Appeal No. 2002-1162
Application No. 08/683,994
such that a person of ordinary skill in the art could practice
the invention without undue experimentation. See Atlas Powder
Co. v. Ireco Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1947
(Fed. Cir. 1999); In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1478-79, 31 USPQ2d
1671, 1673 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
After a review of Kostreski, we agree with Appellants’
assertion that the time stamps are not inserted into the signal
and the decoding is actually frozen before the time stamp is
transmitted. Kostreski relates to a programmable digital
entertainment terminal (DET) that may be dynamically reprogrammed
on an as-needed basis to provide a wide range of functionally
different broadband services (Col. 1, lines 8-12 and Col. 3,
lines 60-65). As depicted in figure 3, a video on demand
application with an enhanced pause functionality is disclosed
wherein upon receiving a “PAUSE” command from the subscriber, the
DET provides for immediately freezing the decoding and displaying
the last decoded frame (col. 17, lines 57-60). It is clear that
once the pause of the program is detected, the DET transmits a
time stamp derived from the MPEG data of the frozen frame as well
as a pause command to the server (Col. 17, lines 60-65) which
stops transmitting video and stores the time stamp (Col. 17,
lines 65 & 66). Therefore, as pointed out by Appellants, instead
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007