Petitioner’s Demonstratives
`
`Google LLC
`v.
`Uniloc USA Inc.
`
`
`IPR2017-01683, IPR2017-01684, IPR2017-01685
`
`October 16, 2018
`
`Page 1 of 44
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1033
`GOOGLE v. UNILOC
`IPR2017-01685
`
`

`

`Patents at Issue
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,804,948
`
`“System and Method for Initiating a
`Conference Call”
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,853,000
`
`“System and Method for Initiating a
`Conference Call”
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,571,194
`
`“System and Method for Initiating a
`Conference Call”
`
`continuation
`
`continuation
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`Page 2 of 44
`
`

`

`Many Challenged Claims Already Found Unpatentable
`in Related IPRs
`
`’948 Patent
`
`Cisco IPR
`(IPR2017-
`00058)
`
`Google's IPR
`
`Cl.
`
`123456789
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`’194 Patent
`
`Cisco IPR
`(IPR2017-
`00597)
`
`Facebook IPR
`(IPR2016-
`01756)
`
`Google's IPR
`
`Cl.
`
`123456789
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`
`Previously Found Unpatentable
`-
`Currently Challenged
`-
`- Unique to Google Petitions
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 1, 62;
`
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 62-63;
`IPR2017-01685: Petition (Paper 1) at 64.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-00198: FWD (Paper 19) at 39;
`IPR2017-00058: FWD (Paper 17) at 49;
`IPR2017-00597: FWD (Paper 20) at 31;
`IPR2016-01756: FWD (Paper 34) at 32. 3
`
`’000 Patent
`
`Cisco IPR
`(IPR2017-
`00198)
`
`Cl.
`
`Google's IPR
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`
`Page 3 of 44
`
`

`

`Instituted Grounds of Unpatentability
`
`’000 Patent:
`– Claims 1-8, 12, and 18-23 are obvious over Tanigawa (US 7,233,589) and
`Liversidge (US Pub 2002/0076025)
`’948 Patent:
`– Claims 1-4, 6-8, 18, 21, and 22 are obvious over Tanigawa and Liversidge
`’194 Patent:
`– Claims 1-16 are obvious over Liversidge and Beyda (US Pub 2003/0233417)
`
`
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01683: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 21;
`IPR2017-01684: Institution Decision (Paper 11) at 19;
`IPR2017-01685: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 21. 4
`
`Page 4 of 44
`
`

`

`Exemplary System Converting to Conference Call
`
`’000 Patent / ’948 Patent / ’194 Patent:
`
`IPR2017-01683: ’194 Patent (Ex. 1001) at Figure 4;
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 12-16,
`
`IPR2017-01684: ’000 Patent (Ex. 1001) at Figure 4;
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 7-11.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01685: ’948 Patent (Ex. 1001) at Figure 4;
`IPR2017-01685: Petition (Paper 1) at 9-13.
`
`5
`
`Page 5 of 44
`
`

`

`The ’000 and ’948 Patents
`
`Claims 1-8, 12, and 18-23 of the ’000 Patent and
`claims 1-4, 6-8, 18, 21, and 22 of the ’948 Patent
`would have been obvious over Tanigawa and Liversidge
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01684: Institution Decision (Paper 11) at 19;
`IPR2017-01685: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 21. 6
`
`Page 6 of 44
`
`

`

`The ’948 & ’000 Claims Share Common Elements
`
`’948 Patent
`
`’000 Patent
`
`Claim Element
`
`Network access device using Instant messaging (IM) service
`Establish connection from network access device to conference call
`server
`Potential targets participating in an IM session
`Generating a conference call request responsively to a single
`request
`Conference call request identifying each of the potential targets
`Transmitting the conference call request to the conference call
`server
`Automatically establish conference call
`With the requester and potential targets
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 10-11;
`IPR2017-01685: Petition (Paper 1) at 12-13. 7
`
`Page 7 of 44
`
`

`

`Representative Claims - ’000 and ’948 Patents
`
`Claim 1 ’000 Patent
`
`Claim 1 ’948 Patent
`
`Disputed?
`
`A method for initiating a conference call for a conference call
`requester using a network access device,
`the network access device communicating via an instant messaging
`service,
`the instant messaging service being adapted to communicate
`conference call request information with a conference call server,
`comprising;
`indicating, at the network access device, a plurality of potential
`targets then being connected to the instant messaging service and
`participating in a given instant messaging session with the
`conference call requester;
`
`A method for initiating a conference call, comprising the steps of:
`providing a conference call requester with a network access device
`said network access device communicating via an instant messaging
`service
`said instant messaging service being adapted to communicate conference
`call request information with a conference call server;
`establishing a communications connection from said network access
`device to the conference call server;
`presenting said conference call requester with a display showing a
`plurality of potential targets then being connected to said instant
`messaging service and participating in a given instant messaging session
`with the conference call requester and with whom a conference call may
`be initiated;
`transmitting said conference call request from said network access device
`transmitting the conference call request to the conference call server
`to said conference call server; and
`wherein, a conference call connection initiated by the conference call
`automatically establishing a conference call connection to said conference
`server and connected to the conference call request[e]r and each of
`call requester, said conference call connection initiated by said conference
`the indicated potential targets is automatically established
`call server, said conference call connection further being connected to
`responsively to the transmitted conference call request.
`each of the potential targets.
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 26-38; IPR2017-01684: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 14) at 15-22;
`IPR2017-01685: Petition (Paper 1) at 29-48; IPR2017-01685: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 13) at 14-20.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`generating a conference call request responsively to a single
`request by the conference call requester,
`said conference call request identifying each of the indicated
`potential targets; and
`
`generating a conference call request responsively to a single request
`by the conference call requester,
`said conference call request identifying each of the potential targets
`for said conference call request;
`
`NO
`
`NO
`
`NO
`
`NO
`
`NO
`
`YES
`
`YES
`
`NO
`
`NO
`
`8
`
`Page 8 of 44
`
`

`

`Tanigawa And Liversidge Render Obvious All Instituted
`Claims of the ’000 and ’948 Patents
`
`Tanigawa describes an IM-Voice
`over Internet Protocol
`interconnecting system
`Network connects a plurality of
`clients at IP terminals to an IM
`server and AP server
`Each client may also have an
`associated telephone or VoIP
`phone capability
`
`IPR2017-01684: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 1, 3:56-4:9, 6:61-66, 15:59-17:64;
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 13-18;
`IPR2017-01685: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 1, 3:56-4:9, 6:61-66. 15:59-17:64;
`IPR2017-01685: Petition (Paper 1) at 15-21.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`Page 9 of 44
`
`

`

`Tanigawa And Liversidge Render Obvious All Instituted
`Claims of the ’000 and ’948 Patents
`
`Tanigawa describes “switching” from an IM session to a call
`
`IPR2017-01684: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 11, 2:8-12, 10:32-49, 14:56-57, 15:36-16:40;
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 13-18;
`IPR2017-01685: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 11, 2:8-12, 10:32-49, 14:56-57, 15:36-16:40;
`IPR2017-01685: Petition (Paper 1) at 15-21.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`10
`
`Page 10 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Disputed Claim Construction:
`“generating a conference call request . . .”
`
`
`
` Full Claim Scope
`“Disclaimer”
`
`Prosecution
`
`No
`
`Did the Applicant
`Disclaim “Selecting
`Attendees”?
`
`Yes
`
`Claims unpatentable:
`No dispute Tanigawa
`discloses “generating”
`
`Claims unpatentable:
`Tanigawa does
`not require
`
`“selecting attendees”
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 1-13; IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 1-13.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`Page 11 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Disputed Claim Construction:
`“generating a conference call request . . .”
`
`Plain language of the claims and specification do not exclude “selecting
`attendees”
`Uniloc in effect concedes this by invoking disclaimer
`“Thus, User A could request a
`conference call with one step, such as
`through actuation of a “call now” button
`or icon associated with User A’s IM
`service. Alternately, User A could be
`provided with a list of participants of
`the on-going IM session, and be
`provided 312 with the opportunity to
`add or remove potential participants
`from a planned conference call.”
`IPR2017-01684: ’000 Patent (Ex. 1001) at 11:65-12:19 (claim 1), 7:31-48 (specification);
`IPR2017-01684: Easttom Deposition Tr. (Ex. 1032) at 22:19-25;
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 1-3;
`IPR2017-01685: ’948 Patent (Ex. 1001) at 11:58-12:17 (claim 1), 7:27-44 (specification);
`IPR2017-01685: Easttom Deposition Tr. (Ex. 1032) at 22:19-25;
`IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 1-3.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`Page 12 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Disputed Claim Construction:
`“generating a conference call request . . .”
`
`Haims discloses starting a conference call in the first instance, not
`converting an IM session to a call or selecting attendees to convert from
`IM to the call
`“Applicants have discovered
`that IM techniques . . . may be
`used to initiate ad hoc
`communication sessions . . . .”
`“[A] meeting creation message
`that causes communication
`server 200 to establish a
`communication session . . . .”
`
`* * * * *
`
`IPR2017-01684: Haims (Ex. 1017) [0098]-[0103];
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 4-6;
`IPR2017-01685: Haims (Ex. 1017) [0098]-[0103];
`IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 4-6. 13
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Page 13 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Disputed Claim Construction:
`“generating a conference call request . . .”
`
`No clear and unmistakable disclaimer of “selecting attendees” to convert
`from IM session to call by distinguishing Haims
`“Haims proposes that a user
`determine whether attendees are
`available and select ones for
`invitation. . . . In contrast, Claim 1
`calls for the system to automatically
`establish a conference call with a
`plurality of users who are then
`participating in a common IM session
`with the requester responsively to a
`single requester request.”
`
`* * *
`
`IPR2017-01684: Prosecution History ’948 Patent (Ex. 2002) at 123-124;
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 3-8;
`IPR2017-01685: Prosecution History ’948 Patent (Ex. 1018) at 123-124;
`IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 3-7.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`14
`
`Page 14 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Disputed Claim Construction:
`“generating a conference call request . . .”
`
`Uniloc’s expert failed to fully analyze Haims
`– As Mr. Easttom states:
`•“Beyond reading [para 104 of Haims for example], I have not
`performed an analysis of that. My only opinions on Haims and my
`only analysis of Haims is in my declaration.” Ex. 1032 at 36:12-14.
`•“So an in-depth analysis of Haims was not part of my process.” Ex.
`1032 at 37:1-2.
`
`
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 6-8;
`IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 6-7.
`
`15
`
`Page 15 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Disputed Claim Construction:
`“generating a conference call request . . .”
`
`
`
` Full Claim Scope
`“Disclaimer”
`
`Prosecution
`
`No
`
`Did the Applicant
`Disclaim “Selecting
`Attendees”?
`
`Yes
`
`Claims unpatentable:
`No dispute Tanigawa
`discloses “generating”
`
`Claims unpatentable:
`Tanigawa does
`not require
`
`“selecting attendees”
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 1-13; IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 1-13.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`16
`
`Page 16 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Tanigawa Discloses “generating a
`conference call request . . .”
`
`Tanigawa’s description of users operating on multiple devices is consistent
`with ’000/’948 specification
`Tanigawa:
`’000 Patent / ’948 Patent:
`
`IPR2017-01685: ’948 Patent (Ex. 1001) at Fig. 4, 9:39-47;
`IPR2017-01684: ’000 Patent (Ex. 1001) at Fig. 4, 9:44-52;
`IPR2017-01685: Easttom Declaration (Ex. 2001) ¶ 39;
`IPR2017-01684: Easttom Declaration (Ex. 2001) ¶ 39;
`IPR2017-01685: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 11, 2:6-12,
`IPR2017-01684: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 11, 2:6-12,
`10:32-49, 14:56-57, 15:36-65;
`10:32-49, 14:56-57, 15:36-65;
`IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 8-13
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 8-13. 17
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Page 17 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Tanigawa Discloses “said conference
`call request indicating each of the potential targets . . .”
`
`Tanigawa’s description of users operating on multiple devices is also
`consistent with the claims, which contemplate users having conference
`call capabilities:
`– via a publicly switched telephone network (e.g., claim 5, ’000 Patent)
`– via a voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) communications path (e.g., claim 6,
`’000 Patent)
`– via a cellular communications path (e.g., claim 8, ’000 Patent)
`
`IPR2017-01684: ’000 Patent (Ex. 1001) at 12:28-37;
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 17-20;
`IPR2017-01685: ’948 Patent (Ex. 1001) 12:29-40;
`IPR2017-01685: : Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 17-20. 18
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Page 18 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Tanigawa Discloses “generating a
`conference call request . . .”
`
`Tanigawa describes conversion of an IM session between taro, hanako, and
`yoshi to a call between the same three users
`
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 13-18, 26-38;
`IPR2017-01685: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 11, 2:6-12,
`10:32-49, 14:56-57, 15:36-65;
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 8-13;
`IPR2017-01685: Petition (Paper 1) at 15-21, 29-48;
`IPR2017-01684: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 11, 2:6-12,
`IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 8-13. 19
`10:32-49, 14:56-57, 15:36-65;
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Page 19 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Tanigawa Discloses “generating a
`conference call request . . .”
`
`As the Board determined at institution: “Clients E and G,
`corresponding to users named hanako and yoshi appear to be
`the only clients in the IM session who are both present and
`capable of voice chat. The instruction described by Tanigawa
`appears to be a single instruction for requesting voice chat for
`IM session . . . .”
`
`each participant of the IM session then being connected to the
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01684: Institution Decision (Paper 11) at 14-15;
`IPR2017-01685: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 15. 20
`
`Page 20 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: “generating a conference call request
`. . .” Would Also Have Been Obvious Over Liversidge
`
`Even if Tanigawa does not disclose this limitation, it would have been
`obvious in view of Liversidge
`Uniloc does not contest Liversidge discloses this limitation
`– Liversidge discloses a “ConvertSession” button to facilitate “conversion of an
`Instant Message session involving the team members using VTE clients (A),
`(B), and (C) to a voice communications session involving the same team
`members”
`It would have been obvious to implement Liversidge’s “ConvertSession”
`button in the user interface of Tanigawa to improve its utility and offer a
`user-friendly means of converting to a call
`
`IPR2017-01684: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) [0126], [0175]-[0176];
`IPR2017-01685: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) [0126], [0175]-[0176];
`IPR2017-01684: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 14) at 15-19;
`IPR2017-01685: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 13) at 16-18;
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 22-25;
`IPR2017-01685: Petition (Paper 1) at 25-29;
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 13-17.
`IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 13-17.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`21
`
`Page 21 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: “generating a conference call
`request . . .” Would Have Been Obvious Over Liversidge
`
`Uniloc’s teaching away argument is misplaced
`– It relies exclusively on Tanigawa disclosing selecting attendees, but Tanigawa
`does not
`– Tanigawa does not criticize, discredit, or discourage a combination with
`Liversidge’s “ConvertSession” button
`Uniloc’s “inoperability” argument is misplaced
`– It relies exclusively on Tanigawa disclosing selecting attendees, but Tanigawa
`does not
`– Uniloc offers only conclusory expert testimony lacking any basis to support
`the underlying opinion
`
`
`
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 13-17;
`IPR2017-01685: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 13-17. 22
`
`Page 22 of 44
`
`

`

`’000 & ’948 Patents: Tanigawa Discloses “said conference
`call request indicating each of the potential targets . . .”
`
`“request voice chat”
`
`IPR2017-01684: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 11, 15:53-16:11;
`IPR2017-01684: Tanigawa (Ex. 1014) at Fig. 11, 15:53-16:11;
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 35;
`IPR2017-01684: Petition (Paper 1) at 35;
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 17-20.
`IPR2017-01684: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 16) at 17-20;
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`23
`
`Page 23 of 44
`
`

`

`The ’194 Patent
`
`Claims 1-16 of the ’194 Patent
`would have been obvious over
`Liversidge and Beyda
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01683: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 21. 24
`
`Page 24 of 44
`
`

`

`Representative Claim – ’194 Patent
`
`Claim 1 ’194 Patent
`
`A non-transitory computer readable medium containing computer instructions configured
`to operate with electronic computer hardware to perform the following steps:
`display, in an instant messaging (IM) chat window of a first party, an exchange of IM
`messages between the first party and at least one other party, the first party and the at least
`one other party being current participants to an IM session;
`display for the first party an indication of whether the at least one other party is
`communicably connected to the IM session;
`
`display for the first party an option to automatically initiate voice communication
`between the current participants of the IM session without requiring individual
`selection of potential members including the first party and the at least one other
`party and without requiring registration with a conference call server for
`establishing the voice communication by the potential members including the first
`party and the at least one other party; and
`
`Disputed?
`
`NO
`
`NO
`
`NO
`
`YES
`
`request, in response to selection of the option, voice communication between the first party
`and the at least one other party;
`wherein in response to the request, the voice communication is established between the
`first party and those of the at least one other party.
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 20-33; IPR2017-01683: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 14) at 30-40.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`NO
`
`NO
`
`25
`
`Page 25 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge and Beyda Render Obvious All
`Claims of the ’194 Patent
`
`Liversidge describes a method for “automatic handling of invitations to join
`communications session in a virtual team environment”
`
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Figs. 1, 2, [0012], [0065], [0070], [0126], [0175]-[0176];
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 8-12; 20-33.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`26
`
`Page 26 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge and Beyda Render Obvious All
`Claims of the ’194 Patent
`
`Liversidge permits users to join and create teams
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Fig. 14, [0100], [0175]-[0181];
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 8-12; 20-33.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`27
`
`Page 27 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge and Beyda Render Obvious All
`Claims of the ’194 Patent
`
`Liversidge’s presence server 42 maintains a status table 43 of team
`members
`
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Figs. 1, 2, [0012], [0065], [0070], [0126], [0175]-[0176];
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 8-12; 20-33.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`28
`
`Page 28 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge and Beyda Render Obvious All
`Claims of the ’194 Patent
`
`Liversidge demonstrates that no check is made with respect to
`registration when “ConvertSession” is performed
`
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Fig. 32, [0062], [0073], [0082], [0134]-[0135], [0176];
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 8-12; 20-33.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`29
`
`Page 29 of 44
`
`

`

`’194 Patent: “Without Requiring” Limitation
`
`Claim 1: “display for the first party an option to automatically initiate Voice
`communication between the current participants of the IM session . . . without
`requiring registration with a conference call server for establishing the voice
`communication by the potential members including the first party and the at least
`one other party”
`
` “Without” clause carves out combination of three things:
`
`’194 patent,
`
`“without requiring”
`limitation
`
`IPR2017-01683: ’194 Patent (Ex. 1001) at 12:13-21;
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 29-32; Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 2-6.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`30
`
`Page 30 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge Disclosure
`
`(1) Liversidge does not require registration; rather it permits users to join
`teams; and, no registration is required in Liversidge to initiate a conference call
`
`
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 12-16;
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Figs. 14, 32, [0062], [0073], [0082], [0134]-[0135], [0176].
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`31
`
`Page 31 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge Disclosure
`
`(2) The VTE server of Liversidge is not a “conference call server;” if anything,
`the Call Server—which is not involved in team creation—is the conference call
`server
`
`
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 12-16;
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Figs. 14, 32, [0062], [0073], [0082], [0134]-[0135], [0176].
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`32
`
`Page 32 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge Disclosure
`
`(3) Even if the VTE server were a “conference call server” and Liversidge’s
`team-joining was “registration,” Liversidge never “requires” registration for
`voice call; rather, users can communicate with anyone
`
`
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 12-16;
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Figs. 14, 32, [0062], [0073], [0082], [0134]-[0135], [0176].
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`33
`
`Page 33 of 44
`
`

`

`(1) Liversidge Does Not Require Registration
`
`Liversidge: “‘[o]n receipt of the [ConvertSession] message,’ the VTE server
`uses the message to ‘determine the session type and the participants,’ and
`translates ‘the personal identifiers associated with the respective team
`members to determine the dialed numbers of a preferred telephone device
`associated with each team member.’”
`
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 12-16;
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Fig. 32, [0062], [0073], [0176].
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`34
`
`Page 34 of 44
`
`

`

`(2) Liversidge’s VTE Server is Not a Conference Call
`Server
`
`Institution Decision: “Call server 50 facilitates interaction between VTE
`server 40, presence server 42, and public switched telephone network
`(PSTN 48).”
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01683: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 11;
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 12-16;
`IPR2017-01683: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 14) at 16-23; 30-39.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`35
`
`Page 35 of 44
`
`

`

`(3) Liversidge Does Not Require Registration with the
`VTE Server
`
`Liversidge: “[T]he Presence Server 42 interacts with packet-based
`communications devices (e.g., PCs, web-enabled communications devices,
`and WAP-enabled communications devices) through a packet network 46
`to receive StatusUpdate messages, and determine associated presence
`information based on the reception and contents of such StatusUpdate
`messages . . . .”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 12-16;
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at Fig. 2, [0066].
`
`36
`
`Page 36 of 44
`
`

`

`(3) Liversidge Does Not Require Registration with the
`VTE Server
`
`Institution Decision: “[s]tatus table 43, with team members A, B, and C
`shown in Figure 2 of Liversidge, is maintained by presence server 42, not
`call server 50.”
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01683: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 15;
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 12-16;
`IPR2017-01683: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 14) at 16-23; 30-39.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`37
`
`Page 37 of 44
`
`

`

`Preliminary Construction Does Not Encompass Hamberg
`
`Preliminary construction (from Institution Decision): “current participants
`of an IM session are not required to complete an additional or separate registration
`with a conference call server before establishing voice communication between
`current participants of the IM session”
`Uniloc’s characterization of Hamberg: “when a conference call is requested,
`Hamberg’s form of registration (like the disclaimed embodiment of the ’194 Patent)
`requires a conference call server to confirm whether a user is or is not currently
`registered for the requested conference call service.”
` Hamberg at [0028]: “If the subscriber sending the conference call set-up
`message is not registered or the member in question does not have the right to set up
`the conference call in question, the initiation routine of the conference call is ended.”
`IPR2017-01683: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 5-9;
`IPR2017-01683: Petition (Paper 1) at 17-19; Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 2-6;
`IPR2017-01683: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 14) at 12.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`38
`
`Page 38 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge Is Unlike Hamberg
`
`Liversidge
`
`Hamberg
`
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 3-5; 8-12.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`39
`
`Page 39 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge Is Unlike Hamberg
`
`Liversidge: Permits users to “log in to the collaboration services suite 2 and join
`one or more teams.”
` Liversidge at [0134]-[0135]: Allows users to communicate not only with their
`team members but also with “any other individual for whom appropriate contact
`information is available.”
`Hamberg: Users must register with a group, and can only communicate with
`others in that group: “When the members of the group G1 then communicate with
`each other, only the members of the group in question are allowed to participate”
` Hamberg at [0028]: “If the subscriber sending the conference call set-up
`message is not registered or the member in question does not have the right to set up
`the conference call in question, the initiation routine of the conference call is ended.”
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 3-5; 8-12.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`40
`
`Page 40 of 44
`
`

`

`“Additional or Separate Registration”
`
`Google’s Position: when a user initiates voice communication between
`parties of an IM session, those parties do not need to undertake any
`“additional or separate” registration to participate in the voice
`communication.
`– During prosecution, Applicant stated users do not “need to register, e.g., with
`the [present] IM session or any group associated therewith, to be joined in a
`conference call.”
`Uniloc’s proposal in prior litigation: “separate registration with a
`conference call server is not required to initiate voice communication
`between current participants of an instant messaging session.”
`Preliminary construction (from Institution Decision): “current
`participants of an IM session are not required to complete an additional
`or separate registration with a conference call server before establishing
`voice communication between current participants of the IM session”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`IPR2017-01683: Institution Decision (Paper 10) at 6;
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 2-5.
`
`41
`
`Page 41 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge Discloses “Without Requiring Individual
`Selection”
`
`Uniloc incorrectly describes Liversidge as having “selection” and “non-
`selection” embodiments
`– Liversidge at [0134]-[0135]: describes how a user may search a directory to
`find another user with whom the user may wish to communicate (Uniloc’s
`alleged “selection” embodiment)
`– Liversidge at [0176]: describes how to convert an IM communication session to
`a voice communication (Uniloc’s alleged “non-selection” embodiment)
`To the extent these are separate embodiments, they are complementary of
`one another
`
`
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 16-18;
`IPR2017-01683: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 14) at 39-40.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`42
`
`Page 42 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge Discloses “Without Requiring Individual
`Selection”
`
`Uniloc’s expert could not identify any separate embodiments during
`deposition
`
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 16-18;
`IPR2017-01683: Deposition Transcript of William C. Easttom II (Ex, 1032) at 65:6-12, 65:21-66:8.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`43
`
`Page 43 of 44
`
`

`

`Liversidge Does Not Teach Away
`
`Liversidge: “On receipt of the message,” the VTE server uses the message to
`“determine the session type and the participants,” and translates “the personal
`identifiers associated with the respective team members to determine the dialed
`numbers of a preferred telephone device associated with each team member”
`’194 Patent: “[T]he conference call requester may generate 106 a message
`(hereafter referred to as the ‘conference request message’) to the conference server
`identifying parties who are potential participants (‘potential targets’) to a
`conference call. The potential call targets may be identified by an alias, such as a
`user name associated with the conference call targets in the conference call
`requester’s NAD.”
`IPR2017-01683: ’194 Patent (Ex. 1001) at 6:44-51;
`IPR2017-01683: Liversidge (Ex. 1004) at [0062], [0073], [0176];
`IPR2017-01683: Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 15) at 8-9, fn. 2;
`IPR2017-01683: Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 14) at 30-34.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`44
`
`Page 44 of 44
`
`