Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`Claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`Intel Corporation
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`ACQIS LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`__________________
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01110
`
`__________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 9,703,750
`CHALLENGING CLAIMS 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 312 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`Claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
`
`I.
`
`II. Mandatory Notices........................................................................................... 1
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Related Matters ...................................................................................... 1
`
`Real Parties-in-Interest .......................................................................... 8
`
`Counsel .................................................................................................. 8
`
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)) ....................................... 9
`
`III.
`
`Fees ................................................................................................................ 10
`
`IV. Grounds for Standing ..................................................................................... 10
`
`V.
`
`Identification of Challenge and Relief Requested ......................................... 10
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Identification of Prior Art .................................................................... 10
`
`Statutory Grounds of Unpatentability ................................................. 11
`
`VI. Overview of the ’750 Patent .......................................................................... 11
`
`VII. The ’750 Patent Is Not Entitled To A Priority Date Before April 15,
`2011 ............................................................................................................... 17
`
`A.
`
`The Challenged Claims Recite Limitations Not Supported By
`The ’436 Patent’s Parent Applications ................................................ 19
`
`1.
`
`The Purported Written Description Support For The
`“Integrated CPU-Graphics/Controller” and “CPU-
`LVDS” Limitations Was First Introduced In The ’436
`Patent ......................................................................................... 22
`
`B.
`
`The ’436 Patent Introduced Subject Matter Not Found In Its
`Parent Applications ............................................................................. 24
`
`i
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1. Materials Incorporated By Reference Must Be Identified
`“With Detailed Particularity” and “Specific[ity]” .................... 26
`
`
`
`2.
`
`’436 Patent’s Parent Applications Never Incorporated By
`Reference the ’886 Provisional ................................................. 27
`
`C.
`
`The Challenged Claims Are Not Entitled To A Priority Date
`Earlier Than The Filing Date Of The ’436 Patent .............................. 31
`
`VIII. Prosecution History of the ’750 Patent .......................................................... 32
`
`IX. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ................................................................. 32
`
`X.
`
`Claim Construction ........................................................................................ 32
`
`XI. Specific Grounds for Challenge .................................................................... 35
`
`A. Ground I: Chu330 in combination with Cupps Render Obvious
`Claims 1, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44, and 48-50 .............................................. 35
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`Prior Art .................................................................................... 35
`
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 54
`
`Claim 21 .................................................................................... 85
`
`Claim 24 .................................................................................... 95
`
`Claim 31 .................................................................................. 110
`
`Claim 34 .................................................................................. 111
`
`Claim 44 .................................................................................. 112
`
`Claim 48 .................................................................................. 116
`
`Claim 49 .................................................................................. 120
`
`10. Claim 50 .................................................................................. 122
`
`ii
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`
`
`B.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ground II: Chu330 in combination with Cupps and Helms
`Render Obvious Claims 2, 4, and 45 ................................................. 125
`
`
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Prior Art .................................................................................. 125
`
`Claim 2 .................................................................................... 127
`
`Claim 4 .................................................................................... 135
`
`Claim 45 .................................................................................. 137
`
`XII. Discretionary Factors ................................................................................... 137
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d) – Prosecution History ........................................ 137
`
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a) – General Plastic (GP) Factors and Valve
`Factor ................................................................................................. 139
`
`C.
`
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a) – Fintiv Factors .................................................. 140
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`Factor 1 ................................................................................... 140
`
`Factor 2 ................................................................................... 141
`
`Factor 3 ................................................................................... 142
`
`Factor 4 ................................................................................... 142
`
`Factor 5 ................................................................................... 144
`
`Factor 6 ................................................................................... 144
`
`XIII. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 144
`
`iii
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`
`
`
`Cases
`
`Advanced Bionics, LLC v. Med-El Elektromedizinische Gerate GmbH,
`IPR2019-01469, Paper 6 (PTAB Feb. 13, 2020) ........................................139
`
`Advanced Display System, Inc. v. Kent State University, 212 F.3d 1272 (Fed.
`Cir. 2000) ................................................................................................ 29, 35
`
`ALZA Corp. v. Andrx Pharms., LLC, 603 F.3d 935 (Fed. Cir. 2010) .....................32
`
`Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc., IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB March 20, 2020) .. 142,
`143
`
`Ariad Pharms., Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2010) .................31
`
`Auto. Techs. Int’l, Inc. v. BMW of N. Am., Inc., 501 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir.
`2007) ..............................................................................................................31
`
`Droplets, Inc., v. E*Trade Bank, 887 F.3d 1309 (Fed. Cir. 2018) ..........................26
`
`Duodecad IT Services Luxembourg S.A.R.L, et al. v. WAG Acquisition, LLC
`IPR2015-01036, Paper 17 (PTAB Oct. 20, 2016) .......................................133
`
`Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk A/S, 108 F.3d 1361, (Fed. Cir. 1997)..................32
`
`Harari v. Hollmer, 602 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2010) ................................................26
`
`Hollmer v. Harari, 681 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ........................................ passim
`
`In re NTP, Inc, 654 F.3d, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ...................................................140
`
`In re Seversky, 474 F.2d 671 (CCPA 1973) ............................................................30
`
`Navistar, Inc. v. Fatigue Fracture Tech., LLC, IPR2018-00853, Paper 13
`(PTAB Sept. 12, 2018) ................................................................................140
`
`PowerOasis, Inc. v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 522 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2008) ...........140
`
`iv
`
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Acorn Semi, LLC, IPR2020-01272, Paper
`20 (Feb. 10, 2021) ........................................................................................143
`
`
`
`Sand Revolution II, LLC v. Cont’l Intermodal Group-Trucking LLC,
`IPR2019-01393, Paper 24 (PTAB June 16, 2020) ......................................143
`
`See Google Inc. v. Uniloc 2017, IPR2020-00396, Paper 11 (PTAB Aug. 03,
`2020) ............................................................................................................141
`
`Toshiba Am. Info. Sys. V. Walletex Microelectronics Ltd., IPR2018-01538,
`Paper 11 (PTAB March 05, 2019) ...............................................................141
`
`Vivid Techs., Inc. v, Am. Sci. & Engʼg, Inc., 200 F.3d 795 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ..........34
`
`VMware, Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC, IPR2020-00470, Paper 13
`(PTAB Aug. 18, 2020) ................................................................................145
`
`Zenon Envtl., Inc. v. U.S. Filter, 506 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ...........................26
`
`Zip Top, LLC v. Stasher, Inc., IPR2018-01216, Paper 14 (PTAB Jan. 17,
`2019) ............................................................................................................140
`
`Statutes
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ............................................................................................ 10, 11
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 ........................................................................................................11
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112 ........................................................................................................19
`
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a) .................................................................................. 11, 141, 142
`
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d) .................................................................................................139
`
`Other Authorities
`
`America Invents Act ................................................................................................10
`
`Regulations
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ................................................................................................ 9
`
`v
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`37 C.F.R. §42.100(b) ...............................................................................................34
`
`
`
`37 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(4)-(5) .......................................................................................35
`
`MPEP §2143(A) .......................................................................................................67
`
`MPEP §2143(B) .......................................................................................................83
`
`MPEP §2143(C) ................................................................................................ 67, 83
`
`MPEP §2143(G) ................................................................................................ 67, 83
`
`MPEP §608.01(p) .....................................................................................................29
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`
`
`
`Petitioner
`Exhibit No.
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`1011
`1012
`
`1013
`1014
`1015
`1016
`1017
`1018
`1019
`1020
`1021
`1022
`
`1023
`1024
`
`1025
`1026
`
`1027
`1028
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`Declaration of Dr. John Kubiatowicz
`U.S. Patent No. 6,345,330 (“Chu330”)
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0135771 (“Cupps”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,216,185 (“Chu185”)
`File history of U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`U.S. Patent Application No. 60/134,122
`U.S. Patent No. 8,234,436
`File history of U.S. Patent No. 8,234,436 (“’436 FH”)
`U.S. Patent Application No. 60/083,886 (“’886 Provisional”)
`File history of U.S. Patent No. 6,345,330 (“Chu330 FH”)
`August 12, 2011 Amendment from File History of Control No.
`90/010,816 (Reexamination of Chu185)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,718,415 (“Chu8415”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,099,981
`U.S. Patent No. 7,363,415
`U.S. Patent No. 7,376,779
`U.S. Patent No. 7,676,624
`U.S. Patent No. 8,041,873
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 7,363,415 (“’3415 FH”)
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 7,376,779 (“’779 FH”)
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 7,676,624 (“’624 FH”)
`October 17, 2007 Second Preliminary Amendment from File
`History of RE41,294 (11/474,256)
`Reserved
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 with highlights of substantively identical
`portions from Chu330, Chu185, ’886 Provisional, and Chu8415
`Patent
`U.S. Patent No. 6,321,335 (“Chu335”)
`IEEE Std 1596.3-1996, IEEE Standard for Low-Voltage
`Differential Signals (LVDS) for Scalable Coherent Interface (SCI)
`Reserved
`Reserved
`
`vii
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
`
`
`Petitioner
`Exhibit No.
`1029
`
`1030
`1031
`1032
`1033
`1034
`1035
`1036
`1037
`1038
`1039
`1040
`1041
`1042
`1043
`
`1044
`
`
`All emphases, colors, and annotations have been added unless indicated otherwise.
`
`ACQIS LLC v. EMC Corp., Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-13560, No.
`185 (D. Mass. Jan. 20, 2017) (EMC Corporation’s Opening Claim
`Construction Brief)
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`Reserved
`HyperTransport Technology Consortium, HyperTransport™ I/O
`Link Specification, Revision 1.03 (cited in US 7,146,510 (“Helms”)
`file history)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,146,510 (“Helms”)
`
`viii
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`
`
`Intel Corporation (“Petitioner”) requests inter partes review (“IPR”) of claims
`
`1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50 (“challenged claims”) of U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,703,750 (“’750 Patent” (Ex-1001)).
`
`II. Mandatory Notices
`A. Related Matters
`ACQIS LLC (“Patent Owner” or “ACQIS”) filed patent infringement actions
`
`asserting the ’750 Patent against a number of defendants, not including the
`
`Petitioner.
`
`• ACQIS LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., Civil Action No.
`
`2:20-cv-00295 (E.D. Tex. 2020),
`
`• ACQIS LLC v. MITAC Holdings Corp. et al., Civil Action No. 6:20-
`
`cv-00962 (W.D. Tex. 2020),
`
`• ACQIS LLC v. Inventec Corp., Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-00965 (W.D.
`
`Tex. 2020),
`
`• ACQIS LLC v. ASUSTek Computer Inc., Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-
`
`00966 (W.D. Tex. 2020),
`
`• ACQIS LLC v. Lenovo Group Ltd. et al., Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-
`
`00967 (W.D. Tex. 2020), and
`
`1
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`• ACQIS LLC v. Wistron Corp. et al., Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-00968
`
`(W.D. Tex. 2020).
`
`ACQIS has filed the following patent infringement actions on patents that are
`
`related (e.g., in the same family or with similar claims) to the ’750 Patent, also
`
`against defendants not including the Petitioner.
`
`• ACQIS LLC v. International Business Machines Corp., Civil Action
`
`No. 6:09-cv-00148 (E.D. Tex. 2009)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 6,216,185
`o U.S. Patent No. 6,718,415
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,099,981
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,146,446
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,328,297
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,363,415
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,363,416
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,376,779
`• ACQIS LLC v. International Business Machines Corp., Civil Action
`
`No. 6:11-cv-00546 (E.D. Tex. 2011)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,041,873
`• ACQIS LLC v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 6:13-
`
`cv-00638 (E.D. Tex. 2013); ACQIS LLC v. EMC Corporation, Civil
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`Action No. 6:13-cv-00639 (E.D. Tex. 2013); ACQIS LLC v. Ericsson,
`
`Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 6:13-cv-00640 (E.D. Tex. 2013); ACQIS
`
`LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. et al., Civil Action No. 6:13-
`
`cv-00641 (E.D. Tex. 2013); and ACQIS LLC v. EMC Corp., Civil
`
`Action No. 1:14-cv-13560 (D. Mass. 2014)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,363,416
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,676,624
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,818,487
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,041,873
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 41,294
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 41,961
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 42,814
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 42,984
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 43,119
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 43,171
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,468
`• ACQIS LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., Civil Action No.
`
`2:20-cv-00295 (E.D. Tex. 2020)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,977,797
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,829,768
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,654
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 45,140
`• ACQIS LLC v. MITAC Holdings Corp. et al., Civil Action No. 6:20-
`
`
`
`cv-00962 (W.D. Tex. 2020)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,626,977
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,756,359
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,977,797
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,529,768
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,529,769
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 42,984
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 43,602
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,654
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,739
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 45,140
`• ACQIS LLC v. Inventec Corp., Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-00965 (W.D.
`
`Tex. 2020)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,756,359
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,977,797
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,529,768
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 42,984
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 43,602
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,654
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,739
`• ACQIS LLC v. ASUSTeK Computer Inc., Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-
`
`00966 (W.D. Tex. 2020)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,626,977
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,756,359
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,977,797
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,529,768
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,529,769
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,654
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,739
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 45,140
`• ACQIS LLC v. Lenovo Group Ltd. et al., Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-
`
`00967 (W.D. Tex. 2020)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,626,977
`
`5
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,756,359
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,977,797
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,529,768
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,529,769
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,654
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,739
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 45,140
`• ACQIS LLC v. Wistron Corp. et al., Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-00968
`
`(W.D. Tex. 2020)
`
`o U.S. Patent No. 7,676,624
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,041,873
`o U.S. Patent No. 8,977,797
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,529,768
`o U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,468
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 44,654
`o U.S. Reissued Patent No. 46,947
`EMC has filed IPR petitions for the following patents under the following IPR
`
`case numbers:
`
`6
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`• IPR2014-01452 against U.S. Reissued Patent No. 43,171
`
`
`
`• IPR2014-01462 against U.S. Patent No. 8,041,873
`
`• IPR2014-01469 against U.S. Reissued Patent No. 42,814
`
`Samsung has filed IPR petitions for the following patents under the following
`
`IPR case numbers:
`
`• IPR2021-00666 and IPR2021-00605 against U.S. Patent No. 9,529,768
`
`• IPR2021-00667 and IPR2021-00606 against U.S. Patent No. 8,977,797
`
`• IPR2021-00668 and IPR2021-00604 against U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750
`
`• IPR2021-00669 and IPR2021-00608 against U.S. Reissued Patent No.
`
`44,654
`
`• IPR2021-00670 and IPR2021-00607 against U.S. Reissued Patent No.
`
`45,140
`
`Petitioner is concurrently filing the following additional IPR petitions:
`
`• IPR2021-01107, challenging claims 4-6 and 10-12 of U.S. Patent
`
`9,529,768;
`
`• IPR2021-01108, challenging claims 1-3, 7-9, 13-17, 19-20, 25, and 33-
`
`35 of U.S. Patent 9,529,768;
`
`• IPR2021-01109, challenging claims 18, 21-24, 26-32, and 36-40 of
`
`U.S. Patent 9,529,768;
`
`7
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`• IPR2021-01111, challenging claims 5-13, 18-20, 25-28, 35-38, and 46-
`
`47 of U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750; and
`
`• IPR2021-01112, challenging claims 14-17, 29-30, and 42-43 of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 9,703,750.
`
`B. Real Parties-in-Interest
`Petitioner identifies itself as a real party-in-interest. Petitioner also identifies
`
`Lenovo Group Ltd.; Lenovo PC HK Limited; LCFC (HEFEI) Electronics
`
`Technology Co., Ltd.; Lenovo Information Products (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.; Lenovo
`
`(Beijing) Information Technology Ltd.; and Lenovo Centro Tecnológico S. de R.L.
`
`de C.V. as additional real parties-in-interest (“RPIs”).
`
`C. Counsel
`Petitioner is filing a power of attorney appointing the practitioners associated
`
`with Customer Number 132,593. Petitioner designates the following lead and back-
`
`up counsel:
`
`8
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`Lead Counsel
`Yung-Hoon Ha
`Registration No. 56,368
`Desmarais LLP
`230 Park Ave
`New York, NY 10169
`Telephone: (212) 351-3400
`Facsimile: (212) 351-3401
`Email: yha@desmaraisllp.com
`
`
`
`
`
`First Back-up Counsel
`Christian Dorman
`Registration No. 79,118
`Desmarais LLP
`230 Park Ave
`New York, NY 10169
`Telephone: (212) 351-3400
`Facsimile: (212) 351-3401
`Email: cdorman@desmaraisllp.com
`Back-up Counsel
`Theodoros Konstantakopoulos
`Registration No. 74,155
`Desmarais LLP
`230 Park Ave
`New York, NY 10169
`Telephone: (212) 351-3400
`Facsimile: (212) 351-3401
`Email:
`tkonstantakopoulos@desmaraisllp.com
`
`
`
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4))
`
`D.
`Post and hand delivery: Desmarais LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Telephone:
`
`Email:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`230 Park Ave, New York, NY 10169
`
`212-351-3400
`
`Intel-ACQIS-IPRService@desmaraisllp.com
`
`Please address all correspondence to counsel identified above. Petitioner
`
`consents to electronic service by email at:
`
`Intel-ACQIS-IPRService@desmaraisllp.com
`
`9
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`III. Fees
`Petitioner concurrently submits required fees for this Petition. The Board is
`
`
`
`authorized to charge Desmarais LLP’s deposit account, No. 50-6822, for any fee
`
`deficiency.
`
`IV. Grounds for Standing
`Petitioner certifies that the ’750 Patent is available for IPR and that Petitioner
`
`is not estopped or barred from requesting IPR.
`
`V.
`
`Identification of Challenge and Relief Requested
`
`Identification of Prior Art
`
`A.
`The following references are pertinent to the grounds of unpatentability
`
`explained below:
`
`1. U.S. Patent No. 6,345,330 (“Chu330” (Ex-1003)), issued on February
`
`5, 2002, is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).1
`
`2.
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0135771 (“Cupps” (Ex-1004)),
`
`published on July 17, 2003, is prior art under at least 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`
`1 Because the ʼ750 Patent is, at best, entitled to a priority date of April 15, 2011 (as
`
`explained more fully below), the pre-AIA (America Invents Act) statutory
`
`framework applies.
`
`10
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,146,510 (“Helms” (Ex-1044)), issued on December
`
`5, 2006, is prior art under at least 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`Statutory Grounds of Unpatentability
`
`B.
`Petitioner requests IPR and cancellation of claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-
`
`45, and 48-50 of the ’750 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 103. This Petition demonstrates
`
`that there is a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner will prevail with respect to
`
`cancellation of at least one challenged claim. See 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
`
`VI. Overview of the ’750 Patent
`The ’750 Patent describes a computer system that includes an attached
`
`computer module (“ACM”) and a peripheral console (“PCON”). Ex-1001, Figures
`
`1, 6.
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ACM
`
`The ACM can be inserted into the PCON. Ex-1001, 7:1-8, 10:3-6. The ACM
`
`includes a central processing unit (“CPU”), a graphics subsystem, and a host
`
`interface controller (“HIC”). As shown below in Figure 8B of the ’750 Patent,
`
`certain components, such as the CPU, the graphics subsystem and the HIC, can be
`
`integrated together. See Ex-1001, 16:24-33.
`
`12
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Peripheral Console
`
`The PCON can have a number of connected components (e.g., hard drive,
`
`display). See Ex-1001, 32:5-18, 33:5-39, 34:21-25. Specifically, the “PCON …
`
`comprises a Peripheral Interface Controller (PIC).” Ex-1001, 32:19-21.
`
`13
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Communications Interface Between ACM and PCON
`
`The HIC in the ACM and the PIC in the PCON form a communication
`
`interface. Specifically, as shown in Figure 6, “[t]he ACM 605 and the peripheral
`
`console 610 are interfaced through an exchange interface system (XIS) bus 615”
`
`which “includes power bus 616, video bus 617 and peripheral bus (XPBus) 618.”
`
`Ex-1001, 15:62-66.
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`
` “Video bus 617 transmits video signals between the ACM 605 and the
`
`peripheral console 610 … such as … (TMDS) signals for flat panel displays.” Ex-
`
`1001, 16:3-9.
`
`Local PCI bus transactions are encoded for transmission over the XPBus. See,
`
`e.g., Ex-1001, 17:60-62 (“Encoders … format the PCI address/data bits to a form
`
`more suitable for parallel to serial conversion prior to transmittal on the XPBus.”).
`
`The XPBus includes two sets of unidirectional lines. See Ex-1001, 24:31-39. The
`
`’750 Patent explains that “although each of the lines PCK, PD0 to PD3, …, PCKR,
`
`15
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`PDR0 to PDR3, … is referred to as a line, in the singular rather than plural, each
`
`
`
`such line may contain more than one physical line.” Ex-1001, 24:51-61.
`
`The first set of unidirectional lines PCK, PD0 to PD3 with differential signal
`
`pairs is illustrated in Figure 31. Ex-1001, 24:26-30 (“These lines are unidirectional
`
`LVDS lines for transmitting signals from HIC 2900 to PIC 3000.”); see also id.,
`
`22:41-46.
`
`
`The second “set of lines, namely PCKR and PDR0 to PDR3 [not shown in
`
`Figure 31] are used to transmit clock signals and bits from the PIC 3000 to HIC
`
`2900.” Ex-1001, 24:26-30; see also id., 22:46-52.
`
`16
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`In addition to encoded PCI bus transactions (e.g., XX00 and XX10 indicating
`
`
`
`PCI address/data), reserved data packets (e.g., 0011 or 1011) can purportedly be used
`
`to transmit non-PCI (e.g., USB) bus transactions. See Ex-1001, 25:6-9.
`
`
`VII. The ’750 Patent Is Not Entitled To A Priority Date Before April 15, 2011
`As shown below, the ʼ750 Patent claims priority to U.S. Patent Application
`
`No. 60/134,122 (“’122 Provisional”) (Ex-1007). Ex-1001, Cover, 1:13-37.
`
`17
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`However, the ’750 Patent is, at best, entitled to a priority date only as to the
`
`
`
`filing date of U.S. Patent No. 8,234,436 (the “’436 Patent”, (Ex-1008)).2
`
`A. The Challenged Claims Recite Limitations Not Supported By The
`’436 Patent’s Parent Applications
`
`The challenged claims recite the following limitations:
`
`• “Integrated CPU-graphics/controller” limitations:
`
`o claims 1-2 and 4: “an integrated [CPU] and interface controller
`in a single chip,”
`
`o claim 21: “an integrated [CPU] and interface device,”
`o claims 24, 31, 34, and 48-49: “an integrated [CPU] and graphics
`subsystem in a single chip,” and
`
`o claim 50: “an integrated … (CPU) and graphics controller in a
`single chip.”
`
`• “CPU-LVDS” limitations:
`
`o Claims 1-2 and 4: “a … (LVDS) channel directly extending from
`the [integrated CPU and] interface controller … compris[ing] …
`
`
`2 Petitioner and RPIs do not cede that each of the claims of the ʼ750 Patent is
`
`supported by the ʼ750 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
`
`19
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`
`
`[two] unidirectional, differential signal pair[s] to convey data in
`
`… opposite direction[s],”
`
`o claim 21: “an integrated [CPU] … directly connected to a …
`(LVDS) channel comprising at least two sets of unidirectional,
`
`multiple, differential signal pairs transmitting … in opposite
`
`directions,”
`
`o claim 24: “an integrated [CPU] … directly connected to a …
`(LVDS) channel comprising unidirectional, differential signal
`
`pairs to convey data in opposite direction [sic],”
`
`o claims 31, 34: “a … (LVDS) channel directly extending from the
`integrated [CPU] … compris[ing] first … and second
`
`unidirectional, multiple, differential signal pairs to convey data
`
`in … opposite direction[s],” and
`
`o claims 44-45: “a [CPU] directly connected to a … (LVDS)
`channel comprising at least two sets of multiple, unidirectional,
`
`differential signal pairs transmitting data packets serially in
`
`opposite directions.”
`
`Figures 8A-8C and the associated descriptions are the only arguable support
`
`for the “integrated CPU-graphics/controller” limitations. See e.g., Ex-1001, 16:24-
`
`32 (“FIG. 8A shows an … integrated CPU/NB/Graphics 815 …. FIG. 8B shows
`
`20
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`a[] … single chip 825 fully integrated: CPU, Cache, Core Logic, Graphics
`
`
`
`controller and Interface controller.… FIG. 8C shows an … Integrated CPU/North
`
`Bridge/Graphics.”).
`
`’750 Patent
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Figure 8B and the associated description is the only arguable support for the
`
`“CPU-LVDS” limitations. See Ex-1001, Figure 8B (showing the “direct”
`
`connection).
`
`21
`
`

`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,703,750 (claims 1-2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 34, 44-45, and 48-50)
`
`
`The table below summarizes the specific figures (and their associated
`
`
`
`description) that arguably support the challenged claims.
`
`Integrated CPU-
`Graphics/Controller
`1-2, 4
`21
`24
`31, 34
`
`48-49
`50
`
`
`
`CPU-LVDS
`
`Purported Support
`
`1-2, 4
`21
`24
`31, 34
`44-45
`
`
`
`FIG. 8B
`FIG. 8B
`FIG. 8B
`FIG. 8B
`FIG. 8B
`FIGS. 8A-8C
`FIGS. 8A-8C
`
`1.
`
`The Purported Written Description Support For The
`“Integrated CPU-Graphics/Controller” and “CPU-LVDS”
`Limitations Was First Introduced In The ’436 Patent
`
`The ’750 Patent’s purported written description support for the “integrated
`
`CPU-graphics/controller” and “