Appeal 2007-0635
Application 10/176,598
art.
E. CONCLUSION OF LAW
On the record before us, Appellants have failed to show that the Examiner
erred in rejecting claim 10 over the prior art.
III. CLAIM 11
Claim 11 reads as follows:
11. The method of claim 10, further comprising the step of adjusting a value
of each of the popularity metrics based on the timestamp such that the value
is reduced in relation to how long ago a corresponding media file was last
played back.
A. ISSUE
The issue is whether it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to
modify the Ward method so as to include a step of associating a timestamp with
each of the popularity metrics, the timestamp for indicating a last playback time of
a corresponding media file, and adjusting a value of each of the popularity metrics
based on the timestamp such that the value is reduced in relation to how long ago a
corresponding media file was last played back.
B. FACTS
The record supports the following findings of fact (FF) by a preponderance
of the evidence.
Claim construction
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013