Ex Parte Bunch

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Oct 15, 2014

10870469 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 15, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte CLINTON D. BUNCH
____________________

Appeal 2012-0031791
Application 10/870,4692
Technology Center 2400
____________________

Before JOSEPH A. FISCHETTI, BIBHU R. MOHANTY, and
NINA L. MEDLOCK, Administrative Patent Judges.

MEDLOCK, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final
rejection of claims 70–76, 78, and 79. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b).
We AFFIRM.

1 Our decision references Appellant’s Appeal Brief (“Br.,” filed June 17,
2011) and the Examiner’s Answer (“Ans.,” mailed September 16, 2011).
2 Appellant identifies the real party in interest as “Accountability
International, Inc., assignee and owner of all right, title and interest, having
an a place of business in the city of Dallas and an address of P.O.
Box 516382, Dallas, Texas 75251.” Br. 4.
Appeal 2012-003179
Application 10/870,469

2
CLAIMED INVENTION
Appellant’s claimed invention “relates generally to information
processing, and in particular to systems and methods for monitoring access
and usage of individual computer systems and local area networks (‘LANS’)
connected to larger open networks (wide area networks or ‘WANS’),
including the Internet” (Spec., para. [0002]).
Claim 70, reproduced below, is illustrative of the subject matter on
appeal:
70. A system for monitoring access to a network, the
system comprising:
a computer connected to the network;
time guidelines stored at the computer, the time
guidelines specifying an amount of authorized time a user of
the computer has remaining on the network;
a timer stored on the computer, the timer maintaining an
internal time at the computer; and
a user display application stored on the computer, the
user display application providing, prior to a violation of the
time guidelines, based upon the time guidelines and the internal
time, a visual display to the user of the amount of authorized
time the user of the computer has remaining on the network.

REJECTION
Claims 7076, 78, and 79 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Freund (US 5,987,611, iss. Nov. 16, 1999) and Zhao
(US 6,035,404, iss. Mar. 7, 2000).

ANALYSIS
Appellant argues claims 7076, 78, and 79 as a group (Br. 6–12). We
select claim 70 as representative. The remaining claims stand or fall with
claim 70. 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2008).
Appeal 2012-003179
Application 10/870,469

3
We are not persuaded by Appellant’s arguments that the Examiner
erred in rejecting claim 70 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) because the
combination of Freund and Zhao fails to disclose or suggest “a user display
application . . . providing, prior to a violation of the time guidelines, . . . a
visual display to the user of the amount of authorized time the user of the
computer has remaining on the network,” as recited in claim 70 (Br. 8–12).
Instead, we agree with, and adopt the Examiner’s response to Appellant’s
argument as set forth at pages 6 through 8 of the Answer.
Freund discloses a system for monitoring access to a network, e.g., the
Internet, and describes that rules may be established to govern Internet
access (Freund, col. 1, ll. 2430). Freund describes at column 5, lines 56–
63, cited by the Examiner (Ans. 5), that a client monitor manages activities
that an application is allowed to do and can stop the application from
accessing the Internet and/or warn the user if the application violates a rule.
The client monitor also can be used to limit the amount of time that an
application can use the Internet (see, e.g., Freund, col. 10, ll. 5–13 and
Fig. 7B).
The Examiner acknowledges that Freund does not explicitly teach the
concept of warning a user prior to the violation of guidelines or explicitly tie
the concept of warning a user with time limits for using an application
(Ans. 6–7). And the Examiner cites Zhao to cure the deficiency of Freund
(id.). Zhao discloses a system in which a current Internet user is given a
time limit for logging off and notified of the time left, after which a new user
is logged on (Zhao, col. 7, ll. 7–10).
In our view, modifying Freund to provide an indication, e.g., a
warning, prior to the expiration of the time limit, of the amount of time that a
Appeal 2012-003179
Application 10/870,469

4
user has remaining on a network, as taught by Zhao, is nothing more than a
combination of prior art elements according to their established functions,
and yields a predictable result. Therefore, it would have been obvious at the
time of Appellant’s invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007) (“The
combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be
obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results”).
In view of the foregoing, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of
claim 70 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). We also sustain the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 71–76, 78, and 79, which stand or fall with claim 70.

DECISION
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 70–76, 78, and 79 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) is affirmed.
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

llw