Patent No. 9,025,896 B2
`Petition For Inter Partes Review
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`C&A Marketing, Inc.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`GoPro, Inc.
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 9,025,896 B2
`_______________
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2017-01300
`____________________________________________________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`sf-3747955
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`
`Page
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`I.
`SUMMARY OF THE ’896 PATENT ............................................................ 5
`II.
`III. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ........................................................................... 9
`IV.
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE ....................................................... 12
`A. Grounds based on Ikebe ..................................................................... 12
`1.
`Ground 1: Ikebe in view of Castorina renders claims 1, 2,
`8-11, 17, and 18 obvious. ......................................................... 12
`a.
`Ikebe teaches obtaining RAW image data from a
`Bayer sensor, separating the RAW image data into
`a plurality of image planes, and encoding/decoding
`the image planes’ data. .................................................. 14
`Castorina teaches previewing an original image at
`a lower resolution, the preview comprising a
`subset of image planes. .................................................. 22
`One of skill in the art would have a strong
`motivation to combine Castorina’s lower
`resolution preview functionality with Ikebe’s
`image processing system to “achiev[e]
`considerable savings in terms of frame-rate
`processing, albeit maintaining a high quality of the
`final image perceived.” .................................................. 25
`Ikebe in view of Castorina teaches “accessing a
`subset of the set of encoded image planes, the
`subset comprising less than all of the set of
`encoded image planes” .................................................. 30
`Ground 2: Ikebe in view of Hunter renders claims 1, 2, 8-
`11, 17, and 18 obvious. ............................................................ 43
`a.
`Hunter teaches previewing an original image at a
`lower resolution, the preview comprising a subset
`of image planes. ............................................................. 44
`
`d.
`
`2.
`
`sf-3747955
`
`i
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`c.
`
`b.
`
`One of skill in the art would have a strong
`motivation to combine Hunter’s lower resolution
`preview functionality with Ikebe’s image
`processing system for “minimisation of the amount
`of data required to be transmitted” for display. ............. 47
`Ikebe in view of Hunter teaches “accessing a
`subset of the set of encoded image planes, the
`subset comprising less than all of the set of
`encoded image planes” .................................................. 53
`B. Grounds based on Linzer .................................................................... 62
`1.
`Ground 3: Linzer anticipates claims 1, 2, 8-11, 17, and
`18. ............................................................................................. 62
`V. NOTICES AND STATEMENTS ................................................................. 73
`VI. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 75
`
`
`sf-3747955
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`
` Page(s)
`
`CASES
`C&A Marketing, Inc. v. GoPro, Inc.,
`Case No. 15-cv-7854 (D.N.J.) ............................................................................ 74
`
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee,
`136 S. Ct. 2131 (2016) .......................................................................................... 9
`
`GoPro, Inc. v. C&A Marketing, Inc. et al.,
`Case No. 16-cv-03590 (N.D. Cal.) ..................................................................... 73
`
`Hakim v. Cannon Avent Group, PLC,
`479 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2007) .......................................................................... 10
`
`Medtronic v. Edotach, LLC,
`IPR2014-00698, Paper No. 18 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 25, 2014) .................................. 63
`
`Oatey Co. v. IPS Corp.,
`514 F.3d 1271 (Fed. Cir. 2008) .......................................................................... 11
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp.,
`415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) .................................................... 9, 34, 35, 38, 56
`
`Vivid Techs., Inc. v. Am. Sci. & Eng’g, Inc.,
`200 F.3d 795 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ............................................................................ 10
`
`STATUTES
`
`35 U.S.C.
`§ 102 ................................................................................................................ 4, 12
`§ 102(a) ............................................................................................. 12, 13, 44, 62
`§ 102 (b) ............................................................................................ 12, 13, 44, 62
`§ 102 (e) ............................................................................................ 12, 13, 44, 62
`§ 103 ................................................................................................................ 4, 12
`§§ 311-319 ............................................................................................................ 1
`
`sf-3747955
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`OTHER AUTHORITIES
`
`37 C.F.R.
