IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES
`
`Applicants: Michael TASLER
`
`Title: ANALOG DATA GENERATING AND
`PROCESSING DEVICE HAVING A MUL Tl-
`USE AUTOMATIC PROCESSOR
`
`Serial No.: 11/467,092
`
`Filed:
`
`August 24, 2006
`
`Examiner: C.K. LEE
`
`Art Unit:
`
`2181
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`Confirmation No.: 3038
`
`I hereby certify that this paper is being
`deposited with the United States Postal
`Service as Express Mail EV
`594140793 US in a box addressed to
`Mail Stop Appeal Brief-Patents,
`Commissioner for Patents, P:o. Box 1450,
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 on 7 May
`
`2~s:
`
`Richa,d SensenbrenD~
`
`APPELLANT'S BRIEF ON APPEAL UNDER 37 C.F.R. §41.37
`
`Mail Stop Appeal Brief-Patents
`Commissioner for Patents
`P. 0. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`Dear Sir/Madam:
`
`This is an Appeal"from the Final Office Action mailed July 19, 2011, finally rejecting all
`
`of the pending claims. A Notice of Appeal was filed on November 7, 2011. A petition for a one
`
`month extension of time and all applicable fees accompany this brief.
`
`· Should there be any deficiency in fees in connection with this Appeal, the Commissioner
`
`is respectfully reqt;tested to and is hereby authorized to charge any such deficiency in fees.to
`
`Deposit Account No. 23-0920.
`
`· CHl-15739-1
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.1
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`1. REAL PARTY IN INTEREST ..................................... :·························: ................................ 4
`
`2. RELATED APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES .................................................................. 4
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`STATUS OF CLAIMS ........................................................................................................... 5
`
`STATUS OF Al\1ENDMENTS· ................... : .......................................................................... 5
`
`SUMMARY OF CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER ............................................................... 5
`
`6. GROUNDS OF REJECTION TO BE REVIEWED ON APPEAL ..................................... 10
`
`7. ARGUMENT .................................................................... : ............. · ...................................... 11
`
`A.
`
`All pending claims are distinguishable over any combination of the cited
`
`references because none of the references disclose an ADGPD processor
`
`that causes a file of digitized analog data to be automatically transferred to
`
`a host computer without requiring any user-loaded file transfer enabling
`
`software regardless of the computer manufacturer. ............................................... 13
`
`B.
`
`All pending claims are distinguishable over the cited references because
`
`none of the references disclose a processor involved in an automatic
`
`recognition process in which the processor automatically sends
`
`identification information to the host computer ..................................................... 17
`
`C.
`
`All pending claims are distinguishable over the cited references because
`
`none of the references disclose an automatic recognition process without
`
`requiring any end user to load software onto the computer, regardless of
`
`the manufacturer of the computer. .......................... _ .............................................. .22
`
`D.
`
`All pending claims are distinguishable over the cited references because
`
`none of the cited references discloses an automatic recognition process
`
`without requiring an end user to interact with the host computer to set up a
`
`file system in the ADGPD at any time regardless of the manufacturer ................. 24
`
`E.
`
`Independent claim 321, and dependent claims 283-285, 322 are
`
`distinguishable over the cited references because none of the references
`
`discloses a processor in the peripheral device which causes a virtual boot
`
`sequence ................................................................................................................. 25
`
`CHl-15739-1
`
`2
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.2
`
`

`
`r
`
`F.
`
`Independent claim 321 and dependent claims 270, 283-285, 322 and 324
`
`are further distinguishable over the cited references because none of the
`
`references discloses an analog acquisition device which identifies itself to
`
`a host comput~r as a hard disk drive ...................................................................... 26
`
`The· references cannot be properly combined .................................... : ................... 27
`
`Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 32
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`8. CLAIMS APPENDIX ........................................................................................................... 32
`
`9. EVIDENCE APPENDIX ...................................................................................................... 32
`
`10. · RELATED PROCEEDINGS APPENDIX .................................................... : ...................... 33
`
`CHI-15739-1
`
`3
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.3
`
`

`
`1.
`
`REAL PARTY IN INTEREST
`
`The real party in interest is Papst Licensing GmbH & Co., KG, a German Corporation,
`.
`.
`
`'
`
`the assignee of the entire right, title and interest to the above-identified patent application, having
`
`a place of business at Bahnofstrasse 33, St. Georgen, Germany 78112. Existing licensees of the
`
`application on appeal are: Casio Computer Company, Ltd.; Ricoh Company, Ltd.; Konica
`
`Minolta Photo Imagining, Inc.; Pentax Corporation; and Coby Electronics Corporation.
`
`Defendants in District Court litigation regarding related patents are: Fujifilm Corporation,
`
`Fujifilm U.S.A., Inc. Fujifilm Japan; Matsushita Electric Company, Ltd., Victor Company of
`
`Japan, Ltd.; Olympus Corporation, Olympus Imagining America Inc.; Samsung Techwin
`
`Company, Samsung Opto-Electronics America, Inc.; Panasonic Corporation of North America,
`
`JVC Company of America; Nikon Corporation, Nikon Inc.; Hewlett Packard Company; Sanyo
`
`Electric Co., Ltd., Sanyo North America Corporation; Canon, Inc., Canon USA, Inc.; and
`
`Eastman Kodak Company.
`
`2.
`
`RELATED APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES
`
`This application, as well as application Serial Numbers 11/467,073 and 11/926, 283, are
`
`continuations of an application bearing Serial Number 11/078,778 filed March 11, 2006 which is
`
`a continuation of application Serial No. 10/219,105 issued as U.S. Patent No. 6,895,449 which is
`
`a division of application Serial No. 09/331,002 issued as U.S. Patent No. 6,470,33~. A Notice of
`
`Appeal was filed for the '073 application on January 29, 2010. An appeal brief was filed on July
`
`26, 2010 and a Reply Brief was filed on November 8, 2010 for the '073 application. A
`
`continuation was filed for the '283 application bearing S.N. 12/891,443 on September 27, 2010.
`
`Copies of the office action in the '283 application and the Briefs in the '073 application are
`
`attached in the Related Proceedings Appendix. There are no other pending appeals, or ·
`
`CH[.J5739·1
`
`4
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.4
`
`

`
`interferences, related to, directly affecting or affected by, or having a bearing on the Board's
`
`decision in the captioned Appeal.
`
`U.S. Patent Nos. 6A70,339 and 6,895,449, from which this application claims priority,
`
`are currently in multi-district litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, in
`
`a lawsuit captioned "In re Papst Licensing GMBH & Co. KG Litigation", Misc. Action No.07-
`
`0493(RMC):MDL Docket No. 1880. A copy of the court docket and of the court's claim
`
`construction decision are attached in the Related Proceedings Appendix.
`
`3.
`
`STATUS OF CLAIMS
`
`Claims 239, and 333-374 are currently pending, and have been finally rejected under 35
`
`U.S.C. §103(a) in a Final Office Action dated July 19, 2011. Claimsl-238 and claims 240-332
`
`have been cancelled. A Notice of Appeal was filed on November 7, 2011. All currently pending
`
`rejected claims are being appealed.
`
`4.
`
`STATUS OF AMENDMENTS
`
`There was an amendment filed on May 10, 2011 prior to the final office action mailing
`
`on July 19, 2011, there have no amendments filed after the final office action.
`
`5.
`
`SUMMARY OF CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
`
`Claims 239, 370. 372and 374 are the independent claims on appeal:
`
`a.
`
`Independ_ent Claim 239·
`
`Claim 239 recites an analog data generating and processing device (ADGPD) (Figs. 1 and
`
`2, Ref. 10) comprising an input/output (i/o) port (Fig. 1, Ref. 12), a program memory (Fig. 1,
`
`Ref. 14; Fig. 2, Ref. 1440, 1400), a data storage memory (Fig. 1, Ref. 14; Fig. 2, Ref. 1420), and
`
`a processor (Fig. 1, Ref. 13; Fig. 2, Ref. 1300). The processor is operatively interfaced with.the
`
`i/o port, the program memory, and the data storage memory (p. 8, paragraph 22, lines 3-9); and
`
`CHl-15739-i
`
`5
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.5
`
`

`
`the processor is adapted to implement a data generation process by which the analog data is
`
`acquired from each respective analog acquisition channel of a plurality of independent analog
`
`acquisition channels (p. 16, paragraph 0040; p. 17, paragraph 0043), the analog data from each
`
`respective channel is digitized, coupled into the processor and is processed,_ and the processed
`
`and digitized analog data is stored in the data storage memory as at least one file of digitized
`
`analog data (p. 10 paragraph 0026).
`
`The processor (13; 1300) is also adapted to be involved in an automatic recognition
`
`process of a host computer (p. 9, paragraph 0023, lines 9-13) in which, when the i/o port is
`
`operatively interfaced with a multi-purpose interface of the host computer (p. 6, paragraph 0016,
`
`lines 1-4; p. 8, paragraph 0022, lines 2-3), the processor (13; 1300) executes at least one
`
`instruction set stored in the program memory and thereby causes at least one parameter
`
`identifying the analog data generating and processing device, independent of analog data source,
`
`as a digitized storage device instead of as an analog data generating and processing device to be
`
`automatically sent through the i/o port (12) and to the multi-purpose interface of the computer (p.
`
`9, paragraph 0023, lines 9-13) (a) without requiring any end user to load any software onto the
`
`computer at any time (p. 12, paragraph 0030, lines 5-7, and (b) without requiring any end user to
`
`interact with the computer to set up a file system in the ADGPD at any time (p. 12, paragraph
`
`0030, lines 1-7). The at least one parameter provides information to the computer about file
`
`transfer characteristics of the ADGPD.
`
`The processor (13; 1300) is further adapted to be involved in an automatic file transfer
`
`process in which, when the i/o port (12) is operatively interfaced with the multi-purpose interface
`
`of the computer (p. 6, paragraph 0016, lines 1-3; p. 10, paragraph 0025) and after the at least one
`
`parameter has been sent from the i/o port to the multi,,urpose interface of the computer (p. 9,.
`
`CHI-15739-1
`
`6
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.6
`
`

`
`paragraph 0024, lines 1-3), the processor (13; 1300) executes at least one other instruction set
`
`sto.red in the program memory to thereby cause the at least one file of digitized analog data
`
`acquired from at least one of the plurality of analog acquisition channels to be transferred to the
`
`computer (p. 10, paragraph 0025, lines 5-13) using a device driver for the digital _storage device
`
`while causing the analog data generating and processing device to appear to the computer as if it
`
`were the digital storage device without requiring any user-loaded file transfer enabling software
`
`to be loaded on or installed in the computer at any time (p. 5, paragraph 0015; p. 7, paragraph
`
`0017, lines 21-24; p. 12, paragraph 0031, lines 4-6).
`
`b.
`
`Independent Claim 3 70
`
`Claim 370 recites an analog data generating and processing device for acquiring analog
`
`data and for compmnicating with a host computer (Figs. 1 and 2; Ref. 10) comprising a program
`
`memory (Fig. 1, Ref. 11; Fig. 2, Ref. 1440, 1400), a data storage memory (Fig. 1, Ref. 14; Fig. 2,
`
`Ref. 1420), and a digital processor (Fig. 1, Ref. 13; Fig. 2, Ref. 1300) configured to interface to a
`
`multi-purpose interface of the host computer, the program memory, and the data storage memory
`
`(p. 2, paragraph 005; p. 8, paragraph 22, lines 3-9). The analog data generating and processing
`
`device also ~omprises ah analog to digital converter operatively coupled to the digital processor
`
`and configured to acquire analog data from each respective analog acquisition channel of a
`
`plurality of analog acquisition channels. The analog to digital converted is configured to convert
`
`the acquired analog data to digitized acquired analog data and to couple the digitized acquired
`
`analog data from the plurality of analog acquisition channels into the digital processor for
`
`processing by the digital processor.
`
`The digital processor is configured to automatically generate and transmit to the host
`
`computer via the multi-purpose interface an identifier parameter which identifies the analog data
`
`generating and processing device to the host computer as a digital storage device but which is
`
`CHI-15739-1
`
`7
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.7
`
`

`
`different than an analog data generating and processing device and independent of analog data
`
`source. The digital processor communicates with the host computer through the multi-purpose
`
`interface as if the analog data generating and processing device where the digital storage device
`
`including transferring the digitized acquired analog data acquired from at least one of the_ analog ..
`
`acquisition channels, using a device driver present for a digital storage device in the host
`
`computer without requiring the user to load the device driver.
`
`The digital pr9cessor (13; 1300) is also configured to transmit to th~ host computer active
`
`commands through the multi-purpose interface to access a system bus of the host computer to
`
`enable communication directly with other devices of the host computer while bypassing the host
`
`computer processor without requiring the user to load enabling software.
`
`c.
`
`Independent Claim 3 72
`
`Claim 3 72 recites an analog data generating and processing device (Figs 1 and ~, Ref. 10)
`
`for acquiring analog data and for communicating with a host computer which includes a
`
`manufacturer installed BIOS comprising a program memory (Fig 1, Ref. 14; Fig 2, Ref 1400), a
`
`data storage memory (Fig l, Ref 14; Fig 2, Ref 14201, and a digital processor configured to
`
`interface to a multi-purpose interface of the host computer, the program memory, and the data
`
`storage memory (Fig 1, Ref 13; Fig 2, Ref 1300). An analog to digital converter is operatively
`
`coupled to the digital processor and configured to sim.ultaneously acquire analog data from each
`
`respective analog source of a plurality of analog sources on a respective one of a plurality of
`
`independent analog acquisition channels. The analog to digital converter is configured to
`
`convert the acquired analog data to digitized acquired analog data and to couple the digitized
`
`acquired analog data into the digital processor for processing by the digital processor.
`
`The digital processor ( 13: 1300) is configured to automatically generate and transmit to
`
`the host computer via th~ multipurpose interface an identification parameter which identifies the
`
`CHI-15739-1
`
`8
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.8
`
`

`
`analog data generating and proc€;ssing device to the host computer as a digital mass storage
`
`device but which is different than an analog data generating and processing device and
`
`independent of the analog sources. The processor communicates with the ~ost computer through
`
`the multi-purpose interface as if the analog data generating and processing device were the
`
`digital mass storage device including transferring the digitized analog data acquired from at least
`
`one of the analog sources, using a device driver present in the BIOS of the host computer for the
`
`digital mass storage device in the host computer without requiring the user to load the device
`
`driver.
`
`d.
`
`Independent claim 3 7 4
`
`Claim 374 recites an analog data generating and processing method for acquiring analog
`
`data and for communicating with a host computer comprising operatively interfacing an analog
`
`data device including a digital processor, a program memory and a data storage memory, to a
`
`multi-purpose interface of the host computer.
`
`The method further comprises acquiring analog data on each respective analog .
`
`acquisition channel of a plurality of independent analog acquisition channels, converting the
`
`acquired analog data to digitized acquired analog data, and coupling the digitized acquired
`
`analog data into the digital processor for processing by the digital processor;
`
`The method also comprises automatically generating and transmitting to the host
`
`computer via the multipurpose interface, an identification parameter which identifies the analog
`
`data generating and processing device to the host computer as a digital storage device but which
`
`is different than an analog data device, and independent of analog data source, and the analog
`
`data generating and processing device communicating with the host computer through the multi(cid:173)
`
`purpose interface as if the analog data generating and processing device were the digital storage
`
`device including transferring the digitized acquired analog data acquired from at least (?Ile of the
`
`CHl-15739-1
`
`9
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.9
`
`

