Appeal No. 2002-1162
Application No. 08/683,994
of the claimed “reproduction of said signal is interrupted upon
detection of a position label after a pause command is received,”
Kostreski provides for transmitting a time stamp derived from the
MPEG data of a frozen frame. In other words, the transmission is
first frozen and then a time stamp is sent to the server which
later resumes transmission from the frame group identified by the
time stamp.
We find Appellants’ distinction of the steps or means for
resuming transmission after an interruption at positions where
the position labels are inserted and interrupting the signal when
a position label is detected, as recited in claims 1 and 7, over
the time stamp of Kostreski to be persuasive. As discussed
above, the time stamps are not inserted into the video signal and
are, in fact, generated and transmitted after freezing the
decoding of the signal. We note that claims 7 and 12, in
addition to the above discussed features, require that upon
receiving the pause command, the received signal following the
position label be thrown away. As discussed above, the Examiner
neither points to any specific portion of Kostreski that
discloses the discarding of the received signal following the
position label, nor do we find the time stamp of Kostreski to
include information for directing such task. Accordingly,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007