Ex Parte KIM et al

Patent Trials and Appeals BoardSep 16, 2014

11862040 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Sep. 16, 2014)

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. 11/862,040 09/26/2007 Jung-Hun KIM 1235-447 9330 66547 7590 09/16/2014 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. 290 Broadhollow Road Suite 210E Melville, NY 11747 EXAMINER GREENE, SABRINA LETICIA ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2172 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 09/16/2014 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 JUNG-HUN KIM, YOUNG-HO RHEE, and JAE-HWAN KIM ____________ Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 1 Technology Center 2100 ____________ Before CATHERINE Q. TIMM, ERIC B. GRIMES, and KENNETH G. SCHOPFER, Administrative Patent Judges. SCHOPFER, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 involving claims to a method and apparatus for displaying relation-based information in a mobile terminal. The Examiner rejected the claims as obvious. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm. 1 According to Appellants, the real party in interest is Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. App. Br. 1. Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Background The present invention relates generally to an apparatus and method for displaying relation-based information in a mobile terminal, and in particular, to an apparatus and method for searching and displaying relation-based information on a search target by name without collecting and displaying several pieces of storage information on a per-function basis in a mobile terminal. Spec. 1. That is, rather than sorting, storing, and searching information based on different functions (e.g., call records, texts, and photographs), the mobile terminal sorts, stores, and searches records based on relation-based information (e.g., by the name of the party involved in the call, text, or photograph). Id. at 1-2. The disclosed invention seeks in this way to avoid the “inconvenience that when intending to search storage information (e.g. a call record for one called party, information on short message transmission/ reception, and a photograph), a calling party has to search each of the storage information on a per-function basis to find out relation information on a search target.” Id. at 2. The Claims Claims 1, 3–7, 10, and 12–16 are on appeal. Claim 1 is representative and reads as follows. 1. A method for displaying relation-based information in a mobile terminal, the method comprising: sorting and storing storage data when the storage data can be sorted by the relation-based information; composing a sort-identifier in the storage data and storing the storage data with the sort-identifier, when the storage data cannot be sorted by the relation-based information; Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 3 upon receipt of a request for displaying the relation-based information, searching the storage data for the relation-based information on a search target; sorting, by function, the searched relation-based information and creating and displaying icons having each function as an icon bar; displaying, as a background image, image information on the search target among the searched relation-based information; and upon the selection of an icon from the displayed icon bar, providing the sorted relation-based information depending on a function of the selected icon, wherein in the creating and displaying of the icon bar, the icons are arranged in a regular sequence according to a frequency of use of the icons when the icon bar is created. App. Br. 11 (Claims App’x) (emphasis added). The only other independent claim, claim 10, is directed to an apparatus for displaying relation-based information in a mobile terminal, which includes “a sort-identifier in the storage data for storing the storage data with the sort-identifier in the memory where the storage data cannot be sorted by the relation-based information” and “wherein when creating the icon bar, the icon bar creator arranges the icons in regular sequence according to a frequency of use of the icons.” Id. at 12–13. The Rejections 1. The Examiner maintains that claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 10, 12, 13, and 15 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Lee 2 in view of Kim 3 and Mineki. 4 2 Lee, US 7,260,419 B2, issued Aug. 21, 2007. 3 Kim et al., US 2006/0099978 A1, published May 11, 2006. Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 4 2. The Examiner maintains that claims 5, 7, 14, and 16 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Lee in view of Kim, Mineki, and Handa. 5 DISCUSSION 1. Lee in view of Kim and Mineki The Examiner finds that Lee discloses a method for displaying relation-based information in a mobile terminal including each of the limitations of claim 1 except for “displaying, as a background image, image information on the search target among the searched relation-based information” and “wherein in the creating and displaying of the icon bar, the icons are arranged in a regular sequence according to a frequency of use of the icons when the icon bar is created.” See Ans. 4–7. The Examiner finds that Kim teaches “displaying, as a background image, image information on the search target among the searched relation- based information” as required by claim 1. Ans. 6. According to the Examiner, it would have been obvious to modify Lee to include the displaying of a background image according to Kim “in order to obtain a display where the user can not only input who/what they want to search [but] also see an image(s) of what/who is being searched.” Id. The Examiner also finds that Mineki teaches creating an icon bar in which the icons are arranged in a regular sequence according to a frequency of use of the icons when the icon bar is created. Ans. 7. The Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to modify the method of Lee and 4 Mineki et al., US 5,241,655, issued Aug. 31, 1993. 