`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE (USPS)
`AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
`AS REPRESENTED BY THE POSTMASTER GENERAL
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`RETURN MAIL, INC.
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case CBM2014-00116
`Patent 6,826,548
`____________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CBM2014-00116
`Patent Owner’s Demonstrative Exhibits
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVES
`
`
`
`
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b) and the Board’s Order (Paper 35),
`
`Patent Owner Return Mail, Inc. submits the following demonstrative exhibits for use
`
`at the hearing scheduled for Tuesday, May 12, 2015.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: May 7, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Eric M. Adams/
`Eric M. Adams (Reg. No. 56,290)
`eric@elliottiplaw.com
`Douglas H. Elliott (Reg. No. 32,982)
`delliott@elliottiplaw.com
`THE ELLIOTT LAW FIRM, PLLC
`6750 West Loop South, Suite 920
`Bellaire, Texas 77401
`(832) 485-3508
`(832) 485-3511 fax
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`CBM2014-00116
`Patent Owner’s Demonstrative Exhibits
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Patent Owner Return Mail, Inc.’s
`
`Demonstrative Exhibits was served on May 7, 2015, by FEDERAL EXPRESS
`standard overnight shipping to the following attorneys of record for Petitioner as well
`as by electronic service at the e-mail address listed below.
`
`Lionel Lavenue
`Erika Arner
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
`Two Freedom Square
`11955 Freedom Drive
`Reston, VA 20190
`
`Elizabeth Ferrill
`Joshua Goldberg
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
`901 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20001
`
`USPS-RMI-CBM@finnegan.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Eric M. Adams/
`Eric M. Adams
`Registration No. 56,290
`
`
`
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CBM2014-00116
`U.S. Patent No. 6,826,548
`
`
`
`Demonstratives
`Patent Owner
`Return Mail, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`GROUNDS AT ISSUE
`
` Whether Claims 39-44 are directed to non-statutory subject
`matter under Section 101.
`
` Whether 1997 ACS anticipates Claims 39-44.
`
`TECHNOLOGY
`
` A method, system and program product for processing
`returned mail
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`RREPREESENTAATIVEE CLAIIM 42
`
`REPRESENTATIVE CLAIM 42
`
`42. A metltodfor processing a plurality of'andeliverable
`mail items, comprising:
`
`receiving from a sender a plurality of mail items, each
`
`includin i) a written addressee, and ii)
`
`identifi’ing. as undeliverable mail items, mail items oft/3e
`plurality of mail iten-is that are returned subsequent to
`mailing as undeliverable;
`
`
`
`creating output data that includes—0 f
`the sender and at least a portion ot—
`determining iftlze sender wants a. corrected address pro-
`
`%d for intended recipients based on_
`
`if the sender wants a corrected address provided. -
`—fbr the
`identified intended recipients that enable the sender to
`update the sender ’s mailing addressfiles; and
`
`il'tlze sender does not want a corrected address provided,
`_thI is
`accessible to the sender to enable the sender to access
`
`the records.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SECTTION 1101
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claims 39-44 aree a technnologicall improvvement.
`
`
`
` C
`
`
` T
`
`The ‘5488 patent
`
`
`
`
`
`contempplates innformatioon encodded direcctly
`onto the
`
`
`
`
`mation oon the piiece of mmail
`
`he informpiece off mail, th
`can be
`
`
`
`read diirectly bby an ooptical
`
`
`scanner,, and thhen
`
`
`automatically proocessed
`
`
`by the aapplicatiion serv
`
`er. (Exhhibit
`
`2015 at ¶¶¶ 56-65
`).
`
`oca2
`
`d).
`(Ex.20221 at 3:46-553) (emphaasis added
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
` A
`
`
`
`
`
`As explained in PPetitioneer’s ownn words iin one o
`
`f its pateents
`
`
`
`entitled ““Methodds and SSystems
`
`for Proocessing
`One C
`ode
`
`
`
`
`
`Address Correctiion Service” issuued on MMarch 8,
`2011:
`
`eA
`
`
`
`MACHINE-OR-TRANSFORMATION TEST
` The ‘548 patent claims meet the machine prong of the machine-or-
`transformation test because they are tied to specific machines in a
`specific sequence for specific purposes capable of organizing,
`transforming, transmitting and posting address information. (Ex.1001
`at Figs. 2 & 3).
