`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Charter Communications, Inc.
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Sprint Communications Company
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 6,757,907
`Case No. IPR2019-01137
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`V.
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ..................................................................... 1
`
`THE ’7907 PATENT ....................................................................................... 2
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Overview of the ’7907 Patent ................................................................ 2
`
`The Challenged Claims ......................................................................... 4
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED ................................. 12
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL .................................................................. 12
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 13
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`“A video-on-demand system” (claim 1) / “operating a video-on-
`demand system” (claims 21 and 41) ................................................... 13
`
`“viewer control signal” (claims 1, 21, 41) .......................................... 14
`
`“transfer . . . [first/second] video signals” (claim 1) /
`“transferring [first/second] video signals” (claims 21, 41) ................. 15
`
`D.
`
`Agreed Constructions in Comcast Claim Construction Order ............ 16
`
`VI. CLAIMS 1-53 ARE UNPATENTABLE OVER THE PRIOR ART ........... 17
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Overview of the Prior Art .................................................................... 17
`
`Ground 1: Ellis and Yosuke Render Obvious Claims 1-53 ................. 20
`
`Ground 2: Ellis and Yosuke and Browne Render Obvious
`Claims 1-53 ......................................................................................... 52
`
`Ground 3: Ellis and Yosuke and Humpleman Render Obvious
`Claims 1-53 ......................................................................................... 63
`
`VII. MANDATORY NOTICES ........................................................................... 77
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Real Party-in-Interest .......................................................................... 77
`
`Related Matters .................................................................................... 77
`
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel, and Service Information ....................... 78
`
`VIII. CERTIFICATION UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(d) ........................................ 79
`
`IX. GROUNDS FOR STANDING ...................................................................... 79
`
`X.
`
`CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 79
`
`i
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit Description
`
`Ex. 1001 U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907 to Schumacher et al. (“the ’7907 patent”)
`
`Ex. 1002 Declaration of Kevin C. Almeroth (“Almeroth”)
`
`Ex. 1003 Curriculum Vitae of Kevin C. Almeroth, Ph.D.
`
`Ex. 1004 Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`Ex. 1005 RESERVED - OMITTED
`
`Ex. 1006 European Patent Application EP 0 872 987 A2 to Yosuke (“Yosuke”)
`
`Ex. 1007 WO 92/22983 to Browne et al. (“Browne”)
`
`Ex. 1008 U.S. Patent No. 7,913,278 to Ellis et al. (“Ellis”)
`
`Ex. 1009 U.S. Patent No. 6,182,094 to Humpleman et al. (“Humpleman”)
`
`Ex. 1010 Claim Construction Order from Comcast Cable Commc’ns, LLC v.
`Sprint Commc’ns Co., LP, Case No. 2:12-cv-859-JD, Dkt. 162 (Aug.
`15, 2014, E.D. Pa.) (“Comcast Order”)
`
`Ex. 1011 Sprint’s Opening Claim Construction Br. from Comcast Cable
`Commc’ns, LLC v. Sprint Commc’ns Co., LP, Case No. 2:12-cv-859-
`JD, Dkt. 162 (Aug. 15, 2014, E.D. Pa.) (“Sprint Claim Construction
`Br.”)
`
`ii
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`I.
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
`
`Petitioner requests IPR and cancellation of claims 1-53 of the ’7907 patent
`
`(Ex. 1001).1 These claims are directed to a video-on-demand (“VOD”) system that
`
`allows the viewer to use a computer—instead of a set-top box—to remotely control
`
`the display of video content. The ’7907 patent explains that, when it was filed in
`
`2000, VOD systems already allowed a viewer to use a television set-top box to
`
`remotely control the display of video content. (’7907 patent, 1:23-35.) However,
`
`the ’7907 patent emphasized that using a set-top box for remote control was
`
`undesirable because it was a “special component” that could not be used for other
`
`purposes, such as “offer[ing] a selection of displays and bandwidths.” (’7907
`
`patent, 1:38-43.) The ’7907 patent attempts to overcome this alleged shortcoming
`
`by simply replacing the set-top box with a computer that allows the viewer to
`
`remotely control video content displayed on the television, using a high bandwidth
`
`to transfer the video content, or displayed on the computer itself, using a lower
`
`bandwidth to transfer the video content. (’7907 patent, 1:46-55, Abstract.)
`
`But the concept of using a computer to replace a set-top box for remotely
`
`controlling video content displayed on a television or on the computer itself was
`
`well-known before the ’7907 patent. Ellis discloses this same video-on-demand
`
`
`1 In a separate, concurrently filed Inter Partes Review Petitions, IPR2019-01135
`and IPR2019-01139, Petitioner request cancellation of the same claims from the
`’7907 patent.
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`system. Ellis identified the same problem with set-top boxes as the ’7907 patent.
`
`(Ellis, 1:37-45.) And Ellis sought to solve this problem with the same solution as
`
`the ’7907 patent by disclosing the use of a remote program access device to
`
`remotely select video content and direct the system to send and play the selected
`
`video content either on the remote program access device or television equipment.
`
`(Ellis, 2:47-60, 5:9-12, 9:42-49, Fig. 2d.)
`
`Beyond Ellis, the concept of using a computer to remotely control a video
`
`system was known as early as 1991 in Browne and continued to be a known
`
`concept of controlling a VOD system, as shown in Yosuke and Humpleman, before
`
`the invention of the ’7907 patent. Similarly, the concept of varying the bandwidth
`
`for transmitting video content depending on the display has also been a known
`
`concept for providing user flexibility, as demonstrated in Yosuke. Accordingly, the
`
`’7907 patent’s claimed technology was well-known prior to the invention of the
`
`’7907 patent, and rendered obvious by the art submitted in this Petition.
`
`II. THE ’7907 PATENT
`
`A. Overview of the ’7907 Patent
`
` The ’7907 patent’s three independent claims (1, 21, and 41) are generally
`
`directed to methods and systems for using a computer to remotely control a VOD
`
`system, and offering the user the choice of transferring the selected video content
`
`to either a television or to the computer itself at different bandwidths. (’7907
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`patent, 6:42-58, 7:58-8:4, 8:62-9:11.) The patent, like the prior art, recognized
`
`limitations in using set-top boxes for remotely controlling a VOD system, and
`
`attempted to improve VOD systems by replacing the set-top box with a “portable
`
`computer [that] has many other uses and eliminates the cost of a special television
`
`set-top box.” (’7907 patent, 1:53-55.)
`
`The ’7907 patent claims require interactions between a “first communication
`
`system,” which the patent defines as including “optical fiber systems, wire cable
`
`systems, and wireless link systems,” and a “second communication system,” which
`
`the patent defines as the “Internet,” and “in particular, the World-Wide Web.”
`
`(’7907 patent, 2:42-46.) The claims require that transferring video signals to the
`
`second communication system use less bandwidth than transferring video signals
`
`to the first communication system. (See, e.g., ’7907 patent, 6:43-49.) Each
`
`communication system is coupled to its own display, e.g., the first communication
`
`system is coupled to a television display and the second communications system is
`
`coupled to a portable computer with a browser and display. (’7907 patent, 2:46-
`
`48.)
`
`The ’7907 patent claims are directed to a method for controlling the two
`
`communications systems using two separate communication interfaces. (’7907
`
`patent, 3:1-14.) The claimed VOD system transmits a “control screen signal” to
`
`the user over a second communications system, the user then transmits a “viewer
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`control signal” to the VOD system over a communication interface that is coupled
`
`to a particular communications system, and in response, the VOD system transmits
`
`“video signals” over the user’s selected communications system, either the first or
`
`the second communication system, where transmitting the video signals to the
`
`second communications system uses less bandwidth than transmitting video signals
`
`to the first communications system. (’7907 patent, 2:29-3:14.)
`
`Figure 1 of the ’7907 patent, reproduced below, demonstrates the interaction
`
`between the various claimed systems, interfaces, and displays. Figure 6, also
`
`reproduced below, depicts a preferred embodiment of the claimed invention.
`
`B.
`
`The Challenged Claims
`
`This petition challenges claims 1-53, of which claims 1, 21, and 41 are
`
`independent. For ease of reference, the Challenged Claims are reproduced below:
`
`4
`
`
`
`No.
`
`1[P]
`
`1[A]
`
`1[B]
`
`1[C]
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`Claim 1
`
`Claim Limitation
`
`A video-on demand system comprising:
`
`a first communication interface configured to transfer first video
`signals to a first communication system using a first bandwidth;
`
`a second communication interface configured to transfer a control
`screen signal and second video signals to a second communication
`system using a second bandwidth that is less than the first bandwidth;
`and
`
`a processing system configured to transfer the control screen signal to
`the second communication interface, receive a viewer control signal
`from the second communication interface, and transfer the first video
`signals to the first communication interface if the first communication
`system is indicated by the viewer control signal or transfer the second
`video signals to the second communication interface if the second
`communication system is indicated by the viewer control signal.
`
`Claim 2
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the control screen includes video
`display menu.
`
`Claim 3
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 2 wherein second communications interface
`is configured to receive a video display menu selection signal from the second
`communications system, and the processing system is configured to process the
`video display menu selection signal to responsively select the first communications
`interface or the second communications interface to transfer the video signals.
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 3 wherein the video display menu selection
`signal includes a selection of displays to display the video signals.
`
`Claim 4
`
` The video-on-demand system of claim 3 wherein the video display menu selection
`signal includes a selection of bandwidths to transfer the video signals.
`
`Claim 5
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`Claim 6
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the control screen includes a
`video content menu.
`
`Claim 7
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 6 wherein the video content menu includes
`a video preview selection.
`
`Claim 8
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 7 wherein second communications interface
`is configured to receive a video preview selection signal from the second
`communications system, and the processing system is configured to process the
`video preview selection signal to responsively transfer a selected video preview as
`the video signals.
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 8 wherein the control screen includes a
`viewer that is configured to display the selected video previews.
`
`Claim 9
`
`Claim 10
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 6 wherein second communications interface
`is configured to receive a video content menu selection signal from the second
`communications system, and the processing system is configured to process the
`video content menu selection signal to responsively transfer selected video content
`as the video signals.
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 10 wherein the control screen includes a
`viewer configured to display the selected video content.
`
`Claim 11
`
`Claim 12
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the control screen includes a
`video display control menu comprising play, pause, rewind, fast forward, and stop.
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 12 wherein second communications
`interface is configured to receive a video display control menu selection signal
`
`Claim 13
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`from the second communications system, and the processing system is configured
`to process the video display control menu selection signal to implement a selected
`video display control.
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the control screen includes a
`video display control comprising full screen view.
`
`Claim 14
`
`Claim 15
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the first communication interface
`is configured to interface with optical fiber.
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the first communication interface
`is configured to interface with wire cable.
`
`Claim 16
`
`Claim 17
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the first communication interface
`is configured to interface with wireless links.
`
`Claim 18
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the second communication
`interface is configured to interface with an internet.
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 1 wherein the second communication
`interface is configured to interface with a world-wide web.
`
`Claim 19
`
`Claim 20
`
`The video-on-demand system of claim 19 wherein the control screen comprises a
`web page.
`
`Claim 21
`
`A method of operating a video-on-demand system, the method
`comprising:
`
`transferring a control screen signal indicating a control screen to a
`second communication system;
`
`7
`
`21[P]
`
`21[A]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`21[B]
`
`receiving a viewer control signal from the second communication
`system; and
`
`21[C]
`
`transferring first video signals to a first communication system using a
`first bandwidth if the first communication system is indicated by the
`viewer control signal or transferring second video signals to the second
`communication system using a second bandwidth if the second
`communication system is indicated by the viewer control signal
`wherein the second bandwidth is less than the first bandwidth.
`
`Claim 22
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein the control screen includes a video display menu.
`
`Claim 23
`
`The method of claim 22 wherein receiving the viewer control signal comprises
`receiving a video display menu selection signal and transferring the video content
`signals comprises processing the video display menu selection signal to
`responsively select the first communications interface or the second
`communications interface to transfer the video signals.
`
`Claim 24
`
`The method of claim 23 wherein the video display menu selection signal includes a
`selection of displays to display the video signals.
`
`Claim 25
`
`The method of claim 23 wherein the video display menu selection signal includes a
`selection of bandwidths to transfer the video signals.
`
`Claim 26
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein the control screen includes a video content menu.
`
`Claim 27
`
`The method of claim 26 wherein the video content menu includes a video preview
`selection.
`
`The method of claim 27 wherein receiving the viewer control signal comprises
`receiving a video preview selection signal and transferring the video signals
`
`Claim 28
`
`8
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`comprises processing the video preview selection signal to responsively transfer a
`selected video preview as the video signals.
`
`Claim 29
`
`The method of claim 27 wherein receiving the viewer control signal comprises
`receiving a video content selection signal and transferring the video signals
`comprises processing the video content selection signal to responsively transfer
`selected video content as the video signals.
`
`Claim 30
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein the control screen includes a video display control
`menu comprising play, pause, rewind, fast forward, and stop.
`
`Claim 31
`
`The method of claim 30 wherein receiving the viewer control signal comprises
`receiving a video display control menu selection signal and transferring the video
`signals comprises processing the video display control menu selection signal to
`responsively implement a selected video display control.
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein the control screen includes a video display control
`comprising full screen view.
`
`Claim 32
`
`Claim 33
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein transferring the video signals comprises
`interfacing with optical fiber.
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein transferring the video signals comprises
`interfacing with wire cable.
`
`Claim 34
`
`Claim 35
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein transferring the video signals comprises
`interfacing with wireless links.
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein transferring the video signals comprises
`
`Claim 36
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`interfacing with an internet.
`
`Claim 37
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein transferring the video signals comprises
`interfacing with a world-wide web.
`
`Claim 38
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein transferring the control screen signal comprises
`interfacing with an internet.
`
`Claim 39
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein transferring the control screen signal comprises
`interfacing with a world-wide web.
`
`The method of claim 21 wherein the control screen comprises a web page.
`
`Claim 40
`
`Claim 41
`
`41[P]
`
`41[A]
`
`41[B]
`
`41[C]
`
`A product comprising a processor-readable storage medium storing
`processor-executable instructions for performing a method for
`operating a video-on-demand system, the method comprising:
`
`transferring a control screen signal indicating a control screen to a
`second communication system;
`
`receiving a viewer control signal from the second communication
`system; and
`
`transferring first video signals to a first communication system using a
`first bandwidth if the first communication system is indicated by the
`viewer control signal or transferring second video signals to the second
`communication system using a second bandwidth if the second
`communication system is indicated by the viewer control signal
`wherein the second bandwidth is less than the first bandwidth.
`
`The product of claim 41 wherein the control screen includes a video display menu.
`
`Claim 42
`
`Claim 43
`
`10
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`The product of claim 42 wherein receiving the viewer control signal comprises
`receiving a video display menu selection signal and transferring the video content
`signals comprises processing the video display menu selection signal to
`responsively select the first communications interface or the second
`communications interface to transfer the video signals.
`
`Claim 44
`
`The product of claim 43 wherein the video display menu selection signal includes a
`selection of displays to display the video signals.
`
`Claim 45
`
`The product of claim 43 wherein the video display menu selection signal includes a
`selection of bandwidths to transfer the video signals.
`
`Claim 46
`
`The product of claim 41 wherein the control screen includes a video content menu.
`
`Claim 47
`
`The product of claim 46 wherein the video content menu includes a video preview
`selection.
`
`Claim 48
`
`The product of claim 47 wherein receiving the viewer control signal comprises
`receiving a video preview selection signal and transferring the video signals
`comprises processing the video preview selection signal to responsively transfer a
`selected video preview as the video signals.
`
`Claim 49
`
`The product of claim 47 wherein receiving the viewer control signal comprises
`receiving a video content selection signal and transferring the video signals
`comprises processing the video content selection signal to responsively transfer
`selected video content as the video signals.
`
`The product of claim 41 wherein the control screen includes a video display control
`menu comprising play, pause, rewind, fast forward, and stop.
`
`Claim 50
`
`
`
`
`Claim 51
`
`11
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`The product of claim 50 wherein receiving the viewer control signal comprises
`receiving a video display control menu selection signal and transferring the video
`signals comprises processing the video display control menu selection signal to
`responsively implement a selected video display control.
`
`Claim 52
`
`The product of claim 41 wherein the control screen includes a video display control
`comprising full screen view.
`
`The product of claim 41 wherein the control screen comprises a web page.
`
`Claim 53
`
`III.
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Claims 1-53 of the ’7907 patent are unpatentable and should be canceled in
`
`view of the following grounds:
`
`# Ground for Challenge
`Claims 1-53 are obvious over Ellis (Exhibit 1008) and Yosuke (Exhibit
`1006)
`Claims 1-53 are obvious over Ellis (Exhibit 1008), Yosuke (Exhibit
`1006), and Browne (Exhibit 1007)
`Claims 1-53 are obvious over Ellis (Exhibit 1008), Yosuke (Exhibit
`1006), and Humpleman (Exhibit 1009)
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) regarding the ’7907 patent
`
`would have held a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering, computer science, or
`
`a related field with at least five years of experience or research in interactive
`
`12
`
`
`
`systems applicable to digital television, including VOD for cable and Internet
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`delivery. (Almeroth, ¶¶44-46.)
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`Sprint asserted the ’7907 patent in another district court litigation against
`
`different parties. Comcast Cable Commc’ns, LLC v. Sprint Commc’ns Co., LP,
`
`Case No. 2:12-cv-859-JD (E.D. Pa.). The parties in that case proposed
`
`constructions and the district court construed various terms in the ’7907 patent.
`
`Comcast Cable Commc’ns, LLC v. Sprint Commc’ns Co., LP, Case No. 2:12-cv-
`
`859-JD, Dkt. 162 (Aug. 15, 2014, E.D. Pa.) (“Comcast Order”). While the
`
`Comcast court disagreed with Sprint’s proposed constructions (Comcast Order at
`
`28-38), the Board need not resolve those disputes here because the claims read on
`
`the prior art under either Sprint’s proposed construction or the Comcast court’s
`
`construction.2
`
`A.
`
`“A video-on-demand system” (claim 1) / “operating a video-on-
`demand system” (claims 21 and 41)
`
`Sprint’s proposed construction and the Comcast court’s construction for
`
`these terms are set forth below. (Comcast Order at 28-33.)
`
`
`2 Sprint asserted claims 21, 23, and 36 of the ’7907 patent against Comcast in
`Comcast v. Sprint. Accordingly, the Comcast court only construed terms
`contained in those claims. However, the Comcast court’s constructions for those
`terms apply equally to the same or similar terms found in the remaining claims in
`the patent, as like terms should be construed consistently across all claims in a
`patent. See Omega Engineering, Inc, v. Raytek Corp., 334 F.3d 1314, 1334 (Fed.
`Cir. 2003).
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`Sprint
`
`Comcast Claim Construction Order
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, or
`
`Should the Court deem a construction of
`the ordinary meaning necessary:
`operating a system that provides video-
`on-demand
`
`operating a video-on-demand system
`without the use of a set-top box for
`remote control of the video-on-demand
`system
`
`
`For the reasons discussed in Section VI, the prior art renders the challenged
`
`claims invalid under both the Comcast court’s construction and Sprint’s proposed
`
`construction in the prior case. However, Petitioner notes that the Comcast court’s
`
`construction, which Petitioner supports, is confirmed by the ’7907 patent. The
`
`difference between these two constructions is whether the claimed methods for
`
`operating a VOD system must exclude the use of a set-top box for remote control
`
`of the VOD system. The Comcast court correctly found that the ’7907 patent
`
`disclaims the use of a set-top box for remote control by disparaging the prior art’s
`
`reliance on set-top boxes and by not including a set-top box in any one of the
`
`patent’s embodiments. (Comcast Order at 28-32; see also ’7907 patent, 1:36-55.)
`
`The difference between these constructions, however, does not impact the outcome
`
`of this proceeding, because the prior art, to the extent a set-top box is disclosed,
`
`does not use a set-top box for remote control of the VOD system.
`
`B.
`
`“viewer control signal” (claims 1, 21, 41)
`
`Sprint’s proposed construction and the Comcast court’s construction for this
`
`term are set forth below. (Comcast Order at 34-35.)
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`Sprint
`
`Comcast Claim Construction Order
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, or
`
`Should the Court deem a construction of
`the ordinary meaning necessary: a
`signal reflecting viewer control
`
`a viewer control signal generated and
`processed without the involvement of a
`set-top box for remote control of the
`video-on-demand system.
`
`
`Petitioner notes that the Comcast court’s construction, which Petitioner
`
`supports, is confirmed by the ’7907 patent. The difference between these
`
`constructions is related to the dispute presented with the prior term—whether a
`
`viewer control signal can be generated without the use of a set-top box for remote
`
`control of the VOD system. For the same reasons set forth above, the Comcast
`
`court held that disclaimer also applies to this term.3 (Comcast Order at 34-35.)
`
`C.
`
`“transfer . . . [first/second] video signals” (claim 1) / “transferring
`[first/second] video signals” (claims 21, 41)
`
`Sprint’s proposed construction and the Comcast court’s construction for
`
`these terms are set forth below. (Comcast Order at 36-38.)
`
`Sprint
`
`Comcast Claim Construction Order
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, or
`
`Should the Court deem a construction of
`the ordinary meaning necessary:
`sending [first/second] video signals
`
`in response to the viewer control signal,
`transferring [first/second] video signals
`
`
`
`3 The Comcast court found that “[t]he specification does not disparage the use of a
`set-top box for other purposes, such as for decod[ing a video signal] and
`present[ing] it to a television” (Comcast Order at 35), and thus the Comcast Order
`permits the use of a set-top box for purposes other than for remote control.
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`For the reasons discussed in Section VI, the prior art renders the challenged
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`claims invalid under both the Comcast court’s construction and Sprint’s proposed
`
`construction in the prior case. Petitioner notes that the Comcast court’s
`
`construction, which Petitioner supports, is confirmed by the ’7907 patent. As the
`
`Comcast court noted, there is no disagreement in the construction about what it
`
`means to transfer a video signal; rather, the constructions differ on the issue of
`
`whether the video signal must be sent in response to a viewer control signal.
`
`(Comcast Order at 37.) The Comcast court correctly found that as described in the
`
`’7907 specification, the video signals are transferred in response to the viewer
`
`control signal received from the computer, and therefore construed this term as
`
`such. (Comcast Order at 36-37; ’7907 patent, Abstract, 2:61-3:14 , 4:5-7.)
`
`D. Agreed Constructions in Comcast Claim Construction Order
`
`The parties in Comcast v. Sprint agreed that: (1) “control screen signal”
`
`should be construed as “a signal that defines a control screen” and (2)
`
`“implementing a viewer control selection” should be construed as “in response to
`
`the video control signal, implementing a viewer control selection.” (Comcast
`
`Order at 42.) For the purposes of this Petition, Petitioner applies these
`
`constructions in Section VI.
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`VI. CLAIMS 1-53 ARE UNPATENTABLE OVER THE PRIOR ART
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`A. Overview of the Prior Art
`
`1.
`
`Ellis
`
`Ellis “relates to interactive television program guide video systems, and
`
`more particularly, to interactive television program guide systems that provide
`
`remote access to program guide functionality.” (Ellis, 1:19-22.) Ellis explains that
`
`“[i]nteractive television program guides are typically implemented on set-top
`
`boxes located in the homes of users.” (Ellis, 1:37-38.) The problem with set-top
`
`boxes, as explained in Ellis, is that set-top boxes are not portable, and therefore,
`
`“the user cannot use the program guide to adjust program reminder settings, to
`
`select programs for recording, to purchase pay-per-view programs, or to perform
`
`other program guide functions without that user being physically located in the
`
`same room in the home.” (Ellis, 1:40-45.) The invention in Ellis seeks to “provide
`
`an interactive television program guide system in which the program guide may be
`
`remotely accessed by the user” on a remote program access device. (Ellis, 2:23-
`
`28.) This remote access program guide may provide a user with an opportunity to
`
`remotely play a stored program or a currently broadcasted program on the remote
`
`program access device or on television equipment. (Ellis, 2:47-60, 5:9-12, Fig.
`
`2d.)
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`2.
`
`Yosuke
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`Yosuke teaches a VOD system: “VOD system is a system for providing
`
`specific video information and audio information through a plurality of channels
`
`on demand of a plurality of clients for providing information.” (Yosuke, 3:20-26.)
`
`The VOD system in Yosuke provides video signals to clients in response to a
`
`client’s instructions from a touch panel. (Yosuke, 3:25-28, 6:24-31.) In response
`
`to these instructions, video signals are sent from the VOD server to a display.
`
`(Yosuke, 3:25-28.)
`
`Yosuke discloses displaying video images on a first and/or second display.
`
`(Yosuke, Fig. 2, 5:24-6:30.) Yosuke discloses a first video display for “receiving
`
`video signals sent from the VOD server for video image display.” (Yosuke, 6:24-
`
`31.) Yosuke discloses a second video display (i.e., a touch panel) “for displaying
`
`video signals outputted from the client computer and for giving instructions to the
`
`client computer.” (Yosuke, 6:24-31.) Yosuke discloses that the transmission line
`
`for transmitting video content to the first video display is a higher bandwidth
`
`transmission medium than the transmission line for transmitting video content to
`
`the second video display. (Yosuke, 12:34-42.)
`
`In Figure 7, Yosuke sets forth an embodiment of a control screen that allows
`
`a user to select audio video data (“AV data”) to view from the second video
`
`display. (Yosuke, Fig. 7, Fig. 8, 10:15-47.) Upon a user making a selection on the
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01137
`U.S. Patent No. 6,757,907
`
`control screen for AV data, the server receives the user selection and sends an
`
`instruction to control the VOD server from the client computer from the WWW.
`
`(Yosuke, 7:42-8:5, 11:41-46, 12:34-36.)
`
`3.
`
`Browne
`
`Browne teaches a VOD system “capable of receiving a plurality of
`
`simultaneous input signals” that are recorded and an user can request to view these
`
`recorded input signals on one or more output monitors. (Browne, 1, 13.) To view
`
`recorded input