IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
`
`No. 15-1307
`
`Judge Victor J. Wolski
`
`)))))))))))))))))))))
`
`CELLCAST TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`and
`
`ENVISIONIT, LLC
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`THE UNITED STATES,
`
`Defendant,
`
`and
`
`INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES
`CORP.,
`
`Third-Party Defendant
`
`DEFENDANTS UNITED STATES AND INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE
`CORPORATION’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS
`
`In accordance with the Court’s July 20, 2016 Scheduling Order, Defendants the United
`
`States and International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”) provide the following
`
`“Response Charts” containing a disclosure of Defendants’ invalidity contentions for the asserted
`
`claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,693,938 (“the ’938 patent”); 8,103,719 (“the ’719 patent”);
`
`8,438,221 (“the ’221 patent”); 8,438,212 (“the ’212 patent”); and 9,136,954 (“the ’954 patent”)
`
`(collectively “the Patents-in-Suit”).
`
`Page 1 of 8
`
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
`
`No. 15-1307
`
`Judge Victor J. Wolski
`
`)))))))))))))))))))))
`
`CELLCAST TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`and
`
`ENVISIONIT, LLC
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`THE UNITED STATES,
`
`Defendant,
`
`and
`
`INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES
`CORP.,
`
`Third-Party Defendant
`
`DEFENDANTS UNITED STATES AND INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE
`CORPORATION’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS
`
`In accordance with the Court’s July 20, 2016 Scheduling Order, Defendants the United
`
`States and International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”) provide the following
`
`“Response Charts” containing a disclosure of Defendants’ invalidity contentions for the asserted
`
`claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,693,938 (“the ’938 patent”); 8,103,719 (“the ’719 patent”);
`
`8,438,221 (“the ’221 patent”); 8,438,212 (“the ’212 patent”); and 9,136,954 (“the ’954 patent”)
`
`(collectively “the Patents-in-Suit”).
`
`Page 1 of 8
`
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
`
`A.
`
`Identification of Prior Art References
`
`Table 1(a) – U.S. Patents
`
`U.S. Patent No.
`5,029,290
`
`First Named
`Inventor/Abbreviation
`Parsons
`
`Issue/Publication Date
`July 2, 1991
`
`5,565,909
`
`5,628,050
`
`5,875,401
`
`5,995,553
`
`6,112,074
`
`6,112,075
`
`6,392,538
`
`6,505,123
`
`6,594,345
`
`6,603,405
`
`6,653,689
`
`6,704,295
`
`6,816,878
`
`6,915,134
`
`7,053,753
`
`7,054,612
`
`7,184,744
`
`7,194,249
`
`7,725,256
`
`Thibadeau
`
`McGraw
`
`Rochkind
`
`Crandall
`
`Pinder
`
`Weiser
`
`Shere
`
`Root
`
`Vinson
`
`Smith
`
`Kelly
`
`Tari
`
`Zimmers
`
`Atkin
`
`Kacalek
`
`Patel
`
`Schnabel
`
`Phillips
`
`Marsh
`
`Oct. 15, 1996
`
`May 6, 1997
`
`Feb. 23, 1999
`
`Nov. 30, 1999
`
`Aug. 29, 2000
`
`Aug. 29, 2000
`
`May 21, 2002
`
`Jan. 7, 2003
`
`July 15, 2003
`
`Aug. 5, 2003
`
`Nov. 25, 2003
`
`Mar. 9, 2004
`
`Nov. 9, 2004
`
`July 5, 2005
`
`May 30, 2006
`
`May 30, 2006
`
`Feb. 27, 2007
`
`Mar. 20, 2007
`
`May 25, 2010
`
`Page 2 of 8
`
`18
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No.
`7,233,781
`
`First Named
`Inventor/Abbreviation
`Hunter
`
`Issue/Publication Date
`June 19, 2007
`
`7,299,050
`
`Delaney
`
`Nov. 20, 2007
`
`7,480,501
`
`7,617,287
`
`Petite
`
`Vella
`
`Jan. 20, 2009
`
`Nov. 11, 2009
`
`2002/0176545
`
`Schweitzer
`
`Nov. 28, 2002
`
`2002/0184346
`
`Mani
`
`Dec. 5, 2002
`
`2003/0001371
`
`Goldberg
`
`Jan. 3, 2002
`
`2003/0141971
`
`Heiken
`
`July 31, 2003
`
`2003/0142797
`
`Troy
`
`July 31, 2003
`
`2003/0143974
`
`Navarro
`
`July 31, 2003
`
`2004/0103158
`
`Vella
`
`Mat 27, 2004
`
`Page 3 of 8
`
`19
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No.
