Ex Parte Bardwil

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardMar 27, 2017

12287973 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 27, 2017)

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. 12/287,973 10/14/2008 Steven Bardwil 0260183 3173 63649 7590 03/29/2017 DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC. C/O FARJAMI & FARJAMI LLP 26522 LA ALAMEDA AVENUE, SUITE 360 MISSION VIEJO, CA 92691 EXAMINER HOFFLER, RAHEEM ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2155 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 03/29/2017 ELECTRONIC 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. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address(es): docketing @ farj ami. com farj amidocketing @ yahoo, com ITarj ami @ farj ami. com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte STEVEN BARDWIL Appeal 2015-004579 Application 12/287,973 Technology Center 2100 Before CAROLYN D. THOMAS, JOSEPH P. LENTIVECH, and MICHAEL M. BARRY, Administrative Patent Judges. LENTIVECH, 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—8, 10—22, 24, and 25. Claims 9, 23, 26—28 have been canceled. See App. Br. 13—20 (Claims App’x). We have jurisdiction over the pending claims under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. 1 According to Appellant, the real party in interest is Disney Enterprises, Inc. App. Br. 2. Appeal 2015-004579 Application 12/287,973 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellant’s Invention Appellant’s invention generally relates to computer mediated customization of creative content. Spec. 1. The creative content may be customizable content that includes a modification library and base content which may be a presentation-ready content capable of playback without customization. Spec. 9. A content administrator may use a content customizing application to identify customization rules coded into the customizable content, and determine the content modifiers necessary to produce customized content from the base content, according to customization criteria associated with a target audience for the customized content. Id. The customized content may have customized presentation features such as cultural, geographical, ethnic, architectural, iconographical, and physiological features familiar to the target audience. Id. Claim 1, which is illustrative, reads as follows: 1. A method for producing a customized content from a customizable content, the method comprising: identifying the customizable content; identifying a base content in the customizable content; receiving at least one customizing criterion as input; determining a plurality of content modifiers for harmonizing the base content and the at least one customizing criterion; extracting the plurality of content modifiers from a modification library; and integrating the plurality of content modifiers with the base content to produce the customized content having customized 2 Appeal 2015-004579 Application 12/287,973 presentation features corresponding to an ethnicity of a target audience selected by a customization administrator of the customized content, wherein the selection of the ethnicity of the target audience by the customization administrator alters, according to the ethnicity of the target audience, one or more features included in the base content, wherein the one or more features include a physical appearance of at least one architectural feature in the base content. Rejections Claims 1—8, 10, 11, 13—22, 24, and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination of Quinn et al. (US 2010/0241507 Al; published Sept. 23, 2010) (“Quinn”) and Candelore (US 2006/0174264 Al, published Aug. 3, 2006). Final Act. 2-11. Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination of Quinn, Candelore, and Crist (US 2009/0240736 Al; published Sept. 24, 2009). Final Act. 11-12. ANALYSIS Appellant contends the combination of Quinn and Candelore fails to teach or suggest “wherein the selection of the ethnicity of the target audience by the customization administrator alters, according to the ethnicity of the target audience, one or more features included in the base content, wherein the one or more features include a physical appearance of at least one architectural feature in the base content,” as recited in claim 1. App. Br. 7— 10; Reply Br. 2—3. In particular, Appellant contends Candelore, upon which the Examiner relies (see Final Act. 4—5; Ans. 5, 13—14) does not teach or suggest altering a physical appearance of at least one architectural feature in 3 Appeal 2015-004579 Application 12/287,973 the base content, as recited in claim 1. App. Br. 9. According to Appellant, Candelore, instead, “merely discusses a customization of physical traits or personal characteristics, such as ‘skin color, hair color, eye color, and sex (e.g. male or female).’” Id. (citing Candelore 75, 78, 90—92). Appellant contends Candelore’s teachings of altering “other personal characteristics” (Candelore 185) refer to a characteristic or trait belonging or relating to a particular person and not a physical appearance of an architectural feature, as required by claim 1. App. Br. 9—10. In response, the Examiner finds: Candelore teaches of personalized replacement content that comprises various types of personalization parameters for an end-user to personalize a program for a user. For example, a graphical representation for a character of a program can illustrate a particular age or ethnicity pertaining to a certain target audience, reading on the fact that features of a person or character can be altered to reflect the age, ethnicity, etc. of the intended person or character. In regards to the modification of a physical appearance of at least one architectural feature in the base content, paragraph [0094] of Candelore suggests, “ ... an almost infinite amount of variations to personalize the content of a program be it audio, visual, cartoons, T.V. shows, static animation, movie animation, computer programs, or any sort of audio and/or visual content that is capable of digital representation can be performed with the previously-described apparatus and methods ”, reading on the aspect that all content, including the “static animation”, can be altered based on personalized content which in turn suggests any customization can be made to targeted audience. Applicant’s claim language lacks detail into what the particular architectural features entail and leave its definition open for interpretation. Ans. 14. Having considered the Examiner’s findings with respect to the teachings in Candelore, we find the Examiner has failed to provide sufficient 4 Appeal 2015-004579 Application 12/287,973 findings that show that Candelore teaches or suggests the disputed limitation. The Examiner fails to provide any explanation or reasoning sufficient to show that because Candelore teaches that an almost infinite amount of variations to personalize content of a program, including static animation, can be performed (Candelore 194), Candelore teaches or suggests altering a physical appearance of at least one architectural feature in the base content, as required by claim 1. As such, we are constrained by the record to not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 1; independent claims 10 and 17, which recite commensurate limitations; and claims 2—8, 11, 13— 16, 18—22, 24, and 25, which depend from claims 10 and 17. We also do not sustain the rejection of dependent claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on Quinn, Candelore, and Crist because the Examiner’s application of Crist fails to cure the deficiency in the teachings of Candelore discussed supra. DECISION We reverse the Examiner’s rejections of claims 1—8, 10—22, 24, and 25. REVERSED 5