Appeal 2007-1412
Application 09/822,152
prevent any viewing of the closed captioning, therefore preventing a
safe viewing or any other viewing. Therefore, modifying Lapierre
with Goddard, if even possible, would result in the preventing safe,
censored viewing of the closed-captioning content, thus rendering
Lapierre unsatisfactory for its intended purpose.
(Brief 10.)
Further, Appellant contends that the Examiner’s suggested modification
of Lapierre by integrating DeStefano’s highlighting of words therein would
also render Lapierre unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. Instead of
removing the objectionable language from the caption, as contemplated by
Lapierre, the proposed modification would highlight the objectionable
language in order to draw the viewer’s attention to the potentially offensive
material. One of ordinary skill would not have been led to draw the
attention of a viewer, such as a child, to highlighted objectionable text in the
closed captioning displayed by Lapierre. (Id. 9.) In response, the Examiner
contends that one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine
the cited references because it would have drawn the attention of the viewer
to the potentially offensive material used to adjust the content rating
parameters. (Answer 4 and 11.)
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013