Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 160

CLAIM CONSTRUCTION RESPONSE BRIEF re: #151 Mirror Worlds' Claim Construction Brief, filed by Apple Inc. (Attachments: #1 Decl. of Stefani C. Smith ISO Apple's Brief, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C, #5 Exhibit D, #6 Exhibit E, #7 Exhibit F, #8 Exhibit G, #9 Exhibit H, #10 Exhibit I, #11 Exhibit J, #12 Exhibit K, #13 Exhibit L)(Smith, Stefani) Modified on 1/11/2010 (mll, ).

Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Doc. 160 Att. 5

:t /3(B
DKT. 515091R~
to

lO-t¡,-cj
STATES PATENT AN TRAEM OFFICE

Applicants
Serial No.

Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER
CPA of 08/673,255

Group Art Unit: 2771

Prior Application

Filed
For

June 28, 1996

Examiner: W. Amsbury

DOCUMENT STREAM OPERATING SYSTEM
the Americas 1185 Avenue of New York, New York 10036 October 16, 1998

Received
Assistant Commissioner of Patents Box CPA Washington,D. C. 20231

Deï 2 i! l~~ö

Group 2700

PRELIMINARY AMMENT
This Preliminary Amendment is filed in connection with the above-identified continuation continued prosection application
("CPA") of u.S. Serial No. 08/673,255 filed June 28, 1996 ("Prior

Application") . An Office Action was issued in the Prior
Application on April 17, 1998 setting a three-month period for

a response. On October 16, 1998, applicants filed a Petition
for A Three-Month Extension Of Time from July 17, 1998 to October

17, 1998 to respond to the Office Action. Accordingly, the Prior
Application is pending today and this CPA and Preliminary
Amendment are timely filed.

Before examining the CPA, applicants respectfully request
that the CPA be amended as indicated below.
IN THE CLAIMS

As indicated below:

(1) Please can.i claims A- ¿: and ~ithout prejudice; and
(2) Please amend claims 1, 2, 4, 6-12, 14-21, and 23 by

/')

".'.1")' ./

APMW0015101

227 CFH 653
Dockets.Justia.com

~

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 2

deleting the text in the square brackets ~ ()" and by inserting

the underlined text; and ~
(3) Please ad~w claims ~~

Claims 22 and 24 are unchanged, but are included below to
present all the pending claims in one document.

--1. Twice Amended) A computer (program) system for organizing

system, rising:

(one ore) each data (units) unit received by the computer
means generating one or more data unit streams, the data

unit data unit stream;
iving (one or more of the data units,) each
data unit (associated ith one or more chronological indicators)L

means for selectin a timestam to identif each data unit.
ective timestam ; (and)

means uni t with at least one
data (units) unit according

to the timestam chronological (indicators)
indicator so as to include each (of th data (units) unit in at

least (one of) the main data unit (strea stream; and

means for storin each data to the
. chronoloaical indicators.---.--~
i

--2. (Amended) The computer (program) system of claim 1, wherein

1?ß
:i ~
.r'._-"

(the chronological indicators comprise) each timestamp is
selected from the aroup consistina of: past, present, and future
times. --

-~(Canceled) .-3
-¡r. (Amended) The computer (program) svstem of claim 1, wherein

j)3
"I

...- ~"

-i

;i

APMW0015102

227 CFH 654

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 3

each data unit includes textual data, video data, audio data
and/or multimedia data.-. .,
i

'--

-~ (Canceled) .-\

_ït. (Amended) The computer (program) system of claim i, wherein

3f
r;5

the means for receiving further comprises means for receiving
data units from the (Word) World Wide Web.--

,5
--1. (Amended) The computer (program) system of claim i, wherein said means for receiving further comprises means for receiving

data units from a client computer.--

--8.

Amended) A method for organizing (one or more) each

ity

data steps of:

by a computer system, comprising the

generating ne or more data unit streams, the data unit
streams includin
receiving (one or ore of the) data units,) each data unit

(associated with chronological indicators) L
selectin associatin
; (and)

. each data unit. chronolo ical

timestamp in the (indicators) indicator

linking each (of the) data (un' ts) to the

so as to include in at least (one
storin each data unit stream accordin
indicators. --

of) the main data unit (streams) stream: an
:¡

1

i,'t

l~

J:b

--1.1Ý (Amended) The method of clai~ ,Ijwherein (the chronological

\..--1 ,
§

J

i

¡

Ii

APMW0015103

227 CFH 655

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 4

indicators comprise) each timestamp is selected from the aroup

.~~-~.~--..,.~..~".

consistina of: past, present, and future times"--

The method of claim 8, further comprising the

'l\lo _ ~ step of disp ~'\ J L indicia represent ~e i streams. -~
'7

the data unit streams (, wherein respective
it) on a display device as visual

unit
. ~"1

--)A.

(Amended) The method of claim t, wherein each data (units)

includes textual data, video data, audio data and/or

multimedia data.--

-

(Twice Amended) The method of claim (8) 10, wherein step

i~

b1

of display'

the data unit streams further comprises the steps

of:
a) receiving
indications of one or
streams corresponding to one

user one or more (values indicative)
lected segments of the data unit

ånd

b) displaying the selected segment the streams
corresponding to the selected intervals of time).--

--13 ~nCeled) .-(program according to claim 1 further)

each data unit received b the com uter

system, means for
for associatin
indicator havin

than one data unit stream" means

at least onechronolo ical
the data

unit. means for

to other

\"

i

'\

'i

APMW0015104

227 CFH 656

ì.. ._.

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 5

accordin to the res ective chronolo ical indicator.
means
each data unit stream accordin

to the

means

access to stream;
means

a data unit havin indicia to allow second data unit
the indicia in the
the first data unit stream

second data unit stream; and
means for providing access

from (a) the second data unit stream (5

a data unit
indicia. --

indicating the first stream) in accordance

11

~~

--15. (Amended) A computer (program) s
(1) 11 further comprising:

means for providing ted access to (a) the first data
uni t stream from e second data unit stream by generating
a data

(the first stream and) access privileges
unit stream.--

to the

4l --)6. (Amended) The computer (program) system according to claim 1, further comprising:
means for displaying (data from one) alternative versions
of the content of the data units (in abbreviated form).--

_~ computer (program) system according to claim 1 further comprisiñg: means for summarizing

the contents

of data units in a data unit stream
overview data units.--

--18. (Amended).A computer (program) system
-\:---.-

..~.-. ..-

\....

¡;l

APMW0015105

227 CFH 657

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 6

1 f comprising:
ans for archiving £ data (units having) unit associated

wi th chronological (indicators) indicator older than a
specified point while retainina the respective chronoloaical

indicator data unit havin a res ective alternative
content of the archived data unit.--

--19.

(Amended) A computer (program) svstem according to claim for sumarizing further comprises means for
overview data units to include chanaes

continuously updating

in the contents of dat

units in the data unit stream bein

~~\\~.

summarized. --

--20. (Amended) The method 0

comprising the
unit stream from a second
indicating the first

step of:
providing access to a first

data unit stream by generating a

data unit stream.--

--21. (Amended) The method of claim 8,
(step) steps of ~

comprising the

selecting access privileges to
stream (for access of) from a second

stream); and

providing access to the first data unit strea
second data unit stream according to the access privil es.-__ 2. (Unchanged) The method of claim 8, further comprising the

step of:
N,6,
displaying data from one of the data units in abbreviated
form. --

Vi

APMW0015106

227 CFH 658

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 7

ended) The method of claim 8, further comprising the

summarizing (data from one or
units in a data unit stream to generate one or more 0
units. --

of data

ew data

--

--24. (Unchanged) The method of claim 8, further comprising the

~.v~

step of:
archiving data units having chronological indicators older

than a specified time point.--

~\

--2 computer system of claim 1, wherein the computer

cOY

progra comprises one set of operations for operating on
all data units regardless of the type of timestamp in the respective hronological indicator, the type of timestamp
selected from t e group consisting of past, present, and future
times. --

~IO

--26. (New) The compute system of claim 1 further comprising:
means to generate add' tional data unit streams from existing

data unit streams.--

--27. (New) A computer r organizing each data unit
received by the computer system,

for associating each data unit chronological
indicator having a respective timestamp ich identifies the
respective data unit; means for chronologicall linking each data

means for generating unit stream; means

unit to other data units according to respective

chronological indicator; means for storing each unit stream
according to the chronological indicators;

1

APMW0015107

227 CFH 659

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 8

means for representing d~e or more data units of a selected
data unit stream on a display ~evice as document representations,

each document representation i including the timestamp of the

respective data unit and the rder of appearance of each data

representation on the display determined by the timestamp
of the respective data unit;
means for selecting which

ta units are represented on the

display device by selecting one

f the document representations
tat ions

and displaying document represe

corresponding to data
timepoint; and

uni ts having timestamps wi thin a

means for selecting
representations with a pointing
represented by the selected documen

more

of

the

document

vice so that the data units
representations are further

i~'

displayed with a second document
alternative version of the content 0

epresentation comprising an
the respective data unit.--

;il
--~ . (New) A computer
dimensional effect.--

system as in claim 9', wherein the

~
~

document representations form a visual stream having a threeJ:ß
. --tJ. (New)

A computer system as in claim ?¡, wherein each

document representation comprises a polygon and the polygons
overlap to form a visual stream of polygons.--

~( ;i

-~t6. (New) A computer system as in claim fZ, wherein the threedimensional effect further comprises a perspective view.--

--3ï. (New) A computer system as in claim yr, wherein the
alternative version is an abbreviated version.-

ÇL 1 :J~

~

APMW0015108

227 CFH 660

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 9
~()

;5
(New) A computer system as in claim 21, wherein' the

--)1.

alternative version is a caption version.-

--'Ø. (New) A computer system as in claim p, wherein the alternative version is an expanded version.-

j(

ß/

ji . J~

--~. (New) A computer system as in claim ~, further comprising:
means for selecting one or more alternative versions of the

~~

~~

content of a respective data unit to display another alternative
version of the content of the data unit.-1)--36. (New) A computer system as in claim 1, further comprising:

means for generating a data unit comprising an alternative

versioñ of the content of another data unit; and
means for associating the alternative version data unit with

the chronological indicator of the another data unit.--

') --~) .

J3
(New) A computer system as in claim ~, further comprising:

means for updating the display device to provide a document

representation for data units associated with chronological
indicators having timestamps which become the present time.-~

4

i
.1 1 ~ :¡ ,~ .~ i.

1
~
t;
~ '~ í

i
~

./ i

!

\1
..1
I :.,

APMW0015109

227 CFH 661

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 10

RES
Claims 1-24 were pending in this application. Claims 3, 5,

and 13 have been canceled without prejudice, claims 1, 2, 4, 6-

12, 14-21, and 23 have been amended, and new claims 25-36 have

been added by this Preliminary Amendment. Accordingly, claims
1-2, 4, 6-12, and 14-36 are presently being examined.

