`
` If?
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313- 1450
`wwwnsptogov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`
`
`
`
` F ING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`
`
`
`
`CONF {MATION NO.
`
`11/680,452
`
`02/28/2007
`
`Chuck Jennings
`
`406855
`
`5285
`
`01/27/2011
`7590
`27148
`pOLSINELLISHUGHARTpc
`700 W. 47TH STREET
`SUITE 1000
`KANSAS CITY, MO 64112-1802
`
`BLAIR, DOUGLAS B
`
`2442
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`
`
`
`NOT aICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/27/201 1
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`uspt @polsinelli.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`
`
`
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`
` 11/680,452 JENNINGS ET AL.
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`DOUGLAS B. BLAIR
`2442
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136(a).
`In no event however may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1)|Zl Responsive to communication(s) filed on 07 December 2010.
`
`a)IZI This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)|:l This action is non-final.
`
`3)|:l Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11 , 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`4)|Z CIaim(s) 6-35 and 41-76 is/are pending in the application.
`
`4a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`5 |:| Claim s) _ is/are allowed.
`
`IXI Claim s 6-35 and 41 76 is/are rejected.
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`Application Papers
`
`9)|:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`OH] The drawing(s) filed on _ is/are: a)|:l accepted or b)|:l objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`11)|:| The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)I:I Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`
`a)|:l AII
`
`b)I:I Some * c)I:I None of:
`
`1.|:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. _
`
`3.|:l Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`4) I] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) IZI Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper N0(S )/Mai| Date. _
`2) I] Notice of Draftsperson‘s Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)
`5)I:I Notice 0f Informal Patent Application
`3) IZI Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| DateW16”: Other:—
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20110121
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Response to Amendment
`
`The applicant has amended claims 6, 9, 18, 20, 27, 33, 34, 41—45, 50—55, 57—59, and 63—
`
`70, cancelled claims 1—5 and 36—40, and added claims 71—76. Claims 6—35 and 41—76 are
`
`currently pending.
`
`The applicant's amendment to claim 6 has overcome the rejection of claims 6—21 and 24—
`
`35 under 35 USC section 101.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 12/7/2010 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`persuasive.
`
`As to the argument against the rejection of claims 41—70 under 35 USC section 101, the
`
`applicant has not supplied any evidence that the term "switch management system" is limited to
`
`hardware. The plain meaning of the term "switch management system" is broad enough to cover
`
`software that manages a switch.
`
`As to the arguments against the prior art rejection, the term "order rule" is broad in nature
`
`and taught by Wiser for the reasons given in the revised office action. The applicant's
`
`specification provides examples of "order rules" but does not provide a limiting definition of the
`
`term. If the applicant were to specifically limit the claims to the embodiments that the applicant
`
`is arguing are patentable, then the applicant would have a point about the rejections. As it stands
`
`now the claims limitations are too broad to overcome the cited references.
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`Claim Objections
`
`Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
`
`the amendment to the third
`
`limitation deletes the semicolon which separates it from the fourth limitation. Appropriate
`
`correction is required.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 USC. 112:
`
`The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the
`subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`Claim 74 is rejected under 35 USC. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for
`
`failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as
`
`the invention.
`
`Claim 74 recites the limitation "the system of claim 6" in the preamble of the claim.
`
`There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes,
`
`it will be assumed that the applicant intended to refer to the system of claim 41.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
`
`35 USC. 101 reads as follows:
`
`Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or
`any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and
`requirements of this title.
`
`Claims 41—70 and 74—76 are rejected under 35 USC. 101 because the claimed invention
`
`is directed to non—statutory subject matter. Claims 41—62 and 74—76 are directed towards a
`
`system comprising a presentation creator and a reservation generator. Claims 63—69 further
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`comprise a service order system. Claim 70 further comprises a financial screener. None of these
`
`elements which comprise the claimed system are explicitly disclosed as being hardware
`
`elements. Therefore claims 41—70 are broad enough to cover software per se. Software per se
`
`does not fit into any of the statutory categories of invention.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 USC. 102 that form the
`
`basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
`
`A person shall be entitled to a patent unless ,
`
`(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed
`in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for
`patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an
`international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this
`subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United
`States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
`
`Claims 6, 17—23, 35, 41, 52—58, and 70—76 are rejected under 35 USC. 102(e) as being
`
`anticipated by US. Patent Number 6,385,596 to Wiser et al.
`
`As to claim 6, Wiser teaches a method for reserving media for a viewer, comprising: at a
`
`switch management system (content manager 112), receiving a program comprising at least one
`
`media reference identifying at least one media of the program and an order comprising at least
`
`one order rule associated with the at least one media of the program (col. 10, line 59-col. 11, line
`
`7 and Figure 1B, the distribution hub distributes to the content manager. The
`
`augmentation qualifies as the claimed "order rule"); receiving a communication at a
`
`reservation system (the merchant server 132) of the switch management system, the
`
`communication identifying the at least one media (col. 16, lines 26-65); using the at least one
`
`order rule associated with the at least one media of the program (col. 11, lines 49-62) and the at
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`least one media reference identifying the at least one media of the program to generate a
`
`presentation for the at least one media at the reservation system (col. 16 line 66-col. 17, line 5);
`
`determining if a system resource is available to stream the presentation at the reservation system
`
`and, if so, creating a reservation for the presentation (col. 17, lines 6-12); and assigning a
`
`reservation identification to the reservation at the reservation system (col. 17, lines 22-35, the
`
`voucher ID is the reservation identification).
`
`Claim 41 is rejected according to the same embodiments as claim 6.
`
`Claims 17—23, 35, 41, 52—58, and 70 are rejected for the reasoning presented in the last
`
`office action.
`
`As to claims 71 and 74, see col. 10, line 59—col. 11, line 7 and col. 11, lines 49—62, the
`
`information attached to the media regarding payment qualifies as a "service".
`
`As to claims 72, 73, 75, and 76, the cited portion qualifies as a server rule identifying
`
`how a media viewing should be paid and the claimed collection rule thereby satisfying the "at
`
`least one" limitation. If the applicant is trying to claim a system and method capable of
`
`processing all of the claimed rules, then such a system should be explicitly claimed.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 USC. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in
`section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are
`such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person
`having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the
`manner in which the invention was made.
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: ll/680,452
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`Claims 7—16, 24—34, 42—51, and 59—69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over US. Patent Number 6,385,596 to Wiser et al. in view of US. Patent
`
`Application Publication Number 2002/0078444 by Krewin et al.
`
`As to claim 7, Wiser teaches the method of claim 6; however Wiser does not explicitly
`
`teach the use of a viewer profile used to select other media as claimed in claim 7.
`
`Krewin shows that the concept of using a viewer profile to dynamically select another
`
`media for presentation to viewers is an obvious concept (paragraphs 27—32).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the Computer networking art at the
`
`time of the invention to combine the teachings of Wiser regarding reserving media with the
`
`teachings of Krewin regarding using a viewer profile because such a system would not require
`
`any changed in how Wiser operates to be implemented with Wiser and would provide viewers
`
`with potentially useful supplemental information.
`
`As to claims 8—14, see paragraphs 27—73 of Krewin.
`
`As to claims 15 and 16, see paragraphs 27—73 of Krewin.
`
`In claims l5, 16, 24, and 28 Wiser and Krewin are combined for the same reasoning as
`
`explained in the rejection of claim 7.
`
`As to claims 24—36 and 28—34, see paragraphs 27—73 of Krewin.
`
`As to claim 27, see col. 14, lines 40—47 of Wiser.
`
`As to claims 42—51 and 59—69, they are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 7—16
`
`and 24—34.
`
`Conclusion
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this
`
`Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a).
`
`Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR l.l36(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed Within TWO
`
`MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after
`
`the end of the THREE—MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period
`
`Will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37
`
`CFR l.l36(a) Will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event,
`
`however, Will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this
`
`final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS B. BLAIR Whose telephone number is (571)272—
`
`3893. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am—5:30pm.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Glen Burgess can be reached on (571) 272—3949. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization Where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571—273—8300.
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
`
`applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
`
`system, see http://pair—direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR
`
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866—217—9197 (toll—free). If you would
`
`like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated
`
`information system, call 800—786—9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571—272—1000.
`
`/Douglas B Blair/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2442
`
`
![](/site_media/img/document_icon.png)
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
![](/site_media/img/error_icon.png)
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
![](/site_media/img/error_icon.png)
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
![](/site_media/img/error_icon.png)
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
![](/site_media/img/document_icon.png)
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
![](/site_media/img/document_icon.png)
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
![](/site_media/img/error_icon.png)
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site