Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 93

Defendant's MOTION Defendant and Counterclaim-Plaintiff Apple Inc.'s Claim Construction Brief by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Christine Saunders Haskett, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit 12, # 14 Exhibit 13, # 15 Exhibit 14, # 16 Exhibit 15, # 17 Exhibit 16, # 18 Exhibit 17, # 19 Exhibit 18, # 20 Exhibit 19, # 21 Exhibit 20)(Pace, Christopher)

Download PDF
EXHIBIT 14 ATTORNEY DOCKr:T NO. P IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK / Applicants: DeLuca, et aI. Application No.: 08/672,004 Group Art Unit: 2735 Filed: June 24, 1996 Examiner: E. Merz For: Method and Apparatus for Controlling Utilization of a Process Added to a Portable Communication Device I HEREBY CERTIFY mAT THIS CORRESPONDENCE IS BEING DEPOSITED WITH mE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE AS FIRST CLASS MAIL, POSTAGE PREPAID, IN AN ENVELOPE ADDRESSED TO: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS Ay~t 13.1998 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20231, ON: Date of Deposit Assistant Commissioner for Patents Washington, D.C. 20231 Sir: In response to the Office Action dated May 20, 1998, please amend the application as follows: IN THE CLAIMS Please cancel claims 21, 23, 24, 27 and 28 without prejudicr~ I , \.0 c; ~, c· e-() f'0 -.' C CJ co :t:>o ~:::: <;.-') N <::> " .. .:r:- ::.>: :::D ti -! t. • • .) f T'; -.:::: ""r~ "1 ~ eo 1 737FH124 ATTORNEY DOCKt:T NO. PT01678UPOI Please amend claim 29 as follows: ---~------------------;7-'---- [The portable communication device of cla' Claim 31, line 3, replace "polynomial generator" with -secure ploynomial-. 2 737FH125 ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. PT01678UP01 Remarks The rejection of claims 21, 23, 24, 27 and 28 has been rendered moot in light of the cancellation of those claims. Claim 29 has been made independent, incorporating all the limitations of the base claim~ claim 27. Reconsideration of the rejection of claims 22, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 31 under 35 U.s.c. §103(a) as being unpatentable over McGregor et al., (5,577,100), is respectfully requested in light of the amendment to claims 29 and 31, and for the following reasons. The mobile phone system of McGregor et al., lacks"a request receiver element coupled to the processor for receiving a request from the portable portion, the request comprising at least a software name, a secure checksum and an address identifying the portable portion", as recited in the third element of daim 22 at lines 7 - 9. In particular, neither the mobile phone 30 of McGregor nor the mobile phone 30a of McGregor makes a request of the central processing unit 14 of McGregor comprising a secure checksum. Furthermore, McGregor fails to disclose a request comprising "a size of the software, and in which the secure checksum is a secure cyclic redundancy check of the software for which the portable portion is requesting authorization", as recited in claim 25. Also, McGregor does not teach an apparatus 112.at a fixed portion 102 of a communication system that "uses a secure polynomial stored in the memory (228) of the apparatus (112) to calculate the secure cyclic redundancy check", as recited in claim 26. In particular, the central processing unit 14 of McGregor does not use a se.cure polynomial to calculate a secure cyclic redundancy check. In fact, McGregor does not teach anything about calculating a secure cyclic redundancy check. Finally, the mobile phones 'of McGregor do not generate a secure cyclic redundancy check by using a polynomial generator stored in the memory of the mobile phone. In particular, McGregor does not teach that which is claimed in claim 31, "in which the secure cyclic redundancy check is generated by the portable communication device (112) by using a secure polynomial (311) stored in the memory (310) of the portable communication device". Accordingly, it is believed that the rejection of claims 22, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 31 under 35 U.s.c. §103 has been overcome by the remarks. The remaining cited references have been reviewed and are not believed to affect the patentability of the claims as amended. The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any fees which may be required or credit any overpayment to deposit account # 13-4778. 3 737FH126 AITORNEY DOCKET NO. PT01678UPOI In view of the above, it is submitted that the claims are in condition for allowance. Reconsideration of the rejections is requested. However, should the Examiner disagree with applicant's attorney in any respect, it is respectfully requested that the Examiner telephone applicant's attorney in an effort to resolve such differences. Respectfully submitted, DeLuca et al. MOTOROLA, INC. Intellectual Property Department 1500 Gateway Boulevard, MS 96 Boynton Beach, Florida 33426-8292 Michael Zazzara Attorney for Ap Reg. No. 35,743 Tel. (561) 739-3969 FAX (561) 739-2825 4 737FH127

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?