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 is issued in response to application, 19/393,368, filed on 11/18/2025.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority to provisional application, 63/722,451, filed on 11/19/2024.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS), submitted on 3/13/2026, is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-10, 13-16, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(2) as being anticipated by Abajian, US 2003/0061490 A1 (hereinafter “Aba”).
Claims 1, 9 and 15
Aba discloses a method comprising:
at a first time (Aba, Fig. 2, see step 24 “Discover” corresponds to the “first time”):
executing, via at least one processor of a computer system (Aba, [0050], see general-purpose processor), a web crawler, the web crawler identifying at least one media type located on web pages of the Internet, resulting in detected media content and a web address of the detected media content (Aba, [0027], see the contents of servers, databases, and other storage locations are searched by a tool known as a web crawler/search engine that are displayed in FIG. 2 as a flow diagram of an exemplary search and retrieval process in accordance with the present invention. Discovery (step 24) comprises an automated process referred to as a spider or web crawler, for searching web sites, data storage sites, or data available through a communications network [i.e., corresponds to “Internet”]. Each site containing media objects may comprise any number of web pages and/or data on storage devices (hard drives, flash cards, disc drives, optical disc storage). The spider utilizes predetermined algorithms to continuously search for media files on web pages and file directories at each searched web site. The spider also searches each web site for links to other web sites, unique streams, and downloadable files; Aba, [0028], see, upon finding a media file [i.e., corresponds to the “detected media content”], metadata and fingerprinting information associated with that file is extracted (step 26); and Aba, [0030], see the extracted metadata, which may be enhanced, is categorized in accordance with specific metadata and fingerprinting attributes in step 30. At this point the links representatives of a media object, e.g., uniform resource indicators (URIs) in the form of uniform resource locators (URLs) for web pages [i.e., corresponds to the “web address of the detected media content”] and data files and associated fingerprint vector and metadata, may be transferred to a database);
generating, via the at least one processor (Aba, [0050], see general-purpose processor), a fingerprint for each piece of media within the detected media content, resulting in at least one captured fingerprint (Aba, [0028], see, upon finding a media file, metadata and fingerprinting information associated with that file is extracted (step 26). … . The fingerprinting of the media object is made with a module at the extraction step, where the media object is analyzed, and a vector representing a fingerprint is generated and stored with the metadata representative of a media file. Optionally, only fingerprint information from the media object is extracted because metadata is not as reliable as a fingerprint); and
at a second time, the second time being after the first time (Aba, Fig. 4, see step 408 “Comparing fingerprint of media object to fingerprints in database of located objects”, which occurs after the web crawling finding the media content, which corresponds to the “second time being after the first time”):
receiving, at the computer system, a catalog of proprietary media content (See below);
generating, via the at least one processor (Aba, [0050], see general-purpose processor), a fingerprint for each piece of media within the catalog of proprietary media content, resulting in at least one proprietary fingerprint (Aba, [0045], see, step 406 allows the copyright holder to supply a fingerprint profile of a media object directly. The copyright holder may already have analyzed media objects to develop a set of fingerprints [i.e., corresponds to the “catalog of proprietary media content”], whereby a database of the fingerprints of media objects (generated by the analysis program) may be uploaded to the front end of the invention);
comparing, via the at least one processor (Aba, [0050], see general-purpose processor), the at least one proprietary fingerprint against the at least one captured fingerprint, resulting in at least one match of proprietary media content with previously identified media content (Aba, [0046], see, using the information generated in steps 404 and 406, the invention matches the fingerprint profiles of specified media objects [i.e., corresponds to the “at least one proprietary fingerprint”] against the fingerprint profiles [i.e., corresponds to the “at least one captured fingerprint”] located in a database of the invention. The matching algorithm may comprise of a comparison performed in a SQL compatible environment, or other well-known approach of comparing queried data against data in a database, as database 21 in FIG. 1. In FIG. 5, a fingerprint profile (CBID vector) of a media object known as “myOriginalWork.wav” is compared to a database of fingerprints of located media files; and Aba, [0048], see, step 410 outputs ancillary information of matched objects media objects (from step 408). In FIG. 5. the ancillary information of matched media objects shown is the URIs of matched media objects, although other types of ancillary information (such as the metadata of matched media objects) may be outputted as well); and
verifying, via the at least one processor executing the web crawler (Aba, [0027], see discovery (step 24) comprises an automated process referred to as a spider or web crawler, for searching web sites, data storage sites; and Aba, [0050], see general-purpose processor), that proprietary media content associated with the at least one match is still available at the web address of the detected media content (Aba, [0036], see, referring again to FIG. 3, the validator 72 dequeues entries from the queue in time and priority order. The validator 72 validates the media data by determining if the Web page comprises a link to a desired media file and also determining if the desired media file works. Validation is performed at a future point in time (e.g., check if the URL is still alive in 3 days), or alternatively, at periodic future points in time. If validity changes from valid to invalid, a notification is sent to promoter 82, as indicated by arrow 70. Validity may change from valid to invalid, for example, if the media file was removed from the linking URL; and Aba, Fig. 3, see step 72 “Validator (annotation agent 1) determines whether a multimedia URL is working).
Claim(s) 9 and 15 recite(s) similar limitations to claim 1 and is/are rejected under the same rationale.
With respect to claim 9, Aba discloses a system comprising:
at least one processor (Aba, [0050], see general-purpose processor); and
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored (Aba, [0050], see memories).
With respect to claim 15, Aba discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored (Aba, [0050], see memories).
Claims 2, 10 and 16
With respect to claims 2, 10 and 16, Aba discloses further comprising:
generating a communication to an owner of the web address informing the owner that the proprietary media content associated with the at least one match is still available at the web address of the detected media content (Aba, [0048], see, step 410 outputs ancillary information of matched objects media objects (from step 408). In FIG. 5. the ancillary information of matched media objects shown is the URIs of matched media objects, although other types of ancillary information (such as the metadata of matched media objects) may be outputted as well. For example, the invention outputs the title, format type, and location of a matched media object. The outputted ancillary information of matched media objects may be modified upon the needs of a copyright holder in a method consistent with the principles of the present invention. The copyright owner is then enabled to notify the operator of a data store or a website that illicitly copied copyright materials exists (on a site) and needs to be removed).
Claims 5, 13 and 19
With respect to claims 5, 13 and 19, Aba discloses wherein identification of the at least one match is based on the at least one proprietary fingerprint being within a predetermined percentage of similarity with the at least one captured fingerprint (Aba, [0022], see, from the calculated distance from the two vectors, an effective “weighting” of the different bands is compared to a threshold value [i.e., corresponds to the “predetermined percentage similarity”] (as a distance) for determining if two fingerprints are from the “same” stream (i.e. represent the same CD track or QuickTime movie file). If the resulting distance (calculated from the two vectors) was less than a threshold distance, then it is probable that the fingerprints from two media objects are from the same source. If not, the two media objects are probably from different sources. The degree of confidence of a match between two fingerprints may be inversely modified so that the smaller the threshold distance, the more likely that two media objects are from the same source).
Claims 6 and 20
With respect to claims 6 and 20, Aba discloses wherein the at least one media type comprises videos (Aba, [0017], see retrieving media files and data related to media files on a computer network via a search system utilizing metadata. As used herein, the term “media object” includes audio, video, textual, multimedia data files, and streaming media files. Multimedia objects comprise any combination of text, image, video, and audio data; and Aba, [0022], see determining the similarity of a QuickTime movie file [i.e., corresponds to a “video”]).
Claim 7
With respect to claim 7, Aba discloses wherein the at least one media type comprises images (Aba, [0017], see retrieving media files and data related to media files on a computer network via a search system utilizing metadata. As used herein, the term “media object” includes audio, video, textual, multimedia data files, and streaming media files. Multimedia objects comprise any combination of text, image, video, and audio data).
Claims 8 and 14
With respect to claims 8 and 14, Aba discloses wherein execution of the web crawler to identify the at least one media type comprises:
a priority crawl which is executed periodically on a specific web page to identify newly uploaded content (See below); and
a general crawl which, when executed, crawls all web pages associated with a domain (Aba, [0027], see discovery (step 24) comprises an automated process referred to as a spider or web crawler, for searching web sites, data storage sites, or data available through a communications network [i.e., searches entire domain]. Each site containing media objects may comprise any number of web pages and/or data on storage devices (hard drives, flash cards, disc drives, optical disc storage). The spider utilizes predetermined algorithms to continuously search [i.e., which encompasses multiple, periodic searches] for media files on web pages and file directories at each searched web site. The spider also searches each web site for links to other web sites, unique streams, and downloadable files).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 11, 12, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aba in view of Yu, US 2019/0183451 A1 (hereinafter “Yu”).
