CTFR 19/423,966 CTFR 83095 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 06/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on pages 7+ of the Remarks that Zeng et al. and Inaba fail to disclose “presenting an editing interface, the editing interface comprising a content area and a control area, the content area presenting first media content, the control area presenting a generation entry and an editing control, the editing control being configured to edit at least one media content, the at least one media content comprising the first media content” as now recited in claims 1, 13 and 20. In response to argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Zeng et al. discloses presenting a configuration interface that displays media content and controls in paragraphs 0033-0035, 0048, fig. 2A (200A). So Zeng clearly shows an interface with displayed media content (reference images, generated videos) and controls, but does not explicitly label them as “content area” vs. “control area”. Inaba explicitly teaches a UI divided into a video display region and editing controls. Inaba discloses on the playback screen 310, a stock video 311 is displayed, edit icons 314, 315, 316 are displayed in paragraphs 0142-0143. Content area is considered as video 311 and control area is considered as edit icons 314-316. Paragraph 0116 of Inaba discloses a basic edit instruction is an edit instruction input on a basic edit screen 320 shown in FIG. 7. The basic edit instructions are various basic instructions for editing, such as trimming, changing the playback speed, adjusting the volume, inserting a text, zooming in, and zooming out. Therefore, it would have been obvious to incorporate Inaba’s explicit content/control area layout into Zeng’s interface to improve clarity and usability . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 11-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0175681) in view of Inaba (U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0404564) . Regarding claim 1 , Zeng et al. discloses a method for content generation, comprising: presenting an interface, the interface comprising media content and controls, the interface presenting first media content (see paragraphs 0033-0035, 0048; presenting a configuration interface that displays media content and controls. Paragraph 0033-0035 discloses that electronic device 110 may present a configuration interface 200A. The user may upload a plurality of reference images in a first input component 212), the interface presenting a generation entry (see paragraph 0046; the user may trigger the generation of the target video through a preset control 216); obtaining, based on triggering of the generation entry, a generation request indicating at least one generation parameter (see paragraphs 0043-0046, fig. 2A (216); when the user triggers the generation control 216, the system obtains the necessary inputs to generate media content. Paragraphs 0043-0045 discloses media parameters such as action amplitude, lens transformation, picture scale, and frame control); providing second media content in the editing interface, the second media content being dynamic media content generated based on the first media content and the at least one generation parameter (see paragraphs 0036-0046, 0056, 0047-0049, fig. 2B-2D, fig 3 (step 330). Paragraph 0056 generates target media content (video) based on reference images and parameters. Displaying the generated video in the interface, including preview windows and history views. The generated content is dynamic media content (video)). However, Zeng et al. is silent as to an edit interface comprising a content area and a control area, the editing control being configured to edit at least one media content, the at least one media content comprising the first media content; posting, in response to a posting request received in the editing interface, a work corresponding to the dynamic media content. Inaba discloses an edit interface comprising a content area and a control area (see paragraphs 0142-0143, 0116; content area is considered as video 311 and control area is considered as edit icons 314-316), the editing control being configured to edit at least one media content, the at least one media content comprising the first media content (see paragraphs 0116, 0142-0143; editing control configured to edit media content); posting, in response to a posting request received in the editing interface, a work corresponding to the dynamic media content (see fig. 12 (step S21 – post edited video on social media), paragraphs 0124, 0075, 0135, 0149, fig. 16 (elements 248, 249)). It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zeng et al. with the teachings of Inaba, the motivation being to allow users to share generated media content thereby improving usability. Regarding claim 13 , claim 13 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 20 , claim 13 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claims 2 and 14 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claims 1 and 13 ). Zeng et al. discloses wherein obtaining the generation request based on the triggering of the generation entry comprises: presenting an input control in response to a selection of the generation entry (see paragraphs 0033-0034, 0042, 0054 fig. 2A); and obtaining, via the input control, a prompt for generating the second media content (see paragraphs 0042, 0056, fig. 2A (element 214)). Regarding claims 3 and 15 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claims 1 and 13 ). Zeng et al. discloses updating, in response to obtaining the generation request, a style of the generation entry to indicate a processing state of the generation request (see paragraphs 0046-0049, fig. 2B, 2C). Regarding claim 11 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claim 1 ). Zeng et al. discloses wherein the generation request is processed asynchronously and processing of the generation request is independent of whether the editing interface is in an active state (see paragraphs 0046-0048). Regarding claim 12 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claim 1 ). Zeng et al. discloses a viewing interface of the work (see paragraphs 0048, fig. 2A-2B), a creation entry (see paragraphs 0033-0035) and triggering generation from an entry (see paragraph 0046). Inaba teaches viewing interface with action entries (see paragraph 0123, fig. 10, fig. 11) and triggering transitions to editing/creation interfaces (see paragraphs 0114, 0135, 0152) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al. and Inaba as applied to claim s 3 and 15 above, and further in view of Rodriquez (U.S. Pub. No. 2003/0005447) . Regarding claims 4 and 16 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claims 3 and 15 ). Zeng et al. discloses presenting, before processing of the generation request is completed, state information in association with the generation entry (see paragraphs 0047-0049, fig. 2b, 2c). However, Zeng et al. and Inaba are silent as to the state information indicating a duration of remaining processing of the generation request. Rodriquez discloses the state information indicating a duration of remaining processing of the generation request (see paragraph 0130). It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zeng et al. and Inaba with the teachings of Rodriquez, the motivation being to allow show progress . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 5, 6, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al. and Inaba as applied to claim s 3 and 15 above, and further in view of Bazarevich et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,755,344) . Regarding claims 5 and 17 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claims 3 and 15 ). However, Zeng et al. and Inaba are silent as to presenting a viewing panel before processing of the generation request is completed and in response to a selection of the generation entry, the viewing panel comprising at least one of: a first entry for triggering presentation of a draft viewing interface, or a second entry for triggering stopping of processing of the generation request. Bazarevich et al. discloses presenting a viewing panel before processing of the generation request is completed and in response to a selection of the generation entry (see col. 40, lines 5-20), the viewing panel comprising at least one of: a first entry for triggering presentation of a draft viewing interface , (see col. 40, lines 5-20) or a second entry for triggering stopping of processing of the generation request. It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zeng et al. and Inaba with the teachings of Bazarevich et al., the motivation being to remind the user what window this is. Regarding claims 6 and 18 , Zeng et al., Inaba and Bazarevich et al. discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claims 5 and 17 ). Zeng et al. discloses presenting, in the draft viewing interface (see paragraphs 0047-0048), a processing state of a set of historical generation requests (see paragraph 0048 and fig. 2b, 2c), the set of historical generation requests indicating generation of dynamic media content based on static media content (see paragraph 0021, 0036), the set of historical generation requests comprising the generation request associated with the first media content (see paragraph 0047) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 7, 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al. and Inaba as applied to claim s 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Janszen (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0336043) . Regarding claims 7 and 19 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claims 1 and 13 ). However, Zeng et al. and Inaba are silent as to receiving, in the editing interface and before processing of the generation request is completed, at least one edit operation independent of the generation request; and applying, in the editing interface, the at least one edit operation to the first media content. Janszen discloses receiving, in the editing interface and before processing of the generation request is completed, at least one edit operation independent of the generation request (see paragraphs 0002, 0010); and applying, in the editing interface, the at least one edit operation to the first media content (see paragraphs 0002, 0010). It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zeng et al. and Inaba with the teachings of Janszen, the motivation being to provide content enhancement. Regarding claim 8 , Zeng et al, Inaba and Janszen discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claim 7 ). Janszen discloses applying, in response to completion of the processing of the generation request, the at least one edit operation to the generated second media content (see paragraphs 0002, 0010) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al. and Inaba as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0341376) . Regarding claim 9 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claim 1 ). However, Zeng et al. and Inaba are silent as to presenting a reminder message in response to completion of processing of the generation request; and presenting, in response to a predetermined operation on the reminder message, the generated second media content in the editing interface. Liu et al. discloses presenting a reminder message in response to completion of processing of the generation request (see paragraph 0073 and fig. 6); and presenting, in response to a predetermined operation on the reminder message, the generated second media content in the editing interface (see paragraph 0073 and fig. 6). It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zeng et al. and Inaba with the teachings of Liu et al., the motivation being to notifying a user . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al. and Inaba as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jiao et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0004268) . Regarding claim 10 , Zeng et al. and Inaba discloses everything claimed as applied above ( see claim 1 ). Zeng et al. discloses presenting, a content item associated with the first media content (see paragraphs 0047-0048); and presenting, in association with the content item, the generation request (see paragraph 0048, figs. 2B, 2C). Inaba discloses displaying processing states and status indicators (see paragraph 0009, 0152 and fig. 12). However, Zeng et al. and Inaba are silent as to presenting, in a personal page of a user, content item. Jiao et al. discloses presenting, in a personal page of a user, content item (see paragraph 0035). It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zeng et al. and Inaba with the teachings of Jiao et al., the motivation being to switch videos. Conclusion 07-39 AIA THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NNENNA NGOZI EKPO whose telephone number is (571)270-1663. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 10:00am - 6:30pm, TH-F 8:00am - 4:30pm. 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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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. NNENNA EKPO Primary Examiner Art Unit 2425 /NNENNA N EKPO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425 June 15, 2026. Application/Control Number: 19/423,966 Page 2 Art Unit: 2425 Application/Control Number: 19/423,966 Page 3 Art Unit: 2425 Application/Control Number: 19/423,966 Page 4 Art Unit: 2425 Application/Control Number: 19/423,966 Page 5 Art Unit: 2425 Application/Control Number: 19/423,966 Page 6 Art Unit: 2425 Application/Control Number: 19/423,966 Page 8 Art Unit: 2425 Application/Control Number: 19/423,966 Page 10 Art Unit: 2425
Prosecution Insights