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 .
This Office Action has been issued in response to Applicant’s Communication of application S/N 19/358,007 filed on October 14, 2025. Claims 1 to 20 are currently pending with the application.
Priority
The instant application is a continuation of application S/N 18/904,278, filed on October 2, 2024, which is a continuation of application S/N 16/698,900, filed on November 27, 2019, and which claims priority from provisional application S/N 62/896,460, filed on September 5, 2019. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of the prior-filed applications under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, or 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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, 3 to 8, 10 to 15, and 17 to 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 18, and 21 of U.S. Patent 12,141,197, and claims 1, 7, 8, 14, 15, and 20 of U.S. Patent 12,468,759. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims in the instant application are anticipated by the claims in the U.S. Patents.
Following mapping of claims 1, and 3 to 7 of Instant Application to claims 13, and 16 of U.S. Patent 12,141,197. Similar mapping applies to claims 8, 10 to 15, and 17 to 20 of instant application, since they recite similar limitations.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent 12,141,197
1. A computer-implemented method comprising: generating, for each received media sample of a plurality of received media samples from broadcast media, at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint based on the received media sample, wherein each of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint is based on at least one adjustment of the received media sample, wherein each of the at least one adjustment is associated with a corresponding type; identifying at least one match based on comparing the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint to at least one reference media fingerprint; updating a frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment corresponding to each of the at least one match of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint; and transmitting a report, wherein the report comprises the frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment.
3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the at least one adjustment is one of (a) a pitch shift by a pitch shift value, (b) a time shift by a time shift value, or (c) a resample by a resample ratio of the received media sample.
4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the type of the at least one adjustment is one of (a) a pitch shift, (b) a time shift, or (c) a resample.
5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the report further comprises (a) one or more pitch shift values, (b) one or more time shift values, or (c) one or more resample ratios.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the report is transmitted in response to a query.
13. A method comprising: receiving broadcast media, wherein the broadcast media comprises a plurality of received media samples; analyzing each received media sample of the plurality of received media samples by: generating at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint based on the received media sample, wherein each of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint comprises at least one of (a) a pitch shift, (b) a time shift, or (c) a resample of the received media sample; identifying at least one match based on comparing the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint to at least one reference media fingerprint; and updating a frequency of occurrence of each of (a) a pitch shift value, (b) a time shift value, or (c) a resample ratio corresponding to each of the at least one match of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint; receiving, after collecting the broadcast media for a threshold period of time a request for information associated with a query corresponding to a suspected alteration to an audio signal; and transmitting, in response to the received request, a report, wherein the report includes the frequency of occurrence of (a) the pitch shift value, (b) the time shift value, or (c) the resample ratio.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein the one or more pitch shift values, the one or more time shift values, or the one or more resample ratios have a higher frequency of occurrence than (a) one or more additional pitch shift values, (b) one or more additional time shift values, or (c) one or more additional resample ratios, respectively.
16. The method of claim 13, wherein the report includes (a) one or more pitch shift values or (b) one or more resample ratios that have a higher frequency of occurrence than (a) one or more additional pitch shift values or (b) one or more additional resample ratios, respectively.
Following mapping of claims 1, and 3 to 7 of Instant Application to claims 8, and 14 of U.S. Patent 12,468,759. Similar mapping applies to claims 8, 10 to 15, and 17 to 20 of instant application, since they recite similar limitations.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent 12,468,759
1. A computer-implemented method comprising: generating, for each received media sample of a plurality of received media samples from broadcast media, at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint based on the received media sample, wherein each of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint is based on at least one adjustment of the received media sample, wherein each of the at least one adjustment is associated with a corresponding type; identifying at least one match based on comparing the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint to at least one reference media fingerprint; updating a frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment corresponding to each of the at least one match of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint; and transmitting a report, wherein the report comprises the frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment.
3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the at least one adjustment is one of (a) a pitch shift by a pitch shift value, (b) a time shift by a time shift value, or (c) a resample by a resample ratio of the received media sample.
4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the type of the at least one adjustment is one of (a) a pitch shift, (b) a time shift, or (c) a resample.
