IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________________
`
`ELECTRONIC ARTS INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`WHITE KNUCKLE GAMING, LLC
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,540,575 to Athanasios Angelopoulos
`Issue Date: September 24, 2013
`Title: Method And System For Increased Realism In Video Games
`_____________________
`
`Inter Partes Review No.: Unassigned
`_____________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,540,575
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-.80, 42.100-.107
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`

`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`I. 
`
`INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1 
`
`II.  OVERVIEW ................................................................................................... 1 
`
`III.  MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8 ................................. 5 
`
`A. 
`
`B. 
`
`Real Party-in-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)) ..................................... 5 
`
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)) .............................................. 6 
`
`1. 
`
`2. 
`
`3. 
`
`Judicial Matters ........................................................................... 6 
`
`Administrative Matters: .............................................................. 6 
`
`Related Patents ............................................................................ 6 
`
`C. 
`
`Lead/Back-up Counsel (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)): ................................. 6 
`
`D.  Notice of Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)): ...................... 7 
`
`IV.  GROUNDS FOR STANDING (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(A)) ............................. 7 
`
`V.  RELIEF REQUESTED (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(A)) .......................................... 7 
`
`VI.  REASONS FOR THE REQUESTED RELIEF .......................................... 7 
`
`A. 
`
`B. 
`
`C. 
`
`D. 
`
`E. 
`
`F. 
`
`Summary of the ’575 Patent .................................................................. 8 
`
`Prosecution History ............................................................................. 12 
`
`Claim Construction ............................................................................. 14 
`
`1. 
`
`“the at least weekly transmissions” .......................................... 15 
`
`Priority Date of the Challenged Claims .............................................. 16 
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ..................................................... 16 
`
`State of the Art .................................................................................... 17 
`
`VII.  IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGES .................................................. 21 
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`
`
`
`A. 
`
`B. 
`
`Challenged Claims .............................................................................. 21 
`
`Statutory Grounds for Challenges ....................................................... 21 
`
`VIII.  IDENTIFICATION OF HOW THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`ARE UNPATENTABLE ............................................................................. 25 
`
`A. 
`
`Challenge 1: Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8, 11-12, 14-17, 22-25, and 27-
`31 are Unpatentable over the Madden NFL 2000 References ............ 25 
`
`1.  Madden 2000 Manual ............................................................... 25 
`
`2.  Madden 2000 Card .................................................................... 27 
`
`3.  Madden 2000 Updates Including Playoff Week 1 Update and
`Super Bowl Update ................................................................... 27 
`
`4. 
`
`The Combinability of the Madden NFL 2000 References........ 28 
`
`B. 
`
`Challenge 2: Claims 4, 7, 9-10, and 21 are Unpatentable over
`the Madden NFL 2000 References in view of FIFA 2001 News ....... 40 
`
`1.  Motivation to Combine the Madden NFL 2000 References and
`FIFA 2001 News ....................................................................... 42 
`
`C. 
`
`D. 
`
`Challenge 3: Claims 1-3, 11-12, and 23-31 are Unpatentable
`over Swanberg ..................................................................................... 45 
`
`Challenge 4: Claims 13, 18-20, and 32-35 are obvious under 35
`U.S.C. § 103 over Swanberg in view of Hines ................................... 55 
`
`1.  Motivation to Combine Swanberg and Hines ........................... 56 
`
`IX.  CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 60 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`
`
`
`Cases
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`White Knuckle Gaming, LLC v. Electronic Arts Inc., D. Utah Case No.
`1:15-cv-00150-JNP ............................................................................................... 5
`
`Statutes
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(a) ............................................................................................. 21-22
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ............................................................................................. 20-22
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 .................................................................................. 1, 19-21, 40, 55
`
`35 U.S.C. § 311 et seq. ............................................................................................... 1
`
`Other Authorities
`37 C.F.R. § 42.1 et seq. .............................................................................................. 1
`
`37 C.F.R. §42.8 .......................................................................................................... 5
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ................................................................................................ 5
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ................................................................................................ 5
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ................................................................................................ 5
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ................................................................................................ 6
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.22(A).................................................................................................. 6
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) .............................................................................................. 12
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ................................................................................................. 6
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.106(a) ................................................................................................. 6
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.108 ................................................................................................. 1, 6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`
`
`
`EA
`Exhibit #
`
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`1011
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`Petitioner’s Exhibit List
`
`Description
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,540,575 (“the ’575 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 8,540,575 File History (Part 1 of 2)
`U.S. Patent No. 8,540,575 File History (Part 2 of 2)
`Declaration of David Crane
`U.S. Patent No. 8,529,350 File History
`intentionally left blank
`FIFA 2001 Online – News Archive for September 2000, October
`2000, November 2000, January 2001, March 2001, April 2001 and
`May 2001, archived at Wayback Machine on June 17, 2001 (“FIFA
`2001 News - 1”)
`FIFA 2001 Online – News Archive for December 2000 and February
`2001, archived at Wayback Machine on April 25, 2001 (“FIFA 2001
`News - 2”)
`FIFA 2001 Online – News Archive for June 2001, archived at
`Wayback Machine on July 26, 2001 (“FIFA 2001 News - 3”)
`Declaration of Christopher Butler No. 11
`U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2002/0155893 to Swanberg, et al. (“Swanberg”)
`FIFA-MRA, Support System – Installation, Loading Files (Games,
`Patches & Favorites), Launching the MRA, and Skins archived at
`Wayback Machine on March 3, 2001 (“FIFA MRA Support - 1”)
`FIFA-MRA, Support System – Features of the MRA, archived at
`Wayback Machine on April 22, 2001 (“FIFA MRA Support - 2”)
`FIFA-MRA, Support System – Patches, archived at Wayback Machine
`on April 23, 2001 (“FIFA MRA Support - 3”)
`EA Sports, Madden 2000 Downloads, archived at Wayback Machine
`on March 2, 2000 (“Madden 2000 Updates”)
`
`
`1 The Declaration of Christopher Butler No. 1 (EA-1010) is submitted as an
`
`evidentiary declaration for Exhibit EA-1025. Exhibit A of EA-1010 is EA-1025.
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`

`
`
`
`EA
`Exhibit #
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`1021
`1022
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`1028
`
`Description
`
`EA SPORTS Madden NFL(TM) 2000 Roster Update - Playoff Week 1
`(01/07/00) ReadMe text file (“Playoff Week 1 Update”)
`Electronic Arts, Inc., Madden 2000 Reference Card (1999) (“Madden
`2000 Card”)
`Electronic Arts, Inc., Madden 2000 Reference Manual (1999)
`(“Madden 2000 Manual”)
`EA SPORTS Madden NFL(TM) 2000 Roster Update – EA Super
`Bowl (01/28/00) ReadMe text file (“Super Bowl Update”)
`U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2003/0234787 to Hines, et al. (“Hines”)
`Resume of Expert David Crane
`Listing of Patents and Patent Applications Related to the ’575 Patent
`EA Sports Australian Base Cricket World Cup 1999 Home Page,
`archived at Wayback Machine on February 29, 2000 (“Cricket 99
`Main”)
`EA Sports Australian Base Home Page archived at Wayback Machine
`on May 11, 2000 (“EA Sports Main”)
`EA Sports Australian Base Cricket World Cup 1999 News Page,
`archived at Wayback Machine on June 6, 2000 (“Cricket 99 News”)
`“CRICKET WORLD CUP 99 UNOFFICIAL FAQ,” VERSION
`1.0917, 17 September, 1999, archived at Wayback Machine on
`October 26, 2000 (“Cricket 99 FAQs”)
`Declaration of Christopher Butler No. 2 2
`Declaration of Ryan Ferwerda
`
`
`2 The Declaration of Christopher Butler No. 2 (EA-1027) is submitted as an
`
`evidentiary declaration for Exhibits EA-1007 to EA-1009, EA-1023, EA-1024, and
`
`EA-1026. Exhibit A of EA-1027 includes EA-1007 to EA-1009, EA-1023, EA-
`
`1024, and evidentiary documents referenced in Exhibit EA-1004. Exhibit B of
`
`EA-1027 is EA-1026.
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`

`
`
`
`EA
`Exhibit #
`
`1029
`1030
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`
`
`
`
`Description
`
`Declaration of David Witts
`Nathan’s File Collection web page archived at Wayback Machine on
`February 4, 2002
`FIFA-MRA, Support Home page, archived at Wayback Machine on
`February 4, 2001
`FIFA-MRA, Home page, archived at Wayback Machine on March 31,
`2001
`FIFA-MRA, Support-About page, archived at Wayback Machine on
`April 10, 2001
`FIFA 2001 Online –News Archive Home page, archived at Wayback
`Machine on June 3, 2001
`FIFA 2001 Online –News Archive Home page, archived at Wayback
`Machine on October 21, 2001
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`

`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 311 et seq. and 37 C.F.R. § 42.1 et seq., Electronic
`
`Arts Inc. (“Petitioner” or “EA”) hereby petitions for an inter partes review of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,540,575 (“the ’575 Patent”). Petitioner respectfully submits that
`
`Claims 1-35 (the “Challenged Claims”) of the ’575 Patent are unpatentable under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the prior art references discussed herein. This Petition
`
`demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that there is a reasonable
`
`likelihood that Petitioner will prevail with respect to at least one of these claims.
`
`Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the Board institute an inter partes
`
`review of the ’575 Patent pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.108.
`
`II. OVERVIEW
`The Challenged Claims are unpatentable as obvious over the prior art. The
`
`claims are directed to a combination of conventional components to perform
`
`conventional functions that were well-known in the art of sports video games,
`
`including updating parameters that control the operation of sports video games
`
`after production and release. Specifically, it was well-known to provide updates
`
`for sports video games that included updated parameters for video game character
`
`performances in order to provide an accurate simulation of the performance of the
`
`corresponding real-life athlete. Choosing from a finite number of identified,
`
`updatable parameters is a predictable solution to providing a simulation of a real-
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`
`
`life gaming experience with a reasonable expectation of success and is therefore
`
`not invention, but rather an obvious combination of known features.
`
`The Background of the ’575 Patent acknowledges that prior art sports video
`
`games existed to simulate real-life sporting events and that these prior art video
`
`games simulated the real-life visual attributes of specific real-life athletes,
`
`uniforms, and stadiums, the real-life composition of specific teams, and the real-
`
`life performance in games or matches by such athletes, by storing corresponding
`
`visual, composition, and performance parameters on the video game medium. EA-
`
`1001, 1:7-223, 1:23-31, 1:35-41, 1:48-61; EA-1004, ¶¶ 31-32. The ’575 Patent
`
`also acknowledges that the performance parameters in these prior art video games
`
`“cause the different [video game] characters to replicate their real-life
`
`counterparts’ performance.” EA-1001, 1:20-22 (emphasis added), 1:26-31, 1:35-
`
`38, 1:52-56; EA-1004, ¶ 33. The Background identifies that a problem in these
`
`prior art games was that such visual and performance parameters were fixed at the
`
`time that the game was produced. EA-1001, 1:23-33; EA-1004, ¶ 34. However,
`
`the ’575 Patent explains that the visual appearance of such real-life athletes,
`
`stadiums and uniforms, the composition of such real-life teams, and the
`
`performance in games or matches by such real-life athletes, may continue to
`
`change after the video game is produced and thus may not reflect the real-life
`
`3 All citations to U.S. Patents are referenced by column: line numbers.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`
`
`visual attributes and performance characteristics at the time the game is being
`
`played. EA-1001, 1:62-2:8; EA-1004, ¶ 34.
`
`The identified solution to this problem was to provide the ability for a sports
`
`video game to receive updates for the visual and performance parameters so that
`
`the game reflected the real-life visual attributes, and the characters in the game
`
`reflected the real-life performance characteristics, at the time the game is being
`
`played. EA-1001, 2:11-21; EA-1004, ¶¶ 35-37. However, this problem had been
`
`already identified in prior art sports video game systems, and the same solution had
`
`already been described and demonstrated. EA-1004, ¶ 78. Accordingly, during
`
`prosecution, the Examiner cited several of such prior art systems. EA-1003, 103-
`
`113; §§ VI.B, F. In response to the rejections, the Applicant argued that while the
`
`cited art disclosed updating of team composition and team performance parameters
`
`annually, none of the cited art disclosed updating an individual character’s
`
`performance parameters, more than once during a single sports season, in order to
`
`change the performance of the character in the game over the course of a season.
`
`EA-1002, 404-411, 60-70. Although the Examiner maintained obviousness
`
`rejections over the cited art, during an appeal, the BPAI overturned the rejections,
`
`finding that the Examiner had not identified where character performance
`
`parameters had been updated, more than once during a single sports season, so that
`
`the performance of the video game character more accurately simulated the
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`
`
`performance of the corresponding real-life athlete in the cited art and thus had
`
`failed to make a prima facie case of obviousness. Id., 35-44.
`
`However, as described in more detail below, the updating of character
`
`performance parameters in sports video games, and using those updated parameters
`
`so that the performance of the video game character more accurately simulates the
`
`performance of the corresponding real-life athlete, including during a single sports
`
`season, did exist in the prior art. EA-1004, ¶¶ 9, 32-33, 62-79, 96-144, 214-235,
`
`265-269. Petitioner is a global leader in the video game industry. It makes some
`
`of the most popular sports games in the industry, including Madden NFL and
`
`FIFA. Petitioner submits five prior art publications describing, in part, the features
`
`of Madden NFL for updating character performance and team roster parameters
`
`weekly during a real-life NFL season, and using those updated parameters so that
`
`the video game rosters correspond to the real-life rosters and the performance of
`
`the video game characters more accurately simulates the performance of the
`
`corresponding real-life NFL athletes. EA-1015-1018; EA-1004, ¶¶ 96-127.
`
`Petitioner also submits an additional prior art printed publication written by users
`
`of FIFA that describes, in part, the features of FIFA for updating visual (e.g.
`
`appearance of stadiums or characters) and character performance parameters,
`
`during a real-life FIFA season, so that the FIFA game more closely simulated the
`
`real-life visual attributes, and the characters in the game more closely simulated the
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`
`
`real-life athlete’s performance characteristics, at the time the game is being played.
`
`EA-1007-1009; EA-1027; EA-1004, ¶¶ 189-202. Petitioner further submits a prior
`
`art patent publication to Swanberg (EA-1011) that describes, in part, features for
`
`updating video game character performance parameters to more closely simulate
`
`changed athlete performance attributes during a real-life season, and a prior art
`
`publication to Hines (EA-1020) that describes, in part, features for collecting and
`
`storing updated basketball athlete performance parameters. Id., ¶ 214-222, 263-69.
`
`The combination of the publications describing the features of Madden NFL,
`
`the features of FIFA, Swanberg, and/or Hines, teach all of the limitations of the
`
`Challenged Claims. EA-1004, ¶ 9. These references are all directed to the same
`
`problem as the ’575 Patent (providing a realistic video game experience) and
`
`propose the same solution (providing updated video game parameters to increase
`
`realism). Id., ¶¶ 78, 96-127, 189-202, 214-222. Thus, it is simply a design choice
`
`to select from a finite number of identified, updatable video game parameters to
`
`achieve a predictable solution with a reasonable expectation of success and
`
`therefore this design choice of available features is not invention, but rather an
`
`obvious combination of known features. Id., ¶¶ 45-46, 78, 202, 269; §§VI.A, F.
`
`III. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8
`A. Real Party-in-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1))
`The real party-in-interest in this Petition is Electronic Arts Inc.
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`
`
`B. Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2))
`1.
`Judicial Matters
`As of the filing date of this Petition and to the best knowledge of Petitioner,
`
`the ’575 Patent is involved in White Knuckle Gaming, LLC v. Electronic Arts Inc.,
`
`D. Utah, Case No. 1:15-cv-00150-JNP (filed on November 25, 2015).
`
`Administrative Matters:
`
`2.
`As of the filing date of this Petition and to the best knowledge of Petitioner,
`
`the ’575 Patent is not involved in any administrative matters. A child patent of the
`
`’575 Patent (U.S. Pat. No. 8,529,350) is involved in IPR2015-01595 which was
`
`instituted by the Board on January 14, 2016. See IPR2015-01595, Paper 11.
`
`Related Patents
`
`3.
`As of the filing date of this Petition and to the best knowledge of Petitioner,
`
`the ’575 Patent is related to U.S. Pat. No. 8,529,350 and U.S. Pat. App. Nos.
`
`14/034,530, 14/790,902, and 14/991,913. See EA-1022.
`
`C. Lead/Back-up Counsel (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)):
`
`Lead Counsel: Patrick D. McPherson, USPTO Reg. No. 46,255
`DUANE MORRIS LLP, 505 9th St. NW, Suite 1000, Washington, D.C. 20004
`P: (202) 776-5214; F: (202) 776-7801; PDMcPherson@duanemorris.com
`
`Back-Up Counsel: Christopher J. Tyson, USPTO Reg. No. 63,850
`DUANE MORRIS LLP, 505 9th St. NW, Suite 1000, Washington, D.C. 20004
`P: (202) 776-7851; F: (202) 776-7801; CJTyson@duanemorris.com
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`
`
`D. Notice of Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)):
`Please direct all correspondence to lead and back-up counsel at the above
`
`addresses. Petitioner consents to electronic service at the email addresses above.
`
`IV. GROUNDS FOR STANDING (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(A))
`Petitioner certifies that the Patent for which review is sought is available for
`
`inter partes review and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped from requesting an
`
`inter partes review of the Challenged Claims on the grounds identified herein. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.104(a). This Petition is filed pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.106(a).
`
`V. RELIEF REQUESTED (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(A))
`Petitioner respectfully requests institution of an inter partes review pursuant
`
`to 37 C.F.R. § 42.108 and cancellation of all claims of the ’575 Patent.
`
`VI. REASONS FOR THE REQUESTED RELIEF
`As explained in §§ II and VII-VIII of this Petition and in the attached
`
`Declaration of Petitioner’s Expert, David Crane, (“Crane,” EA-1004), the systems
`
`and methods for updating video game parameters in sports video games described
`
`and claimed in the ’575 Patent are obvious over the prior art. As detailed in §§ II
`
`and VII-VIII, this Petition and Crane explain where each element is found in the
`
`prior art and why each claim would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art (“POSA”) at the time of the invention.
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`
`
`Summary of the ’575 Patent
`
`A.
`The ’575 Patent is related generally to “video games [that] attempt to
`
`recreate realistic situations” such as, “[f]or example video games simulating sports
`
`games and matches.” EA-1001, 1:6-8, EA-1004, ¶ 31. The ’575 Patent
`
`acknowledges that prior art sports video games existed to play simulations of real-
`
`life sporting events and included and stored realistic visual video game parameters:
`
`Many video games attempt to recreate realistic situations . . . [V]ideo
`games simulating sports games and matches . . . commonly even show
`actual leagues with correct teams. Hometowns may be shown, with
`realistic stadiums. Athletes’ uniforms represent professional athletes’
`actual uniforms. Specific athletes are represented . . . including such
`details as jersey numbers, physical stature and even facial features.
`Id., 1:7-15, 1:48-52, 1:56-60, 1:38-41; 4:41-43; EA-1004, ¶ 31.
`The ’575 Patent acknowledges that it was also well known to include and
`
`store video game character performance parameters (e.g. batting, homerun, points
`
`scored, shots, or rushing yard, average, etc.) associated with real-life athlete or
`
`team performance characteristics and tendencies (e.g. hitting homeruns, basketball
`
`dunking, free-throw shooting) of real-life athletes:
`
`The video game characters have characteristics approximating their
`real life counterparts. For example, the video game Shaquile may be
`very good at dunking the basketball but horrible at shooting free
`throws. Id., 1:16-20; see also 1:26-31.
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`
`
`Performance characteristics are emulated. For example, in a baseball
`video game, an individual professional athlete’s batting average may
`be used to influence a video game character’s batting performance.
`Id., 1:52-56; see also 4:66-5:1, 5:4-5, 5:7-9, 5:13-15; EA-1004, ¶ 32.
`The ’575 Patent acknowledges that these performance parameters were used
`
`in these prior art games to change the performance of the video game characters
`
`and simulate the actual performance of the corresponding real-life athletes:
`
`Parameters are stored on the video game medium that cause the
`different characters to replicate their real life counterparts’
`performance. Id., 1:20-22, see also 1:26-31, 1:52-56.
`[M]ore and more parameters are added to distinguish one character
`from another and to more accurately simulate the performance of real
`life athletes. Id., 1:35-38; EA-1004, ¶ 33.
