`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`
`
`
` FILING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`
`
`
`CONFIRMATIONNO.
`
`13/588,084
`
`08/17/2012
`
`John McCue
`
`141-1 US/PCT CON
`
`4986
`
`09/19/2013
`7590
`24949
`TEITELBAUM & MACLEAN
`280 SUNNYSIDE AVENUE
`OTTAWA,ONKIS OR8
`CANADA
`
`BATURAY,ALICIA
`
`2441
`
`
`
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`09/19/2013
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`ANNETTE@PATENTS.ORG
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`
` 13/588,084 MCCUE ET AL.
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`
`2441
`Alicia Baturay
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY(30) DAYS,
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s)filed on 14 August 2013.
`2a)L] This action is FINAL.
`2b) This action is non-final.
`3)L]
`Anelection was made bythe applicant in responseto a restriction requirementset forth during the interview on
`___; the restriction requirement and election have beenincorporated into this action.
`4)L] Sincethis application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`5) Claim(s) 46-63 and 65-68 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`6)X] Claim(s) 58-63 is/are allowed.
`7)X] Claim(s) 46-57 and 65-68 is/are rejected.
`8)X] Claim(s) 55 is/are objected to.
`
`9)L] Claim(s)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may beeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway
`program ata participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http/www.usoto.qov/patents/init events/pph/index isp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.qov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)L] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)] The drawing(s)filed on 17 August 2012 is/are: a)[X] accepted or b)[_] objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)[.] Acknowledgmentis made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`a)LJ All
`b)L] Some * c)L] None of:
`1.] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.L] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.L] Copiesof the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`
`
`Attachment(s)
`1) x Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) CT] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) | Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date.
`4) Cc] Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 09-12)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20130911
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 2
`
`1. This Office Action is in response to the amendmentfiled 14 August 2013.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`2. Claims 52, 53, 58, and 65-67 were amended.
`
`3. Claims 1-45 and 65 were cancelled.
`
`4. Claim 68 was added.
`
`5. Claims 46-63 and 65-68 are pending in this Office Action.
`
`6. The rejection of claim 53 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, an paragraph regarding indefiniteness was
`
`Response to Amendment
`
`addressed andis withdrawn.
`
`7. Applicant’s amendments and arguments with respect to claims 1-20 and new claims 21-59
`
`filed on October 21, 2004 have been fully considered but they are deemed to be mootin view
`
`of the new groundsofrejection.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`8. Applicant’s arguments filed 14 August 2013 have been fully considered, but they are not
`
`persuasive for the reasonsset forth below.
`
`9. Applicant Argues: Daoud etal. do not teach computer readable code, which when executed
`
`by a computer, causes said computer to send a request to a network-based server, the request
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 3
`
`including a unique identifier for identifying an audio stream, and to load a list of library
`
`servers received from the network-based server,
`
`the list of library servers determined in
`
`dependence uponthe uniqueidentifier.
`
`In Response: The examinerrespectfully submits that the combination of Daoud, Zuniga,
`
`Hunter, and Griffin teaches send a request to a network-based server (direct the transaction to
`
`a server), the request including a unique identifier (the data packet can include an email
`
`message to be delivered to a recipient, a uniform resource locator (URL) requesting a
`
`hypertext markup language (HTTP) page from the corresponding Internet site, etc. — see
`
`Daoud,Fig. 2; col. 4, lines 6-22) for identifying an audio stream (whena user selects content
`
`from the content providers website, a user request-playback data file is created containing
`
`the identification numbers of the selected audio tracks — see Zuniga, page 5, paragraph 55);
`
`load a list of library servers received from the network-based server (when the transaction is
`
`received at the load balancer, the load balancer reads the requested level of service from the
`
`service tag), the list of library servers determined in dependence upon the unique identifier
`
`(Based on the server index, the load balancer selects the server from the server group that is
`
`best providing the requested level of service (e.g., “premium’’). The server ID is indicated as
`
`a group of servers. That is, Servers A, B, and C, are providing a “premium” level of service.
