500289US
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`
`BLACKBERRY CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`OPTIS CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`__________________
`
`Case IPR2017-______
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`
`__________________
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF CLAIMS 1, 2, and 8–11 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,174,506
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 312 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`
`BLACKBERRY CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`OPTIS CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`__________________
`
`Case IPR2017-______
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`
`__________________
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF CLAIMS 1, 2, and 8–11 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,174,506
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 312 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I. Mandatory Notices—Rule 42.8(a)(1) ................................................ 1
`II. Certification of Grounds for Standing—Rule 42.104(a)................... 2
`III. Overview of Challenge and Relief Requested—Rule
`42.104(b) ............................................................................................. 3
`A. Prior Art Patents and Printed Publications ............................ 3
`B. Grounds for Challenge ............................................................. 4
`IV. Overview of the ’506 Patent and the Prior Art ................................ 5
`A. The ’506 Patent ......................................................................... 5
`B. The Prosecution History of the ’506 and ’610 Patents ............ 7
`C.
`Summary of Select Prior Art ................................................... 9
`1.
`Van Os ............................................................................. 9
`2.
`Cox ................................................................................. 14
`3. Woolley ........................................................................... 16
`4.
`Apple Newton MessagePad Handbook
`(“MessagePad Handbook”) ............................................ 17
`V. Claim Construction .......................................................................... 21
`VI. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ................................................... 22
`VII. Identification of How the Challenged Claims Are
`Unpatentable ................................................................................... 23
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1 and 10 Are Obvious Over Van Os
`and Cox ................................................................................... 23
`B. Ground 2: Claims 2 and 11 Are Obvious Over Van Os,
`Cox, and Woolley .................................................................... 47
`C. Ground 3: Claim 8 Is Anticipated By Van Os ....................... 52
`D. Ground 4: Claim 9 Is Obvious Over Van Os and Woolley .... 54
`
`i
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`E. Ground 5: Claims 1, 8, and 10 Are Obvious Over The
`MessagePad Handbook .......................................................... 58
`F. Ground 6: Claims 2, 9, and 11 Are Obvious Over The
`MessagePad Handbook and Woolley ..................................... 79
`VIII. CONCLUSION ................................................................................ 84
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .................................................................. 85
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`Cases
`In re GPAC Inc., 57 F.3d 1573, 1579 (Fed. Cir. 1995 ...................... 21
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a) ............................................................................... 5
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) ......................................................................... 21
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) .................................................................... 23
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) .................................................................... 23
`37 C.F.R. § 42.15(a) ............................................................................. 2
`Rules
`37 C.F.R. 42.8(a)(1) ............................................................................. 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506 to Kim et al.
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506 to Kim et al.
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 7,663,610 to Kim et al.
`
`Declaration of Dr. Daniel J. Wigdor, Ph.D.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,509,588 to Van Os et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,462,760 to Cox, Jr. et al.
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0016211 to Woolley
`
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`Apple Newton MessagePad Handbook,
`1008
` Apple Computer, Inc., 1995.
`
`1009
`
`
`1010
`
`
`1011
`
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/755,368 to
`Van Os et al.
`
`Anstice, J., et al. “The Design of a Pen-Based Musical
`Input.” Sixth Australian Conference on Computer-
`Human Interaction Proceedings: Hamilton, New
`Zealand, November 24-27, 1996.
`
`Computer History Museum: Artifact Details on Newton
`Apple MessagePad Handbook, Catalog Number
`102641160, 1996.
`(http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102
`641160)
`
`PalmPilot Handbook, 3Com Corporation, 1997.
`
`Simon Users Manual: “Simon Says ‘Here’s How!’” IBM
`Corp., 1994.
`
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`“Getting Started With Your E0 Personal
`Communicator.” E0, Inc., 1992-93.
`
`Sutherland, I. E. “Sketchpad: A man-machine graphical
`communication system.” Technical Report Number 574,
`University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory:
`Cambridge, U.K., 2003.
`
`Johnson, E. A. “Touch Displays: A Programmed Man-
`Machine Interface.” Ergonomics, 10:2, 271-277 (1967).
`
`Mehta, N. “A Flexible Human Machine Interface.” The
`University of Toronto Library, Manuscript Thesis:
`Toronto, Canada, October, 1982.
`
`
`
`v
`
`1014
`
`
`1015
`
`
`1016
`
`
`1017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`I.
`
`Mandatory Notices—Rule 42.8(a)(1)
`Blackberry Corp. (“Blackberry” or “Petitioner”) provides notice
`
`of the following:
`
`Real Party-In-Interest: Petitioner certifies that Blackberry
`
`Corp. and BlackBerry Ltd. are the real parties-in-interest.
`
`Related Matters: U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506 (“the ’506 patent”)
`
`is asserted in pending litigation filed January 17, 2016, and captioned
`
`PanOptis Patent Management, LLC et al. v. BlackBerry Corporation
`
`et al., No. 2:16-cv-00060 (ED TX) (consolidated with lead case 2:16-cv-
`
`00062). Optis Cellular Technology, LLC, the purported owner of the
`
`’506 patent (“Patent Owner”), has accused BlackBerry of infringing
`
`eight patents-in-suit, which also include U.S. Patent Nos. 8,019,332
`
`(“the ’332 patent”), 8,102,833 (“the ’833 patent”), 8,437,293 (“the ’293
`
`patent”), 6,865,191 (“the ’191 patent”), 7,783,949 (“the ’949 patent”),
`
`8,064,919 (“the ’919 patent”), and 8,199,792 (“the ’792 patent”).
`
`This Petition is directed to the ’506 patent. Petitions for inter
`
`partes review of the ’332, ’919, and ’792 patents are being filed
`
`concurrently.
`
`Lead counsel: Robert C. Mattson (Reg. No. 42,850)
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`Back-up counsel: Ruby J. Natnithithadha (Reg. No. 71,684)
`
`and Sameer Gokhale (Reg. No. 62,618)
`
`Service Information: Petitioner consents to email service.
`
`Email:
`
`cpdocketmattson@oblon.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`cpdocketrjn@oblon.com
`
`cpdocketgokhale@oblon.com
`
`Post: Oblon LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1940 Duke Street
`
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`
`Telephone: (703) 412-6466
`
`
`
`Fax: (703) 413-2220
`
`The Office is authorized to charge the fee required by 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.15(a) for this Petition to Deposit Account No. 15-0030. Any
`
`additional fees that might be due are also authorized.
`
`II. Certification of Grounds for Standing—Rule 42.104(a)
`Petitioner certifies that the ’506 patent is available for inter
`
`partes review and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped from
`
`requesting review on the grounds identified in this Petition.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`III. Overview of Challenge and Relief Requested—Rule
`42.104(b)
`Petitioner requests inter partes review and cancelation of claims
`
`1, 2, and 8–11 of the ’506 patent. The ’506 patent is subject to pre-AIA
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103.
`
`A. Prior Art Patents and Printed Publications
`Review of the ’506 patent is requested in view of the following:
`
`Ex. 1005 – U.S. Patent No. 7,509,588 (“Van Os”), filed July 24,
`
`2006, claims the benefit of priority to provisional U.S. Patent
`
`Application No. 60/755,368 (“the ’368 provisional application”) (Ex.
`
`1009), filed December 30, 2005. Van Os is available as prior art under
`
`§ 102(e). Van Os was cited by Patent Owner in an information
`
`disclosure statement filed but was not substantively relied upon by
`
`the Examiner. (Ex. 1002, 189.) This Petition presents expert witness
`
`testimony (Ex. 1004) and prior art that was never considered by the
`
`Office in combination with Van Os.
`
`Ex. 1006 – U.S. Patent No. 6,462,760 (“Cox”), issued October 8,
`
`2002, is available as prior art under § 102(b).
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`Ex. 1007 – U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0016211
`
`(“Woolley”), published January 23, 2003, is available as prior art
`
`under § 102(b).
`
`Ex. 1008 – Apple Newton MessagePad Handbook (“the
`
`MessagePad Handbook”), published in 1995, is available as prior art
`
`under § 102(b). (Ex. 1004, ¶ 45.)
`
`B. Grounds for Challenge
`
`Petitioner requests cancelation of the challenged claims under
`
`the following statutory grounds:
`
`1.
`
`Claims 1 and 10 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103
`
`as obvious over Van Os and Cox.
`
`2.
`
`Claims 2 and 11 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103
`
`as obvious over Van Os, Cox, and Woolley.
`
`3.
`
`Claim 8 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
`
`anticipated by Van Os.
`
`4.
`
`Claim 9 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious
`
`over Van Os and Woolley.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1, 8, and 10 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103 as obvious over the MessagePad Handbook.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`Claims 2, 9, and 11 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`
`6.
`
`§ 103 as obvious over the MessagePad Handbook and Woolley.
`
`Section VII demonstrates that there is a reasonable likelihood
`
`that Petitioner will prevail for each of the statutory grounds. See 35
`
`U.S.C. § 314(a). Support for each ground of unpatentability is also
`
`provided in the Declaration of Dr. Daniel J. Wigdor, Ph.D. (Ex. 1004).
`
`IV. Overview of the ’506 Patent and the Prior Art
`A.
` The ’506 Patent
`The ’506 patent describes a method of displaying a graphical
`
`object, which can be any item that can be displayed on a touchscreen
`
`of a terminal and fixed to a particular position on the screen in
`
`response to a touch action of a terminal user. (Ex. 1001, 1:15–20,
`
`1:61–64, 4:37–40.) In particular, a user’s touch action on the
`
`touchscreen releases the object from a fixed position, such that it can
`
`be moved from a first position to a second position on the touchscreen.
`
`(Id. at 5:57–61.) Further, the user interface is designed to give
`
`feedback to the user when the object is no longer fixed in place. (Id. at
`
`6:13–19.) The movable object can then be dragged from the first
`
`position to the second position if another touch action is carried out
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`on the object. (Id. at 2:10–18.) Thereafter, the moved object can be
`
`fixed in the second position by any of the various types of touch
`
`actions illustrated in FIGs. 5A–5D below. (Id. at 5:7–30.)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`The entire process of displaying the object is described, for example,
`
`in the flowchart in FIG. 2 below.
`
`
`B. The Prosecution History of the ’506 and ’610 Patents
`The ’506 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application No.
`
`12/648,248, which was originally filed on December 28, 2009, with
`
`claims 1–18. (Ex. 1002, 167–173.) A copy of the file history of the
`
`application which matured into the ’506 patent is attached to this
`
`Petition as Exhibit 1002. The prosecution history of the ’506 patent
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`was relatively brief, with only an obviousness-type double-patenting
`
`rejection over the claims of the parent ’610 patent, which was
`
`overcome by filing a terminal disclaimer. (Id. at 79–95.)
`
`The prosecution history of the parent ’610 patent was a bit more
`
`extensive, including multiple office actions and amendments to the
`
`claims and a personal interview with the examiner. (Ex. 1003, 114–
`
`220.) The Van Os reference was relied upon by the examiner to reject
`
`the claims, but the prosecution history is silent as to why the ’610
`
`patent was ultimately allowed. The Examiner did not set forth any
`
`statement of reasons for allowance. (Id. at 66–69.)
`
`This Petition presents expert witness testimony, prior art that
`
`was never considered by the Office in combination with Van Os, and
`
`an alternate interpretation of the Van Os reference. For example, the
`
`Petition shows why Van Os explicitly discloses the claimed first and
`
`second touching actions and the additional manipulation of a position
`
`button that is separate from the first and second touching actions.
`
`Further, the Petition combines Van Os with the Cox reference to
`
`explain why it would have been an obvious design choice to a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art to modify Van Os to change a shape of an
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`icon. In another ground of rejection, the Petition combines Van Os
`
`with the Woolley reference to explain why it would have been obvious
`
`to one of ordinary skill in the art to add auditory or tactile feedback to
`
`Van Os’ user interface.
`
`C. Summary of Select Prior Art
`All claim elements of at least claims 1, 2, and 8–11 of the ’506
`
`patent were known in the prior art and used for the same purpose.
`
`(Ex. 1004, ¶ 33.) The subsections below briefly discuss the prior art
`
`references.
`
`1. Van Os
`Van Os describes a portable electronic device, such as a mobile
`
`phone, which displays a plurality of icons or graphical objects in a
`
`region on a touch-sensitive display that are repositionable in an
`
`interface reconfiguration mode. (Ex. 1005, Abstract, 1:27–31, 1:58–
`
`62.) A user may initiate or terminate the interface reconfiguration
`
`process by selecting one or more appropriate physical buttons on the
`
`portable device, by a gesture, and/or by selecting one or more soft
`
`buttons (such as one or more icons that are displayed on the touch-
`
`sensitive display). (Id. at 4:14–21.)
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`As shown in Figure 2B below, in response to a user initiating
`
`the interface reconfiguration mode via a first predefined user action,
`
`positions of one or more icons displayed on the portable device may be
`
`varied about respective average positions. The varying of the
`
`positions of the one or more icons may include animating the one or
`
`more icons to simulate floating of the one or more icons on a surface
`
`corresponding to a surface of a display in the portable device. (Ex.
`
`1005, 3:36–43.) “The varying of the positions of the one or more icons
`
`may intuitively indicate to the user that the positions of the one or
`
`more icons may be reconfigured by the user.” (Id. at 3:49–51.)
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`The user then makes contact, either direct or indirect, with one
`
`of the icons that is moving at a position 226 and moves the point of
`
`contact across the display surface, i.e., “[t]he user may drag the
`
`respective icon to a second position.” (Ex. 1005, 3:58–59.) The contact
`
`and the motion are detected by the portable communication device
`
`200, and, as a consequence, the displayed icon “game,” as illustrated
`
`in Figure 2C below, is moved accordingly. (Id. at 5:63–6:4.) Once the
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`user moves the game icon to position 228 and breaks contact with the
`
`display surface, the game icon is displayed at the position 228. See
`
`Figure 2D of Van Os. (Id. at 6:5–8.)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`After the interface reconfiguration mode has been terminated by
`
`a second predefined user action, for example, by selecting or
`
`deselecting a physical button on the portable device, the icons in the
`
`GUI 210 are displayed in stationary or fixed positions. (Ex. 1005,
`
`4:61–67, Figure 2E.)
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`2. Cox
`Cox describes a user interface directed to conserving space on a
`
`computer display screen by using an icon’s visual appearance to
`
`associate the icon with a particular operation. In response to input
`
`from a user, the icon’s appearance changes to indicate that the icon is
`
`now associated with an alternate operation. (Ex. 1006, Abstract, 1:9–
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`13.) The icon’s appearance can be changed by changing textual
`
`information disposed on the icon, by changing the color of the icon, or
`
`by changing the geometry (e.g., size or shape) of the icon. (Id. at 2:30–
`
`34.)
`
`FIG. 5A of Cox below, for example, illustrates one possible
`
`embodiment of an icon that can be used by the user interface module
`
`60. A pushbutton icon 74 includes text disposed thereon that
`
`associates the pushbutton icon 74 with a particular operation. The
`
`text describes a “Find” operation that may be used as part of a text
`
`replacement function in a word processing program. (Ex. 1006, 5:6–
`
`12.) If an alternate operation is requested by the user, then the user
`
`interface module 60 causes the pushbutton icon 74 to change
`
`appearance at block 84. This is illustrated in FIG. 5B where the text
`
`disposed on the pushbutton icon 74 is changed from “Find” to
`
`“Replace” to associate the pushbutton icon 74 with an alternative
`
`operation. The color, geometry (e.g., shape or size), or other aspect of
`
`the pushbutton icon’s 74 appearance could also be changed to
`
`associate the pushbutton icon 74 with an alternative operation. (Id. at
`
`5:34–43.)
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`3. Woolley
`Woolley describes a kiosk touchpad with a touch-sensitive
`
`surface, which includes a speaker for auditory feedback to indicate,
`
`for example, when a zone has been selected. (Ex. 1007, Abstract.) As
`
`illustrated in FIG. 4 of Woolley below, the touch pad 21 includes, at
`
`least, a cover plate 31, a touch-sensitive surface 26, and electronic
`
`components 45 mounted on the reverse side thereof, including a
`
`speaker 71 for auditory feedback. (Id. at ¶ [0049].)
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`Woolley further suggests employing multiple forms of sensory
`
`feedback simultaneously: auditory, tactile, and visual. (Ex. 1007,
`
`¶ [0049].)