`2004/0193617
`
`First Named
`Inventor/Abbreviation
`Adler
`
`Issue/Publication Date
`Sept. 30, 2004
`
`2005/0013418
`
`Chang
`
`Jan. 20, 2005
`
`2005/0037728
`
`Binzel
`
`Feb. 17, 2005
`
`2005/0060339
`
`McGee
`
`Mar. 17, 2005
`
`2005/0070247
`
`Larson
`
`Mar. 31, 2005
`
`2005/0261012
`
`Weiser
`
`Nov. 24, 2005
`
`Table 1(b) – Foreign Patents and Patent Applications
`
`Patent/Application No.
`WO 2003077063 A2
`
`First Named
`Inventor/Abbreviation
`Heelan
`
`Issue/Publication Date
`September 18, 2003
`
`Table 1(c) – Prior Art Publications, Public Uses, Sales, and Offers for Sale
`
`Description
`R. Sandhu et al., “Access Control: Principles and Practice,” IEEE
`Communications Magazine, Vol. 32 No. 9, pp. 40-48.
`
`Publication Date
`Sept. 1994
`
`Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (FCC
`Report No. 94-288) (“1994FCC Report”)
`
`Dec. 9, 1994
`
`Parker, et al., “Flood warning systems under stress in the United
`Kingdom,” 4.3 Disaster Prevention & Management 32
`
`1995
`
`Page 4 of 8
`
`20
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
`
`Description
`Wood, M. “Disaster Communications” APCO Institute, Inc.
`
`Imielinski & Navas, “Geographic Addressing, Routing, and Resource
`Discovery with the Global Positioning System,” Computer Science
`Department, Rutgers University
`
`Imielinski & Navas, “GPS-Based Geographic Addressing, Routing,
`and Resource Discovery: The Global Positioning System can be used
`to give every terminal a geographic address for multicasting to and
`from recipients within specified geographical areas,” 42(4) Comm’ns
`ACM
`
`Publication Date
`June 1996
`
`Oct. 19, 1996
`
`Apr. 1999
`
`Report of the Ministry of Interior, Finland “Information to the Public –
`Warning and Alarm System”
`
`2000
`
`Waples, “Pelmorex pitches emergency alert system,” Sudbury Star,
`July 17, 2000, at A3
`
`Working Group on National Disaster Information Systems, National
`Science and Technology Council, Effective Disaster Warnings
`
`July 17, 2000
`
`Nov. 2000
`
`FCC Emergency Alert System AM & FM Handbook
`
`FCC Emergency Alert System TV Handbook
`
`FCC Emergency Alert System Cable Handbook
`
`Broadwell, et al., “GeoMote: Geographic Multicast for Networked
`Sensors,” Department of Computer Science, University of California,
`Berkeley
`
`Christensen et al., “Wireless Intelligent Networking” Artech House,
`Inc.
`
`Coschurba & Rothermel, “A Fine-Grained Addressing Concept for
`GeoCast,” Institute of Parallel and Distributed High-Performance
`Systems (IPVR), University of Stuttgart
`
`Carzaniga, et al., “Design and Evaluation of a Wide-Area Event
`Notification System,” 19(3) ACM Transactions on Comp. Sys. 332
`
`Wireless Emergency Services Whitepaper, CMGWireless Data
`Solutions,
`
`2001
`
`2001
`
`2001
`
`2001
`
`2001
`
`2001
`
`Aug. 2001
`
`Nov. 2001
`
`Kerber, “Group seeks overhaul of public-warning system upgrade
`urged to respond to new threats of terrorism,” Boston Globe, Dec. 10,
`
`Dec. 10, 2001
`
`Page 5 of 8
`
`21
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
`
`Description
`
`Publication Date
`
`2001, at C1
`
`Schulzrinne & Arabshian, “Providing Emergency Services in Internet
`Telephony,” Department of Computer Science, Columbia University
`
`2002
`
`3GPP Standard (4.2.0)
`
`Report and Order (FCC Report No. 02-64) (“2002 FCC Report”)
`
`“Building a Better Warning System with Wireless,” Wireless Data
`News 10.5
`
`Schumacher & Stone, “Use the phone for urgent warnings” 84.2
`Public Management 21-2
`
`Mattson, “ON THE ALERT: Emergency warnings can now be sent
`by phone, e-mail,” Florida Times Union, July 23, 2002, at C1
`
`Business Editors, “Notify! By the Weather Channel Helps Subscribers
`Stay Ahead of the Storm; Trusted Weather Source Expands Business
`Model to Include Premium Weather Service,” Business Wire
`
`Caporuscio, et al., “Design and Evaluation of a Support Service for
`Mobile, Wireless Publish/Subscribe Applications,” Tech. Rpt. CU-CS-
`944-03, University of Colorado
`
`M. Wood, Cell Broadcast Broker System, Cell Alert Services Corp.
`(CELLCAST_WOOD_0000013–32)
`
`M. Wood, Cell Broadcast Broker System, Cell Alert Services Corp.
`(ITU-01-000006-013)
`
`M. Wood, Cell Broadcast Broker System (CBBS) Overview, V3.2
`(ITU-01-000154-158)
`
`Partnership for Public Warning, A National Strategy for Integrated
`Public Warning Policy and Capability
`
`D. Gundlegård, “Automotive Telematics Services based on Cell
`Broadcast,” May 8, 2003 (Linkoping University, Norrkoping Sweden)
`(“Gundlegård”)
`
`Business Editors/High-Tech Writers, “Industry Rallies to Establish
`Interoperability Standards to Better Prepare for and Respond to
`Emergencies,” Business Wire
`
`Jan. 11, 2002
`
`Feb. 26, 2002
`
`Feb. 27, 2002
`
`Mar. 2002
`
`July 23, 2002
`
`Nov. 4, 2002
`
`Jan. 2003
`
`Feb. 18, 2003
`
`Feb. 18, 2003
`
`Feb. 10, 2003
`
`Feb. 2003
`
`May 8, 2003
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Page 6 of 8
`
`22
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
`
`Description
`Bunge, Disseminating National Weather Service Watches and
`Warnings Using the XML Based RSS and CAP Formats, National
`Weather Service
`
`McGregor, “Radio network provides warnings,” Chatham Daily News,
`Jan. 12, 2004, at 15
`
`Collins, “Utah agencies soon to get new way to contact public,”
`Deseret News
`
`OASIS, Common Alerting Protocol, v. 1.
`
`Brooks, Connecting the Dots: CAP and WSRP, XML 2004
`Proceedings by SchemaSoft
`
`Publication Date
`Jan. 2004
`
`Jan. 12, 2004
`
`Feb. 2, 2004
`
`Mar. 2004
`
`Specific prior art systems in public use or on sale referenced in the above publications
`
`include:
`
`(cid:120) Emergency Alert System (“EAS”), as evidenced by the attached charts of the
`
`1994 FCC Report, the 2002 FCC Report and 47 C.F.R. § 11 et seq. (2002) (“FCC
`
`Part 11”), and by the FCC Emergency Alert System Radio, TV and Cable
`
`Handbooks.
`
`(cid:120) Consequence Management Interoperability Service (“CMIS”) / Disaster
`
`Management Interoperability Services (“DMIS”)
`
`(cid:120) GeoCast
`
`(cid:120) ComCare Alliance (COMCARE-01-000001 to -098)
`
`Prior description in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, or known to others,
`
`in public use or on sale in this country:
`
`(cid:120) Wood Presentation and White Paper to ITU (February 2003) (ITU-01-000001 to -
`
`-262) (see, e.g., ITU-01-000006 (“Cell Alert is working now to negotiate with
`
`Page 7 of 8
`
`23
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
`
`B.
`
`Invalidity in View of Art of Record in the Prosecution Histories of the
`Patents-in-Suit
`
`The Asserted Claims are invalid as anticipated by and/or obvious in light of the art before
`
`the Patent Office during prosecution of the applications that resulted in the Patents-in-Suit, at
`
`least for the reasons expressed by the Patent Office in the Office Actions of:
`
`(cid:120)
`
`(cid:120)
`
`’221 patent Prosecution History, April 24, 2012 Non-Final Office Action; and
`
`’954 patent Prosecution History, July 31, 2014 Non-Final Office Action
`
`The motivation to combine these references is inherent in the Patent Office’s citation of
`
`the art in connection with an Office Action, as well as in the obviousness rejections.
`
`A.
`
`Invalidity In View of References Cited in Petitions for Inter Partes Review
`
`On November 1, 2016, Defendant United States served Plaintiff with the following
`
`Petitions for Inter Partes Review, filed by Defendant United States before the Patent Trial &
`
`Appeal Board of the United States Patent & Trademark Office:
`
`(cid:120)
`
`(cid:120)
`
`(cid:120)
`
`(cid:120)
`
`(cid:120)
`
`IPR2017-00160 (regarding the ’221 patent)
`
`IPR2017-00180 (regarding the ’954 patent)
`
`IPR2017-00183 (regarding the ’938 patent)
`
`IPR2017-00185 (regarding the ’212 patent)
`
`IPR2017-00186 (regarding the ’719 patent)
`
`These Petitions set forth detailed grounds for unpatentability of the Asserted Claims in
`
`view of identified printed publications, copies of which were also served on Plaintiff.
`
`Defendants incorporate by reference the grounds for unpatentability and associated rationales
`
`identified the United States’ Petitions.
`
`Page 8 of 8
`
`34
`EnvisionIT Ex. 2010, IBM v. EnvisionIT, IPR2017-01247
`
`
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
