Ex Parte BockingDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardDec 16, 201411070133 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 16, 2014) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ______________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ______________ Ex parte ANDREW BOCKING ______________ Appeal 2012-004529 Application 11/070,133 Technology Center 2600 ______________ Before JEFFREY S. SMITH, STANLEY M. WEINBERG, and JOHNNY A. KUMAR, Administrative Patent Judges. KUMAR, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final rejection of claims 57–78. Claims 1–56 are cancelled. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm. Appeal 2012-004529 Application 11/070,133 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellant’s invention relates to various modes that can be set in a cell phone—NORMAL mode, SILENT mode, LOUD mode, OFF mode, and TELEPHONE ONLY mode. See non-textual visual outputs (i.e., icons) in Figure 3. Claim 57 is exemplary with disputed language highlighted: 57. A method of determining an operational mode for a handheld electronic device, the handheld electronic device including a display apparatus, an input apparatus, at least one output apparatus and a processor apparatus, the processor apparatus adapted to provide output signals to said at least one output apparatus when an occurrence of a predetermined event is detected, the method comprising: displaying a plurality of non-textual visual outputs at said display device, each one of said plurality of non-textual visual outputs associated with a respective one of a plurality of output modes for said at least one output apparatus; receiving input from said input apparatus that a given one of said plurality of non-textual visual outputs has been selected, such that an associated one of said plurality of output modes becomes a currently active output mode; changing a profiles icon based on said input to said given one of said plurality of non-textual visual outputs such that an appearance of said profiles icon is indicative of said currently active output mode; and, when said occurrence of said predetermined event is detected, providing said output signals in accordance with said currently active output mode as visually represented by said profiles icon. Appeal 2012-004529 Application 11/070,133 3 The Examiner’s Rejection The Examiner rejected claims 57–78 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Parker (US 2002/0116541 A1, Aug. 22, 2002) and Kim (US 2001/0006388 A1, July 5, 2001). Ans. 5–10. ANALYSIS Claims 57 and 68 are independent—they both have the disputed feature (changing a profiles icon based on said input to said given one of said plurality of non-textual visual outputs such that an appearance of said profiles icon is indicative of said currently active output mode). The Examiner cited Parker for all the claim elements except for the icons (non- textual visual outputs). The Examiner relied upon Kim (Fig. 6) for the element missing in Parker. Ans. 5–6. The Examiner finds, and we agree, Kim teaches “the selected icon based on the user's input (par. 66, lines 4-8), that is currently active . . . now has an inverted color to distinguish it from other available icons (par. 66, lines 1-4); the selected icon's appearance changes,” and Parker teaches “visual indication such as a check mark changes the appearance of the textual notification mode otherwise it will not serve as an indicator; there will be no way to differentiate the current textual notification mode from other notification modes.” Ans. 11. In the Reply Brief, the Appellant first alleges, “There is no disclosure of changing an appearance of a profiles icon to a given one of a plurality of non-textual visual outputs, based on input that a given one of a plurality of non-textual inputs outputs have been selected.” Reply Br. 6–7. However, Appellant’s arguments are not commensurate with the scope of the claim because the claim does not recite this feature. Appellant then argues, “While Appeal 2012-004529 Application 11/070,133 4 the cited passages of Kim disclose icons corresponding to respective menu items displayed in a display window, each icon appears to be associated with a different application, and the respective application is launched by selecting a given icon.” Id. at 7 (emphasis ours). The claim does not preclude “different applications.” Finally, Appellant argues that “the issue at hand is not whether the appearance of an icon changes, but HOW it changes.” Id. at 8. However, Appellant’s arguments are not commensurate with the scope of the claim because the claim does not recite this feature. We adopt as our own (1) the findings and reasons set forth by the Examiner in the action from which this appeal is taken and (2) the reasons set forth by the Examiner in the Examiner’s Answer in response to Appellant’s Appeal Brief. Ans. 10–12. We have considered Appellant’s Reply Brief but find it unpersuasive to rebut the Examiner’s responses. DECISION The Examiner did not err in rejecting claims 57–78 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv). AFFIRMED msc Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation