Patent Application 18545819 - VIDEO EDITING METHOD AND APPARATUS ELECTRONIC - Rejection

Patent Application 18545819 - VIDEO EDITING METHOD AND APPARATUS ELECTRONIC

Title: VIDEO EDITING METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Application Information

• Invention Title: VIDEO EDITING METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
• Application Number: 18545819
• Submission Date: 2025-05-16T00:00:00.000Z
• Effective Filing Date: 2023-12-19T00:00:00.000Z
• Filing Date: 2023-12-19T00:00:00.000Z
• National Class: 386
• National Sub-Class: 278000
• Examiner Employee Number: 82149
• Art Unit: 2484
• Tech Center: 2400

Rejection Summary

• 102 Rejections: 0
• 103 Rejections: 3

Cited Patents

The following patents were cited in the rejection:

• US 0312948🔗
• US 0104259🔗

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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 8-10, Applicant argues that Haley does not disclose “controlling, in response to a sliding operation in the editing segment shifting area, a plurality of editing segments displayed in the editing segment shift area to move synchronously along a sliding direction of the sliding, and when the sliding operation ends, taking an editing segment moved to a preset selection position in the editing segment shift area as a first editing segment.”
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that, at least in [0121], Haley teaches “the user can scroll back and forth across the video scrubber tool 356 (which may be thought of, for purposes of the user interface 111, as a graphical representation for the video timeline 133) and/or the audio scrubber tool 353 (a graphical representation for the audio timeline 138)” (emphasis added). By “scroll back and forth across the video scrubber tool 356”, Haley clearly means the user can move a display of any currently displayed segments in tool 356 to a different part where other segments are displayed. As such, any segments in between are moved or slid synchronously along a scrolling (or sliding) direction of the scrolling (or sliding). Further, when the scrolling ends, the display would stop at any segment that the user intends to scroll to. That segment where the display stops is the new editing segment as a first editing segment.
As such, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 are not persuasive.
 On pages 10, Applicant argues that Angquist does not disclose "updating an audio data of the second editing segment based on a modified caption content, and adjusting a duration of the second editing segment according to an updated audio data."
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Angquist teaches at least in [0034] that caption, video, and audio data can be concurrently manipulated as a single group of objects in timeline. In [0037], Angquist teaches that the user can move them together to a different position, thus the caption of the current segment has been removed, the audio associated with the segment also moved according to the operation.
With respect to the limitation of “adjusting a duration of the second editing segment according to an updated audio data,” Examiner respectfully submits that the limitation recites “an updated audio data”, not “the updated audio data”, which means “an updated audio data” is not related to the audio data updated according to the caption modification operation previously recited. Thus, Angquist teaches in [0059]: “…a user could open up the media object 1003 in timeline 104 and apply trim edits to either of media objects 1005 and 1006. Modifications to the trimmed range of these objects will affect the total range of the media object 1003 …” (emphasis added). Therefore, any update on the audio components in either object 1005 or object 1006 will have the total range of the media object 1003, which is the second editing segment updated.
Applicant’s arguments are therefore not persuasive.
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.

Claims 1, 6-9, 12, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rady (US 9,583,140 B1 – hereinafter Rady) and Haley et al. (US 2021/0312948 A1 – hereinafter Haley).
Regarding claim 1, Rady discloses a video editing method, comprising: displaying a material filling interface of a target editing video (Fig. 1; column 9, line 63 – column 10, line 9 – a video editor interface for filling material, which is a media asset into a timespan of a target editing video); wherein the target editing video includes a plurality of editing segments (Fig. 1; column 9, line 63 – column 10, line 9 – the target editing video has a plurality of editing segments within its timespan indicated by timeline 130, for example each segment is defined by a pair of gridlines 132), and the material filling interface includes a video preview area (Fig. 1; column 9, line 63 – column 10, line 9; column 10, lines 26-41 – a video preview area 120), an editing segment shift area (Fig. 1; column 10, lines 23-25, 52-53 – timeline area can be used to move progress indicator to a new editing segment) and a multimedia material selection area (Fig. 1; column 9, line 63 – column 10, line 9 – media asset area 110); controlling a plurality of editing segments displayed in the editing shift area to move synchronously so as to shift a selected first editing segment among the plurality of editing segments in response to a shifting operation in the editing segment shifting area (Fig. 1; column 10, lines 6-9 – via the zoom control 131), the first editing segment is an editing segment located at a preset selection position of the editing segment (Fig. 1; column 10, lines 23-25, 52-53 – moving the progress indicator to a selected editing segment); filling a first material into the first editing segment in response to a selection operation of the first material in the multimedia material selection area, so that the first editing segment in the target editing video presents the first material (Fig. 1; column 10, lines 23-25, 52-53 – by dragging and dropping a media asset selected from area 110 to either the preview area 120 or into the timeline 130); and playing the target editing video in the video preview area in response to a play triggering operation of the target editing video (Fig. 1; column 10, lines 26-41 – playing the target editing video in stage area 120 in response to the user selecting a play button control 140).
However, Rady does not disclose a plurality of editing segments are presented in the editing segment shift area in a form of an image; controlling, in response to a sliding operation in the editing segment shifting area, a plurality of editing segments displayed in the editing segment shift area to move synchronously along a sliding direction of the sliding, and when the sliding operation ends, taking an editing segment moved to a preset selection position in the editing segment shift area as a first editing segment.
Haley discloses a plurality of editing segments are presented in an editing segment shift area in a form of an image (Figs. 3E, 3G; Fig. 8; [0121] – segments of video are presented in an area of a timeline in a form of frame images); controlling, in response to a sliding operation in the editing segment shifting area, a plurality of editing segments displayed in the editing segment shift area to move synchronously along a sliding direction of the sliding, and when the sliding operation ends, taking an editing segment moved to a preset selection position in the editing segment shift area as a first editing segment (Figs. 3E, 3G; Fig. 8 – in response to a scrolling operation, a sequence of frame images from segments of the video scrolls, i.e. the frames move synchronously from a first position to a second position, which is a preset selection position to display a second segment of video).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Haley into the method taught by Rady to assist the user in navigating the video segments, i.e. at frame level.
Regarding claim 6, Rady also discloses, after playing the target editing video in the video preview area: shifting a current editing segment displayed for play in the video preview area to a selected state (column 10, lines 26-41 – in a loop state).
Regarding claim 7, Rady also discloses the step of filling the first material into the first editing segment includes: replacing an original material filled in the first editing segment with the first material (column 11, lines 6-19 – by deleting and selecting a new media asset).
Regarding claim 8, Rady also discloses, after replacing the original material filled in the first editing segment with the first material: resetting a material filled in the first editing segment to the original material in response to a material reset operation on the first editing segment (column 11, lines 6-19 – by undoing).
Regarding claim 9, Rady also discloses, after replacing the original material filled in the first editing segment with the first material: displaying the original material at a preset position in the multimedia material selection area for selection by a user (column 11, lines 6-19 – the material is displayed in the selection area).
Claim 12 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 in view of Rady also disclosing an electronic device (Fig. 11) comprising: at least one processor (Fig. 11 – processor 1104); a memory configured to store one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to perform a video editing method as recited (Fig. 1; column 47, lines 51-62 – memory 1106).
Claim 17 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above in view of Rady also disclosing a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon that, when executed by a processor, performs a video editing method as recited.
Claims 3-5, 14-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rady and Haley as applied to claims 1, 6-9, 12, and 17 above, and further in view of Martin (US 9,917,957 B1 – hereinafter Martin).
Regarding claim 3, see the teachings of Rady and Haley as discussed in claim 1 above. Rady also discloses filling the first material into the first editing segment so that the first editing segment in the target editing video presents the first material includes: resizing the first material to obtain a second material, and filling the second material into the first editing segment, so that the first editing segment in the target editing segment presents the second material (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 2 – resizing the asset).
However, Rady and Haley do not disclose the resizing comprising cropping using a preset cropping rule.
Martin discloses resizing a media asset by cropping using a preset cropping rule (column 5, line 62 – column 6, line 17).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate cropping operation taught by Martin into resizing the asset taught by Rady and Haley to make the asset fit into the space while cutting out unwanted parts of the asset.
Regarding claim 4, see the teachings of Rady and Haley as discussed in claim 1 above. Rady also discloses, before filling the first material into the first editing segment: displaying a resizing interface of the first material (column 10, line 62 – column 11, line 19 – displaying an interface having various controls for manipulations for the assets, including resizing the asset); resizing the first material to obtain a second material in response to a resizing operation in the resizing interface (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 2 – resizing the asset); wherein the step of filling the first material into the first editing segment so that the first editing segment in the target editing video presents the first material includes: filling the second material into the first editing segment in response to a filling operation in the resizing interface, so that the first editing segment in the target editing segment presents the second material (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 2 – filling the video with the resized media asset).
However, Rady and Haley do not disclose the resizing comprising cropping a cropping interface.
Martin discloses resizing a media asset by cropping using a cropping interface (column 5, line 62 – column 6, line 17).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate cropping operation taught by Martin into the resizing interface taught by Rady and Haley to provide the user with controls make the asset fit into the space while cutting out unwanted parts of the asset.
Regarding claim 5, see the teachings of Rady, Haley, and Martin as discussed in claim 3 above. Rady also discloses the first material includes a video material (column 3, lines 4-8 – media assets include video clips), and the method further comprises, after filling the second material into the first editing segment (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 2 – filling the video with the resized media asset, which is, in view of Martin, the cropped second material): extending the second material into a third material based on the first material in response to an extension operation on the first editing segment, and filling the third material into the first editing segment to extend the first editing segment (column 10, lines 21-25 – extending the timespan of the media asset); and shortening an editing segment adjacent to the first editing segment in the target editing video (column 10, lines 21-25 – shortening the timespan of the media asset adjacent to the first editing segment).
Claim 14 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 3 above.
Claim 15 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 4 above.
Claim 16 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 5 above.
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 3 above.
Claim 20 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 4 above.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rady and Haley as applied to claims 1-2, 6-9, 12-13, and 17-18 above, and further in view of Angquist et al. (US 2019/0104259 A1 – hereinafter Angquist).
Regarding claim 10, see the teachings of Rady and Haley as discussed in claim 1 above. However, Rady and Haley do not disclose modifying a caption content of a second editing segment in response to a caption modification operation of the second editing segment in the target editing video; and updating an audio data of the second editing segment based on a modified caption content, and adjusting a duration of the second editing segment according to an updated audio data.
Angquist discloses modifying a caption content of an editing segment in response to a caption modification operation of the editing segment in a target editing video ([0039]); and updating an audio data of the second editing segment based on a modified caption content ([0059]), and adjusting a duration of the second editing segment according to an updated audio data ([0038]; [0059]; Fig. 2B).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Angquist into the second editing segment in the method taught by Rady and Haley to allow the user to edit the content of the caption thus enhancing the editing interface of the method.
Regarding claim 11, see the teachings of Rady and Haley as discussed in claim 1 above. However, Rady and Haley do not disclose adjusting a caption style of a third editing segment in response to a caption style adjustment operation on the third editing segment in the target editing video.
Angquist discloses adjusting a caption style of an editing segment in response to a caption style adjustment operation on the editing segment in a target editing video. (Fig. 6B; [0047]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Angquist into the third editing segment in the method taught by Rady and Haley to allow the user format the caption in a desired style thus enhancing the editing interface of the method.
Conclusion
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 HUNG Q DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1116. The examiner can normally be reached IFT.
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 Q Tran can be reached on 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.




/HUNG Q DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484