Patent Application 18536487 - METHOD TO GENERATE A DATABASE FOR - Rejection

Patent Application 18536487 - METHOD TO GENERATE A DATABASE FOR

Title: METHOD TO GENERATE A DATABASE FOR SYNCHRONIZATION OF A TEXT, A VIDEO AND/OR AUDIO MEDIA

Application Information

• Invention Title: METHOD TO GENERATE A DATABASE FOR SYNCHRONIZATION OF A TEXT, A VIDEO AND/OR AUDIO MEDIA
• Application Number: 18536487
• Submission Date: 2025-05-14T00:00:00.000Z
• Effective Filing Date: 2023-12-12T00:00:00.000Z
• Filing Date: 2023-12-12T00:00:00.000Z
• National Class: 386
• National Sub-Class: 241000
• Examiner Employee Number: 80785
• Art Unit: 2484
• Tech Center: 2400

Rejection Summary

• 102 Rejections: 1
• 103 Rejections: 0

Cited Patents

No patents were cited in this rejection.

Office Action Text

    DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA  or AIA  Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.

The following is a quotation of pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.

Claims 2-8 and 10-11 do not incorporate all the limitations of the claim to which it refers to. The claims merely recite “method according to claim 1” or “method according to the previous claim” without all the limitations of the claims to which they depend on. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims recite “method according to the previous claim” but fail to recite which ‘previous claim’ precisely the claims are referencing to.  Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 9 and 12 objected to because of the following informalities: The claims recite “and/or audio”.  Either the symbol “/” or the word “or” should be removed since both have the same meaning. Appropriate correction is required.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b)  CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.


The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.


Claim 9 recites the limitation "by a user selection on a video and/or audio media comprising the steps" in line 2. The preamble of claim 9 indicates the computer-implemented method of claim 1 encompasses the said ‘by a user selection on a video and/or audio media’.  Claim 1 does not recite “by a user selection on a video and/or audio media’”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claim recites, “a system…comprising the system comprising” on line 2. It is unclear what applicant is trying to recite.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice.  They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.


Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bradley et al. (US Pat. No. 12, 125, 487 hereinafter referred as Bradely).
Regarding claim 1, Bradely discloses a computer-implemented method to generate a database for synchronization of a text, a video and/or audio media with a video stream to be generated using said database, comprising the steps of:
receiving an input text (see col. 7 lines 27-41 receive text transcript);
splitting the input text into text segments (see col. 14 lines 46-53 splitting text; see col. 9 lines 37-39 text strings);
clustering the text segments into at least one text group (see col. 9 lines 59-67 combine the text strings);
labelling each text segment with a sequential timestamp (see col. 9 lines 59-67, timestamp text and the text strings in chronological order); and,
storing each text segment with the label on a data record (see col. 9 lines 59-67, compile into a database of text strings, saved on a computer medium);
wherein the input text is split for each line break, tab, space, text column, or their combination (see col. 15 lines 18-24 various metadata; and see col. 17 lines 1-8 and col. 19 lines 40-46);
wherein a text group comprises at least one text segment (see col. 11 lines 54-57 text segments; see col. 13 line 66-col. 14 lines 6 text strings; see figures 6A and 6 segmentation);
wherein the text group comprises a time interval label (see col. 14 lines 46-56 text in time stamp; see col. 15 lines 11-12 time-aligned text; see col. 19 lines 40-46);
wherein the time interval of the text group corresponds to the duration of at least a portion of a video and/or audio media (see col. 14 lines 46-56 text corresponding to audio segments in the correct order; see col. 17 line 63-col. 18 line 13).
Regarding claim 2, Bradely discloses the time interval label of a text group comprises the timestamp of the first text segment and the timestamp of the last text segment (see col. 9 lines 59-col. 10 line 2).
Regarding claim 3, Bradely discloses the time interval label of a text group is provided by a user (see col. 18 line 41-col. 19 line 3).
Regarding claim 4, Bradely discloses the text group represents a movie scene, a time of day, an action line, a dialogue line, a character, a musical score, a sound effect, or a combination of any of the previous (see col. 21 lines 9-19).
Regarding claim 5, Bradely discloses the database comprises only one text group (see col. 2 lines 36-49).
Regarding claim 6, Bradely discloses the input text is generated from a speech or narration by a user to text (see col. 9 lines 37-48; col. 24 line 65-col. 25 line 4).
Regarding claim 7, Bradely discloses a pre-processing step of the input text, preferably by converting a docx, pdf, or txt file (see col. 17 lines 45-52).
Regarding claim 8, Bradely discloses the input text is a screenplay (see col. 3 lines 18-53).
Regarding claim 9, Bradely discloses a user selection on a video and/or audio media comprising the steps: selecting a frame from said video and/or audio media; identifying a timestamp of said frame; retrieving from said database the text group which comprises that timestamp; and, outputting the text group related with the selected frame (see col. 12 line 59-col. 13 line 35 and col. 25 line 53-col. 26 line 15).
Regarding claim 10, Bradely discloses receiving a text input from a user; adding the text input to a text group (see col. 18 line 41-col. 19 line 3 and lines 27-46).
Regarding claim 11, Bradely discloses receiving an audio media from a user; overlapping the received audio media with at least a portion of the audio of the video on said timestamp (see col. 13 lines 18-24 and lines 47-53 and col. 4 lines 3-19).
Regarding claim 12, the limitation of claim 12 can be found in claim 1 above. Therefore claim 12 is analyzed and rejected for the same reasons as discussed in claim 1 above. See also figures 19B and 20B.
Regarding claim 13, the limitation of claim 13 can be found in claim 1 above. Therefore claim 13 is analyzed and rejected for the same reasons as discussed in claim 1 above. See also figures 19B and 20B, and claim 11 of the applied prior art.

Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN SHIBRU whose telephone number is (571)272-7329. The examiner can normally be reached M-TR 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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, THAI TRAN can be reached at 571 272 7382. 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.





/HELEN SHIBRU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484                                                                                                                                                                                                        May 8, 2025