UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN VIDEO CAPABLE ELECTRONIC
`DEVICES, INCLUDING COMPUTERS,
`STREAMING DEVICES, TELEVISIONS,
`CAMERAS, AND COMPONENTS AND
`MODULES THEREOF
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1379
`
`INITIAL DETERMINATION ON VIOLATION OF SECTION 337 AND
`RECOMMENDED DETERMINATION ON REMEDY AND BOND
`
`Administrntive Law Judge Doris Johnson Hines
`
`(Janmuy 29, 2025)
`
`Appearances:
`
`For Complainants Nokia Technologies Oy and Nokia C01poration:
`
`Adam D. Swain of Alston & Bird LLP, Washington, DC; John D. Haynes, Nicholas T. Tsui,
`Lindsay C. Church, Shawn P. Gannon, and Paul Michael Haley of Alston & Bird LLP, Atlanta,
`GA; Theodore Stevenson and Eric Fountain of Alston & Bird LLP, Dallas, TX; Jennifer Cieluch
`of Alston & Bird LLP, New York, NY; Wan en Lipschitz, Alexandra F. Easley, and Sam Moore
`of McKool Smith PC, Dallas, TX; R. Mitch Verboncoeur and Joshua J. Newcomer of McKool
`Smith PC, Austin, TX; and Jamie Levien and Kyra Cooper Of McKool Smith PC, Washington,
`DC.
`
`For Respondents Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon.com Services LLC:
`
`Veronica S. Ascanunz, Emily Rich, and Michelle Yocum of Perkins Coie LLP, Washington, DC;
`Thomas N. Millikan of Perkins Coie LLP, San Diego, CA; Stefani E. Shanberg, Robin L. Brewer,
`and Karl Johnston of Perkins Coie LLP, San Francisco, CA; Kevin A. Zeck of Perkins Coie LLP,
`Seattle, WA; and Stephen S. Komiczky, Maii in R. Bader, and Ryan Cunningham of Sheppard,
`Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP, San Diego, CA.
`
`For the Office of Unfair Import Investigations:
`
`Mai·garet Macdonald, Jeffrey T. Hsu, and Marissa R. Ducca, Washington, DC.
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 1
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`I.
`
`Table of Contents
`Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1
`A. Procedural Histo1y .............................................................................................................. 1
`B. The Private Pa1iies .............................................................................................................. 3
`1. Nokia ............................................................................................................................ 3
`2. Alnazon ......................................................................................................................... 3
`C. The Asse1i ed Patents and Claims ........................................................................................ 4
`1. U.S. Patent No. 7,532,808 ............................................................................................ 4
`
`2. U.S. Patent No. 8,204,134 ............................................................................................ 8
`D. The Accused Products ....................................................................................................... 10
`E. The Domestic Industiy Products ....................................................................................... 10
`1. Microsoft Domestic Industiy Products ....................................................................... 10
`2. Samsung Domestic Industiy Products ........................................................................ 11
`II. Statuto1y Authority ................................................................................................................ 11
`A. Quo1111n ............................................................................................................................. 11
`B. U.S. Constitution, Ali icle II .............................................................................................. 12
`C. U.S. Constitution, Ali icle III and Seventh Amendment Jmy Trial Right.. ....................... 13
`
`III. Ownership Rights in the Asse1i ed Patents ............................................................................. 15
`IV. hnpo1iation ............................................................................................................................ 15
`V. Level of Ordina1y Skill in the Ali. ......................................................................................... 16
`VI. The '808 Patent ...................................................................................................................... 17
`A. Claim Constiuction ........................................................................................................... 17
`
`B. Infringement and Technical Domestic Industiy ............................................................... 19
`1. Legal Standards .......................................................................................................... 19
`a)
`Infi·ingement ..................................................................................................... 19
`
`b) Technical Domestic Industiy ........................................................................... 21
`2. Disputed Issues ........................................................................................................... 22
`3. Decoding Claims ........................................................................................................ 23
`a) Claims 7 and 16 ................................................................................................ 23
`(1) Element 7[pre] and Element 16[pre]. ........................................................ 23
`(2) Element 7[a] and Element 16[a] ............................................................... 23
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 2
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`(a) Construction of "Image Segments Sunounding the Macroblock in
`Question" .................................................................................................. 24
`(b) Infringement and Technical Domestic Industry ....................................... 31
`(3) Element 7[b] and Element 16[b] ............................................................... 34
`(4) Element 7[c] and Element 16[c] ............................................................... 35
`b) Claim 22 ........................................................................................................... 35
`c) Claim 40 ........................................................................................................... 36
`4. Encoding Claims ......................................................................................................... 37
`a) Claims 1 and 10 ................................................................................................ 37
`(1) Element l[pre] and Element l 0[pre]. ........................................................ 37
`(2) Element l[a] and Element l 0[a] ............................................................... 37
`(3) Element 1 [b] and Element 1 0[b] ............................................................... 38
`(4) Element l[c] and Element l 0[c] ............................................................... 39
`(5) Element l[d] and Element l0[d] ............................................................... 45
`b) Claim 21 ........................................................................................................... 46
`c) Claims 29 and 48 .............................................................................................. 47
`5. Indirect Infringement .................................................................................................. 48
`C. Validity ............................................................................................................................. 48
`
`1. Legal Standard ............................................................................................................ 49
`2. MPEG-1 ...................................................................................................................... 51
`
`a) Anticipation ...................................................................................................... 52
`b) Obviousness ..................................................................................................... 53
`3. NT-Fl 00 .................................................................................................................... 59
`
`4. Secondaiy Considerations .......................................................................................... 62
`VII. The ' 134 Patent ...................................................................................................................... 64
`
`A. Claim Construction ........................................................................................................... 64
`B. Infringement and Technical Domestic Industry ............................................................... 64
`1. Domestic Industiy Source Code ................................................................................. 65
`2. Claim 9 ....................................................................................................................... 66
`a) Element 9[b] ..................................................................................................... 66
`b) Element 9[c] ..................................................................................................... 70
`3. Dependent Claims ....................................................................................................... 71
`
`11
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 3
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`4. fudirect fufringement .................................................................................................. 71
`C. Validity ............................................................................................................................. 71
`1. Combination ofTML-9 and H.262 ............................................................................. 71
`
`a) Element 9[b] ..................................................................................................... 72
`b) Element 9[c] ..................................................................................................... 75
`c) Dependent ClailllS ............................................................................................ 77
`2. Secondaiy Considerations .......................................................................................... 77
`VIII. Economic Prong .................................................................................................................. 77
`A. Articles Protected by the Patents ...................................................................................... 78
`B. Realities of the Marketplace ............................................................................................. 80
`1. Separate Entity or Alticle of Cormnerce .................................................................... 81
`2. Essential Component .................................................................................................. 83
`3. Direct Relationship to Exploitation of the Patented Technology ............................... 84
`C. Microsoft's Domestic Activities ....................................................................................... 88
`1. Overview of Microsoft's Domestic Activities ............................................................ 88
`2. Microsoft's Domestic Expenditures ........................................................................... 90
`a) Plant and Equipment ........................................................................................ 90
`b) Labor or Capital ............................................................................................... 90
`3. Significance Analysis ................................................................................................. 90
`D. Samsung's Domestic Activities ........................................................................................ 93
`1. Overview of Samsung's Domestic Activities ............................................................. 93
`2. Samsung's Domestic Expenditures ............................................................................ 95
`
`a) Plant and Equipment ........................................................................................ 95
`b) Labor or Capital ............................................................................................... 95
`3. Significance Analysis ................................................................................................. 96
`E. Alnazon's Additional AI·guments ..................................................................................... 98
`1. IInproper Ti1nefi·a1ne ................................................................................................... 98
`2. Pre-launch Activities .................................................................................................. 99
`3. Alleged Noncognizable fuvestments .......................................................................... 99
`F. Economic Domestic fudustry as to Microsoft Xbox Products ........................................ 101
`IX. Other Defenses ..................................................................................................................... 102
`A. Breach of RAND Obligations ......................................................................................... 102
`
`1ll
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 4
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`B. Breach of Duty to Negotiate in Good Faith .................................................................... 106
`C. Implied Waiver and Equitable Estoppel ......................................................................... 109
`
`D. Waiver of Right to Exclusionaiy Relief.. ........................................................................ 112
`
`E. Laches ............................................................................................................................. 113
`F. Patent Misuse and Unclean Hands .................................................................................. 115
`X. Conclusions of Law ............................................................................................................. 117
`
`XI. Public Interest ...................................................................................................................... 117
`A. Public Health and Welfare .............................................................................................. 119
`
`B. Competitive Conditions in the United States Economy ................................................. 121
`C. Production of Like or Directly Competitive Aliicles in the United States ..................... 122
`
`D. United States Consumers ................................................................................................ 123
`E. Standai·d Essential Patents .............................................................................................. 124
`
`XII. Recommended Detennination on Remedy and Bond ......................................................... 124
`
`A. Li1nited Exclusion Order. ................................................................................................ 125
`B. Cease and Desist Order ................................................................................................... 126
`C. Bond During Presidential Review .................................................................................. 128
`XIII. Initial Determination on Violation .................................................................................... 129
`
`XIV. Order .................................................................................................................................. 130
`
`lV
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 5
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`This is the final initial determination in Certain Video Capable Electronic Devices,
`
`Including Computers, Streaming Devices, Televisions, Cameras, and Components and Modules
`
`Thereof, United States International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1379. Notice
`
`of Investigation, 88 Fed. Reg. 84832 (Dec. 6, 2023) (EDIS Doc. ID 810224).
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`A.
`
`Procedural History
`
`Nokia Technologies Oy and Nokia Corporation filed a complaint alleging violations of
`
`section 337 based on the impoitation into the United States, the sale for impo1tation, and the sale
`
`within the United States after impo1tation of ce1tain video capable electronic devices, including
`
`computers, streaming devices, televisions, cameras, and components and modules thereof. See
`
`Notice of Investigation.
`
`The Commission instituted this investigation to detennine:
`
`[W]hether there is a violation of subsection (a)(l)(B) of section 337
`in the importation into the United States, the sale for impo1tation, or
`the sale within the United States after impo1tation of ce1tain
`products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of one
`or more of claims 1-3, 6, 7, 9-12, 15-17, 20-25, 28- 30, 32- 34, 36,
`39-41 , 43, 44, 47-49, 51- 54, 58- 60, and 62- 65 of [U.S. Patent No.
`7,532,808], and claims 1-22 of [U.S. Patent No. 8,204,134], and
`whether an industry in the United States exists as required by
`subsection (a)(2) of section 337.
`
`Notice of Investigation.
`
`The plain language description of the accused products defines the scope of the
`
`investigation. 19 C.F.R. § 210.l0(b)(l). The products are described as "laptop computers, desktop
`
`computers, tablet computers, sti·eaming devices, televisions, cameras, and components and
`
`modules thereof." Notice of Investigation.
`
`1
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 6
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon.com Services, LLC, and HP Inc. were named as respondents.
`
`Id. The Office of Unfair Impo1i Investigations is also a party. Id.
`
`The target date for this investigation was originally set at sixteen months, which was
`
`extended to May 29,2025, making this final initial detennination due no later than Januaiy 29,
`
`2025. Order No. 62 (EDIS Doc. ID 838803), unreviewed by Coilllll'n Notice (EDIS Doc.
`
`ID 840560) and Order No. 63 (EDIS Doc. ID 840864), unreviewed by Coilllll'n Notice (EDIS Doc.
`
`ID 841885).
`
`Nokia's complaint asserted infringement of 66 claims across the two asse1ied patents.
`
`Complaint (EDIS Doc. ID 807342). Nokia moved several times to tenninate its complaint as to
`
`vai-ious claims, which motions were granted. Order No. 20 (EDIS Doc. ID 813182), unreviewed
`
`by Coilllll'n Notice (EDIS Doc. ID 814203), Order No. 44 (EDIS Doc. ID 8235 19), unreviewed
`
`by Comm'n Notice (EDIS Doc. ID 825113), and Order No. 52 (EDIS Doc. ID 825558),
`
`unreviewed by Coilllll'n Notice (EDIS Doc. ID 828353). The following claims are cmTently
`
`asse1i ed:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`claims 1, 7, 10, 16, 2 1, 22, 29, 40, and 48 of the '808 patent; and
`
`claims 9, 11, and 13-15 of the ' 134 patent.
`
`A claim constmction heai·ing was held after which a claim constmction order was issued.
`
`Con ected Order No. 38 (EDIS Doc. ID 826408).
`
`Nokia and HP moved to tenninate the investigation as to HP based on settlement, which
`
`motion was granted. Order No. 61 (EDIS Doc. ID 838594), unreviewed by Coilllll'n Notice (EDIS
`
`Doc. ID 840492). In view of this tennination, issues specifically relating to HP ai·e not addressed.
`
`Amazon filed a stipulation regarding impo1iation and invento1y of the accused products.
`
`Amazon Stipulation. JX-0007C (EDIS Doc. ID 818554).
`
`2
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 7
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`I held a prehearing conference and an evidentiaiy heai·ing. See Tr. at 1-1978. 1 The paiiies
`
`filed post-heai·ing briefs, Nokia Br. (EDIS Doc. ID 830252 ( con ected brief)); Amazon Br. (EDIS
`
`Doc. ID 830467); Staff Br. (EDIS Doc. ID 831854); Nokia Reply (EDIS Doc. ID 831343);
`
`Amazon Reply (EDIS Doc. ID 831371); and Staff Reply (EDIS Doc. ID 831888).
`
`Nokia filed an unopposed motion to reopen the record and admit two exhibits, CX-4912C
`
`and CX-5707C, which were addressed at the evidentiaiy heai·ing. Motion Docket No. 1379-053
`
`(EDIS Doc. ID 840579). Nokia states that its "vendor inadve1i ently provided the inco1Tect native
`
`spreadsheets" for these exhibits. Mot. at 3. There being no opposition and for good cause shown,
`
`Motion No. 1379-053 is GRANTED.
`
`B.
`
`The Private Parties
`
`1.
`
`Nokia
`
`Complainants Nokia Technologies Oy and Nokia Co1poration ai·e Finnish c01porations,
`
`located in Espoo, Finland. Compl. at ,r 10 and 13. Nokia Tech is a wholly owned subsidia1y of
`
`Nokia Co1p. Id. at ,r 11 . Nokia Tech is the owner by assignment of all right, title and interest in the
`
`asse1ied patents. JX-0005 ('808 patent assignment documents) and JX-0006 ('134 patent
`
`assignment documents).
`
`2.
`
`Amazon
`
`Respondent Amazon.com, Inc. is a Delawai·e Co1poration with a place of business in
`
`Seattle, Washington. Amazon Response to Complaint at ,r 33 (EDIS Doc. ID 811784).
`
`1 The public transcript of the evidentiaiy hearing is available as EDIS Doc. IDs 827089 ( day 1 ),
`827238 (day 2), 827393 (day 3), 827634 (day 4), 827706 (day 5), and 827985 (day 6). The
`confidential transcript of the evidentiaiy hearing is on EDIS as Doc. IDs 827088 (day 1), 827237
`(day 2), 827392 (day 3), 827631 (day 4), 827705 (day 5), and 827984 (day 6). These transcripts
`are hereinafter collectively refened to as Tr.
`
`3
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 8
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`Amazon.com Services, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiaiy of Amazon.com and is a Delaware
`
`Limited Liability Company with a place of business in Seattle, Washington. Id. at ,r,r 38- 39.
`
`Amazon states that it has impo1ted and sold within the United States after impo1tation the products
`
`accused of infringement in this investigation. Amazon Joint Stipulation at if 3.
`
`C.
`
`The Asserted Patents and Claims
`
`Nokia asse1t s claims from two patents in this investigation: the '808 and ' 134 patents.
`
`1.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,532,808
`
`The '808 patent is titled "Method for Coding Motion in a Video Sequence" and relates
`
`generally to motion compensation in video coding. The patent explains that in a typical video
`
`coding system, motion compensated prediction is perfo1med on a macro-block basis. '808 patent
`
`(JX-0003) at 10:23- 25. 2 The patent refers to "Joint Model Number 1" (JM-1) of the Joint Video
`
`Team (JVT) ofISO/IEC MPEG (Motion Picture Expe1t Group) and ITU-T VCEG (Video Coding
`
`Expe1ts Group), which assigned a coding mode depending on the chai·acteristics of the macro block
`
`and the motion in a video sequence. Id. at 10:27- 50. There were eight such coding modes, with
`
`the eighth known as skip mode, which indicated that the macroblock was to be copied from the
`
`reference video frame without using motion compensated prediction. Id. at 10:50-67.
`
`The '808 patent recognizes a problem with an assumption made by JM-1 of N T that skip
`
`mode is statistically the most likely coding mode for a macro block. If the video sequence contains
`
`global motion, panning or zooming, etc., skip mode is not used, causing degradation of
`
`compression efficiency. Id. at 12:18-47. Though solutions to this problem were proposed, the
`
`2 The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), Pub. L. No. 112-29, 125 Stat. 284 (2011),
`amended 35 U.S.C. § 102 and§ 103, effective March 16, 2013. Because the filing date of the
`'808 patent predates the AIA's amendments to§ 102 and § 103, the pre-AIA versions of§§ 102
`and 103 apply.
`
`4
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 9
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`specification states that "it should be appreciated that there exists a significant unresolved technical
`
`problem relating to the coding of a digital video sequence in the presence of global motion, such
`
`as translation, panning or zooming of the camera." Id. at 13:45-49. To address these problems,
`
`"the present invention is based on a redefinition of the skip mode concept used in JMl of the NT
`
`codec." Id. at 14:16-18. In pa1ticular, "[a]ccording to the invention, the skip mode concept is
`
`redefined in such a way that a macroblock assigned to skip mode is either associated with a zero
`
`(non-active) motion vector, in which case it is treated in the same way as a conventional skip mode
`
`macroblock and copied directly from the reference frame, or it is associated with a non-zero
`
`(active) motion vector." Id. at 14:23- 29.
`
`Nokia asserts claims 1, 7, 10, 16, 21, 22, 29, 40, and 48, which recite:
`
`1. [pre] A method of encoding a video sequence, the method comprising:
`
`[a] assigning a skip coding mode to a first segment of a first frame of the
`sequence;
`
`[b] assigning either a zero motion vector or a predicted non-zero motion
`vector for the skip coding mode for the first segment based at least in pait
`on the motion infonnation of a second segment neighboring the first
`segment; and
`
`[ c] fonning a prediction for the first segment with respect to a reference
`fraine based at least in pait on the assigned motion vector for the skip coding
`mode, wherein the assigned motion vector is one of the zero motion vector
`and the predicted non-zero motion vector; and
`
`[ d] providing in an encoded bitstream an indication of the skip coding mode,
`wherein no farther motion vector infonnation for the first segment is coded
`in the encoded bitstreain .
`
`7. [pre] A method of decoding an encoded video sequence, the method
`compn smg:
`
`[a] receiving an indication of a skip coding mode for a first segment;
`
`[b] assigning either a zero motion vector or a predicted non-zero motion
`vector for the skip coding mode for the first segment based at least in pait
`
`5
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 10
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`on the motion infonnation of a second segment neighboring the first
`segment; and
`
`[ c] fonning a prediction for the first segment with respect to a reference
`frame based at least in paii on the assigned motion vector for the skip coding
`mode, wherein the assigned motion vector is one of the zero motion vector
`and the predicted non-zero motion vector.
`
`[pre] A video encoder for encoding a video sequence, the encoder
`10.
`compnses:
`
`[a] a coding controller for assigning a skip coding mode to a first segment;
`
`[b, c] a motion estimation block for
`
`[b] assigning either a zero motion vector or a predicted non-zero motion
`vector for the skip coding mode for the first segment based at least in pait
`on the motion infonnation of a second segment neighboring the first
`segment; and
`
`[ c] fonning a prediction for the first segment with respect to a reference
`frame based at least in paii on the assigned motion vector for the skip
`coding mode, wherein the assigned motion vector is one of the zero motion
`vector and the predicted non-zero motion vector; and
`
`[ d] a multiplexer for providing in an encoded bitstream an indication of the
`skip coding mode, wherein no fmiher motion vector infonnation for the
`first segment is coded in the encoded bitstream.
`
`16. [pre] A video decoder for decoding an encoded video sequence, the
`decoder comprising:
`
`[a] a demultiplexer for receiving an indication of a skip coding mode
`assigned to a first segment;
`
`[b, c] a motion compensated prediction block for
`
`[b] assigning either a zero motion vector or a predicted non-zero motion
`vector for the skip coding mode for the first segment based at least in
`paii on the motion infonnation of a second segment neighboring the first
`segment; and
`
`[ c] fonning a prediction for the first segment with respect to a reference
`fraine based at least in paii on the assigned motion vector for the skip
`coding mode, wherein the assigned motion vector is one of the zero
`motion vector and the predicted non-zero motion vector.
`
`6
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 11
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`21. A multimedia tenninal, comprising an encoder according to claim 10.
`
`22. A multimedia terminal comprising a decoder according to claim 16.
`
`29. A method according to claim 1, fmiher comprising:
`
`deriving the predicted non-zero motion vector based at least in pali on the
`motion vector of the second segment and motion vector of a third segment
`neighboring the first segment.
`
`40. A method according to claim 7, fmiher comprising:
`
`deriving the predicted non-zero motion vector based at least in pali on the
`motion vector of the second segment and motion vector of a third segment
`neighboring the first segment.
`
`48. An encoder according to claim 10, wherein the motion estimation block
`fmther ananged to derive the predicted non-zero motion vector based at
`least in paii on the motion vector of the second segment and motion vector
`of a third segment neighboring the first segment.
`
`Nokia Br. at 2 and '808 patent at claims 1, 7, 10, 16, 21, 22, 29, 40, and 48.
`
`Nokia contends that claims 7, 16, 22, and 40 are essential to the H.264 standard and that
`
`claims 1, 10, 21, 29, and 48 ai·e not. Nokia Revised Identification at 1 (EDIS Doc. ID 8135 10) and
`
`H.264 standard, CX-0024. The H.264 standard refers to the ITU-T recommendation published as
`
`"H.264: Advanced Video Coding for Generic Audiovisual Services." Amazon recognizes that the
`
`tenn "essential" means "required to implement" the H.264 standai·d. Respondents' Identification
`
`at 1 (EDIS Doc. ID 813 140). The H.264 standai·d defines "decoding process" as "[t]he process
`
`specified in this Recommendation I International Standai·d that reads a bitstream and derives
`
`decoded pictures from it" and defines "encoding process" as "[a] process, not specified in this
`
`Recommendation I International Standai·d, that produces a bitstream confonning to this
`
`Recommendation I International Standai·d." H.264 standai·d at .0023 at 3.41 and 3.47, respectively.
`
`( emphasis in original).
`
`7
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 12
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`Amazon contends that no claims of the '808 patent are essential to the H.264 standard
`
`because the standard does not use a "smTounding" approach and instead uses a "block-by-block"
`
`approach "akin to the process developed by MPEG-1 ." Amazon Reply at 22 and see Respondents'
`
`Identification at 2. This issue relates to the patties' claim construction dispute on "smrnunding,"
`
`which is addressed below.
`
`2.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,204,134
`
`The ' 134 patent is titled "Grouping of Image Frames in Video Coding" and relates
`
`generally to the grouping of multimedia files, and pait iculai·ly video files and in connection with
`
`sti·eaming. The patent states that the "invention relates to the grouping of multimedia files,
`
`paiticulai·ly video files and pa1t iculai·ly in connection with sti·eaming." ' 134 patent (JX-0004) at
`
`1: 13-15. 3 The patent explains that video files in multimedia files comprise a great number of still
`
`image frames, which ai·e displayed rapidly in succession to create an impression of a moving
`
`image. The infonnation comprised by consecutively displayed image frames is typically lai·gely
`
`similai·, resulting in a considerable amount ofredundancy. '134 patent at 1:55- 65. To reduce the
`
`amount of data in video files, the image data can be compressed into a smaller f01m by reducing
`
`the amount of redundant info1mation in the image frames. In addition, while encoding, most of the
`
`cmTently used video encoders downgrade image quality in image fraine sections that ai·e less
`
`important in the video infonnation. ' 134 patent at 2:5-10.
`
`The patent describes one problem with a common procedme called reference picture
`
`selection in video coding: "the adjusting of scalability or coding method in the sti·eaming server or
`
`a network element becomes difficult, because the video sequence must be decoded, parsed and
`
`3 Because the filing date of the '134 patent predates the AIA's ainendments to § 102 and § 103,
`the pre-AIA versions of§§ 102 and 103 apply. See n.2.
`
`8
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Nokia Exhibit 2016, p. 13
`Amazon.com v. Nokia
`IPR2024-00847
`
`

`

`buffered for a long period of time to allow any dependencies between different image groups to
`
`be detected." Id. at 3: 3 7- 61. Another problem relates to "the insertion of a video sequence in the
`
`middle of another video sequence, which has typically led to discontinuity in image numbering."
`
`Id. at 3:62- 64. fu this situation, the receiving tenninal "may inte1pret the deviating image
`
`numbering as a signal of lost image frames and staii unnecessaiy actions to reconstruct the image
`
`fraines suspected as lost or to request a re-ti·ansmission." Id. at 4:4-7