UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`Boku, Inc. and Boku Account Services, Inc.
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`Xilidev, Inc.
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 7,273,168
`Filing Date: October 8, 2004
`Issue Date: September 25, 2007
`Title: POINT-OF-SALE BILLING VIA HAND-HELD DEVICES
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review No. ______
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Page
`
`
`
`I.
`
`II.
`III.
`
`Table of Contents
`
`
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(A)(1) ........................................ 1
`A.
`Real Parties-ln-lnterest under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ..................................... 1
`B.
`Related Matters under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ................................................ 1
`C.
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .............................. 1
`D.
`Service Information ......................................................................................... 2
`E.
`Power of Attorney ............................................................................................ 2
`PAYMENT OF FEES - 37 C.F.R. § 42.203 ................................................................ 2
`REQUIREMENTS FOR COVERED BUSINESS METHOD REVIEW UNDER
`37 C.F.R. § 42.304 ..................................................................................................... 3
`A.
`Grounds for Standing under 37 C.F.R. § 42.304(a) ........................................ 3
`B.
`The ‘168 Patent is a “Covered Business Method Patent” ............................... 3
`C.
`Claims 1-23 are Not Directed to a “Technological Invention” ......................... 5
`D.
`Identification of Challenge under 37 C.F.R. § 42.304(b) and Statement
`of Precise Relief Requested ........................................................................... 6
`SUMMARY OF THE ‘168 PATENT ........................................................................... 7
`A.
`Brief Description of the ‘168 Patent ................................................................ 7
`B.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ................................................................. 10
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.304(B)(3) ................................. 10
`A.
`“Completing the Transaction Request” and “Completing the
`Transaction” .................................................................................................. 11
`“Point-Of-Sale” .............................................................................................. 12
`B.
`CLAIM 17 OF THE ‘168 PATENT IS UNPATENTABLE UNDER (PRE-AIA)
`35 U.S.C. § 112, SECOND PARAGRAPH .............................................................. 13
`A.
`Legal Standard for Definiteness .................................................................... 13
`B.
`Claim 17 is Indefinite – Ground 1 .................................................................. 13
`VII. CLAIMS 1-16 AND 18-23 OF THE ‘168 PATENT ARE UNPATENTABLE
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 102 AND/OR § 103 ................................................................. 20
`A.
`Prior Art ......................................................................................................... 21
`
`IV.
`
`V.
`
`VI.
`
`
`
`
`
`-i-
`
`
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`B.
`
`C.
`D.
`E.
`
`Claims 1-5, 7-16, 18 and 20-23 Are Anticipated by Demoff – Ground 2
`and (Alternative) Ground 3 ............................................................................ 23
`Claim 19 Is Obvious over Demoff – Ground 4 .............................................. 50
`Claim 6 Is Obvious over Demoff in view of Gerson – Ground 5 ................... 51
`Claims 1-11 and 20-23 Are Unpatentable over Gerson in View of
`Wronski – Ground 6 ...................................................................................... 51
`Claims 12-16 Are Anticipated by Gerson – Ground 7 ................................... 70
`Claims 18 and 19 Are Anticipated by Gerson – Ground 7 and
`(Alternative) Ground 8 ................................................................................... 76
`VIII. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................... 80
`
`
`F.
`G.
`
`
`
`
`
`-ii-
`
`
`
`

`
`List of Exhibits
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1001: U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168 to Linlor (“the ‘168 patent”)
`Exhibit 1002: File History of the ‘168 Patent
`Exhibit 1003: Declaration of Dr. Michael Shamos (“Shamos Dec.”)
`Exhibit 1004: U.S. Patent No. 6,456,984 to Demoff et al. (“Demoff”)
`Exhibit 1005: International Publication No. WO 01/95546 to Gerson (“Gerson”)
`Exhibit 1006: U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0101137 (“Wronski”)
`Exhibit 1007: European Patent Application No. EP 1065634 to Van Moer et al. (“Van Moer”)
`Exhibit 1008: Complaint filed in Xilidev, Inc. v. Boku, Inc. and Boku Account Services, Inc. et
`al., Case No. 3:13-cv-02793-DMS-NLS
`Exhibit 1009: File Wrapper for U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/510,649
`
`
`
`
`
`-iii-
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Page(s)
`
`Cases
`In re Donaldson Co.,
`16 F.3d 1189 (Fed. Cir. 1994) ......................................................................................... 15
`Exxon Research and Eng’g Co. v. United States,
`265 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2001) ....................................................................................... 13
`In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litig.,
`639 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ....................................................................................... 16
`Noah Sys. Inc. v. Intuit Inc.,
`675 F.3d 1302 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ................................................................................. 15, 16
`Personalized Media Commc’ns v. Int’l Trade Comm’n,
`161 F.3d 696 (Fed. Cir. 1998) ......................................................................................... 13
`Seal-Flex, Inc. v. Athletic Track and Court Constr.,
`172 F.3d 836 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (Rader, J., concurring) .................................................... 15
`In re Van Geuns,
`988 F.2d 1181 (Fed. Cir. 1993) ....................................................................................... 11
`Xilidev, Inc. v. Boku, Inc. and Boku Account Services, Inc. et al.,
`Case No. 3:13-cv-02793-DMS-NLS .................................................................................. 1
`In re Zletz,
`893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989) ................................................................................... 10, 11
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 102 ..................................................................................................................... 20
`35 U.S.C. § 102(a) .......................................................................................................... 22, 31
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ...................................................................................................... 7, 21, 23
`35 U.S.C. § 103 .................................................................................................................... 20
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ................................................................................................ 7, 31, 50, 52
`
`
`
`
`
`-iv-
`
`
`
`

`
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2 ...................................................................................................... passim
`35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6 ....................................................................................................... 14, 15
`35 U.S.C. § 322(a)(1) ............................................................................................................. 3
`America Invents Act ............................................................................................................ 1, 4
`Other Authorities
`37 C.F.R. § 42 ........................................................................................................................ 1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(A)(1) ............................................................................................................. 1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ............................................................................................................. 1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ............................................................................................................. 1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ............................................................................................................. 1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) ............................................................................................................... 2
`37 C.F.R. § 42.15(b) ............................................................................................................... 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.203 .................................................................................................................. 2
`37 C.F.R. § 42.300(b) ........................................................................................................... 10
`37 C.F.R. § 42.301(a) ......................................................................................................... 3, 5
`37 C.F.R. § 42.301(b) ............................................................................................................. 5
`37 C.F.R. § 42.302 ................................................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.302(a) ............................................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.302(b) ............................................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.304 .................................................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.304(a) ............................................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.304(b) ............................................................................................................. 6
`37 C.F.R. § 42.304(b)(3) ....................................................................................................... 10
`
`
`
`
`
`-v-
`
`
`
`

`
`
`157 Cong. Rec. S1364. (daily ed. Mar. 8, 2011) .................................................................... 4
`157 Cong. Rec. S1364. (daily ed. Mar. 8, 2011) .................................................................. .. 4
`77 Fed. Reg. 48734, 48735 (August 14, 2012) .......................................................... 3, 4, 5, 6
`77 Fed. Reg. 48734, 48735 (August 14, 2012) ........................................................ .. 3, 4, 5, 6
`M.P.E.P. § 2141.01(a) .......................................................................................................... 21
`M.P.E.P. §2141.01(a) ........................................................................................................ .. 21
`M.P.E.P. § 2143 (A, C) ......................................................................................................... 20
`M.P.E.P. §2143 (A, C) ....................................................................................................... .. 20
`M.P.E.P. §2181(I) ................................................................................................................. 14
`M.P.E.P. §2181(|) ............................................................................................................... .. 14
`M.P.E.P. § 2181 (I)(B) .......................................................................................................... 14
`M.P.E.P. §2181 (|)(B) ........................................................................................................ .. 14
`M.P.E.P. § 2181 (I)(C) .......................................................................................................... 15
`M.P.E.P. §2181 (|)(C) ........................................................................................................ .. 15
`U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168 ............................................................................................. passim
`U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168 ........................................................................................... ..passim
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-vi-
`
`
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`Through counsel, real parties-in-interest Boku, Inc. and Boku Account Services, Inc.
`
`(collectively, "Petitioner" or “Boku”) hereby petition for Covered Business Method (CBM)
`
`review under Section 18(a) of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) and 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42 of claims 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168 (Ex. 1001) (“the ‘168 patent”), and asserts
`
`that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the instant petition
`
`is unpatentable.
`
`I.
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(A)(1)
`A.
`Real Parties-ln-lnterest under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)
`Boku, Inc. and Boku Account Services, Inc. are the real parties-in-interest for the
`
`instant petition. Boku Account Services, Inc. is a subsidiary of Boku, Inc.
`
`Related Matters under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)
`B.
`Boku, Inc. and Boku Account Services, Inc. have been sued by Patent Owner for
`
`infringement of the ‘168 patent in Xilidev, Inc. v. Boku, Inc. and Boku Account Services, Inc.
`
`et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-02793-DMS-NLS. See, Ex. 1008. This lawsuit was filed in the
`
`Southern District of California (San Diego) on November 25, 2013 and is on-going. As of the
`
`filing date of this petition, only claims 1, 12, and 17-19 have been asserted in the lawsuit. In
`
`addition, on November 26, 2013 in the same court, Patent Owner separately sued Danal,
`
`Inc. for infringement of the ‘168 patent: Xilidev, Inc. v. Danal, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-
`
`02799-AJB-BLM. The case has settled, although the action has not yet been dismissed.
`
`1
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`There are no other related matters that the Petitioner is aware of at the time of filing the
`
`instant petition.
`
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)
`C.
`Petitioner provides the following designation of counsel.
`
`LEAD COUNSEL
`Frank Pietrantonio (Reg. No. 32,289)
`Cooley LLP
` ATTN: Patent Group
`1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 700
`Washington, DC 20004
`Tel: (703) 456-8567
`Fax: (202) 842-7899
`
`fpietrantonio@cooley.com
`
`Service Information
`D.
`As identified in the attached Certificate of Service, a copy of the instant petition, in its
`
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`Drew Koning (Reg. No. 60,764)
`Cooley LLP
` ATTN: Patent Group
`1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 700
`Washington, DC 20004
`Tel: (858) 550-6129
`Fax: (202) 842-7899
`
`dkoning@cooley.com
`
`entirety, including all Exhibits and a power of attorney, is being served by EXPRESS MAIL®
`
`to the address of the attorney or agent of record for the owner of record of the ‘168 patent,
`
`Xilidev, Inc. (“Patent Owner” or “Xilidev”). Boku may be served at the lead counsel address
`
`provided in Section I.C. of this Petition, and consents to electronic service by email at the
`
`addresses above.
`
`Power of Attorney
`E.
`A power of attorney is being filed with the designation of counsel in accordance with
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b).
`
`2
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`
`II.
`
`PAYMENT OF FEES - 37 C.F.R. § 42.203
`This petition for CBM review requests review of 23 claims of the ’168 patent and is
`
`accompanied by a payment of $35,150, which includes a $12,750 CBM Review Petition Fee
`
`(i.e., $12,000 for 20 claims and an additional $750 for 3 claims in excess of 20 claims) and a
`
`$22,400 Post-Institution Fee (i.e., $18,000 for 15 claims and an additional $4,400 for 8
`
`claims in excess of 15 claims). See 37 C.F.R. § 42.15(b). Thus, this petition meets the fee
`
`requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 322(a)(1).
`
`III.
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR COVERED BUSINESS METHOD REVIEW UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.304
`A.
`Grounds for Standing under 37 C.F.R. § 42.304(a)
`Petitioner certifies that the ‘168 patent is eligible for CBM review (see Sections III.B
`
`and III.C below) and further certifies that Petitioner meets the eligibility requirements set
`
`forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.302. As discussed in Section I.C of this petition, Boku has been sued
`
`by Patent Owner for infringement of the ‘168 patent in the aforementioned litigation. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.302(a). Boku is also not barred or otherwise estopped from challenging the
`
`claims on the grounds identified within the instant petition. 37 C.F.R. § 42.302(b).
`
`The ‘168 Patent is a “Covered Business Method Patent”
`B.
`A covered business method patent is defined as “a patent that claims a method or
`
`corresponding apparatus for performing data processing or other operations used in the
`
`practice, administration, or management of a financial product or service …” 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.301(a). The term “financial product or service” should be “interpreted broadly” and
`
`“encompass patents claiming activities that are financial in nature, incidental to a financial
`
`3
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`activity or complementary to a financial activity.” Transitional Program for Covered Business
`
`Method Patents, 77 Fed. Reg. 48734, 48735 (August 14, 2012)(“CBM Final Rules”)(internal
`
`quotes omitted).
`
`Independent claims 1, 12, 17 and 18 are directed to covered business methods and
`
`qualify the ‘168 patent for CBM review. Independent claims 1 and 18, in particular, are
`
`directed to methods of authenticating or completing a transaction, which are clearly
`
`activities that are “financial in nature, incidental to a financial activity or complementary to a
`
`financial activity.” CBM Final Rules at 48735. Independent claims 1 and 18 also specifically
`
`recite “receiving … a transaction request associated with one or more products and a
`
`payment amount” (claim 1), “completing the transaction request by authorizing deduction of
`
`a transaction amount from the user account maintained by [a] payment source” (claim 1),
`
`“receiving an authorization code … indicating that the payment source authorized deduction
`
`of the payment amount from a payment source” (claim 18), and “deducting a transaction
`
`amount from the payment source” (claim 18). Ex. 1001. The activities of receiving and
`
`processing transaction requests and deducting payment from an account are the epitome of
`
`a financial activity. Independent claims 12 and 17 include similar recitations, although these
`
`claims are drafted in a system claim format.1
`
`1 Petitioner asserts that Congress intended system claims to qualify for CBM review. For
`
`example, during the passage of the America Invents Act, Senator Schumer clarified that
`
`“[t]he phrase ‘method or corresponding apparatus’ is intended to encompass, but not be
`
`4
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`The specification of the ‘168 patent further supports the notion that the claimed
`
`invention is directed to financial activity. The title of the ‘168 patent – “Point-of-Sale Billing
`
`via Hand-Held Devices” – is itself suggestive of financial activity, as billing is necessary and
`
`incidental to a financial transaction. Additionally, the “Background of the Invention” section
`
`of the ‘168 patent discloses that the “invention relates to systems and methods for
`
`completing transactions” and that the “[c]onvenient completion of financial transactions
`
`using hand-held devices continues to gain increasing popularity among consumers.” Ex.
`
`1001, 1:12-17]. Discussions of financial activity can easily be found throughout the ‘168
`
`patent.
`
`Since the claims of the ‘168 patent are directed to financial activity, the patent is
`
`eligible for CBM review.
`
`Claims 1-23 are Not Directed to a “Technological Invention”
`C.
`The CBM patent definition excludes “patents for technological inventions.” 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.301(a). Whether or not a patent qualifies as a “technological invention” depends on the
`
`following factors, which are considered on a case-by-case basis: (a) “whether the claimed
`
`limited to, any type of claim contained in a patent, including, method claims, system claims,
`
`[and] apparatus claims… A patent qualifies as a covered business method patent
`
`regardless of the type or structure of claims contained in the patent.” 157 Cong. Rec.
`
`S1364. (daily ed. Mar. 8, 2011). Thus, independent claims 12 and 17 are also directed to
`
`covered business methods.
`
`5
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`subject matter as a whole recites a technological feature that is novel and unobvious over
`
`the prior art”, and (b) whether the claimed subject matter as a whole “solves a technical
`
`problem using a technical solution.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.301(b).
`
`The CBM Final Rules make clear that “[m]ere recitation of known technologies, such
`
`as computer hardware, communication or computer networks, software, memory, computer-
`
`readable storage medium, scanners, display devices or databases, or specialized
`
`machines, such as an ATM or point of sale device” does not typically render a patent a
`
`technological invention. CBM Final Rules at 48764.
`
`No technological feature is recited in the ‘168 patent claims. The ‘168 patent claims
`
`refer to hand-held devices, transaction databases, and point-of-sale devices, generic
`
`hardware that was neither novel nor unobvious on the effective filing date of the ‘168 patent
`
`but, the alleged invention concerns preventing fraudulent transactions by introducing an
`
`authorization code that verifies that a purchaser has the funds to complete a purchase. That
`
`code is not inherently a technological invention, nor is the process by which it is generated
`
`and verified. Ex. 1001, 2:1-4. For at least this reason, the ‘168 patent claims fail to satisfy
`
`the first prong of the two-part test. As for the second prong of the test, the claims are not
`
`directed to a technical problem at all. They are directed to modifying the amount and type of
`
`information exchanged in a financial transaction to reduce fraud.
`
`D.
`
`Identification of Challenge under 37 C.F.R. § 42.304(b) and Statement of
`Precise Relief Requested
`Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board initiate CBM review of claims 1-23 of
`
`6
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`the ‘168 patent on the grounds set forth in the table below, and requests that each of the
`
`claims be found unpatentable. An explanation of how claims 1-23 are unpatentable under
`
`the statutory grounds is identified below, including the identification of where each element
`
`is found in the prior art patents or publications and the relevance of the prior art reference.
`
`Additional explanation and support for each ground of rejection is set forth in the Declaration
`
`of Dr. Michael Shamos (Ex. 1003) (“Shamos Dec.”).
`
`Ground
`Ground 1
`Ground 2
`
`Ground 3
`
`Ground 4
`Ground 5
`
`‘168 Patent
`Basis for Challenge and Applicable Statutory Ground
`Claim(s)
`Indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112, Second Paragraph
`17
`1-5, 7-16, 18,
`Anticipated by Demoff under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
`20-23
`Anticipated by Demoff, as evidenced by Van Moer, under 35
`1-5, 7-16, 18,
`U.S.C. § 102(b) or, in the alternative, Obvious over Demoff in
`20-23
`view of Van Moer under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`Obvious over Demoff under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`19
`Obvious over Demoff in view of Gerson under 35 U.S.C. §
`6
`103(a)
`1-11, 20-23 Obvious over Gerson in view of Wronski under 35 U.S.C. §
`103(a)
`12-16, 18-19 Anticipated by Gerson under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
`Obvious over Gerson in view of Wronski under 35 U.S.C. §
`18-19
`103(a)
`
`Ground 6
`Ground 7
`Ground 8
`
`SUMMARY OF THE ‘168 PATENT
`A.
`Brief Description of the ‘168 Patent
`The ‘168 patent, titled “Point-Of-Sale Billing via Hand-Held Devices,” describes a
`
`IV.
`
`system and method that allows for the purchase of products and services using a hand-held
`
`device. Ex. 1001, Abstract. As shown below in FIG. 1 of the ‘168 patent, the system can
`
`7
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`include the hand-held device 120 (operated by the consumer), a payment resolution module
`
`110, a payment authorization source 130, a transaction database 140 and a confirmation
`
`device 150 located at the point-of-sale.
`
`
`
`During operation, when a consumer desires to purchase a product (or service) from
`
`a merchant, the hand-held device 120 connects with the payment resolution module 110,
`
`and initiates a transaction request by selecting the desired product (or service) for purchase
`
`and then sending this selection request to the payment resolution module 110. Col. 3, ln.
`
`14-28; see also, FIG. 4; FIG. 3 (items 310 and 320) and corresponding description at col. 7,
`
`ln. 26-46 (“a desired product is identified by entering a product identification code or by
`
`navigating a series of menus using the hand-held device 120”); and col. 1, ln. 43-50. The
`
`payment resolution module 110 then “transmits a verification of the selected product to the
`
`hand-held device 120.” Col. 3, ln. 25-28. In some embodiments, the payment resolution
`
`module 110 may also send “availability, price, product description, and/or other product
`
`related information” back to the hand-held device 120. Col. 1, ln. 50-54.
`
`Next, the payment resolution module 110 authenticates the consumer to ensure that
`
`the consumer is authorized to make the purchase on the hand-held device 120. Col. 3, ln.
`
`8
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`29-45; see also, FIG. 3 (item 330) and FIG. 5. For example, the ‘168 patent describes using
`
`a personal identification code (Abstract), biometrics (col. 7, ln. 17-21), caller ID (col. 7, ln.
`
`48-52), or a serial number of the hand-held device 120 (id.) to identify the consumer for
`
`authentification purposes. See, also, col. 5, ln. 19-34.
`
`After the consumer is authenticated, the payment resolution module 110 transmits
`
`“information identifying the user, along with the product information, such as the price of the
`
`product requested,” to the payment authorization source 130. Col. 3, ln. 46-49. The
`
`“payment authorization source 130” can be, for example, a financial institution such as a
`
`credit card company. Col. 3, ln. 52-55. In return, the payment authorization source 130
`
`sends the payment resolution module 110 “either an authorization or denial” for the
`
`requested charge amount. Col. 3, ln. 62-65.
`
`In some embodiments, the payment resolution module 110 is configured to generate
`
`an authorization code for the approved transactions. Col. 4, ln. 10-12. The authorization
`
`code can then be stored at the transaction database 140 along with other transaction-
`
`related information. Col. 4, ln. 13-26. The payment resolution module 110 also sends this
`
`authorization code to the hand-held device 120 for future use. Col. 4, ln. 27-39.
`
`At the point of sale, the consumer is required by the merchant to provide the
`
`authorization code. Id. The authorization code can be entered into the confirmation device
`
`150 by either the consumer or the merchant. Col. 4, ln. 40-50. The confirmation device 150
`
`then “communicates with the transaction database 140 to confirm that the sales transaction
`
`9
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`has been authorized.” Id. For example, as shown in FIG. 8 of the ‘168 patent, the
`
`transaction database 140 can search for a stored authorization code that matches the
`
`authorization code entered at and received from the confirmation device 150. Col. 11, ln.
`
`16-25. When a matching code is found, the transaction database 140 can send the code to
`
`the confirmation device 150 where it is again compared against the previously entered
`
`authorization code. Col. 11, ln. 26-28; see also, FIG. 8 (item 830). If the confirmation device
`
`150 determines that the codes match, then the transaction is authorized and the consumer
`
`may collect the products or services s/he purchased. Col. 11, ln. 52-67. Shamos Dec., Ex.
`
`1003, ¶¶ 15-24.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`B.
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) in the field of the ‘168 patent in
`
`October 2003 (i.e., the presumed effective filing date of the ‘168 patent) would have been
`
`someone with an undergraduate degree in computer science or with equivalent work
`
`experience. In addition that person would have at least two years of experience with
`
`electronic payment systems, including familiarity with databases and integration with
`
`interactive voice response software. See, Shamos Dec., Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 11-14.
`
`V.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.304(b)(3)
`A claim subject to CBM review is given its “broadest reasonable construction in light
`
`of the specification of the patent in which it appears.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.300(b). This means
`
`that the words of the claim are given their plain meaning unless that meaning is inconsistent
`
`10
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`with the specification. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321 (Fed. Cir. 1989). The “broadest
`
`reasonable construction” standard also requires the Board to refrain from importing a
`
`particular embodiment from the written description into the claim if the claim language is
`
`broader than the embodiment. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 1184 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
`
`This Petition shows that the claims of the ‘168 patent are indefinite, anticipated or
`
`rendered obvious by the prior art identified herein when the challenged claims are given
`
`their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification.2 Except as expressly
`
`set out below, Petitioner construes the language of the claims to have its plain and ordinary
`
`meaning.
`
`the Transaction Request” and “Completing
`
`the
`
`A.
`
`“Completing
`Transaction”
`Independent claim 1 recites “completing the transaction request.” Independent claim
`
`17 recites “completing the transaction request” as well as a “means for completing the
`
`transaction request”. (Note: this “means for” recitation will be addressed separately in
`
`Section V.F below.) The preambles of independent claims 12 and 18 each recite
`
`“completing a transaction” but there are no further references in claims 12 and 18 to
`
`“completing”.
`
`
`2 Any interpretation or construction of the challenged claims in this CBM, either implicitly or
`
`explicitly, is not binding on Petitioner in any future litigation related to the ‘168 patent. See In
`
`re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
`
`11
`
`

`
`Petition for Covered Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168
`Attorney Docket No. BOKU-001/00US 321239-2001
`The ‘168 patent is largely silent about what it means to complete the transaction
`
`
`
`request. Figure 3 at 320 refers to “transmitting the transaction request.” Then, the last step
`
`in Fig. 3 refers to “[verifying the] authorization code at the point of sale.” Ex. 1001. Claim 1
`
`refers to “receiving a transaction request” and then goes on to state what actions take place,
`
`upon verification of the authorization code. Claim 1 states, “completing the transaction
`
`request by authorizing deduction of a transaction amount from the user account maintained
`
`by the payment source and authorizing release of the one or more products to the user of
`
`the hand-held device.” Ex. 1001. Thus “completing the transaction request” means
`
`completing the steps that are performed “by” or at the direction of the payment resolution
`
`module in order to complete the request – in this case, authorizing deduction of the
`
`transaction amount and authorizing release of the products to the user.
`
`
`
`Under the broadest reasonable construction standard, the phrases “completing the
`
`transactio