`
`analog acquisition channels, using a device driver present for a digital storage device in the host
`
`computer without requiring the user to load the device driver
`
`e.
`
`Dependent claim 345
`
`Claim 345 recites the analog data generating and processing device of claim 239, wherein
`
`the analog data generating and processing device processor interprets a read command from the
`
`host comput~r as a data transfer command to initiate transfer of digitized analog data from the
`
`analog acquisition channels to the host computer.
`
`f.
`
`Dependent claim 357
`
`Claim 357 recites the analog data generating i;md processing device of claim 239, wherein
`
`the processor is configured to cause, after the at least one parameter has been sent to the
`
`multipurpose interface, file allocation table information to be sent to the multipurpose interface,
`
`· wherein the processor is configured to cause a virtual boot sequence to be sent to the
`
`multipurpose interface which includes at least information that is representative of a number of
`
`sectors of a storage disk, and wherein the file allocation table information includes at least a start
`
`location of a file allocation table.
`
`g.
`
`Dependent claim 3 66
`
`Claim 366 recite~ the analog data generating and processing device of claim 239, wherein
`
`the analog data generating and processing device is designed so that the at least one aspect of
`
`operation is controlled by means of a configuration file which includes specification of a volume
`
`of analog data to be acquired by specifying a measurement time.
`
`6.
`
`GROUNDS OF REJECTION TO BE REVIEWED ON APPEAL
`
`Appeal is taken from the rejections of Claims 239, 333-339, 341-362, 364-367 and 369-
`
`376 under 35 U.S.C. §I03(a).as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. No. 6,111,604 to Hashimoto et
`
`al. ("Hashimoto") in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,634,075 to Smith et al. ("Smith"), Ristelhueber;
`
`CHI-I 5739-1
`
`10
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.10
`
`

`
`"Plug and Play is almost here", ("Ristelhueber"), and U.S. Pat. No. 5,742,934 to Shinohara.
`
`("Shinohara"); and from the rejections of Claims 340 and 368 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Hashimoto, Smith, Ristelhueber, and Shinohara and further in view of U.S.
`
`Pat. No. 4,652,928 to Endo et al. ("Endo"); and from the rejection of claim 363 under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hashimoto, Smith, Ristelhueber, and Shinohara and further
`
`in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,576,757 to Ro9erts et al ("Roberts").
`
`7.
`
`ARGUMENT
`
`All the claims on appeal are directed to a device (referred to in the claim as an
`
`("ADGPD" 1
`
`) for connection to a multipurpose interface of a host digital computer for
`
`generating analog data from an analog sensor and processing the analog data to provide
`
`enhanced data communication between the analog sensor and the host computer without.
`
`requiring device specific driver software to be loaded onto the host computer by the user. The
`
`ADGPD converts the analog data to digitized data and a processor on the ADGPD processes and
`
`stores the digitized analog data in a digitized file suitable for transfer to the host computer. The
`
`processor on the ADGPD is also involved in automatic recognition of the ADGPD by the host
`
`computer in which the processor automatically sends identification information regarding the
`
`ADGPD to the host computer before the computer is able to receive the data file without
`
`requiring an end user to load software on the computer at any time, or interact with the computer
`
`to set up a file system at anytime, independent of the manufacturer of the computer. Further, the
`
`processor on the ADGPD is also involved in an automatic file transfer process in which the
`
`processor causes at least one digitized analog data file to be transferred to the host computer
`
`regardless of the computer's manufacturer and without requiring any user-loaded file transfer
`
`enabling software to be loaded into the host computer. Thus, the invention provides an interface
`
`1 "Analog Data Generating and Processing Device"
`
`CHI-15739-1
`
`11
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.11
`
`