`
`For example, where the service tag indicates that the requested level of service is “premium,”
`
`the load balancer directs the transaction to any oneof the servers 511, 512, and 513 in the
`
`premium group. The load balancer can use conventional load balancing algorithms (e.g.,
`
`fastest available) to select a specific server 511, 512, 513 within the premium group — see
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 4
`
`Daoud, Fig. 6; col. 8, lines 31-50). This renders the rejection proper, and thus the rejection
`
`stands.
`
`10. Applicant Argues: The cited combination cannot teach a non-transitory computer readable
`
`storage medium including computer readable code, which when executed by a computer,
`
`causes said computer to: send a request to a network-based server, load a list of library
`
`servers received from the network-based server, and downloadafirst digital audio file from
`
`the plurality of digital audio files for playback with a media player.
`
`In Response: The examinerrespectfully submits that the combination of Daoud, Zuniga,
`
`Hunter, and Griffin teaches download a first digital audio file from the plurality of digital
`
`audio files for playback with a media player (when the contentfile is copied fromafirst user
`
`device to a second user device, it is copied without any information transmitted from the first
`
`user device to the second user device indicating the play back status of the contentfile. As a
`
`result, if the content file is partially consumed onthe first user device and then the content
`
`file is copied to a second user device,
`
`the content must either be displayed from the
`
`beginning of the contentfile or the user must manually attempt to locate the point where the
`
`display of the consumption on thefirst user device — see Griffin, page 1, paragraph 3).
`
`The other limitations have been discussed above or within the instant office action.
`
`This renders the rejection proper, and thusthe rejection stands.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 5
`
`11. Applicant Argues: One of ordinary skill in the art would never interpret Griffin to teach
`
`“download a first digital audio file from the plurality of digital audio files for playback with a
`
`media player, each digital audio file in the plurality of digital audio files including a different
`
`segment of the audio stream.”
`
`In Response: The examinerrespectfully submits that the combination of Daoud, Zuniga,
`
`Hunter, and Griffin teaches download a first digital audio file from the plurality of digital
`
`audio files for playback with a media player (when the contentfile is copied fromafirst user
`
`device to a second user device, it is copied without any information transmitted from the first
`
`user device to the second user device indicating the play back status of the contentfile. As a
`
`result, if the content file is partially consumed onthe first user device and then the content
`
`file is copied to a second user device,
`
`the content must either be displayed from the
`
`beginning of the contentfile or the user must manually attempt to locate the point where the
`
`display of the consumption on the first user device — see Griffin, page 1, paragraph 3) from
`
`the plurality of digital audio files for playback with a media player, each digital audio file in
`
`the plurality of digital audio files including a different segment of the audio stream (video
`
`data associated with frames of the selected shots is analyzed to determine a time of each
`
`video shot. The selected video shots are organized in chronological order based on the
`
`determined time of each shot. The organized sequence of video shots is analyzed to
`
`determine time gaps between successive video shots. The segmenting routine segments the
`
`video recording into two video clusters by segmenting or grouping video shots on opposite
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 6
`
`sides of the largest time gap — see Hunter, col. 15, lines 29-48). This renders the rejection
`
`proper, and thus the rejection stands.
`
`12. Applicant Argues: The cited combination does not teach “download a second other digital
`
`audio file from a secondlibrary server for playback with the media player.” No combination
`
`of the cited references teaches downloading different segments of an audio stream from
`
`different libraries.
`
`In Response: The examinerrespectfully submits that the combination of Daoud, Zuniga,
`
`Hunter, and Griffin teaches download a second other digital audio file from the second
`
`library server for playback with the media player (where the service tag indicates that the
`
`requested level of service is “premium,” the load balancer directs the transaction to any one
`
`of the servers 511, 512, 513 in the premium group. The load balancers can direct the
`
`transaction to the “fastest” available server in the server pool — see Daoud, Fig. 1; col. 3, line
`
`39 — col. 4, line 6; and col. 8, lines 31-50). This renders the rejection proper, and thus the
`
`rejection stands.