`
`4. Apple Newton MessagePad Handbook (“MessagePad
`Handbook”)
`The Apple Newton MessagePad Handbook (“MessagePad
`
`Handbook”) provides user instructions for operating the Apple
`
`Newton MessagePad, hereinafter referred to as the “MessagePad,” a
`
`personal digital assistant (“PDA”) or portable electronic device. Along
`
`a lower edge of the touch screen of the MessagePad are a plurality of
`
`pictures, which are buttons that can be used to access different
`
`applications of the MessagePad, such as an address book (“Names”), a
`
`calendar (“Dates”), “Extras”, etc. (Ex. 1008, 15–16.) As described in
`
`the MessagePad Handbook, tapping the “Extras” application, for
`
`example, opens the “Extras Drawer,” which contains a plurality of
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`repositionable icons or graphical objects. (Id.) “You can select icons
`
`and move them around in the Extras Drawer to change their
`
`position.” (Id. at 160.)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`As shown in the example below, to move an icon from a first
`
`position to a second position, the user first selects the icon by holding
`
`a pen on or near the icon until a heavy mark appears under the pen
`
`and the MessagePad makes a squeaking sound. (Ex. 1008, 160.) Next,
`
`the user draws the mark over or around the icon to select it. (Id. at
`
`160, 212.) Then, to actually move the icon, the user drags the icon
`
`from the first position to the second position. (Id. at 160.)
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`Finally, to fix the moved icon in the second position on the touch
`
`screen, the user simply taps the pen anywhere outside the selection to
`
`deselect the item. (Ex. 1008, 61–62.)
`
`V. Claim Construction
`This Petition shows that the challenged claims are
`
`unpatentable when given their broadest reasonable interpretation in
`
`light of the specification. See Rule 42.100(b).
`
`“Shape” (claims 1 and 10) means appearance. (Ex. 1004, ¶¶ 21–
`
`23.) As described in the ’506 patent, changing the appearance of the
`
`object visually informs the terminal user that the position fixation of
`
`the object is either fixed to a position or released. (Ex. 1001, 5:31–38,
`
`
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`6:13–19.) An example of how the appearance of the object can be
`
`changed includes displaying an icon or graphical indication adjacent
`
`to or attached to the fixed object, labeled “Not Fixed” or “Movable.”
`
`(Id.)
`
`VI. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`The level of ordinary skill in the art is evidenced by, among
`
`other things, the prior art. See In re GPAC Inc., 57 F.3d 1573, 1579
`
`(Fed. Cir. 1995) (the Board did not err in adopting the approach that
`
`the level of skill in the art was best determined by the references of
`
`record).
`
`Before the earliest priority date of the ’506 patent, portable
`
`electronic devices having reconfigurable user interfaces and touch-
`
`sensitive display technology were well-known. (Ex. 1004, ¶¶ 16–17.)
`
`The prior art also demonstrates that companies such as Apple, Inc.
`
`and IBM were already seeking patent protection on user interfaces
`
`for portable devices, such as mobile phones and PDAs, for displaying
`
`objects or icons more intuitively and efficiently in order to make
`
`better use of the display screen area, which may be limited in size.
`
`(Ex. 1005, 1:20–54, Figures 1-3; Ex. 1006, 1:16–62; Ex. 1004, ¶ 18.)
`
`
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`Further, the prior art also evidences that a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) knew to change the appearance
`
`of objects or icons or output a sound or vibration to indicate a change
`
`in operation associated with the object, such as the movability of the
`
`object on a touchscreen, i.e., the object being in a fixed position or the
`
`position fixation of the object being released. (Ex. 1006, Abstract, 1:9–
`
`13, 2:30–34; Ex. 1007, Abstract, ¶ [0049]; Ex. 1004, ¶ 19.)
`
`As demonstrated by the prior art discussed below, the claims of
`
`the ’506 patent simply recite a combination of prior art elements that
`
`function predictably in their known manner.
`
`VII. Identification of How the Challenged Claims Are
`Unpatentable
`Pursuant to Rule 42.104(b), this section demonstrates that the
`
`challenged claims are unpatentable. Certain claim elements are
`
`annotated [a], [b], etc. for cross-referencing ease.
