Appeal 2007-0635
Application 10/176,598
I. CLAIMS 2, 4-9, and 12-16.
Pursuant to the rules, the Board selects representative claim 2 to decide the
appeal with respect to this group of claims, and claims 4-9 and 12-16 stand or fall
with claim 2. 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2006). It reads as follows:
2. A method for using media files on a media playback device,
comprising the step of at least one of creating and updating popularity
metrics for the media files that are stored on the media playback device,
wherein the popularity metrics are related to the playback of the media files
by a user of the media playback device with each of the popularity metrics
being proportional to an total amount of playback time that the user plays
back a corresponding one of the media files.
A. ISSUE
The claimed invention involves a method for ranking media files found on
media playback devices according to how long a user has played a media file.
Ward does not explicitly disclose ranking media files by how long a user has
played a media file. Ward discloses ranking media files according to how often the
files have been played. The issue is whether the claimed method, giving claim 2
the broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification as it would be
interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art, would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art in light of the disclosure in Ward.
B. FACTS
The record supports the following findings of fact (FF) by a preponderance
of the evidence.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013