Applicants have amended independent claims 1 and 8 to more

clearly recite the subject matter of invention. Specifically,
amended claims 1 and 8 recite that: (1) each data unit received
by the computer system is organized and included in at least the

main data unit stream; (2) each data unit is identified by a

timestamp selected for a chronological indicator; (3) the

chronological indicator is associated with the data unit; (4)
each data unit is linked to other data units according to the
timestamp in the chronological indicator; and (5) each data unit

stream is stored according to the chronological indicators.
Claims 2 and 9 have been amended to conform to the recitation of

timestamps in amended claims 1 and 8 , respectively. Further,

claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 14-19 have been amended to recite a

computer system. Support for these amendments can be found, inter alia, from page 11, line 12 to page 12, line 10, on page
12 in lines 21-25, on page 20 in lines 14-19, and on page 27 in
lines 9-14 and 19-21 of the subject specification.
Claim 10 has been amended to specifically recite that a data

unit stream can be displayed as a 'visual stream'. Support for
this amendment can be found, inter alia, in Fig. 1 and on page
17 in lines 11-13 of the subject specification.
Claims 16-19 and 23 have been amended and new claims 27 and

31-35 have been added to more clearly recite using the content
of one or more data units: (1) to generate additional data units

having alternative versions of the content (amended claims 17,

APMW0015110

227 CFH 662

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 11

19, 23, and

new claim 35) ; (2) to display alternative versions

of the content (amended claim 16 and new claims 27 and 31-34);

(3) to use data units having alternative versions of the content
as part of the archiving aspect of the subject invention (amended

claim 18). Support for these amendments and new claims can be
found, inter alia, on page 14 in lines 11-23, on page 17 in lines

13-16, on page 18 in lines 1-3, on page 21 in lines 10-21, from
page 24, line 17 to page 25, line 6, one page 27 in lines 9-21,

on page 33 in lines 15-19 of the subiect specification.
Claims 12, 15, 20, and 21 have been amended to consistently recite 'data unit stream(s)' instead of 'stream(s)'. Support for

these amendments can be found, inter aiia, on page 11 in lines

11-22 of the subject specification. Claim 12 also has been
amended to recite 'indications' instead of values. Support for
this amendment can be found, inter alia, on page 21 in lines 4-9

of the subject specification. Claim 15 has been further amended
to be dependent on amended claim 14 and to allow for a separate data unit for providing the access privileges. Support for this

amendments can be found, inter alia, on page 23 in lines 11-18
of the subject specification. In addition, claims 12, 15 and 21'

have been further amended to simplify the claim language, and
claims 6, 11 and 12 have been amended to correct typographical
errors. Support for these amendments can be found, inter alia,
in the claims themselves.

Applicants also have amended claim 14 to be an independent

claim which recites essentially the same subject matter as
amended claim 1 except for the main data unit stream, and also to recite: (1) means for generating a data unit having indicia
which provides access to a first data unit stream from a second
data unit stream; (2) means for including the access indicia data unit in the second data unit stream;, and (3) means for providing

APMW0015111

227 CFH 663

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 12

access to the first data unit stream using the indicia. Support
for these amendments can be found, inter alia, from page 11, line

12 to page 12, line 10, on page 12 in lines 21-25, on page 20 in

lines 14-19, on page 27 in lines 9-14 and 19-21, and from page
21, line 22 to page 22, line 10 of the subject specification.

In addition, applicants have added new claim 25 to
explici tly recite the symetry of the computer system, to wit,
the same operations are used to operate on data units associated

wi th chronological indicators having timestamps of the past,

present, or future. Support for this amendment can be found,

inter alia, from page 11, lines 22 to page 12, line 1 of the

subject specification. New claim 26 also has been added to
recite that a data stream can be formed from another data stream.

Support for this amendment can be found, inter alia, on page 19
in lines 15-18 of the subj ect specification.

Applicants additionally have added new independent claim 27

which derives from canceled dependent claims 3 and 5, and

dependent claim 16. Specifically, new claim 27 recites
essentially the same subj ect matter as amended claim 1 except for

the main data unit stream, and also recites: (1) means for

representing data units on a display device as document

representations, each document representation having the'
timestamp, and ordered according to the timestamp; (2) means for

selecting which data units are represented on the display using

a timepoint; and (3) a pointer device for selecting document

representations to be further displayed with an alternative

version of the respective data unit. Support for these
amendments can be found, inter alia, from page 11, line 12 to
page 12, line 10, on page 12 in lines 21-25, from page 15, line
24 to page 16, line 2, on page 17 in lines 13-16, on page 20 in lines 14-19, from page 25, lines 19 to page 26, line 2, on page

APMW0015112

227 CFH 664

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 13

27 in lines 9-14 and 19-21, and in Fig. 1 of the subject

specification.
New claims 28-30 have been added to specifically recite the

way in which the visual stream is displayed, that is: (1) three-

dimensionally (new claim 28); (2) as data representations of
overlapping polygons (new claim 29); and (3) in a perspective
view (new claim 30). Support for these new claims can be found,
inter alia, from page 25, lines 19 to page 26, line 2 and in Fig.
1 of the subj ect specification.

New claim 36 has been added to specifically recite that data

uni ts associated with a chronological indicator having a
timestamp of a future time become displayed when the future time

becomes the present time. Support for this new claim can be
found, inter alia, on page 20 in lines 19-22 and in Fig. 1 of the
subj ect specification.

The Office Action has 26 numbered sections: (1) sections

1, 2 and 23-26 are of an informational nature and do not require
a response from the applicants; (2) sections 3, 4, 7, 12, and

16

reject claim 13 which has been canceled without prejudice by this

Preliminary Amendment; (3) sections 5, 8-10, 13, and 14 maintain
and repeat rejections from the September 19, 1997 Office Action;
(4) sections 17-22 reject claims first presented in the previous

Amendment; and (5) sections 6, 11 and 15 respond to the
applicants' arguments in the previous Amendment.

In this Preliminary Amendment, each of the following the short form provided in the documents are referred to by
parenthesis following the full title of the document:
(1) ~The Cyber-Road Not Taken" by David Gelernter from The Washington Post dated April 3, 1994 (~Gelernter Article");

(2) U.S. Patent No. 5,530,859 to Tobias, II et al. (~Tobias") ;
(3) ~Getting Results with Microsoft Outlook 97", pp. 28-29
(~Outlook"); and

APMW0015113

227 CFH 665

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 14

(4) D.S. Patent No. 5,297,032 to Trojan et aL. ("Trojan").
Section 2 of the Office Action states that the Petition for

the addition of David Gelernter as an inventor was to be forwarded to the Petitions Branch for processing after the
mailing of this Office Action.
Applicants have received a Corrected Filing Receipt for the

Prior Application indicating that David H. Gelernter has been
added as an applicant (inventor). Accordingly, as indicated on
the Preliminary Amendment, 'both the Prior Application and this

CPA have two inventors, Eric Freeman and David H. Gelernter.

Sections 3, 4, 7, 12, and 16 of the Office Action,
respectively, rejected claim 13 under: (1) 35 D.S.C. §112, second

paragraph as being indefinite; (2) 35 D.S.C. §101 as being
directed to non-statutory subject matter; (3) 35 D.S.C. §102(b)

as being clearly anticipated by the Gelernter .Article; (4) 35
U.S.C. §102(a) as being anticipated by Tobias; and (5) 35 U.S.C.
§102 (a) as being anticipated by Outlook.

Applicants hereinabove have canceled claim 13 without
prejudice. Accordingly, applicants respectfully submit that the

rejections of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. §112, second paragraph,
35 U.S.C. §101, and 35 U.S.C. §102 are now moot.

In view of the cancellation of claim 13, applicants
respectfully request that the rejections raised against claim 13

be reconsidered and withdrawn.

Sections 5 and 6 of the Office Action rej ected claims 1-4,
and 8-11 under 35 U. S. C. 102 (b) as being clearly anticipated by

the Gelernter Article.

Specifically, the Office Action states that the rej ection
made in the previous Office Action is maintained. Applicants
note that in the previous Office Action, no particular reason was

APMW0015114

227 CFH 666

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996
Page 15

made for this rejection. However, this Office Action states that

applicants' arguments in the previous Amendment that the
Gelernter Article does not anticipate chronological indicators
were not persuasive because the 'paradigm' (broadly interpreted)

as described in the Gelernter Article contains chronological

indicators which are inherently required in interactive
navigation of a chronological stream. The Office Action also
notes that: (1) the 'paradigm' of the Gelernter Article allows

entries at arbitrary points; (2) appointments are inherently
included; (3) the claim language includes the case of a single

data stream that includes all data units, which is clearly
anticipated by the Gelernter Article phrase "Your 'lifestreams

captures your whole life"; and (4) nothing is claimed about symmetry, other than in the sense of the Gelernter Article in
which any data unit can be included in a chronological stream.

Applicants hereinabove have amended claims 1 and 8 to emphasize and more clearly recite: selecting a timestamp to identify each data unit, associatinq each data unit with a
chronological indicator including the timestamp, linkinq each
data unit into a pata unit stream according to the timestamp, and

storinq the data unit stream according to the chronological
indicators. The Gelernter Article, in contrast, fails to teach

or suggest any such means or steps. Indeed, the Gelernter
Article only addresses display of data units in chronological
order, and neither teaches nor suggests any implementations of
the 'paradigm', and specifically, does not teach or suggest the
identification, association, linkage, and storage steps or means

for data units of data unit streams as recited in the amended
claims. While a time indication traditionally has been used to

prepare a display of data in chronological order, using a time

indication for the purposes of identification, association,

APMW0015116

227 CFH 668

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 16

linkage and storage for data units in data unit streams is not.

Thus, applicants respectfully submit that, for at least this

reason, amended claims 1 and 8 are not anticipated by, nor

unpatentable over, the Gelernter Article.
Further, applicants respectfully submit that the 'paradigm'

described in the Gelernter Article neither 'inherently' includes

nor renders obvious to one of skill in the art, the
timestamp/chronological indicator identification, association,
linkage, and storage any more than that the 'paradigm' inherently

"allows entries at arbitrary points" or includes future

"appointments". Applicants submit that the Gelernter Article
never discusses or suggests inclusion of data units anywhere but

at the end of the stream (that is, at the present) or inclusion

of a future time data unit in a data unit stream. Instead, the
Gelernter Article only discusses display of data units of the
past and adding data units in the present.

With respect to the inclusion of all data unit in a single

data stream, applicants respectfully submit that while the
Gelernter Article discusses including all "chunks of information"

in a single lifestream, the Gelernter Article fails to teach or

suggest the generation of additional streams as recited in amended claims 1 and 8. Indeed, the Gelernter Article teaches
away from additional streams by stating on page 4: "I want to
spend no time whatsoever orGanizinG it (my life). In short, I
want £ 'lifestream'" (emphasis added). Also, while the Gelernter

Article relates to viewinG its Lifestream selectively, there is no teaching or suggestion that the "chunks of information" of a
selectively viewed Lifestream are linked to be included in a data

uni t stream entity or that a data unit stream is generated and

stored according to chronological indicators as taught by the
subject invention and as recited in at least amended claims land

APMW0015117

227 CFH 669

i

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 1 7

8.
With respect to symetry, applicants note that new claim 25

explicitly recites such 'symmetry' in that the same operations

can be performed on a data unit regardless of whether the data
uni t has a past, present, or future timestamp.
Since amended claim 3 has been canceled, and because amended

claims 2 and 4 and amended claims 9-11 are dependent on amended

claims 1 and 8 respectively, and because a claim which depends
on another claim is subject to all the limitations of that other

claim, applicants respectfully submit that amended claims 2, 4,

and 8-11 are not anticipated by, nor unpatentable over, the
Gelernter Article for at least the same reasons discussed above
wi th respect to amended claims land 8. least because amended claims 1-2, 4 and 8-1l Therefore, at

each recite, or are dependent upon. a claim which recites: selecting a timestamp to identify each data unit, associatinG

each data unit with a chronological indicator including the
timestamp, linkinG each data unit into a data unit stream according to the timestamp, and storinG the data unit stream
according to the chronological indicators, amended claims 1-2,
4 and 8-11 are neither anticipated by, nor unpatentable over, the

Gelernter Article.
In view of the remarks above, applicants respectfully
request that the rejection of claims 1-4 and 8-11 as anticipated
by the Gelernter Article under 35 U.S.C. §102 (b) be reconsidered

and withdrawn.
Section 8 of the Office Action rej ects claims 5-7, and 12

under 35 U. S. C. 103 (a) as being unpatentable over the Gelernter

k\rticle. Specifically, the Office Action states that the rej ection
made in the previous Office Action is maintained. The previous

APMW0015118

227 CFH 670

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996

Page l8

Office Action stated that claims 5-7, and 12 were rejected because: (1) displaying segments of a Lifestream according to
intervals of time would have been obvious to one of skill in art;

(2) one of skill in the art would know an entire Lifestream could

not be displayed on a television set at once; and (3) with
respect to claims 6 and 7, one of skill in the art would know how
to receive data units from the World Wide Web or client computer.

Since claim 5 has been canceled and since claims 6, 7, and

12 are dependent on claims 1 and 8 respectively, and because a

claim which depends on another claim is subject to all the
limitations of that other claim, applicants respectfully submit
that claims 6, 7, and 12 are not unpatentable over the Gelernter

Article for the at least the same reasons discussed above with respect to amended claims 1 and 8. In view of the remarks above, applicants respectfully request that the rej ection of claims 6, 7, and 12 as being unpatentable over the Gelernter Article under 35 U. S. c. §103 (a)
be reconsidered and withdrawn.

Sections 9 and 11 of the Office Action rej ect claims 1-5,
8-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Tobias.

Specifically, the Office Action states that the rej ection
made in the previous Office Action is maintained. The previous

Office Action stated that claims 1-5 and 8-12 were rejected
because: (l) with respect to claims 1 and 8, Tobias teaches
receiving/receiving means, and linking/linking means; (2) with

respect to claims 2 and 9 Tobias discusses that the software
clock can run forward or backward; (3) with respect to claims 3,

4, 10, and 11 Tobias targeted displaying the clocks and
multimedia; and (4) with respect to claim 5 and 12, Tobias
focused on showing segments of time for presentation. The Office

Action also notes with respect to applicants' arguments in the

APMW0015119

227 CFH 671

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 19

previous Amendment that Tobias: (1) fails to link all the data

units into a stream; and (2) distinguishes between data units
which perform a task and those which do not, were not persuasive.

The Office Action states that these distinctions are specious
because the claims recite "one or more data units", which is not
every unit in some specified system, and, also, do not recite any

task performance of the data units. According to the Office
Action, therefore, the claims do not distinguish over the units

of Tobias. The Office Action also noted that the Gelernter
Article ~paradigm' as "described in numerous sources" requires

that each data unit be applied to all items associated with a
system and/or person as part of the definition, motivation, and
organization

of the 'paradigm'.

Applicants hereinabove have amended claims land 8 to more

clearly recite that "each data unit" received by the computer
system is identified by a selected timestamp, associated with a

chronological indicator including the timestamp, linked into a
data unit stream according to the timestamp, and stored as part
of a data unit stream according to the chronological indicator.

In contrast, Tobias does not teach or suggest such

timestamp/chronological indicators for identification,
association, linkage, and storage for data units of a data unit
streams as taught by the subject invention and as recited in at

least amended claims 1 and 8. For example, in column 18, lines

10-22 and 54-63, and in Figs. 28 and 30 of Tobias, graphic
objects and MIDI sequences are discussed and illustrated without
any teaching or suggestion that all of these obj ects or sequences

are identified by a timestamp, associated with a chronological
indicator including the timestamp, linked into a data unit stream

according to the timestamp, and stored as part of a data unit

stream according to the chronological indicator. Indeed,

APMW0015120

227 CFH 672

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 20

according to Tobias, MIDI sequences and graphic objects only
become associated with a time, that is, a clock object in Tobias,.

