Ex Parte Yurt et alDownload PDFBoard of Patent Appeals and InterferencesMar 27, 200810279664 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 27, 2008) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ____________ Ex parte PAUL YURT AND H. LEE BROWNE ____________ Appeal 2008-0928 Application 10/279,664 Technology Center 2600 ____________ Decided: March 27, 2008 ____________ Before KENNETH W. HAIRSTON, ROBERT E. NAPPI and JOHN A. JEFFERY, Administrative Patent Judges. HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a final rejection of claims 33 to 48 and 50 to 82. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We will reverse the rejection. Appeal 2008-0928 Application 10/279,664 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants have invented a method of and a system for providing digital audiovisual information in the form of compressed, formatted, and multiplexed digital data blocks via satellite to user receiving systems. The video information in the audiovisual information is compressed using a discrete cosine transform and motion compensation. Relative time markers are assigned to at least some of the compressed, formatted, digital data blocks of video information. At least some of the compressed, formatted, digital data blocks of audio information are also assigned relative time markers. The relative time markers allow for realignment of the video and the audio information (Figure 2a; Specification 17 to 19). Claims 33 and 65 are representative of the claims on appeal, and they read as follows: 33. A method of providing multiplexed data blocks comprising compressed digital audiovisual information via satellite to a remotely located user reception system, comprising: associating a program note with an item of audiovisual information; storing program note information in an item database; converting video information in the item of audiovisual information into a predetermined format as first formatted digital data blocks; converting audio information in the item of audiovisual information into a predetermined format as second formatted digital data blocks; assigning relative time markers to at least some of the first formatted digital data blocks; Appeal 2008-0928 Application 10/279,664 3 assigning relative time markers to at least some of the second formatted digital data blocks; wherein the relative time markers allow for realignment of the first formatted digital data blocks and the second formatted digital data blocks; compressing the first formatted digital data blocks using a compression process that comprises discrete cosine transform and motion compensation; compressing the second formatted digital data blocks; multiplexing the first and second compressed formatted digital data blocks with compressed formatted digital data blocks of another item of audiovisual information by placing data blocks interleaved onto a transmission path; and transmitting the multiplexed data blocks via satellite directly to the remotely located user reception system, for reception and playback by the remotely located user reception system. 65. A method of providing multiplexed data blocks comprising compressed digital video information via satellite to a remotely located user reception system, comprising: associating a program note with video information; storing program note information in an item database; converting the video information into a predetermined format as first formatted digital data blocks; assigning relative time markers to at least some of the first formatted digital data blocks; Appeal 2008-0928 Application 10/279,664 4 compressing the first formatted digital data blocks using a compression process that comprises discrete cosine transform and motion compensation; storing the first compressed formatted digital data blocks and relative time markers in a file; multiplexing the first compressed formatted digital data blocks with second compressed formatted digital data blocks by placing data blocks interleaved onto a transmission path; and transmitting the multiplexed data blocks via satellite to the remotely located user reception system. The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on appeal is: Tu US 4,544,950 Oct. 1, 1985 Krause US 5,091,782 Feb. 25, 1992 Tindell US 5,130,792 Jul. 14, 1992 M. M. Mourad, “Some issues in the implementation of multimedia communication systems,” IEEE Xplore, Release 2.1, pages 1, and 4 to 13, Sept. 30-Oct. 2 1990. The Examiner rejected claims 33 to 48 and 50 to 82 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon the teachings of Tindell, Mourad, Tu, and Krause. ISSUE Appellants contend inter alia that Mourad does not teach relative time markers assigned to digital audio or video data blocks (App. Br. 10 to 15; Reply Br. 5 and 6). Thus, the issue before us is whether the applied prior art Appeal 2008-0928 Application 10/279,664 5 teaches or would it have suggested to the skilled artisan the assignment of relative time markers to digital audio data blocks or the assignment of relative time markers to digital video data blocks? FINDINGS OF FACT As indicated supra, Appellants’ method includes the steps of assigning relative time codes to the compressed, formatted, digital data blocks of video information, and to the compressed, formatted, digital data blocks of audio information. Tindell describes a system and method for transferring video programs from a first location to a second location via a telephone network. Prior to the transfer, the video and the audio portions of the program are separated, digitized, and compressed (Figure 3; Abstract; col. 2, ll. 3 to 9). In Tindell, information (e.g., program notes) that is needed to make a program selection and to keep up with administrative matters is stored (col. 3, ll. 22 to 49). A multiplexing operation is performed during the transfer of the video program (col. 7, ll. 9 to 16). In the paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5, the publication to Mourad describes a multimedia communications system which is concerned with synchronization between video and audio signals during playback. In sections 2.3, 2.3.2, 2.3.4, and 2.4, Mourad indicates that the synchronization is performed in the time domain based on a start time and duration of the multimedia information. In section 2.4, Mourad describes descriptors and attributes (e.g., program notes) that are stored for multimedia objects. Appeal 2008-0928 Application 10/279,664 6 Tu describes a technique for transmission of video and audio over a digital transmission system (Figures 2 and 6; Abstract; col. 2, ll. 6 to 26). A digitized video signal and associated video mode status bits are multiplexed with a plurality of digitized audio signals into an N-bit frame format (Abstract; col. 4, ll. 2 to 40). Krause describes an apparatus and a method for compressing successive blocks of digital data using a discrete cosine transform encoder (Figure 3; Abstract; col. 4, ll. 23 to 30; col. 6, ll. 3 to 10; col. 7, ll. 10 to 17). Krause uses motion compensation to increase compression efficiency (col. 3, ll. 52 and 53; col. 7, ll. 19 to 24; col. 9, ll. 4 to 67). Krause recognizes that the output from the transmitter can be transmitted to a receiver via either satellite to cable or satellite to satellite (col. 1, ll. 18 to 27). PRINCIPLES OF LAW The Examiner bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445 (Fed. Cir. 1992). If that burden is met, then the burden shifts to the Appellants to overcome the prima facie case with argument and/or evidence. See Id. The Examiner’s articulated reasoning in the rejection must possess a rational underpinning to support the legal conclusion of obviousness. In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 988 (Fed. Cir. 2006). ANALYSIS As indicated supra in the findings of fact, Mourad is the only reference of record that expressly describes the use of time for Appeal 2008-0928 Application 10/279,664 7 synchronization purposes during the playback of video and audio multimedia information. Although time is used in Mourad, it is not used as a relative time marker assigned to formatted digital data blocks of video information as set forth in claims 33 to 48 and 50 to 82 on appeal, and as a relative time marker assigned to formatted digital data blocks of audio information as set forth in claims 33 to 48, 50 to 64, and 74 to 82 on appeal. Thus, even if we assume for the sake of argument that it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan to combine the reference teachings in the manner suggested by the Examiner, the combined teachings of the references neither teach nor would have suggested to the skilled artisan the assignment of relative time markers to formatted digital data blocks of video, and the assignment of relative time markers to formatted digital data blocks of audio. CONCLUSION OF LAW The Examiner has not established the obviousness of claims 33 to 48 and 50 to 82. Appeal 2008-0928 Application 10/279,664 8 ORDER The obviousness rejection of claims 33 to 48 and 50 to 82 is reversed. REVERSED KIS CHRISTIE, PARKER & HALE, L.L.P. P. O. BOX 7068 PASADENA, CA 91109-7068 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation