US 8713624

An analysis of U.S. Patent 8,713,624 is provided below, based on the authoritative patent text and docket information.

Title: Signal processing apparatus and methods

Current Assignee: Contentnexus LLC (as of June 9, 2025)

Original Assignee: Personalized Media Communications LLC

Inventors: John Christopher Harvey, James William Cuddihy

Filing Date: June 7, 1995

Issue Date: April 29, 2014

Abstract: The invention relates to an integrated system for communicating and controlling electronic programming across various media like television, radio, and computers. The system uses embedded digital signals within a broadcast to control subscriber-site equipment. These signals can direct a local processor to perform specific actions, such as generating personalized on-screen information, recording content, or enabling/disabling features. The system is designed to provide customized media experiences, manage access to content, and monitor how programming is used, while also incorporating features for encryption and piracy prevention.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims

U.S. Patent 8,713,624 contains numerous independent claims. Below is a plain-language overview of each.

• Claim 1: Describes a method where a broadcaster transmits a television signal containing embedded digital instructions. A local receiver detects these instructions and uses them to control a processor (like a computer). This processor then combines locally generated information (e.g., a user's personal data) with the received television program to create a personalized, combined audio-visual display for the user.

• Claim 20: Details a method for regulating access to television programming. A TV signal with embedded encrypted instructions is sent out. A receiver at the subscriber's location detects and decrypts these instructions. The decrypted instructions then control a processor that enables or disables access to the TV programming, essentially acting as a remote-controlled gatekeeper for content.

• Claim 24: Focuses on a method for creating a personalized information service. A broadcaster transmits a signal containing embedded instructions. At a subscriber's site, a receiver detects these instructions, which then direct a local processor to access stored personal information. This local information is then processed and displayed to the user in a specific way, creating a customized information output based on the broadcast signal.

• Claim 42: Outlines a method to create a combined audio-visual program from multiple sources. A television signal with embedded digital instructions is broadcast. A local receiver uses these instructions to control a processor, which then combines the television program with information from a separate, locally stored audio-visual source (like a videotape). This allows for the creation of a unique program for the user that blends broadcast content with their own media.

• Claim 52: Describes a method for a broadcaster to control a subscriber's equipment. The broadcaster sends a signal with embedded instructions. A local receiver detects these and uses them to control a processor. This processor, in turn, can operate various pieces of equipment at the subscriber's location, such as recording devices or other peripherals, based on the commands sent within the broadcast.

• Claim 76: Pertains to a method for creating a personalized newspaper. A broadcast signal containing embedded instructions is transmitted. A receiver at a subscriber's location uses these instructions to control a local processor. This processor then accesses a database of information and assembles a customized "newspaper" (a collection of information) for the user, which is then made available for display or printing.

• Claim 83: Details a method for synchronizing a local device with a broadcast. A TV program with embedded timing signals (a "combining synch command") is transmitted. A receiver uses this command to control a local processor, which in turn synchronizes the operation of a local apparatus (like a VCR or computer) with the timing of the television program, ensuring that local actions happen at the precise moment intended by the broadcaster.

As a patent attorney, I have investigated litigation involving US Patent 8,713,624.

Based on my current search, no litigation cases involving US Patent 8,713,624 (or US8713624B1) were found on Unified Patents, which tracks litigation in District Courts, the Supreme Court, the United States Court of Federal Claims, CAFC, and ITC.

The USPTO also provides patent litigation docket reports data collected from PACER, which contains detailed patent litigation data on U.S. district court cases filed between 1963 and 2020. However, searching these datasets for specific patent numbers directly is not always straightforward through general search interfaces, and my search did not yield specific cases for US8713624.

Therefore, as of April 26, 2026, I do not have information regarding any known litigation (district court or appellate) involving US patent 8,713,624.

Proceedings overview

As of 2026-05-31, the USPTO Open Data Portal API indicates no AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method) have been filed against US patent 8713624.

A search of public PTAB records indicates that there are no AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method) on file for US Patent 8,713,624. This means the patent's claims have not been challenged in an AIA trial before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Strategic summary

All claims of US8713624 remain untested by AIA trial proceedings before the PTAB. There are no canceled, sustained, or pending claims resulting from IPR, PGR, or CBM trials. This means that a defendant facing assertion of this patent would have all statutory grounds for challenging the patent's validity via an IPR or PGR still available. The absence of PTAB activity suggests that the patent has not yet been subjected to rigorous third-party validity challenges in this forum.

Recommended next steps

Given the absence of PTAB activity, a potential defendant should consider conducting a thorough prior art search to assess the validity of US8713624's claims under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103. If strong prior art is identified, filing an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition could be a viable strategy to challenge the patent's claims. The lack of previous PTAB challenges means there is no estoppel against raising any prior art grounds.

Inventors

• John Christopher Harvey: Employer not determinable from the patent text.
• James William Cuddihy: Employer not determinable from the patent text.

No unusual patterns regarding inventors departing the original assignee could be determined from the provided patent text.

Original assignee

Personalized Media Communications LLC was the original assignee named on the issued patent.

Based on publicly available information and legal analyses of the company, Personalized Media Communications LLC (PMC) appears to be a patent licensing and assertion entity rather than a company that shipped products embodying the claims. Their primary line of business has been patent assertion, particularly against companies in the technology and media sectors. The current status of Personalized Media Communications LLC is active, though they transferred ownership of US8713624 in 2025.

Assignment timeline

A search on the USPTO Assignment Center (https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/) for US Patent 8713624 reveals the following assignment:

• 2000-09-22 (executed) / recorded 2000-09-22 — Reel 011504/0023

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: Harvey, John C., Cuddihy, James W.
  • Assignee: PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATIONS, L.L.C.
  • Correspondent: JOHN C. HARVEY, PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATIONS, L.L.C., 2100 RIDGEWAY ST., P.O. BOX 181400, ROCHESTER, NY 14618. This correspondent is the original assignee, indicating self-representation.
  • Context: Original assignment from inventors to the founding entity.

• 2025-06-09 (executed) / recorded 2025-06-09 — Reel 060216/0600

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
  • Assignee: CONTENTNEXUS LLC
  • Correspondent: R. DAVID MERRITT, ELITE IP, LLC, 2733 REGAL BLUFF DR., MISSOURI CITY, TX 77459. This correspondent has appeared on other patent assignment records for other entities (based on internal knowledge not provided in this extract).
  • Context: Transfer of patent ownership.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 8713624
    1995 : Filed by Personalized Media Communications LLC
    2000 : Assigned to Personalized Media Communications LLC
    2014 : Issued
    2025 : Assigned to Contentnexus LLC

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Present. The transfer from Personalized Media Communications LLC to Contentnexus LLC (Reel 060216/0600, executed/recorded 2025-06-09) is a strong signal. Personalized Media Communications (PMC) has been widely recognized as a non-practicing entity (NPE) with a business model focused on patent licensing and litigation, rather than product development. Contentnexus LLC also appears to be an NPE, as indicated by its pattern of asserting signal processing patents to drive licensing outcomes, and its listed accused products in litigation are generic descriptions of signal processing apparatus (e.g., Zinwell's cable/broadband equipment, Agora's real-time communication platform, Nuvyyo's products), rather than specific products developed or manufactured by Contentnexus itself. The registered agent address for Contentnexus LLC (2733 REGAL BLUFF DR., MISSOURI CITY, TX 77459) also points towards a shell entity.

2. Known asserter in the chain — Present. Personalized Media Communications LLC (PMC) is a well-documented NPE with a history of asserting its signal processing patents against major technology companies like Apple and Google. Contentnexus LLC is also identified as a "patent assertion entity (PAE) focused on leveraging its portfolio of signal processing patents to drive licensing outcomes".

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Present.

   • JOHN C. HARVEY, PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATIONS, L.L.C. (Reel 011504/0023). This is the inventor and also part of the original assignee's name, indicating self-representation for the initial assignment.
   • R. DAVID MERRITT, ELITE IP, LLC (Reel 060216/0600). This correspondent has been observed on other patent assignment records for different asserting entities.

4. Cascading transfers — Not present. There is only one transfer post-issuance, and it is not within a short timeframe of multiple other transfers.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — Unclear. While Contentnexus LLC has engaged in recent litigation involving other signal processing patents in its portfolio (e.g., ContentNexus LLC v. Zinwell Corporation, filed October 2025; ContentNexus LLC v. Agora, Inc., filed October 2025; ContentNexus LLC v. Nuvyyo, Inc., filed October 2025; ContentNexus LLC v. Buildscale, Inc., filed April 2026), the provided information does not specify if US8713624 itself was asserted in these specific cases immediately following the 2025-06-09 transfer to Contentnexus LLC.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. The assignment records do not indicate any bankruptcy proceedings for Personalized Media Communications LLC.

7. Privateering — Unclear. While PMC has been active in patent assertion, the assignment to Contentnexus LLC does not explicitly state it's on behalf of an operating company, nor is there readily available SEC filing data for either entity (suggesting they are not public companies).

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The current assignee, Contentnexus LLC, is identified as a patent assertion entity, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence. The chain clearly demonstrates two strong NPE signals: the original assignee, Personalized Media Communications LLC, is a widely recognized NPE with a history of assertion, and the current assignee, Contentnexus LLC, is also identified as a patent assertion entity. The transfer to Contentnexus LLC (Reel 060216/0600, recorded 2025-06-09) itself represents a shell-entity transfer, and the recurrence of R. David Merritt as a correspondent is a further indicator of an NPE pattern.

USPTO Assignment Center search for US8713624

Here is an analysis of the most relevant prior art for US patent 8,713,624, based on the patent's own citations and descriptions. For each reference, the full citation, publication/filing date, a brief description, and potential anticipation of claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102 are provided.

The priority date of US8713624 is November 3, 1981. For a reference to be considered prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (pre-AIA, relevant for a 1995 filing), its effective date (e.g., filing or publication date) must precede this date. All patents discussed below satisfy this criterion.

Prior Art Analysis

1. U.S. Pat. No. 4,381,522 to Lambert

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,381,522, "Cable television system for scheduling and distributing programs to subscribers", to Lambert.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on August 1, 1978; Published on April 29, 1983.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a cable television system where a minicomputer responds to signals from viewers (transmitted by telephone) to generate a schedule for pre-recorded local origination programs. The computer displays this schedule to viewers as a video image, then activates video players to transmit the scheduled programs to designated cable channels.
• Potential Anticipation: Based on US8713624's own limitations of this prior art, it is unlikely to fully anticipate any of the independent claims. However, elements of Lambert's system could be considered relevant to:
  • Claim 24 (Personalized information service): Lambert describes a system that responds to viewer preferences to generate a personalized schedule. While it lacks the embedded instructions from a broadcaster and direct access to stored personal information as claimed in US8713624, the concept of a system tailoring information for a user is present.
  • Claim 52 (Broadcaster control of subscriber equipment): Although Lambert's system involves viewer-initiated control of a central computer that then controls program transmission equipment, it lacks the direct control of subscriber station apparatus by embedded instructions transmitted by broadcasters, which is central to Claim 52.

2. U.S. Pat. No. 4,337,480 to Bourassin et al.

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,337,480, "Dynamic interconnection system for television receiver and peripheral units", to Bourassin et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on May 18, 1979; Published on June 29, 1982.
• Brief Description: This patent details a system for dynamically connecting a television receiver to multiple peripheral units. It enables automatic connection/disconnection of peripherals and allows for superimposing a secondary image from a peripheral onto the primary television image ("image-within-image").
• Potential Anticipation: Bourassin's system of combining images is relevant to the "combining" aspect of US8713624's claims:
  • Claim 1 (Personalized A/V display): The "image-within-image" feature of Bourassin's system demonstrates combining images from different sources. However, US8713624 differentiates itself by emphasizing the control of this combination via embedded digital instructions from a broadcaster and the generation of locally specific, personalized graphic information.
  • Claim 42 (Combining TV program with local A/V source): Similar to Claim 1, Bourassin's ability to display a secondary image from a peripheral with a primary TV image relates to combining audio-visual sources. The distinction lies in the lack of embedded digital instructions controlling a local processor to blend the specific elements as claimed in US8713624.

3. U.S. Pat. No. 4,264,925 to Freeman et al.

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,264,925, "Multi-channel programming transmission system", to Freeman et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on May 4, 1979; Published on April 28, 1981.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a multi-channel programming transmission system where subscribers can manually select among related programming alternatives broadcast simultaneously on separate channels.
• Potential Anticipation: The US8713624 patent explicitly states that Freeman lacks the capacity for automatic operation based on broadcaster-transmitted instructions. Therefore, it is unlikely to anticipate the independent claims of US8713624, which heavily rely on such automation and control.

4. U.S. Pat. No. 4,025,851 to Haselwood et al.

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,025,851, "Audience measurement system and method for television", to Haselwood et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on January 20, 1975; Published on May 24, 1977.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system that monitors television programming using embedded digital signals, primarily for audience measurement purposes.
• Potential Anticipation: Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg (discussed below) all relate to embedding signals for monitoring, which is a foundational concept also present in US8713624.
  • Claims 1, 20, 24, 42, 52, 76, 83 (Generally, for "embedded digital instructions"): Haselwood's use of "embedded digital signals" to convey information (for monitoring) demonstrates the general principle of embedding data within a broadcast. However, US8713624 distinguishes itself by using these embedded signals not just for monitoring but for actively controlling a local processor to generate user-specific content, enable conditional access, or synchronize external apparatus, functionalities that Haselwood lacks according to US8713624's self-assessment.

5. U.S. Pat. No. 3,845,391 to Crosby

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 3,845,391, "System for monitoring a communications transmission", to Crosby.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on April 20, 1972; Published on October 29, 1974.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system for monitoring communications transmissions using "substantially inaudible" audio codes embedded within the signal.
• Potential Anticipation: Similar to Haselwood, Crosby's system involves embedding codes for monitoring.
  • Claims 1, 20, 24, 42, 52, 76, 83 (Generally, for "embedded digital instructions"): Crosby demonstrates the concept of embedding information (audio codes) within a broadcast for a specific function (monitoring). However, as with Haselwood, it lacks the broader control, personalization, and interactive capabilities central to US8713624's claims, especially the use of these embedded signals to trigger complex processing and output at the subscriber's station.

6. U.S. Pat. No. 4,547,804 to Greenberg

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,547,804, "Television program monitor", to Greenberg.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on June 8, 1981; Published on October 15, 1985.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system that automatically monitors multiple television channels sequentially and can monitor audio and visual quality, primarily for generating "ratings."
• Potential Anticipation: Greenberg also focuses on monitoring by means of embedded signals, specifically mentioning a digital signal on a particular line of each frame of a television program.
  • Claims 1, 20, 24, 42, 52, 76, 83 (Generally, for "embedded digital instructions"): Greenberg, like Haselwood and Crosby, establishes the prior art of embedding signals in broadcasts for monitoring. US8713624 specifically notes Greenberg's use of signals on a particular line of a video frame. While this teaches embedding, US8713624 explicitly critiques this prior art for its limited function (only identifying programming) and lack of capacity to decrypt, record, or transfer information simultaneously, or to control subscriber apparatus in the sophisticated ways claimed.

In summary, while these prior art patents demonstrate various individual elements relevant to different parts of US8713624's claims (e.g., embedding signals, combining images, rudimentary personalization), the US8713624 patent itself meticulously describes why each of these references lacks the specific combination of features, particularly the dynamic control of local processors and equipment via broadcaster-embedded instructions to create personalized content or manage access, as defined in its independent claims. Therefore, based on the provided patent text, these references individually would likely not fully anticipate the independent claims of US8713624 under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

The obviousness analysis of US patent 8,713,624 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 requires identifying combinations of prior art references that would render the claims obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSA). The motivation to combine these references must also be explained. This analysis relies solely on the prior art explicitly described and limited within the provided patent text, ensuring no outside information is introduced.

General Motivation for Combination

The patent itself frequently highlights the limitations of the prior art, indicating areas where existing technologies were insufficient. For instance, it notes the inefficiency of embedded signals being used "only to identify programming" and suggests that "broadcasters can foresee alternate potential for this capacity that may be more profitable". This implies a general motivation for a POSA to expand the utility of embedded signals beyond mere identification to include control functions. Similarly, for various systems, the patent criticizes the lack of automatic, broadcast-controlled operations or the inability to handle user-specific information effectively. A POSA would be motivated to address these identified shortcomings by combining known elements to achieve more automated, controlled, and personalized media experiences, which are clearly recognized benefits.

Obviousness Analysis for Independent Claims

Claim 1: Personalized, Combined Audio-Visual Display

• Claim Elements: A method where a broadcaster transmits a television signal containing embedded digital instructions. A local receiver detects these instructions and uses them to control a processor. This processor then combines locally generated information with the received television program to create a personalized, combined audio-visual display for the user.

• Prior Art Elements:

  • Broadcast TV signal with embedded digital signals: U.S. patent to Haselwood, et al. U.S. Pat. No. 4,025,851, U.S. patent to Crosby U.S. Pat. No. 3,845,391, and U.S. patent to Greenberg U.S. Pat. No. 4,547,804 describe embedding digital signals in programming for monitoring purposes. While these signals were "used only to identify programming", the patent notes the inefficiency of this single function and the potential for "alternate potential".
  • Local receiver detects signals: This is inherent in the monitoring systems of Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg, and the "modios" described for Dataspeed Corporation and Equatorial Communications Company that "receive the particular transmission and convert its data content into unencrypted digital signals that computers can process".
  • Local processor controlled by instructions: Dataspeed Corporation and Equatorial Communications Company describe microcomputers that receive and process data, though the patent notes they "do not control data processing" in a broad, broadcast-driven sense. U.S. patent to Lambert U.S. Pat. No. 4,381,522 describes a minicomputer controlling a cable television system and responding to signals.
  • Combining information / Overlay display: U.S. patent to Bourassin et al. U.S. Pat. No. 4,337,480 describes an "image-within-image" feature where a secondary image from a peripheral unit can be superimposed upon the primary image on a television display.
  • Locally generated information / Personalization: Dataspeed Corporation and Equatorial Communications Company allow subscribers to "program his subscriber station apparatus to select particular data of interest", implying local processing and generation of customized information. The patent's example in FIG. 1 mentions a microcomputer with a floppy disk holding "information on the portfolio of financial instruments owned by the subscriber".

• Motivation for Combination:
  A POSA would have been motivated to combine the broadcast embedded signal technology (Haselwood et al./Greenberg) with local data processing and overlay capabilities (Bourassin et al., Dataspeed Corporation/Equatorial Communications Company) to overcome the recognized limitations in the prior art. The patent itself highlights that Bourassin's overlay "has no capacity to cause receiver station computers to generate any information whatsoever, let alone user specific information" or "cause overlays to commence or cease appearing at receiver stations". Similarly, Dataspeed/Equatorial systems were limited in that they "only transmits data; it does not control data processing" in a broadcast-driven manner to generate user-specific information.

  Recognizing the inefficiency of embedded signals serving "only one function" (identification) as noted by the patent, a POSA would be motivated to utilize these embedded signals (from Haselwood/Greenberg) as control instructions. These instructions would direct a local microcomputer (as found in Dataspeed/Equatorial systems, capable of processing "data of interest" and holding local data files) to generate personalized information. This locally generated, personalized information would then be combined with the broadcast TV program using the "image-within-image" overlay technique taught by Bourassin et al.. This combination would predictably result in a personalized, combined audio-visual display where broadcast instructions dynamically control the generation and display of local, user-specific content, directly addressing the limitations identified by the patent regarding both overlay control and personalized data processing.

Claim 20: Regulating Access to Television Programming (Encryption/Decryption)

• Claim Elements: A method for regulating access to television programming. A TV signal with embedded encrypted instructions is sent out. A receiver at the subscriber's location detects and decrypts these instructions. The decrypted instructions then control a processor that enables or disables access to the TV programming.

• Prior Art Elements:

  • TV signal with embedded signals: Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg describe embedding signals in programming.
  • Encrypted instructions / Decryptors: The prior art includes "decoders and decryptors" and "addressable" systems that "enable programming suppliers to restrict the use of transmitted programming to only duly authorized subscribers". These "addressable" systems "have capacity for controlling specific individual subscriber station apparatus by means of control instructions transmitted in broadcasts," and can "turn off subscriber station decoder/decryptor apparatus of subscribers who do not pay their bills and turn them back on when the bills are paid". Dataspeed/Equatorial's "modios" include "decryptors".
  • Receiver detecting and decrypting instructions: The "addressable" systems inherently perform this function to control subscriber access. Dataspeed/Equatorial's "modios" also decrypt received data.
  • Processor controlled by decrypted instructions: The "addressable" systems control "specific individual subscriber station apparatus". Lambert's minicomputer controls a cable TV system and responds to signals.
  • Enabling/disabling access: This is the core function of the described "addressable" systems, which can "turn off subscriber station decoder/decryptor apparatus".

• Motivation for Combination:
  A POSA would be motivated to combine the known access control capabilities of "addressable" systems with the technique of embedding digital signals in broadcasts. The patent identifies limitations of prior art access control systems, stating they "have no capacity for identifying then selectively decrypting control instructions embedded in unencrypted programming transmissions". However, the concept of embedding signals is known (Haselwood/Greenberg), and the use of decryptors within receiver systems is known (Dataspeed/Equatorial "modios"). The very purpose of "addressable" systems is to control access via broadcast instructions and decryptors.

  A POSA, seeking to improve the robustness, efficiency, or integration of access control within the broadcast stream, would find it obvious to embed the encrypted control instructions (which "addressable" systems already transmit) directly into the television signal itself, as suggested by the embedded signal techniques of Haselwood/Greenberg. The motivation would be to make the control signals inseparable from the programming and to leverage the existing capacity for embedded signals for a control function, rather than just identification, a change the patent itself suggests broadcasters would find profitable. The local receiver/decryptor (from "addressable" systems or Dataspeed "modios") would then detect and decrypt these embedded instructions, and the processor (part of the subscriber station apparatus controlled by "addressable" systems) would enable or disable access accordingly, thereby directly implementing the known function of addressable systems using embedded control.

Claim 24: Personalized Information Service (Processing Stored Personal Information)

• Claim Elements: A broadcaster transmits a signal containing embedded instructions. At a subscriber's site, a receiver detects these instructions, which then direct a local processor to access stored personal information. This local information is then processed and displayed to the user in a specific way, creating a customized information output based on the broadcast signal.

• Prior Art Elements:

  • Broadcast signal with embedded instructions: Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg teach embedding signals in programming.
  • Receiver detects instructions: Implied by monitoring systems (Haselwood/Greenberg) and Dataspeed/Equatorial "modios".
  • Local processor controlled by instructions: Dataspeed Corporation and Equatorial Communications Company describe microcomputers that receive "real-time financial data" and where subscribers "program his subscriber station apparatus to select particular data of interest". This demonstrates local processing and some form of user-directed control.
  • Accessing stored personal information: Dataspeed/Equatorial systems involve subscribers selecting "particular data of interest," which inherently requires some form of stored preference or profile data that can be considered "personal information." The patent's example in FIG. 1 describes a local microcomputer with a floppy disk storing "information on the portfolio of financial instruments owned by the subscriber".
  • Processing and displaying customized information: Dataspeed/Equatorial allow subscribers to select "particular data of interest", leading to a customized display. The patent also refers to "electronic print services" such as "tickers" and "broad tapes" as a form of electronic print mass medium.

• Motivation for Combination:
  A POSA would be motivated to combine broadcast embedded signals (Haselwood et al./Greenberg) with the local data processing and personalization capabilities of systems like Dataspeed Corporation/Equatorial Communications Company. The patent notes that Dataspeed/Equatorial systems "only transmits data; it does not control data processing" in a broadcast-driven manner, and "None has any capacity to cause subscriber station computers to process received data, let alone in ways that are not inputted by the subscribers".

  To overcome this limitation and provide automated, broadcast-controlled personalization, a POSA would recognize the utility of using embedded signals (from Haselwood/Greenberg, motivated by the inefficiency of using them only for identification) as control instructions. These instructions would direct a local microcomputer (Dataspeed/Equatorial, which already processes "data of interest" and has local storage for relevant information like a portfolio). The microcomputer would then automatically access stored personal information (e.g., subscriber preferences or financial portfolios as in the patent's example), process it according to the broadcast instructions, and display the customized output. This combination provides a predictable way to achieve dynamic, broadcast-controlled personalized information services, addressing the gap identified in the Dataspeed/Equatorial systems by leveraging embedded signals for control.

Claim 42: Combined Audio-Visual Program from Multiple Sources (Broadcast + Local AV)

• Claim Elements: A method to create a combined audio-visual program from multiple sources. A television signal with embedded digital instructions is broadcast. A local receiver uses these instructions to control a processor, which then combines the television program with information from a separate, locally stored audio-visual source (like a videotape). This allows for the creation of a unique program for the user that blends broadcast content with their own media.

• Prior Art Elements:

  • TV signal with embedded digital signals: Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg teach embedding signals in programming.
  • Local receiver detects instructions: Implied by monitoring systems (Haselwood/Greenberg) and Dataspeed/Equatorial "modios".
  • Processor controlled by instructions: Lambert's minicomputer "actuates preloaded video tape, disc or film players and transmits the programming transmissions from these players".
  • Locally stored audio-visual source (e.g., videotape): Lambert explicitly mentions "preloaded video tape, disc or film players". "Interactive video" systems have "capacity for locating prerecorded television programming on a given disc". Video tape recorders "have capacity for automatic delayed recording of television transmissions on the basis of instructions input manually by viewers".
  • Combining TV program with local AV: Bourassin et al. (US 4,337,480) teaches "image-within-image," allowing a secondary image from a "second peripheral unit" to be superimposed upon the primary TV image.

• Motivation for Combination:
  A POSA would be motivated to combine the embedded signal control of broadcasts with the capabilities of local AV playback and display integration to overcome limitations in existing systems. The patent notes that "interactive video" systems "has no capacity for automatically embedding signals in and/or removing embedded signals from a television transmission then recording the transmission" or "controlling the connection or actuation or tuning of external apparatus". Similarly, VCRs rely on "instructions input manually by viewers" for delayed recording.

  To achieve automatic, broadcast-synchronized control of local AV sources, a POSA would leverage the embedded digital signals (from Haselwood/Greenberg, motivated by their underutilized potential for control) as instructions. These instructions would control a local processor (like Lambert's minicomputer which "actuates preloaded video tape, disc or film players") to play content from a locally stored audio-visual source (e.g., videotape as described for Lambert or interactive video systems). The output from this local AV source would then be combined with the incoming television program using the "image-within-image" technique described by Bourassin et al.. This combination directly addresses the need for broadcast-controlled actuation and synchronization of local AV content, providing a predictable way to create a blended program that overcomes the manual or unsynchronized nature of prior art systems.

Claim 52: Broadcaster Control of Subscriber's Equipment

• Claim Elements: A broadcaster sends a signal with embedded instructions. A local receiver detects these and uses them to control a processor. This processor, in turn, can operate various pieces of equipment at the subscriber's location, such as recording devices or other peripherals.

• Prior Art Elements:

  • Broadcaster sending signal with embedded instructions: Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg teach embedding signals in programming. "Addressable" systems control "specific individual subscriber station apparatus by means of control instructions transmitted in broadcasts".
  • Local receiver detects instructions: Implied by monitoring and addressable systems.
  • Processor controlled by instructions: Lambert's minicomputer "actuates preloaded video tape, disc or film players". "Addressable" systems control "specific individual subscriber station apparatus". Dataspeed/Equatorial microcomputers receive and process data.
  • Operating equipment at subscriber's location (peripherals/recording devices): Lambert controls video tape players. U.S. patent to Bourassin et al. U.S. Pat. No. 4,337,480 describes a "dynamic interconnection system for connecting at least one television receiver to a plurality of television peripheral units". Video tape recorders have "capacity for automatic delayed recording of television transmissions on the basis of instructions input manually by viewers". The patent notes that Freeman et al. (and by implication, Bourassin) lacked "capacity for acting on instructions transmitted by broadcasters to interconnect, actuate or tune systems peripheral to a television receiver".

• Motivation for Combination:
  A POSA would be motivated to combine embedded broadcast signals (Haselwood et al./Greenberg) with local processing and peripheral control capabilities (Lambert, Bourassin et al., VCRs) to enable automated, broadcast-driven operation of subscriber equipment. The patent explicitly states the limitation of Bourassin/Freeman that they "has no capacity for acting on instructions transmitted by broadcasters to interconnect, actuate or tune systems peripheral to a television receiver". Yet, "addressable" systems already perform broadcast control over subscriber apparatus (e.g., turning decryptors on/off), and Lambert's system shows a computer actuating video players based on control.

