Appeal No. 2001-1626
Application No. 09/007,622
We refer to the Final Rejection (Paper No. 8) and the Examiner's Answer (Paper
No. 13) for a statement of the examiner's position and to the Brief (Paper No. 11) and
the Reply Brief (Paper No. 14) for appellants’ position with respect to the claims which
stand rejected.
OPINION
The examiner offers as evidence of obviousness, with respect to independent
claims 1, 12, and 19, and most of the claims depending therefrom, the references of
Greenwood and Miller (Answer at 4-14).
We find that Greenwood describes operation of a video distribution management
system (VDMS). As shown in Figure 1, and described in the detailed description
portion of the patent, one or more centralized video libraries such as library 11 are
connected to a wide area network (WAN) 13 via a wide area server 10. Server 10
delivers video files from library 11 to WAN 13 on demand, but at a rate not consistent
with video playback. Local area network 16 is connected to WAN 13 by way of a local
area server 14, linking the relatively high speed LAN with the relatively low speed WAN.
Video files in local cache 15 can be delivered in real time to video display station 17 on
LAN 16.
Figure 2 of Greenwood shows general operation of VDMS 12. VDMS 12
determines whether any video request has been received from a video display station
(e.g., 17) and monitors local cache 15, maintaining cache statistics for tracking use of
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007