Uniloc USA, Inc. et al v. NATIONAL INSTRUMENTS CORP. et al

Filing 254

REPLY to Response to Motion re 243 Opposed MOTION for Leave to Construe Previously Construed Term filed by Pervasive Software, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Huston, Charles)

EXHIBIT A

Application/Control Number: 90/010,831

Page 5

Art Unit: 3992
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR PATENTABILITY AND/OR CONFIRMATION
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for patentability and/or
confirmation of the claims found patentable in this reexamination proceeding:

During reexamination, claims are given the broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with the specification and limitations in the specification are not read into the
claims (In re Yamamoto, 740 F.2d 1569,222 USPQ 934 (Fed. Cir. .,
1984)). Where there
exists a final decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding the
construction of claims, an interpretation is not reasonable where it is inconsistent with
that decision. The Patent Owner has persuasively argued that, based on such decisions
regarding the '216 patent, Hellman cannot be reasonably construed as teaching to a
local licensee unique 10 generating means or a remote licensee unique 10 generating
means.
The licensee unique 10 generated by the means recited in each of the claims
must be derived from at least piece of information that is specific to the user, such as
name, billing information, or product information unique to the instantiation entered by
the user. The information cannot be specific to the computer or independently
generated by the computer. Hellman's 10 has four inputs: a computer-specific key (SK),
a number of uses requested (N), a random number generated by the computer (R), and
a hash of a code for the type of software package, which is general to all installations of
that package (H). Since none of these are user-specific, Hellman's algorithm does not
. generated the claimed licensee unique 10.