Ex Parte Sahota et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 8, 2010

11022898 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 8, 2010)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte RANJIT SAHOTA,
JOHN CARNEY, DAVID de ANDRADE,
and MARK KNOWLES
____________
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,8981
Technology Center 2100
____________
Decided: March 9, 2010
____________
Before LEE E. BARRETT, JAY P. LUCAS, and THU A. DANG,
Administrative Patent Judges.

BARRETT, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the final
rejection of claims 1-15, 21, and 22. We have jurisdiction pursuant to
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.

1 Filed December 22, 2004, titled "Method and System for
Transforming Content for Execution on Multiple Platforms."
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The invention
The invention relates to a method and system for acquiring and
transforming existing content (e.g., Hyper Text Markup Language HTML
content) for display and execution on multiple platforms and architectures.
In one embodiment, capture templates are created to harvest content from
disparate content sources on multiple platforms. Data is extracted from the
content from the disparate content sources using the created capture
templates that drives the extracting process. A standardized data stream is
generated from the extracted data. The standardized data stream is provided
for display on one or more different type of platforms. See Abstract.

Illustrative claim
Claim 1 is reproduced below for illustration:

1. A computer-implemented method comprising:
parsing an Hyper Text Markup Language (HTML) web page;
creating an XHTML-compliant document from the HTML web
page;
extracting content from the XHTML-compliant document using
a capture template specifying how elements of the XHTML-compliant
document are to be located for retrieval;
creating one or more extensible markup language (XML) files
or documents from the extracted content; and
transforming the XML files or documents into a displayable
format.

Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

3
The references

Cuan US 2001/0011265 A1 Aug. 2, 2001
(based on Provision Application filed Nov. 29, 1999)

Whitledge US 6,925,595 B1 Aug. 2, 2005
(filed Aug. 5, 1998)

XHTML 1.0: The Extensible HyperText Markup Language,
http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-html-in-xml-19990224/, pages 1-15
(downloaded 4/21/2009) ("W3C").

The rejection
Claims 1-15, 21, and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Whitledge, XHTML, and Cuan.
As to the independent claims, the Examiner finds that Whitledge
teaches: parsing an HTML Web page; creating one or more XML files or
documents from the parsed HTML Web pages; transforming the XML files
or documents into a displayable format; and extracting tags and attributes
from the Web pages. Final Office Action (FOA) 4.
The Examiner finds that Whitledge does not teach creating an
XHTML-compliant document from existing HTML pages and extracting
content from the XHTML document. The Examiner finds that W3C teaches
that an XHTML document is a reformulation of an HTML document as an
XML document and concludes that one of ordinary skill in the art would
have been motivated to convert the HTML document of Whitledge into an
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

4
XHTML-compliant document because XHTML is designed to be extensible
and portable. FOA 4.
The Examiner finds that Whitledge does not teach using a capture
template to specify how elements of the XHTML-compliant document are to
be located for retrieval. FOA 5. The Examiner finds that Cuan, ¶ [0076],
teaches using capture templates to format XML data for display and
concludes that it would have been obvious to combine the capture templates
of Cuan with the XHTML-compliant document of Whitledge as modified by
W3C "to merge data from various sources such that it is formatted to be
displayed in a logical and easily readable manner." FOA 5.

ISSUE
Appellants argue that while Cuan states that templates may be used to
capture, edit, and store data imported from end-users, nothing in Cuan
teaches or suggests using templates to extract data from an XHTML-
compliant document. Br. 11. It is argued that there is no suggestion of how
elements of the XHTML-compliant document are to be located for retrieval
are created. Br. 11. Appellants argue that "Cuan describes the use of two
types of templates: capture templates, which are used for capturing data
from data sources, and display templates, which are used to specify how data
is to be presented on websites" (Reply Br. 2) and the Examiner relies on the
display templates instead of capture templates. Reply Br. 2. It is argued that
"[t]he Cuan reference is silent when it comes to any discussion of capture
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

5
templates that specify how elements of XHTML-compliant document are to
be located for retrieval." Reply Br. 2.
The issue is:
Does Cuan teach or suggest "extracting content from the XHTML-
compliant document using a capture template specifying how elements of
the XHTML-compliant document are to be located for retrieval," as recited
in independent claims 1, 11, and 20? Independent claim 6 recites a similar
limitation and presents the same issue.

PRINCIPLES OF LAW
"[T]he test [for obviousness] is what the combined teachings of the
references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art."
In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981). A rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) is based on the following factual determinations: (1) the scope and
content of the prior art; (2) the level of ordinary skill in the art; (3) the
differences between the claimed invention and the prior art; and (4) any
objective indicia of non-obviousness. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
550 U.S. 398, 399 (2007) (citing Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1,
17-18 (1966)). All claim limitations must be taught or suggested.

FINDINGS OF FACT
Appellants' invention
The following description of "a capture template specifying how
elements of the XHTML-compliant document are to be located for retrieval"
is important for understanding the patentability issue.
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

6
The Specification generally describes the invention as follows:

A method and system are described for acquiring and
transforming existing content (e.g., Hyper Text Markup Language
HTML content) for display and execution on multiple platforms and
architectures. In one embodiment, capture templates are created to
harvest content from disparate content sources on multiple platforms.
Data is extracted from the content from the disparate content sources
using the created capture templates that drives extracting process.

¶ [0024]. "[C]apture templates are created to harvest content from
disparate content sources on multiple platforms." ¶ [0039]; block 152 in
Figure 1B. "[D]ata from the content is extracted using the created
capture templates." ¶ [0041]; block 154 [mislabeled 152] in Figure 1B.
The Web page content wizard 558 is an authoring tool to create Web
page templates for use by the syndication feed manager 556:

To create web page templates, web page content wizard 558 allows
content to be marked up and mapped to a template for use by
syndication feed manager 556. Web page content wizard 558 starts
with a web page selected by a user and displays the web page with the
html structure revealed. The user can select content such as, for
example, "the second paragraph' or the "table2, row 3, cell 4" and
label it for inclusion into a separate template.

A web page capture template is built as the user progresses, starting
with a root node that references the user elected web page, and
progressing to sub nodes that reference user elected content on the
web page, and further to other web pages referenced from the root
page, or even web pages that are not physically linked to the root
page, but whose content is relevant. . . .

. . .
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

7
The template may also include macros and regular expressions to
further refine content extraction. Web page content wizard 558 can
capture repeating patterns, such as a list of products, and can navigate
across the web pages. Web page content wizard 558 also allows rules
to be specified, e.g., what action to take should some user content be
missing or empty.

¶¶ [0079]-[0081].
The process of creating a capture template is described at
¶¶ [0093]-[0103] with respect to Figures 8A-8O. The process of capturing
the content of a Web page using a capture template is described at
¶¶ [00104]-[00112] and Figures 9A and 9B.

Cuan
Cuan relates to a method and apparatus for dynamically organizing
and tracking website content during its development as it is being modified
by individual contributors and its deployment externally to outside
destinations such as production servers that provide access to websites via
the Internet or intranet. Abstract.
Cuan describes creating templates for use in deploying data. "The
method of using templates provides a highly configurable way to capture,
edit and store data imported from end-users who are developing websites."
¶¶ [0023] and [0074]. "Once the data is captured, it can be merged with
presentation templates and displayed, or optionally deployed to a database
for storage." ¶ [0024].

Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

8
Cuan states:

According to the invention, the template mechanism for capturing
data content from end-users may be separate from the mechanism for
defining the appearance of the contents when it is displayed. This
architecture allows for the unlimited re-use of data after the data is
captured and stored. It further allows a user to define different
appearances and behaviors for the same data content based on how,
when, where, or to whom the data is displayed. Once the data is
captured, it is configured and stored according to a data capture
template, which defines the data captured for use in a work area. The
data stored in the data capture template can be displayed via
presentation templates. Either template may optionally deployed to a
database for storage. The isolation of the data apart from the manner
in which it is presented allows for easy deployment and manipulation
of the data. This feature also allows for the flexibility to deploy
captured data according to different presentation templates.
Moreover, if a default template is chosen and enforced, a system
could allow a user to input data without having any website content
development skill. A user may simply input or modify data, then
deploy the resulting content, either internally or externally. No
special programming skills are necessarily required.