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1 and 10 Are Obvious Over Van Os
`and Cox
`Van Os describes a portable electronic device, such as a mobile
`
`phone, which displays a plurality of icons or graphical objects in a
`
`region on a touch-sensitive display that are repositionable in an
`
`
`
`
`
`23
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`interface reconfiguration mode, i.e., the object can be released and
`
`then moved from a first position to a second position and fixed thereto
`
`on the touchscreen. (Ex. 1005, Abstract, 1:27–31, 1:58-62; Ex. 1009,
`
`¶¶ 31–32; Ex. 1004, ¶¶ 56, 57, 73, 74.) A user may initiate or
`
`terminate the interface reconfiguration process by selecting one or
`
`more appropriate physical buttons on the portable device, by a
`
`gesture, and/or by selecting one or more soft buttons (such as one or
`
`more icons that are displayed on the touch-sensitive display). (Id. at
`
`4:14–21; Id.; Id. at ¶ 57.)
`
`As described in the ’506 patent, changing an appearance of the
`
`object visually informs the user that the position of the object is
`
`either fixed or released. An indication, such as a change in shape of
`
`the object or a display of an icon or graphical indication adjacent to or
`
`attached to the released object, is displayed to the user. (Ex. 1001,
`
`5:31–45, 6:13–25.)
`
`As discussed in Section V supra, under the broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation, “shape” means appearance. Although Van Os does not
`
`explicitly disclose displaying the shape of the icon differently when a
`
`fixed position of the icon is released, Van Os does disclose changing
`
`
`
`
`
`24
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`an appearance of the icon when the fixed position of the icon is
`
`released by animating one or more icons or varying the position of the
`
`icons in response to a user initiating the interface reconfiguration
`
`mode. (Ex. 1005, 3:36–53; Ex. 1004, ¶ 83.) In particular, Van Os
`
`states that “[t]he varying of the positions of the one or more icons
`
`may intuitively indicate to the user that the positions of the one or
`
`more icons may be reconfigured by the user.” (Id. at 3:49–51.)
`
`Further, Cox teaches that, in response to input from a user, the
`
`icon’s appearance changes to indicate that the icon is now associated
`
`with an alternative operation. (Ex. 1006, Abstract, 1:9–13; Ex. 1004,
`
`¶ 84.) The icon’s appearance can be changed by changing textual
`
`information disposed on the icon, by changing the color of the icon, or
`
`by changing the geometry (e.g., size or shape) of the icon. (Id. at 2:30–
`
`34; Id.)
`
`It would have been obvious design choice for a POSITA to
`
`modify Van Os to change the shape of an icon, as in Cox, as opposed
`
`to animating or varying the position of the icons when a user initiates
`
`the interface reconfiguration mode because both are ways to
`
`intuitively inform the user that the icon is not fixed and can be
`
`
`
`
`
`25
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`reconfigured. (Ex. 1004, ¶ 86.) Further, a POSITA would have a
`
`reasonable expectation of success in making that modification
`
`because Van Os’ user interface would perform equally well with
`
`either animated icons or icons that change in shape because both
`
`provide the same predictable result of changing the icons’ appearance
`
`for the same purpose of informing the user that the position fixation
`
`of the icon has been released and is ready for reconfiguration. (Id. at
`
`¶ 87.)
`
`Claim 1[a]: A mobile terminal comprising:
`As described in the ’506 patent, the mobile terminal can be “a
`
`mobile phone, a PDA . . . , a PMP (portable multimedia player), a
`
`game player, and the like.” (Ex. 1001, 3:1–3; Ex. 1004, ¶ 50.) Van Os
`
`discloses a “portable electronic device, including but not limited to a
`
`handheld computer, a tablet computer, a mobile phone, a media
`
`player, personal digital assistant (PDA) and the like.” (Ex. 1005, 7:9–
`
`18; Ex. 1004, ¶ 51.) Figure 2A of Van Os below, for example,
`
`illustrates a portable communication device 200. Thus, the Van
`
`Os/Cox combination renders obvious element 1[a]. (Ex. 1004, ¶ 52.)
