Conversant Wireless Licensing S.a r.l.

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Apr 1, 2021

2020002557 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 1, 2021)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
15/830,202 12/04/2017 Mathieu Kennedy Martyn 67692-US-CON4 9720
100809 7590 04/01/2021
Conversant Wireless Licensing Ltd.
5830 Granite Parkway #100-247
Suite 247
Plano, TX 75024
EXAMINER
VU, THANH T
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2175
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
04/01/2021 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
ipadmin-core@conversant-wireless.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte MATHIEU KENNEDY MARTYN
____________________

Appeal 2020-002557
Application 15/830,2021
Technology Center 2100
____________________

Before ALLEN R. MacDONALD, KALYAN K. DESHPANDE, and
JAMES B. ARPIN Administrative Patent Judges.

MacDONALD, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals2 under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of
claims 1–19, all of the pending claims. We have jurisdiction under 35
U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.

1 This Appeal and related Appeal No. 2020-000055 (U.S. Patent Application
No. 15/785,645) are continuations of now abandoned U.S. Patent
Application No. 13/860,143, filed on April 10, 2013. These Appeals are
directed to the same underlying invention and issues and are decided
concurrently.
2 Appellant refers to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42(a). Appellant
identifies real party in interest in the present appeal is Conversant Wireless
Licensing S.A.R.L. Appeal Br. 1.
Appeal 2020-002557
Application 15/830,202
2
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claim 1 is illustrative (emphasis, formatting, and bracketed material
added):
1. A mobile telephone comprising a display screen, the mobile
telephone being adapted to:
[A.] display a plurality of items on the screen, each item
corresponding to an application, the plurality of items
arranged in a main view from which, responsive to a
user input of a first type selecting any of the plurality
of items in the main view, the application corresponding
to the selected item is opened;
[B.] responsive to a user input of the first type selecting an
item corresponding to a contacts application, open the
contacts application to display on the screen a list of
contacts; and
[C.] responsive to a user input of a second type selecting a
contact in the displayed list:
[i.] display on the screen one or more contact details
corresponding to the selected contact, each of the
contact details associated with a corresponding
application; and
[ii.] responsive to a user input selecting one of the
contact details,
[a.] initiate a communication using the selected
contact detail in the corresponding application.
RELATED APPEALS & TRIALS
Appeal number 2020-000055; U.S. Application S.N. 15/785,645.
U.S. Patents 8,434,020 and 8,713,476; IPR2015-01898, IPR2015-
01899, IPR2015-01984, and IPR2015-01985, aff’d sub nom. LG Elecs., Inc.
v. Conversant Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L., 759 F. App’x 917 (Fed. Cir.
2019).
Appeal 2020-002557
Application 15/830,202
3
REJECTION
The Examiner rejects claims 1–19 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) as failing
to comply with the written description requirement. Final Act. 4–7 (Final
Office Action, mailed November 5, 2018, “Final Act.”).
The Examiner’s rejection raises multiple, distinct “written
description” issues throughout the claims, and Appellant argues each distinct
issue in the Appeal Brief. Appeal Br. 13–34. However, the Examiner’s
Answer only responds to a single of these distinct written description issues.
We address that single issue below. As to Appellant’s argued “written
description” issues that lack an Examiner’s Answer response, we agree with
Appellant’s arguments as to those issues.
As to the remaining unresolved § 112(a) written description issue, the
Examiner finds:
Claims 1, 8 and 15 recite[] the limitation of “responsive
to a user input of the first type selecting . . .” and “responsive to
a user input of a second type selecting . . .” The specification
fails to provide sufficient written description for the claimed
limitations.
Final Act. 5 (emphasis added).
We select claim 1 as representative. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(iv).
To the extent that Appellant discusses this remaining issue as to claims 2–
19, Appellant is merely repeating the arguments directed to claim 1. Such a
repeated (or referenced) argument is not an argument for “separate
patentability.” Thus, Appellant does not present separate arguments for
claims 2–19. Except for our ultimate decision, we do not discuss the merits
of the § 112(a) rejection of claims 2–19 further herein.
Appeal 2020-002557
Application 15/830,202
4
OPINION
The Examiner rejects claim 1 herein on the same basis as the rejection
of the claims 1–30 in related application 15/785,645 on appeal as Appeal
No. 2020-000055. The arguments Appellant presents in this Appeal are the
same arguments presented in Appeal No. 2020-000055. We reach the same
decision herein for the reasons we set forth in our decision directed to 2020-
000055. We incorporate that decision here in full.
CONCLUSION
The Examiner does not err in rejecting claims 1–19 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 1–19 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) is
affirmed.
DECISION SUMMARY
In summary:
Claim(s)
Rejected
35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed
1–19 112(a) Written Description 1–19
Overall
Outcome

1–19

Appeal 2020-002557
Application 15/830,202
5
TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv).

AFFIRMED