¶ [0075].
In the paragraph relied upon by the Examiner, Cuan describes:

XML is an open standard that gives flexibility in incorporating textual
and graphical data. The use of the standard allows a programmer to
write definition that allows a system to capture data and store it in an
XML data content record file. This data content is kept separate from
whatever presentation template that is to be used to display the data.
An XML template file is kept separate, and defines the manner in
which the data content is presented on a web page.

¶ [0076].
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

9
ANALYSIS
The Examiner finds that "Cuan teaches capturing data and storing said
captured data in a data capture template which defines the data captured for
use in a work area." Ans. 9. As to capture templates that specify how
elements are to be located for retrieval, the examiner finds that "Cuan
teaches using capture templates to format XML data for display (See Cuan,
Page 9, paragraph 0076)" (Ans. 6) and also:

Cuan teaches including work area software application that includes
template codes for creating and storing templates used for displaying
data. The templates define the displays used on a website, so that a
user having a graphical user interface can read the data displayed in
the selected template format (See Cuan, Page 9, paragraph 0078).

Ans. 9-10.
Initially, the Examiner appears to interpret "specifying how elements
of the . . . document are to be located for retrieval" to mean how elements of
the document are located when retrieved for display because the Examiner
refers to reading data in the template for display. However, "specifying how
elements of the . . . document are to be located for retrieval" relates to
"extracting content from the . . . document," not retrieving data for display.
Nevertheless, the Examiner also notes that Cuan mentions capture templates
and it is this teaching that we focus on.
Cuan describes that "using templates provides a highly configurable
way to capture, edit and store data imported from end-users who are
developing websites." ¶¶ [0023] and [0074]. Cuan also describes that
"[o]nce the data is captured, it is configured and stored according to a data
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

10
capture template, which defines the data captured for use in a work area"
¶ [0075], and "the [XML] standard allows a programmer to write definition
that allows a system to capture data and store it in an XML data content
record file," ¶ [0076]. Thus, Cuan describes using a "template" to "capture"
data. The question we must decide is whether this teaches or suggests
"extracting content from the XHTML-compliant document using a capture
template specifying how elements of the XHTML-compliant document are
to be located for retrieval." We conclude that it does not.
The noted portion of Cuan are the extent of the description of capture
templates which presents a problem in meeting the specific limitations of the
claims. Cuan does not describe "extracting content from [a] . . . document
using a capture template," no matter what format the document is in (XML,
HTML, XHTML, etc.). Cuan describes capturing data imported from end-
users, which can just mean that the capture template is like a blank form that
the user fills in with data, which is likely since Cuan relates to tracking
website content as it is being modified by individual contributors (¶ [0008]),
rather than extracting data from documents. That is, "capture" does not
imply capturing by extracting data from a document.
Cuan also does not describe the "capture template specifying how
elements of the . . . document are to be located for retrieval." The
construction and operation of the capture template are simply not described
in Cuan and there is no suggestion that the capture template in Cuan
specifies how elements of a document are to be located for retrieval and
extraction. We will not speculate that the functions are the same just
Appeal 2009-008486
Application 11/022,898

11
because the names are the same. It is improper to resort to speculation or
unfounded assumptions to supply deficiencies in the factual basis for a
rejection. See In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017 (CCPA 1967) ("[The
Patent Office] may not, because it may doubt that the invention is
patentable, resort to speculation, unfounded assumptions or hindsight
reconstruction to supply deficiencies in its factual basis.").
According, Appellants have shown that Cuan fails to support the
conclusion of obviousness.

CONCLUSION
Cuan does not teach or suggest "extracting content from the XHTML-
compliant document using a capture template specifying how elements of
the XHTML-compliant document are to be located for retrieval."
Accordingly, Appellants have shown error in the rejection.
The rejection of claims 1-15, 21, and 22 is reversed.

REVERSED

rwk

BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD
ATTORNEYS FOR CLIENT NUMBER 007412
1100 13th STREET, N.W.
SUITE 1200
WASHINGTON, DC 20005-4051