Appeal No. 2000-1362
Application 08/914,165
for decrypting the encrypted audio communication." It is argued
that neither Bieselin nor Olson address reducing the
vulnerability of digitally recorded audio information to
tampering while allowing a calling party access to the
information (Br8).
The examiner states that sufficient motivation has been
provided to modify Bieselin to include this feature (EA8 ¶ 7).
The examiner's rejection, as we understand it, is based on
the following logic: (1) one of ordinary skill in the art would
have recognized the need for "security" in Bieselin; (2) Olson
shows encrypting a stored audio message as a type of security;
(3) the combination of Olson and Bieselin would suggest
encrypting the recorded audio communications of Bieselin to
provide security; and (4) if the audio communications were
encrypted in Bieselin, it would be necessary to supply the code
to calling parties in order for them to be able access the
communications.
The examiner's reasoning is not persuasive. Assuming one
skilled in the art would have recognized the need for "security,"
the only "security" teachings in the combination are found in
Olson. Olson is directed to a voice mailbox system (VMS) where a
called party's messages are encrypted for the purpose of
preventing the playing of unauthorized voice messages to a
non-designated user in case of a system malfunction. A calling
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007