`
` §
`
` 42.8(b)(1) ......................................................................................................... 73
`§ 42.8(b)(2) ......................................................................................................... 73
`§ 42.8(b)(3) ......................................................................................................... 74
`§ 42.8(b)(4) ......................................................................................................... 74
`§ 42.15(a) ............................................................................................................ 75
`§§ 42.100 et seq. ................................................................................................... 1
`§ 42.100(b) ............................................................................................................ 9
`§ 42.104(a) .......................................................................................................... 75
`§ 42.104(b) .......................................................................................................... 12
`
`
`
`
`
`sf-3747955
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`Exhibit List for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,025,896 B2
`
`Exhibit Description
`
`Exhibit #
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,025,896 B2
`
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 9,025,896 B2
`
`U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/784,866
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0126019 to Ikebe
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0174441 to Castorina
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0080984 to Hunter
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,005,621 to Linzer
`
`Declaration of A. Bovik
`
`GoPro Amended Infringement Contentions
`
`Joint Claim Construction Statement
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`sf-3747955
`
`v
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`Petitioner C&A Marketing, Inc. (“Petitioner”) respectfully petitions for inter
`
`partes review of claims 1, 2, 8-11, 17, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 9,025,896 B2
`
`(“the ’896 patent” (Ex. 1001)) in accordance with 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 and 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq.
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`The ’896 patent relates to compression, storage, and retrieval of video
`
`content captured by digital cameras. (Ex. 1001, Col. 1:32-45.) The ’896 patent
`
`claims methods and apparatuses for previewing images obtained from digital
`
`image sensors.
`
`Digital image sensors capture either a red, blue, or green value at each pixel,
`
`with twice as many green pixels captured for every red pixel and blue pixel. To
`
`faithfully reproduce an original image from a digital sensor requires converting the
`
`pixel data to display data, a compute-intensive process. Traditionally, digital
`
`cameras perform this process whether viewing full images or preview images. The
`
`’896 patent proposes simplifying the traditional process for previewing images by
`
`discarding half of the green pixels.
`
`Independent claim 11 of the ’896 patent requires two main operations: (1)
`
`encode a set of image planes and (2) produce a lower resolution preview image
`
`1 The ’896 patent includes two independent claims. Independent claim 10 is a
`
`system analogue of claim 1’s method.
`
`sf-3747955
`
`1
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`from a subset of the encoded image planes. Figure 7 (reproduced below)
`
`graphically illustrates claim 1, with annotations to illustrate claim 1’s main
`
`operations.
`
`Figure 7 illustrates a set of four image planes, each corresponding to a red
`
`color plane (R), a blue color plane (B), a first green color plane (G1), and a second
`
`
`
`sf-3747955
`
`2
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`green color plane (G2). For a preview image, Figure 7 discards a green color plane
`
`(G2).
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0126019 (“Ikebe” (Ex. 1004)) discloses
`
`the independent claims’ first operation, encoding image data into image planes.
`
`Ikebe teaches obtaining RAW image data from a Bayer sensor, separating the
`
`RAW image data into a plurality of image planes, and encoding and storing each
`
`image plane’s data. (Ex. 1004, Abstract.)
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0174441 (“Castorina” (Ex. 1005))
`
`discloses the independent claims’ second operation, producing a reduced resolution
`
`preview image from a subset of image planes. Castorina teaches previewing an
`
`image at a reduced resolution by selecting a subset of image planes and
`
`disregarding the extra green plane. (Ex. 1005, [0048].) One of skill in the art
`
`would combine Castorina’s preview functionality with Ikebe’s imaging device to,
`
`as Castorina teaches, “obtain[] a reasonable compromise in terms of quality
`
`perceived by the end user . . . and computational complexity.” (Decl. of Alan C.
`
`Bovik, Ph.D. (Ex. 1008), [43] (citing Ex. 1005, [0019]).)
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0080984 (“Hunter” (Ex. 1006)) also
`
`discloses the independent claims’ second operation. Hunter teaches previewing an
`
`image at a reduced resolution by reducing image planes, where “sets of three
`
`adjacent red, green and blue pixels are selected . . . , and the rest of the pixels are
`
`sf-3747955
`
`3
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`disregarded.” (Ex. 1006, [0039].) When Hunter selects adjacent pixels and
`
`disregards the remaining pixels, Hunter reduces image planes for a preview image.