  To overcome the manual or non-broadcast-controlled limitations, a POSA would find it obvious to use the embedded signals (from Haselwood/Greenberg, motivated by their potential for greater utility than mere identification) as control instructions. These instructions would be detected by a local receiver and used to control a local processor (such as Lambert's minicomputer or the processing elements within "addressable" systems) that is connected to various subscriber equipment (e.g., peripheral units from Bourassin et al. or VCRs for recording). This combination would predictably enable a broadcaster to remotely and automatically operate subscriber equipment, thereby automating tasks like recording (currently manual for VCRs) or dynamic peripheral interconnection (lacking broadcast control in Bourassin/Freeman).

Claim 76: Personalized Newspaper

• Claim Elements: A broadcast signal containing embedded instructions is transmitted. A receiver at a subscriber's location uses these instructions to control a local processor. This processor then accesses a database of information and assembles a customized "newspaper" (a collection of information) for the user, which is then made available for display or printing.

• Prior Art Elements:

  • Broadcast signal with embedded instructions: Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg teach embedding signals in programming.
  • Receiver detects instructions: Implied by monitoring systems and Dataspeed/Equatorial "modios".
  • Local processor controlled by instructions: Dataspeed Corporation and Equatorial Communications Company describe microcomputers that receive "real-time financial data" and where "Each subscriber programs his subscriber station apparatus to select particular data of interest".
  • Accessing a database of information: Dataspeed/Equatorial systems continuously transmit "real-time financial data", which functions as a dynamic information database. Subscribers selecting "data of interest" implies a local filtering or selection from this data or a locally stored profile/database. The patent's example in FIG. 1 involves a local data file on a floppy disk.
  • Assembling a customized "newspaper" / Display or printing: Dataspeed/Equatorial systems provide "electronic print services" such as "tickers" and "broad tapes", which are customized collections of information displayed or printed. The act of "selecting particular data of interest" is a form of customization.

• Motivation for Combination:
  A POSA would be motivated to combine embedded broadcast signals (Haselwood et al./Greenberg) with the local data processing, customization, and display/print capabilities of Dataspeed Corporation/Equatorial Communications Company systems to enable automated creation of personalized information outputs. The patent identifies a key limitation of Dataspeed/Equatorial systems as "it only transmits data; it does not control data processing" in a broadcast-driven manner, and also notes that subscribers manually "program his subscriber station apparatus to select particular data of interest".

  To automate and centralize control over this personalization, a POSA would predictably use embedded signals (from Haselwood/Greenberg, motivated by the desire to leverage these signals for more than just identification) as instructions. These instructions would direct a local microcomputer (Dataspeed/Equatorial, which already receives and processes real-time data and enables selection of "data of interest") to automatically access its data sources (whether the incoming real-time stream or a local database). The processor would then assemble and format a customized collection of information ("newspaper") based on these instructions and the subscriber's previously defined "data of interest" or local data, for display or printing (as exemplified by "tickers" and "broad tapes"). This combination provides a predictable solution for broadcast-controlled, automatic generation of personalized textual information, addressing the gap where Dataspeed/Equatorial lacked broadcast-driven processing control.

Claim 83: Synchronizing Local Device with Broadcast

• Claim Elements: A TV program with embedded timing signals (a "combining synch command") is transmitted. A receiver uses this command to control a local processor, which in turn synchronizes the operation of a local apparatus (like a VCR or computer) with the timing of the television program.

• Prior Art Elements:

  • TV program with embedded signals: Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg teach embedding signals in programming. The patent also notes that Greenberg "requires that a digital signal be transmitted at a particular place on a select line of each frame of a television program", which highlights the capacity for precise timing.
  • Receiver uses command to control local processor: Lambert's minicomputer responds to signals to generate a schedule and "actuates preloaded video tape, disc or film players". "Addressable" systems control "specific individual subscriber station apparatus" via broadcast control instructions. Dataspeed/Equatorial microcomputers process data based on subscriber input.
  • Synchronizing operation of a local apparatus (VCR, computer) with timing of TV program: Video tape recorders "have capacity for automatic delayed recording of television transmissions on the basis of instructions input manually by viewers", indicating time-based operation. Bourassin et al. provides "image-within-image" superimposition, which inherently requires some form of visual synchronization. The patent notes that prior art overlay systems lacked the "capacity to cause overlays to commence or cease appearing at receiver stations, let alone commence and cease appearing periodically".

• Motivation for Combination:
  A POSA would be motivated to combine the embedded signal capabilities of broadcasts (Haselwood et al./Greenberg) with the local control and time-based operations of existing apparatus (VCRs, Lambert's system, Bourassin's overlay) to achieve automatic and precise synchronization with broadcast content. While VCRs can perform "automatic delayed recording", this is based on manual input. Lambert's system schedules playback but doesn't describe synchronization with embedded broadcast timing signals for dynamic operations. Bourassin's "image-within-image" lacks broadcast-controlled commencement/cessation.

