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 .
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watson (US 2014/0052873) in view of Haritaohlu (US 11,039,181).
Regarding claim 1, Watson discloses a method comprising:
sending, by a user device, a request for a content asset (a user requests playback of a media title; see at least Fig. 4 and paragraph 0048);
receiving, by the user device, one or more manifest files associated with an unsecured portion of the content asset (receiving metadata for unencrypted data; see at least Fig. 4 and paragraph 0048); and
receiving, by the user device, one or more manifest files associated with a secured portion of the content asset (receiving metadata for encrypted data; see at least Fig. 4 and paragraph 0049), wherein the one or more manifest files associated with the unsecured portion is delivered to the user device prior to performing a validation process for the request for the content asset (metadata for unencrypted data is sent prior requesting license; see at least Fig. 4 and paragraphs 0048-0049).
Watson discloses the one or more manifest files associated with the secured portion and delivering it to the user device and performing the validation process for the request for the content asset; as above, but is not clear about delivering one or more manifest files after performing the validation process for the request.
Haritaohlu discloses the above missing limitation; a manifest file is transmitted to a video player after processing an encryption key; see at least col. 7, lines 18-65.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Watson by the teachings of Haritaohlu by having the above limitations so to be able to encrypt the manifest file prior to securely providing it to the video player; see at least the Abstract.
Regarding claim 2, Watson in view of Haritaohlu disclose the method of claim 1, wherein a size of the unsecured portion of the content asset is based on an expected time associated with performing the validation process for the request for the content asset (Watson; the device transitions from unecrypted content to encrypted content when the device receives the encrypted content and the DRM license, therefore, the size of the unencrypted content is based on the expected time to process and receive the DRM license; see at least paragraph 0050).
Regarding claim 3, Watson in view of Haritaohlu disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the expected time associated with performing the validation process is at least based on an expected time associated with processing a license associated with the content asset (Watson; the device transitions from unecrypted content to encrypted content when the device receives the encrypted content and the DRM license, therefore, the size of the unencrypted content is based on the expected time to process and receive the DRM license; see at least paragraph 005).
Regarding claim 6, Watson in view of Haritaohlu disclose the method of claim 1, wherein performing the validation process for the request for the content asset further comprises processing a license associated with the content asset for the user device (Haritaohlu; see at least the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 7, Watson in view of Haritaohlu disclose the method of claim 1, wherein a size of the unsecured portion of the content asset comprises a size configured to have a playing time corresponding to an expected time for the user device to receive a license associated with the content asset (Watson; the unencrypted data is played back until the metadata for the encrypted data is processed and then playback of the encrypted data begins; see at least Fig. 4 and paragraphs 0048-0049).
Regarding claim 8, Watson in view of Haritaohlu disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the secured portion comprises an encrypted portion (Watson; see at least the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 9, Watson in view of Haritaohlu disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the request for the content asset comprises authentication data for the content asset (the request of Watson; see at least paragraphs 0048-0049).
Claim 10 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 11 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 2.
Claim 12 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 3.
Claim 15 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 6.
Claim 16 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 7.
Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 8.
Claim 18 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 9.
Claim 19 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 2.
Claims 4-5 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watson in view of Haritaohlu and further in view of Rao (US 2019/0362055).
Regarding claim 4, Watson in view of Haritaohlu disclose the method of claim 3, but are not clear about wherein the expected time associated with processing the license is at least based on a condition of a network.
Rao discloses the above missing limitation; using a cookie allow for connections to be established with reduced network traffic and/or associated latency; see at least paragraphs 0038 and 0078.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Watson in view of Haritaohlu by the teachings of Rao by having the above limitations so to be able to provide end-to-end protection of content keys from their point of origination at a content creator and/or content service to end user devices; see at least the Abstract.
Regarding claim 5, Watson in view of Haritaohlu disclose the method of claim 3, but are not clear about wherein the expected time associated with processing the license is at least based on a quantity of requests received from other devices.
Rao discloses the above missing limitation; based on the number of demands; see at least paragraph 0078.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Watson in view of Haritaohlu by the teachings of Rao by having the above limitations so to be able to provide end-to-end protection of content keys from their point of origination at a content creator and/or content service to end user devices; see at least the Abstract.
Claim 13 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 4.
Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YASSIN ALATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5683. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7-4 ET.
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.
/YASSIN ALATA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights