Ex Parte Fratti

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardDec 31, 2012

11103815 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 31, 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. 11/103,815 04/12/2005 Roger A. Fratti 23 8779 7590 12/31/2012 Ryan, Mason & Lewis, LLP 90 Forest Avenue Locust Valley, NY 11560 EXAMINER TRAN, TRANG U ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2422 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 12/31/2012 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 ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte ROGER A. FRATTI ____________ Appeal 2010-001728 Application 11/103,815 Technology Center 2400 ____________ Before CARL W. WHITEHEAD, JR., ERIC S. FRAHM, and ANDREW J. DILLON, Administrative Patent Judges. DILLON, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s rejections of claims 1-21. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. STATEMENT OF THE CASE The present invention addresses a “power-on interval” of digital televisions, which is described as follows: Specifically, when first turned on, the display screens of such flat-panel TV receivers may remain blanked (e.g., black) for several seconds after application of power, and the audio often Appeal 2010-001728 Application 11/103,815 2 remains muted during this period as well. The delay in presenting the audio and video signals is generally required in order for the TV receivers to perform certain initialization functions, such as, for example, loading video buffers in the TV receivers, video decoding, surge protection, etc.” Spec., p. 1, ll. 12-17. In prior systems, an indicator light changes to show whether a television is under a standby mode, a power-on interval, or an operative mode. If the light is not within view, the length of the power-on interval can cause the user to mistakenly think that a remote controller’s ON command was not received and, in turn, to re-press the on-off button and thereby unwantedly turn off the television. Spec., p. 1, l. 25 – p. 2, l. 2. To address this problem, the present invention audibly indicates that the power- on interval is underway. Spec., p. 2, ll. 11-16. Claim 1 is illustrative, with a key disputed limitation emphasized: 1. A circuit for audibly indicating at least one state of a television receiver, the circuit comprising: memory operative to store at least one audio file; and a controller coupled to the memory, the controller being operative, in response to a control signal indicative of the television receiver receiving a power-on command, to forward the at least one audio file to an audio indicating device associated with the television receiver during a power-on interval of the television receiver for audibly indicating the at least one state of the television receiver. Appeal 2010-001728 Application 11/103,815 3 The Examiner relies on the following references as evidence of unpatentability: Hailey Lee Kerman US 5,502,496 US 5,528,316 US 5,659,366 Mar. 26, 1996 Jun. 18, 1996 Aug. 19, 1997 THE REJECTIONS The Examiner rejected claims 1-4, 6-14, and 17-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Kerman.1 Ans. 3-8. The Examiner rejected claims 5 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kerman and Lee. Ans. 8-9. The Examiner rejected claim 16 under § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kerman and Hailey. Ans. 9-10. KERMAN Kerman discloses “[a] notification system for television receivers including a visible alarm and/or an audible alarm that is activated when a certain event occurs.” Kerman, abstract. In Kerman’s notification process, a message is detected within a broadcasted signal and stored to a memory during the standby mode. Kerman, col. 5, ll. 16-21; col., 6, ll. 36-41. The message is displayed “when the television receiver is turned on.” Kerman, col., 6, ll. 36-41. A corresponding visual and/or audio notification alarm is 1 Throughout this opinion, we refer to the Appeal Brief filed March 30, 2009 (“App. Br.”) and the Examiner’s Answer mailed July 7, 2009 (“Ans.”). Appeal 2010-001728 Application 11/103,815 4 presented to the user upon the message’s detection and storage; that is, regardless of whether the receiver is turned on. Kerman, col. 3, ll. 30-35; col. 5, ll. 16-21; col. 6, ll. 40-49. ISSUE Based upon our review of the record, the arguments proffered by Appellant, and the findings of the Examiner, we address the following issue: Under § 102, has the Examiner established that Kerman’s notification system forwards an audio file to an audio indicating device during a “power-on interval,” as required by claim 1? ANALYSIS As reflected by reproduced claim 1 (see emphasis) and the issue statement, Appellant argues that Kerman’s cited notification system does not forward an audio file to an audio indicating device during a power-on interval, as claimed. Appellant argues in part: In the case of a digital television receiver (DTV), the display may not be powered up for several seconds after initiating a power-on command. See, e.g., present specification; page 1, lines 10-17. “During this time period, there is often no, or an inadequate, indication to a viewer regarding the power-on state of the TV ...” Id. at lines 17-19. The notification system taught by Kerman does not remotely address this problem to which the claimed invention is directed. App. Br. 6. The Examiner finds that Kerman’s standby and operative modes occur within a power-on interval and that Kerman’s user notification system, by Appeal 2010-001728 Application 11/103,815 5 way of presenting the audio alarm during these modes, forwards an audio file during a power-on interval. Ans. 10-13. In making this finding, the Examiner interprets “power-on interval” as meaning merely that “portions of the receiver … are active and operating at full power.” Ans. 13. We disagree with Appellant’s argument insofar that claim 1 does not require an audible indication of a television’s power-on state. Rather, claim 1 requires an audible indication of an unspecified “state of the television receiver,” i.e., any type of state. However, we agree with Appellant’s argument insofar that the Examiner failed to apply Appellant’s intended meaning of “power-on interval.” See In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (An applicant “may demonstrate an intent to deviate from the ordinary and accustomed meaning of a claim term by including in the specification expressions of manifest exclusion or restriction, representing a clear disavowal of claim scope.” (citations and quotations omitted)). Particularly, the Examiner failed to recognize Appellant’s clear intention to limit the invention’s “power-on interval” to a duration between television activation (i.e., pressing an on-button) and initialization (i.e., readiness to play the audio and visual components of a programming signal). The limited scope of the “power-on interval” is expressed as follows: These flat-panel TV receivers, including liquid crystal display (LCD) TVs, plasma TVs, digital TVs (DTVs), etc., commonly exhibit an undesirable delayed response time when power is first applied. Specifically, when first turned on, the display screens of such flat-panel TV receivers may remain blanked (e.g., black) for several seconds after application of power, and Appeal 2010-001728 Application 11/103,815 6 the audio often remains muted during this period as well. The delay in presenting the audio and video signals is generally required in order for the TV receivers to perform certain initialization functions, such as, for example, loading video buffers in the TV receivers, video decoding, surge protection, etc. During this time period, there is often no, or an inadequate, indication to a viewer regarding the power-on state of the TV (e.g., whether the TV receiver is on or off). Spec., p. 1, ll. 10-19. The limited scope of the “power-on interval” is further expressed as follows: The power-on interval can be defined herein as a period of time beginning just after application of power to the TV receiver (e.g., about 100 milliseconds (ms) after receiving a power-on command) and lasting for a certain duration (e.g., a few seconds). It is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to a particular start time of the power-on interval, nor is the power-on interval limited to any particular duration. In fact, the present invention contemplates that the power-on interval may be selectively controlled (e.g., start time and/or duration) as a function of certain characteristics of the TV receiver and/or certain viewer configurable attributes. Spec., p. 3, ll. 19-26. And, the limited scope of the “power-on interval” is even further expressed as follows: As previously stated, the power-on interval during which the audible indication is presented preferably begins just after application of power to the DTV receiver 100, such as, for example, about 50-100 ms after depressing a “POWER” button of the DTV receiver or corresponding remote control device, and lasts for a certain duration (e.g., a few seconds). Preferably, the start of the power-on interval is within a response time of a typical viewer, such as less than about 100 ms after depressing the “POWER” button on the DTV receiver or corresponding remote control device. The duration of the Appeal 2010-001728 Application 11/103,815 7 power-on interval may be substantially matched to a duration of, for example, a “warm-up” period of the LCD 114 in the DTV receiver 100, an initialization procedure performed by the DTV receiver, or some alternative reference timing of the DTV receiver, which may be specified, at least in part, by the viewer. Spec., p. 5, ll. 13-22. Though the above excerpts state that the power-on interval can be adjusted, they unequivocally manifest an intention to limit the invention’s power-on interval to a time period occurring between a television’s activation and initialization. Given this limited scope, the Examiner erred in finding that Kerman’s standby and operative modes are executed within a power-on interval.2 Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the § 102 rejection of independent claim 1 over Kerman. Because the Examiner repeats the same error for independent claims 19-21 and the remaining dependent claims, we also reverse: (i) the § 102 rejection of claims 2-4, 6-14, and 17-21 over Kerman; (ii) the § 103 rejection of claims 5 and 15 over Kerman and Lee; and (iii) the § 103 rejection of claim 16 over Kerman and Hailey. ORDER The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-21 is reversed. REVERSED 2 Our holding reflects no determination of whether it would have been obvious to forward an audio file of Kerman’s alarm in response to the television being turned on (e.g., in concurrence with displaying the message) and, in turn, during a power-on interval. Appeal 2010-001728 Application 11/103,815 8 tkl