`The specification of the ’575 Patent identifies that the problem with these
`
`prior art sports video games was that these well-known video game parameters
`
`could not be updated between annual releases of the video game:
`
`Video game producers typically produce professional sports video
`games once per year. The performance parameters and visual aspects
`are typically specified based on the most recent year . . . A problem
`with this system is that the performance parameters and visual
`aspects of a video game are fixed at the time the video game is
`produced . . . The problem remains that visual aspects and
`performance characteristics of real life sports players, teams and
`environments change throughout the year. Id., 1:23-25, 1:31-35,
`1:42-44 (emphasis added), 1:62-2:5; 4:52-55, 5:7-18; EA-1004, ¶ 34.
`9
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`The Summary section of the ’575 Patent identifies the solution to set the
`
`invention apart from these prior art sports video games and solve this problem was
`
`to implement systems and methods that record real-world events that may
`
`influence a video game attribute onto a server as updated parameters, and connect
`
`the video game to the server to download and store the updated parameters:
`
`Accordingly, a system and method for updating parameters of a video
`game is provided. As events occur in the real world that may
`influence a game attribute, a parameter is recorded on a server. A
`video game player may connect to the server and download the
`parameter. The parameter is stored by the video game and changes an
`attribute of the video game. EA-1001, 2:11-16; EA-1004, ¶ 35.
`The Summary of the ’575 Patent describes that once the updated parameters
`
`are downloaded and stored on a video game machine, the corresponding visual
`
`attributes in the video game, and performance characteristics of video game
`
`characters, change. Id., 2:14-16; 2:17-21; EA-1004, ¶ 36. The ’575 Patent does
`
`not disclose how the updated parameters change these visual attributes or
`
`performance characteristics; rather it simply discloses that they do. EA-1004, ¶ 37.
`
`Aspects of the preferred embodiments that generally correspond to features
`
`in the Challenged Claims are discussed below. The video game system includes a
`
`video game that is played in video game machine that communicates with a data
`
`server via a network. EA-1004, ¶ 38. In the preferred embodiment, the video
`
`game machine includes a central processing unit (CPU), a drive for receiving a
`
`10
`
`
`

`
`
`
`video game medium (e.g., CD/DVD disc), a user interface such as a video game
`
`controller to receive inputs while the user is playing the video game, a local
`
`memory (e.g., read only memory (ROM)), random access memory (RAM), and a
`
`modem to connect to the network, such as the Internet. EA-1001, FIGS. 1-3, 2:66,
`
`3:4-5, 3:15-17, 3:34-36, 3:43-47, 3:51-54, 4:6-14, 4:23-29; EA-1004, ¶ 39. The
`
`data server stores updated video game parameters and connects to network to
`
`communicate these updated parameters to the video game machine. EA-1001,
`
`FIGS. 1-3, 2:64-66, 3:36-39, 3:51-62, 4:23-26, 5:3-4; EA-1004, ¶ 40.
`
`Each of the embodiments of the ’575 Patent discloses the following
`
`combination to enable more realistic video game play: (1) a data server
`
`communicating new or updated video game parameters over (2) a network to (3) a
`
`video game machine operating a video game. EA-1001, FIGS. 1-3, 2:11-21, 2:64-
`
`3:7, 3:51-4:6, 4:49-57, 4:64-5:6; EA-1004, ¶ 40-43. The ’575 Patent describes that
`
`this same combination was used to request, download, and store in local memory
`
`of the CPU, various types of updated video game parameters including updated: (a)
`
`performance parameters for a particular athlete or a particular team (EA-1001,
`
`Abstract, 1:63-65, 2:1-3, 2:60-63, 2:67-3:2, 3:13-14, 3:57-65, 5:1-4, 5:9-11, 5:58-
`
`64, 6:11-13, 7:42-44), team parameters for a particular team or all teams (Id., 1:64-
`
`65, 4:64-66, 7:40-42), stadium or field parameters (Id., 1:66, 4:43-53), and other
`
`parameters (e.g., referees, announcers, etc.) (Id., 1:66, 4:59-63). EA-1004, ¶ 44.