5 Handa et al., US 2004/0085020 A1, published May 6, 2004. Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 5 Kim with the teaching of Mineki “in order to obtain a method for displaying relation-based information with frequently used icons displayed.” Id. Further, the Examiner finds that “[o]ne would have been motivated to make such a combination because the user would not have to go through a list of menu options/icons he/she use[s] on a regular basis but instead [could] simply select from frequently used icons, as taught by Mineki . . . .” Id. Appellants confine their arguments to the rejection of claim 1. Pursuant to our authority under 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii), we select claim 1 as representative for resolving the issues on appeal with respect to the rejection over Lee, Kim, and Mineki. The issue presented with respect to this rejection is whether the Examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness. Findings of Fact The following findings of fact (“FF”) are supported by a preponderance of the evidence of record. 1. Lee discloses: A method for displaying a call record list in a wireless telecommunication terminal is disclosed. The method includes the steps of: reading a stored call record in response to a call record list searching request; collecting call records having identical caller information in [the] form of a list in sequence of time; and displaying caller information together with more than one icon of the call records. Lee, Abstract. 2. Figure 5 of Lee is reproduced below. Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 6 “[Figure] 5 is a block diagram showing a method for displaying a call record list in a wireless terminal in accordance with the embodiment of the present invention.” Lee col. 2, ll. 63–65. 3. With respect to Figure 5, Lee discloses the following. However, in the present invention, referring to FIG. 5, the call information according to Hong gil dong is displayed in parallel at the second line 512. The user can select one of the parallel displayed icons using direction and selection keys and search detail call information (i.e., time information, incoming/outgoing call information, call time information, etc.), according to the selected icon. Lee col. 4, ll. 40–46. Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 7 4. Figure 4 of Lee is reproduced below. “[Figure] 4 is a flowchart describing a method for displaying a call record list in a wireless telecommunication terminal in accordance with the embodiment of the present invention.” Lee, col. 3, ll. 47–49. Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 8 5. With respect to the flowchart in Figure 4, Lee discloses the following. If there is the name of which telephone number is identical to the telephone number in the call record list, the operation/control unit 12 displays the corresponding name and icons according to the call records of the call record list in order of predetermined sequence, i.e., in parallel at step S409. Herein, the call record includes the call event occurring information, e.g., incoming call information, outgoing call information, missed call information and short message receiving information, etc. and icons of each of the call records are predetermined. If there is no name of which telephone number is identical to the telephone number in the call record list, the operation/control unit 12 displays the telephone number and icons according to the call record of the call record list in order of predetermined sequence, i.e., in parallel at step S411. Lee col. 3, l. 63–col. 4, l. 10. 6. Mineki describes a menu presentation method and data processing apparatus and discloses the following. The data processing method and the data processing apparatus of the present invention may display those icons as separate icons which are frequently used by the operator. This may be readily attained by storing the numbers of times of the use of icons in the external memory as frequency information, and when the power is next turned off, a reading out of the frequency information in a RAM and a selecting of the icons to be displayed as separate icons is effected in accordance with the frequency of use. Mineki col. 14, ll. 16–25. Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 9 Principles of Law “An examiner bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness.” In re Huai-Hung Kao, 639 F.3d 1057, 1066 (Fed. Cir. 2011). Analysis Appellants assert that the proposed combination of Lee, Kim, and Mineki fails to render claim 1 obvious because it fails to teach the step of composing a sort–identifier as recited in claim 1 and displaying of icons according to their frequency of use as further required by claim 1. App. Br. 5–7. For the reasons set forth below, we find Appellants’ arguments unpersuasive. Lee discloses the following: A method for displaying a call record list in a wireless telecommunication terminal is disclosed. The method includes the steps of: reading a stored call record in response to a call record list searching request; collecting call records having identical caller information in form of a list in sequence of time; and displaying caller information together with more than one icon of the call records. FF 1. Figure 5 of Lee is a block diagram showing the result of this method in which data is sorted based on relation-based information where available, e.g. by the name Hong gil dong, and sorted based on a phone number where relation-based information is not available and in which icon bars are created and shown next to each entry in the list. FF 2; FF 3. Figure 4 of Lee is a flow chart of the method for producing the display information represented in Figure 5 and shows the steps of displaying names along with appropriate icons for call records sorted by relation-based information as well as Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 10 displaying icons and phone numbers for entries that cannot be sorted by relation-based information. FF 4; FF 5. As an initial matter, we find that Appellants’ argument regarding the step of composing a sort–identifier does not adequately explain why the Examiner erred in finding that Lee discloses “composing a sort-identifier in the storage data and storing the storage data with the sort-identifier, when the storage data cannot be sorted by the relation-based information,” as required by claim 1. See App. Br. 7. Appellants point to Lee’s Figure 2 and other figures as not supporting the finding, but the Examiner cited to column 1, lines 23-27. Appellants do not explain why the portion of Lee cited by the Examiner fails to support the Examiner’s finding. The Examiner further clarifies that Lee teaches this limitation because, when no “relation-based information” is available, Lee teaches displaying the telephone number on the call record list. Ans. 17. Based on the disclosures of Lee described above, we find no apparent error in the Examiner’s reasoning, and Appellants have not apprised us of any. Turning to Appellants’ argument that the combination of art fails to teach arranging and displaying the icons according to their frequency of use, we note that the Examiner relies upon Mineki as teaching the frequency limitation. Ans. 7. Mineki discloses the following. The data processing method and the data processing apparatus of the present invention may display those icons as separate icons which are frequently used by the operator. This may be readily attained by storing the numbers of times of the use of icons in the external memory as frequency information, and when the power is next turned off, a reading out of the frequency information in a RAM and a selecting of the icons to be displayed as separate icons is effected in accordance with the frequency of use. Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 11 FF 6. According to the Examiner, it would have been obvious to include icons arranged according to frequency of use based on this teaching in Mineki. Ans. 7. We find that Appellants’ argument on this point also fails to adequately explain why the Examiner erred in making this conclusion. See App. Br. 5–7. 6 Appellants merely make statements about portions of Mineki cited by the Examiner, and then contend that Mineki, either alone or in combination, fails to teach the step of composing a sort-identifier as recited in claim 1. App. Br. 7. But the Examiner did not rely upon Mineki as teaching the composing step, the Examiner relied upon Lee. Ans. 6-7. The Examiner relied upon Mineki for a teaching regarding the arranging of icons in a regular sequence according to the frequency of their use. Ans. 7. As found by the Examiner, Mineki discloses displaying icons based on their frequency of use and we find no apparent error, and Appellants have not apprised us of any, in the Examiner’s conclusion that it would have been obvious to incorporate this teaching into the combined device of Lee and Kim. 6 In their reply, Appellants raise new arguments regarding this combination, which we decline to address here. An argument raised for the first time in a Reply Brief can be considered waived if Appellants do not explain why it could not have been raised previously. See Ex parte Nakashima, 93 USPQ2d 1834 (BPAI 2010) (informative) (explaining that arguments and evidence not timely presented in the principal Brief will not be considered when filed in a Reply Brief, absent a showing of good cause explaining why the argument could not have been presented in the Principal Brief); Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ2d 1473, 1477 (BPAI 2010) (informative) (“Properly interpreted, the Rules do not require the Board to take up a belated argument that has not been addressed by the Examiner, absent a showing of good cause.”). Appeal 2012-005844 Application 11/862,040 12 Based on the foregoing, we find that the Examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness that Appellants have failed to rebut. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 10, 12, 13, and 15. 2. Lee in view of Kim, Mineki, and Handa Appellants have not presented any separate arguments with respect to this rejection. Accordingly, based on the findings above, we affirm the rejection of claims 5, 7, 14, and 16. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, we affirm the rejection of claims 1, 3–7, 10, and 12–16. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv). AFFIRMED dw