UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00223
`Patent 8,724,622
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`I.
`II.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1
`Identification of challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)) .......................................... 2
`A. Identification of challenge and statement of relief requested ....................... 2
`B. Meaningful distinction between Dahod- and Vuori-based petitions ............ 4
`III. The ’622 Patent .................................................................................................. 4
`A. Overview of the ’622 Patent ......................................................................... 4
`B. POSITA ......................................................................................................... 5
`C. Claim construction ........................................................................................ 6
`1. “object field” (Claim 1) ......................................................................... 6
`2. “action field” (Claim 1) ......................................................................... 6
`3. “identifier field” (Claim 1) .................................................................... 7
`4. “source field” (Claim 1) ........................................................................ 7
`5. “destination field” (Claim 1) ................................................................. 7
`6. “display[ing] at least one of the plurality of instant voice
`messages” (claim 16)............................................................................. 8
`IV. Claims 3, 4, 6-8, 10-19, 21-23, and 38 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103
`
`9
`A. Ground 1: Claims 3, 4, 6-8, 11-13, 18, and 21-23 are unpatentable
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Vuori in view of SMSS ....... 9
`1. Vuori ...................................................................................................... 9
`2. SMSS ...................................................................................................11
`3. KSR .....................................................................................................12
`4. Claim 3 ................................................................................................12
`5. Claim 4: “wherein the instant voice message includes an action
`field identifying one of a predetermined set of permitted actions
`requested by the user.” ........................................................................21
`6. Claim 6: “wherein the instant voice message includes an identifier
`field including a unique identifier associated with the instant voice
`message.” .............................................................................................24
`7. Claim 7: “[7.1] wherein the instant voice message includes a
`source field including [7.2] a unique identifier associated with at
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`least one of a given one of the plurality of instant voice message
`client systems that created the instant voice message and a given
`one of the plurality of users using the given one of the plurality of
`instant voice message client systems.” ................................................26
`8. Claim 8: “[8.1] wherein the instant voice message includes a
`destination field including [8.2] a unique identifier associated with
`at least one of a given one of the plurality of instant voice message
`client systems identified as a recipient of the instant voice message
`and a given one of the plurality of users using the given one of the
`plurality of instant voice message client systems.” .............................31
`9. Claim 11: “[11.1] wherein, upon receipt of an instant voice
`message, the communication platform system determines if there is
`the current connection to one of the plurality of instant voice
`message client systems identified as a recipient of the instant voice
`message, and [11.2] if there is no connection with the one of the
`plurality of instant voice message client system identified as the
`recipient, the instant voice message is stored and [11.3] delivered
`when the one of the plurality of instant voice message client
`systems identified as the recipient re-established a connection.” .......36
`10. Claim 12: “wherein the communication platform system updates
`the connection information for each of the instant voice message
`client systems by periodically transmitting a connection status
`request to the given one of the plurality of instant voice message
`client systems.” ....................................................................................38
`11. Claim 13: “[13.1] wherein each of the instant voice message client
`systems comprises an instant voice messaging application
`generating an instant voice message and [13.2] transmitting the
`instant voice message over the packet-switched network to the
`messaging system.” .............................................................................41
`12. Claim 18: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes an audio file creation system creating an audio file for the
`instant voice message based on input received via an audio input
`device coupled to the client device.” ...................................................43
`13. Claim 21: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`displays a list of one or more potential recipients for the instant
`voice message.” ...................................................................................45
`14. Claim 22: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`displays an indicia for each of the one or more potential recipients
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`indicating whether the potential recipient is currently available to
`receive an instant voice message.” ......................................................45
`15. Claim 23: “wherein the instant voice message application
`generates an audible or visual effect indicating receipt of an instant
`voice message. .....................................................................................46
`B. Ground 2: Claims 10 and 14-17 are obvious over Vuori, SMSS, and
`Holtzberg ..................................................................................................... 47
`1. Vuori and SMSS ..................................................................................47
`2. Holtzberg .............................................................................................48
`3. KSR .....................................................................................................49
`4. Claim 10: “a message database storing the instant voice messages
`received from the instant voice message client systems.” ..................49
`5. Claim 14: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes a message database storing the instant voice message,
`wherein the instant voice message is represented by a database
`record including a unique identifier.” .................................................52
`6. Claim 15: “wherein the message database includes a plurality of
`instant voice messages recorded by a user of the client device and
`instant voice messages received over the packet-switched
`network.” .............................................................................................55
`7. Claim 16: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`displays at least one of the plurality of instant voice messages
`stored in the message database.” .........................................................57
`8. Claim 17: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes a file manager system performing at least one of storing,
`deleting and retrieving the instant voice messages from the
`message database.” ..............................................................................59
`C. Ground 3: Claim 19 is obvious over Vuori, SMSS, and Väänänen ........... 62
`1. Vuori and SMSS ..................................................................................62
`2. Väänänen .............................................................................................62
`3. KSR .....................................................................................................63
`4. Claim 19: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes an encryption/decryption system for encrypting the instant
`voice messages to be transmitted over the packet-switched network
`
`
`
`- iii -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`and decrypting the instant voices messages received over the
`packet-switched network” ...................................................................63
`D. Ground 4: Claim 38 is obvious in view of Vuori ....................................... 65
`V. Mandatory notices under 37 C.F.R. §42.8 .......................................................71
`A. Real parties-in-interest (§42.8(b)(1)) .......................................................... 71
`B. Notice of related matters (§42.8(b)(2)) ....................................................... 71
`C. Lead and back-up counsel with service information (§42.8(b)(3) and
`(4)) ............................................................................................................... 75
`VI. Grounds for standing ........................................................................................75
`VII. Conclusion ........................................................................................................76
`
`
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`Rojas, U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622 (filed July 11, 2012, issued May
`13, 2014).
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622.
`
`Declaration of Leonard J. Forys, Ph.D.
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Leonard J. Forys, Ph.D.
`
`Vuori, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0146097 (filed
`July 23, 2001, published October 10, 2002).
`
`SMSS, Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UTMS);
`Technical realization of the Short Message Service (SMS) (3G TS
`23.040 version 3.5.0 Release 1999) (published on August 16, 2000).
`
`Holtzberg, U.S. Patent No. 6,625,261 (filed December 20, 2000,
`issued September 23, 2003).
`
`Väänänen, U.S. Patent No. 7,218,919 (filed August 8, 2001, issued
`May 15, 2007).
`
`Dahod et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0022208
`(filed on August 1, 2002, published February 5, 2004).
`
`Hogan et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,619,554 (filed June 8, 1994, issued
`April 8, 1997).
`
`Logan et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,732,216 (filed October 2, 1996, issued
`March 24, 1998).
`
`Peersman et al., The Global System for Mobile Communications
`Short Message Service, IEEE Personal Communications (June 2000).
`
`SMS Forum, SMPP v3.4 Protocol Implementation guide for GSM /
`UMTS, Version 1.0 (May 30, 2002).
`
`
`
`- v -
`
`

`
`Exhibit
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`Description
`
`Clarke et al., Experiments with packet switching of voice traffic, IEE
`Proceedings, G - Electronic Circuits and Systems, Vol. 130, Pt. G,
`N.4, pp. 105-113 (August 1983).
`
`Oouchi et al., Study on Appropriate Voice Data Length of IP Packets
`for VoIP Network Adjustment, Proceedings of the IEEE Global
`Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM) 2002, V. 2, Taipei,
`Taiwan, 2002, pp. 1618–1622.
`
`Lotito et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,625,081 (filed November 30, 1982,
`issued November 25, 1986).
`
`Pershan, U.S. Patent No. 5,260,986 (filed April 23, 1991, issued
`November 9, 1993).
`
`Old Version of AOL Instant Messenger 2.1 Download, retrieved
`from http://www.oldapps.com/aim.php?old_aim=4#screenshots.
`
`Malik, Patent Publication No. 2003/0219104 (filed August 19, 2002,
`published November 27, 2003).
`
`Staack et al., WO Patent Publication No. 02/07396 (filed July 13,
`2000, published January 24, 2002).
`
`International Telecommunication Union, General Aspects of Digital
`Transmission Systems, Terminal Equipments, Pulse Code
`Modulation (PCM) of Voice Frequencies, ITU-T Recommendation
`G.711., pp. 1-10 (ITU 1993).
`
`1022
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Fifth Edition.
`
`1023
`
`Gayomali, C., “The text message turns 20: A brief history of SMS,”
`The Week, December 3, 2012, retrieved from
`http://www.theweek.com/articles/469869/text-message-turns-20-
`brief-history-sms.
`
`
`
`- vi -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`This exhibit list covers two inter partes review petitions being filed against
`
`the ’622 patent. Not all exhibits are used in each petition, but all are used in the
`
`single declaration that supports both petitions.
