Apple Computer Inc. v. Burst.com, Inc.
Filing
74
Declaration of Nicholas Brown filed byApple Computer Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A Part 1# 2 Exhibit Exhibit A Part 2# 3 Exhibit Exhibit A Part 3# 4 Exhibit Exhibit A Part 4# 5 Exhibit Exhibit B Part 1# 6 Exhibit Exhibit B Part# 7 Exhibit Exhibit B Part 3# 8 Exhibit Exhibit B Part 4)(Brown, Nicholas) (Filed on 12/9/2006)
Case 3:06-cv-00019-MHP
Apple Computer Inc. v. Burst.com, Inc.
Document 74-4
Filed 12/09/2006
Page 1 of 30
Doc. 74 Att. 3
<
> -
/?
\
/
Serial No. 289776
I
,
-5-
Art Unit
_-
235
3
>
Nichols discloses the digitizing and the compressing (col 9 lines 1-22) of claim 12. Nichols inherently includes the,video cassette becaus Nichols discloses a VTR which includes a video.cassette. Nichols in fig 1 discloses the first means receiving the signal from the cassette of claim 13. Nichols in fig 4 discloses the first means(100 106 and 1121, the second means(fig1 24) and the third means(fig 1 16) of claim 14.
_-
/
Nichols discloses t%e'coinpressed digital data (col 9 lines 125) of claim 15. Nichols in fig 4 discloses the audio video recorder(co1 2 lines 28-33) the audio video control unit(96, 118, 122!, and 168) the memory (100, 106 112, and 1701, the first means(98, 120,124, and 1681, the second means(fig 1 24) and the third means(fig 1 16)of claim 25.
,
Nichols in fig 4 discloses .the video control unit which
> '
digitizes and rnodiiies (96,118,122,168) of claim-26. Nichols in fig 1 discloses the video cassette recorder being I . a single deck(22) of claim 27. -Nichols discloses the audio control unit which digitizes and compresses(co1 9 lines 1-20) of claim 28 means of claim 29
1 indirectly sent to the
APBU-00000061
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 3:06-cv-00019-MHP
Document 74-4
Filed 12/09/2006
Page 2 of 30
,
; -.
-.
\,
\
Serial No. 289776 Art Unit 235
-6-
control unit. Nichols inherently includes the expanded signal because the picture signal is modified to include time
\
information. Nichols in fig 1 discloses the fifth means because the editor is connected to the VTR. Nichols in fig 1 discloses the audio video recorder(22), and the audio video control unit(l4)of claim 30. Nichols in fig 4 discloses the A/D converter(96 118, 122 and 168), the D/A converter(142,144, 146 and 1761, the compressor/decompressor(col
9
lines 1-20) the controller(l4),the central processor(fig/l 12)
the random access memory(co1 14 lines 20-251, the transmitting means(fig 1 221, the modifier of the controller, and RAM (fig 1 24), the memory(100,106,112, and 170) the memory transmitter means(fig 1 24)an the receiver transmitting means(fig 1 24) and the digital control unit(fig1 24) of claim 30. Nichols in fig 4 discloses the digital form controller of Claim 31 because the signals are converted to digital form. Nichols in fig 1 discloses the medium transmitting means (24) of claim 32.
,
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 103 which forms . the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action : identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such thqt the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentabil-ity shall not be negatived by the manner in which
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not
APBU-00000062
Case 3:06-cv-00019-MHP
Document 74-4
Filed 12/09/2006
Page 3 of 30
Serial No. 289776 Art Unit 235'
-_
t
--.
`.l
-7i
the invention was made. Subject matter developed by another person, which qualifies as prior art only under subsection ( f ) or (9)of section 102 of this title, shall not preclude patentability under this section where the subject matte? and the claimed invention were, at the time the invention was made, owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person. Claims 3 , 16, and 17 are rejected &der
35 U.S.C.
§
103 as
being unpatentable over Baldwin in view of Lem. Baldwin does not disclose the' coupled telephone means of claim 3 . Lem discloses the coupled telephone means (co 45-50] of claim 2. skill in the art to modify Baldwin with the coupled telephone
means as taught by Lem because a telephone line provide remote transmission capability. Baldwin inherently includes the first means and the second means of claim 16 because the digital signal must have originally been an analog signal. Baldwin does not disclose the third means of claim 16. hem discloses the third means (col 2 lilies 45-50) the art
I .
of
claim 16. It wou1d;have been obvious to one of ordinarv skill in to modify Baldwin
. %
with the third me
s taught by Lem
n capability.
I because a telephone line provide remote trans
1-2O)of claim 17. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§
- Baldwin discloses the compressed digital data( col 9 lines
103 as being
unpatentable over Baldwin in view of Ohira,
APBU-00000063
Case 3:06-cv-00019-MHP
Document 74-4
Filed 12/09/2006
Page 4 of 30
Serial No. 289776 Art Unit
235
-.
..I
\
-8-
? .
Baldwin does not disclose the optical fiber of claim 2. Ohira discloses the optical fiber(co1 3 lines 30-35) of claim 2. It would have been obvious to one of'ordinary skill in the art to modify Baldwin with the optical fiber as taught by Ohira
because optical fiber is a well known method of coupling devices (e g telephone systems). Scott and Hoshimi further shows the state of the art. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to W. Daniel Swayze at telephone number ( 7 0 3 ) 557-8002.
.
PHSTEVEN 1. STEPHAN PRIMARY EXAMINER RRT UNIT 239
/
APBU-00000064
Case 3:06-cv-00019-MHP
Document 74-4
Filed 12/09/2006
Page 5 of 30 __
TO SEPARATE, HOI 0 TOP A N D BOTTOM EDGES, SNAP-APART A N 0 DISCARD CARBON
REV. 3-78)
ORM PT0892
US. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PATENT AND TRAOEMAAK OFFICE
SERIALNO*
r.
ART -IT
NOTICE OF REFERENCES CITED
/'"
,' APPLICANT(S)
,/%% 9736
33s-
ATTACHMENT TO PAPER NUMBER .
-
L4fV lJNAME
OOCUMENTNO.
I
OAk"
I
I
CLASS
I
CLASS
SUB-
FILING
APPROPRIATE
DATE IF
-.
DOCUMENT NO.
DATE
.
COUNTRY
NAME
cuss
LASS
PERTINENT SHTS PP. D W G SPEC
L
M
N
0
P
0
OTHER REFERENCES (Including Author, Title, Date, Pertinent Pages, Etc.)
I "I
C
T
I
"I
A copy of this reference is not being furnished with this office action. (See Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, section 707.05 (a).)
. ..
..
APBU-00000065
Case 3:06-cv-00019-MHP
Document 74-4
Filed 12/09/2006
Page 6 of 30
hfh? 2 ? 1990
GROUP 230
I N THE
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
ART U N I T 235 Examiner W. Daniel Swayze
fitrofwf.&rCh
Richard A. Lang
ail** mniling LtIUntmtm.E2JUQ%
12, 1990
CASE
SERIAL NO.
3352L (204) 07/2a9,776
December 27, 1988
cenify thrr d , j &e Unit4 S r u a pbvur 4,AdrCuwc" snke UDdar n,
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?