when the user decides to create such a linkage, see column 19,
lines 54-65 of Tobias. Accordingly, unlike the subj ect invention

and as recited in amended claims 1 and 8, Tobias fails to teach
or suggest a computer system in which each data unit received by

the computer system is identified by a selected time stamp,
associated with a chronological indicator having that timestamp,

linked into a data unit stream according to the timestamp, and

stored as part of a data unit stream according to the

chronological indicator.
Also, with respect the particular application of Tobias in

which segments of music, that is MIDI sequences, are
chronologically related by the timestamps, one of skill in the
art would not consider using the subject invention as recited in

at least amended claims 1 and 8, because the timestamps of the
subject invention and, thus, linkages are selected irrespective of the content of the data unit. Accordingly, even if only data

units having music content are received by the computer system
of the subject invention, the data units will be placed in the

main data stream without regard to the musical flow, resulting

only in noise mixed with data units having nothing to do with

music. Thus, at least because amended claims 1 and 8
specifically recite that each data unit received by the computer
system is linked and stored in at least a main data stream (that
is, without regard to the task to be performed by that data unit)

according to a timestamp in a chronological indicator, amended
claims 1 and 8 are neither anticipated by, nor unpatentable over,

Tobias. In addition, Tobias, like the Gelernter Article, fails
to teach or suggest any means or steps for storing the data unit

streams according to the chronological indicators.

APMW0015121

227 CFH 673

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 21

With respect to the uncited "numerous sources" which
describe the paradigm of lifestreams of Gelernter, applicants
respectfully submit that a broad paradigm stating that "all items

associated with a system and/or a person" is insufficient to
teach or suggest how the items become associated with a system
or person, and certainly fail to teach or suggest how the items

become identified by a selected timestamp, associated with
chronological indicators having the selected timestamp, linked
into a data unit stream according to the timestamp, and stored

as part of a data unit stream according to the chronological
indicator as taught by the subj ect invention and as recited in
amended claims 1 and 8.
Since claims 3 and 5 have been canceled, and because amended

claims 2 and 4 and amended claims 9-12 are dependent on amended

claims 1 and 8 respectively, and because a claim which depends
on another claim is subject to all the limitations of that other

claim, applicants respectfully submit that amended claims 2, 4,

and 8-l2 are neither anticipated by, nor unpatentable over,

Tobias for the same reasons discussed above with respect to
amended claims 1 and 8.

In view of the remarks above, applicants respectfully
request that rejection of claims 1-5 and 8-12 as anticipated by

Tobias under 35 U.S.C. §102(a) be reconsidered and withdrawn.
Section 10 of the Office Action rejects claims 6 and 7 under

35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Tobias.

Specifically, the Office Action states that the rej ection
made in the previous Office Action is maintained. The previous
Office Action stated that claims 6 and 7 were rej ected because
one of skill in the art would know how to receive data units from

the World Wide Web or client computer.

Since claims 6-7 are indirectly dependent on claim 1 and

APMW0015122

227 CFH 674

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 22

because a claim which depends on another claim is subject to all

the limitations of that other claim, applicants respectfully
submit that claims 6-7 are not unpatentable over Tobias for at

least the same reasons discussed above with respect to amended

claim 1.
In view of the remarks above, applicants respectfully
request that the rejection of claims 6-7 as unpatentable over
Tobias under 35 U.S.C. §l03(a) be reconsidered and withdrawn.
Sections 13 and 15 of the Office Action rejected claims 1-3,

6-8, and 10 under 35 U. S. C. 102 (a) as being anticipated by
Outlook. Specifically, the Office Action states that the

rejection made in the previous Office Action is maintained. The
previous Office Action stated that claims 1-3, and 6-8 were
rejected because: (1) with respect to claims 1, 3, 8, and 10,

Outlook has data units dated in a sequence displayed in a
journal; and (2) with respect to claims 6 and 7, the Web and
client computers are well-known sources of e-mail. The Office

Action also states that applicants' arguments in the previous
Amendment that Outlook fails to link all data units into a stream

in that only selected records are linked is not persuasive. The
Office Action states that these distinctions are specious because

the claims recite "one or more data units", which is not every
unit in some specified

system. According to the Office Action,

therefore, the claims do not distinguish over the units of

Outlook.

As discussed above with respect to Tobias, applicants
hereinabove have amended claims 1 and 8 to more clearly recite

that "each data unit" received by the computer system is

identified by a selected timestamp, associated with a
chronological indicator having the timestamp, linked into a data

unit stream according to the timestamp, and stored as part of a

APMW0015123

227 CFH 675

r-

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 23

data unit stream according to chronological indicators. In

contrast, Outlook does not teach or suggest such
timestamp/chronological indicator identification, association,

linkage, and storage for data units of data unit streams. For
example, on page 28 of Outlook, the "contacts" are discussed and

illustrated without any indication that the "contacts" are identified by a timestamp, associated with a chronological
indicator, linked into a da'ta unit stream according to the
timestamp and stored as part of a data unit stream according to

chronological indicators. Indeed, these "contacts" are not
listed in the chronological journal of Outlook. Instead, the
journal of Outlook records "activities related to the contacts".

Thus, if Outlook provides a teaching of how to identify,
associate, link, and store "contacts", that teaching is not to
use timestamps/chronological indicators to form data unit streams

as taught by the subject invention, but instead to list the

"contacts" as shown by the non-chronological display of
"çontacts" on page 28 of Outlook. Accordingly, Outlook teaches

away from identifying, associating, linking, and storing each
data unit received by the system into data unit streams according

to a timestamp/chronological indicator. Since amended claims 1

and 8 specifically recite that each data unit received by the
computer system is identified by a timestamp, associated with a
chronological indicator having the timestamp, linked into a data

unit stream according to the timestamp, and stored as part of a

data unit stream according to chronological indicators, amended
claims 1 and 8 are neither anticipated by, nor unpatentable over,

Outlook under 35 U.S.C. §102(a).
Since claim 3 has been canceled, and because amended claims

2, 6, 7, and 10 are dependent on amended claims i or 8
respectively, and because a claim which depends on another claim

APMW0015124

227 CFH 676

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 24

is subject to all the limitations of that other claim, applicants

respectfully submit that amended claims 2, 6, 7, and 10 are not

anticipated by, nor unpatentable over, Outlook for the same
reasons discussed above with respect to amended claims 1 and 8.

In view of the remarks above, applicants respectfully request that the rejection of claims 1-3, 6-7, 8 and 10 as

anticipated by Outlook under 35 U. S. C. §102 (a) be reconsidered
and withdrawn.

Section l4 of the Office Action rejected claims 2, 4-5, 9,
11 and 12, under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over

Outlook.

Specifically, the Office Action states that the rej ection
made in the previous Office Action is maintained. The previous

Office Action stated that claims 2, 4-5, 9, 11, and 12 were
rejected because: (1) with respect to claims 2 and 9, it would
have been obvious to one. of

skill in the art to include past,

present and future times because Outlook deals with "all

acti vi ties" associated with "contacts"; (2) with respect to
claims 4 and 11, meeting data involves multimedia of various
kinds; (3) with respect to claims 5 and 12, one of skill in the

art would display designated segments of the "Journal" at one

time.

Since claim 5 has been canceled without prej udice, and since
amended claims 2, 4, 9, and 11-12 are dependent on amended claims

1 or 8, and because a claim which depends on another claim is
subj ect to all the limitations of that other claim, applicants

respectfully submit that amended claims 2, 4, 9, and 11-12 are

not unpatentable over Outlook for at least the same reasons
discussed above with respect to amended claims 1 and 8.

In view of the remarks above, applicants respectfully

request that rejection of claims 2, 4-5, 9, and 11-l2 as

APMW0015125

227 CFH 677

r
Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 25

being unpatentable over Outlook under 35 U. S. C. §103 (a) be
reconsidered and withdrawn.

Section 17, is and 19 of the Office Action rejects claims
16-19, 22-24 under U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over the
Gelernter Article, Tobias or Outlook.
Specifically, the Office Action states that the limitations

of these claims were well known in the art at the time of the
invention and follow naturally as housekeeping and organizational

details required to manage access to a complex or extensive stream of data units. In particular, the Office Action states
that: (1) an "abbreviated form", as reclted in claims 16 and 22,

of a data record corresponds to the title, abstract, or summary

of a document or other data unit; (2) "summarizing data", as
recited in claims 17

and 23 corresponds to a title, abstract, or

summary, and to a summary record in a spreadsheet or tax form

line; (3) for data acquired in chronological order, it is
necessary to update such data dynamically, as recited in claim
19; and (4) since storage capacity is not infinite, data such as
E-mail , tax records, snapshots, and the like are archived, as

recited in claims 18 and 24. According to the Office Action,
therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill

in the art at the time of the invention to provide the
limitations of these claims to the system of the references
because they enhance efficiency and organizational viability in
those systems.
Applicants respectfully submit that because claims 16-19 and

22-24 are directly or indirectly dependent on amended claims 1

or 8, and because a claim which depends on another claim is
subject to all the limitations of that other claim, for at least

the reasons discussed above with respect to amended claims 1 and
8, claims 17-19 and 22-24 are not anticipated by, or unpatentable

APMW0015126

227 CFH 678

If l

Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 26

over, the Gelernter Article, Tobias, or Outlook taken alone or
in combination.

In addition, applicants hereinabove have amended claims 17

and 23 to more clearly recite that the overview data unit is a

summary of a data unit stream. In contrast, the Gelernter
Article does not discuss sumaries or, indeed, any operations on

data units or data unit streams which combine the contents of
data units from a data unit stream into a data unit. Similarly,

nei ther Tobias nor Outlook combine the contents of data units

from a data unit stream for the purposes of a summary. In
particular, applicants note that while the journal in Outlook

lists acti vi ties according to type, Outlook fails to teach or
suggest providing a summary of the contents of such acti vi ties.
Also, while a traditional spreadsheet or an automated tax form
can summarize data, such a summary is not derived from data units

in a data uni t stream~ Applicants respectfully submit that one
of skill in the art would not naturally access the contents of
data units in a data unit stream to create a summary absent the

teaching of the subj ect invention. Indeed, the paradigm as
presented in the Gelernter Article fails to teach or suggest such

summaries. With respect to claim 19, applicants respectfully
submit that because none of the cited art teaches or suggests
overview data units combining the contents of data units from a

data stream, the cited art also does not teach or suggest
continuously updating the overview data units. Thus, applicants

respectfully submit that claims 17, 19 and 23 are not
unpatentable over the Gelernter Article, Tobias, or Outlook for
at least this reason.

Also, with respect to amended claims 17-19, and 23
applicants respectfully submit that none of the cited art teaches

or suggests the generation of data units in data unit streams

APMW0015127

227 CFH 679

rApplicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996
Page 27

having alternative versions of the content of another data unit,
and with respect to amended claim 18, the use of such alternative

content data units as part of the archiving means.

In view of the remarks above, applicants respectfully
request that the rejections of claims 16-19 and 22-24 as being

unpatentable over the Gelernter Article, Tobias or Outlook be
reconsidered and withdrawn.
Sections 20, 21 and 22 of the Office Action rejected claims
14, 15, 20, and 21 under U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over

any of the Gelernter Article, Tobias, or Outlook, in view of

Troj an.
Specifically, the Office Action states that Troj an teaches:

(1) a secure connection between data streams in the paradigm of

market trading, where a "second stream" such as the NSD trade
stream is copied, but only in part, into the "first stream" of
a trader; and (2) that the passing of data units into an improper

first stream is clearly a breach of security. While the Office

Action states that Trojan is not explicit about using a "data

unit" in a stream to properly divert a copy to a trader, the
Office Action argues that the corresponding functionality is
clearly necessary. Also, the Office Action states that the data

stream of a trader must access the NSD stream in order to track

whether or not a specific bid or ask transaction, (not an
equivalent one), has been executed and that this chronological sequencing of data units of Trojan is crucial to the operation
of the system. Thus, the Office Action states, Troj an teaches

the access of one data stream to another at specific sequenced
da ta units, but does not specify the mechanism. Nevertheless,
the Office Action states that it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use

a data unit to encapsulate a connection between streams with a

APMW0015128

227 CFH 680

T
Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996
Page 28

data unit in Gelernter, Tobias, or Outlook because their data
units provide the means of sequencing.

Applicants hereinabove have amended claim 14 to be recited

in independent form to emphasize that a data unit stream
according to the subject invention comprises multiple data unit

streams, each data unit in the data unit streams identified by
a selected timestamp, associated with a chronological indicator

having the timestamp, linked into a data unit stream according

to the timestamp, and stored as part of a data unit stream according to chronological indicators. In addition, amended
claim 14 recites that a data unit stream can access another data

unit stream by providing the second data unit stream with a data

unit permitting such access.
Applicants respectfully submit that Trojan does not indicate

to a second stream the presence of a first stream by sending a
data unit which would be included in the second data unit stream

to allow such access. Instead, as noted in the Office Action,
Trojan does not teach how such access is performed. Although the

Office Action states that one of ordinary skill in the art would
use such a data unit to provide access, this solution is neither

taught nor suggested in any of the cited art. The Gelernter
Article has only one chronological stream; Tobias interconnects

data according to time sequences, but does not pass data units

from one sequence to another; Outlook only provides a
chronological list of activities related to contacts, not lists

of journals; and Trojan's datastream is limited to the NASDAQ

information stream. Thus, applicants respectfully submit that
the cited art lacks any teaching or suggestion for one of
ordinary skill in the art to follow in order to provide access

from one data unit stream to another as taught by the subj ect
invention and as recited in at least amended claim 14. Thus, for

APMW0015129

227 CFH 681

r
Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 29
at least this reason, applicants respectfully submit that amended

claim 14 is not unpatentable over the Gelernter Article, Tobias,

or Outlook in view of Trojan under 35 U.S.C. §103(a).

Because amended claim 15 is dependent on amended claim 14
and because a claim which depends on another claim is subject to

all the limitations of that other claim, applicants respectfully

submit that amended claim 15 is not unpatentable over the
Gelernter Article, Tobias, or Outlook in view of Trojan under 35
U.S.C. §103(a) for at least the same reasons discussed above with

respect to amended claim 14.

Since amended claims 20-21 are dependent on amended claim

8 and because a claim which depends on another claim is subj ect
to all the limitations of that other claim, applicants respectfully submit that amended claims 20-21 are not
unpatentable over the Gelernter Article, Tobias, or Outlook for
at least the same reasons discussed above with respect to amended

claim 8.
In view of the remarks above and the amendments to claims

14-15 and 20-21, applicants respectfully request that the
rejections of claims 14-15 and 20-21 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) be
reconsidered and withdrawn.

Finally, applicants respectfully note that the while the
Gelernter Article can be viewed as presenting a broad paradigm

for a lifestream, the lifestream described in the Gelernter
Article fails to teach or suggest the data unit streams of the
subject invention as recited in the amended claims. Indeed, the

unique identification, association, linkage, and storage of the

data units using a timestamp in chronological indicators as
taught by the subj ect invention and as recited in the amended
claims is not taught or suggested by the Gelernter Article or any

of the other cited art, alone or in combination. Furthermore,

APMW0015130

227 CFH 682

r
Applicants: Eric FREEMAN and David H. GELERNTER Serial No.: CPA of 08/673,255 Prior Application Filed: June 28, 1996 Page 30

none of the cited art teaches or suggests the operations which
can be performed on or between the data unit streams as recited
in the claims 14-24, as amended. ' In addition, new claims 27-34

and 36 recite a unique display for presenting the visual form of the data unit streams according to one embodiment of the subject

invention. Also, new claims 25, 26 and 35 clarify other unique

aspects of the subj ect invention, to wit: a single set of operations for past, present and future times, the ability to
generate additional data unit streams from an existing data unit

stream, and the generation of data units having content which is an al ternati ve version of the content of another data unit.
In view of the remarks and amendments in this Amendment,
applicants respectfully request that the objection and rejections

in the Office Action be withdrawn and earnestly solicits the
allowance of claims 1, 2, 4, 6-12, and 14-36, as amended.

Applicants respectfully submit that a telephone interview

could be of assistance in advancing prosecution of the subj ect
application as discussed in a short October 15, 1998 telephone
conference between th Examiner and the applicants' undersigned
attorney. Accordingly, applicants' undersigned attorney invites the Examiner to telephone him at the number provided below.
No fee is deemed necessary in connection with the filing of

this Preliminary Amendment. However, if any fee is required,
authorization is hereby given to charge the amount of any such
fee to Deposit Account No. 03-3125.
Respectfully submitted,

Richard S. Milner Registration No. 33,970 Attorney for Applicants Cooper & Dunham LLP 1185 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 [phone]

~PJ~ -227 CFH 683

APMW0015131