5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the report further comprises (a) one or more pitch shift values, (b) one or more time shift values, or (c) one or more resample ratios.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the report is transmitted in response to a query.
8. A computer-implemented method comprising: generating, for each received media sample of a plurality of received media samples from broadcast media, at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint based on the received media sample, wherein each of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint comprises at least one of (a) a pitch shift, (b) a time shift, or (c) a resample of the received media sample; identifying at least one match based on comparing the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint to at least one reference media fingerprint; updating a frequency of occurrence of each of (a) a pitch shift value, (b) a time shift value, or (c) a resample ratio corresponding to each of the at least one match of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint; receiving, after collecting the broadcast media for a threshold period of time, a request for information associated with a query corresponding to a suspected alteration to an audio signal; and transmitting, in response to the received request, a report, wherein the report includes the frequency of occurrence of at least one of (a) the pitch shift value, (b) the time shift value, or (c) the resample ratio.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein the one or more pitch shift values, the one or more time shift values, or the one or more resample ratios have a higher frequency of occurrence than (a) one or more additional pitch shift values, (b) one or more additional time shift values, or (c) one or more additional resample ratios, respectively.
14. The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the report includes (a) one or more pitch shift values, (b) one or more time shift values, or (c) one or more resample ratios that have a higher frequency of occurrence than (a) one or more additional pitch shift values, (b) one or more additional time shift values or (c) one or more additional resample ratios, respectively.
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.
Claims 1 to 6, 8 to 13, and 15 to 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bilobrov et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0371962) hereinafter Bilobrov, and further in view of Yen (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0314507).
As to claim 1:
Bilobrov discloses:
A computer-implemented method comprising:
generating, for each received media sample of a plurality of received media samples from broadcast media, at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint based on the received media sample, wherein each of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint is based on at least one adjustment of the received media sample[Paragraph 0024 teaches generating a set of distorted fingerprints based on a test content item; Paragraph 0093 teaches test content item may be a live content stream provided by an authorized broadcaster; Paragraph 0094 teaches generating a set of distorted fingerprints ];
identifying at least one match based on comparing the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint to at least one reference media fingerprint [Paragraph 0014 teaches evaluating at least one portion of a test content item with at least one portion of a reference content item using one or more first fingerprints of the test content item and one or more first fingerprints of the reference content item; Paragraph 0024 teaches determining one or more reference content items using the set of distorted fingerprints, wherein the test content item is evaluated against at least one reference content item to identify matching content; Paragraph 0033 teaches determining at least one matching reference content item using the fingerprint; Paragraph 0094 teaches distorted fingerprinted frames can be used to identify one or more reference content items and determine what portions of those reference content items include matching content].
Bilobrov does not appear to expressly disclose wherein each of the at least one adjustment is associated with a corresponding type; updating a frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment corresponding to each of the at least one match of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint; and transmitting a report, wherein the report comprises the frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment.
Yen discloses:
wherein each of the at least one adjustment is associated with a corresponding type [Paragraph 0063 teaches based on the type of modification, the system may determine that the modification is legitimate, therefore, the adjustments or modifications correspond to a type, i.e., adding frames; Paragraph 0066 teaches determine a type of modification (e.g., addition of frames, deletion of frames, modification of frames, repeated frames, etc.)];
updating a frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment corresponding to each of the at least one match of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint [Paragraph 0063 teaches determining the type of modification; Paragraph 0092 teaches determining the number and types of modifications of the unverified content item, hence, updating frequency of occurrence of the types of modifications of the matching items]; and
transmitting a report, wherein the report comprises the frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment [Paragraph 0085 teaches generating an indication of the number of frames that have been altered; Paragraph 0113 teaches percent of altered content, modification type, clusters of altered content; Fig. 14 teaches a matrix (representing the report) indicating the frequency of occurrence of altered content by modification type].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the cited references and modify the invention as taught by Bilobrov, by incorporating wherein each of the at least one adjustment is associated with a corresponding type; updating a frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment corresponding to each of the at least one match of the at least one adjusted media sample fingerprint; and transmitting a report, wherein the report comprises the frequency of occurrence of each type of the at least one adjustment, as taught by Yen [Paragraph 0062, 0063, 0085, 0092, 0113, Fig. 14], because both applications are directed to identification of content, including when it has been altered; tracking the frequency of types of modifications, and providing the data, i.e., in a report, enables the system to learn which modifications and combinations of alterations require user alerting, enabling feedback mechanisms that further allow for the improvement of the processes (See Yen Para [0111]).
As to claim 2:
Bilobrov as modified by Yen discloses:
the plurality of received media samples is received by a central facility [Yen - Paragraph 0050 teaches system includes a server, which may be a cloud-based network including a plurality of servers and devices for content delivery; Fig. 6, 604, Server in communication with a network, media content sources, and user equipments].
As to claim 3:
Bilobrov discloses:
at least one of the at least one adjustment is one of (a) a pitch shift by a pitch shift value, (b) a time shift by a time shift value, or (c) a resample by a resample ratio of the received media sample [Paragraph 0071 teaches fingerprinting module can shift the set of frames to compute the next fingerprint, by one frame, for example, if the initial set of frames included values for frames 1 to 8, then the shifted set of frames will include values for frames 2 to 9, hence, a time shift by a time shift value].
As to claim 4:
Bilobrov discloses:
type of the at least one adjustment is one of (a) a pitch shift, (b) a time shift, or (c) a resample [Paragraph 0071 teaches fingerprinting module can shift the set of frames to compute the next fingerprint, by one frame, for example, if the initial set of frames included values for frames 1 to 8, then the shifted set of frames will include values for frames 2 to 9, hence, a time shift].
As to claim 5:
The combination of Bilobrov and Yen discloses:
at least one of the at least one adjustment is one of (a) a pitch shift by a pitch shift value, (b) a time shift by a time shift value, or (c) a resample by a resample ratio of the received media sample [Bilobrov - Paragraph 0071 teaches fingerprinting module can shift the set of frames to compute the next fingerprint, by one frame, for example, if the initial set of frames included values for frames 1 to 8, then the shifted set of frames will include values for frames 2 to 9, hence, a time shift by a time shift value; Yen - Paragraph 0085 teaches generating an indication of the number of frames that have been altered; Paragraph 0113 teaches percent of altered content, modification type, clusters of altered content; Fig. 14 teaches a matrix (representing the report) indicating the frequency of occurrence of altered content by modification type].
As to claim 6:
The combination of Bilobrov and Yen discloses:
the one or more pitch shift values, the one or more time shift values, or the one or more resample ratios have a higher frequency of occurrence than (a) one or more additional pitch shift values, (b) one or more additional time shift values, or (c) one or more additional resample ratios, respectively [Bilobrov - Paragraph 0071 teaches fingerprinting module can shift the set of frames to compute the next fingerprint, by one frame, for example, if the initial set of frames included values for frames 1 to 8, then the shifted set of frames will include values for frames 2 to 9, hence, a time shift by a time shift value; Yen – Fig. 14 teaches a matrix (report) representing the modification types, and the frequency, and teaches types of modification “altered portion” has a higher frequency as a % of altered content of 12.5%].
Same rationale applies to claims 8 to 12, and 15 to 20, since they recite similar limitations, and are therefore similarly rejected.
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bilobrov et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0371962) hereinafter Bilobrov, in view of Yen (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0314507), and further in view of Stoddard et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0361843) hereinafter Stoddard.
As to claim 7:
Bilobrov discloses all the limitations as set forth in the rejections of claim 1 above, but does not appear to expressly disclose the report is transmitted in response to a query.
Stoddard discloses:
the report is transmitted in response to a query.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the cited references and modify the invention as taught by Bilobrov, by incorporating wherein each of the at least one adjustment is associated with a corresponding type; by transmitting the report in response to a query, as taught by Stoddard [Paragraph 0205], because the applications are directed to processing of data, including content matching and identification; transmitting the report in response to a query is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Same rationale applies to claim 14, since it recites similar limitations, and is therefor similarly rejected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAQUEL PEREZ-ARROYO whose telephone number is (571)272-8969. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 5:30pm, Alt Friday, EST.
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, Sherief Badawi can be reached at 571-272-9782. 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.
/RAQUEL PEREZ-ARROYO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2169
Prosecution Insights