Ex Parte Michael et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 24, 2016

13245831 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 24, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/245,831 09/26/2011
100462 7590 06/24/2016
Dority & Manning P,A, and Google Inc,
Post Office Box 1449
Greenville, SC 29602
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Constantinos Michael
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
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
GGL-418 6432
EXAMINER
HUANG, MIRANDA M
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2157
MAILDATE DELIVERY MODE
06/24/2016 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
Exparte CONSTANTINOS MICHAEL, STEFFEN
MESCHKAT, TOBIAS BOONSTOPPEL, and STEFAN
HAUSTEIN
Appeal2013-007826
Application 13/245,831
Technology Center 2100
Before JASON V. MORGAN, NATHAN A. ENGELS, and GARTH D.
BAER, Administrative Patent Judges.
ENGELS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of
claims 1-11 and 14--26. Claims 12, 13, and 27 are canceled. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.
Appeal2013-007826
Application 13/245,831
ILLUSTRATIVE CLAIM
Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject
matter:
1. A computer-implemented method for generating a
template pruning schema, comprising:
parsing a template for generating an HTML document
that displays a formatted webpage, the template including one
or more typed data structures, each typed data structure in the
one or more typed data structures including one or more typed
data fields;
for each typed data structure, retrieving a pruning
schema specific to the typed data structure, wherein the pruning
schema includes a data type for each typed data field in the
typed data structure; and
generating the template pruning schema from the
retrieved one or more pruning schemas, wherein the template
pruning schema identifies the one or more fields in each of the
typed data structures that are included in the template.
Br. 42.
APPELLANTS' CONTENTIONS
Appellants contend that the Examiner erred in rejecting under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) claims 1-3, 7, 8, 10, 14--16, 19-22, 25, and 26 as being
unpatentable in view of the combination of Koskimies (US 2006/0107206
Al; May 18, 2006) and Popp et al. (US 2007 /0033280 Al; Feb. 8, 2007),
and claims 4--6, 9, 11, 17, 18, 23, and 24 as being unpatentable in view of
the combination of Koskimies, Popp, and Kaur, Gurpreet et al., An
Evaluation of Protocol Buffer, IEEE 978-1-4244-5853-0/10 (2010). Final
Act. 2-19.
2
Appeal2013-007826
Application 13/245,831
ANALYSIS
Appellants contend the Examiner erred in finding the combination of
Koskimies and Popp teaches "parsing a template for generating an HTML
document that displays a formatted webpage, the template including one or
more typed data structures, each typed data structure in the one or more
typed data structures including one or more typed data fields" as recited in
claim 1. App. Br. 21. The Examiner finds that Koskimies Figure 1 a
discloses the claimed template. Ans. 3 (citing Koskimies Fig. 1 a, i-fi-1 4--6,
42, 52 and Popp i-f 19). Specifically, the Examiner interprets the claimed
template to include form 10 in Figure la, stating that "[t]he word template in
the claim, when given its broadest reasonable interpretation, could include
any input that is used to generate an HTML page." Ans. 4.
Koskimies' s Figure 1 a is reproduced below:
,, ..• ,__, • • ...... -~-~··":;:.-;::.""'l l~\~~'.:::_~: ..........
•
,, ... .;;, ,,, •. • t''. """"'" 'X. ....,... ·. '/ • • / \ lt • ~ ·1'
\<~ ;~ '~ l-~\ f )~ / ,........ x· ....,.. i·~·· ! x· i
\ /\ ~ i /\~
~ ··""- ... \._, ~ : .~"':, r'\
:?:>)~<>x~:: ::~~~~~~~~::~::::~:~·~·~·~·~·~·~~ 1
Koskimies Figure 1 a illustrates "a tree view of form-related data within an
application." Koskimies i1 42.
3
Appeal2013-007826
Application 13/245,831
Appellants argue that Koskimies fails to teach a template for
generating an HTML document that includes one or more typed data
structures. Appellants argue, and we agree, that while the form 10 depicts
input fields, Koskimies does not disclose typed data structures included in
the form. See Br. 23. Koskimies states that data structures related to its
forms are "stored in memory or file system" as "a separate XML document
to which form controls refer." Id. (citing Koskimies i-f 42).
Popp fails to remedy the deficiencies of Koskimies because, although
Popp teaches a template for generating HTML documents, Popp similarly
fails to disclose typed data structures included in such a template. See Br.
24. The Examiner cites Popp's disclosures of objects as typed data
structures (Ans. 5), but we agree with Appellants that the objects described
in Popp are not part of a template for generating an HTML document. Popp
states, among other things, that HTML elements in a template are mapped to
objects in an object-oriented environment and the properties of each element
are stored in instance variables of the associated object. Popp i-f 18.
Accordingly, we agree with Appellants that Popp does not remedy the
deficiencies of Koskimies.
Having reviewed each of Appellants' arguments in view of the
Examiner's rejections and the evidence of record, we find Appellants'
arguments persuasive of error in the Examiner's rejection of independent
claim 1, as well as claims independent claims 7, 14, and 20, each of which
recites a template that includes typed data structures. See Br. 43, 44, 46
(claims App 'x). Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner's rejections of
independent claims 1, 7, 14, and 20, as well as dependent claims 2-6, 8-11,
15-19, 21-26.
4
Appeal2013-007826
Application 13/245,831
DECISION
We reverse the Examiner's rejections of claims 1-11 and 14--26.
REVERSED
5