Ex Parte Chou et al

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Apr 28, 2016

11773942 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Apr. 28, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
111773,942 0710512007 Hung-Te Chou
27765 7590 05/02/2016
NORTH AMERICA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
P.O. BOX506
MERRIFIELD, VA 22116
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
PCLP0021USA 2268
EXAMINER
MESA,JOSEM
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2484
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
05/02/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
Patent.admin.uspto.Rcv@naipo.com
mis.ap.uspto@naipo.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte HUNG-TE CHOU, CHUN-MING SU, HUNG-TE LIN, YUNG-
CHAO TSENG, CHIH-CHUNG CHANG, KUANG-CHE WU,
MENG-JYI SHIEH and KUO-HSIN YANG
Appeal2014-007190
Application 11/773,942
Technology Center 2400
Before CARLA M. KRIVAK, JEFFREY S. SMITH, and
AARON W. MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.
SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal2014-007190
Application 11/773,942
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's
rejection of claims 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 14--25. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We affirm.
Illustrative Claim
Claim 1. A method for activating video-audio data in an optical disc,
the method comprising:
determining whether a first activation signal is received or not,
wherein the first activation signal is provided by an information platform
connected through a network and the first activation signal is an
identification code;
a program in the optical disc allowing access to a first featured content
of the video-audio data when the first activation signal is not received; and
the program in the optical disc allowing access to a second featured
content of the video-audio data when the first activation signal is received,
wherein the program in the optical disc allows access according to a case
selected from the group consisting of:
the program in the optical disc allowing access to the first
featured content of the video-audio data comprises allowing
access to partial contents of the video-audio data, and the
program in the optical disc allowing access to the second
featured content of the video-audio data comprises allowing
access to full contents of the video-audio data;
the program in the optical disc allowing access to the first
featured content of the video-audio data comprises allowing
access to a first partially-featured content of the video-audio
data, and the program in the optical disc allowing access to the
second featured content of the video-audio data comprises
allowing access to a second partially-featured content of the
video-audio data;
2
Appeal2014-007190
Application 11/773,942
the program in the optical disc allowing access to the first
featured content of the video-audio data comprises allowing
access to a first partially-featured content of the video-audio
data, and the program in the optical disc allowing access to the
second featured content of the video-audio data comprises
allowing access to a second partially-featured content of the
video-audio data within a predetermined period;
the program in the optical disc allowing access to the first
featured content of the video-audio data comprises allowing
access to full contents of the video-audio data within a first
predetermined period, and the program in the optical disc
allowing access to the second featured content of the video-
audio data comprises allowing access to the full contents of the
video-audio data within a second predetermined period; and
the program in the optical disc allowing access to the first
featured content of the video-audio data comprises allowing
playing full contents of the video-audio data according to a first
display standard, and the program in the optical disc allowing
access to the second featured content of the video-audio data
comprises allowing playing the full contents of the video-audio
data according to a second display standard.
T sumagari
Jung
Prior Art
US 2003/06161615 Al Aug. 28, 2003
US 2006/0280048 Al Dec. 14, 2006
Examiner's Rejections
Claims 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 14-25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Jung and Tsumagari.
3
Appeal2014-007190
Application 11/773,942
ANALYSIS
We adopt the findings of fact made by the Examiner in the Final
Action and Examiner's Answer as our own. We concur with the response
by the Examiner to Appellants' contentions raised in the Appeal Brief for
the reasons given in the Examiner's Answer. We highlight the following for
emphasis.
In the Reply Brief, Appellants make several contentions that are not
commensurate with the scope of claim 1. For example, Appellants contend
the claimed identification code is similar to a password and is used for
unlocking contents. Reply Br. 4--5. However, claim 1 does not recite using
an identification code for unlocking contents. Further, Appellants'
Specification does not provide a definition of "identification code" that
excludes an identification for an actor as taught by Jung.
Appellants also contend the claimed contents and the identification
code are stored separately. Reply Br. 5---6. However, Claim 1 only recites
an activation signal is an identification code that is either received or not.
Claim 1 does not recite storing the identification code. Appellants'
Specification does not provide a definition of "determining whether a first
activation signal is received or not" that excludes determining whether a
user's selection of an actor is received as taught by Jung.
Appellants contend the verb "activating" is not the same as the verb
"searching." Reply Br. 7-8. Appellants also contend Jung does not make
anything active. Reply Br. 8-9. Claim 1 does not recite the verb
"activating," nor recite making anything active. Rather, claim 1 recites a
"first activation signal" that "is an identification code" and allows access to
certain data when received.
4
Appeal2014-007190
Application 11/773,942
Appellants contend Jung does not grant or deny access to data
according to whether the activation signal is received. Reply Br. 9-11.
However, claim 1 recites "allowing access," not granting or denying access.
Appellants' contentions are not commensurate with the scope of claim 1.
Appellants contend the descriptors of Jung do not teach the claimed
"activation signal" that allows access to first content when not received, and
allows access to second content when received. Reply Br. 11-13. The
Examiner finds receiving a user's selection of an actor, or ''first activation
signal," allows "access to a second featured content" for the actor, while
receiving a selection for an actress when a selection for the actor is not
received, allows "access to a first featured content" for the actress "when the
first activation signal" for the actor "is not received" within the meaning of
claim 1. Ans. 29-30. Appellants contend the selection of an actress is more
analogous to the claimed "second feature content" and has nothing to do
with the claimed "first feature content." Reply Br. 13. Appellants'
contention is unsupported by persuasive evidence or argument. We agree
with the Examiner that the selection of an actor teaches a "first activation
signal" within the meaning of claim 1. We also agree that the scope of
"allowing access to a first featured content" when the "first activation signal
is not received" encompasses allowing access to content for an actress when
the user's selection of an actor is not received, but the user's selection of an
actress is received, as taught by Jung.
We sustain the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Appellants
do not provide arguments for separate patentability of claims 5, 6, 8, 9, 11,
12, and 14--25, which fall with claim 1.
5
Appeal2014-007190
Application 11/773,942
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 14--25 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). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(±).
AFFIRMED
6