Ex Parte LaJoie et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jul 22, 2014

12432871 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 22, 2014)

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.
12/432,871 04/30/2009 Mike L. LaJoie TW-68 (TWC 96-14D) 7957
26479 7590 07/22/2014
STRAUB & POKOTYLO
788 Shrewsbury Avenue
TINTON FALLS, NJ 07724
EXAMINER
PENG, HSIUNGFEI
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2426
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
07/22/2014 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 PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte MIKE L. LAJOIE, JOSEPH G. BUEHL, HAIG H. KRAKIRIAN,
STEPHEN M. JOHNSON, and RALPH W. BROWN
____________

Appeal 2012-003489
Application 12/432,871
Technology Center 2400
____________

Before FRED E. McKELVEY, JOHN G. NEW, and
ROBERT L. KINDER, Administrative Patent Judges.

KINDER, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Mike L. LaJoie, Joseph G. Buehl, Haig H. Krakirian, Stephen M.
Johnson, and Ralph W. Brown (“Appellants”)1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
from the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1–21.
We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.

1 The real party-in-interest is Time Warner Cable, Inc. Appeal Br. 2.
Appeal 2012-003489
Application 12/432,871

2

References
The Examiner relies upon the following prior art references:
Rowe US 6,008,803 Dec. 28, 1999
Yuen US 2003/0194200 A1 Oct. 16, 2003
Mankovitz US 2008/0188213 A1 Aug. 7, 2008

Rejections
Appellants seek review of the following Rejections I through III:
I. Claims 1–7 and 10–15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
anticipated by Yuen;
II. Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Yuen and Mankovitz; and
III. Claims 16–21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Yuen and Rowe.
Claimed Subject Matter
Because Appellants make the same argument for all of the claims on
appeal, we select claim 1 as representative. App. Br. 4, 10. 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii). Claim 1 is reproduced below:
1. A method of recording at least one television program
using an interactive program guide, the interactive program
guide having displayable information pertaining to a plurality
of television programs, the method comprising:
displaying the interactive program guide on a display;
highlighting on the display information in the program guide
pertaining to a selected television program yet to be broadcast;
receiving a single record-key actuation; and
Appeal 2012-003489
Application 12/432,871

3

in response to receiving only the single record-key actuation,
automatically recording the selected television program when
the selected television program is broadcast.
Appeal Br. A1.

OPINION
Rejection I
Yuen relates to various embodiments of a magnetic tape cassette
reader/recorder capable of maintaining program information, such as a
directory of recorded television programs. Yuen, ¶ 21. The availability of
the program directory is described in several embodiments as facilitating the
operations of the tape cassette reader/recorder, such as allowing a user to
perform program recording operations. Id.
Appellants contend Yuen does not disclose the limitation of claim 1
reciting “receiving a single record-key actuation and, in response to
receiving only the single record-key actuation, automatically recording the
selected television program when the selected television program is
broadcast. Appeal Br. 3. Appellants refer to this limitation as a “one touch
recording (“OTR”) feature.” Id.
The Examiner relied upon Yuen paragraphs 37 and 424–426 as
disclosing the OTR limitation. Yuen teaches an embodiment for recording
programs through the use of a stored program guide and timer programming
of a VCR. Yuen, ¶ 426. Yuen explains “[t]he user programs the indexing
VCR 10 to record the desired program by moving the cursor to this program
pressing the Record button.” Id. The same paragraph describes how
PLUSCODE numbers may also be used to program the VCR to record a
Appeal 2012-003489
Application 12/432,871

4

program. Id. A PLUSCODE may be used for identifying future programs.
See, e.g., Yuen, ¶¶ 407; 421.
Appellants contend Yuen does not disclose an indexing VCR that
requires only a single record-key actuation to record a program from a
program guide. Appeal Br. 5, Reply Br. 2. Appellants point out that
paragraph 426 of Yuen “does not expressly state that the Record button is
the only key actuation required in order to record a program from a program
guide.” Reply Br. 2. Appellants further argue the recording disclosure of
Yuen paragraph 426 is bound by later disclosures in the application (Yuen
paragraphs 528–570), which require using multiple key actuations. Thus,
according to Appellants, Yuen does not disclose or suggest using only a
single key actuation for recording a program at a later time because
embodiments discussed later in the specification require multiple key
actuations. Reply Br. 6.
We have considered Appellants’ arguments regarding each of these
later embodiments of Yuen. For the reasons discussed below, we disagree
that multiple key actuations described in these later embodiments are
necessary for all of the embodiments of Yuen set forth in paragraphs 424–
430.
Yuen describes how PLUSCODE numbers and the stored program
guide can be used to program recordings by moving a cursor to a selected
program and pressing record. Yuen, ¶ 426. In the following paragraph,
Yuen clarifies that PLUSCODE numbers may be used to record future
programs by the press of only one button:
Further, a “PLUSCODETM” number may be provided so that at
the press of a single button the “PLUSCODETM” number is
Appeal 2012-003489
Application 12/432,871

5

used to program the indexing VCR 10 to record the requested
program.
Yuen, ¶ 427, ll. 27–30 (emphasis added). The same paragraph describes
recording either concurrent programing or programming available “at a later
time.” Yuen, ¶ 427, l. 6.
In certain embodiments where the program related information
(“PRI”) contains PLUSCODE numbers, Yuen also describes pressing a
single record button (Step 3735 of Fig. 43) to record “programs that are to be
broadcasted later.” Yuen, ¶ 430; Fig. 3. Figure 43 shows once the record
button (3735) is actuated, the PLUSCODE number is stored in the
programming stack (3736) for future recordings with no additional key
actuations. This disclosure supports Yuen’s teaching that recording is
possible in some embodiments “at the press of a single button.” Yuen, ¶¶
426, 427.
In light of Yuen’s disclosure, we agree with the Examiner that Yuen
teaches or suggests “receiving a single record-key actuation; and in response
to receiving only the single record-key actuation, automatically recording
the selected television program when the selected television program is
broadcast” as recited in claim 1 We therefore conclude that Appellants have
failed to show that the Examiner erred and we affirm the Examiner’s
rejection of the claim.
Rejections II and III
In addressing Rejections II and III, Appellants rely on the same
arguments that they presented with respect to rejection I. Consequently, for
the reasons related supra, we sustain the Examiner’s Rejections II and III.
Appeal 2012-003489
Application 12/432,871

6

DECISION
We AFFIRM the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1–21.
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)(iv).
AFFIRMED

msc