`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`__________________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`__________________
`
`
`APPLE INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SMITH INTERFACE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2024-01085
`Patent 10,649,580
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S REPLY TO PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`ii
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`LIST OF EXHIBITS ................................................................................................ iv
`UPDATED LISTING OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS .......................................... viii
`CONVENTIONS OF THIS REPLY BRIEF ......................................................... xxi
` Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
` The RROD Renders Obvious Claims 1-4, 6-10, 17, 19, 22-26, 28-30, 32-33,
`36, 41, 58-62, 64-65, 67, 69-70, 73, 77, and 82 .............................................. 1
`A. Smith’s contention of failure to motivate is belied by record evidence of
`the benefits of implementing partially transparent widgets and the
`commonplace nature of doing so .............................................................. 1
`B. The RROD’s second virtual display layer—including all Zlider
`components—appears to have a lesser depth than the first virtual display
`layer at least because the Zlider’s pressure cursor is partially translucent,
`as Smith and Dr. Mahon admit ...............................................................13
`C. At least a portion of the RROD’s second virtual display layer is at least
`partially translucent due to the Zlider pressure cursor’s translucency and
`Ording’s teachings ..................................................................................20
`D. Smith’s arguments concerning “perform[ing] a zoom operation on …
`the first virtual display layer” “without performing the zoom operation
`on the plurality of markings” misinterpret the claims ([1l](i)-(iii)/[1.k],
`[22h](i)-(iii)/[22.g], [58g(i)-(iii)]/[58.f], [82]) ........................................21
`E. Smith’s argument that a hover cannot satisfy the claims is belied by
`record evidence of a “touch” includes proximity ([1.h], [22.d], [58.c]).24
`F. Smith’s professed confusion as to Petitioner’s mapping is refuted by the
`Board’s understanding of the mapping and Smith’s ability to respond to
`the mapping .............................................................................................28
`G. Smith’s argument that the Petition’s mapping does not show “a single
`continuous gesture in constant contact” relies on a mischaracterization
`of the Petition’s “first touch” and “second touch” (claims 29, 65) ........31
`H. Record evidence refutes Smith’s contention that a POSITA would not
`have been motivated to use duration (claims 9, 32, 69) .........................32
`I. Smith Offers No Independent Arguments Against the Obviousness of
`Claims 2, 4, 6-10, 23, 25-26, 28-30, 32-33, 59, 61-62, 64-65, 67, 69-70,
`or 73 ........................................................................................................33
` The RROHD Renders Obvious Claim 48 .....................................................33
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`iii
`A. The Petition Argues that a POSITA Would Have Been Motivated to
`Modify RROD with Hayward, Not the Other Way Around, as Smith
`Alleges ....................................................................................................33
` Conclusion .....................................................................................................34
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`iv
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`APPLE-1001 U.S. Patent No. 10,649,580
`APPLE-1002 U.S. Patent No. 10,649,580 File History
`APPLE-1003 Declaration of Dr. Andrew Cockburn
`APPLE-1004 Ramos et al., “Zliding: Fluid Zooming an d Sliding for High
`Precision Parameter Manipulation,” UIST: Proceedings of the
`ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology ,
`2005.
`APPLE-1005 Zooming & Zliding (Gonzalo Ramos), Decem ber 28, 2007,
`available at
`https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcE3XBytN-U
`(“Ramos Video”)
`APPLE-1006 US 2008/0094356 to Ording et al. (“Ordin g”)
`APPLE-1007 Declaration of Kathryn Talbot
`APPLE-1008 Gonzalo Alberto Ramos, Press-Sensitive Pen Interactions
`(2008) (Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto) (“Ramos Thesis”)
`APPLE-1009 Declaration of June Ann Munford
`APPLE-1010 Webpage version of the Ramos Video, available at
`https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcE3XBytN-U
`APPLE-1011 Dictionary of Computing , Sixth Edition (2010)
`APPLE-1012 Telecom Dictionary , First Edition (2007)
`APPLE-1013 Wiley Electronical and Electronics Engineering Dictionary ,
`First Edition (2004)
`APPLE-1014 A Dictionary of Computing , Sixth Edition (2008)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`v
`APPLE-1015 The Facts on File Dictionary of Computer Science , Revised
`Edition (2006)
`APPLE-1016 U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2012/0176401 to Hay ward et al.
`(“Hayward”)
`APPLE-1017 U.S. Patent No. 7,479,949 to Jobs et al. (“Jobs”)
`APPLE-1018 Bezerianos & Balakrishnan, “The Vacuum: Facilitating the
`Manipulation of Distant Objects,” PAPERS: Smart Interaction
`Techniques 2, April 2-7, 2005
`APPLE-1019 Fitzmaurice et al., “Tracking Menus,” UIST , 2003
`APPLE-1020 U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2012/0319959 to Sap onas et al.
`(“Saponas”)
`APPLE-1021 U.S. Patent No. 2012/0046071 to Brandis et al. (“Brandis”)
`APPLE-1022 Declaration of Gonzalo Ramos
`APPLE-1023 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0316183 to Westerman et al.
`(“Westerman”)
`APPLE-1024 U.S. Patent No. 8,164,573 to da Costa ( “da Costa”)
`APPLE-1025 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0046071 to Brandis et al.
`(“Brandis”)
`APPLE-1026 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2006/0026535 to Hotelling et al.
`(“Hotelling”)
`APPLE-1027 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2006/0132457 to Rimas-
`Ribikauskas et al. (“Rimas-Ribikauskas”)
`APPLE-1028 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0024459 to Poupyrev et al
`(“Poupyrev”)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`vi
`APPLE-1029 United States District Courts — National Judicial Caseload
`Profile (Dec. 31, 2023) | United States Courts (uscourts.gov),
`https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/fcms_na_distprofile
`1231.2023_0.pdf (last visited June 25, 2024)
`APPLE-1030 Memorandum, Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in
`AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court
`Litigation (USPTO June 21, 2022) (“Guidance”)
`APPLE-1031 Case Management Order, Smith Interface Technologies, LLC
`v. Apple Inc., 3-23-cv-01187, S.D. Cal. (June 20, 2024)
`APPLE-1032 Supplemental Declaration of Dr. Andrew C ockburn
`APPLE-1033 Transcript of the Deposition of Dr. Mark P. Mahon 1
`APPLE-1034 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0122796 to Jobs et al.
`(“Jobs2”)
`
`1 Petitioner understands that Patent Owner intends for Dr. Mahon to perform a read-
`and-sign of this deposition transcript (APPLE-1033), per 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(f)(5). At
`the time of this filing, Petitioner has not receive d any communications from Patent
`Owner regarding the progress of Dr. Mahon’s read-an d-sign. Petitioner assumes
`Patent Owner is facilitating Dr. Mahon’s review, that the review is ongoing, and that
`Patent Owner will raise any alleged errata. Should Patent Owner propose entry into
`the record of any alleged errata that does not seek to change the substance of Dr.
`Mahon’s testimony, Petitioner does not expect to object.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`vii
`APPLE-1035 iPhone Resolution by Edward Tufte, Novem ber 25, 2008,
`available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YslQ2625TR4
`APPLE-1036 Date Picker, Android Developers, capture d August 20, 2010,
`available at
`https://web.archive.org/web/20100820005027/http://developer.
`android.com/resources/tutorials/views/hello-datepicker.html
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`viii
`UPDATED LISTING OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`UPDATED LISTING OF CLAIMS
`Per ID Per
`Petition
`and
`APPLE-
`1003
`
` Claim 1
`1. [1.pre] An apparatus, comprising:
`[1a] [1.a] at least one non-transitory memory;
`[1b] [1.b] a touch screen;
`[1c] [1.c] a camera; and
`[1d] [1.d] one or more processors in communication with the at
`least one non-transitory memory, the touch screen, and
`the camera, wherein the one or more processors
`execute instructions stored in the non-transitory
`memory to cause the apparatus to:
`[1e] [1.e] display, via the touch screen, a first v irtual display layer
`including contents;
`[1f] [1.f] display, via the touch screen, at least one user interface
`element;
`[1g] [1.g] detect, via the touch screen, at least a portion of touch
`on the least one user interface element;
`[1h] [1.h] when an aspect of the touch is detected to surpass a
`threshold, display, via the touch screen, a plurality of
`markings in a second virtual display layer that appears
`to have a lesser depth than the first virtual display
`layer,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`ix
`[1i] where at least a portion of the second virtual display
`layer is at least partially translucent so that at least a
`portion of the contents of the first virtual display layer
`is visible through the at least portion of the second
`virtual display layer;
`[1j] [1.i] detect, via the touch screen, a touch mo vement on at
`least one of the plurality of marking; and
`[1k] [1.j] during detection of the touch movement o n the at least
`one of the plurality of marking in the second virtual
`display layer that appears to have the lesser depth than
`the first virtual display layer, display, via the touch
`screen, a movement of the markings in the second
`virtual display layer as a function of the touch
`movement; and
`[1l(i)] [1.k] perform a zoom operation on the at le ast portion of the
`contents of the first virtual display layer without
`performing the zoom operation on the plurality of
`markings in the second virtual display layer,
`[1l(ii)] where the zoom operation correlates with t he movement
`of the markings in the second virtual display layer, and
`[1l(iii)] the at least portion of the second virtua l display layer is
`at least partially translucent so that a result of the zoom
`operation on the at least portion of the contents of the
`first virtual display layer is visible through the at least
`portion of the second virtual display layer.
` Claim 2
`[2] [2] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the appar atus is
`configured such that the contents of the first virtual
`display layer include input detected by the camera.
` Claim 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`x
`[3] [3] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the appar atus is
`configured such that the plurality of markings in the
`second virtual display layer remains displayed for at
`least some time in response to detection of a cessation
`of the touch when the aspect of the touch is detected to
`surpass the threshold.
` Claim 4
`[4] [4] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the appar atus is
`configured such that the plurality of markings are
`displayed as part of a virtual dial.
` Claim 6
`[6] [6] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the appar atus is
`configured such that the at least portion of the touch is
`detected to be dynamic.
` Claim 7
`[7] [7] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the appar atus is
`configured such that the touch is detected to be part of
`the touch movement.
` Claim 8
`[8] [8] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the appar atus is
`configured such that the touch movement is part of
`another touch that is separate from the touch.
` Claim 9
`[9] [9] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the appar atus is
`configured such that the aspect of the touch includes a
`duration aspect and the threshold includes a duration
`magnitude threshold.
` Claim 10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xi
`[10] [10] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the app aratus is
`configured such that the aspect of the touch includes a
`distance aspect and the threshold includes a distance
`magnitude threshold.
` Claim 17
`[17] [17] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the app aratus is
`configured such that the movement of the markings in
`the second virtual display layer result in an appearance
`that the markings are rotating.
` Claim 18
`[18] [18] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the app aratus is
`configured such that the plurality of markings in the
`second virtual display layer remains displayed for at
`least some time in response to detection of a cessation
`of the touch when the aspect of the touch is detected to
`surpass the threshold, and the touch movement is
`capable of including either a pinch gesture on at least
`part of the contents of the first virtual display layer or a
`slide gesture on at least one of the plurality of
`markings.
`Claim 19
`[19] [19] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the app aratus is
`configured such that the at least one user interface
`element is displayed in the second virtual display layer.
`Claim 20
`[20pre] [20.pre] The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the apparatus is
`configured such that:
`[20a] [20.a] the contents of the first virtual dis play layer include
`input detected by the camera;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xii
`[20b] [20.b] the plurality of markings in the secon d virtual display
`layer at least temporarily remain displayed after a
`cessation of the touch is detected when the aspect of
`the touch is detected to surpass the threshold;
`[20c] [20.c] the plurality of markings is displayed by increasing a
`size of the second virtual display layer; and
`[20d] [20.d] during detection of the touch movement on at least one
`of the plurality of markings, a magnitude of an
`operation is increased on the contents of the first virtual
`display layer, where the increase in the magnitude of
`the operation and the movement of the markings in the
`second virtual display layer both correlate with
`detection of a distance of the touch movement on the at
`least one of the plurality of markings.
`Claim 22
`22. [22.pre] A method, comprising:
`[22a] [22.a] at a device with at least one non-tra nsitory memory, a
`touch screen, a camera, and one or more processors in
`communication with the at least one non-transitory
`memory, the touch screen, and the camera:
`[22b] [22.b] displaying, via the touch screen, a fi rst virtual display
`layer including contents;
`[22c] [22.c] detecting, via the touch screen, at le ast a portion of
`touch;
`[22d] [22.d] in response to an aspect of the touch being detected to
`surpass a threshold, displaying, via the touch screen, a
`plurality of markings in a second virtual display layer
`that appears to have a lesser depth than the first virtual
`display layer,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xiii
`[22e] where at least a portion of the second virtua l display
`layer is at least partially translucent so that at least a
`portion of the contents of the first virtual display layer
`is visible through the at least portion of the second
`virtual display layer;
`[22f] [22.e] detecting, via the touch screen, anoth er touch on at least
`one of the plurality of marking; and
`[22g] [22.f] in response to detection of the anothe r touch on the at
`least one of the plurality of marking in the second
`virtual display layer that appears to have the lesser
`depth than the first virtual display layer, displaying, via
`the touch screen, a movement of one or more of the
`plurality of markings in the second virtual display
`layer; and
`[22h(i)] [22.g] performing a zoom operation on the at least portion of
`the contents of the first virtual display layer without
`performing the zoom operation on the plurality of
`markings in the second virtual display layer,
`[22h(ii)] where the zoom operation is performed bas ed on the
`movement of the one or more of the plurality of
`markings in the second virtual display layer, and
`[22h(iii)] the at least portion of the second virtu al display layer is
`at least partially translucent so that a result of the zoom
`operation on the at least portion of the contents of the
`first virtual display layer is visible through the at least
`portion of the second virtual display layer.
`Claim 23
`[23] [23] The method of claim 22, wherein the conte nts of the
`first virtual display layer include input detected by the
`camera.
`Claim 24
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xiv
`[24] [24] The method of claim 23, wherein the plura lity of
`markings in the second virtual display layer remains
`displayed for a limited time in response to detection of
`a cessation of the touch with the aspect of the touch
`being detected to surpass the threshold.
`Claim 25
`[25] [25] The method of claim 23, wherein the plura lity of
`markings are displayed as part of a virtual dial.
`Claim 26
`[26] [26] The method of claim 23, wherein the plura lity of
`markings are displayed as part of a slider.
`Claim 28
`[28] [28] The method of claim 23, wherein the anoth er touch is
`detected to be dynamic.
`Claim 29
`[29] [29] The method of claim 23, wherein the touch and the
`another touch are detected to be part of a single
`continuous gesture with constant contact with the
`electronic device.
`Claim 30
`[30] [30] The method of claim 23, wherein the anoth er touch is
`separate from the touch in that at least one cessation of
`contact is detected between the touch and the another
`touch.
`Claim 32
`[32] [32] The method of claim 23, wherein the aspec t of the
`touch includes a duration aspect and the threshold
`includes a duration magnitude threshold.
`Claim 33
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xv
`[33] [33] The method of claim 23, wherein the aspec t of the
`touch includes a distance aspect and the threshold
`includes a distance magnitude threshold.
`Claim 36
`[36] [36] The method of claim 35, wherein the at le ast portion of
`the touch is detected on at least one user interface
`element in the second virtual display layer.
`Claim 41
`[41] [41] The method of claim 23, wherein the movem ent of the
`markings in the second virtual display layer result in an
`appearance that the markings are rotating.
`Claim 58
`58. [58.pre] A non-transitory computer readable storage medium
`storing one or more programs, the one or more
`programs comprising instructions, which when
`executed by an electronic device with at least one non-
`transitory memory, a touch screen, a camera, and one
`or more processors, cause the electronic device to:
`[58a] [58.a] display, via the touch screen, a firs t virtual display
`layer including contents;
`[58b] [58.b] detect, via the touch screen, at least a portion of touch;
`[58c] [58.c] in response to an aspect of the touch being detected to
`surpass a threshold, display, via the touch screen, a
`plurality of markings in a second virtual display layer
`that appears to have a lesser depth than the first virtual
`display layer,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xvi
`[58d] where at least a portion of the second virtua l display
`layer is at least partially translucent so that at least a
`portion of the contents of the first virtual display layer
`is visible through the at least portion of the second
`virtual display layer;
`[58e] [58.d] detect, via the touch screen, another touch on at least
`one of the plurality of marking; and
`[58f] [58.e] in response to detection of the anothe r touch on the at
`least one of the plurality of marking in the second
`virtual display layer that appears to have the lesser
`depth than the first virtual display layer, display, via the
`touch screen, a movement of one or more of the
`plurality of markings in the second virtual display
`layer; and
`[58g(i)] [58.f] perform a zoom operation on the at least portion of the
`contents of the first virtual display layer without
`performing the zoom operation on the plurality of
`markings in the second virtual display layer,
`[58g(ii)] where the zoom operation is performed bas ed on the
`movement of the one or more of the plurality of
`markings in the second virtual display layer, and
`[58g(iii)] [58.g] the at least portion of the secon d virtual display layer is
`at least partially translucent so that a result of the zoom
`operation on the at least portion of the contents of the
`first virtual display layer is visible through the at least
`portion of the second virtual display layer.
`Claim 59
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xvii
`[59] [59] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the contents of the first virtual display layer include
`input detected by the camera.
`Claim 60
`[60] [60] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the plurality of markings in the second virtual display
`layer remains displayed for a limited time in response
`to detection of a cessation of the touch with the aspect
`of the touch being detected to surpass the threshold.
`Claim 61
`[61] [61] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the plurality of markings are displayed as part of a
`virtual dial.
`Claim 62
`[62] [62] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the plurality of markings are displayed as part of a
`slider.
`Claim 64
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xviii
`[64] [64] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the another touch is detected to be dynamic.
`Claim 65
`[65] [65] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the touch and the another touch are detected to be part
`of a single continuous gesture with constant contact
`with the electronic device.
`Claim 67
`[67] [67] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the another touch is separate from the touch in that at
`least one cessation of contact is detected between the
`touch and the another touch.
`Claim 69
`[69] [69] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the aspect of the touch includes a duration aspect and
`the threshold includes a duration magnitude threshold.
`Claim 70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xix
`[70] [70] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the aspect of the touch includes a distance aspect and
`the threshold includes a distance magnitude threshold.
`Claim 73
`[73] [73] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that
`the at least portion of the touch is detected at a
`predetermined location and as being static where the
`aspect of the touch includes a duration that is detected
`to surpass the threshold that includes a duration
`magnitude threshold, and the another touch is detected
`to begin at the predetermined location and as being
`dynamic.
`Claim 77
`[77] [77] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the movement of the markings in the second virtual
`display layer result in an appearance that the markings
`are rotating.
`Claim 82
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xx
`[82] [82] The non-transitory computer readable stor age medium
`of claim 58, wherein the one or more programs include
`instructions which, when executed by the electronic
`device, cause the electronic device to operate such that:
`the zoom operation is performed on the at least portion
`of the contents of the first virtual display layer without
`performing the zoom operation on the plurality of
`markings in the second virtual display layer, so that the
`plurality of markings in the second virtual display layer
`remain displayed regardless of the zoom operation
`being performed.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`xxi
`CONVENTIONS OF THIS REPLY BRIEF
` All emphasis is added unless noted otherwise;
` The phrase “as discussed” and equivalent phrases incorporate fully the
`analysis of the cross-cited portion of the Reply Brief.
` Where claim limitations have different reference nu mbers, per the
`Updated Listing of Challenged Claims, both claim limitation reference
`numbers are provided with the Institution Decision’ s nomenclature
`followed by Petitioner’s and Dr. Cockburn’s.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`1
` Introduction
`The Petition establishes that the ’580 Patent’s putative invention is merely an
`obvious variant of the prior art. Smith contends otherwise, but not credibly. Arguing
`that rudimentary user interface features like user interface objects (e.g., widgets),
`semi-translucency, and zooming operations were new in 2011 is simply not credible,
`as is Smith’s suggestion that the ’580 Patent does anything more than combine these
`known elements using known techniques. The Petition shows, conclusively, that it
`does not.
`The Board should find the Challenged Claims obvious and unpatentable.
` The RROD Renders Obvious Claims 1-4, 6-10, 17, 19, 22-26, 28-30, 32-
`33, 36, 41, 58-62, 64-65, 67, 69-70, 73, 77, and 82
`A. Smith’s contention of failure to motivate is belied by record
`evidence of the benefits of implementing partially transparent
`widgets and the commonplace nature of doing so
`Smith’s arguments concerning motivation to combine rely on a flawed
`premise, which is that the proffered motivations are unrelated to translucency.
`Preliminarily, Smith is wrong in broadly contending that “Petitioner fails to
`support its purported combination” (POR, 10), as Pe titioner demonstrated with
`evidence several distinct reasons a POSITA would have been motivated to make the
`combination. Importantly, some of the motivations w ere not directly related to
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`2
`semitransparency, and these motivations were simply ignored and thus unrebutted
`by Smith.
`Indeed, Smith only attacks Petitioner’s reasons for combining with Ording as
`it relates to translucency. As such, Smith fails to even address the Petition’s first and
`second combination motivations, and instead merely contends that these motivations
`do not support transparency. Thus, for at least the Petitioner’s unrebutted first two
`reasons, a POSITA would have been motivated to comb ine Ramos Paper, Ramos
`Video, and Ording. APPLE-1032, ¶16.
`Second, as to the RROD rendering obvious translucen cy, Petitioner
`establishes that translucency is a feature of the Z lider within the Ramos Paper and
`the Ramos Video, and thus, a POSITA would not need to incorporate Ording’s
`teachings relating to transparency to teach or rend er [1i]/[1.h] obvious. Pet., 54-57;
`APPLE-1032, ¶17. And Smith does not dispute but ins tead agrees that Zlider’s
`pressure cursor is translucent. POR, 28 (“The translucency of the pressure cursor is
`seen”). Indeed, Ramos Video shows a Zlider “in whic h translucent markings (a
`wedge connecting the cursor location with a box top -left) appear on a second layer
`in response to an aspect of a touch.” Pet., 56 (cit ing APPLE-1005, 3:57-4:15). For
`example, the figure below (from APPLE-1005, 3:18) s hows tree branches visible
`through the translucent pressure cursor. Additional ly, Figure 6 of Ramos Paper
`shows “the ‘pressure cursor’ of the Zlider is displ ayed in a second layer (i.e., it is
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`3
`always above, for example, the image being displaye d and manipulated by the
`Zlider) along with the other components of the Zlid er (e.g., working area and
`Vernier).” Id. (citing APPLE-1004, FIG. 6; APPLE-1003, ¶91).
`
`APPLE-1005, 3:18.
`
`Pet., 56 (citing APPLE-1004, 127 (Figure 5-16)).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`4
`
`Pet., 57 (citing APPLE-1005, 4:11) (zoomed in; annotated).
`The Petition further explains that a finite number of options exist for the
`Zlider’s working area—either it is adjacent to or o verlaying the underlying image,
`so it would have been “obvious to try this finite n umber of identified predictable
`solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success .” Pet., 57 (citing APPLE-1003,
`¶92). Separately, Ording corroborates that it was w ell-known to use at least semi-
`transparent widgets of the type found in the Ramos Paper and Video. Pet., 57-58;
`APPLE-1006, [0045]. As noted, Smith does not argue against the translucency of
`the Zlider’s pressure cursor. Rather, Smith argues that the Zlider’s pressure cursor
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`5
`is in the same virtual display layer as the content s (POR, 24)—despite the pressure
`cursor clearly overlaying the contents, as explained in §II.B. APPLE-1032, ¶18.
`Third, to the extent that the Zlider itself does no t offer the requisite
`transparency (it does), Ordering demonstrates that transparency of [1i]/[1.h] is
`obvious, as observed in the Institution Decision. S imilarly obvious is the asserted
`combination that incorporates Ording’s teaching of a “semitransparent object” to
`render, for example, the majority of the Zlider at least partially translucent. ID, 31;
`Pet., 57-59; APPLE-1006, [0045], [0094]. As Dr. Coc kburn explained, “the Zlider
`widget of the combined disclosures would offer a UI widget that is at least partially
`transparent such that content below is visible, resulting in a widget that is minimally
`intrusive and reduces the amount of the underlying content that is blocked or not
`visible.” APPLE-1003, ¶60 (citing APPLE-1005, 3:16-3:19, 3:28); see also id. , ¶59;
`APPLE-1032, ¶19.
`Smith’s argument that modifying Ramos’ Zlider to be semitransparent would
`make the Zlider “more intrusive” or “unusable” is b ased on a willfully ignorant
`example scenario. POR, 17-19; APPLE-1032, ¶20. Smit h offers a scenario where
`the underlying content depicts a night sky, and it argues that the outline of a semi-
`translucent Zlider would therefore have been hard to see. POR, 18-19. But, this fails
`to account for the level of ordinary skill of a POS ITA—which is acknowledged by
`Smith as informed by “at least a bachelor’s degree in computer science, computer
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No. IPR2024-01085
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0165IP1
`
`6
`engineering, electrical engineering, human-computer interaction, or a related field,
`and would have had at least two years of relevant work experience in the design and
`development of graphical user