Paper No. 31
`Filed October 21, 2014
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`
`AGILYSYS, INC., ET AL.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`AMERANTH, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_____________
`
`Case CBM2014-00015
`Patent 6,384,850 B1
`_____________
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, MEREDITH C. PETRAVICK, and
`STACEY G. WHITE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`PETITIONER’S FILING OF DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS IN
`ACCORDANCE WITH 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b)
`
`
`
`
`Filed October 21, 2014
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`
`AGILYSYS, INC., ET AL.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`AMERANTH, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_____________
`
`Case CBM2014-00015
`Patent 6,384,850 B1
`_____________
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, MEREDITH C. PETRAVICK, and
`STACEY G. WHITE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`PETITIONER’S FILING OF DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS IN
`ACCORDANCE WITH 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b)
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner hereby respectfully submits its demonstrative exhibits pursuant to
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b) and the Order Trial Hearing dated October 6, 2014 (Paper
`
`
`
`30).
`
`Dated: October 21, 2014
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Richard S. Zembek
`Richard S. Zembek
`Reg. No. 43,306
`FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P.
`1301 McKinney, Suite 5100
`Houston, Texas 77010
`Tel: 713-651-5151
`Fax: 713-651-5246
`richard.zembek@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`Gilbert A. Greene
`Reg. No. 48,366
`FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI LLP
`98 San Jacinto Boulevard, Suite 1100
`Austin, TX 78701
`Tel: 512.474.5201
`Fax: 512.536.4598
`bert.greene@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CBM2014-00013 Apple, Inc., et al. v. Ameranth, Inc.
`CBM2014-00015 Agilysys, Inc., et al. v. Ameranth, Inc.
`CBM2014-00016 Agilysys, Inc., et al. v. Ameranth, Inc.
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,982,733
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,384,850
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,871,325
`
`Petitioner’s Demonstratives
`
`Consolidated Oral Argument
`October 24, 2014
`
`
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Procedural History
`’733 Patent (CBM2014-00013)
`– Petition challenged claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 112.
`– Trial instituted on claims 1-16 under § 101.
`
`’850 Patent (CBM2014-00015)
`– Petition challenged claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 112.
`– Trial instituted on claims 1-11 (“generating menus”) under § 101.
`– Trial not instituted on claims 12-16 (“application and data synchronization”).
`
`’325 Patent (CBM2014-00016)
`– Petition challenged claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 112.
`– Trial instituted on claims 1-10 (“generating menus”) under § 101.
`– Trial not instituted on claims 11-15 (“application and data synchronization”).
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 23 at 2-3
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 20 at 2-3, 22, 24
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 19 at 2-3, 22-23, 25
`
`2
`
`
`
`Claim 1 of ’733 Patent
`
`An information management and synchronous communications system for generating and
`transmitting menus comprising:
`a. a central processing unit,
`b. a data storage device connected to said central processing unit,
`c. an operating system including a graphical user interface,
`d. a first menu consisting of menu categories, said menu categories consisting of menu
`items, said first menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window
`of said graphical user interface in a hierarchical tree format,
`e. a modifier menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window of
`said graphical user interface,
`f. a sub-modifier menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window
`of said graphical user interface, and
`g. application software for generating a second menu from said first menu and
`transmitting said second menu to a wireless handheld computing device or Web page,
`wherein the application software facilitates the generation of the second menu by
`allowing selection of categories and items from the first menu, addition of menu
`categories to the second menu, addition of menu items to the second menu and
`assignment of parameters to items in the second menu using the graphical user
`interface of said operating system, said parameters being selected from the modifier
`and sub-modifier menus, wherein said second menu is manually modified after
`generation.
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1033 at 15:60-16:25
`
`3
`
`
`
`Claim 1 of ’850 Patent
`
`An information management and synchronous communications system for generating and
`transmitting menus comprising:
`a. a central processing unit,
`b. a data storage device connected to said central processing unit,
`c. an operating system including a graphical user interface,
`d. a first menu consisting of menu categories, said menu categories consisting of menu
`items, said first menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window
`of said graphical user interface in a hierarchical tree format,
`e. a modifier menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window of
`said graphical user interface,
`f. a sub-modifier menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window
`of said graphical user interface, and
`g. application software for generating a second menu from said first menu and
`transmitting said second menu to a wireless handheld computing device or Web page,
`wherein the application software facilitates the generation of the second menu by
`allowing selection of categories and items from the first menu, addition of menu
`categories to the second menu, addition of menu items to the second menu and
`assignment of parameters to items in the second menu using the graphical user
`interface of said operating system, said parameters being selected from the modifier
`and sub-modifier menus.
`
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 14:48-15:11
`
`4
`
`
`
`Claim 1 of ’325 Patent
`
`An information management and synchronous communications system for generating and
`transmitting menus comprising:
`a. a central processing unit,
`b. a data storage device connected to said central processing unit,
`c. an operating system including a graphical user interface,
`d. a first menu consisting of menu categories, said menu categories consisting of menu
`items, said first menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window
`of said graphical user interface in a hierarchical tree format,
`e. a modifier menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window of
`said graphical user interface,
`f. a sub-modifier menu stored on said data storage device and displayable in a window
`of said graphical user interface, and
`g. application software for generating a second menu from said first menu and
`transmitting said second menu to a wireless handheld computing device or Web page.
`wherein the application software facilitates the generation of the second menu by
`allowing selection of categories and items from the first menu, addition of menu
`categories to the second menu, addition of menu items to the second menu and
`assignment of parameters to items in the second menu using the graphical user
`interface of said operating system, said parameters being selected from the modifier
`and sub-modifier menus, wherein said second menu to applicable to a predetermined
`type of ordering.
`
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1032 at 14:60-15:24
`
`5
`
`
`
`The Preamble Is Not a Limitation
`
`From Patent Owner’s Response:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 29 at 36; Paper 30 at 3-4
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 27 at 34; Paper 28 at 3
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 26 at 35; Paper 27 at 3-4
`
`6
`
`
`
`The Preamble Is Not a Limitation (contd.)
`
`From Court’s Construction in Ameranth v. Par:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 2017 at 4; Paper 30 at 4
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 2017 at 4; Paper 28 at 3-4
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 2017 at 4; Paper 27 at 4
`
`7
`
`
`
`The Preamble Is Not a Limitation (contd.)
`
`Claim 12 of the
`’850 Patent
`(not instituted):
`
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 16:15-17;
`Paper 28 at 6
`
`8
`
`
`
`The Preamble Is Not a Limitation (contd.)
`
`From Patent Owner’s briefing in Ameranth v. Par:
`
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1067 at 4-5; Paper 28 at 6-7
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1067 at 4-5; Paper 27 at 7
`
`9
`
`
`
`“Central Processing Unit”
`Is a Microprocessor
`From the ’733, ’850, and ’325 specifications:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1033 at 6:52-54; Paper 30 at 7
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 5:37-39; Paper 28 at 7
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1032 at 5:43-45; Paper 27 at 7-8
`
`10
`
`
`
`Alice v. CLS Bank
`When patent claims are directed to an abstract
`idea, “we consider the elements of each claim
`both individually and as an ordered combination
`to determine whether the additional elements
`transform the nature of the claim into a patent-
`eligible application. We have described step
`two of this analysis as a search for an inventive
`concept . . . .”
`134 S. Ct. at 2355 (internal citations and quotations omitted)
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 1, 9
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 28 at 1, 9
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 27 at 1, 9
`
`11
`
`
`
`§ 101 vs. §§ 102/103
`“Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful
`process, machine, manufacture, or composition of
`matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof,
`may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions
`and requirements of this title.”
`35 U.S.C. § 101
`
`“These considerations lead us to decline the
`Government’s invitation to substitute §§ 102, 103, and
`112 inquiries for the better established inquiry under
`§ 101.”
`Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1304
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 8
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 28 at 8-9
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 27 at 9
`
`12
`
`
`
`The Instituted Claims are
`Directed to an Abstract Idea
`From the ’850 and ’325 Institution Decisions:
`
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 20 at 13, 23
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 19 at 13-14, 24
`
`13
`
`
`
`The Instituted Claims are
`Directed to an Abstract Idea (contd.)
`From the ’733 Institution Decision:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 23 at 28
`
`14
`
`
`
`The Instituted Claims are
`Directed to an Abstract Idea (contd.)
`From the ’733, ’850, and ’325 specifications:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1033 at 1:25-31, 3:39-43; Paper 8 at 52, 54
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 1:18-24, 3:31-35; Paper 9 at 59-60, 61-62
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1032 at 1:23-29, 3:36-40; Paper 8 at 62, 64
`
`15
`
`
`
`The Instituted Claims are
`Directed to an Abstract Idea (contd.)
`From the ’733, ’850, and ’325 specifications:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1033 at 14:53-55, 15:31-34, 15:43-45
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 13:37-39, 14:18-21, 14:30-32
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1032 at 13:50-52, 14:30-33, 14:42-44
`
`16
`
`
`
`The Instituted Claims Lack
`an Inventive Concept
`• “[T]he mere recitation of a generic computer cannot
`transform a patent-ineligible abstract idea into a
`patent-eligible invention.” Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2358.
`
`• “Taking the claim elements separately, the function
`performed by the computer at each step of the
`process is ‘[p]urely conventional.’ . . . In short, each
`step does no more than require a generic computer
`to perform generic computer functions.” Alice, 134
`S. Ct. at 2359 (quoting Mayo).
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 10, 14
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 28 at 11, 13
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 27 at 11, 13
`
`17
`
`
`
`The Instituted Claims Lack
`an Inventive Concept (contd.)
`From the ’733, ’850, and ’325 specifications:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1033 at 6:47-52, 6:63-67; Paper 30 at 13
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 5:34-38, 5:48-52; Paper 28 at 12
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1032 at 5:39-43, 5:54-58; Paper 27 at 13
`
`18
`
`
`
`The Instituted Claims Lack
`an Inventive Concept (contd.)
`From the ’733, ’850, and ’325 specifications:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1033 at 12:60-65; Paper 30 at 13
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 11:43-48; Paper 28 at 13
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1032 at 11:56-61; Paper 27 at 13
`
`19
`
`
`
`The Instituted Claims Lack
`an Inventive Concept (contd.)
`From the ’733, ’850, and ’325 specifications:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1033 at 12:13-20; Paper 30 at 13
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 10:63-11:3; Paper 28 at 13
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1032 at 11:9-16; Paper 27 at 14
`
`20
`
`
`
`“Customizing Display Layouts” Is Not
`an Element of the Instituted Claims
`From Patent Owner’s Response for ’850 Patent:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 29 at 49
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 27 at 49
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 26 at 49-50
`
`21
`
`
`
`“Customizing Display Layouts” Is Not
`an Element of the Instituted Claims (contd.)
`From Petitioner’s Reply for ’850 Patent:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 10
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 28 at 11
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 27 at 11
`
`22
`
`
`
`“Customizing Display Layouts” Is Not
`an Element of the Instituted Claims (contd.)
`Claim 1 of the
`’077 Patent
`(not instituted):
`
`CBM2014-00016, Exhibit 1001 at 15:56-16:61
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 10
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 28 at 11
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 27 at 11
`
`23
`
`
`
`“Manually Modified” Does Not
`Provide an Inventive Concept
`Claim 1 of the
`’733 Patent:
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1033 at 15:60-16:25
`
`24
`
`
`
`“Manually Modified” Does Not
`Provide an Inventive Concept (contd.)
`“The claims merely employ computers to track, reconcile,
`and administer a life insurance policy with a stable value
`component--i.e., the computer simply performs more
`efficiently what could otherwise be accomplished
`manually.”
`Bancorp, 687 F.3d at 1279
`
`“‘Simply appending conventional steps, specified at a
`high level of generality,’ was not ‘enough’ to ‘supply an
`inventive concept.’”
`Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2357 (emph. in orig. and int. cit. omitted)
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 11
`
`25
`
`
`
`“Manually Modified” Does Not
`Provide an Inventive Concept (contd.)
`From U.S. Pat. No.
`4,972,496
`(issued 20 years
`before ’733 Patent):
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1071
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 11-12
`
`26
`
`
`
`“Manually Modified” Does Not
`Provide an Inventive Concept (contd.)
`From U.S. Pat. No.
`4,972,496
`(issued 20 years
`before ’733 Patent):
`
`CBM2014-00013, Exhibit 1071 at Fig. 12C
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 11-12
`
`27
`
`
`
`The Claim as a Whole
`Does Not Solve a Technical Problem
`“Considered as an ordered combination these
`computer components add nothing that is not al-
`ready present when the steps are considered
`separately. Viewed as a whole, these method
`claims simply recite the concept of intermediated
`settlement as performed by a generic computer.
`They do not, for example, purport to improve the
`functioning of the computer itself or effect an
`improvement in any other technology or technical
`field.”
`
`Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2359 (internal citations and quotations omitted)
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 14
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 28 at 13-14
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 27 at 14
`
`28
`
`
`
`The Dependent Claims Do Not
`Provide an Inventive Concept
`“The claims merely employ computers to track,
`reconcile, and administer a life insurance policy with a
`stable value component--i.e., the computer simply
`performs more efficiently what could otherwise be
`accomplished manually.”
`Bancorp, 687 F.3d at 1279
`
`“The notion that post-solution activity, no matter how
`conventional or obvious in itself, can transform an
`unpatentable principle into a patentable process exalts
`form over substance.”
`Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. at 590
`
`CBM2014-00013, Paper 30 at 15
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 28 at 15
`CBM2014-00016, Paper 27 at 15
`
`29
`
`
`
`The “Preview” Functionality
`Does Not Provide an Inventive Concept
`From Patent Owner’s Response for ’850 Patent:
`
`CBM2014-00015, Paper 27 at 6
`
`30
`
`
`
`The “Preview” Functionality
`Does Not Provide an Inventive Concept (contd.)
`
`Claim 10 of the
`’850 Patent:
`
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1031 at 15:41-44; Paper 27 at 6
`
`31
`
`
`
`The “Preview” Functionality
`Does Not Provide an Inventive Concept (contd.)
`From “Professional Visual Basic Windows CE
`Programming” (1998):
`
`CBM2014-00015, Exhibit 1069 at 43; Paper 28 at 15
`
`32
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`I hereby certify that on October 21, 2014, the foregoing Petitioner’s Filing
`
`of Demonstrative Exhibits was served by electronic mail upon the following lead
`
`and backup counsel of record for Patent Owner Ameranth, Inc.:
`
`John W. Osborne
`
`josborne@osborneipl.com
`
`Michael D. Fabiano
`
`mdfabiano@fabianolawfirm.com
`
`/s/ Richard S. Zembek
`Richard S. Zembek
`Reg. No. 43,306
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