`
`
`
`- vii -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`The Examiner erroneously issued U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622 (Ex. 1001, “the
`
`’622 Patent.”) The ’622 Patent is directed to methods, systems and programs “for
`
`instant voice messaging over a packet-switched network…” (’622 Patent,
`
`Abstract.) In the Notice of Allowance dated March 6, 2014, the Examiner stated:
`
`“applicant’s instant voice messaging system that has an object field including a
`
`digitized audio file, nor does the instant voice messaging system include displaying
`
`a list of recipients for an instant voice message.” (Ex. 1002,’622 Prosecution
`
`History, p.41.) However, these limitations were both known and broadly used in
`
`similar instant messaging systems. For example, Vuori teaches or suggests wherein
`
`the instant voice message includes an object field (i.e., octets of data in each packet
`
`data unit) including a digitized audio file (i.e., strung together to form a short voice
`
`message). (Ex. 1005, Vuori, [0038].) Further, Vuori provides user equipment that
`
`comprises a display where a sender “uses the menu key to select one or more
`
`intended recipients...” (Id., [0033].)
`
`In addition, all other limitations of the challenged claims were broadly
`
`applied and known in the industry, and there was nothing novel about the manner
`
`in which those limitations were combined. Accordingly, the Petition should be
`
`granted and trial instituted on all of the challenged claims as set forth below.
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`Identification of challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))
`
`II.
`
`Identification of challenge and statement of relief requested
`A.
`Petitioner respectfully requests inter partes review and cancellation of
`
`challenged claims based on seven grounds in two petitions as follows:
`
`1
`
`Petition 1 (the current petition):
`Claims Challenged
`Basis
`Ground
`References
`Vuori1 and the SMS Specification
`§ 103 3, 4, 6-8, 11-13, 18, and
`(“SMSS”)2
`21-23
`Vuori, the SMSS, and Holtzberg3 § 103 10 and 14-17
`4 § 103 19
`
`2
`
`3
`
`Vuori, the SMSS, and Väänänen
`
`Vuori
`
`§ 103 38
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`1 Vuori (Ex. 1005) published on October 10, 2002, and is prior art under §
`
`102(b).
`
`2 SMSS (Ex. 1006) published on August 16, 2000, and is prior art under §
`
`102(b).
`
`3 Holtzberg (Ex. 1007) issued on September 23, 2003, and is prior art under
`
`§102(e).
`
`4 Väänänen (Ex. 1008) was filed on August 8, 2001, and is prior art under §
`
`102(e).
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`
`Petition 2 (co-pending petition):
`Ground
`References
`
`Dahod5 6
`
`Dahod and Hogan7
`Dahod and Logan8
`
`1
`
`2
`3
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`Claims Challenged
`Basis
`§ 103 3, 4, 7-8, 11-13, 18, 21-
`23, and 38
`§ 103 6, 10, and 14-17
`§ 103 19
`
`
`5 During prosecution of U.S. Pat. No. 7,535,890, a patent to which the ’622
`
`Patent claims priority, the Patentee did submit a §1.131 affidavit alleging a
`
`conception date before August 15, 2003. (’890 Prosecution History, 89-135.) Even
`
`if the affidavit meets §1.131 standards, which it does not, all the applied references
`
`in this Petition are still prior art.
`
`6 Dahod (Ex. 1009) was filed on August 1, 2002, and is prior art under
`
`§102(e).
`
`7 Hogan (Ex. 1010) was issued on April 8, 1997, and is prior art under
`
`§102(b).
`
`8 Logan (Ex. 1011) was issued on March 24, 1998, and is prior art under
`
`§102(b).
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`B. Meaningful distinction between Dahod- and Vuori-based petitions
`
`As can be seen, none of the prior art overlaps between the Petitions. Both
`
`Petitions should be instituted because there are meaningful distinctions between
`
`Vuori and Dahod. (Ex. 1003, ForysDec., ¶331.)
`
`For example, Dahod better teaches the “object field including a digitized
`
`audio file” recited in independent claim 3. Specifically, Dahod explicitly discloses
`
`that a “new [voice instant message] VIM may optionally include or attach the
`
`original VIM.” (Ex. 1009, Dahod, [0090].)
`
`Vuori was not cited in an office action against the ’622 Patent during
`
`prosecution and is not susceptible to a potential §325(d) attack.
`
`The Board should institute both the Dahod and Vuori Grounds.
`
`III. The ’622 Patent
`
`A. Overview of the ’622 Patent
`
`The ’622 Patent is directed to methods, systems and programs “for instant
`
`voice messaging over a packet-switched network…” (’622 Patent, Abstract.)
`
`As illustrated in FIG. 2, reproduced below, the ’622 Patent provides a
`
`plurality of instant voice message (IVM) clients over a packet-switched network.
`
`(Id., 6:61-7:2.) Input is provided at a sending client, one or more recipients are
`
`selected, and the instant voice message is transmitted to the recipients. (Id., 4:66-
`
`5:10) The selected recipient[s] can play the audible instant voice message. (Id.)
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`The server in the ’622 Patent comprises a “client manager” that provides
`
`“contact presence (connection) information and message scheduling and delivery”
`
`for the connected recipient[s]. (Id., 14:67-15:3.) For example, when the server
`
`receives an instant voice message, if the recipient is not connected to the server
`
`(i.e., unavailable), the server temporarily saves the message and delivers the
`
`message when the recipient[s] connects to the server (i.e., available). (Id., 16:35-
`
`40.)
`
`As explained in greater detail below, the ’622 Patent is merely an obvious
`
`combination of elements that were known in the art.
`
`B.
`
`POSITA
`
`With respect to the ’622 Patent, a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`(POSITA) would have a B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Science,
`
`or an equivalent field as well as at least 3–5 years of academic or industry
`
`experience in communications systems, particularly in messaging systems, data
`
`networks including VoIP and mobile telephony, or comparable industry
`
`experience. (ForysDec., ¶30.)
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`C. Claim construction
`
`Claim terms of the ʼ622 Patent are interpreted according to their broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation (BRI) in light of the specification. 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b);
`
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131, 2142 (2016).9
`
`1.
`
`“object field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the object field is a block of
`
`data being carried by the message object, which may be, for example, a digitized
`
`instant voice message.” (’622 Patent, 14:37-40.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “object field” means “a field
`
`containing a block of data carried in an instant voice message.” (ForysDec., ¶108.)
`
`2.
`
`“action field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the action field is selected from
`
`a list of permitted actions, which among other actions includes: connect,
`
`disconnect, subscribe, unsubscribe, and post message.” (’622 Patent, 14:7-10
`
`(emphasis added)10.)
`
`
`9 Proposed constructions are for inter partes review only and Petitioner
`
`reserves the right to revisit constructions in litigation. Petitioner further reserves
`
`the right to challenge indefiniteness of all claim terms in litigation.
`
`10 Unless otherwise noted, any emphasis in a citation has been added.
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “action field” means “a
`
`message field identifying a permitted action.” (ForysDec., ¶110.)
`
`3.
`
`“identifier field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the ID field represents a unique
`
`identifier for the message object.” (’622 Patent, 14:17-19.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “identifier field” means “a
`
`message field including a unique identifier for the message.” (ForysDec., ¶112.)
`
`4.
`
`“source field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the source field is a globally
`
`unique identifier (‘GUID’) that uniquely identifies the sender of the message.”
`
`(’622 Patent, 14:19-21.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “source field” means “a
`
`message field identifying the sender of the message.” (ForysDec., ¶114.)
`
`5.
`
`“destination field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the destination field is a GUID
`
`of an intended IVM recipient of the instant voice message.” (’622 Patent, 14:36-
`
`37.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “destination field” means “a
`
`message field identifying the recipient of the message.” (ForysDec., ¶116.)
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`“display[ing] at least one of the plurality of instant voice
`6.
`messages” (claim 16)
`
`Claim 16 recites, “wherein the instant voice messaging application displays
`
`at least one of the plurality of instant voice messages stored in the message
`
`database.” The ’622 Patent does not provide a clear definition of this claim
`
`element. However, the ’622 Patent describes that a “display device 216 is
`
`connected to the IVM client 208 to display instant voice messages recorded and/or
`
`received by a user of the IVM client 208.” (’622 Patent, 7:15-17.) The ’622 Patent
`
`also provides that the “user can select the instant voice message from a listing of
`
`available instant voice messages displayed on the IVM client 208.” (’622 Patent,
`
`13:4-7.) A POSITA would understand that a listing of available voice messages
`
`would include information identifying each voice message, for example a time
`
`received, sender, or message title. (ForysDec., ¶117.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent “display[ing] at least one of the
`
`plurality of instant voice messages” means “displaying the content or identifying
`
`information of at least one of the plurality of instant voice messages.” (ForysDec.,
`
`¶118.)
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`IV. Claims 3, 4, 6-8, 10-19, 21-23, and 38 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`§103
`
`The Petition and Petitioner’s Declarant Leonard Forys, who has nearly 50
`
`years of experience in the telecommunications industry, demonstrate a reasonable
`
`likelihood that the Petitioner will prevail with respect to each Ground.
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 3, 4, 6-8, 11-13, 18, and 21-23 are unpatentable
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Vuori in view of SMSS
`
`Vuori and SMSS teach or suggest each feature recited by claims 3, 4, 6-8,
`
`11-13, 18, and 21-23and a POSITA would have been motivated to combine the
`
`references, which after combination would have continued to operate for their
`
`intended purpose.
`
`1.
`
`Vuori
`
`Like the ’622 Patent, Vuori is directed to short voice message (SVM) service
`
`methods, apparatus, and systems. (Vuori, Title.) More specifically, Vuori provides
`
`a method for sending a SVM, which is “recorded in the sending terminal and sent
`
`to a SVM service center (SVMSC)” the “second terminal may then commence a
`
`bidirectional communication so that an instant voice message session can be
`
`established.” (Id., Abstract.)
`
`Like the ’622 Patent, Vuori employs “a packet-based infrastructure via the
`
`General Packet Radio Service (GPRS).” (Id., [0039].) Vuori also provides a
`
`method “where the sender first determines whether the intended recipient is
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`available by means of a presence service and the intended recipient has effectively
`
`acquiesced to availability by previously joining a ‘buddy list’ or otherwise
`
`subscribing to the service.” (Id., [0035].) The determined status is “guided by the
`
`model to have at least two states that interact with instant message delivery—open
`
`[i.e., available], in which short voice messages will be accepted, and closed [i.e.,
`
`unavailable], in which short voice messages will not be accepted.” (Id., [0047].)
`
`As illustrated in FIG. 11, reproduced below, Vuori’s SVMSC includes a
`
`means for receiving an SVM (i.e., means 324) “from the first terminal spoken by
`
`the first user intended by the first user for delivery to the second user at the second
`
`terminal.” (Id., FIG. 11, [0050].) Vuori’s SVMSC is “able to check the availability
`
`of the second terminal by means 322 for checking such availability.” (Id.) Like the
`
`’622 Patent, if the “second terminal is available, the SVMSC immediately sends
`
`the received voice message to the second terminal by means 324.” (Vuori, [0050].)
`
`If the recipient is determined unavailable, the voice message “may be stored
`
`temporarily in a means 326 for storing short voice messages in the SVMC until it
`
`is determined that the second terminal is available.” (Id., [0051].)
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`
`
`(Id., FIG. 11.)
`
`2.
`
`SMSS
`
`SMSS provides the specification of the short message service protocol that
`
`was in force at the time of the Vuori patent submission. SMSS provides “a means
`
`to transfer short messages between a GSM/UMTS MS and an [short message
`
`entity] SME via an [service centre] SC.” (Ex. 1006, SMSS, p.11; ForysDec., ¶85.)
`
`“The SC serves as an interworking and relaying function of the message transfer
`
`between the MS and the SME.” (SMSS, p.11; ForysDec., ¶85.) Further, SMSS
`
`specifies a TP-user-data-field (i.e., object field), a TP-Message-Type-Indicator
`
`(i.e., action field), a TP-Message-Number (i.e., identifier field), a TP-Originating-
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`Address (i.e., source field), and a TP-Destination-Address (i.e., destination field).
`
`(SMSS, pp.38, 50, 52, 58; ForysDec., ¶¶86-90.)
`
`3. KSR
`
`A POSITA would find it obvious to combine Vuori and SMSS because the
`
`combination would not amount to anything more than use of a known technique—
`
`an SMS protocol—to improve similar systems in the same way such that after
`
`combination each system would continue to function as intended. See KSR Intern.
`
`Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007). A POSITA would have enhanced
`
`Vuori with SMSS’s protocol because would he/she would have recognized the
`
`advantages of SMSS’s “protocol layer for the existing [] point-to-point service
`
`with the capability to transfer short messages.” (Vuori, [0038]; ForysDec., ¶144.)
`
`Such a modification to Vuori was expressly mentioned in Vuori. (Vuori, [0038].)
`
`Thus, employing the SMSS’s protocol would have been predictable to a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art. KSR, 550 U.S. at 417.
`
`4.
`
`Claim 3
`
`a)
`
`[3.P]: “A system”
`
`Vuori provides a “[s]hort voice message (SVM) service method, apparatus
`
`and system.” (Vuori, Title.) Thus, Vuori teaches a system. (ForysDec., ¶122.)
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`[3.1]: “a network interface connected to a packet-
`b)
`switched network”
`
`Vuori teaches or suggests a network interface (i.e., interconnected
`
`interfaces) connected to a packet-switched network (i.e., a GPRS infrastructure).
`
`(ForysDec., ¶¶123-125.) For example, in FIG. 3, reproduced below, Vuori provides
`
`that:
`
`At the subscriber side, a user equipment 124 is connected by one or
`more radio links (Uu) to one or more corresponding Node Bs 126
`which are in turn connected (Iub) to corresponding radio network
`controllers (RNCs) 128… The RNCs 128 are connected to the UMTS
`infrastructure 120 via Iu interfaces to a third generation-serving
`[General Packet Radio Service] GPRS support node (3G-SGSN)
`140… It may also be connected to an SVM service 146 similar to the
`SVM service center 50 of FIG. 3, according to the present invention
`for connection to a GSM Network Subsystem, to another UMTS
`infrastructure, to a GPRS infrastructure, or similar.
`
`(Vuori, [0040].) A General Packet Radio Service (“GPRS”) infrastructure, as
`
`disclosed in Vuori, is a packet-switched network. (ForysDec., ¶124.) Further, the
`
`interconnected interfaces that provide a connection between the radio network
`
`controllers and the data network act as a network interface. (Id.)
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`(Vuori, FIG. 3.)
`
`
`
`Thus, Vuori teaches or suggests a network interface connected to a packet-
`
`switched network. (ForysDec., ¶125.)
`
`[3.2]: “a messaging system communicating with a
`c)
`plurality of instant voice message client systems via the
`network interface”
`
`Vuori teaches or suggests a messaging system (i.e., short voice message
`
`service center (“SVMSC”)) communicating with a plurality of instant voice
`
`message client systems via the network interface. (ForysDec., ¶¶126-128.)
`
`In FIG. 11, reproduced below, Vuori discloses that the “SVM [short voice
`
`message] is recorded in the sending terminal and sent to a SVM service center
`
`(SVMSC). The SVMSC may notify the intended recipient of the arrival of the
`
`SVM and await acceptance before sending it.” (Vuori, Abstract.)
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`(Vuori, FIG. 11.) FIG. 11 illustrates a plurality of instant voice message client
`
`systems connected to the messaging system via the network interface. (ForysDec.,
`
`
`
`¶127.)
`
`Vuori additionally provides that the “second terminal may then commence a
`
`bidirectional communication so that an instant voice message session can be
`
`established.” (Vuori, Abstract.) Thus, Vuori describes instant voice message
`
`transmissions between a plurality of instant voice message client systems (i.e., a
`
`sending client and a receiving client). (ForysDec., ¶127.)
`
`Thus, Vuori teaches or suggests a messaging system communicating with a
`
`plurality of instant voice message client systems via the network interface. (Id.,
`
`¶128.)
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`communication
`platform
`system
`“a
`[3.3.1]:
`d)
`maintaining connection
`information for each of the
`plurality of instant voice message client systems…”
`
`Vuori teaches or suggests a communication platform system (i.e., SVM
`
`presence service) maintaining connection information for each of the plurality of
`
`instant voice message client systems (i.e., availability of buddy list subscribers).
`
`(ForysDec., ¶¶129-131.)
`
`Vuori discloses an “SVM presence service” that “serves to accept SVM
`
`presence information e.g. on a line 250, store it, and distribute it, e.g., on a line
`
`252. An SVM presentity 254 is a client that provides the presence information on
`
`the line 250 to be stored and distributed.” (Vuori, [0043].) Vuori additionally
`
`discloses that in “a conventional SMS or instant messaging (IM) context where the
`
`sender first determines whether the intended recipient is available by means of a
`
`presence service and the intended recipient has effectively acquiesced to
`
`availability by previously joining a ‘buddy list’ or otherwise subscribing to the
`
`service.” (Id., [0035].) Thus, Vuori describes a presence service that keeps track of
`
`the presence information (i.e., connection information) o