Ex Parte TytgatDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardFeb 26, 201612483606 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 26, 2016) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 12/483,606 06/12/2009 48116 7590 FAY SHARPE/LUCENT 1228 Euclid Avenue, 5th Floor The Halle Building Cleveland, OH 44115-1843 02/26/2016 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Donny G. Tytgat 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. LUTZ 201025US01 9595 EXAMINER AMIN, JW ALANT B ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2618 MAILDATE DELIVERY MODE 02/26/2016 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 Ex parte DONNY G. TYTGAT Appeal2014-001326 Application 12/483,606 Technology Center 2600 Before ST. JOHN COURTENAY III, JOHN A. EVANS, and MELISSA A. RAAP ALA, Administrative Patent Judges. EV ANS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellant1 seeks our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of the Examiner's final rejection of Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 15-18. App. Br. i. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ). We REVERSE.2 1 The Appeal Brief identifies Alcatel-Lucent as the real party in interest. App. Br. 1. 2 Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the Examiner, we refer to the Appeal Brief (filed May 28, 2013, "App. Br."), the Reply Brief (filed October 29, 2013, Reply Br."), the Examiner's Answer (mailed September 3, 2013, "Ans."), the Final Action (mailed October 4, 2012, "Final Act."), and the Specification (filed June 12, 2009, "Spec.") for the respective details. Appeal2014-001326 Application 12/483,606 STATEMENT OF THE CASE The claims relate to a method of switching from a first to a second video source. See Abstract. Claims 1, 11, and 1 7 are independent. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary Claims 1 and 11, reproduced below with some formatting added: 1. A method for switching from a first video source to a second video source, the first video source producing first video content being displayed to a user, and the second video source producing second video content, the method comprising: - displaying a changing view of a polyhedron with first and second substantially rectangular surfaces starting with at least a view of the first surface and changing the direction under which the polyhedron is viewed until only the second surface is displayed; and, - mapping the first video content and the second video content on the first and second surfaces of the polyhedron, respectively, so that at least the first video content is displayed at least at the beginning of the changing view and the second video content is displayed at least at the end of the changing view. 11. A system for switching from a first video source to a second video source, comprising: - a tuner for obtaining first video content from a first video source and second video content from a second video source; - a composing means receiving said first video content and second video content from the tuner, and arranged for mapping the first video content and the second video content on first and second substantially rectangular surfaces of a polyhedron, respectively; and, 2 Appeal2014-001326 Application 12/483,606 - a image generating and processing means for providing images to a display unit showing the polyhedron starting with the first surface and further showing a changing view of the polyhedron until only the second surface is visible. References and Rejections The Examiner relies upon the prior art as follows: Eiref Herz Ross US 6,621,509 Bl US 7,685,619 Bl GB 2 425 700 A The claims stand rejected as follows: 3 Sept. 16, 2003 Mar. 23, 2010 Nov. 1, 2006 1. Claims 1-5, 9-12, and 15-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Eiref and Ross. Final Act. 2-13. 2. Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Eiref, Ross, and Herz. Final Act. 13. ANALYSIS We have reviewed the rejections of Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 15-18 in light of Appellant's arguments that the Examiner has erred. We agree with Appellant's conclusions. 3 Based on Appellant's arguments in the Appeal Brief, we will decide the appeal on the basis of claims as set forth below. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37( c )(1 )(vii). 3 Appeal2014-001326 Application 12/483,606 CLAIM 11 OBVIOUSNESS OVER EIREF AND Ross Appellant contends that Claim 11 requires a video screen that displays an image of a polyhedron having first and second substantially rectangular surfaces wherein first and second video images are presented respectively on said surfaces. Appellant argues Eiref teaches a polyhedron wherein text is displayed on at least one surface of the polyhedron, but where video is displayed on only a single surface of said polyhedron. Appellant maintains that Eiref distinguishes between the text and video presentations such that Eiref fails to teach displaying video on multiple surfaces. App. Br. 13. The Examiner finds, with respect to Figure 7, video 90 is displayed on a first surface and detailed information 112 is displayed on a second surface. The Examiner finds the detailed information 112 may comprise a second video. Thus, video may be displayed on each of two surfaces of the polyhedron. Ans. 3--4 (citing Eiref, col. 13, 11. 15-19; Fig. 7). Appellant replies the Examiner's findings relate to information from ~ single program that is displayed on the surfaces of a polyhedron, but that Eiref fails to teach video from first and second sources being displayed on first and second surfaces of a polyhedron. Reply Br. 4. With respect to Figure 7, Eiref teaches the plurality of thumbnails represent a TV channel guide where live video may be displayed in one surface along with detailed information about the program, and detailed information regarding the actors in the other surfaces. See Eiref, col. 8. 11. 34--40. Eiref further teaches selection of an information thumbnail which may include live video, channel specific programming information, user options, vertical blanking interval information, and information identifiers. 4 Appeal2014-001326 Application 12/483,606 The information identifier functions as an index to more in-depth data or functions as a title. Based on the selected thumbnail, detailed information is retrieved and displayed on at least one surface of the polyhedron. This information may include live video, text data, and animation data. See Id. col. 13, 11. 6-19. Claim 11 recites, inter alia: "a tuner for obtaining first video content from a first video source and second video content from a second video source." The cited portions of Eiref teach video may be displayed on more than one surface of a virtual polyhedron. However, we find no teaching that such video may be obtained from more than one source, as claimed. Therefore, we decline to sustain the rejection of Claim 11. CLAIMS 12 AND15 OBVIOUSNESS OVEREIREF AND Ross In view of the foregoing discussion, we decline to sustain the rejection of Claims 12 and 15 which depend from Claim 11. CLAIMS 1-5, 9, 10, AND 16-18 OBVIOUSNESS OVER EIREF AND Ross In view of the foregoing, we decline to sustain the rejection of independent Claims 1 and 17 which recite limitations commensurate with those discussed in relation to Claim 11. Similarly, we decline to sustain the rejection of dependent Claims 2-5, 9, 10, 16, and 18. 5 Appeal2014-001326 Application 12/483,606 CLAIM 8 OBVIOUSNESS OVER EIREF' Ross, AND HERZ In view of the foregoing, we decline to sustain the rejection of dependent Claim 8. The Examiner does not apply Herz to the limitations discussed above. DECISION The rejection of Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 15-18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is REVERSED. REVERSED 6 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation