Ex Parte Brock et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 19, 2013

11475603 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 19, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
________________

Ex parte ANTHONY PAUL BROCK, MAXIME GAETAN
GEOFFREY HAOT, and GREGORY KENNETH WILLIS
________________

Appeal 2010-006768
Application 11/475,603
Technology Center 2100
________________

Before JOHN A. JEFFERY, JEREMY J. CURCURI, and
GREGG I. ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judges.

CURCURI, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL1
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 25-48. Claims 1-24 are canceled. App. Br. 2. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).

1 Rather than repeat the Examiner’s positions and Appellants’ arguments in
their entirety, we refer to the following documents for their respective
details: the Appeal Brief (App. Br.) filed October 27, 2009; the Examiner’s
Answer (Ans.) mailed December 28, 2009; and the Reply Brief (Reply Br.)
filed March 1, 2010.
Appeal 2010-006768
Application 11/475,603

2
Claims 25-32, 34-40, and 42-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
as anticipated by Sull (US 2002/0069218 A1; published June 6, 2002). Ans.
3-11.2
Claims 33 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious
over Sull and Srinivasan (US 6,026,408; issued Feb. 15, 2000). Ans. 12.
We reverse.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants’ invention relates to a database system which is
particularly useful in the field of storing and managing multimedia objects.
Spec. 1:14-15. Claim 25 is illustrative and reproduced below with the key
disputed limitation emphasized:
25. An apparatus for managing data objects, the apparatus
comprising:
a memory configured to store a meta table and a content table, the
meta table including metadata records,
wherein the content table specifies an instance of each of the data
objects, each of the instances being linked to a metadata record stored in the
meta table and including a parameter associated with the metadata record,
wherein the content table further specifies relationships between the
instances,
wherein the meta table specifies definitions for subsets of the data
objects and hierarchical relationships between the subsets of the data
objects.

2 The ground of rejection lists the rejected claims as 25-32, 34-40, and 43-
48. Ans. 3. The Examiner’s explanation additionally discusses claim 42.
Ans. 9. Accordingly, we list the rejected claims as further including
claim 42.
Appeal 2010-006768
Application 11/475,603

3
ANALYSIS
THE ANTICIPATION REJECTION
The Examiner finds that Sull teaches all claim limitations of claim 25.
Ans. 3-4. The Examiner relies on Sull’s metafile 3308 composed of
segments 3310, 3316, 3322, and 3328, and segments 3380 and 3382 defined
in metafile 3308 for describing the recited meta table specifying definitions
for subsets of the data objects and hierarchical relationships between the
subsets of the data objects. Ans. 4 (citing Sull, Fig. 33; ¶¶ 192 (describing a
metadata ID), 465 (describing hierarchical structure of metafile segments in
Figure 33).
Appellants argue, among other arguments, that Sull’s hierarchical
structure in Figure 33 is in relation to the structure being edited (metafiles of
video 1, video 2, and video 3), and does not disclose a meta table specifying
hierarchical relationships between the subsets of the data objects. App. Br.
7. Appellants further explain that is it ambiguous as to what is being relied
upon in Figure 33 for the recited subsets of the data objects. Id. Appellants
further argue that the mere disclosure of a metadata ID of a database object
does not inherently describe a meta table specifying hierarchical
relationships between the subsets of the data objects. App. Br. 10. We agree
with Appellants.
In response, the Examiner explains that Sull teaches a database object
containing metadata with a hierarchical relationship between set and subset
of the data objects. Ans. 13.
In the Reply Brief, Appellants further argue that the mere teaching in
Sull of segments forming a hierarchical structure is not a disclosure or
Appeal 2010-006768
Application 11/475,603

4
suggestion of a meta table specifying hierarchical relationships between
subsets of data objects. Reply Br. 2-4. Again, we agree with Appellants.
Notably, for the recited data objects, the Examiner relies on Sull’s
multimedia content files in Figure 6. Ans. 3. At the same time, the Examiner
relies on Sull’s metafile 3308 in Figure 33 for the recited meta table
specifying definitions for subsets of the data objects and hierarchical
relationships between the subsets of the data objects. Ans. 4. The Examiner
has not explained how or why the metafile 3308 in Figure 33 specifies
hierarchical relationships between subsets of the multimedia content files in
Figure 6.
Weighing Appellants’ arguments against the Examiner’s findings, we
are persuaded that the Examiner has erred in rejecting claim 25. We,
therefore, do not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 25, or of claims
26-32, 34, and 35 which depend from claim 25. We also do not sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of independent claim 36 which recites “the meta table
specifies definitions for subsets of the data objects and hierarchical
relationships between the subsets of the data objects,” or of claims 37-40 and
42-46 which depend from claim 36. We also do not sustain the Examiner’s
rejection of independent claim 47 which recites “a meta link table defining
hierarchical relationships between a first subset of the data objects and a
second subset of the data objects,” or of claim 48 which depends from
claim 47.

Appeal 2010-006768
Application 11/475,603

5
THE OBVIOUSNESS REJECTION
Claim 33 depends from claim 25, and claim 41 depends from claim
36. For the reasons discussed above for claims 25 and 36, we do not sustain
the Examiner’s rejection of claims 33 and 41.

ORDER
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 25-48 is reversed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1).

REVERSED

babc