`
`
`
`
`
`26
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`Claim 1[b]: a touch screen configured to display at least
`one object and to sense first and second touching actions
`on the at least one object; and
`The portable electronic device of Van Os includes a touch-
`
`sensitive display “which responds to physical contact by a stylus or
`
`one or more fingers at one or more contact points.” (Ex. 1005, 3:43–48;
`
`Ex. 1004, ¶ 53.) Figure 2A of Van Os above illustrates the portable
`
`communication device 200 with the touch-sensitive display with a
`
`
`
`
`
`27
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`GUI 210. The display surface is transparent to allow various icons or
`
`graphical objects 222 to be displayed to a user. (Id. at 5:8–11; Id.)
`
`Van Os further discloses that the touch-sensitive display 412
`
`and the touch screen controller 432 detect contact and movement or
`
`release thereof using any of a plurality of touch sensitive technologies
`
`“including but not limited to . . . proximity sensor arrays or other
`
`elements for determining one or more points of contact with the
`
`touch-sensitive display 412.” (Emphasis added.) (Ex. 1005, 9:63–10:3;
`
`Ex. 1004, ¶ 55.) In particular, “[t]he touch-sensitive display 412
`
`communicates with the processing system 404 via the touch sensitive
`
`screen controller 432 . . . The touch-sensitive display 412 and the
`
`touch screen controller 432 . . . detects contact . . . on the touch-
`
`sensitive display 412 and converts the detected contact into
`
`interaction with user-interface objects, such as one or more soft keys,
`
`that are displayed on the touch screen when the contact occurs.” (Id.
`
`at 9:34–36, 50–57; Id. at ¶ 54.)
`
`In order to move or reposition an icon, Van Os discloses that the
`
`user may drag the respective icon 222 from a first position and drop it
`
`at a second position, which corresponds to the claimed “first touching
`
`
`
`
`
`28
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`action.” (Ex. 1005, 3:58–59, 4:53–60; Ex. 1004, ¶ 56.) “The user makes
`
`contact, either direct or indirect, with one of the icons that is moving
`
`at a position 226 and moves the point of contact across the display
`
`surface with GUI 210. The contact and the motion are detected by the
`
`portable communication device 200. As a consequence, the displayed
`
`icon, in this example corresponding to a game [(see Figure 2C)], is
`
`moved accordingly.” (Id. at 5:65–6:4, Figure 2C; Id.)
`
`
`
`
`
`29
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`Additionally, a first predefined user action described in Van Os,
`
`which corresponds to the claimed “second touching action,” initiates
`
`the interface reconfiguration process and releases the object from a
`
`fixed or stationary position, which can be done by “selecting one or
`
`more appropriate physical buttons on the portable device, by a
`
`gesture (such as making contact and swiping one or more fingers
`
`across the touch-sensitive display or making contact and holding for
`
`more than a predefined time period) and/or by selecting one or more
`
`soft buttons (such as one or more icons that are displayed on the
`
`touch-sensitive display).” (Id. at 4:14–67; Id. at ¶ 57.) Thus, the Van
`
`Os/Cox combination renders obvious element 1[b]. (Ex. 1004, ¶ 58.)
`
`Claim 1[c]: a control unit configured to display the at
`least one object as being fixed and not moveable,
`Figure 4 of Van Os is a block diagram of a portable
`
`communication device 400, which can include “one or more computer-
`
`readable mediums 402, a processing system 404 [including a
`
`controller 420], an Input/Output (I/O) subsystem 406, radio frequency
`
`(RF) circuitry 408 and audio circuitry 410. These components may be
`
`coupled by one or more communication buses or signal lines 403.” (Ex.
`
`1005, 7:9–19; Ex. 1004, ¶ 59.)
`
`
`
`
`
`30
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`
`
`31
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,174,506
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`Further, as explained above for claim 1[b], “[t]he touch-sensitive
`
`display 412 communicates with the processing system 404 via the
`
`touch sensitive screen controller 432 . . . The touch-sensitive display
`
`412 and the touch screen controller 432 . . . detects contact . . . on the
`
`touch-sensitive display 412 and converts the detected contact into
`
`interaction with user-interface objects, such as one or more soft keys,
`
`that are displayed on the touch screen when the contact occurs.” (Ex.
`
`1005, 9:34–36, 50–57; Ex. 1004, ¶ 60.)
`
`Figure 2E of Van Os illustrates the portable communication
`
`device 200 after the interface reconfiguration mode has been
`
`terminated or has terminated (due to a time out). The icons 222 in
`
`GUI 210 are visuall
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
