Ex Parte COFFLAND

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 1, 2011

09405031 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 1, 2011)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
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
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
09/405,031 09/24/1999 DOUGLAS R. COFFLAND IL-10360 9034
7590 03/01/2011
LLOYD E DAKIN JR
ASSISTANT LABORATORY COUNSEL
LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY
P O BOX 808-L-703
LIVERMORE, CA 94551
EXAMINER
BETIT, JACOB F
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2169
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/01/2011 PAPER
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.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________________

Ex parte DOUGLAS R. COFFLAND
____________________

Appeal 2009-008051
Application 09/405,031
Technology Center 2100
____________________

Before JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO, ROBERT E. NAPPI, and
CARLA M. KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judges.

KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL1
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of
claims 1-30. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.

1 The two-month time period for filing an appeal or commencing a civil
action, as recited in 37 C.F.R. § 1.304, or for filing a request for rehearing,
as recited in 37 C.F.R. § 41.52, begins to run from the “MAIL DATE”
(paper delivery mode) or the “NOTIFICATION DATE” (electronic delivery
mode) shown on the PTOL-90A cover letter attached to this decision.
Appeal 2009-008051
Application 09/405,031

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant’s claimed invention relates to using a media signal to
generate a keyword for multimedia encryption (Spec. 4:2-5:2).
Independent claim 1, reproduced below, is representative of the
subject matter on appeal:
1. A system adapted for use for multimedia encryption
comprising:

acquisition means for acquiring a media signal, said acquisition
means including a random noise transducer for acquiring
random noise only, said random noise being unpredictable from
one moment to the next and not being chaotic noise;

data compression means coupled to said acquisition means to
receive and compress said media signal containing random
noise that is unpredictable from one moment to the next and not
being chaotic noise into a compressed data stream;

data acquisition means coupled to said data compression means
to receive and select a set of data from the compressed data
stream; and

hashing means coupled to said data acquisition means to
receive and hash the set of data into a keyword.

REJECTIONS
The Examiner rejected claims 1-30 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The Examiner rejected claims 1-30 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite.
Appellant contends claims 1-30 are described in the specification such
that a person skilled in the art would recognize Appellant had possession of
Appeal 2009-008051
Application 09/405,031

3
the claimed invention (App. Br. 10).2 Appellant also contends claims 1-30
are definite and no essential steps are omitted (App. Br. 14, 16).

ANALYSIS
Rejection under § 112, first paragraph
The Examiner finds Appellant’s Specification does not describe
claims 1-30 so as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the art Appellant
had possession of the claimed invention (Ans. 3). In particular, the
Examiner finds the limitation “random noise being unpredictable from one
moment to the next,” as recited in claims 1, 10, 17, and 24, is unsupported
by the Specification (Ans. 4). Although the Specification discloses using
white Gaussian noise, the Examiner argues white Gaussian noise is
predictable because over time the noise values will occur close to a
statistical mean (Ans. 4-5). We disagree.
As Appellant asserts, the Specification discloses “Random noise, such
as white Gaussian noise, is completely unpredictable from one moment to a
next . . .” (App. Br. 11; Spec. 7:13-14). This is supported by the article titled
“Design of Random Noise Generator Using SW Algorithm,” by Hong et al.
(App. Br., Evidence Appendix, 1). Hong discloses “A popular method for
generating random numbers using a natural phenomenon is the electronic
amplification and sampling of a thermal or Gaussian noise signal” (Hong, p.
9). The Examiner’s reliance on a statistical mean of the Gaussian curve to
show the predictability of white Gaussian noise is misplaced (Ans. 5).
While the noise values may coalesce around a mean over a period of time,

2 Appellant’s Amended Brief filed February 5, 2009, is referenced
throughout this opinion.
Appeal 2009-008051
Application 09/405,031

4
white Gaussian noise is “unpredictable from one moment to the next,” as
recited in claims 1, 10, 17, and 24 (emphasis added). Therefore, Appellant
was in possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was
filed.
Rejection under § 112, second paragraph
The Examiner finds claims 1-30 are incomplete for omitting essential
steps, elements, or instructions (Ans. 6). In particular, the Examiner notes
claims 1, 10, 17, and 24 recite in their respective preambles the language
“adapted for use for multimedia encryption,” but finds these claims omit the
steps, elements, or instructions of actually encrypting multimedia data (Ans.
6-7). However, the language “adapted for use for multimedia encryption”
does not require the claims recite steps relating to actual encryption. Rather,
the claims are directed to generating a keyword that is useful in multimedia
encryption, in accordance with the language “for use.” Therefore, claims 1-
30 are not incomplete, and thus, are not indefinite.

DECISION
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-30 is reversed.

REVERSED

kis
LLOYD E DAKIN JR
ASSISTANT LABORATORY COUNSEL
LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY
P O BOX 808-L-703
LIVERMORE, CA 94551