  Recognizing the precision of embedded digital signals (e.g., Greenberg's placement on a specific line of a video frame) and the desire for more dynamic control, a POSA would predictably use these embedded signals (from Haselwood/Greenberg, motivated by their potential for expanded utility) as timing signals or "combining synch commands." These commands, detected by a local receiver/processor (like Lambert's minicomputer or Dataspeed's microcomputer), would then automatically synchronize the operation of a local apparatus (such as a VCR to start/stop recording, or to control the appearance/disappearance of an overlay as in Bourassin et al.) with the exact timing of the television program. This combination directly addresses the limitation of manual input for time-based operations and the lack of dynamic, broadcast-controlled synchronization for combined media presentations.

To provide a comprehensive analysis for US Patent 8,713,624, I will leverage the USPTO's Patent Public Search tool to identify any Patent Term Adjustments (PTA), Patent Term Extensions (PTE), continuation or divisional applications, related family members, and the projected expiration date.

Patent Term Adjustments (PTA) for US8713624

Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) can extend the term of a U.S. patent to compensate for certain delays caused by the USPTO during the examination process. These delays typically involve the USPTO failing to meet specific timeframes, such as issuing a first office action within 14 months or a patent within 36 months of the filing date. However, any extension can be reduced if delays are caused by the applicant.

To determine the specific PTA for US8713624, one would typically need to examine the patent's file wrapper in Patent Center or use a patent term calculator that incorporates PTA data. Since I cannot directly access real-time, dynamic data from the USPTO's Patent Center or execute a proprietary calculator, I cannot provide the exact PTA for US8713624.

Patent Term Extensions (PTE) for US8713624

Patent Term Extensions (PTE) are granted under the Hatch-Waxman Act, primarily for patents covering pharmaceutical products, medical devices, food or color additives, and animal drugs, to restore a portion of the patent term lost due to regulatory review by agencies like the FDA.

Given that US Patent 8,713,624 relates to "Signal processing apparatus and methods" and not a product requiring regulatory approval from agencies such as the FDA, it is highly unlikely to have received any Patent Term Extensions (PTE).

Continuation and Divisional Applications for US8713624

Continuation applications are filed while a parent application is still pending (not abandoned or granted) and claim priority to the parent application, often to pursue additional claims to the same subject matter. Divisional applications are a specific type of continuing application filed when an examiner requires the original application to be divided into multiple inventions.

To definitively identify any continuation or divisional applications for US8713624, a thorough search of the patent's family history within the USPTO database (such as Patent Center or Patent Public Search) would be necessary. Without direct access to this live search functionality, I cannot list specific continuation or divisional applications for US8713624 at this time.

Related Family Members of US8713624

A patent family consists of all patents and patent applications that share a common priority claim. Related family members would typically be identified through a "Global Dossier" or similar tools that track patent applications filed in multiple patent offices.

The provided patent text indicates a priority claim from US06/317,510 on November 3, 1981, and also notes "US4694490A/en" under "external-priority". This suggests that US Patent 4,694,490 is a related family member, likely a parent patent from which US8713624 claims priority.

Projected Expiration Date for US8713624

For utility patents filed on or after June 8, 1995, the patent term generally extends for 20 years from the earliest effective non-provisional filing date, subject to any Patent Term Adjustments (PTA) or extensions (PTE) and terminal disclaimers.

US8713624 was filed on June 7, 1995. This filing date falls on the exact cutoff for the 20-year term from filing rule. However, the patent explicitly states that it claims priority from US06/317,510, filed on November 3, 1981. According to 35 U.S.C. § 154, for applications filed after June 7, 1995, the term is 20 years from the filing date of the earliest application if there is a specific reference to an earlier filed application under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c). This means the 20-year clock should start from the earliest priority date.

Given the priority date of November 3, 1981, a basic calculation for a 20-year term would suggest an expiration around November 3, 2001. However, the patent was issued on April 29, 2014, which is well after this date. This indicates that the patent term calculation for this specific patent is complex and likely subject to specific legal interpretations and potentially the pre-GATT rules if it was considered an application that was continuously pending from before June 8, 1995.

The Google Patents information for US8713624 lists an "Anticipated expiration" date of 2031-04-29. This date is 17 years from the issue date of April 29, 2014, which aligns with the previous patent term rule (17 years from grant) for applications filed before June 8, 1995, even if they issued later. This suggests that despite the 1995 filing date of the specific application that matured into US8713624, the priority to the 1981 application (US06/317,510) means its term is likely governed by the pre-GATT rules.

Therefore, the projected expiration date for US8713624 is April 29, 2031, which is 17 years from its issue date. This calculation would supersede the 20-year from earliest filing date rule due to the circumstances of its filing and priority claims. It's important to note that this is a complex area of patent law, and a definitive calculation would require access to the full prosecution history and any terminal disclaimers filed.