INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`FEDEX CORP., FEDERAL EXPRESS
`CORP., FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE
`SYSTEM, INC., FEDEX FREIGHT, INC.,
`FEDEX CUSTOM CRITICAL INC.,
`FEDEX OFFICE AND PRINT SERVICES,
`INC., and GENCO DISTRIBUTION
`SYSTEM, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:16-cv-00980-JRG
`The Hon. Rodney Gilstrap
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PRELIMINARY CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND PRELIMINARY
`IDENTIFICATION OF EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO P.R. 4-2
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to Rule of Practice for Patent Cases P.R. 4-2 and the Court’s February 16, 2017
`
`Docket Control Order (Dkt No. 54), Defendants (“FedEx”) provide their preliminary proposed
`
`claim constructions and preliminary identification of extrinsic evidence, attached hereto as
`
`Appendix A, for U.S. Patent Nos. 6,633,900 (“the ’900 patent”), 6,909,356 (“the ’356 patent”),
`
`7,199,715 (“the ’715 patent”), 8,494,581 (“the ’581 patent”), and 9,047,586 (“the ’586 patent”)
`
`(collectively “the Asserted Patents”) to Plaintiff (“IV2”). Terms construed include those
`
`identified in each party’s P.R. 4-1 disclosures, as modified during the parties’ subsequent
`
`meeting and conferring pursuant to P.R. 4-2(c).
`
`
`
`1
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 1
`
`IV Exhibit 2122
`FedEx v. IV
`Case IPR2017-02039
`
`

`

`
`
`FedEx produces, pursuant to P.R. 4-2(b), copies of the preliminarily identified extrinsic
`
`evidence.1 See FDXIV00177169-FDXIV00177415. FedEx reserves the right to offer further
`
`extrinsic evidence to rebut preliminary claim constructions, testimony, or extrinsic evidence IV2
`
`offers in support of its claim construction positions. In accordance with United States Court of
`
`Appeals for the Federal Circuit precedent, FedEx contends that the following information is part
`
`of the intrinsic record of the Asserted Patents, and therefore does not fall within P.R. 4-2’s
`
`requirement for identification in this paper: (1) the Asserted Patents; (2) statements in the file
`
`histories of the Asserted Patents and related patents; and (3) all references cited in the file
`
`histories of the Asserted Patents and related patents
`
`In addition, FedEx may provide declarations and/or testimony of one or more of its
`
`experts, including, but not limited to, Mr. David Williams, Dr. Jason Hill, Dr. Gary Gaulker,
`
`and/or Dr. Theodore Rappaport, as evidence of how one having ordinary skill in the art would
`
`interpret the foregoing terms. Such declarations and/or testimony may address both the general
`
`understanding of the relevant terms and phrases in the field of the Asserted Patents as well as the
`
`understanding of terms and phrases in the context of the Asserted Patents’ specifications and
`
`claims. FedEx’s experts may also provide testimony concerning the appropriate level of skill in
`
`the art at the time of the inventions and the background of the technology at issue at the time of
`
`the inventions. FedEx reserves the right to introduce expert declarations or testimony to rebut
`
`IV2’s claim construction positions and any expert declarations or testimony introduced by IV2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Although not extrinsic evidence, for the convenience of later referencing certain documents
`during claim construction and otherwise, FedEx has also produced documents from PTAB
`proceedings examining the asserted patents along with its production of preliminarily identified
`extrinsic evidence.
`
`
`
`2
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 2
`
`

`

`Dated: June 14, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Jeffery A. Berkowitz
`Jeffrey A. Berkowitz (VA Bar No. 65149)
`Email: jeffrey.berkowitz@finnegan.com
`Michael V. Young, Sr. (pro hac vice)
`Email: michael.young@finnegan.com
`Daniel C. Tucker (pro hac vice)
`Email: daniel.tucker@finnegan.com
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`Two Freedom Square
`11955 Freedom Drive, Suite 800
`Reston, VA 20190-5675
`(571) 203-2700
`Fax: 202-408-4400
`
`Aidan C. Skoyles (pro hac vice)
`Email: aidan.skoyles@finnegan.com
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`901 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20001
`(202) 408-4000
`Fax: (202) 408-4400
`
`Eric H. Findlay (Bar No. 00789886)
`Email: efindlay@findlaycraft.com
`Roger B. Craft (Bar No. 0004972020)
`Email: bcraft@findlaycraft.com
`FINDLAY CRAFT, P.C.
