Filed on behalf of Wavemarket, Inc. d/b/a Location Labs
`By: Mark L. Hogge
`Scott W. Cummings
`DENTONS US LLP
`
`1301 K Street, N.W., Suite 600
`
`Washington, DC 20005
`Tel.: (202) 408-6400
`Fax: (202) 408~6399
`Email: mark.hogge@dentons.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Wavemarket, Inc. d/b/a Location Labs
`
`Petitioner,
`
`V.
`
`Patent Owner of
`
`U.S. Patent 6,771,970 to Dan
`
`Case IPR TBD
`
`DECLARATION OF SCOTT HOTES Ph.D. FOR INTER PARTES
`
`REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,771,970
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-312 AND 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.100-106, 108
`
`31441679W—3
`
`EXHIBIT 1013
`
`EXHIBIT 1013
`
`
`By: Mark L. Hogge
`Scott W. Cummings
`DENTONS US LLP
`
`1301 K Street, N.W., Suite 600
`
`Washington, DC 20005
`Tel.: (202) 408-6400
`Fax: (202) 408~6399
`Email: mark.hogge@dentons.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Wavemarket, Inc. d/b/a Location Labs
`
`Petitioner,
`
`V.
`
`Patent Owner of
`
`U.S. Patent 6,771,970 to Dan
`
`Case IPR TBD
`
`DECLARATION OF SCOTT HOTES Ph.D. FOR INTER PARTES
`
`REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,771,970
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-312 AND 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.100-106, 108
`
`31441679W—3
`
`EXHIBIT 1013
`
`EXHIBIT 1013
`
`
`
`1, Scott Hotes, do hereby declare:
`
`1.
`
`I am making this declaration at the request of Wavemarket, Inc. d/b/a
`
`Location Labs in the matter of Petition for Inter Par-res Review of U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,771,970 (the "'970 Patent") to Dan Meir.
`
`2.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have studied:
`
`(a)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,771,970 (Exhibit 1001)
`
`(‘0)
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 6,771,970 (Exhibit 1012), and the
`
`prior art cited against the claims by the USPTO
`
`(C)
`
`U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/ 157,643 (Exhibit 1002)
`
`(d)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,243,039 ("Elliot") (Exhibit 1003)
`
`(e)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,321,092 ("Fitch") (Exhibit 1004)
`
`(f)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,741,927 ("Jones") (Exhibit 1005)
`
`(g)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,758,313 ("Shah") (Exhibit 1006)
`
`(h)
`
`A Comparison of IVHS Progress in the United States, Europe and
`
`Japan, R.L. French and Associates, February 18, 1984 (Exhibit 1009)
`
`FAA Historical Chronology, 1926—1996 (Exhibit 1008)
`
`(i)
`
`Advanced Public Transportation Systems: The State of the Art Update
`
`'92, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration
`
`(Exhibit 1011)
`
`81441679\V-3
`
`
`
`(k)
`
`The evolving Roles of Vehicular Navigation, Robert L. French, R.L.
`
`French and Associates, Fort Worth, Texas (1987) (Exhibit 1010)
`
`(1)
`
`Advanced Public Transportation Systems: The State of the Art Update
`
`‘92, Labell et al., (April 1992); and
`
`(in)
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U. S. Patent No. 6,771,970
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-312 and 37 C.F.R. §§42.100~106, 108.
`
`3.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed below, I have considered:
`
`(a)
`
`The documents listed above
`
`(b)
`
`The relevant legal standards, including the standard for anticipation
`
`and obviousness and any additional authoritative documents as cited
`
`in the body of this declaration, and
`
`(c) My knowledge and experience based upon my work in this area as
`
`described below.
`
`Qualifications and Professional Experience
`
`4.
`
`I received a bachelor‘s in science in mathematical physics from Case
`
`Western University in 1987 and a PhD. in particle physics from the University of
`
`California in 1992.
`
`81441679W-3
`
`
`
`5.
`
`In 1995 I joined Silicon Graphics, an American manufacturer of high
`
`performance computing solutions, Where I worked as a lead architect spearheading
`
`numerous enhancements to the SGI Irix operating system, based on the UNIX
`
`operating system, which included developing high speed networking systems and
`
`protocols, data security and cryptography for computing systems used in 3D
`
`graphics generation.
`
`6.
`
`In 1999,
`
`I joined the Defense Department Where I oversaw software
`
`development teams at Ft. Meade, MD and at the Army Research Lab at Austin, TX.
`
`I was also a lead architect
`
`implementing data mining and machine learning
`
`algorithms in Internet security and traffic modeling applications. Although my
`
`work at the defense department is classified, at a high level I developed and
`
`implemented technologies involving location detection technologies such as
`
`cellular networks, GPS (Global Positioning System), GIS (Geographic Information
`
`Systems) and data translation, security and encryption.
`
`7.
`
`In 2001 I joined Location Labs where I am currently serving as the Chief
`
`Technology Officer and Senior Vice President of Engineering. Location Labs was
`
`formerly known as WaveMarket, Inc. and changed its name in June 21, 2010. The
`
`company was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in Emeryvillc, California
`
`Since the inception of the company, I have been instrumentally involved in
`
`8l441679W-3
`
`
`
`developing Location Labs core products and technologies related to location-based
`
`services for mobile OEMs and handset manufacturers, phone developers, retailers,
`
`media brands/agencies,
`
`telematics, workforce management, and social media
`
`markets. I have developed technologies related to a number of location based
`
`products including family safety platform that allows parents to locate their family
`
`members from their PC or cell phone; safe driving, a service for smart phones that
`
`automatically detects when a user is driving and sets the phone into a ‘driving
`
`mode’ disabling texting and calling features to the handset while the car is in
`
`motion; and Sparkle, a platform that facilitates developers access to services, such
`
`as
`
`location,
`
`security, and user
`
`level controls to manage voice, data, and
`
`applications on the handset.
`
`i have also led teams in developing Geofencing, a
`
`client SDK with background processing that enables creation of a geofence, a
`
`virtual perimeter around a location of interest, and triggers an alert when an
`
`application user enters or exits this perimeter; Spatial Storage, a product that solves
`
`the problems, which developers
`
`confront while building location-aware
`
`applications; and Universal Location Service, a cross-carrier location platform with
`
`coverage across various U.S. carriers enabling developers to remotely access the
`
`location of various mobile phones.
`
`8.
`
`I have also published in a wide range of disciplines,
`
`from discrete
`
`mathematics and elementary particle theory,
`
`to analytical chemistry and geo—
`
`S 244 l 679\V-3
`
`5
`
`
`
`physics.
`
`I am a named inventor on a number of issued patents and several patent
`
`applications.
`
`I am proficient in coding in several languages, including C, C++,
`
`Pearl, Java, and Unix.
`
`9.
`
`In the field of the alleged invention of the '970 Patent, 3 person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art has a bachelor of science degree in computer science, electrical
`
`engineering, physics, mathematics or a comparable degree and at least three years
`
`of experience working with client—server systems, networking technologies and
`
`applications, data translation systems, and wireless and Internet communications
`
`protocols.
`
`10.
`
`I am familiar with the knowledge and capabilities of one of ordinary skill in
`
`the field of the '970 Patent between 1999-2004 (the time of the fiiing of the '970
`
`provisional patent application and the issuance of the '970 patent). Specifically,
`
`my experience (I) in the industry, (2) with undergraduate and post-graduate
`
`students, (3) with colleagues fi'om academia, and (4) with my employment at
`
`Silicon Graphics and the Defense Department allowed me to become personally
`
`familiar with the level of skill of individuals in the general state of the art at the
`
`time of the alleged invention. Unless otherwise stated, my statements made herein
`
`refer to the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the field of the alleged invention
`
`of the ‘970 Patent.
`
`81441679\V-3
`
`
`
`11.
`
`The '970 Patent does not claim to invent location determination technologies.
`
`Wireless mobile device tracking technologies were available many years before the
`
`filing of the ’970 Patent‘s earlier priority date and have been used in a wide range
`
`of applications,
`
`including aviation, military, automotive, and mobile phone
`
`services.
`
`12.
`
`For instance,
`
`the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) began using
`
`wireless location technology for air traffic control and navigation purposes at least
`
`as early as 1944.1 Similarly, the automotive industry developed various vehicle
`
`navigation, fleet management, and intelligent vehicle highway systems (IVHS)
`
`using wireless location technology in the 1980s.2
`
`13.
`
`In the mid 90's, based on my experience and knowledge in the industry, I
`
`was well aware of the fact that cellular and GPS systems could integrate with
`
`Internet communications protocols using data formats such as CDMA, GPRS and
`
`1 See, e.g., Exhibit 1008, FAA Historical Chronology 1926-1996 at 32 (“In 1944,
`
`incorporating wartime radio advances, CAA began testing an improved, static-free,
`
`very high frequency omnidirectional radio range (VOR) at its Experimental Station
`
`in Indianapolis”).
`
`2 See Exhibit 1009, R.L. French & Associates, “A Comparison of IVHS Progress
`
`in the United States, Europe, and Japan,” December 31, 1993; Exhibit 1010, R.L.
`
`French, “The Evolving Roles of Vehicular Navigation,” 1987.
`
`8 1441 679\V-3
`
`7
`
`
`
`CDPD. Based on my experience and knowledge in the industry, I was also well
`
`aware of the fact that mapping databases (such as GIS) could be combined with
`
`existing location based systems to deliver
`
`location data to consumers and
`
`subscribers.
`
`14. All of the concepts set forth in the '970 patent were disclosed, for example,
`
`in Labell et al.'s report of April 1992.3 Disclosed for example are: buses with GE’S
`
`(p. xiv); wireless communication links to connect a mobile device to a subscriber
`
`(p. 24); real time location data for vehicle monitoring, fleet management and
`
`coordination with systems (p. 42); GPS and ground-based signal triangulation (p.
`
`46); automatic vehicle location subsystem with data connections between drivers
`
`and dispatcher(s) (p. 56); and use of maps to display location (p. 76). The only
`
`thing missing in Labell is express mention of the Internet. However, the use of the
`
`Internet was a well known concept in the early 1990's and mid and late 90's and it
`
`would have been obvious to adapt existing location based technology to Internet
`
`standards.
`
`15.
`
`In the mid 90's, I was well aware that GPS and other location based
`
`technologies such as Cell ID, AMPS (Advanced Mobile Phone Service), GSM
`
`(Global System for Mobile Communication), CDPD (Cellular Digital Packet Data),
`
`3 Exhibit 1011, Lawrence N. Label], er al., "Advanced Public Transportation
`
`Systems: The State the Art Update '92," April 1992 (report date).
`
`81441679\V-3
`
`8
`
`
`
`EDACS (Enhanced Digital Access Communication Systems) and MSAT (Mobile
`
`Satellite Communication Systems) were available for locating objects such as
`
`vehicles and objects.
`
`Relevant legal Standards
`
`16.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether the claims of
`
`the '970 Patent are anticipated or would have been obvious to a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention, in light of the prior art.
`
`It is my understanding that to anticipate a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 102, a reference
`
`must disclose every element of the claim. Moreover, it is my understanding that a
`
`prior art reference may still anticipate without disclosing a feature of the claimed
`
`invention if that missing characteristic is necessarily present, or inherent,
`
`in a
`
`single anticipating reference.
`
`Further, it is my understanding that a claimed
`
`invention is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 if the differences between the
`
`invention and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have
`
`been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill
`
`in the art
`
`to which the subject matter pertains.
`
`I also understand that
`
`the
`
`obviousness analysis takes into account factual inquiries including the level of
`
`ordinary skill in the art, the scope and content of the prior art, and the differences
`
`between the prior art and the claimed subject.
`
`8 144 E 679\V-3
`
`
`
`17.
`
`It
`
`is my understanding that the Supreme Court has recognized several
`
`rationales for combining references or modifying a reference to show obviousness
`
`of claimed subject matter. Some of these rationales include the following:
`
`combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable
`
`results; simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable
`
`results; applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready
`
`for improvement to yield predictable results; choosing from a finite number or
`
`identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, and
`
`some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of
`
`ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or combine prior art reference
`
`teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
`
`Background of '97!) Patent
`
`18.
`
`The '970 Patent was filed on October 2, 2000 but claims priority to a
`
`provisional application4 filed on October 4, 1999.5 The '970 Patent acknowledges
`
`4 Exhibit 1002.
`
`5 At this juncture I am not providing an opinion on whether the '970 claims are
`
`fully supported by the provisional application.
`
`I reserve the right to provide such
`
`an opinion if the patentee attempts to rely on the provisional application to claim
`
`an earlier priority date.
`
`B l 441679W—3
`
`10
`
`
`
`that there were multiple different location technologies available at the time the
`
`patent was filed: "Technologies such as GPS (Global Positioning System), EOTD
`
`(Enhanced Observed Time Difference), Cell ID, AWS (Advanced Mobile Phone
`
`Service), GSM (Global System for Mobile Communication), CDPD (Cellular
`
`Digital Packet Data), EDACS (Enhanced Digital Access Communication System)
`
`and MSAT (Mobile Satellite communications) allow a vehicle, mobile telephone
`
`or other mobile entity to be located." (Exhibit 1001, col. 1, 11. 11-21). The '970
`
`Patent states that at the time the '970 Patent was filed, various service providers
`
`used these
`
`technologies
`
`to provide
`
`location information to subscribers:
`
`Organizations with a need for instantaneous information on the whereabouts of
`
`their vehicles normally employ the services of a location tracking service provider.
`
`Such service providers offer access to the equipment and technology necessary to
`
`locate the vehicles to a number of organizations." (Exhibit 1001, col. 1, 11. 28-33).
`
`The '970 Patent claims that organizations and subscribers of location information
`
`using multiple location services have to deal with different complex systems that
`
`are not easy to employ due to the use of different software systems and protocols:
`
`"due
`
`to
`
`the
`
`complexity
`
`of
`
`the
`
`underlying
`
`systems,
`
`communication with a service provider's systems is normally
`
`made via expensive and complex client software. Each service
`
`provider collects data using different technologies and stores
`
`this data in its own proprietary format. In addition, many
`
`8 144 l 679W-3
`
`11
`
`
`
`service providers have their own proprietary communication
`
`formats in which position requests must be made and in which
`
`location data is
`
`received. This
`
`results
`
`in confusion for
`
`customers who need to consider
`
`the various advantages,
`
`disadvantages and cost implications associated with each of the
`
`various
`
`location systems offered by service providers."
`
`(Exhibit 1001, col. 1, 11. 38-49).
`
`19.
`
`The '970 Patent alleges that "the differences in proprietary data and
`
`communication formats make it extremely difficult
`
`for an organization to
`
`customize the client software or to develop systems capable of communicating
`
`with the service provider's systems and accepting the location is data." (EX. 1001,
`
`col. ll, 11. 55—60). Therefore the patentee states that there is a:
`
`"need in the art to simplify the process by allowing inter alia
`
`extraction of information from multiple tracking service
`
`providers. There is a further need in the art to provide a
`
`relatively simple to operate location tracking service adapted
`
`for use by common subscribers whilst obviating the need to
`
`install and use a cumbersome vehicle tracking software."
`
`(Exhibit 1001, col. 1, 11. 60-67).
`
`20.
`
`The '970 Patent claims to offer a solution to this alleged problem by offering
`
`a centralized system that can communicate with multiple location tracking systems
`
`to provide location information and other location related to data to a subscriber
`
`8144 [679\V-3
`
`12
`
`
`
`over a communications network. (Ex. 1001, col. 2-3, Summary of the Invention).
`
`Claim 1 is illustrative of the technology claimed in '970 Patent and reads:
`
`1. A system for location tracking of mobile platforms, each
`
`mobile platform having a tracking unit; the system including:
`
`a location determination system communicating
`
`through a user interface with at least one subscriber; said
`
`communication
`
`including
`
`inputs
`
`that
`
`include
`
`the
`
`subscriber
`
`identity and the identity of the mobile
`
`platform to be located;
`
`a communication system communicating with said
`
`location determination system for receiving said mobile
`
`platform identity; and,
`
`a
`
`plurality
`
`of
`
`remote
`
`tracking
`
`systems
`
`communicating with said communication system each of
`
`the remote tracking systems being adapted to determine
`
`the location of a respective mobile platform according to
`
`a preperty that is predetermined for each mobile platform
`
`for determining the location of the mobile platform;
`
`. wherein said location determination system is
`
`arranged to determine an appropriate one of the plurality
`
`of remote tracking systems,
`
`the appropriate remote
`
`tracking system receiving said mobile platform identity
`
`from said communication system and returning mobile
`
`platform location information,
`
`said communication system being arranged to pass
`
`said mobile platform location information to said location
`
`81441679\V—3
`
`13
`
`
`
`determination system; said location determination system
`
`being arranged to receive said mobile platform location
`
`information and to forward it to said subscriber.
`
`21. Annotated Figure 1
`
`illustrates the main components of the location
`
`determination system of the '970 Patent:
`
`Subscriber
`
`
`
`Plurality of remote
`tracking systems
`
`Mobile platforms
`
`/
`
`
`
`Location determination
`
`Communication
`
`system
`
`system
`
`85441679\V-3
`
`14
`
`
`
`22. As shown above, the alleged invention (as represented in claim 1) merely
`
`consists of a centralized "location determination system (1) which is connected to a
`
`"subscriber's computer" (60) over a network, shown here as "Internet" (30), which
`
`mediates communications between various "location tracking systems" (11-14)
`
`through a "conununication sub-system" (3) to obtain the location of "mobile
`
`platforms" (21-24). (Exhibit 1001, col 4, II. 12-22).
`
`In some embodiments, the
`
`subscriber can interact with the location determination system through a "Website"
`
`(5) and a "map server" (4) to display the location on a web browser running on the
`
`subscriber's computer.
`
`(Exhibit 1001, col. 5, ll. 3-24).
`
`The Patentee does not
`
`claim to have invented any of these elements and has merely combined existing
`
`technology and prior art.
`
`(Exhibit 1001, col 1, 11. 10-67).
`
`23.
`
`The references discussed herein teach the all claimed elements, including
`
`those found missing during prosecution of the '970 Patent. Generally speaking,
`
`Elliot (Exhibit 1013) teaches a plurality of remote tracking systems to determine
`
`the location of specific mobile phones (Elliot, col. 4, 11. 52—65; Fig. 1).
`
`Fitch
`
`(Exhibit 1004) shows the same thing (Fitch, col. 2, 11. 38454; col. 5, 11. 17-49; Fig.
`
`2). Likewise, Jones (Exhibit 1005) teaches the same thing (Jones, col. 11, ll. 13-
`
`18; Fig. 26; col. 23, 11. 17-43).
`
`81441679\V-3
`
`15
`
`
`
`Claim Constructions
`
`24.
`
`It is my understanding that in the IPR proceedings the claim terms of a
`
`patent
`
`are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the
`
`specification and file history of the '970 Patent, as understood by one of ordinary
`
`skill the art.
`
`Consistent with that understanding, based on my review of the
`
`specification and file history and as one of skill in the art at the time of alleged
`
`invention, I would construe the relevant terms as follows:
`
`"mobile platforms" means a mobile device with a tracking unit, e.g., cell
`
`phones, and motor vehicles.
`
`(see e.g., col. 3, 11. 58-001. 4, ll. 5 of the ‘970
`
`Patent).
`
`"a location determination system" means a centralized computer system that
`
`connects to remote tracking systems and subscribers of location information.
`
`(see e.g., Col. 4, lines 12-61.
`
`"a communication system" means communication hardware, software or
`
`protocols for receiving and transmitting location information and requests
`
`for location information. (see e.g., col. 4, 11. 46—62 of the '970 Patent).
`
`"a plurality of remote tracking systems" means more than one system for
`
`determining the location of a mobile device, e.g., GPS (Global Positioning
`
`System) or cellular networks.
`
`(see e.g., col. 1, 11. 12—26; col 3, 11. 47—57; col.
`
`4, 11. 6-11 of the '970 Patent).
`
`31441679\V—3
`
`16
`
`
`
`I understand that claim terms may be construed differently in litigation and
`
`the district court depending different standards for claim construction that are not
`
`necessarily based on the broadest reasonable interpretation but can also be based
`
`on other factors such as specific positions taken by the inventors or patent owners
`
`in interpreting claim terms, the plaintiffs infringement contentions, and other
`
`factors such as definitions set forth in dictionaries and technical documentation that
`
`may elucidate different definitions, depending on the context. I have not attempted
`
`to apply those standards here for claim interpretation and reserve the right to
`
`modify or adjust claim constructions based on positions taken by the patentee on
`
`infiingement or invalidity and other evidence which is not considered by the patent
`
`office in construing claim language here for purposes of this inter partes review.
`
`Elliot, U.S. 6,243,039, "Anytime/Anmhere Child Locator system”
`
`25. As described in the "Summary of the Invention," Elliot discloses systems
`
`and methods which provide a centralized means to access location information on
`
`mobile platforms (e.g., location of child) over the Internet using multiple location
`
`tracking technologies communicating with a location determination system and
`
`then communicating this information to subscribers in the form of a map diSplay:
`
`the system provides multiple interface means such that the current
`
`and historical location of a child or any other individual wearing or
`
`carrying the device may be observed at anytime by another person or
`
`8 M4 1679\V-3
`
`17
`
`
`
`persons. These interfaces are made available via a web server and a
`
`call center. With the use and convenience of the Web and the
`
`Internet, the observation of a child 's or other person 's movements
`
`may be conducted from anywhere accessible by a computer with a
`
`Web browser and Internet access. A web server with its associated
`
`files provides graphical maps capable of showing’the current and
`
`historical locations of the device. With the use and convenience of a
`
`VRU, a determination of the location may be conducted from any
`
`telephone. Therefore,
`
`the present
`
`invention provides multiple
`
`mechanisms for determining and Viewing remotely, the current and
`
`historical locations of the device in various display formats. (Exhibit
`
`1003, col. 2, In. 60 — col. 3, ln. 9). (emphasis added)
`
`Figure 1, shown below, highlights the major elements of the ‘970 Patent,
`
`including "mobile platforms"
`
`(e.g., device worn by child 12),
`
`"location
`
`determination system" (e.g., central control system 20), "remote tracking system"
`
`(e.g., GPS 14 and/or base station 15), "communication system" (cg. central
`
`receiver transmitter 16) and "subscribers" (parent).
`
`8 E44 1679\V-3
`
`18
`
`
`
`41
`
`Global Positioning
`System satellite
`
`anytime anywhere
`
`
`child locator
`coverage area
`
`central
`receiver—
`
`
`
`transmitter
`anywhere
`
`
`child locator
`coverage area
`
`
`
`2O
`
`18
`
`Elliot also explicitly teaches the alleged point of novelty of the '970 Patent, which
`
`is use of multiple remote tracking systems depending on the type of mobile
`
`platform involved:
`
`More particularly, the present invention utilizes a GPS device for
`
`providing reference coordinates of a person's current location. In
`
`addition, a ground based system could ride on a sub carrier in the
`
`cellular bandwidth inside the cells. The ground based system may be
`
`used either as a primary locator with GPS as a backup, or as a
`
`backup when the GPS is used as a primary locator.
`
`(Exhibit 1003,
`
`001. 2, 11. 47-54). (emphasis added)
`
`Sl44!679\V—3
`
`19
`
`
`
`Fitch= U.S. 6,321,092, "Multiple Input Data Management For Wireless
`
`Location Based Applications
`
`26.
`
`Fitch et ai. (Exhibit 1004) discloses systems and methods that employ
`
`multiple location finding equipment, communicating with a centralized Location
`
`Finding System to determine the location of mobile platforms, and provide the
`
`location information to subscribers or users of the system in a common format.
`
`These concepts are summarized, for example, in the ”Abstract" of Fitch:
`
`Multiple location finding equipment (LFE)
`
`inputs are used to
`
`enhance the location information made available to wireless
`
`location-based applications. In one implementation, the invention is
`
`implemented in a wireless network including an MSC (112) for use in
`
`routing communications to or from wireless stations (102), a network
`
`platform (114) associated with the MSC (112), and a variety of LFE
`
`systems (104, 106, 108 and 110). A Location Finding System (LFS)
`
`(116) in accordance with the present invention is resident on the
`
`platform (114). The LFS (116) receives location information from
`
`the LFEs (104, 106, 108 and 110) and provides location information
`
`to wireless location based applications (118). In this regard, the LFS
`
`(116) can receive input
`
`information at varying time intervals of
`
`varying accuracies
`
`and in various
`
`formats,
`
`and can provide
`
`standardized outputs to the applications (118), for exampie, depending
`
`on the needs of the applications (118). Multiple inputs may also be cc—
`
`processed for enhanced accuracy.
`
`(Exhibit 1003, Abstract).
`
`(emphasis added)
`
`81441679\V-3
`
`20
`
`
`
`Figure 2 of Fitch, shown below, highlights all the major elements of
`
`the '970 Patent for tracking wireless stations (mobile platforms), including
`
`"location determination system" (e.g., platform 214, and Location Finding
`
`System (LFS)), "remote tracking systems" (location finding equipment 202-
`
`206), "communication system" ("LFCS" 208-212, multiple switching center
`
`or MSC 112 (Fig. 1)), and "subscribers" (interfacing with wireless location
`
`applications 226—23 0).
`
`MULTI-
`lNPUT
`
` FIG.2
`
`Fitch also explicitly teaches the alleged point of novelty of the '970 Patent,
`
`which is use of multiple remote tracking systems depending on the type of mobile
`
`platform involved, for example:
`
`81441679W-3
`
`21
`
`iPROCESSING
`
`230
`
`APPLICATION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`To some extent,
`
`the LFEs
`
`and applications have developed
`
`independently. In this regard, a number of types of LFES exist and/or
`
`are in development. These include so-called angle of arrival (AOA)
`
`time difference of arrival (TDOA), handset giobal positioning system
`
`(GPS) and the use of cell/sector location. The types of equipment
`
`employed and the nature of the information received from such
`
`equipment vary in a number of ways. First, some of these equipment
`
`types,
`
`like GPS, are wireless
`
`station—based whereas others are
`
`“ground-based”, usually infrastructure-based. Some can determine a
`
`wireless station's location at any time via a polling process, some
`
`require that the station be transmitting on the reverse traffic channel
`
`(voice channel), and others can only determine location at call
`
`origination,
`
`termination, and perhaps registration. Moreover,
`
`the
`
`accuracy with which location can be determined varies significantly
`
`from case to case. Accordingly, the outputs from the various LFE's
`
`vary in a number of ways including data format, accuracy and
`
`timeliness. (Exhibit 1004, col. 1, ll. 46-65).
`
`The invention allows wireless location-based applications access to
`
`information based inputs from LFEs of different
`
`types,
`
`thereby
`
`enhancing the timeliness, accuracy and/or reliability of the requested
`
`location information. Moreover,
`
`in accordance with the present
`
`invention, applications are independent of particular LFEs and can
`
`access
`
`location information from various LFE sources without
`
`requiring specific adaptations, data formats, or indeed knowledge of
`
`the LFE sources employed, in order to access and use such location
`
`information. By virtue of such independence, new location finding
`
`81441679\V-3
`
`22
`
`
`
`technologies can be readily deployed and existing applications can
`
`exploit such new technologies without compatibility issues. (Exhibit
`
`1004, col. 2, ll. 26-41).
`
`Grounds for Invalidifl Based on '039 Patent (Elliot)
`
`27.
`
`I have reviewed the claim chart appearing in section VII of the Petition for
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,771,970 Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-
`
`312 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.100-106, 108 containing a detailed mapping of the
`
`disclosure of Elliot, along with various secondary references and combinations for
`
`meeting all of the various sub—parts of claims l~19 of the '970 Patent ("Elliot claim
`
`chart").
`
`I believe the charts are accurate and support my opinion that claims l~l9
`
`are anticipated over Elliot alone, or obvious in combination with various additional
`
`references. The citations to the prior art are exemplary and are not exhaustive.
`
`I
`
`reserve the right
`
`to provide fiirther evidence and testimony that such claim
`
`limitations would in fact be inherent or obvious based on the Elliot reference and
`
`the state of the technology at the time. As shown in the Elliot claim chart, the
`
`following grounds for invalidity are demonstrated.
`
`28.
`
`Claims 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, ll, 12, l3, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 are anticipated
`
`by Elliot. Elliot discloses a systems and methods for location tracking of mobile
`
`platforms with tracking units. Exhibit 1003, See e.g., Abstract
`
`("A system that
`
`tracks the current and historical locations of a GPS locator device carried by a
`
`814416?9\V-3
`
`23
`
`
`
`person provides widely available access to data referencing these locations, so that
`
`a parent can easily and frequently monitor the location of a child. Monitoring of a
`
`child's location may be conducted via a Web site, which provides graphical maps
`
`of location data, or via calling into a call center"); see also col. 4, 11. 35-51; and
`
`Figs. 1, 2 and 3.
`
`Independent claims 1, 14, 16, and 19 essentially claim the same
`
`concepts in different forms, i.e., systems, methods, and computer code claims.
`
`The addition of computer code and/or implementing the methods of systems over
`
`the Internet does not make the claims novel or non—obvious, and the use of such
`
`code and the Internet is disclosed in Elliot. Elliot discloses systems and methods
`
`that may be employed in computer programs, computer readable medium and
`
`program instructions, including over the Internet; see e.g., Exhibit 1003, col. 5, 11.
`
`46-59 ("The central control system 20, shown in detail in FIG. 3, may reside on a
`
`single
`
`computer, or on multiple
`
`computers
`
`in a distributed computing
`
`environment"). Therefore, adapting the system of claim 1
`
`to one or more
`
`computers, which include software or computer readable media, is not a novel
`
`concept.
`
`29.
`
`Claims 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, ll, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 are also
`
`obvious over Elliot
`
`in combination with Fitch. Each of claims 1, i4, i6 and 19
`
`contain a feature directed to determining an apprOpriate one of the plurality of
`
`remote tracking systems capable of locating a mobile platform. This feature is
`
`8 M4 1679\V—3
`
`24
`
`
`
`described with sufficient clarity by Elliot.
`
`In particular, Elliot discloses that either
`
`GPS or ground based cellular systems can be used or combined to locate a device
`
`depending which is appropriate to use (primary/backup roles) and can be based on
`
`the properties of the device tracking unit (GPS receiver installed/cellular chipset
`
`included). Exhibit 1003, col. 4, 11. 52—65; Fig. 1, Ref. 14 (GPS); and col. 4, ll. 48-
`
`51("In the present invention, the GPS system is the geographical locator system of
`
`choice. However other systems that use broadcast technologies may be used").
`
`To the extent that one takes the view that this feature of the above-noted claims is
`
`not adequately disclosed by Elliot alone, it is clearly disclosed and suggested by
`
`Fitch. Fitch teaches a system (200) configured and arranged to select or prompt
`
`one of a plurality of location finding equipment (LFEs) in order to make use of the
`
`best or most appropriate location information from any available LFE:
`
`"[T]he illustrated system 200 includes a wireless location
`
`interface (WLI) 224 that allows wireless iocation applications
`
`226, 228 and 230 to selectively access information stored in the
`
`LC 220 or prompt one or more of LFEs 202, 204 and/or 206 to
`
`initiate a location determination. The WLI 224 provides a
`
`standar
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
