Prior art

Analysis of Prior Art for U.S. Patent 11,991,234 B2

Date of Analysis: April 26, 2026

As a technical patent analyst, I have conducted a review of the prior art cited in U.S. Patent 11,991,234 B2. The following analysis details the most relevant references and their potential impact on the patent's claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102 for anticipation. An invention is anticipated if every element as set forth in a claim is found, either expressly or inherently, in a single prior art reference.

Based on the patent's own citations, the following references are most relevant:

1. U.S. Patent No. 7,987,294 B2 (Zaslavsky et al.)

• Full Citation: US 7987294B2, "Method and system for adaptive bitrate streaming of content," filed on May 29, 2008, and issued on July 26, 2011.
• Brief Description: This patent discloses a method and system for adaptive bitrate streaming of media content over a network. It describes receiving a request for a media file from a client, where the media file is divided into a plurality of chunks. The system then selects an initial bitrate and sends a first set of chunks encoded at that bitrate. Based on network conditions, subsequent chunks can be sent at different bitrates.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims:
  • Claims 1, 9, 15: Zaslavsky et al. appears to teach the core concepts of segmenting media content into smaller pieces ("chunks," analogous to "streamlets") and providing these segments at different bitrates to adapt to network conditions. This aligns with the fundamental process described in the independent claims of US 11,991,234 B2. However, a key distinction in US 11,991,234 B2 is the "muster module" and the "bidding" process for assigning encoding jobs. Zaslavsky et al. does not explicitly describe this distributed encoding management system. Therefore, while it describes the adaptive streaming aspect, it may not fully anticipate the claims due to the absence of the encoding job allocation mechanism.

2. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2005/0240659 A1 (Pabla et al.)

• Full Citation: US 20050240659A1, "System and method for providing media content to a client device," filed on April 27, 2004, and published on October 27, 2005.
• Brief Description: Pabla et al. describes a system where media content is encoded into multiple versions at different quality levels (bitrates). The content is divided into segments, and the client device can request different segments at different quality levels based on available bandwidth. The system can dynamically switch between these different quality versions during playback.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims:
  • Claims 1, 9, 15: This reference teaches the creation of multiple versions of content segments at varying bitrates for adaptive streaming, which is a central element of the claims in US 11,991,234 B2. The concept of a client requesting these different versions based on network conditions is also present. However, similar to Zaslavsky et al., Pabla et al. does not appear to disclose the specific "muster module" and the competitive "bidding" process for distributing encoding tasks among multiple host computers. The absence of this specific distributed encoding architecture would likely prevent this reference from fully anticipating the claims.

3. U.S. Patent No. 8,161,202 B2 (Van Rossum)

• Full Citation: US 8161202B2, "Method and apparatus for providing adaptive streaming of digital media," filed on November 30, 2007, and issued on April 17, 2012.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a method for adaptive streaming where a media file is divided into segments, and for each segment, multiple versions are created with different encoding parameters (e.g., bitrate). A manifest file is provided to the client which lists the available segments and their different versions. The client can then request the appropriate version of each segment based on its current network conditions and buffer status.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims:
  • Claims 1, 9, 15: Van Rossum discloses the fundamental elements of segmenting content and creating multiple bitrate versions of each segment for adaptive streaming, which is consistent with the claims of US 11,991,234 B2. The use of a manifest file to communicate the available versions to the client is a common technique in this field. However, once again, the detailed description of a "muster module" that assigns encoding jobs based on a "bidding" system from a plurality of host computing modules is not present in Van Rossum. This unique feature of the encoding process in US 11,991,234 B2 appears to be the novel element not taught by this prior art reference.

Summary of Findings:

The cited prior art references, including Zaslavsky et al., Pabla et al., and Van Rossum, all describe the foundational concepts of adaptive bitrate streaming, which involve segmenting media content and creating multiple versions of these segments at different quality levels. This establishes a strong background for the general method of adaptive streaming.

However, none of these references appear to disclose the specific implementation of the encoding process as described in independent claims 1, 9, and 15 of US 11,991,234 B2. The novelty of the '234 patent seems to lie in the "muster module" and the "encoding job completion bid" mechanism. This system for distributing and managing encoding tasks across multiple host computers based on their performance and availability is a distinguishing feature that is not explicitly taught in the analyzed prior art. Therefore, while the general concept of adaptive streaming is well-established, the specific apparatus, system, and method for managing the encoding of the "streamlets" appears to be the patentable invention.