Joel M. Ezell et al.Download PDFPatent Trials and Appeals BoardOct 31, 201914943225 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Oct. 31, 2019) Copy Citation 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. 14/943,225 11/17/2015 Joel M. Ezell 4366-778 2519 48500 7590 10/31/2019 SHERIDAN ROSS P.C. 1560 BROADWAY, SUITE 1200 DENVER, CO 80202 EXAMINER SHERKAT, AREZOO ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2434 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 10/31/2019 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): cjacquet@sheridanross.com edocket@sheridanross.com pair_Avaya@firsttofile.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ________________ Ex parte JOEL M. EZELL, MEHMET C. BALASAYGUN, and GEOFF BASKWILL ________________ Appeal 2018-009023 Application 14/943,225 Technology Center 2400 ________________ Before JASON V. MORGAN, JAMES B. ARPIN, and DAVID J. CUTITTA II, Administrative Patent Judges. MORGAN, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Introduction Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant1 appeals from the Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1–18, 21, and 22. Claims 19 and 20 are canceled. Appeal Br. 2. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. 1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party-in-interest as Avaya Inc. Appeal Br. 2. Appeal 2018-009023 Application 14/943,225 2 Summary of the disclosure Appellant discloses receiving an access token in response to providing valid login credentials and sending the access token and an address for a server application, via a local loopback address, to a local application, thus, allowing “the local application to send local information, such as local files, to the server application using the token.” Abstract. Illustrative claim (disputed limitations emphasized) 1. A method comprising: receiving, by a processor and via a browser, a challenge for one or more user login credentials; sending, by the processor and from the browser, the one or more user login credentials; in response to sending the one or more user login credentials, receiving, by the processor and at the browser, a security access token for a remote server application; and in response to receiving, at the browser, the security access token for the remote server application, sending, by the browser, via the processor, the security access token and an address for the remote server application, via a local loopback address, to a separate local application, wherein the processor, the browser, and the separate local application are on a user communication device and the remote server application is external to the user communication device. The Examiner’s rejection and cited references The Examiner rejects claims 1–18, 21, and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the combined teachings of Kaplan et al. (US 2015/03587328 A1; published Dec. 10, 2015) (“Kaplan”) and Garmark et al. (US 2014/0337959 A1; published Nov. 13, 2014) (“Garmark”). Final Act. 6–20. Appeal 2018-009023 Application 14/943,225 3 ANALYSIS In rejecting claim 1 as obvious, the Examiner finds that Garmark’s authenticated session between a web browser and a web server, combined with Kaplan’s use of user credentials, teaches or suggests sending one or more user login credentials. Final Act. 6–7 (citing Garmark ¶¶ 47, 59; Kaplan ¶ 84). The Examiner relies on Garmark’s module server requesting a token from a token server and then sending the token to a web browser to teach or suggest in response to sending the one or more user login credentials, receiving, by the processor and at the browser, a security access token for a remote server application. Id. at 7. The Examiner concludes it would have been obvious to modify Garmark to include Kaplan’s use of user credentialing “because it would allow [a user] ‘to provide user credentials so that a native client application can access the user’s account on the content management system.’” Id. at 9 (citing Kaplan ¶ 84). Appellant contends the Examiner erred because the token in Garmark is received in response to “[c]ontacting a module server to receive a module,” rather than in response to “sending one or more login credentials.” Appeal Br. 5. With respect to the Examiner’s finding that Garmark teaches authenticating the session in which a module is requested and a token received, Appellant argues that “[i]n Garmark, there is no user authentication (no provided user login credentials). Instead the web browser requests the digital certificate from the web server to authenticate the web server. A user is not being authenticated in Garmark.” Reply Br. 5. Appellant’s arguments are persuasive of error. Garmark’s authenticated session merely establishes a secure communication channel. Garmark ¶ 47. Establishing such channels is known, even when engaging Appeal 2018-009023 Application 14/943,225 4 with web sites that do not require use of login credentials (the URLs to such sites typically start with “https” and web browsers provide a visual indication that communications are secure). See MICROSOFT COMPUTER DICTIONARY, 259 (5th ed. 2002) (“HTTPS n. 1 Acronym for Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure. A variation of HTTP that provides for encryption and transmission through a secure port. HTTPS was devised by Netscape and allows HTTP to run over a secure mechanism known as SSL (Secure Sockets Layer)”). Even with websites that request login credentials, a secure communication channel may be established before the login credentials are sent so as to protect the login credentials themselves. Furthermore, even if Garmark were modified, based on the teachings and suggestions of Kaplan, to include sending login credentials, the Examiner’s findings do not show that Garmark teaches receiving a token in response to the sending of login credentials. Garmark specifically teaches that “in response to receiving the request for the module 124, the module server 122 requests and receives a first token from the token server 502. The module server 122, then sends the module 124 and the first token to the web browser 108.” Garmark ¶ 60. The Examiner does not show that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason, even in light of Kaplan’s teachings and suggestions, to replace or augment Garmark’s request for the module with the submission of login credentials. Even if login credentials were sent before Garmark’s web browser 108 received web page 116, which includes a reference to module 124 (thus, leading to the request for module 124), the receipt of a token still would be in response to the request for module 124, not in response to the submission of login credentials. See Garmark ¶ 59. Appeal 2018-009023 Application 14/943,225 5 Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of claim 1, or of claims 2–18, 21, and 22, which depend from claim 1. CONCLUSION In summary: Claims Rejected 35 U.S.C. § References Affirmed Reversed 1–18, 21, 22 103 Kaplan, Garmark 1–18, 21, 22 REVERSED Notice of References Cited Application/Control No. 14/943,225 Applicant(s)/Patent Under Reexamination Examiner Art Unit Page 1 of 1 U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS * Document Number Country Code-Number-Kind Code Date MM-YYYY Name Classification 1 A US- 1 1 B US- C US- D US- E US- F US- G US- H US- I US- J US- K US- L US- M US- FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS * Document Number Country Code-Number-Kind Code Date MM-YYYY Country Name Classification N O P Q R S T NON-PATENT DOCUMENTS * Include as applicable: Author, Title Date, Publisher, Edition or Volume, Pertinent Pages) U MICROSOFT COMPUTER DICTIONARY, 259 (5th ed. 2002) V W X *A copy of this reference is not being furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).) Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office PTO-892 (Rev. 01-2001) Notice of References Cited Part of Paper No. Delete Last PagelAdd A Page PUBLISHED BY Microsoft Press A Division of Microsoft Corporation One Microsoft Way Redmond, Washington 98052-6399 Copyright© 2002 by Microsoft Corporation All rights reserved. No part of the contents of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any fotm or by any means without the written pem1ission of the publisher. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Microsoft Computer Dictionary. --5th ed. p. cm. ISBN 0-7356-1495-4 1. Computers--Dictionaries. 2. Microcornputers--Dictionaries. AQ76.5. M52267 2002 004'.03--dc21 20021 97 14 Printed and bound in the United States of America. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 QWf 7 6 5 4 3 2 Distributed in Canad~ by H.B . Fenn and Company Ltd. A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Microsoft Press books are available through booksellers and distributors worldwide. For further informa- tion about international editions, contact your local Microsoft Corporation office or contact Microsoft Press International directly at fax (425) 936-7329. Visit our Web site at www.microsott.com/mspress. Send comments to mspinput@microsoft.com. Active Desktop, Active Direc tory, ActiveM ovie, ActiveStore, ActiveSync, ActiveX, Authenticode, BackOffice, BizTalk, ClearType, Direct3D, DirectAnimation, DirectDraw, Directlnput, DirectMusic, DirectPlay, DirectShow, DirectSound, DircctX, Entourage, FoxPro, FrontPage, Hotmail, IntelliEye, lntelliMouse, lntelliSense, JScript, MapPoint, Microsoft, Microsoft Press, Mobile Explorer, MS-DOS, MSN, Music Central, Net.tvTeeting, Outlook, PhotoDraw, PowerPoint, Share.Point, UltimateTV, Visio, Visual Basic, Visual C++, Visual FoxPro, Visual InterDev, Visual J++, Visual SourceSafe, Visual Studio, Win32, Win32s, Windows, Windows Media, Wiudows NT, Xhox are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporntion in the United States and/or other countries. Other product and company names mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners . The example companies, organizations, products, domain names, e-mail addresses, logos, people, places, and events depicted herein are fictitious. N o association with any real company, organization, product, domain name, e-mail address, logo, person, place, or event is intended or should be inferred. Acquisitions Editor: Alex. Blanton Project Editor: Sandra Haynes Body Patt No. X OB-41929 Contributors Peter Aiken Bart Arenson Janice Borzendowski Jerome Colburn Duane Hanson Andrew Himes Robert Howecton Annette B. Jackson Larry S. Jackson Thomas A. Jackson Chris Kinata Ilana Kingsley Robin Lombard Thomas A. Long I William G. Madison Illustrators Travis Beaven David Holter Alton Lawson . Thomas P. Magliery David Mason Terrence M. Mclaren Wallace Parker Charles Petzold Phil Rose John Ross David Rygmyr Aimee Truchard Michael Vose Bruce Webster Judson D. Weeks Tom Winn JoAnne Woodcock Rob Nance Joel Panchot . · i:b browsers should display these elements i\'a'.ishould respond to user actions such as acti- ,/,'tby means of a key press or mouse click. ... ,ed by the Internet Engineering Task Force ed features of HTML common to all Web .•· 1994 and was the first version of HTML rt the World Wide Web. HTML+ was pro- 'tiriding HTML 2 in 1994, but it was never tj{HTML 3, which also was never standard- \implemented by a major browser developer, ·ables. HTML 3 .2 incorporated features widely ,d as of early 1996, including tables, applets, fry to flow text. around images. HTML 4, the c.ification, supports style sheets and scripting lan- :4includes internationalization and accessibility ';_itture HTIVIL development will be carried out by 'Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Most Web notably Netscape Navigator and Internet ,Jccognize HTML tags beyond those included in ht standard. See al.so .htm, .html, SGML, tag .'\1. 3), Web browser. ~ttribute n. A value within an HTML tag that )ciditional properties to the object being defined. · · editing software assigns some attributes 'tically when you create an object such as a para- 't table. . code fragment n. HTML code that you add to a . · age to create features such as a script, a counter, or a #iig marquee. Often used in the context of webrings . J'a link and standard graphics or automation to an ,Vtdual page to indicate membership. '~l document 11. A hypertext document that has been ded with HTML See Web page. _ _k;iL editor n. A software program used to create and '.'. ifyHTML documents (Web pages). Most HTML edi- -i include a method for it1serting HTML tags without " ally having to type out each tag. A number of HTML . __ tors will also automatically reformat a document with ~:WML tags, ba~ed on formatting codes used by the word \(lf;processing program in which the document was created. f (~~e also tag (definition 3), Web page. ~j~TML extensions 11. A feature or setting that is an exten- }I~ion to the formal HTML specification. Extensions may t'J~ot be supported by all Web browsers, but they may be li£;u'sed widely by Web authors. An example of an extension J )s marquee scrolling text. }/HTML page n. See Web page. HTML server control 11. An ASP.NET server control that belongs to the System. Web. UI.HtmlControls narnespace. An HTML server control maps directly to an HTML element and is declared on an ASP.NET page as an I-ITML element marked by a runat=server attribute. In contrast to Web server controls, HTML server controls do not have an tag prefix. See also Web server control. HTML source 11. See source (definition 2). HTML source file n. See source (definition 2). HTML tag 11. See tag (definition 3}. . HTML validation service n. A service used to confirm that a Web page uses valid HTML according to the latest standard and/or that its hyperlinks are valid. An HTML validation service can catch small syntactical errors in HTML c~ding as well as deviations from the HTML stai1- dards. See also HTML. HTTP 11. Acronym for Hypertext Transfer Protocol. The protocol used to carry requests from a browser to a Web server and to transport pages from Web servers back to the requesting browser. Although HTIP is almost universally used on the Web, it is not an especially secure protocol. HTTPd n. Acronym for Hypertext Transfer Protocol Dae- mon. A small, fast HTTP server that was available free from NCSA. HTTPd was the predecessor for Apache. Also called: HTTP Daemon. See also Apache, HTIP server, NCSA (definition 1) . HTTP Daemon n. See HITPd . HTTP Next Generation n. See HTIP-NG. 259 HTTP-NG 11. Acronym for Hypertext Transfer Protocol Next Generation. A standard