Ex Parte St. Laurent et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardApr 23, 2013

11854442 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 23, 2013)

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. 11/854,442 09/12/2007 Darren M. St. Laurent PD-207100 4890 20991 7590 04/23/2013 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. PATENT DOCKET ADMINISTRATION CA / LA1 / A109 2230 E. IMPERIAL HIGHWAY EL SEGUNDO, CA 90245 EXAMINER HSU, ALPUS ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2465 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 04/23/2013 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 DARREN M. ST. LAURENT, DANIEL M. MINER, DAVID T. BOLTZ, CARL D. OSTROM, and MITCHELL B. WASDEN ____________ Appeal 2010-012464 Application 11/854,442 Technology Center 2400 ____________ Before JOSEPH A. DIXON, ST. JOHN COURTENAY III, and CARLA M. KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judges. KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a non-final rejection of claims 1-24. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. Appeal 2010-012464 Application 11/854,442 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a method and system for monitoring and controlling the switching of a back-up network adapter at a local collection facility from a remote facility of a signal collection and uplinking system (Spec. ¶ [0001]). Independent claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the subject matter on appeal. 1. A method comprising: receiving a plurality of channel signals; generating a first plurality of encoded signals from the plurality of channel signal at a local collection facility; multiplexing the first plurality of encoded signals at a multiplexer to form first multiplexed signals; forming a primary asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) circuit between the local collection facility and the remote facility; forming first ATM signals from the multiplexed signals; communicating the first ATM signals to a remote facility through the primary ATM circuit; generating control signals to tear down the primary ATM circuit at the remote facility; communicating the control signal to tear down the primary ATM circuit to the local collection facility; tearing down the primary ATM circuit; Appeal 2010-012464 Application 11/854,442 3 multiplexing a second plurality of encoded signals at the multiplexer to form second multiplexed signals; forming a secondary ATM circuit between the local collection facility and the remote facility; forming secondary ATM signals from the second multiplexed signals; communicating the secondary ATM signals to the remote facility through the secondary ATM circuit; and generating an output signal at the remote facility in response to the secondary ATM signals. REFERENCES and REJECTIONS The Examiner rejected claims 1-5, 8-14, 19, 20, 22, and 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon the teachings of Aghvami (US Patent App. Pub. No. 2006/0166699 A1, July 27, 2006) and Chang (US Patent App. Pub. No. 2006/0133352 A1, June 22, 2006). The Examiner rejected claims 6, 15, and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon the teachings of Aghvami, Chang, and Eriokson (US Patent App. Pub. No. 2006/0198389 A1, September 7, 2006). The Examiner rejected claims 7, 17, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon the teachings of Aghvami, Chang, Eriokson, and Fukuoka (US Patent App. Pub. No. 2009/0022241 A1, published January 22, 2009, PCT filed January 19, 2006). The Examiner rejected claims 21 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon the teachings of Aghvami, Chang, and Chang-2 (US Patent App. Pub. No. 2006/0098735 A1, May 11, 2006). Appeal 2010-012464 Application 11/854,442 4 ANALYSIS Appellants contend the Examiner is incorrect finding the combination of Aghvami and Chang teaches or suggests Appellants’ claims 1-6 and 13- 15. That is, Chang does not teach ATM technology and Chang’s handover “does not involve tearing down one circuit to form another circuit” as claimed (App. Br. 11). We agree with Appellants. The Examiner is trying to combine two different technologies: Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) in Aghvami and Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) in Chang. However, ATM technology is not reasonably combinable with VOIP technology in the manner proffered by the Examiner, as these technologies use different protocols. (See Ans. 6). Additionally, we agree a handover is not the same as a tear down, that is “there is no remote facility that generates control signals to tear down the primary ATM circuit in the Chang reference” (App. Br, 10). We also agree with Appellants the Examiner is incorrect in finding monitoring signals in Chang is the same as control signals for tearing down a primary ATM circuit as claimed (App.Br. 10; Reply Br. 3). Thus, the Examiner erred in concluding claims 1 and 13 are obvious over the combination of Aghvami and Chang, and claims 2-5, 8-12, 14, 19, 20, 22, and 23, which depend therefrom and were argued together (App. Br. 9). The remaining dependent claims 6, 7, 15-18, 21, and 24 were rejected over various combination of the cited references. These claims are also not obvious over the collective teachings of the cited references due to their dependency on claims 1 and 13, and further, none of the additionally cited references cures the deficiencies of Aghvami and Chang. Appeal 2010-012464 Application 11/854,442 5 The Examiner objected to claims 1-6 and 13-15 stating the term “ATM signals” in paragraph 44 of Appellants’ Specification should be re- labeled “ATM cells” (Ans. 3). However, this is a petitionable, rather than appealable, matter, and we express no opinion as to its propriety. See 37 CFR § 1.181. DECISION The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed. REVERSED tkl