Claims 3, 11 and 17
Claims 3, 11 and 17 incorporate all of the limitations above. Aba discloses via the at least one processor (Aba, [0050], see general-purpose processor) based on the at least one match (Aba, [0046], see, using the information generated in steps 404 and 406, the invention matches the fingerprint profiles of specified media objects [i.e., corresponds to the “at least one proprietary fingerprint”] against the fingerprint profiles [i.e., corresponds to the “at least one captured fingerprint”] located in a database of the invention. The matching algorithm may comprise of a comparison performed in a SQL compatible environment, or other well-known approach of comparing queried data against data in a database, as database 21 in FIG. 1. In FIG. 5, a fingerprint profile (CBID vector) of a media object known as “myOriginalWork.wav” is compared to a database of fingerprints of located media files; and Aba, [0048], see, step 410 outputs ancillary information of matched objects media objects (from step 408). In FIG. 5. the ancillary information of matched media objects shown is the URIs of matched media objects, although other types of ancillary information (such as the metadata of matched media objects) may be outputted as well).
Aba does not appear to explicitly disclose further comprising:
generating a Graphics Interchange Format (GIF) for each match in the at least one match, resulting in at least one GIF, the at least one GIF illustrating the at least one match, wherein the communication further comprises the at least one GIF.
Yu discloses further comprising:
generating a Graphics Interchange Format (GIF) for each match in the at least one match, resulting in at least one GIF, the at least one GIF illustrating the at least one match, wherein the communication further comprises the at least one GIF (Yu, [0038], see matching images; Yu, [0040], see scoring for matching and generating 2D images; and Yu, [0050], see .GIF image format).
Aba and Yu are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of searching images.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Aba and Yu before him/her, to modify the content fingerprinting of Aba to include the image generation of Yu because it would allow processing of different file formats.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to easily select the correct image while respecting the confidentiality/sensitivity of the image, see Yu, [0021].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Yu with Aba to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim(s).
Claims 4, 12 and 18
Claims 4, 12 and 18 incorporate all of the limitations above. Aba discloses wherein the fingerprint of each piece of media (Aba, [0028], see, upon finding a media file, metadata and fingerprinting information associated with that file is extracted (step 26). … . The fingerprinting of the media object is made with a module at the extraction step, where the media object is analyzed, and a vector representing a fingerprint is generated and stored with the metadata representative of a media file. Optionally, only fingerprint information from the media object is extracted because metadata is not as reliable as a fingerprint).
Aba does not appear to explicitly disclose comprises a perceptual hash.
Yu discloses comprises a perceptual hash (Yu, [0041], see perceptual hash).
See claims 3, 11 and 17 above for the motivation to combine.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
– Pavetic et al., 2018/0068410 for detecting multiple parts of a screen to fingerprint to detect abusive uploading videos;
– Balasubramanian et al., 2008/0235163 for online duplicate detection and elimination in a web crawler;
– Harkness et al., 2010/0174608 for digital rights management and audience measurement systems;
– Bernosky, 2011/0153417 for networking with media fingerprints;
– Singh et al., 2022/0309118 for targeted crawler to develop and/or maintain a searchable database of media content across multiple content providers;
– Emanual, 2024/0256741 for authentication of rareness of a digital asset;
– Harkness et al., 2008/0249961 for digital rights management and audience measurement systems; and
– Ives, WO 2007/042840 for searching using changes in prevalence of content items on the web.
Point of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUBERT G CHEUNG whose telephone number is (571) 270-1396. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 8:00A-5:00P EST; alt. F 8:00A-4:00P 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, Apu Mofiz can be reached at (571) 272-4080. 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.
HUBERT G. CHEUNG
Assistant Examiner
Art Unit 2161
Examiner: Hubert Cheung
/Hubert Cheung/Assistant Examiner, Art Unit 2161Date: September 2, 2026
/APU M MOFIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2161
Prosecution Insights