Board discusses metadata in Ex parte Hertz
Appellants argue that, despite the fact that Savitzky discloses that
metadata may be associated with a digital image and that the metadata may include multiple pieces of information (e.g., camera ID, date of capture, GPS location), there is no indication within Savitzky that such information may be utilized as search criteria. App. Br. 7, Reply Br. 1-3.
The Appellant did not fare well:
We find Appellants’ arguments unpersuasive. Appellants argument that searching by “captions or titles” is not suggestive of searching for an image from a “desired source” does not address the express teaching within Savitzky of searching images by “image features.” Further, we find that Appellants’ failure to expressly define “source” within the Specification in a manner which would render the Examiner’s interpretation unreasonable, leads us to conclude that Savitzky’s teaching of searching by “image features” is suggestive of Appellants’ claimed searching for images from a “desired source.”