`
`(Ex. 1008, [45, 84].) One of skill in the art would combine Hunter’s preview
`
`functionality with Ikebe’s image processing system because, as Hunter teaches,
`
`Hunter’s method minimizes data transfer and processing. (Ex. 1008, [85] (citing
`
`Ex. 1006, [0004], [0008], and [0025]-[0026]).)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,005,621 (“Linzer” (Ex. 1007)) anticipates the ’896
`
`patent’s independent claims under Patent Owner’s infringement theory in co-
`
`pending litigation. There, Patent Owner contends that Petitioner’s use of Motion
`
`JPEG for compression and video playback meets the limitations of claim 1. (Ex.
`
`1009.) Linzer discloses a system that uses Motion JPEG compression video
`
`playback.
`
`Accordingly, the claims of the ’896 patent are unpatentable under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102 and/or § 103. Petitioner respectfully submits that this Petition
`
`demonstrates a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner will prevail on at least one
`
`challenged claim, and requests institution of inter partes review of the ’896 patent.
`
`sf-3747955
`
`4
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`II.
`
`SUMMARY OF THE ’896 PATENT
`
`The ’896 patent is titled “Compression and Decoding of Single Sensor Color
`
`Image Data.”2 (Ex. 1001, Cover Page.) The ’896 patent acknowledges Bayer
`
`image sensors’ prevalence in digital still cameras and digital video cameras, but
`
`identifies issues with Bayer sensors. (Ex. 1001, Col. 1:37-51.) A Bayer sensor
`
`produces “RAW image data,” and some displays, including video applications,
`
`require “RGB channels.” (Ex. 1008, [26, 28].) To apply Bayer sensor image data
`
`to video, a camera must arithmetically convert the RAW image data into planar
`
`RGB images, and then compress planar data into a smaller file size. (Ex. 1001,
`
`Col. 1:52-65.) This process requires a “highly compute-intensive operation known
`
`as a ‘demosaic filter.’” (Ex. 1001, Col. 1:66-2:1.)
`
`The ’896 patent skips demosaic filtering to provide a streamlined RAW data
`
`process for preview images. (Ex. 1001, Col. 4:54-60.) Figure 7 illustrates a “fast
`
`
`2 The ’896 patent matured from U.S. Application No. 14/504,326 filed on October
`
`1, 2014. (Ex. 1001, Cover Page.) U.S. Application No. 14/504,326 claims
`
`priority, through a chain of six continuation applications, to U.S. Provisional
`
`Application No. 60/784,866 filed on March 22, 2006. (Id.) The USPTO did not
`
`issue a substantive rejection based on prior art during prosecution of
`
`U.S. Application No. 14/504,326. (Ex. 1002.)
`
`sf-3747955
`
`5
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`decode mode” for generating a preview image for display from encoded image
`
`planes:
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1001, Col. 5:6-57.)
`
`In Figure 7, the process begins by separating the high definition Bayer
`
`sensor image data from the RGGB interleaved pattern into four quarter-resolution
`
`planes, each consisting of the red pixels (R), blue pixels (B), first green pixels
`
`sf-3747955
`
`6
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`(G1), and second green pixels (G2), so that each plane contains one color primary.
`
`(Ex. 1001, Col. 3:52-60; see also claim 1 (“an original image at an original
`
`resolution, the original image comprising a plurality of image planes”).)
`
`Next, each plane is “encode[d]” using “common compression techniques”
`
`known in the prior art. (Ex. 1001, Col. 3:62-65; see also claim 1 (“the encoded
`
`image data comprising a set of encoded image planes each representative of one or
`
`more of the image planes of the original image”).) At this point, the method of
`
`Figure 7 has completed the first main operation of claim 1, encoding a set of image
`
`planes. This step is summarized in U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/784,8663 ,
`
`which states “[t]he camera’s required processing steps are reduced to: 1. Capture
`
`the image from Bayer CCD or CMOS sensor; 2. Directly compress the raw Bayer
`
`sensor output for storage or delivery.” (Ex. 1003, Page 2.)
`
`Figure 7 then moves to the second main operation of claim 1, a “fast
`
`decode” for preview where only three of the four encoded image planes are
`
`accessed and decoded for display as a preview image. (Ex. 1001, Col. 5:6-12.)
`
`Figure 7 illustrates decoding only three of the four encoded image planes (i.e., a
`
`subset of encoded image planes) and discarding the second green image plane (G2)
`
`for presenting the preview image. (Ex. 1001, Col. 5:6-12; see also claim 1
`
`3 The ’896 patent incorporates U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/784,866 “in
`
`[its] entirety by reference for all purposes.” (Ex. 1001, Col. 1:26-28.)
`
`sf-3747955
`
`7
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`(“accessing a subset of the set of encoded image planes, the subset comprising less
`
`than all of the set of encoded image planes”).)
`
`Figure 7’s “fast decode” mode reconstructs the red, blue, and first green
`
`(G1) image planes into an interleaved RGB format for display as a standard
`
`quarter-resolution, lower quality preview image. (Ex. 1001, Col. 5:19-29; see also
`
`claim 1 (“decoding, by a processor, the accessed subset of encoded image planes to
`
`produce the original image at the preview resolution”).) Figure 7’s method outputs
`
`each red, blue, and first green (G1) pixel from the RAW data as the red, blue, and
`
`green channel, respectively, of the display. (Ex. 1008, [34] (citing Ex. 1001,
`
`Figure 7).)
`
`Figure 7 mirrors claim 1. Claim 1 is reproduced below with annotations to
`
`illustrate the main operations:
`
`sf-3747955
`
`8
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`III. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b), a claim of an unexpired patent is given
`
`its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. See Cuozzo
`
`Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131 (2016).
`
`Both Petitioner and Patent Owner have proposed claim constructions in co-
`
`pending litigation. (Ex. 1010.) There, Petitioner has proposed the following
`
`constructions under the standard for district court claim construction set out in
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005):
`
`• “encoded image data” means “data obtained from an image sensor
`
`(i.e., RAW data) and then compressed without demosaicing;”
`
`sf-3747955
`
`9
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`• “a set of encoded image planes” means “image data first compressed
`
`without demosaicing and then stored in the recording medium as sets
`
`of data;”
`
`• “a set of encoded image planes each representative of one or more
`
`image planes of the original image” means “image data first
`
`compressed without demosaicing and then stored in the recording
`
`medium as sets of data, each set of data corresponding to an image
`
`plane of the sensor;” and
`
`• “access[ing] a subset of the set of encoded image planes” means
`
`“accessing some but not all of the encoded image planes of a frame.”
`
`Petitioner does not submit claim constructions here. Petitioner relies on the
`
`plain language of the claims and embodiments in the ’896 patent to demonstrate
`
`that the prior art meets the limitations of the ’896 patent. In light of the art cited
`
`herein, a formal claim construction is unnecessary. Hakim v. Cannon Avent
`
`Group, PLC, 479 F.3d 1313, 1318-19 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (“When there is no dispute
`
`as to the meaning of a term that could affect the disputed issues of the litigation,
`
`‘construction’ may not be necessary.”); see also Vivid Techs., Inc. v. Am. Sci. &
`
`Eng’g, Inc., 200 F.3d 795, 803 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (holding that only those terms that
`
`are in controversy need to be construed and only to the extent necessary to resolve
`
`the controversy).
`
`sf-3747955
`
`10
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`“We normally do not interpret claim terms in a way that excludes
`
`embodiments disclosed in the specification.” Oatey Co. v. IPS Corp., 514 F.3d
`
`1271, 1276 (Fed. Cir. 2008). In Oatey, the Federal Circuit vacated the trial
`
`court’s claim construction because it improperly excluded an embodiment
`
`referenced in a figure, where that embodiment was not “clearly disclaimed” in the
`
`specification or prosecution history. Id. at 1276-77. The court held that “where
`
`claims can reasonably [be] interpreted to include a specific embodiment, it is
`
`incorrect to construe the claims to exclude that embodiment, absent probative
`
`evidence on the contrary.” Id. at 1277. No evidence in the ’896 patent’s
`
`prosecution history or specification suggests Patent Owner intended to exclude
`
`Figure 7 or any embodiment from the scope of the challenged claims. Because
`
`the cited art meets embodiments described in the ’896 patent and there is no
`
`evidence of disclaimer in the ’896 specification or prosecution history that
`
`excludes any embodiment (Ex. 1008, [37]), no construction is necessary.