`
`13. Applicant Argues: Thiagarajan does not teach a non-transitory computer readable storage
`
`medium having computer code configured to cause a computer to purge the downloaded
`
`digital audio files in dependence upon an amount of memory available. A pause buffer (e.g.,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 7
`
`configured as a circular, or ring, buffer) typically writes over data in volatile memory (RAM)
`
`and does not purge downloadedfiles. In addition, it is respectfully submitted that one of
`
`ordinary skill
`
`in the art would never interpret
`
`the data within the pause buffer to be
`
`equivalent to one or more downloaded digital audio files. For example, it is well known in
`
`the art, the data that is being streamed needs to be processed for rendering and is generally
`
`understood to be a frame or packet, rather than a digital audiofile.
`
`In Response: The examiner respectfully submits that Thiagarajan teaches the use of a
`
`digital video recorder that receives video content. The digital video recorder includes a hard
`
`disk memory so that a viewer can record the video content. The digital video recorder also
`
`includes a pause buffer to record the most recent segment of a paused broadcast program or
`
`on-demand video. This pause buffer is typically configured as a circular, or ring, buffer on
`
`the hard disk memory and the amount of time which a television program can be delayedis
`
`dependent upon how much storage space is allocated for the pause buffer. When a pause
`
`buffer reaches capacity, the content corresponding to the beginning of a pause event will be
`
`written over (Thiagarajan, page 1, paragraphs | and 2).
`
`There is nothing in Thiagarajan that suggests that the data in the buffer must be an
`
`unprocessed frame or packet rather than a digital file. Using the broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation,
`
`the examiner respectfully submits that writing over data present
`
`in the
`
`beginning of a circular queue is equivalent to purging downloaded data. Merriam-Webster’s
`
`Collegiate Dictionary 10" Edition defines “purge” as “to clear,” “to free,” or “to rid.” When
`
`the original data present in the beginning of the circular queue is written over, it is written
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 8
`
`over by different data. Thus, that original data is no longer accessible, and the queueis rid of
`
`it. This renders the rejection proper, and thus the rejection stands.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`14. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness
`
`rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the inventionis not identically disclosed or described as set forth in
`section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented andthe prior art are
`such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obviousat the time the invention was madeto a person
`having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the
`manner in which the invention was made.
`
`15. Claims 46 and 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Daoud
`
`et al. (U.S. 7,984,147) in view of Zuniga (U.S. 2005/0245243) in view of Hunteret al.
`
`(U.S. 7,242,809) and further in view of Griffin (U.S. 2007/0124331).
`
`Zuniga and Hunter werecited in the IDS filed on 17 August 2012.
`
`16. With respect to claim 46, Daoud teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium
`
`including computer readable code, which when executed by a computer, causes said
`
`computer to: send a request to a network-based server,
`
`the request including a unique
`
`identifier (Daoud, Fig. 2; col. 4, lines 6-22); load a list of library servers received from the
`
`network-based server, the list of library servers determined in dependence upon the unique
`
`identifier (Daoud, Fig. 6; col. 8, lines 31-50); maintain service level statistics for each library
`
`server in the list of library servers (Daoud,Fig. 4; col. 6, lines 22-44); select a first library
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 9
`
`server from the list of library servers in dependence uponthe service level statistics, the first
`
`library server (Daoud,col. 6, lines 45-63)
`
`Daoud does not explicitly teach identifying an audio stream.
`
`However, Zuniga teaches identifying an audio stream (Zuniga, page 5, paragraph 55).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify Daoud in view of Zuniga in order to enable identifying an audio stream.
`
`One would be motivated to do so in order to provide better bandwidth use and reduce or
`
`eliminate the need to transmit large audio segments to a client device by assigning an
`
`identifier to the audio segment and the audio segment is broken into several audio files
`
`(Zuniga, page 2, paragraph 20).
`
`The combination of Daoud and Zuniga does not explicitly teach having a plurality of
`
`digital audio files, each digital audio file in the plurality of digital audio files including a
`
`different segment of the audio stream.
`
`However, Hunter teaches having a plurality of digital audio files, each digital audio file in
`
`the plurality of digital audio files including a different segment of the audio stream (Hunter,
`
`col. 15, lines 29-48).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud and Zuniga in view of Hunter in order to
`
`enable having a plurality of digital audio files, each digital audio file in the plurality of digital
`
`audio files including a different segment of the audio stream. One would be motivated to do
`
`so in order to provide automatic segmentation of digital files into one or more video clusters
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 10
`
`corresponding to specific events, date ranges, time ranges, chapters or any other logical way
`
`to segmentdigital files (Hunter, col. 1, lines 8-12).
`
`The combination of Daoud, Zuniga, and Hunter does not explicitly teach downloada first
`
`digital audio file from the plurality of digital audio files for playback with a media player.
`
`However, Griffin teaches downloadafirst digital audio file from the plurality of digital
`
`audio files for playback with a media player (Griffin, page 1, paragraph 3).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud, Zuniga, and Hunter in view of Griffin in
`
`order to enable downloadafirst digital audio file from the plurality of digital audio files for
`
`playback with a media player. One would be motivated to do so in order to provide a
`
`bookmark associated with the content file such that the bookmark will save the place in the
`
`content file such that
`
`the bookmark will save the place in the content file where the
`
`consumption of the content was stopped. The bookmark can be used whenthe userdesires to
`
`access the same contentat a later time either on the sameor a different user device (Griffin,
`
`page 1, paragraph 5).
`
`17.
`
`With respect to claim 55, the combination of Daoud, Zuniga, Hunter, and Griffin teaches the
`
`invention described in claim 46,
`
`including the non-transitory computer readable storage
`
`medium wherein the computer code is further configured to cause said computerto: select a
`
`second library server from the list of library servers in dependence upon the service level
`
`statistics (Daoud, Fig. 1; col. 3, line 39 — col. 4, line 6), the second library server having a
`
`copy of the plurality of digital audio files (Hunter, col. 15, lines 29-48); and download a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 11
`
`second other digital audio file from the second library server for playback with the media
`
`player (Griffin, page 1, paragraph 3).
`
`18.
`
`Claims 47 and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Daoud
`
`in view of Zuniga in view of Hunter in view of Griffin and further in view of Iida et al.
`
`(U.S. 2003/0167262).
`
`19.
`
`With respect to claim 47, Daoud teaches the invention described in claim 46, including a
`
`non-transitory computer readable storage medium including computer readable code, which
`
`when executed by a computer, causes said computer to: send a request to a network-based
`
`server, the request including a unique identifier (Daoud, Fig. 2; col. 4, lines 6-22); load a list
`
`of library servers received from the network-based server,
`
`the list of library servers
`
`determined in dependence upon the unique identifier (Daoud, Fig. 6; col. 8, lines 31-50);
`
`maintain service level statistics for each library server in the list of library servers (Daoud,
`
`Fig. 4; col. 6, lines 22-44); select a first library server from the list of library servers in
`
`dependence upon the service level statistics, the first library server (Daoud,col. 6, lines 45-
`
`63)
`
`Daoud does not explicitly teach identifying an audio stream.
`
`However, Zuniga teaches identifying an audio stream (Zuniga, page 5, paragraph 55).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify Daoudin view of Zuniga in order to enable identifying an audio stream.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 12
`
`One would be motivated to do so in order to provide better bandwidth use and reduce or
`
`eliminate the need to transmit large audio segments to a client device by assigning an
`
`identifier to the audio segment and the audio segment is broken into several audio files
`
`(Zuniga, page 2, paragraph 20).
`
`The combination of Daoud and Zuniga does not explicitly teach having a plurality of
`
`digital audio files, each digital audio file in the plurality of digital audio files including a
`
`different segment of the audio stream.
`
`However, Hunter teaches having a plurality of digital audio files, each digital audiofile in
`
`the plurality of digital audio files including a different segment of the audio stream (Hunter,
`
`col. 15, lines 29-48).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud and Zuniga in view of Hunter in order to
`
`enable having a plurality of digital audio files, each digital audio file in the plurality of digital
`
`audio files including a different segment of the audio stream. One would be motivated to do
`
`so in order to provide automatic segmentation of digital files into one or more video clusters
`
`corresponding to specific events, date ranges, time ranges, chapters or any other logical way
`
`to segmentdigital files (Hunter, col. 1, lines 8-12).
