SONY INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA LLC

Patent Trials and Appeals BoardAug 25, 2021

2020005851 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 25, 2021)

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. 14/711,723 05/13/2015 Carter Lipscomb SCEA-14027 9412 15827 7590 08/25/2021 Polsinelli LLP - SIEA 3 Embarcadero Center Suite 2400 San Francisco, CA 94111 EXAMINER SAX, TIMOTHY P ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3685 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 08/25/2021 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): scea_patent_docket@Playstation.Sony.com sfpatent@polsinelli.com uspt@polsinelli.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________________ Ex parte CARTER LIPSCOMB __________________ Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 Technology Center 3600 ____________________ Before MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, JAMES P. CALVE, and TARA L. HUTCHINGS, Administrative Patent Judges. CALVE, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant1 appeals from the decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1, 2, 4–14, and 16–22, which are all of the pending claims.2 We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We AFFIRM. 1 “Appellant” refers to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies Sony Interactive Entertainment America LLC as the real party in interest. See Appeal Br. 3. 2 Claims 3 and 15 are cancelled. See Appeal Br. 19, 22 (Claims App.). Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 2 CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER Claims 1, 10, and 19 are independent. Representative claim 1 recites: 1. A method of providing temporary authorization for customized software, the method comprising: forming a local wireless connection between a base computing device and a portable storage device associated with a user account; receiving a profile data set at the base computing device from the portable storage device via the local wireless connection; identifying, at the base computing device and using the profile data set, a software application and secured user software settings that customize the software application based on one or more previous executions of the software application on a second base computing device; downloading the software application from a network server to a memory of the base computing device in response to receipt of the profile data set at the base computing device; receiving an authorization token at the base computing device from the portable storage device via the local wireless connection; authorizing access to the secured user software settings at the base computing device using the authorization token; storing the software application and the secured user software settings in the memory of the base computing device temporarily until the local wireless connection between the portable storage device and the base computing device is terminated; executing, at the base computing device, the software application; customizing execution of the software application on the base computing device based on the one or more previous executions of the software application on the second base computing device according to the secured user software settings in response to authorizing access to the secured user software settings; Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 3 identifying that the local wireless connection between the base computing device and the portable storage device is terminated; and terminating access at the base computing device to the software application and the secured user software settings automatically in response to identifying that the local wireless connection is terminated. Appeal Br. 18–19 (Claims App.). REJECTIONS Claims 1, 4, 5, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 19–21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Burckart,3 Ferrazzini,4 and Kitagawa.5 Claims 2, 6, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, and Rohatgi.6 Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, and Hammad.7 Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, and Giobbi.8 Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, and Fisk.9 Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, and Brooks.10 3 US 2010/0009756 A1, published January 14, 2010. 4 US 2011/0213843 A1, published September 1, 2011. 5 US 2002/0100037 A1, published July 25, 2002. 6 US 2005/0210270 A1, published September 22, 2005. 7 US 2011/0270757 A1, published November 3, 2011. 8 US 8,918,854 B1, issued December 23, 2014. 9 US 2013/0047233 A1, published February 21, 2013. 10 US 2017/0063987 A1, published March 2, 2017. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 4 ANALYSIS Claims 1, 4, 5, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 19–21 Rejected over Burckart, Ferrazzini, and Kitagawa Appellant argues the claims as a group. See Appeal Br. 12–16. We select claim 1 as representative. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(iv). Regarding claim 1, the Examiner finds that Burckart forms a local wireless connection between a base computing device (gaming system 102) and a portable device (wireless device 104), receives a profile data set (e.g. gaming profile data) at the base computing device from the portable storage device via the local wireless connection, identifies at the base computing device and using the profile data set a software application and secured user software settings that customize the software application based on previous executions of the software application on a second base station computing device, authorizes access to the secured user software settings at the base computing device using an authorization token, stores the secured user software settings in a memory of the base computing device, and customizes execution of the software application according to the secured user software settings (e.g., game settings). Final Act. 3–4. The Examiner cites Ferrazzini to teach storing a software application and secured user software settings in the memory of a base computing device until a local wireless connection between the portable storage device and the base computing device is terminated, identifying that the local wireless connection is terminated, and terminating access at the base computing device to the software application and secured user software settings automatically in response to identifying that the local wireless connection is terminated as claimed. Id. at 5. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 5 Appellant argues that Ferrazzini does not terminate access at the base computer device to secured user software settings automatically in response to identifying that the local wireless connection is terminated. Appellant argues that an “account” is not equivalent to “secured user software settings” because the account cannot “customize execution” of any “application” as the “secured user software settings” are claimed to do. Appeal Br. 13. In response, the Examiner explains that Burckart’s gaming system receives gaming profile data that includes user settings and game settings associated with a particular software application, and Ferrazzini downloads an application to a terminal device when the terminal device connects with a portable storage device and removes the application when the connection is terminated. Ans. 4. The Examiner explains that Burckart and Ferrazzini both install data on a base device when it establishes communication with a second device such that it would have been obvious in view of Ferrazzini’s teaching to uninstall such downloaded applications when a connection is terminated between devices to uninstall the game settings in Burckart when the connection between the two devices is terminated. Id. at 4–5. The Examiner also explains that Ferrazzini installs other types of data when it installs applications such as contact data and historic messages for an IM application, and Ferrazzini uninstalls the IM application and these user software settings when communication between computer 116 and computing device 108c is terminated. Ans. 5. The Examiner explains that Ferrazzini installs and uninstalls applications, ancillary applications, and data and lists for the application on computer 116 when it associates and disassociates with portable device 108c and thus installs and uninstalls other data (user software settings) associated with an application as claimed. Id. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 6 We agree with Appellant that Ferrazzini’s termination of access by computer 116 to “an account or application associated with device 108c” when a communication session between computer 116 and portable device 108c is terminated does not teach or suggest “terminating access at the base computing device to […] the secured user software settings automatically in response to identifying that the local wireless connection is terminated” as recited in claim 1. Appeal Br. 13; see Final Act. 5 (finding that Ferrazzini terminates access at base computing device (computer 116) to a software application and secured user software settings (e.g., account) in response to identifying that the local wireless connection is terminated). However, we disagree with Appellant’s argument that the Examiner “effectively admits that Ferrazzini fails to disclose anything equivalent to the Appellant’s claimed ‘secured user software settings.’” Reply Br. 6 (citing to Ans. 3–6). In the Answer, the Examiner explains that Ferrazzini discloses in paragraphs 70 and 72 that computer 116 can install an IM application with contact data and historic messages sent and received by the IM application when computer 116 connects to portable computer device 108c. Ans. 5. The Examiner finds that the contact data and historic messages of the IM application correspond to the claimed “secured user software settings” and reasons that all of this data (IM application, contact data, historic messages) that are installed by computer 116 when it establishes communication with portable device 108c are uninstalled when that communication is terminated. Id. The Examiner explains that paragraph 93 of Ferrazzini teaches to install and uninstall applications, ancillary applications, and data and lists that are associated with an application on computer 116, and Ferrazzini thus teaches that the other data and lists are uninstalled as well as the application. Id. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 7 The Examiner’s findings that Ferrazzini terminates access at a base station computing device to a software application and user software settings automatically in response to identifying that a local wireless connection is terminated (as recited in claim 1) is supported by Ferrazzini’s teachings as cited by the Examiner. Final Act. 5 (citing Ferrazzini ¶¶ 55, 72, 73); Ans. 5 (citing Ferrazzini ¶¶ 70, 72, 93). Ferrazzini describes a process to access applications and data that are associated with the applications to include ancillary applications so that computer 116 can access and run the application properly. Ferrazzini ¶ 70. If computer 116 accesses an IM application through portable device 108c, “contact data for the IM application may be provided to computer 116” and “historic message data relating to messages (sent and received) by device 108c may be provided to computer 116” with ancillary applications. Id. Ferrazzini also teaches that such an application may be downloaded from device 108c (or another device) to computer 116 when a connection is established between computer and device 108c. Id. ¶ 72. The application has an uninstall routine to remove the application, and the uninstall routine may be triggered when computer 116 disconnects from device 108c. Id. Ferrazzini further teaches an install/uninstall application 612C that “installs and uninstalls applications, ancillary application, data and lists associated with an application on computer 116 that is used in association with device 108c” and does so upon detecting termination of the connection between computer 116 and device 108c. Id. ¶ 93 (emphasis added). These teachings indicate that computer 116 installs an application and ancillary applications and associated data when it connects with device 108c and uninstalls these items when the connection is terminated as claimed. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 8 The Examiner’s determination that “it is reasonable to conclude that all of this same data that is installed when the communication between computing device 108c and computer 116 is established, is also uninstalled when the communication between computer device 108c and computer 116 is terminated” (Ans. 5) is supported by Ferrazzini’s teaching in paragraph 93 to “install[] and uninstall[] applications, ancillary applications, data and lists associated with an application on computer 116 that is used in association with device 108c.” Appellant does not dispute that Ferrazzini installs and uninstalls “data and lists” associated with applications but argues that “Ferrazzini fails to provide any detail regarding the ‘data and lists’ that in any way suggest equivalence to the claimed ‘secured user software settings.’” Reply Br. 8. Appellant argues that “secured user software settings” customize execution of the software application on the base computing device based on the one or more previous executions of the software application on [a] second base computing device.” Id. We disagree. In the case of IM applications that Ferrazzini installs on computer 116 with ancillary applications and associated contact data and historic message data relating to messages sent and received, Ferrazzini’s teaching to install and uninstall associated “data and lists” supports the Examiner’s finding that Ferrazzini uninstalls the associated contact data and historic message data of the IM application when it uninstalls the IM application. Ans. 5. The “data and lists” of an IM application are a contact list and historic message data. We therefore consider whether contact data and historic message data of an IM application correspond to the claimed “user software settings” in claim 1. We determine that they do for the following reasons. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 9 The Specification indicates that “software settings” are settings that pertain to software applications that the user has run before. Spec. ¶ 35. These software settings can include anything that the user has customized about their copy of a particular piece of software. For example, these software settings can include customization of options, network connection settings, saved game files if the software is a video game, or achievements obtained if the software is a video game, or multiplayer settings if the software is a video game, or a music/media library if the software is a music/media software application, or a set of subscribed podcasts or radio/television stations or websites or newspapers if the software is a subscription software application, or a “continue” point if the software is a media player software application . . . . Id. (emphasis added). Contact data is something “the user has customized about their copy of a particular piece of software.” Spec. ¶ 35. The historic message data of messages sent and received by a user (perhaps on another device) is similar to “a music/media library” of a music/media software application or “a set of subscribed podcasts . . . or newspapers if the software is a subscription software application.” Id. Historic message data is customized content that was generated/received and stored by the IM application for the user. The Examiner’s finding that Ferrazzini’s removal of applications from computer 116 when a session terminates with device 108c also removes the user contact data and historic message data installed with an IM application is supported by the explicit teachings of Ferrazzini to uninstall applications, ancillary applications, and associated user data and lists when computer 116 disconnects from portable device 108c. See Ferrazzini ¶¶ 70, 72, 93; Ans. 5. The data and lists uninstalled with an application correspond to the claimed “user software settings” consistent with the Specification. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 10 We also agree with the Examiner that Burckart receives gaming profile data at a base gaming system from a portable wireless device via a local wireless connection and uses the profile data to identify a software application and “secured user software settings” as claimed. The secured user software settings are user settings and game settings used to customize the software application. Burckart ¶¶ 33, 35, 74, 77, 78; see Final Act. 3. Appellant does not dispute that Burckart receives profile data that includes “secured user software settings” as claimed. See Appeal Br. 12–16; Reply Br. 6–10. Instead, Appellant argues that the gaming profile data is not installed on gaming system 102. Id. We disagree. Burckart’s gaming system 102 includes a gaming profile manager 304 that receives gaming profile data and associates the gaming profile data with a gaming profile stored on gaming system 102. Burckart ¶¶ 32, 35. Gaming profile manager 304 receives a username, user settings, and game settings from wireless device and “[t]he username, user settings, and game settings may be used to create or update a gaming profile on the gaming system 102.” Id. ¶ 35. The gaming profile data 802 includes user settings 810 and game settings 814 for the user corresponding to a particular game or gaming controller configuration for a game. Id. ¶¶ 77, 78. Gaming profile data 802 “may be used to create and/or update the gaming profile 804 on the gaming system 102.” Id. ¶ 74; see Ans. 4 (citing Burckart ¶¶ 32–35, 73–79). Burckart’s teaching to associate user settings and game settings with a gaming profile stored in gaming system 102 and to create/update a gaming profile on the gaming system 102 with gaming profile data that includes a username, user settings, and game settings (Burckart ¶¶ 32–35, 73–79) teaches to install “secured user software settings” on gaming system 102. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 11 The associating, creating, and updating of a gaming profile on gaming system 102 stores/installs game profile data, which corresponds to “secured user software settings” such that it would have been obvious to uninstall these user software settings when a connection between gaming system 102 and wireless device 104 is terminated in view of Ferrazzini’s teachings to uninstall applications and their associated data and lists such as contact data and message history data of an IM application from computer 116 when its connection to device 108c is terminated. Ans. 4–7. Appellant’s argument that it would not have been obvious to use the uninstall routine of Ferrazzini to uninstall the “gaming profile data” of Burckart without changing the functionality of Ferrazzini, Burckart, or both is not persuasive in view of these teachings. Reply Br. 9–10. The Examiner proposes to apply Ferrazzini’s technique to the similar system of Burckart for predictable results of uninstalling game profile data on Burckart’s gaming system 102. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007) (“[I]f a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill.”); Ans. 4–7. Furthermore, the Examiner reasonably determines that uninstalling software applications and secured user software settings at a base station in response to identifying that the local wireless connection is terminated as in Burckart and Ferrazzini also terminates access to these elements at a base computing device as claimed. Ans. 5. Appellant does not dispute or refute this finding and interpretation of the Examiner. See Reply Br. 6–11; Appeal Br. 14; In re Jung, 637 F.3d 1356, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2011). Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 12 The Examiner’s interpretation is consistent with the claim language interpreted in light of the Specification. Claim 1 recites “terminating access at the base computing device to the software application and the secured user software settings automatically in response to identifying that the local wireless connection is terminated.” Appeal Br. 19 (Claims App.). No particular way of terminating access is claimed, however. The Specification indicates that base computing device may lose its authorization to run software applications and access user software settings. It may lose authorization to run a software application and software settings received from a user’s profile data set, or it may be required to delete copies of the software application and software settings obtained from a portable device. Spec. ¶¶ 46, 51. We do not limit claim 1 to any particular way of terminating access to software applications and user software settings when the language is broad enough to encompass each of these ways described in the Specification. Ferrazzini terminates access to an installed software application and its user software settings by uninstalling (i.e., deleting) the application and user software settings when a connection is terminated between a base computer and a portable device. Ferrazzini ¶¶ 70, 72, 93. Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of claim 1 and claims 4, 5, 10, 11, 13, 14, 19–21, which fall therewith. Rejections of Dependent Claims 2, 6–9, 12, 16–18, and 22 Appellant argues the patentability of claims 2, 6–9, 12, 16–18, and 22 because they depend from independent claim 1 or claim 10. Appeal Br. 16. Because we sustain the rejection of claims 1 and 10, these arguments are not persuasive and we also sustain the rejections of these claims. Appeal 2020-005851 Application 14/711,723 13 CONCLUSION In summary: Claim(s) Rejected 35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/ Basis Affirmed Reversed 1, 4, 5, 10, 11, 13, 14, 19–21 103 Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa 1, 4, 5, 10, 11, 13, 14, 19–21 2, 6, 12 103 Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, Rohatgi 2, 6, 12 7, 16 103 Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, Hammad 7, 16 8, 17 103 Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, Giobbi 8, 17 9, 18 103 Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, Fisk 9, 18 22 103 Burckart, Ferrazzini, Kitagawa, Brooks 22 Overall Outcome 1, 2, 4– 14, 16–22 No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv). AFFIRMED