`
`o First, a high volume mail sorter (Ex.1001 at 3:32-35; Ex.1023 at 90-91).
`
` o
`
` o
`
` Second, an “optical scanner (Ex.1001 at 3:32-35; Ex.1023 at 56-57).
`
` Third, decoding of encoded information done by a computer (Ex.1001 at 2:66-3:3;
`Ex.1023 at 92-93).
`
` Fourth, the scanned and read information is conveyed to a computer based
`application server programmed to store and process the scanned information.
`(Ex.1001 at 3:39-41; Ex.1023 at 94).
`
` Fifth, the scanned information is stored in the return mail service provider’s mass
`storage device. (Ex.1001 at 3:41-44; Ex.1023 at 94).
`
` Sixth, within the mass storage device, the application server creates a database.
`Ex.1001 at 4:7-10, 3:42-44; Ex.1023 at 94).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` o
`
` o
`
` o
`
` o
`
` Seventh, the application server also may be programmed to search for updated
`address information. (Ex.1001 at 3:52-57; Ex.1023 at 96-97).
`
` o
`
` Eighth, of course, all of these different hardware devices have software interfaces,
`Ex.1001 at 4:20-26 (“provided with software to receive and interpret the data”), and
`data communication lines such that they can “exchange data and information
`electronically and automatically.” (Ex.1001 at 3:60-64; Ex.1023 at 58-59).
`
`
` The ‘548 patent claims meet the transformation prong because they
`transform encoded information regarding a previous address and
`handling instructions into decoded information, which is then used to
`change inaccurate address information into either accurate address
`information or a notice of inaccuracy. (Ex.2015 at ¶¶ 78-80).
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`THE HUMAN MIND
` The ‘548 patent claims cannot be performed in the human mind, or
`with just pencil and paper, because they require encoded
`information in the form of “machine-readable data.” (Ex.1001 at
`2:66-3:3).
`
` The ‘548 patent refers to using a two-dimensional barcode for the
`machine-readable data. (Ex.1001 at 3:14-15).
`
` Petitioner’s declarant, Dr. Lubenow, agreed that a scanner would
`be needed to read the more technical two-dimensional barcodes.
`(Ex.1023 at 50-51).
`
`PREEMPTION
` The Supreme Court has recently clarified that “the concern that
`drives this exclusionary principle [implicit exceptions to Section
`101] as one of pre-emption,” i.e., where the patent “would pre-
`empt use of this approach in all fields, and would effectively grant
`a monopoly over an abstract idea.” Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS
`Bank Int’l, 134 S.Ct. 2347, 2354 (2014).
`
` The real question is whether the claims will preempt a significant
`amount of inventive activity. California Inst. of Tech. v. Hughes
`Comm. Inc., 2014 WL 5661290 at *13 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2014).
`
` Prior art methods of processing return mail, such as 1997 ACS, are
`not preempted by the ‘548 patent claims.
`
` A number of entities have been issued similar patents relating to
`the “processing of returned mail items” since the ‘548 patent
`issued from reexamination. (Ex.2021-2029, 2035-2052)
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LACK OF ANTICIPATION
`
`
`1997 ACS
`
`
`
` The process described in 1997 ACS begins when a postal customer
`fills out a hard copy Form 3575, which is simply a change of address
`order form. (Ex.1004 at 5).
`
` A clerk at the CFS unit manually enters the information from the hard
`copy Form 3575 into a look-up database, and then the hard copy
`Form 3575 is returned to the delivery unit. (Id.).
`
` 1997 ACS describes a process in which information from hard copy
`change of address forms is input into a look-up database by clerks,
`and later there is an attempt by clerks to compare name and address
`information on hard copy mail items to information in the look-up
`database.
`
` Then, if a postal carrier receives a mail item that is undeliverable-as-
`addressed because the intended recipient has moved, in certain
`situations, the mail item is sent to a CFS unit. (Ex.1004 at 5).
`
` A CFS clerk looks up the name and address on the mail item in the
`look-up database, and if the clerk finds a match between the name
`and address on the hard copy mail item and the information in the
`look-up database, then in certain situations there is an opportunity for
`an electronic notification to be generated. (Id.).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Arbitrariily Assiggned Parrticipannt Code
`
`
` Thee ACS paarticipant
`
`code arbbitrarily
`assigned
`
`by the UUSPS is
`
`
`
`encooded dataa or decodded data.
`
`not
`
`
`
`igned byy the
`
`
`
`
`
` The
`rarily asscreated aand arbitr
`
`
`e ACS paarticipant
`
`code is
`
`USPPS. (Ex.1
`
`
`at 137:222-138:24)).
`004 at 9;
`Ex.1023
`
` Acc
`
`
`cording too 1997 AACS, the
`
`
`participaant code
`up of seeven
`is made
`
`
`
`
`alphha characcters, andd the inddividual lletters ussed havee no speccific
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`meaaning behhind themm. (Ex.10004 at 99; Ex.10223 at 13
`
`7:22-1388:24;
`
`
`
`Ex.22015 at ¶¶¶ 102-1033).
`o Thus, th
`
`
`
`
`he particiipant codee is not enncoded ddata.
`
`
` Thee participaant code
`
`
`
`
`
`disclosed in 19997 ACS iss not “deecoded ddata”
`
`
`becaause it is never decciphered
`
`
`
`
`
`into a diffferent forrm. (Ex.11004 at 9,, 19;
`
`
`
`Ex.11023 at 140:21-141:10; Ex..2015 at ¶¶ 103). It
`
`
`
`
`never chaanges forrm:
`
`
` o
`
`
`
` 1
`
`PS assigns participantt code BXBBJDCK too a postal ccustomer. ((Ex.1004 aat 9).
`
`
`
`
`
`
` USP
`
`
`
`participannt code BXXBJDCK
`2 Afte
`
`
`
`er activatioon, the posstal custommer places
`on a
`
`maill item:
`
`
`
`the extent ffulfillmentt files are ccreated, theey are grouuped by p
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`articipant ccode
`
`
`
`(Id.)).
`3 To t
`
`
`
`
`
`BXBBJDCK. (IId. at 19).
`
`oo Thus, th
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`he particiipant codee is not ddecoded ddata.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`THE PLAIN-ENGLISH ENDORSEMENTS
` The plain-English endorsements disclosed in 1997 ACS are not
`encoded data or decoded data.
`
`
`
`
`
` 1997 ACS describes two possible endorsements for the possibility of
`an electronic notification: “Address Service Requested” and “Change
`Service Requested.” (Ex.1004 at 14).
`
` Thus, the endorsements are in plain English rather than in code.
`
` Given that the endorsement is not a code, it cannot be decoded.
`(Ex.2015 at ¶ 104).
`
` Further, the endorsements are also not “decoded data” (decipherable,
`usable data) because they never change form. (Id.).
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NO MEANS FOR DECODING
` 1997 ACS does not describe or disclose any means for decoding information
`indicating whether a sender wants a corrected address.
`
`
`
`
`
` A postal carrier simply reading or not reading a participant code is not
`“decoding.” (Ex.1023 at 154:18-155:17; Ex.2015 at ¶ 105).
`
` Also, 1997 ACS does not disclose or describe CFS units decoding participant
`codes or endorsements, especially given the evidence that the CFS units did not
`have optical scanners until at least 2005.
`
` A USPS article from 2005 explains that new optical scanners were being added
`to replace “mechanized
`terminals previously used
`to manually enter
`information.” (Ex.2030 at 1-2).
`
`
`
` This is consistent with a 2003 CFS Managers and Supervisors Guide which
`points out that a “CFS operator enters the COA information into the CFS
`database” as part of processing undeliverable-as-addressed mail. (Ex.2031 at
`12).
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`