`
`The combination of Daoud, Zuniga, and Hunter does notexplicitly teach downloada first
`
`digital audio file from the plurality of digital audio files for playback with a media player.
`
`However, Griffin teaches downloadafirst digital audio file from the plurality of digital
`
`audio files for playback with a media player (Griffin, page 1, paragraph 3).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 13
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud, Zuniga, and Hunter in view of Griffin in
`
`order to enable downloadafirst digital audio file from the plurality of digital audio files for
`
`playback with a media player. One would be motivated to do so in order to provide a
`
`bookmark associated with the content file such that the bookmark will save the place in the
`
`content file such that
`
`the bookmark will save the place in the content file where the
`
`consumption of the content was stopped. The bookmark can be used when the user desires to
`
`access the same contentat a later time either on the sameor a different user device (Griffin,
`
`page 1, paragraph 5).
`
`The combination of Daoud, Zuniga, Hunter, and Griffin does not explicitly teach the non-
`
`transitory computer readable storage medium wherein the unique identifier is an ISBN
`
`number.
`
`However, lida teaches the non-transitory computer readable storage medium wherein the
`
`unique identifier is an ISBN number(lida, page 7, paragraph 77).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud, Zuniga, Hunter, and Griffin in view of lida
`
`in order to enable the non-transitory computer readable storage medium wherein the unique
`
`identifier is an ISBN number. One would be motivated to do so in order to perform
`
`communications with a plurality of information search sites via a network, requesting each of
`
`said for an information search, and receiving a search result of the information search (lida,
`
`page 1, paragraph 9).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 14
`
`20.
`
`With respect to claim 56,
`
`the combination of Daoud, Zuniga, Hunter, Griffin, and lida
`
`teaches the invention described in claim 46, including the non-transitory computer readable
`
`storage medium wherein the request includes login information (lida, page 7, paragraph 77).
`
`21.
`
`Claim 48 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Daoud in view
`
`of Zuniga in view of Hunter in view of Griffin in view of Iida and further in view of
`
`Wonget al. (U.S. 7,721,301).
`
`22.
`
`With respect to claim 48, Daoud teaches the invention described in claim 47, including a
`
`non-transitory computer readable storage medium including computer readable code, which
`
`when executed by a computer, causes said computer to: send a request to a network-based
`
`server, the request including a unique identifier (Daoud, Fig. 2; col. 4, lines 6-22); load a list
`
`of library servers received from the network-based server,
`
`the list of library servers
`
`determined in dependence upon the unique identifier (Daoud, Fig. 6; col. 8, lines 31-50);
`
`maintain service level statistics for each library server in the list of library servers (Daoud,
`
`Fig. 4; col. 6, lines 22-44); select a first library server from the list of library servers in
`
`dependence upon the service level statistics, the first library server (Daoud,col. 6, lines 45-
`
`63)
`
`Daoud does not explicitly teach identifying an audio stream.
`
`However, Zuniga teaches identifying an audio stream (Zuniga, page 5, paragraph 55).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 15
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify Daoudin view of Zuniga in order to enable identifying an audio stream.
`
`One would be motivated to do so in order to provide better bandwidth use and reduce or
`
`eliminate the need to transmit large audio segments to a client device by assigning an
`
`identifier to the audio segment and the audio segment is broken into several audio files
`
`(Zuniga, page 2, paragraph 20).
`
`The combination of Daoud and Zuniga does not explicitly teach having a plurality of
`
`digital audio files, each digital audio file in the plurality of digital audio files including a
`
`different segment of the audio stream.
`
`However, Hunter teaches having a plurality of digital audio files, each digital audio file in
`
`the plurality of digital audio files including a different segment of the audio stream (Hunter,
`
`col. 15, lines 29-48).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud and Zuniga in view of Hunter in order to
`
`enable having a plurality of digital audio files, each digital audiofile in the plurality of digital
`
`audio files including a different segment of the audio stream. One would be motivated to do
`
`so in order to provide automatic segmentation of digital files into one or more video clusters
`
`corresponding to specific events, date ranges, time ranges, chapters or any other logical way
`
`to segmentdigital files (Hunter, col. 1, lines 8-12).
`
`The combination of Daoud, Zuniga, and Hunter does not explicitly teach downloada first
`
`digital audio file from the plurality of digital audio files for playback with a media player.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 16
`
`However, Griffin teaches downloadafirst digital audio file from the plurality of digital
`
`audio files for playback with a media player (Griffin, page 1, paragraph 3).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud, Zuniga, and Hunter in view of Griffin in
`
`order to enable downloadafirst digital audio file from the plurality of digital audio files for
`
`playback with a media player. One would be motivated to do so in order to provide a
`
`bookmark associated with the content file such that the bookmark will save the place in the
`
`content file such that
`
`the bookmark will save the place in the content file where the
`
`consumption of the content was stopped. The bookmark can be used when the user desires to
`
`access the same contentat a later time either on the sameor a different user device (Griffin,
`
`page 1, paragraph 5).
`
`The combination of Daoud, Zuniga, Hunter, and Griffin does not explicitly teach the non-
`
`transitory computer readable storage medium wherein the unique identifier is an ISBN
`
`number.
`
`However, lida teaches the non-transitory computer readable storage medium wherein the
`
`unique identifier is an ISBN number(lida, page 7, paragraph 77).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud, Zuniga, Hunter, and Griffin in view oflida
`
`in order to enable the non-transitory computer readable storage medium wherein the unique
`
`identifier is an ISBN number. One would be motivated to do so in order to perform
`
`communications with a plurality of information search sites via a network, requesting each of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 17
`
`said for an information search, and receiving a search result of the information search (lida,
`
`page 1, paragraph 9).
`
`The combination of Daoud, Zuniga, Hunter, Griffin, and Iida does not explicitly teach the
`
`non-transitory computer readable storage medium wherein a size of each digital audiofile in
`
`the plurality of digital audio files is selected in dependence upon network throughputrates.
`
`However, Wong teaches the non-transitory computer readable storage medium wherein a
`
`size of each digital audio file in the plurality of digital audio files is selected in dependence
`
`upon network throughput rates (Wong,col. 7, lines 29-42).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to modify the combination of Daoud, Zuniga, Hunter, Griffin, and lida in view of
`
`Wongin order to enable the non-transitory computer readable storage medium wherein a size
`
`of each digital audio file in the plurality of digital audio files is selected in dependence upon
`
`network throughput rates. One would be motivated to do so in order to enable the computing
`
`device that stores the remote collection to intelligently scale the size of the file for the
`
`receiving device to reduce network bandwidth requirements (Wong,col. 2, lines 49-54).
`
`23.
`
`Claim 49 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Daoud in view
`
`of Zuniga in view of Hunter in view of Griffin in view of lida in view of Wong and
`
`further in view of Arons (“SpeechSkimmer: A System for Interactively Skimming
`
`Recorded Speech”).
`
`Zuniga, Hunter, and Arons were cited in the IDS filed on 17 August 2012.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/588,084
`
`Art Unit: 2441
`
`Page 18
`
`24. With respect to claim 49, Daoud teaches the invention described in claim 48, including a
`
`non-transitory computer readable storage medium including computer readable code, which
`
`when executed by a computer, causes said computer to: send a request to a network-based
`
`server, the request including a unique identifier (Daoud, Fig. 2; col. 4, lines 6-22); load a list
`
`of library servers received from the network-based server,
`
`the list of library servers
`
`determined in dependence upon the unique identifier (Daoud, Fig. 6; col. 8, lines 31-50);
`
`maintain service level statistics for each library server in the list of library servers (Daoud,
`
`Fig. 4; col. 6, lines 22-44); select a first library server from the list of library servers in
`
`dependence upon the service level statistics, the first library server (Daoud,col. 6, lines 45-
`
`63)
`
`Daoud does not explicitly teach identifying an audio stream.
`
`However, Zuniga teache