`
`for data communication between a variety of analog sensors and a variety of host digital
`
`computers without the need for a device specific-driver by using an automatic identification
`
`process and a data transfer process which uses a device driver for a different device that is
`
`normally already present in the host computer, thereby providing enhanced flexibility, reliability,
`
`data transfer rate, and host computer independence.
`
`The Primary reference cited is Hashimoto which describes an electronic camera in which
`
`a processor detects connection to a host computer interface by monitoring its external computer
`
`interface (e.g., RS. 232) for a data terminal ready signal from the host computer interface. The
`
`user may then select a transmit mode by activating a mode switch, and then the camera can
`
`transmit image data to the host computer using application software loaded onto the host
`
`computer. Hashimoto does not describe an automatic recognition process at all and describes
`
`data transmission requiring user intervention and user loaded application software. The Smith,
`
`Kerigan, and Ristelheuber references are relied upon for description of Plug and Play
`
`functionality, but they also do not describe the claimed recognition process or the claimed
`
`automatic file transfer process wherein a processor on the peripheral device causes transmission
`
`of identification information, and transfer of digitized analog data without requiring user-loaded
`
`file transfer enabling software. The fifth reference, Shinohara, merely describes a method of
`
`extending the life of a flash memory of a flash disk drive, but does not anywhere describe
`
`transferring acquired digitized analog data without requiring user-loaded file transfer enabling
`
`software, or a processor based recognition process as claimed. Certain dependent claims have
`
`been rejected over the above references and further in view of Roberts and Endo. Neither of
`
`these references disclose the claimed automatic recognition or file transfer processes and the
`
`Final Office Action does not assert that they do. Thus none of the references disclose the
`
`CHl-15739-1
`
`12
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.12
`
`

`
`claimed automatic recognition process or the claimed automatic file transfer process without
`
`requiring loading a device driver.
`
`A.
`
`All pending claims are distinguishable over any combination of the cited
`references because none of the references disclose an ADGPD processor
`that causes a file of digitized analog data to be automatically transferred to
`a host computer without requiring anv user-loaded file transfer enabling
`software regardless of the computer manufacturer.
`
`Independent claims 237, and 321, recite " ... an automatic file transfer process in ·
`
`which ... the processor executes at least one other instruction set...and thereby causes the at least
`
`one file of digitized analog data to be transferred to the computer regardless of the identity of the
`
`manufacturer of the computer and without requiring ~y user-loaded file transfer enabling
`
`software to be loaded on or installed in the computer at any time." Independent claim 323
`
`similarly calls for an automatic file transfer process in which the processor executes at least one
`
`other instruction set to cause at least one file of digitized analog data to be transferred without
`
`requiring end-user loaded file transfer enabling software at any time regardless of the
`
`manufacturer.
`
`The Final Office Action concedes that Hashimoto, Smith, Kerigan, and Ristelhueber do
`
`not teach data transferring regardless of the identity of the manufacturer of the computer and
`
`without requiring any user-loaded file transfer enabling software to be loaded on or installed in
`
`the computer at any time (Final Office Action, p. 13, line 14 top. 14, line 2); but asserts that
`
`Shinohara teaches a system and a method cpmprising data transferring " ... regardless of the
`
`identity of the manufacturer of the computer and without requiring any user-loaded file transfer
`
`enabling software to be loaded on or installed in the computer at anytime" at Col. 1 lines 48-60
`
`and Col. 3, line 33 to Col. 4, line 49 (Final Office Action, p. 14, lines 3-18). The Final Office
`
`Action alleges that by combining the emulation of a rpass storage device of Shinohara with the
`
`CHJ-15739-1
`
`13
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.13
`
`

`
`data transferring Plug and Play functionality of the combined other references, the resulting
`
`combination would teach this feature (Final Office Action, p. 14, lines 18-21 ).
`
`However, this is not the case because Shinohara merely describes an approach to
`
`extending the life of the flash memory in a flash disk drive. Shinohara at the cited Col. 1, line
`
`48-60 merely describes a flash disk memory which can erase and write data in a unit sector of a
`
`flash memory to emulate a hard disk, where the host computer erases and writes a sector
`
`designated by the host computer so an address conversion table is not needed and also describes
`
`a disk operating system. There is no mention of device drivers and no mention of not needing to
`
`load file transfer enabling software. Similarly Col. 3, line 33, Col. 4, line 49 merely describe
`
`details of the flash disk which can cause the flash memory to last for a longer time using an
`
`address conversion table. However, nowhere in Shinohara is there any mention of transferring a
`
`file of digitized analog data without requiring any user loaded file transfer enabling software.
`
`Rather, the detailed description cited calls for the host computer to perform unique file
`
`management functions (Col. 4, lines 34-49) which would require data transfer software in the
`
`host computer to set up the disk emulation. Further, there is no teaching or mention of the
`
`disclosed disk emulator being able to transfer data without data-transfer software loaded on the
`
`host computer. The Shinohara reference is devoid of any such teaching. Thus, Shinohara does
`
`not teach the feature of transferring digitized analog data without requiring any user loaded file
`
`transfer enabling software regardless of the manufacturer.
`
`The Final Office Action also asserts that combining the device of Shinohara with the Plug
`
`and Play functionality of the other references like Smith, teaches this feature. However, Plug
`
`and Play is concerned only with allocation of the resources of the host computer to avoid
`
`CHI-15739-1
`
`14
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.14
`
`

`
`conflicts between resources within the host computer2
`
`• Thus, the Plug and Play process does not
`
`need to recognize the peripheral, it only needs to determine what resources of the host computer
`
`t~e peripheral needs. In Plug and Play, the host computer reads the resource requirements from
`
`each attached peripheral, such resources as i/o addresses, interrupts levels, and DMA channels,
`
`(see, Smith, Col. 3, lines 1-4; also see Plug and Play ISA Specification, Version l.Oa, May 5, _
`
`1994 ("Plug and Play Specification") p.1; abstract, line 5, and lines 9-11 ). The computer then
`
`assigns t.o each peripheral device the necessary resources so as to avoid resource conflicts (see
`
`Smith, Col. 4, lines 25-32; and Plug and Play Spec. p.l, lines 11-12). Once the host computer
`
`has assigned its resources and activated the device, an appropriate device driver must then be
`
`loaded to permit operation. As described in Smith, Col. 4, lines 26-33 in a PnP (Plug and Play)
`
`system:
`
`" ... the operating system will isolate each PNP device, assign a 'handle' (number)
`to each card, and read the reso1,1rce data from that card. Once each card had been
`isolated, assigned a handle and read, the operating system software will arbitrate
`system resources for all PNP devices. Conflict-free resources may then be
`assigned and'the devices activated. Finally, appropriate device drivers may be
`loaded and the system thus configured."
`
`Also see Plug and Play Spec. p. l, Abstract, and Smith, Col. 3, lines 52-59. The Plug and
`
`Play process thus does not eliminate the need to supply a driver but rather calls for loading the
`
`driver after the system resources are allocated and the devices activated. The Plug and Play
`
`standard does not address device drivers other than the fact that one is needed. (Plug and Play
`
`Specification p. 1 Abstract: "However, user interface issues for installation of device drivers are
`
`, not addressed".) Thus, even with Plug and Play, a device specific driver is still needed for each
`
`peripheral installed in the Plug and Play computer system in order for the peripheral's processor
`
`to execute an instruction to automatically transfer a file of digitized analog data to the computer
`
`2 Plug and Play feature refers to the ISA PnP system bus technology that is referred to in the smith and Ristelhueber
`references.
`
`CHI-15739-1
`
`15
`
`Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG's Preliminary Response - Ex. 2001, p.15
`
`

`
`from the peripheral device. This is clearly demonstrated.by the Smith reference and the Plug and
`
`Play Specification document. Applicant has also submitted numerous other prior art references
`
`during prosecution which further demonstrate that Plug and Play requires loading a device driver
`
`after resource allocation is performed. Thus, neither Shinohara nor the Plug and Play
`
`functionality disclosed in the other cited references teach data transfer without a user loaded
`
`driver. 3
`
`In addition, the device described in Shiriohara is merely a memory for storage of digital
`
`data by a host computer and for retrieval of that data by the host computer, and thus is not
`
`suitable for receiving analog data from a sensor independent of the host computer nor for
`
`transferring acquired digitized analog data to a host computer. The Shinohara device has one
`
`port that merely receives and stores digital data from the computer and allows that same
`
`computer to retrieve that stored data through the same port. The claimed invention has two
`
`separate ports providing input of analog data on one port and subsequent transfer of digitized
`
`analog data to a computer on another port. Thus, the disk memory emulation of Shinohara is
`
`dramatically different from the claimed invention and not compatible with or combinable with
`
`Hashimoto to obtain the claimed invention.
`
`Stated another way, at most Shinohara merely teaches that a memory device having a
`
`single read/wri