`102 North College Avenue, Suite 900
`Tyler, TX 75702
`(903) 534-1100
`Fax: (903) 534-1137
`
`Attorneys for Defendants FedEx Corp., Federal
`Express Corp., FedEx Ground Package System,
`Inc., FedEx Freight, Inc., FedEx Custom Critical,
`Inc., FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc., and
`GENCO Distribution System, Inc.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 3
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on June 14, 2017, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document
`
`was served on all counsel of record via electronic mail.
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Mark A. Rosenberger
`Mark A. Rosenberger
`Case Manager
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 4
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPENDIX A
`
`APPENDIX A
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 5
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`A.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,633,900
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`“distributing work
`order assignment data
`to a field crew”
`
`1
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`“distributing, to a group of
`people in the field, data
`describing a task to be
`performed by the group of
`people in the field”
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`American Heritage College Dictionary (3d Ed. 1997)
`(definitions of “assignment,” “assign”). FDXIV00177313-
`FDXIV00177316.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (9th Ed. 1988)
`(definitions of “assignment,” “assign”). FDXIV00177308-
`FDXIV00177310.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (10th Ed. 2001)
`(definitions of “assignment,” “assign”). FDXIV00177303-
`FDXIV00177305.
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definitions of “assignment,” “assign”). FDXIV00177319-
`FDXIV00177322.
`American Heritage College Dictionary (3d Ed. 1997) (definition
`of “crew”). FDXIV00177313- FDXIV00177314,
`FDXIV00177317.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (9th Ed. 1998) (definition
`of “crew”). FDXIV00177308- FDXIV00177309,
`FDXIV00177311.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (10th Ed. 2001)
`(definition of “crew”). FDXIV00177303- FDXIV00177304,
`FDXIV00177306.
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definition of “crew”). FDXIV00177323-FDXIV00177325.
`
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “distributing work order
`
`
`
`1
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 6
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`“work order
`assignment data”
`
`1
`
`“data describing a task to
`be performed by the group
`of people in the field”
`
`assignment data to a field crew” should be construed to mean
`“distributing, to a group of people in a field, data describing a
`task to be performed by the group of people in the field.” He
`will explain the technology, the state of the art at the time the
`patent application was filed, the meaning of claim terms and
`phrases as they would be understood by those of ordinary skill
`in the art at the time of the alleged invention, how those of
`ordinary skill in the art would have understood statements made
`during prosecution of the application, the indefiniteness of any
`of the asserted claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the
`relevant art. He may offer a declaration on any of the above
`topics and/or to respond to IV’s contentions, any expert
`testimony on behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`American Heritage College Dictionary (3d Ed. 1997)
`(definitions of “assignment,” “assign”). FDXIV00177313-
`FDXIV00177316.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (9th Ed. 1998)
`(definitions of “assignment,” “assign”). FDXIV00177308-
`FDXIV00177310.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (10th Ed. 2001)
`(definitions of “assignment,” “assign”). FDXIV00177303-
`FDXIV00177305.
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definitions of “assignment,” “assign”). FDXIV00177319-
`FDXIV00177322.
`
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “work order assignment
`data” should be construed to mean “data describing a task to be
`
`
`
`2
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 7
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`“field crew”
`
`1
`
`“a group of people in the
`field”
`
`performed by the group of people in the field.” He will explain
`the technology, the state of the art at the time the patent
`application was filed, the meaning of claim terms and phrases as
`they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at
`the time of the alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in
`the art would have understood statements made during
`prosecution of the application, the indefiniteness of any of the
`asserted claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the relevant
`art. He may offer a declaration on any of the above topics
`and/or to respond to IV’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`American Heritage College Dictionary (3d Ed. 1997) (definition
`of “crew”). FDXIV00177313- FDXIV00177314,
`FDXIV00177317.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (9th Ed. 1988) (definition
`of “crew”). FDXIV00177308- FDXIV00177309,
`FDXIV00177311.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (10th Ed. 2001)
`(definition of “crew”). FDXIV00177303- FDXIV00177304,
`FDXIV00177306.
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definition of “crew”). FDXIV00177323-FDXIV00177325.
`
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “field crew” should be
`construed to mean “a group of people in a field.” He will
`explain the technology, the state of the art at the time the patent
`application was filed, the meaning of claim terms and phrases as
`they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at
`
`
`
`3
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 8
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`“a system having an
`enterprise computing
`system and at least one
`mobile field unit”
`
`1
`
`“a system having an
`enterprise computing
`system and at least one
`mobile field unit, where all
`graphical user interfaces on
`the mobile device are built
`using HTML generated
`dynamically by a CGI or
`stored procedures at the
`enterprise computing
`system and communication
`between the enterprise
`computing system and
`mobile field unit uses non-
`proprietary technology”
`
`“mobile field unit”
`
`1
`
`“a mobile device in which
`all graphical user interfaces
`are built using HTML; no
`
`the time of the alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in
`the art would have understood statements made during
`prosecution of the application, the indefiniteness of any of the
`asserted claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the relevant
`art. He may offer a declaration on any of the above topics
`and/or to respond to IV’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “a system having an
`enterprise computing system and at least one mobile field unit”
`should be construed to mean “a system having an enterprise
`computing system and at least one mobile field unit, where all
`graphical user interfaces on the mobile device are built using
`HTML generated dynamically by a CGI or stored procedures at
`the enterprise computing system and communication between
`the enterprise computing system and mobile field unit uses non-
`proprietary technology.” He will explain the technology, the
`state of the art at the time the patent application was filed, the
`meaning of claim terms and phrases as they would be
`understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in the art would
`have understood statements made during prosecution of the
`application, the indefiniteness of any of the asserted claims, and
`the level of ordinary skill in the relevant art. He may offer a
`declaration on any of the above topics and/or to respond to IV’s
`contentions, any expert testimony on behalf of IV, or for the
`Court’s benefit.
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “mobile field unit”
`should be construed to mean “a mobile device in which all
`graphical user interfaces are built using HTML; no proprietary
`
`
`
`4
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 9
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`proprietary code is used to
`present data”
`
`“notifying the group of
`people in the field of
`successful login”
`
`“in response to the input of
`login data corresponding to
`and entered by the group of
`people in the field”
`
`1
`
`1
`
`“notifying the field
`crew of successful
`login”
`
`“in response to the
`input of field crew
`login data”
`
`
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`code is used to present data.” He will explain the technology,
`the state of the art at the time the patent application was filed,
`the meaning of claim terms and phrases as they would be
`understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in the art would
`have understood statements made during prosecution of the
`application, the indefiniteness of any of the asserted claims, and
`the level of ordinary skill in the relevant art. He may offer a
`declaration on any of the above topics and/or to respond to IV’s
`contentions, any expert testimony on behalf of IV, or for the
`Court’s benefit.
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “notifying the field crew
`of a successful login” should be construed to mean “notifying
`the group of people in the field of successful login.” He will
`explain the technology, the state of the art at the time the patent
`application was filed, the meaning of claim terms and phrases as
`they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at
`the time of the alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in
`the art would have understood statements made during
`prosecution of the application, the indefiniteness of any of the
`asserted claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the relevant
`art. He may offer a declaration on any of the above topics
`and/or to respond to IV’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “in response to the input
`of field crew login data” should be construed to mean “in
`response to the input of login data corresponding to and entered
`by the group of people in the field.” He will explain the
`technology, the state of the art at the time the patent application
`
`5
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 10
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`“verifying field crew
`identity”
`
`1
`
`“verifying, by the
`enterprise computing
`system, the identity of the
`group of people in the
`field”
`
`“retrieving and
`presenting a list of
`assignments”
`
`1
`
`“retrieving and presenting
`assignment data arranged
`as a list of HTML links”
`
`was filed, the meaning of claim terms and phrases as they
`would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at the
`time of the alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in the
`art would have understood statements made during prosecution
`of the application, the indefiniteness of any of the asserted
`claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the relevant art. He
`may offer a declaration on any of the above topics and/or to
`respond to IV’s contentions, any expert testimony on behalf of
`IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “verifying field crew
`identity” should be construed to mean “verifying, by the
`enterprise computing system, the identity of the group of people
`in the field.” He will explain the technology, the state of the art
`at the time the patent application was filed, the meaning of
`claim terms and phrases as they would be understood by those
`of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention,
`how those of ordinary skill in the art would have understood
`statements made during prosecution of the application, the
`indefiniteness of any of the asserted claims, and the level of
`ordinary skill in the relevant art. He may offer a declaration on
`any of the above topics and/or to respond to IV’s contentions,
`any expert testimony on behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`American Heritage College Dictionary (3d Ed. 1997) (definition
`of “list”). FDXIV00177313-FDXIV00177314,
`FDXIV00177318.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (9th Ed. 1988) (definition
`of “list”). FDXIV00177308-FDXIV00177309,
`FDXIV00177312.
`Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (10th Ed. 2001)
`
`
`
`6
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 11
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`(definition of “list”). FDXIV00177303-FDXIV00177304,
`FDXIV00177307.
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definition of “list”). FDXIV00177326-FDXIV00177331.
`The IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics
`Terms (6th ed. 1996) (definition of “list”). FDXIV00177300-
`FDXIV00177302.
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “retrieving and
`presenting a list of assignments” should be construed to mean
`“retrieving and presenting assignment data arranged as a list of
`HTML links.” He will explain the technology, the state of the
`art at the time the patent application was filed, the meaning of
`claim terms and phrases as they would be understood by those
`of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention,
`how those of ordinary skill in the art would have understood
`statements made during prosecution of the application, the
`indefiniteness of any of the asserted claims, and the level of
`ordinary skill in the relevant art. He may offer a declaration on
`any of the above topics and/or to respond to IV’s contentions,
`any expert testimony on behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`FedEx Corp. v. Intellectual Ventures II LLC, IPR 2017-00741,
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC’s Patent Owner Preliminary
`Response (PTAB May 2, 2017). FDXIV00177362-
`FDXIV00177366.
`
`FedEx Corp. v. Intellectual Ventures II LLC, IPR 2017-00743,
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC’s Patent Owner Preliminary
`Response (PTAB May 2, 2017). FDXIV00177397-
`
`“retrieving detailed
`assignment data”
`
`1
`
`“retrieving, from the
`enterprise computing
`system, detailed data
`regarding the assignment
`that the field crew is
`working on”
`
`
`
`7
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 12
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`FDXIV00177400.
`
`Testimony of Mr. David Williams that “retrieving detailed
`assignment data” should be construed to mean “retrieving, from
`the enterprise computing system, detailed data regarding the
`assignment that the field crew is working on.” He will explain
`the technology, the state of the art at the time the patent
`application was filed, the meaning of claim terms and phrases as
`they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at
`the time of the alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in
`the art would have understood statements made during
`prosecution of the application, the indefiniteness of any of the
`asserted claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the relevant
`art. He may offer a declaration on any of the above topics
`and/or to respond to IV’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 13
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`B.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,909,356
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`“obtaining identity
`information regarding
`an entity which enters a
`controlled space”
`
`1
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`“receiving information
`from a human, or
`automated device designed
`to function in place of a
`human, identifying the
`human or device upon
`entry into a storage
`location having a
`mechanism limiting
`unauthorized access to the
`storage location”
`
`“monitoring, using a
`wireless tracking
`system . . . locations
`and movements of the
`
`1
`
`“monitoring, using a close
`proximity tracking system,
`the locations and
`movements of a human, or
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definition of “robot”). FDXIV00177195-FDXIV00177197.
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definition of “automation”). FDXIV00177172-
`FDXIV00177175.
`
`Testimony of Dr. Jason Hill and/or Dr. Gary Gaulker that
`“obtaining identity information regarding an entity which enters
`a controlled space” should be construed to mean “receiving
`information from a human, or automated device designed to
`function in place of a human, identifying the human or device
`upon entry into a storage location having a mechanism limiting
`unauthorized access to the storage location.” He will explain
`the technology, the state of the art at the time the patent
`application was filed, the meaning of claim terms and phrases as
`they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at
`the time of the alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in
`the art would have understood statements made during
`prosecution of the application, the indefiniteness of any of the
`asserted claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the relevant
`art. He may offer a declaration on any of the above topics
`and/or to respond to IV’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`Testimony of Dr. Jason Hill and/or Dr. Gary Gaulker that
`“monitoring, using a wireless tracking system . . . locations and
`movements of the entity and objects” should be construed to
`mean “monitoring, using a close proximity tracking system, the
`
`
`
`9
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 14
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`entity and objects”
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`automated device designed
`to function in place of a
`human, and inventoried
`items”
`
`1
`
`“automatically
`associating . . . the
`identity information
`regarding the entity
`with status information
`regarding additions,
`removals, returns,
`defective status, or
`movements of the
`objects to/from/within
`the controlled space”
`
`“without human
`intervention, specifying a
`relationship using the
`computer system between
`the identity information for
`each human, or automated
`device designed to function
`in place of a human, that
`enters the controlled space
`with information regarding
`an event in inventory
`showing object additions,
`object removals, object
`returns, object defective
`statuses, or object
`movements to, from, and
`within the controlled
`space”
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`locations and movements of a human, or automated device
`designed to function in place of a human, and inventoried
`items.” He will explain the technology, the state of the art at the
`time the patent application was filed, the meaning of claim
`terms and phrases as they would be understood by those of
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention, how
`those of ordinary skill in the art would have understood
`statements made during prosecution of the application, the
`indefiniteness of any of the asserted claims, and the level of
`ordinary skill in the relevant art. He may offer a declaration on
`any of the above topics and/or to respond to IV’s contentions,
`any expert testimony on behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`The IEEE Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standard Terms
`(6th ed. 1996) (definition of “association”). FDXIV00177169-
`FDXIV00177171.
`
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definition of “automation”). FDXIV00177172-
`FDXIV00177175.
`
`Testimony of Dr. Jason Hill and/or Dr. Gary Gaulker that
`“automatically associating . . . the identity information
`regarding the entity with status information regarding additions,
`removals, returns, defective status, or movements of the objects
`to/from/within the controlled space” should be construed to
`mean “without human intervention, specifying a relationship
`using the computer system between the identity information for
`each human, or automated device designed to function in place
`
`
`
`10
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 15
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`of a human, that enters the controlled space with information
`regarding an event in inventory showing object additions, object
`removals, object returns, object defective statuses, or object
`movements to, from, and within the controlled space.” He will
`explain the technology, the state of the art at the time the patent
`application was filed, the meaning of claim terms and phrases as
`they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art at
`the time of the alleged invention, how those of ordinary skill in
`the art would have understood statements made during
`prosecution of the application, the indefiniteness of any of the
`asserted claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the relevant
`art. He may offer a declaration on any of the above topics
`and/or to respond to IV’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`The IEEE Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standard Terms
`(6th ed. 1996) (definition of “association”). FDXIV00177169-
`FDXIV00177171.
`
`The Oxford English Dictionary (2d ed. 1989, reprinted 2000)
`(definition of “automation”). FDXIV00177172-
`FDXIV00177175.
`
`Testimony of Dr. Jason Hill and/or Dr. Gary Gaulker that
`“transmitting the status information and the associated identity
`information to a server communicatively coupled to the
`computer system and configured to automatically notify a user
`of the status information, wherein at least one of the objects is
`automatically returned or picked up as a result of such
`
`“transmitting the
`information regarding an
`event in inventory and the
`identity information for
`each human, or automated
`device designed to function
`in place of a human, that
`the computer system has
`specified a relationship
`between the identity
`information and the status
`information, to a server
`wirelessly or physically
`linked with the computer
`system to enable exchange
`of information through a
`
`11
`
`1
`
`“transmitting the status
`information and the
`associated identity
`information to a server
`communicatively
`coupled to the
`computer system and
`configured to
`automatically notify a
`user of the status
`information, wherein at
`least one of the objects
`is automatically
`returned or picked up
`as a result of such
`notification”
`
`
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 16
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`system of interconnections
`and programmed to notify
`a user, without human
`intervention, of the
`information regarding an
`event in inventory, wherein
`the server is distinct from
`the computer system that
`specifies a relationship
`between the identity
`information and status
`information, wherein at
`least one of the inventoried
`items is returned to or
`picked up from the storage
`location having a
`mechanism limiting
`unauthorized access to the
`storage location without
`human intervention in
`response to the notification
`of the status information to
`the user”
`
`“notifying the user of
`whether or not the
`addition, removal,
`return, defective status,
`
`4
`
`“notifying the user with
`every notification whether
`or not the addition,
`removal, return, defective
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`notification” should be construed to mean “transmitting the
`information regarding an event in inventory and the identity
`information for each human, or automated device designed to
`function in place of a human, that the computer system has
`specified a relationship between the identity information and the
`status information, to a server wirelessly or physically linked
`with the computer system to enable exchange of information
`through a system of interconnections and programmed to notify
`a user, without human intervention, of the information
`regarding an event in inventory, wherein the server is distinct
`from the computer system that specifies a relationship between
`the identity information and status information, wherein at least
`one of the inventoried items is returned to or picked up from the
`storage location having a mechanism limiting unauthorized
`access to the storage location without human intervention in
`response to the notification of the status information to the
`user.” He will explain the technology, the state of the art at the
`time the patent application was filed, the meaning of claim
`terms and phrases as they would be understood by those of
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention, how
`those of ordinary skill in the art would have understood
`statements made during prosecution of the application, the
`indefiniteness of any of the asserted claims, and the level of
`ordinary skill in the relevant art. He may offer a declaration on
`any of the above topics and/or to respond to IV’s contentions,
`any expert testimony on behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`Testimony of Dr. Jason Hill and/or Dr. Gary Gaulker that
`“notifying the user of whether or not the addition, removal,
`return, defective status, or movement of the objects is
`authorized or not” should be construed to mean “notifying the
`
`
`
`12
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 17
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`or movement of the
`objects is authorized or
`not.”
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`status, or movement of
`inventory items at the
`storage location having a
`mechanism limiting
`unauthorized access to the
`storage location is
`authorized or not”
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`user with every notification whether or not the addition,
`removal, return, defective status, or movement of inventory
`items at the storage location having a mechanism limiting
`unauthorized access to the storage location is authorized or
`not.” He will explain the technology, the state of the art at the
`time the patent application was filed, the meaning of claim
`terms and phrases as they would be understood by those of
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention, how
`those of ordinary skill in the art would have understood
`statements made during prosecution of the application, the
`indefiniteness of any of the asserted claims, and the level of
`ordinary skill in the relevant art. He may offer a declaration on
`any of the above topics and/or to respond to IV’s contentions,
`any expert testimony on behalf of IV, or for the Court’s benefit.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`Exhibit 2122 Page 18
`
`

`

`APPENDIX A: FedEx’s Preliminary Claim Constructions and Preliminary Identification of Extrinsic Evidence (P.R. 4-2)
`
`
`C.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,199,715
`
`Proposed Terms
`
`Claim(s)
`
`“tracking tags at
`several successive
`points of [a/the]
`business process”
`
`1, 9, 11
`
`FedEx’s Preliminary
`Construction
`“tracking any device or
`marking used to identify a
`product or process along an
`uninterrupted sequence of
`points for completing a
`service or product”
`
`“attempting to read
`each tag at each
`successive point” /
`reading each tag at
`
`1,