Appeal 2007-0035
Application 09/924,036
is argued that there is no motivation to combine Burns with Nagai absent the
conversion of the dynamic HTML page into a static HTML page in Nagai
(Br. 12). It is argued that Burns is not analogous to Nagai (Br. 12).
The Examiner responds that Nagai teaches converting dynamic
contents into a static HTML page at column 7, lines 50-52 (Answer 13).
The Examiner states that the motivation to combine Burns and Nagai is for
the benefit of generating a static digest/summary of a multimedia from a
plurality of media data as stated at column 6, lines 39-43, and column 7,
lines 50-52 (Answer 14).
Although Appellants' arguments could have been more clearly stated,
we understand the main argument to be that the combination of Burns and
Nagai does not teach the steps of "processing," "encoding," "integrating,"
and "transmitting" in combination with the step of "converting the dynamic
HTML page into a static HTML page." The rejection relies principally on
Burns. The Examiner finds that the limitation of "selectively processing
graphics and text associated with a streaming media presentation to create a
dynamic hypertext markup language (HTML) page corresponding thereto" is
taught at column 5, line 66 to column 6, line 7 (Answer 6). As with claim 1,
we find no disclosure of the content server 52 "processing . . . to create."
The server merely retrieves content from storage and transmits it. There is
no mention that a "dynamic HTML" page is "created." The Examiner states
that "HTML by itself is static unless otherwise stated as dynamic HTML"
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013