under development by the World Wide Web Cons_ortium (W3C) for improving per- formance and enabling the addition of features such as security. Whereas the current version of HTTP establishes a connection each time a request is made, HTf P-NG will set up one connection (which consists of separate channels for control information and data) for an entire session between a particular client and a particular se-rver. HTTPS n. I. Acronym for Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure. A variation of fITTP that provides for encryption and transmission through a secure port. HTTPS was devised by Netscape and allows HITP to run over a secu- rity mechanism known as SSL (Secure Sockets Layer). See also HTI'P, SSL. 2. Web sen•er software for Windows NT. Developed by the European Microsoft Windows NT Aca- demic Centre (E1vIWAC) at the University of Edinburgh, CJI Cl Scotland, it offers such features as WAIS search capability. See also HTfP server, WAIS. HTTP server 11. 1. Server software that uses HTIP to serve up HTML documents and any associated files and scripts when requested by a client, such as a Web browser. The connection between client and server is usually bro- ken after the requested document or file has been served. HTTP servers are used on Web and Intranet sites. Also caUed: Web server. See also HTML, HTTP, server (defi- nition 2). Compare application server. 2. Any machine on which an HTTP server program is running. HTTP status codes 11. Three-digit codes sent by an HITP server that indicate the results of a request for data. Codes beginning with 1 respond to requests that the client may not have finished sending; with 2, successful requests; with 3, further action that the client must take; with 4, requests that failed because of client error; and with 5, requests that failed because of server enor. See also 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, HITP. HTTP streaming n. The process of downloading stream- ing digital media using an HTTP server (a standard Inter- net server) rather than a server designed specifically to transmit streaming media. HTTP streaming download~ the media file onto a computer, which plays the downloaded file as it becomes available. See also real-time streaming. hub 11. In a network, a device joining communication lines at a central location, providing a common connection to all devices on the network. The term is an analogy to the hub of a wheel. See also active hub, switching hub. hue n. In the HSB color model, one of the three character- istics used to describe a color. Hue is the attribute that most readily distinguishes one color from other colors. It depends on the frequency of a light wave in the visible spectrum. See also color model, HSB. Compare bright- ness, saturation (definition 2). Huffman coding 11. A method of compressing a given set of data based on the relative frequency of the individual elements. The more often a given element, such as a letter, occurs, the shorter, in bits, is its corresponding code. It was one of the earliest data compression codes and, with modifications, remains one of the most widely used codes for a large variety of message types, human engineering 11. The designing of machines and associated products to suit the needs of humans. See also ergonomics. human-machine interface 11. The:bi people make contact with and use mitt,_.,,, to programs and operating systemsjt%.' known as the user interface. · · '· ·'"''., hung adj. See hang. hybrid circuit 11. A circuit in which futl~' enc types of components are used to pt'·"•\ tions, such as a stereo amplifier thahises ::::::t::~puter n. A computer th~ri~t and analog circuits. hybrid microcircuit n. A ni.icroelecttbili"8 combines individual microminiaturiz~i;;: ' ··'- integrated components. hybrid network 11. A network constriict€~j topologies, such as 1ing and star. See cils"i/. ring network, star network, Token-Ring-:- -· · Hybrls virus 11. A slow-spreading but updating Internet worm first detectedih)it Hybris virus is activated whenever an irii'fr( connected to the Internet. It attaches itselfi e-mail messages. maintains a list of all e~\il·-: the headers of incoming e-mail messagei, ies of itself to all e-mail addresses on th~ difficult to eradicate because it updates)t accessing and downloading updates ahd' anonymous postings to the alt.comp:vWii):_ Hybris incorporates downloaded extensici~s and it e-mails its modified form to additfoii victims. Hybris often incJudcs a spiral pldg~ ; duces a spinning disk on top of any activ~X~tW user's screen. 260 HyperCard 11. An infonnation-manage1nent:°s designed for the Apple Macintosh, that iJ!ifiJ,'e hypertext concepts. A HyperCard docurt\~~{9 series of cards, collected into a stack. Each'.( tain text, graphical images, sound, buttCopy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation