location is the same as the portion of said video segment that was displayed on said video screen; (e) summing said certainty probabilities in said bins; (f) determining whether the sum of said certainty probabilities in any bin exceeds a preset probability threshold; (g) in response to a determination by operation (f) that the sum of said certainty probabilities in any bin exceeds said preset probability threshold, retrieving from said database content associated with the portion of the reference video segment corresponding to said suspect location having said certainty probability in excess of said preset probability threshold; and (h)
sending said retrieved content to the television system while said video segment is still being displayed on said video screen.
6. The system of claim 2, wherein the operations further include:
determining an offset time within the known media segment using the cue, wherein the offset time corresponds to a time within the unknown media segment that is being presented.
5. …(i) a respective sample set of reference data points derived from television signals for respective portions of a respective reference video segment having respective offset times relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment; and (ii) a respective set of associated location data, each set of associated location data comprising segment identity data identifying said respective reference video segment and offset time data comprising a respective offset time of a respective portion relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment;
9. A method comprising:
generating a cue from a video frame of an unknown media segment wherein the unknown media segment is associated with a particular channel;
identifying the unknown media segment by matching the cue to a reference cue
associated with a known media segment;
identifying a substitute media segment based on an identifier of the known media
segment; and
transmitting, to a set of media devices associated with the particular channel, a
notification associated with the substitute media segment, wherein the notification synchronizes a presentation of the substitute media segment by the set of media devices.
1. A method, performed by a centrally located computer system, for automatically providing contextually targeted content to a remotely located television system comprising a video screen, while a video segment is being displayed on the video screen, said method comprising the following steps:
(a) storing in a database a respective reference cue data set for each of a multiplicity of reference video segments, each data set comprising: (i) a respective sample set of reference data points derived from television signals for respective portions of a respective reference video segment having respective offset times relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment; and (ii) a respective set of associated location data, each set of associated location data comprising segment identity data identifying said respective reference video segment and offset time data comprising a respective offset time of a respective portion relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment;
(b) receiving cue points and respective time stamps from the television system during display of a video segment on the video screen, each cue point comprising a respective sample set of data points derived from television signals for a respective portion of said video segment being displayed on the video screen; (c) for each received cue point, searching the database for sample sets of reference data points which are a sufficiently close match to the received cue point using a path pursuit algorithm; (d) storing suspect location data in a history data structure, said suspect location data comprising segment identity data and time offset data associated with the sufficiently close sample sets of reference data points found in step (c), and said data history structure comprising respective bins associated with respective reference video segments corresponding to said suspect location data;
(e) calculating a respective certainty probability for each of said suspect locations, each certainty probability representing a degree of certainty that a respective portion of a reference video segment corresponding to a respective suspect location is the same as location of the portion of said video segment that was displayed on the video screen; (f) summing storing said certainty probabilities in said bins; (g) determining whether the sum of said certainty probabilities in any bin exceeds a preset probability threshold; (h) in response to a determination in step (g) that the sum of said certainty probabilities in any bin exceeds said preset probability threshold, retrieving from said database content associated with the portion of the reference video segment corresponding to said suspect location having said certainty probability in excess of said preset probability threshold; and (i)
sending said retrieved content to the television system while said video segment is still being displayed on the video screen.
13. The method of claim 9, further comprising: determining an offset time within the known media segment using the cue, wherein the offset time corresponds to a time within the unknown media segment that is being presented.
1. … (i) a respective sample set of reference data points derived from television signals for respective portions of a respective reference video segment having respective offset times relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment; and (ii) a respective set of associated location data, each set of associated location data comprising segment identity data identifying said respective reference video segment and offset time data comprising a respective offset time of a respective portion relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment;
16. A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium containing instructions which when executed on one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations including:
generating a cue from a video frame of an unknown media segment wherein the
unknown media segment is associated with a particular channel;
identifying the unknown media segment by matching the cue to a reference cue
associated with a known media segment;
identifying a substitute media segment based on an identifier of the known media
segment; and
transmitting, to a set of media devices associated with the particular channel, a
notification associated with the substitute media segment, wherein the notification
synchronizes a presentation of the substitute media segment by the set of media devices.
5. A system for providing contextually targeted content to a television system comprising a video screen while a video segment is being displayed on the video screen, said system comprising a database and a processing system,
wherein said database contains a respective reference cue data set for each of a multiplicity of reference video segments, each data set comprising: (i) a respective sample set of reference data points derived from television signals for respective portions of a respective reference video segment having respective offset times relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment; and (ii) a respective set of associated location data, each set of associated location data comprising segment identity data identifying said respective reference video segment and offset time data comprising a respective offset time of a respective portion relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment; and
wherein said processing system is programmed to perform the following operations while the video segment is being displayed on the video screen: (a) receiving cue points and respective time stamps from the television system during display of a video segment on the video screen, each cue point comprising a respective sample set of data points derived from television signals for a respective portion of said video segment being displayed on said video screen;
(b) for each received cue point, searching the database for sample sets of reference data points which are a sufficiently close match to the received cue point using a path pursuit algorithm; (c) storing suspect location data in a history data structure, said suspect location data comprising segment identity data and time offset data associated with the sufficiently close sample sets of reference data points found by operation (b), and said data history structure comprising respective bins associated with respective reference video segments identified by said suspect location data; (d) calculating a respective certainty probability for each of said suspect locations, each certainty probability representing a degree of certainty that a respective portion of a reference video segment corresponding to a respective suspect location is the same as the portion of said video segment that was displayed on said video screen; (e) summing said certainty probabilities in said bins; (f) determining whether the sum of said certainty probabilities in any bin exceeds a preset probability threshold; (g) in response to a determination by operation (f) that the sum of said certainty probabilities in any bin exceeds said preset probability threshold, retrieving from said database content associated with the portion of the reference video segment corresponding to said suspect location having said certainty probability in excess of said preset probability threshold; and (h)
sending said retrieved content to the television system while said video segment is still being displayed on said video screen.
20. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 16, wherein the operations further include:
determining an offset time within the known media segment using the cue, wherein the offset time corresponds to a time within the unknown media segment that is being presented.
5. …(i) a respective sample set of reference data points derived from television signals for respective portions of a respective reference video segment having respective offset times relative to a starting point of said respective reference video segment; and (ii) a respective set of associated location data, each set of associated location data comprising segment identity data identifying said respective reference video segment and offset time data
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.
Claim(s) 2-7, 9-14, 16-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gordon (US Pub. No. 2012/0117584).
Regarding claim 2, Gordon teaches a system comprising:
‘one or more processors’ (¶0151)
‘one or more non-transitory machine-readable storage media containing instructions which when executed on the one or more processors (¶0151), cause the one or more processors to perform operations including:
generating a cue from a video frame of an unknown media segment wherein the unknown media segment is associated with a particular channel’ as identifying a unknown sequence of media content and generating a comparison fingerprint for the sequence (¶0195)
‘identifying the unknown media segment by matching the cue to a reference cue associated with a known media segment’ as a fingerprint matching module to compare generated fingerprint for the unknown sequence to fingerprints stored in the content replacement system (¶0145)
‘identifying a substitute media segment based on an identifier of the known media segment’ as thereafter identifying replacement content (¶0146)
‘transmitting, to a set of media devices associated with the particular channel, a notification associated with the substitute media segment, wherein the notification synchronizes a presentation of the substitute media segment by the set of media devices’ as sending the replacement media content to the decoder of the media system which switches over form the original sequence of media content to the replacement media content and synchronizes to devices from a chosen channel (¶0146-148)
Regarding claim 3, Gordon teaches ‘wherein identifying the substitute media segment includes matching an identifier associated with the unknown media segment to an identifier of the substitute media segment’ as identifying the replacement content via the identifier (¶0171)
Regarding claim 4, Gordon teaches ‘wherein the substitute media segment is configured to replace a media segment of the particular channel’ as replacing the content for a channel (¶0089)
Regarding claim 5, Gordon teaches ‘wherein the substitute media segment is configured to presented within an overlay window’ as overlaying of a portion of the media content (¶0029)
Regarding claim 6, Gordon teaches ‘wherein the operations further include:
determining an offset time within the known media segment using the cue, wherein the offset time corresponds to a time within the unknown media segment that is being presented’ as a timestamp of the first sequence of media content and a starting time of the replacement content (¶0154, 167)
Regarding claim 7, Gordon teaches ‘wherein each media device of the set of media devices is connected to the particular channel, and wherein the notification causes each media device of the set of media devices to present the substitute media segment’ as sending the replacement media content to the decoder of the media system which switches over form the original sequence of media content to the replacement media content and synchronizes to devices from a chosen channel (¶0146-148)
Regarding claim 9, Gordon teaches a method comprising:
‘generating a cue from a video frame of an unknown media segment wherein the unknown media segment is associated with a particular channel’ as identifying a unknown sequence of media content and generating a comparison fingerprint for the sequence (¶0195)
‘identifying the unknown media segment by matching the cue to a reference cue associated with a known media segment’ as a fingerprint matching module to compare generated fingerprint for the unknown sequence to fingerprints stored in the content replacement system (¶0145)
‘identifying a substitute media segment based on an identifier of the known media segment’ as thereafter identifying replacement content (¶0146)
‘transmitting, to a set of media devices associated with the particular channel, a notification associated with the substitute media segment, wherein the notification synchronizes a presentation of the substitute media segment by the set of media devices’ as sending the replacement media content to the decoder of the media system which switches over form the original sequence of media content to the replacement media content and synchronizes to devices from a chosen channel (¶0146-148)
Regarding claim 10, Gordon teaches ‘wherein identifying the substitute media segment includes matching an identifier associated with the unknown media segment to an identifier of the substitute media segment’ as identifying the replacement content via the identifier (¶0171)
Regarding claim 11, Gordon teaches ‘wherein the substitute media segment is configured to replace a media segment of the particular channel’ as replacing the content for a channel (¶0089)
Regarding claim 12, Gordon teaches ‘wherein the substitute media segment is configured to presented within an overlay window’ as overlaying of a portion of the media content (¶0029)
Regarding claim 13, Gordon teaches ‘further comprising:
determining an offset time within the known media segment using the cue, wherein the offset time corresponds to a time within the unknown media segment that is being presented’ as a timestamp of the first sequence of media content and a starting time of the replacement content (¶0154, 167)
Regarding claim 14, Gordon teaches ‘wherein each media device of the set of media devices is connected to the particular channel, and wherein the notification causes each media device of the set of media devices to present the substitute media segment’ as sending the replacement media content to the decoder of the media system which switches over form the original sequence of media content to the replacement media content and synchronizes to devices from a chosen channel (¶0146-148)
Regard claim 16, Gordon teaches a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium containing instructions which when executed on one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations including:
‘generating a cue from a video frame of an unknown media segment wherein the unknown media segment is associated with a particular channel’ as identifying a unknown sequence of media content and generating a comparison fingerprint for the sequence (¶0195)
‘identifying the unknown media segment by matching the cue to a reference cue associated with a known media segment’ as a fingerprint matching module to compare generated fingerprint for the unknown sequence to fingerprints stored in the content replacement system (¶0145)
‘identifying a substitute media segment based on an identifier of the known media segment’ as thereafter identifying replacement content (¶0146)
‘transmitting, to a set of media devices associated with the particular channel, a notification associated with the substitute media segment, wherein the notification synchronizes a presentation of the substitute media segment by the set of media devices’ as sending the replacement media content to the decoder of the media system which switches over form the original sequence of media content to the replacement media content and synchronizes to devices from a chosen channel (¶0146-148)
Regarding claim 17, Gordon teaches ‘wherein identifying the substitute media segment includes matching an identifier associated with the unknown media segment to an identifier of the substitute media segment’ as identifying the replacement content via the identifier (¶0171)
Regarding claim 18, Gordon teaches ‘wherein the substitute media segment is configured to replace a media segment of the particular channel’ as replacing the content for a channel (¶0089)
Regarding claim 19, Gordon teaches ‘wherein the substitute media segment is configured to presented within an overlay window’ as overlaying of a portion of the media content (¶0029)
Regarding claim 20, Gordon teaches ‘wherein the operations further include:
determining an offset time within the known media segment using the cue, wherein the offset time corresponds to a time within the unknown media segment that is being presented’ as a timestamp of the first sequence of media content and a starting time of the replacement content (¶0154, 167)
Regarding claim 21, Gordon teaches ‘wherein each media device of the set of media devices is connected to the particular channel, and wherein the notification causes each media device of the set of media devices to present the substitute media segment’ as sending the replacement media content to the decoder of the media system which switches over form the original sequence of media content to the replacement media content and synchronizes to devices from a chosen channel (¶0146-148)
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon (US Pub. No. 2012/0117584) further in view of Amidei (US Pub. No. 2014/0359681)
Regarding claim 8, Gordon fails to explicitly teach ‘wherein the notification synchronizes the presentation of the substitute media segment by triggering a timer on each media device of the set of media devices’
Amidei teaches ‘wherein the notification synchronizes the presentation of the substitute media segment by triggering a timer on each media device of the set of media devices’ as synchronizing playback of content by using time information from a common source to set the playback clocks on individual playback devices (¶0019)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the present invention was effectively filed to modify the teachings of the cited references because Amidei’s would have allowed Gordon’s to improve synchronization of playback amongst several devices (¶0005)
Regarding claim 15, Gordon fails to explicitly teach ‘wherein the notification synchronizes the presentation of the substitute media segment by triggering a timer on each media device of the set of media devices’
Amidei teaches ‘wherein the notification synchronizes the presentation of the substitute media segment by triggering a timer on each media device of the set of media devices’ as synchronizing playback of content by using time information from a common source to set the playback clocks on individual playback devices (¶0019)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the present invention was effectively filed to modify the teachings of the cited references because Amidei’s would have allowed Gordon’s to improve synchronization of playback amongst several devices (¶0005)
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraphs and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP § 2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121(b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131(b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as “Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced” may be deemed insufficient.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAN OBERLY whose telephone number is (571)272-7025. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30am-4pm MT.
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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached at (571) 272-4098. 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.
/VAN H OBERLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166
Prosecution Insights