Application No. 10/956,121
`Attorney Docket No. 111325—291300
`Page 8 of 9
`
`REMARKS
`
`Claims 1—36 are pending in the present application. Applicants thank Examiner West and
`
`Supervisory Examiner Fischer for repeatedly discussing this application with Applicants, and for
`
`their willingness to review Applicants’ proposals. Claims 1, 6, 8—12, 17, 19—24, 29, and 31—36
`
`are amended herein to clarify the invention in accordance with the Examiner’ s suggestions. No
`
`new matter has been added. In accordance with the discussions with the Examiners, Applicants
`
`request reconsideration and allowance of the application in view of the above amendments and
`
`the following remarks.
`
`Claims 1—36 stand provisionally rejected on the ground of non—statutory double—patenting
`
`over claim 6 of co—pending Application No. 10162701. Applicants respectfully request that this
`
`provisional rejection be held in abeyance until this application is otherwise in condition for
`
`allowance, at which point Applicants will consider filing a Terminal Disclaimer.
`
`Claims 1—36 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being related to non—statutory
`
`subject matter. As stated previously, claims 1, 12, and 24 each recite that “the meta—rights are
`
`provided in digital form and are enforceable by a repository,” and a “right” is created by
`
`executing the claimed meta—right. Thus, these claims clearly satisfy the requirements of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 101.
`
`Claims 1—36 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over Anand et
`
`al. (US. Patent No. 6,044,466) in view of “Workshop on Digital Rights Management, Minutes
`
`from Architecture/Infrastructure Session” (hereafter, Infrastructure).
`
`Based on discussions with the Examiners, Applicants amend the claims herein to clarify
`
`that the claimed set of rights includes a “meta—right specifying a right that can be created when
`
`the meta—right is exercised,” and specify that the meta—right is exercised to “create the right
`
`specified by the meta—right if the rights consumer is entitled to the right specified by the meta—
`
`right.” As acknowledged by the Examiners, the applied prior art, including Anand and
`
`Infrastructure), fail to disclose, suggest, or render obvious at least these features.
`129225001
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1053, p. l
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1053, p. 1
`
`

`

`Application No. 10/956,121
`Attorney Docket No. 111325—291300
`Page 9 of 9
`
`For at least the reasons set forth above, Applicants respectfully submit that neither Anand
`
`nor Infrastructure, taken alone or in combination, disclose, suggest, or render obvious the
`
`invention recited in independent claims 1, 12, and 24. The dependent claims are allowable at
`
`least by virtue of their dependency from one of the independent claims, and also on their own
`
`merits .
`
`In view of the foregoing, Applicants respectfully request entry of the above amendments
`
`and submit that this application is in condition for immediate allowance. A notice to that effect
`
`is solicited. If any issue remains after considering this response, the Examiner is encouraged to
`
`call the undersigned to expedite the prosecution and work out any such issue by telephone.
`
`Except for issue fees payable under 37 C.F.R. § 1.18, the Commissioner is hereby
`
`authorized by this paper to charge any additional fees during the entire pendency of this
`
`application including fees due under 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.16 and 1.17 which may be required,
`
`including any required extension of time fees, or credit any overpayment to Deposit Account No.
`
`19—2380. This paragraph is intended to be a CONSTRUCTIVE PETITION FOR
`
`EXTENSION OF TIME in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(3).
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`NIXON PEABODY LLP
`
`/Stephen M. Hertzler, Reg. No. 58,247/
`Stephen M. Hertzler
`Reg. No. 58,247
`
`Date: March 15, 2010
`
`NIXON PEABODY LLP
`
`401 9th Street, N.W., Suite 900
`
`Washington, DC. 20004—2128
`(202) 585—8000
`
`(202) 585—8080 (Fax)
`Customer No. 22204
`
`129225001
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1053, p. 2
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1053, p. 2
`
`