Appeal 2007-1775
Application 09/749,106
patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which
they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all
they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1333, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039
(Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ
275, 277 (CCPA 1968)).
Regarding Appellants’ argument that Pallakoff’s members cannot
elect to purchase or not purchase, as required by the language of each
independent claim (Reply Br. 4), we again note that the Examiner’s rejection
is based upon the combination of the references. Indeed, we find that
Bonomi’s video-on-demand subscribers have the power to purchase or not
purchase video media:
The media storage device 206 facilitates the operations of the
media delivery center by providing storage space to cache or
store the video sources received from the media receiving unit
202. The storage spaces may include a cluster of video servers
or stacks of optical or magnetic storage discs, each being
labeled accordingly and accessible when contents stored therein
are to be delivered.
. . .
The cache area 222 provides a mechanism to buffer the
received live video broadcasts (i.e., live assets) for broadcasting
to subscribers of the video delivery center. The temporary
space 224 provides spaces for the video delivery center to store
data for temporary uses, such as a short-term program guide,
commercial information, latest programs available for video-
on-demand, or any programs that will be deleted after
broadcast. The permanent space 226 is typically used by the
video delivery center to store assets owned by the video
delivery center, the assets may include purchased movies or
other videos available to the subscribers for a fee.
(Bonomi, col. 9, ll. 5-26).
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013