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`
`
`
`Although the Applicant argued the patentability of updating “character
`
`performance parameters” over updating other types of video game parameters, the
`
`’575 Patent does not make any distinction that the updating of character
`
`performance parameters is more technologically challenging than updating other
`
`parameters such as team rosters. EA-1004, ¶ 45. Rather, the ’575 Patent treats all
`
`updated parameters the same and identifies the exact same system architecture and
`
`method for updating each of the different types of parameters. Id., ¶ 45. Indeed,
`
`the ’575 Patent describes that the exact same system architecture and method used
`
`to change what is being displayed in the video game is also used to change the
`
`performance of video game characters and teams. Id., ¶ 46.
`
`Prosecution History
`
`B.
`As set forth in the specification, each of the initial independent claims of the
`
`’575 Patent claimed the identical system architecture and method for updating each
`
`of the different types of disclosed parameters. EA-1003, 257-261; EA-1004, ¶ 80.
`
`In response to anticipation rejections of all claims, the Applicant limited the
`
`independent claims and argued that the type of updated parameters (“character
`
`performance parameters” and “team player parameters”) and the timing of such
`
`updating (during “a single sports season”), distinguished the cited art. EA-1003,
`
`146-158. The Examiner finally rejected these features as obvious over NFL 2K1
`
`GameFaqs on Dreamcast (EA-1005, 370-413) (“NFL 2K1”) in view of Madden
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`
`
`
`NFL 2003 Manual (id., 414-434) (“Madden03”). EA-1003, 103-113. In response,
`
`the Applicant further narrowed the type of updated parameters in the independent
`
`claims to “character performance parameters” and argued that the timing and
`
`frequency of such updating (more than once during a single sports season)
`
`distinguished the prior art which described updating “stats” and “rosters” annually.
`
`Id., 35-47, 2-13; see also EA-1002, 385-421. The Examiner rejected these features
`
`as obvious over NBA 2K1 Manual for Dreamcast (EA-1005, 435-452) (“NBA
`
`2K1”) in view of NFL 2K1 and Nintendo Entertainment System’s Tecmo Super
`
`Bowl (“Tecmo Super Bowl”) (id., 748-751). EA-1002, 303-315.
`
`The Applicant appealed the Examiner’s rejections to the Board of Patent
`
`Appeals and Interferences (“BPAI”). Id., 113-121, 126-279, 54-71, 287-291. On
`
`May 2, 2013, the BPAI reversed the Examiner and found, in part, that:
`
`NBA 2K1 . . . explicitly discloses updating current rosters to the NBA
`game . . . NFL 2K1 . . . discloses connecting to the net to get the new
`update[d] [] rosters with new and improved stats . . . Tecmo Super
`Bowl . . . disclose[s] each team plays one game every week during the
`season and . . . a player’s data that includes player’s condition, record,
`and abilities. Id., 38-42;
`[T]here is no evidence of the alleged fact that merely because video
`game characters have attributes, as a result, the ‘roster’ update in
`NBA 2K1 changes those attributes . . . [and] there is inadequate
`evidence that the incorporation of updated stats [in NFL 2K1] changes
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`
`
`
`video game character performance parameters or the play of either the
`video game characters or the sports game. Id., 39-40;
`Tecmo Super Bowl includes abilities or attributes, such as “accuracy
`of passing” which is a type of video game character performance
`parameter . . . However, there is no evidence that a video game
`character’s abilities or attributes change. Id., 40;
`Thus, for the foregoing reasons, the . . . Examiner’s rejection lacks
`rational underpinning . . . The Examiner has not adequately explained
`how modifying NBA 2K1 with the teachings of NFL 2K1 and Tecmo
`Super Bowl would . . . satisfy[] . . . updating a video game to change
`the manner in which video game characters perform in the video game
`based on updated video game character performance parameters.Id,42.
`Further to this decision, the Examiner allowed the application leading to the
`
`’575 Patent. Id., 18-25. However, as set forth below, the “rational underpinning”
`
`that the BPAI found lacking in the Examiner’s combination of NBA2K1 with
`
`NFL2K1 and Tecmo Super Bowl is explicitly found in Petitioner’s combination of
`
`its Madden NFL 2000 references and in Swanberg. §§ VI.F, VIII.A-VIII.D.
`
`C. Claim Construction
`A proposed interpretation for certain claim terms is provided below. It is
`
`noted that this interpretation is applicable to the inter partes review sought herein
`
`only and should not be construed as constituting, in whole or in part, the
`
`Petitioner’s own interpretation of any claims for