`
`Petitioner also demonstrates that the combinations below (Ikebe in view of
`
`Castorina and Ikebe in view of Hunter) meet all the limitations of claims 1, 2, 8-
`
`11, 17, and 18 under Petitioner’s proposed construction in co-pending litigation.
`
`Petitioner submits, however, that the Board need not construe the claims here to
`
`determine the challenged claims are invalid over the cited art.
`
`sf-3747955
`
`11
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`IV.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b), Petitioner respectfully requests the Board
`
`cancel claims 1, 2, 8-11, 17, and 18 of the ’896 patent.
`
`The table below sets forth the statutory grounds for the challenge (all
`
`statutory citations are pre-AIA).
`
`Ground 35 U.S.C. Reference(s)
`
`Claim(s)
`
`Ground 1 § 103
`
`Ikebe in view of Castorina
`
`1, 2, 8-11, 17, and 18
`
`Ground 2 § 103
`
`Ikebe in view of Hunter
`
`1, 2, 8-11, 17, and 18
`
`Ground 3 § 102
`
`Linzer
`
`1, 2, 8-11, 17, and 18
`
`A. Grounds based on Ikebe
`1. Ground 1: Ikebe in view of Castorina renders claims 1, 2, 8-
`11, 17, and 18 obvious.
`
`Ikebe published on July 1, 2004 from a patent application filed on
`
`September 20, 2003, and qualifies as prior art to the ’896 patent under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§§ 102(a), (b), and (e). (Ex. 1004, Cover Page.) Neither Patent Owner nor the
`
`USPTO cited Ikebe during prosecution of the ’896 patent. Ikebe “relates to
`
`imaging devices for generating color images.” (Ex. 1004, [0002].
`
`Ikebe teaches a compression method where “high compression efficiency is
`
`achieved as compared with the case of compressing the raw image data itself
`
`because of the compression conducted for each of the color planes divided out or
`
`sf-3747955
`
`12
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`decomposed from the raw image data.” (Ex. 1004, [0054].) Ikebe obtains RAW
`
`image data from a Bayer sensor, separates the RAW image data into a plurality of
`
`image planes, and encodes each image plane. (Ex. 1004, Abstract.) Ikebe also
`
`decodes each image plane to restore the RAW image data. (Ex. 1004, [0113].)
`
`Ikebe teaches an on-board display for viewing stored images, but does not describe
`
`any processing of stored images for presentation on the display.
`
`Castorina published on September 9, 2004, from an application filed on
`
`December 10, 2003. Castorina qualifies as prior art to the ’896 patent under
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 102(a), (b), and (e). Castorina is titled “Method and System for
`
`Processing Video Signals, for Example for Displaying on a Small sized Color
`
`Display, and Corresponding Computer Program Product.” Neither Patent Owner
`
`nor the USPTO cited Castorina during prosecution of the ’896 patent.
`
`Castorina teaches a preview method that “envisages recourse to an
`
`implementation of a simple type and hence ‘light’ in terms of computational
`
`burden.” (Ex. 1005, [0023].) Castorina produces a lower resolution preview
`
`image on a viewfinder from a subset of image planes:
`
`[T]he solution described herein envisages splitting the
`Bayer pattern into blocks of four pixels (each containing
`one pixel R, one pixel B, and two pixels G) and
`considering for processing purposes only one pixel for
`each channel. This means that one of the two pixels G,
`i.e., the pixels G designated by X in FIG. 4, is not
`considered.
`
`sf-3747955
`
`13
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1005, [0048]; see also [0020] (typical viewfinders employ just one fraction
`
`(for example, ⅓ or ¼) of the original resolution of the sensor).)
`
`One of skill in the art would include Castorina’s preview functionality in
`
`Ikebe’s imaging device because, as Castorina teaches, “[r]esults demonstrate the
`
`effectiveness of the solution above all as regards the possibility of achieving
`
`considerable savings in terms of frame-rate processing, albeit maintaining a high
`
`quality of the final image perceived.” (Ex. 1008, [43] (citing Ex. 1005, [0022]).)
`
`The combination of Ikebe in view of Castorina teaches all the elements of
`
`claims 1, 2, 8-11, 17, and 18.
`
`a.
`
`Ikebe teaches obtaining RAW image data from a
`Bayer sensor, separating the RAW image data into a
`plurality of image planes, and encoding/decoding the
`image planes’ data.
`
`Ikebe Figure 1 illustrates an imaging device that “may be used for the
`
`electronic camera in digital still cameras or digital video cameras.” (Ex. 1004,
`
`[0077].) The imaging device includes, among other parts, an imager (101), an
`
`image processor (103), a display (104), an encoder/decoder (108), and a recording
`
`medium (109/110). (Ex. 1004, [0078]-[0083]; see also Fig. 1.)
`
`sf-3747955
`
`14
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`Ikebe’s imager generates an original image with a Bayer color filter by
`
`“decompos[ing] the optical image focused on an imaging surface . . . into color
`
`component images and convert[ing] each color component into electrical signals.”
`
`(Ex. 1004, [0078]-[0079]; see also Figs. 1 and 2A-2C.) Ikebe describes the
`
`imager’s output signal as “raw image data.” (Ex. 1004, [0080].)
`
`Ikebe’s image processor acquires, from the RAW image data, image planes
`
`comprised of pixels having the same color (i.e., Red, Green1, Blue, and Green2),
`
`and the encoder/decoder compresses each image plane’s data. (Ex. 1004, [0093]-
`
`[0095]; see also [0103]-[0104].) Ikebe repeats the process for the image planes of
`
`each color, creating four compressed image planes. (Ex. 1004, [0093]; see also
`
`Figs. 2A-2C and Fig. 7, reproduced below.)
`
`sf-3747955
`
`15
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`sf-3747955
`
`16
`
`
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`Ikebe’s Summary of Invention lists the process steps for acquiring RAW
`
`data and producing multiple encoded image planes: “produce raw image data,”
`
`decompose the raw image data into multiple color planes,” and “compress[] the
`
`sub-color image data for each of the multiple color planes.” (Ex. 1004, [0013].)
`
`Ikebe’s encoder/decoder also “decompress[es] . . . the encoded image data”
`
`to restore the image for display.” (Ex. 1004, [0082] and [0113].) “Because the
`
`compression is reversible, the original raw data can be fully restored by
`
`decompressing the recorded encoded data by using the encoder/decoder 108 or any
`
`other external decoder.” (Ex. 1004, [0013]; see also [0092] (color plane data is
`
`provided to the encoder/decoder for reversible compression).)
`
`Ikebe’s image processing system further includes a display device. The
`
`“display device 104 may be a liquid crystal display device and is used for
`
`representation of monitoring images (through images), recorded images and also
`
`various information to be displayed.” (Ex. 1004, [0081].)
`
`Ikebe discloses storing encoded image data representative of an original
`image at an original resolution.
`
`Ikebe’s system stores encoded image planes representative of an original
`
`image at an original resolution in the same way as the ’896 patent. The ’896 patent
`
`obtains RAW data from a Bayer sensor and separates the data into four image
`
`planes, each consisting of red, blue, or one of two green pixels (Ex. 1001, 3:52-65;
`
`see also Fig. 7), encodes the four image planes (Ex. 1001, Col. 3:62-65; see also
`
`sf-3747955
`
`17
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`Col. 4:34-40), and then stores the encoded image planes in a recording medium
`
`(Ex. 1001, 2:52-53.)
`
`Ikebe teaches the same process of storing encoded image planes
`
`representative of an original image at an original resolution. Like the ’896 patent,
`
`Ikebe obtains RAW image data from a Bayer sensor. (Ex. 1004, [0078]-[0080];
`
`see also Fig. 2A.) Further, like the ’896 patent, Ikebe teaches separating the RAW
`
`image data into four image planes, then encoding each image plane. (Ex. 1004,
`
`[0092]-[0094]; see also Fig. 7.) And finally, like the ’896 patent, Ikebe teaches
`
`storing the encoded image planes in a recording medium. (Ex. 1004, [0095]; see
`
`also Fig. 7.)
`
`Ikebe teaches the same steps for storing encoded image planes representative
`
`of an original image at an original resolution as the ’896 patent. Therefore, Ikebe
`
`teaches “storing encoded image data . . . representative of an original image at an
`
`original resolution” as the ’896 patent uses that term.
`
`Ikebe discloses encoded image data comprising a set of encoded image
`planes each representative of one or more image planes of the original
`image.
`
`Ikebe’s image processor functions in the same manner as the ’896 patent to
`
`provide encoded image data comprising a set of encoded image planes, each
`
`representative of one or more image planes of the original image. The ’896 patent
`
`teaches that the original Bayer image data is “separated into four planes of quarter-
`
`sf-3747955
`
`18
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`resolution images,” and “[t]he same technique can be applied for all colors so that
`
`each plane contains the signal for one color primary.” (Ex. 1001, Col. 3:52-62; see
`
`also Fig. 7.) The ’896 patent Figure 7 (reproduced below in relevant part, with
`
`annotations) illustrates the “encoded image data comprising a set of encoded image
`
`planes each representative of one or more of the image planes of the original
`
`image.”
`
`
`
`Ikebe teaches the same process. Ikebe “decompose[s] the raw image data
`
`into multiple color planes4 such that each color plane includes data of pixels of the
`
`4 Although the Board need not construe “image planes,” it is clear that the claim
`
`term encompasses “color planes.” The term “image planes” is used once in the
`
`’896 patent’s specification. (Ex. 1001, Col. 4:6.) Throughout the rest of the ’896
`
`patent, the terms “plane,” “color plane,” and similar terms are used. For example,
`
`Figure 7 (an embodiment covered by claim 1) refers to planes of “color primaries.”
`
`sf-3747955
`
`19
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`same color.” (Ex. 1004, [0013]; see also [0031], [0081], [0093], and [0103] (four
`
`color planes are created by gathering the pixel information of the same color).)
`
`Ikebe Figures 2A-2C illustrate the process:
`
`
`
`(See also Ex. 1004, [0015] (“FIGS. 2A-2C are diagrams illustrating a Bayer array
`
`of primary color filters and decomposition of raw image data into color planes.”).)
`
`The three steps shown in the process flow of Ikebe Figures 2A-2C (above)
`
`provide the same process, except with more detail, as the first step in the ’896
`
`patent Figure 7.
`
`
`Further, claim 3 (which depends from claim 1) requires that the “set of encoded
`
`image planes” include two image planes of the same color, just like the first green
`
`(Gr) and second green (Gb) color planes in Figure 7.
`
`sf-3747955
`
`20
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`With respect to “encoding the image planes,” Ikebe’s image processor
`
`acquires a single image plane, and the encoder/decoder encodes the image plane.
`
`(Ex. 1004, [0092]-[0093].) Ikebe repeats the process for all image planes. (Ex.
`
`1004, [0094]; see also Fig. 7.) Ikebe Figure 7 (reproduced again below for ease of
`
`reference) illustrates the process:
`
`
`
`The four steps shown in the process flow of Ikebe Figure 7 provide the same
`
`process, except with more detail, as the “compress color primaries” step of the
`
`’896 patent Figure 7 (below):
`
`sf-3747955
`
`21
`
`
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of USP 9,025,896 B2
`
`
`
`Thus, Ikebe teaches the same “encoded image data comprising a set of
`
`encoded image planes each representative of one or more of the image planes of
`
`the original image” as disclosed in the ’896 patent.
`
`Ikebe discloses decoding, by a processor, the encoded image planes to
`produce the original image.
`
`Once Ikebe stores the encoded image planes in memory, “the original raw
`
`data can be fully restored by decompressing the recorded encoded data by using
`
`the encoder/decoder 108 or any other external decoder.” (Ex. 1004, [0113]; see
`
`also [0092] (color plane data is provided to the encoder/decoder for reversible
`
`compression).) Ikebe’s image device for digital cameras includes a display device
`
`used for displaying recorded images. (Ex. 1004, [0081].) To represent the
`
`recorded images, Ikebe’s imaging device must first decode the encoded image
`
`planes stored in Ikebe’s memory. (Ex. 1008, [40] (citing Ex. 1004, [0095] and
`
`[0113]).)
`
`Thus, Ikebe teaches decoding, by a processor, the encoded image pla