throbber
Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 10719
`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 1 of 11 PagelD #: 10719
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`ACCELERATION BAYLLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD,INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`ELECTRONIC ARTSINC.,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE,
`INC., ROCKSTAR GAMES, INC., and 2K
`SPORTS,INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`NeeeeeeeeeeNeNeeeeeeeeeNeeeeeNeNeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee”
`
`C.A. No. 16-453 (RGA)
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`C.A. No. 16-454 (RGA)
`
`C.A. No. 16-455 (RGA)
`
`PARTIES’ JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION CHART
`
`[VOLUME5 OF8]
`
`[Exhibit D 13-25]
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 2 of 11 PageID #: 10720
`
`Public Version Dated:
`
`April 25, 2017
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 3 of 11 PageID #: 10721
`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 3 of 11 PagelD #: 10721
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`ACCELERATION BAYLLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD,INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`ELECTRONIC ARTSINC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`ACCELERATION BAYLLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE,
`INC., ROCKSTAR GAMES, INC., and 2K
`SPORTS, INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`NeeeeNeeeNeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeSe”Se”NeneNeeNeeeeeeeeee”ee”Ne”
`
`C.A. No. 16-453 (RGA)
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`C.A. No. 16-454 (RGA)
`
`C.A. No. 16-455 (RGA)
`
`PARTIES’ JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION CHART
`
`Pursuant
`
`to § 6(e) of the Court’s February 27, 2017 Scheduling Order, Plaintiff
`
`Acceleration Bay and Defendants Activision Blizzard, Inc., Electronic Arts Inc., Take-Two
`
`Interactive Software Inc., Rockstar Games, Inc. and 2K Sports, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”)
`
`submit their Joint Claim Construction Chart, attached as Exhibit 1, identifying for the Court the
`
`terms and phrases of the claims in issue and each party’s proposed construction of the disputed
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 4 of 11 PagelD #: 10722
`
`claim language with citations to the intrinsic evidence in support of their respective proposed
`
`constructions.!
`
`TheAsserted Patents are attached as Exhibits A-1 — A-6: U.S. Patent Nos. 6,701,344 (the
`
`“*344 Patent), 6,714,966 (the ““966 Patent”), 6,732,147 (the “147 Patent”), 6,829,634 (the “‘634
`
`Patent”), 6,910,069 (the “‘069 Patent”) and 6,920,497 (the “‘497 Patent”).?
`
`Additional portions of the intrinsic record cited by the parties are identified in the
`
`following summarytable:
`
`
`Evidence
`
` USS. Pat. No. 6,714,966
`
`Asserted Patents
`
`
`US. Pat. No. 6,701,344
`
`
`
`USS. Pat. No. 6,732,147
`A-3
`
`
`USS. Pat. No. 6,829,634
`A-4
`
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,910,069
`A-5
`
`
`A-6 {es Pat. No. 6,920,497
`
`' Defendants’ Statement: On April 5, 2017, Plaintiff dropped various claims and attempted to
`add various claims. On April 13, 2017, Judge Andrewsheld that “[a]bsent good cause, Plaintiff
`cannotsubstitute different claims for the ones currently asserted ...” Therefore, it appears that
`certain terms do not have to be construed against certain claims anymore, and at least one term
`can be droppedin its entirety. Defendants will review thelist and offer a revision after it has
`conferred with Plaintiff. Additionally, various Inter Partes Review petitions are currently
`pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The followinglisting of claimsis not an
`admission that any particular claim is valid. Furthermore, Defendants reserve the right to modify
`this list of claims consistent with current and future rulings at the Patent and Trademark Office.
`? The Asserted Patents state that they are “related.” Many of the Asserted Patents have the same
`or similar disclosures, and each party’s citation to a disclosure in one patent shall be understood
`to encompass the sameor similar disclosures in the other Asserted Patents.
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 5 of 11 PagelD #: 10723
`
`File Histories of the Asserted Patents
`
` Evidence
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review Decisions
`
`
`
`
`
`
`File History of U.S. Pat. No. 6,701,344
`
`
`
`File History of U.S. Pat. No. 6,714,966 _
`
`
`File History of U.S. Pat. No. 6,732,147
`
`
`File History of U.S. Pat. No. 6,829,634
`
`File History of U.S. Pat. No. 6,910,069
`
`File History of U.S. Pat. No. 6,920,497
`
`
`
`
`
`‘344 Patent, IPR2015-01972, Final Written Decision
`
`
`‘634 Patent, IPR2015-01996, Final Written Decision
`
`
`‘344 Patent, IPR2015-01972, Institution Decision
`
`
`
`
`‘634 Patent, IPR2016-00727, Institution Denial
`
`
`
`
`‘069 Patent, IPR2016-00726, Institution Denial
`
`
`
`
`
`C-1
`
`
`C-2
`‘066 Patent, IPR2015-01953, Final Written Decision
`
`
`C-3
`
`‘066 Patent, IPR2015-01953, Institution Decision
`
`‘634 Patent, IPR2015-01996,Institution Decision
`
`
`
`
`‘147 Patent, IPR2016-00747, Partial Institution Decision
`
`
`
`‘497 Patent, IPR2016-00724, Institution Decision
`
`
`
`
`C-11|‘344 Patent, IPR2015-01970, Final Written Decision
`
`
`C-12|‘344 Patent, IPR2016-00931, Institution Denial
`
`
`‘966 Patent, IPR2015-01951, Final Written Decision
`C-13
`
`
`
`[cM
`
`‘966 Patent, IPR2016-00932,Institution Denial
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 6 of 11 PagelD #: 10724
`
`‘966 Patent, IPR2016-00936,Institution Decision
`
`C-16|‘634 Patent, IPR2015-01964, Final Written Decision
`
`
`C-17|‘634 Patent, IPR2016-00963, Institution Decision
`
`C-18|‘634 Patent, IPR2016-00964, Institution Decision
`
`C-19|°344 Patent, IPR2015-01970, Institution Decision
`
`
`C-20|‘966 Patent, IPR2015-01951, Institution Decision
`
`
`C-21|‘634 Patent: IPR2015-01964, Institution Decision
`
`IPR Papers?
`
`
`‘966 pat.: IPR2015-01953, Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`D-1
`
`
`‘344 pat.: IPR2015-1970, Patent Owner Preliminary Response
`D-2
`
`
`D-3
`
`‘344 pat: IPR2015-1970, Declaration of Virgil Bourassa
`
`
`
`‘344 pat: IPR2015-1970, Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`D-4
`
`
`‘344 pat: IPR2015-01972, Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`D-5
`
`
`‘634 pat: IPR2015-01996, Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`D-6
`
`D-7
`‘A497 pat.: IPR2016-00724, Patent Owner Response, Paper 24
`
`
`3 Defendants’ Statement: Multiple IPRs have beeninstituted on the Asserted Patents. Unlike
`most other cases, the records for the IPRs are well-developed and voluminous. Defendants have
`endeavoredto cite the most relevant portions of those papers, and those citations to the papers
`would necessarily include the materials relating to that argument. When Defendantscite to
`Plaintiff’s statements regarding the meaning ofthe claims from the IPR proceedings, Defendants
`are in no way implicitly or explicitly agreeing with those meanings, but intend to argue that
`Plaintiff is bound by those statements. Further, because many of the patents have the same or
`similar disclosures, Plaintiff took the sameor simiiar positions in the IPRs. Defendants’ citation
`to one paper shall be understood to encompass the sameor similar disclosures in the other IPR
`papers. Dueto the volumeof paper, Defendants reserve the right to supplementits citations to
`the IPR papers, especially in response to any inconsistent positions Plaintiff may take now in
`these proceedings.
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 7 of 11 PagelD #: 10725
`
`‘A497 pat.: IPR2016-00724, Deposition of Michael Goodrich
`
`
`
`
`‘069 pat: IPR2016-00726, Patent Owner Preliminary Response
`
`
`‘634 pat.: IPR2016-00727, Patent Owner Preliminary Response
`
`
`
`
`
`D-15
`
`IPR2015-01970, Petitioner’s Petition for {nter Partes Review
`
`D-16|IPR2015-01970, 10/14/16 Petitioner’s Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`
`D-17|IPR2015-01970, 1/20/17 Petitioner’s Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`
`D-18|IPR2015-01972, Petitioner’s Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`D-21|IPR2015-01951, 10/15/16 Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2015-01953, 9/24/15 Petitioner’s Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`Evidence
`
`
`
`‘147 pat.: IPR2016-00747, Patent Owner Preliminary Response
`
` .. IPR2016-00747, Patent Owner Response
`‘147 pat
`
`‘147 pat.: IPR2016-00747, Deposition of Dr. Goodrich
`|
`
`‘147 pat.: IPR2016-00747, Deposition of Virgil Bourassa
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`D-19|IPR2015-01972, 10/15/16 Petitioners’ Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`
`D-20|IPR2015-01951, 9/24/15 Petitioner’s Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`
`D-22|IPR2015-01951, 1/20/17 Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
` D-23
`
`
`D-24|IPR2015-01953, 10/15/16 Petitioners” Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`D-25|IPR2016-00932, 4/22/16 Petitioner’s Petition
`
`
`
`D-26|IPR2016-00936, 4/22/16 Petitioner’s Petition
`
`
`
`
`
`D-27|IPR2015-01964, 9/28/15 Petitioner’s Petition
`
`
`
`D-28|IPR2015-01964, 10/15/16 Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`
`
`
`
`D-29|IPR2015-01964, 1/20/17 Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 8 of 11 PagelD #: 10726
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01996, 9/28/15 Petitioner’s Petition
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00963, 4/29/16 Petitioner’s Petition
`
`
`D-32|IPR2016-00964, 4/29/16 Petitioner’s Petition
`
`
`D-33|IPR2016-00726, 3/12/16 Petitioner’s Petition
`
`
`D-34|IPR2016-00747, 3/29/16 Petitioner’s Corrected Petition
`
`
`D-35|IPR2016-00724, 3/11/16 Petition
`
`D-36|IPR2016-00724,3/28/17 Corrected Replyin Support of Petition
`
`IPR2015-01996, 10/15/16 Petitioner’s Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner Response
`
`Evidence
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00727, 3/12/16 Petition
`
`
`IPR2016-00747, 3/7/17 Reply in Support of Petition
`
`
`E-1 to E-14 Not Used
`
`‘966 pat.: IPR2015-01951, Patent Owner’s Response
`
`
`‘966 pat.: IPR2015-01951, Motion to Amend
`
`
`‘966 pat.: IPR2015-01951, Reply In Support of Motion to Amend
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`E-15|‘966 pat.: IPR2015-01951, Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`
`
`
`
`
`E-19|‘966 pat.: IPR2015-01953, Patent Owner’s Response
`
`
`E-20|‘966 pat.: IPR2015-01953, Motion to Amend
`
`‘966 pat.: IPR2015-01953, Reply In Support of Motion to Amend
`
`
`‘344 pat:
`
`‘344 pat: IPR2015-1970, Motion to Amend
`
`*344 pat: IPR2015-1970, Reply In Support of Motion to Amend
`
`
`IPR2015-1970, Patent Owner Response
`
`
`
`
`E-25|‘344 pat: IPR2015-1972, Patent Owner Response
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 9 of 11 PagelD #: 10727
`
`Evidence
`
`
`
`
`
` ‘344 pat: IPR2015-1972, Motion to Amend
`°344 pat:
`
`
`
`IPR2015-1972, Reply In Support of Motion to Amend
`
`
`‘634 pat: IPR2015-01964, Patent Owner Preliminary Response
`
`
` ‘634 pat: IPR2015-01964, Patent Owner Response
`
`
`‘634 pat: IPR2015-01964, Motion to Amend
`
`
`‘634 pat: IPR2015-01964, Reply In Support of Motion to Amend
`
`
`
`
`‘634 pat: IPR2015-01996, Patent Owner Response
`E-33|‘634 pat: IPR2015-01996, Motion to Amend
`
`
`E-34|‘634 pat: IPR2015-01996, Reply In Support of Motion to Amend
`
`
`E-35|‘497 pat.: IPR2016-00724, Patent Owner Preliminary Response
`
`
`E-36|IPR2016-00724, Deposition of Michael Goodrich, Ex. 1020
`
`
`IPR2016-00724, Deposition of Harry Bims, Ex. 1023 -
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00724, Ex. 2001
`
`
`IPR2016-00724, Ex. 2003
`
`
`Theparties’ identification of intrinsic evidence is preliminary. The parties base this
`disclosure on information currently known by and available to them. Theparties reserve the
`
`right to amend, modify, and/or supplementtheir identification of intrinsic evidence to take into
`
`account additional information that comestolight, including without limitation as additional
`
`contentions are made, facts are ascertained, analyses are made, and proposed constructions are
`
`provided. Further, the parties reserve the right to rely on the intrinsic evidenceidentified by
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 10 of 11 PagelD #: 10728
`
`opposing parties to support their constructions. Finally, the parties reserve the right to rely on
`
`the full content of the documents cited and attached as listed in the table above.
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Paul J. Andre
`Lisa Kobialka
`KRAMERLEVIN NAFTALIS &
`FRANKEL LLP
`990 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`(650) 752-1700
`
`Aaron M.Frankel
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS &
`FRANKEL LLP
`1177 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10036
`(212) 715-9100
`
`POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP
`
`By: /s/ Philip A. Rovner
`Philip A. Rovner (#3215)
`Jonathan A. Choa (#5319)
`Hercules Plaza
`P.O. Box 951
`Wilmington, DE 19899
`(302) 984-6000
`provner@potteranderson.com
`jchoa@potteranderson.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 103 Filed 04/25/17 Page 11 of 11 PageID #: 10729
`
`Public Version Dated:
`5089712
`
`April 25, 2017
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket