Ex Parte Levy

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jan 24, 2012

10795123 (B.P.A.I. Jan. 24, 2012)

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.
10/795,123 03/05/2004 Kenneth L. Levy P0947 6898
23735 7590 01/25/2012
DIGIMARC CORPORATION
9405 SW GEMINI DRIVE
BEAVERTON, OR 97008
EXAMINER
LE, NANCY LOAN T
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3621
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
01/25/2012 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 1
___________ 2
3
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS 4
AND INTERFERENCES 5
___________ 6
7
Ex parte KENNETH L. LEVY 8
___________ 9
10
Appeal 2010-008098 11
Application 10/795,123 12
Technology Center 3600 13
___________ 14
15
16
Before MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, ANTON W. FETTING, and 17
JOSEPH A. FISCHETTI, Administrative Patent Judges. 18
19
FETTING, Administrative Patent Judge. 20
21
22
DECISION ON APPEAL23
24
Appeal 2010-008098
Application 10/795,123

2

STATEMENT OF THE CASE1 1
Kenneth L. Levy (Appellant) seeks review under 35 U.S.C. § 134 2
(2002) of a final rejection of claims 1-23 and 28-31, the only claims pending 3
in the application on appeal. We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant 4
to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002). 5
The Appellant invented a way for content and personal domain 6
identifiers to be used to enable copyright notification and e-Commerce 7
(Spec. 2:1-2). 8
An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of 9
exemplary claim 1, which is reproduced below (bracketed matter and some 10
paragraphing added). 11
1. A method of managing media content comprising: 12
[1] receiving the media content in a personal domain; 13
[2] extracting a content identifier from the content; 14
[3] sending 15
a personal domain identifier 16
of the personal domain 17
and 18
the content identifier 19
to a database 20
to determine from the database 21
whether the personal domain has rights 22
to play the media content based on 23
the content identifier, 24
the personal domain identifier 25
and 26
rights associated with the content 27
identifier and personal domain 28
identifier; 29

1 Our decision will make reference to the Appellant’s Appeal Brief (“App.
Br.,” filed Nov. 24, 2008) and Reply Brief (“Reply Br.,” filed Jun. 2, 2009),
and the Examiner’s Answer (“Ans.,” mailed Apr. 2, 2009).
Appeal 2010-008098
Application 10/795,123

3

[4] wherein the personal domain identifier represents a group of 1
devices 2
for which a common set of rights for the content 3
is associated through the content identifier; 4
and 5
[5] presenting a copyright notice 6
depending on whether the personal domain has rights to 7
play the media content. 8
9
The Examiner relies upon the following prior art: 10
Meyer US 2001/0031066 A1 Oct. 18, 2001
Inoue US 2003/0005135 A1 Jan. 2, 2003
Claims 1, 2, 6-23, and 28-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) 11
as anticipated by Inoue. 12
Claims 3-5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable 13
over Inoue and Meyer. 14
ISSUES 15
The issues of anticipation and obviousness turn primarily on whether 16
Inoue describes extracting a content identifier from the content as required 17
by limitation [2]. 18
FACTS PERTINENT TO THE ISSUES 19
The following enumerated Findings of Fact (FF) are believed to be 20
supported by a preponderance of the evidence. 21
Facts Related to the Prior Art 22
Inoue 23
01. Inoue is directed to providing a license management system and a 24
usage restriction control method that allow a parent of each home 25
to set usage restrictions suitable for a development of each child 26
Appeal 2010-008098
Application 10/795,123

4

who uses a content using more multi-aspect methodology. Inoue 1
¶ 0007. 2
02. Figure 16 is a flow chart that shows a processing procedure 3
executed in the right management server and the child terminal 4
when the child terminal on which the parental control information 5
is set makes a license ticket issuance request. The child instructs 6
the request unit by operating a controller to display a list of 7
available contents which have been downloaded from the right 8
management server. When the child selects her desired content 9
among the displayed content list, inputs her desired usage number 10
or usage time, and pushes the OK button, the request unit acquires 11
a content ID of each content selected among the content IDs 12
corresponding to the listed contents and a usage number (or usage 13
time) of the content. The request unit also reads out the terminal 14
ID, appends it to the license ticket issuance request, and then 15
sends it to the right management server. Inoue ¶ 0116. 16
03. The content ID’s for display to the child are stored in the Content 17
Usage Right Database within the Right Management Server. 18
Inoue ¶ 0058. 19
ANALYSIS 20
We are persuaded by Appellant’s argument that Inoue fails to describe 21
extracting a content identifier from the content as required by limitation [2]. 22
Appeal Br. 6. The Examiner cites ¶ 0116 as describing this. Ans. 3 and 11. 23
This portion actually describes the content identifier coming from the 24
Content Usage Right Database within the Right Management Server instead 25
of from the content itself. Both independent claims have similar limitations. 26
Appeal 2010-008098
Application 10/795,123

5

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1
The rejection of claims 1, 2, 6-23, and 28-31 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) 2
as anticipated by Inoue is improper. 3
The rejection of claims 3-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable 4
over Inoue and Meyer is improper. 5
DECISION 6
The rejection of claims 1-23 and 28-31 is reversed. 7
8
REVERSED 9
10
11
12
hh 13