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 .
Priority
Applicant is reminded that in order for a patent issuing on the instant application to obtain priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or (b), based on priority papers filed in a parent or related Application No. 17/288,051 (to which the present application claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) or is a reissue application of a patent issued on the related application), a claim for such foreign priority must be timely made in this application. To satisfy the requirement of 37 CFR 1.55 for a certified copy of the foreign application, applicant may simply identify the parent nonprovisional application or patent for which reissue is sought containing the certified copy.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/3/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,439,121. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims in the instant application are broader than the claims in the ‘121 Patent.
Referring to claims 1-12 of the instant application, see claims 1-10 of the ‘121 Patent.
Referring to claims 13-19 of the instant application, see claims 11-19 of the ‘121 Patent.
Referring to claim 20 of the instant application, see claim 20 of the ‘121 Patent.
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 1-10 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrett et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2002/0170057) in view of Alexander et al. (U.S. Patent No. 2014/0089980).
Referring to claim 1, Barrett discloses display a first screen including a content on an entire screen of a display unit (see Figures 1-2).
Barrett also discloses displaying a second screen including the television program image on the entire screen of the display, filter information on a first area of the display and a first program guide superimposed on the television program image, wherein the filter information and the first program guide are displayed in different areas superimposed on the television program image (see Figure 3, wherein the filter information includes the X and Y axis values that separates the first program guide cells by channel and time, wherein the program guide is superimposed over the television program).
Barrett also discloses displaying a third screen including a second program guide on the entire screen of the display and the filer information on a third area of the display (see Figure 6 for displaying a second program guide on the entire screen of the display and the channel and time axes (filter information)).
Barrett also discloses performing a transition from the first screen to the second screen (see Paragraph 0066)
Barrett also discloses performing a transition between a second screen and a third screen (see Figure 6 for transition between multiple screens when a user scrolls to the right to view more programs at a later time and further note transitioning to the screen in Figure 7), in accordance with a single operation of a directional key of a cross button provided on a remote controller (see Figure 1 and Paragraph 0043 for the viewer using an input device to activate a button to navigate through the EPG displayed to the user in Figures 2-3 and Paragraphs 0066 for the user using the input device to navigate between the EPG displayed in Figure 2 and Figure 3), wherein the filter information includes at least information identifying a filter for filtering according to a type of program (see Figure 3, wherein the filter information includes the X and Y axis values that separates the first program guide cells by channel and time, the Examiner notes that the time a program airs and channel the program is broadcast on are both program types, as broadly claimed), in a case where there is no target to be selected on a current screen, other than the transition, in a direction corresponding to the single operation (see Paragraph 0066 for scrolling through the list of channels and once the end of the list has been reached continuing scrolling in a direction to expand the list of channels to view).
Barrett fails to disclose that displaying on the third screen the content on a second area of the display.
Alexander discloses displaying on the third screen the content on a second area of the display (see Paragraphs 0031, 0097, 0171 and Figure 1 for filter information 20 and the program guide 52 are in different areas and the TV program image can be placed on a second area (window 12) of the display unit).
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 third EPG screen, as taught by Barrett, using the PIP window, as taught by Alexander, for the purpose of providing improved features to the EPG display (see Paragraph 0009 of Alexander).
Referring to claim 2, Barrett also discloses that the first program guide and the second program guide include information corresponding to the filter (see Figures 2-3 both having the channel and times axes).
Referring to claim 3, Barrett also discloses switching from the second screen to the third screen, in a case where an operation corresponding to a downward direction is performed (see Paragraphs 0066-0067 and Figures 6-7).
Referring to claim 4, Barrett also discloses that in the case the second screen is displayed, the filter information is superimposed on the television program image (see Figure 3).
Referring to claim 5, Alexander also discloses that a size of the television program image in the third screen is smaller than a size of the television program in the first screen (see Figure 1).
Referring to claim 6, Barrett also discloses that the second program guide includes information on channels and broadcasting time (see Figure 3).
Referring to claim 7, Barrett also discloses that the second program guide includes information on programs in a same time on different channels (see Figure 3).
Referring to claim 8, Barrett also discloses that the display control device is a television receiver comprising the display unit (see Figure 1).
Referring to claim 9, Barrett discloses that the transition from the first screen to the second screen is performed in accordance with an operation of an allocated key provided on the remote controller (see the rejection of claim 1 for performing a transition using a directional key of a cross button provided on a remote controller).
Referring to claim 10, Alexander discloses filter information corresponding to registered favorites (see Paragraphs 0185 and 0291).
Referring to claim 12, Barrett also discloses that the filter information includes at least information identifying filters for filtering according to a type of program, the information identifying the filters is selectable (see Figure 7 of Barrett and further note Figures 5-7 of Alexander).
Referring to claims 13-19, see the rejection of claims 1-7, respectively.
Referring to claim 20, see the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrett et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2002/0170057) in view of Alexander et al. (U.S. Patent No. 2014/0089980) in further view of Yates (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0156521).
Referring to claim 11, Barrett and Alexander disclose all of the limitations of claim 1, but fail to teach displaying a fourth screen including the content on the entire screen of the display and detailed program information superimposed on the television program and performing a transition from the first screen to the fourth screen or between the second screen and the fourth screen.
Yates discloses displaying a fourth screen including the content on the entire screen of the display (see Figures 2 and Paragraph 0019) and detailed program information superimposed on the television program (see Figure 2 and the bottom of Paragraph 0134 for displaying detailed program information superimposed over a television program) and performing a transition from the first screen to the fourth screen or between the second screen and the fourth screen (see Figures 19A-19B and Paragraphs 0070, 0072, 0101-0102 and 0111).
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 third EPG screen, as taught by Barrett and Alexander, using the fourth screen, as taught by Yates, for the purpose of providing users of a media program with an opportunity to preview, purchase and gain more information about merchandise related to the media program (see Paragraph 0001 of Yates, wherein the Examiner further notes that merchandise corresponds to additional media program episodes that a user can purchase (see above)).
Conclusion
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
July 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights