Case No. IPR2013-00010
`
`Patent No. 7,516,484
`
`Exhibit 2013
`
`1001 West Fourth St.
`Winston-Salem NC 27101-2400
`t 336 607 7300 f 336 607 7500
`
`Steven D. Moore
`direct dial 336 607 7431
`smoore@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`
`
`May 7, 2012
`
`Mr. R. Bradford Fawley, Esq.
`Downs Rachlin Martin, PLLC
`28 Vernon Street
`Brattleboro, VT 05301
`
`Re: MMI’s Proposed Claim Constructions and Identifications of Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Dear Mr. Fawley:
`
`
`
`Pursuant to the Court’s March 5, 2012 Markman Discovery and Briefing Schedule and
`
`Order (D.E.. 24), Defendant Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“MMI”) hereby serves its Proposed Claim
`
`Constructions and Identifications of Intrinsic Evidence.
`
`
`
`The chart attached as Exhibit A includes MMI’s proposed claim constructions for certain
`
`elements and phrases of the asserted claims of the patent-in-suit and intrinsic evidence for these
`
`constructions. These proposed constructions are not an admission of the validity or definiteness
`
`of any claim or term, and MMI expressly reserves the right to assert that any claim or term is
`
`invalid for indefiniteness or other reasons.
`
`
`
`Discovery in this matter is not yet complete. MMI reserves the right to modify its
`
`proposed claim constructions as well as to add or delete terms, phrases, or clauses based on,
`
`without limitation, the constructions served or proposed by Arnouse, information learned in the
`
`course of meeting and conferring with Arnouse’s counsel, information learned through the
`
`course of discovery or other means, and any further changes or amendments to the parties’
`
`infringement or invalidity contentions. MMI also reserves the right to supplement its proposed
`
`claim constructions with intrinsic evidence, extrinsic evidence, or expert testimony, including in
`
`rebuttal to Arnouse’s proposed or subsequent claim constructions. In addition, MMI expressly
`
`reserves the right to supplement or modify its proposed claim constructions as needed with
`
`respect to summary judgment proceedings or trial.
`
`
`
`As set forth more specifically in Exhibit A, MMI may rely on one or more of the
`
`following to support these and other proposed claim constructions: the claims, specification, and
`
`prosecution histories of the asserted patent and related patent applications; other patents;
`
`US2008 3471984.1
`
`ATLANTA AUGUSTA CHARLOTTE DENVER DUBAI NEW YORK OAKLAND RALEIGH SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SILICON VALLEY STOCKHOLM TAIPEI TOKYO WALNUT CREEK WASHINGTON, DC WINSTON-SALEM
`
`

`

`Mr. Fawley
`May 7, 2012
`Page 2
`
`dictionary definitions; definitions from learned treatises; inventor; expert; and other testimony;
`
`and documents and pleadings produced by Arnouse or third parties. Furthermore, MMI’s
`
`identifications of intrinsic evidence listed in Exhibit A are exemplary, and should not be viewed
`
`as a limitation of the evidence upon which MMI will rely.
`
`Sincerely,
`
`Steve Moore
`
`US2008 3471984.1
`
`

`

`Exhibit A – Defendant’s Proposed Constructions
`
`Defendant’s
`Proposed Term
`Claim 1:
`Preamble of claim 1
`is limiting
`
`Defendant’s Proposed
`Construction
`Preamble of claim 1 is
`limiting
`
`A device that needs a reader
`for the user to interact with
`the device.
`
`Claim 1:
`A reader configured
`to interact with a
`portable computer
`without input and
`output means for
`interacting directly
`therewith, the
`reader comprising:
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Office Action mailed January 13, 2009.
`
`Response to Office Action mailed January 13,
`2009, p. 3.
`
`The preamble is limiting, at least because it was
`added during prosecution to overcome a prior art
`rejection. See In re Cruciferous Sprout Litigation,
`301 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2002); Catalina Mktg.
`Int’l v. Coolsavings.com, Inc., 289 F.3d 802, 808
`(Fed. Cir. 2002); Briston-Myers Squibb Co. v. Ben
`Venue Labs, Inc., 246 F.3d 1368, 1375 (Fed. Cir.
`2001).
`
`Office Action mailed January 13, 2009.
`
`Response to Office Action mailed January 13,
`2009, pg. 9.
`
`‘484 patent, Abstract
`
`‘484 patent, col. 3, ll. 14-16
`
`‘484 patent, col. 3, ll. 54-62.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 4, ll. 44-48.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 4-21.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 22-31.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 52-58.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 33-35.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 37-38.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 45-57.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 9, ll. 11-21.
`
`‘484 patent, claim 3.
`
`‘484 patent, claim 19.
`
`Claim 1:
`A reader configured
`to interact with a
`
`Anything that allows the
`portable computer to receive
`information from or provide
`
`Office Action mailed January 13, 2009.
`
`Response to Office Action mailed January 13,
`2009, pg. 9.
`
`US2008 3471874.1
`
`

`

`Defendant’s
`Proposed Term
`portable computer
`without input and
`output means for
`interacting directly
`therewith, the reader
`comprising
`
`Defendant’s Proposed
`Construction
`information to a user,
`including but not limited to,
`a keyboard, keypad, buttons,
`display, touch screen,
`speaker, webcam,
`microphone, or headphone
`jack.
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`‘484 patent, Abstract
`
`‘484 patent, col. 3, ll. 14-16
`
`‘484 patent, col. 3, ll. 54-62.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 4, ll. 44-48.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 4-21.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 22-31.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 52-58.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 33-35.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 37-38.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 45-57.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 9, ll. 11-21.
`
`‘484 patent, claim 3.
`
`‘484 patent, claim 19.
`
`The reader is configured to
`operate only with a portable
`computer that does not have
`input and output means.
`
`Third Revised Accelerated Examination Support
`Document, pg. 6.
`
` ‘484 patent, col. 1, ll. 40-44.
`
` ‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 16-21.
`
` ‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 38-42.
`
` ‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 46-50.
`
` ‘484 patent, col. 8, ll. 7-8.
`
`Claim 1:
`wherein the readers
`are configured so
`that they will not
`operate with a
`computer other than
`a portable
`computer of the
`system
`
`Claim 15:
`wherein the readers
`are configured so
`that they will not
`operate with a
`computer other than
`a portable
`computer of the
`system
`
`Claim 15:
`
`The device does not have
`
`US2008 3471874.1
`
`

`

`Defendant’s
`Proposed Term
`wherein the portable
`computer excludes
`means for a user to
`interact directly
`with the portable
`computer
`
`Defendant’s Proposed
`Construction
`anything that can provide
`information to or receive
`information from a user.
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Office Action mailed January 13, 2009.
`
`Response to Office Action mailed January 13,
`2009, pg. 9.
`
`‘484 patent, Abstract
`
`‘484 patent, col. 3, ll. 14-16
`
`‘484 patent, col. 3, ll. 54-62.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 4-21.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 22-31.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 52-58.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 33-35.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 37-38.
`
` ‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 45-57.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 9, ll. 11-21.
`
`‘484 patent, claim 3.
`
`‘484 patent, claim 19.
`
`‘484 patent, Abstract
`
`‘484 patent, col. 1. ll. 64-67.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 3, ll. 54-65.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 4-21.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 6, ll. 22-31.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 17-24.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 7, ll. 33-50.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 9, ll. 11-21.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 9, ll. 43-45.
`
`‘484 patent, col. 11, ll. 60-66.
`
`‘484 patent, claim 3.
`
`Claim 15:
`wherein the reader
`and portable
`computer are
`configured to
`become a fully
`functioning
`computer when
`connected,
`
`When connected, the reader
`and portable computer
`together have a memory, an
`input device, an output
`device, and a processor.
`When not connected, neither
`the reader nor the portable
`computer on its own has all
`of those components.
`
`US2008 3471874.1
`
`