`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`INTRADO, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`911 NOTIFY, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`___________________
`
`Case IPR2014-00505
`___________________
`
`RESUBMITTED PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`
`Patent No.: 6,775,356
`Filed:
`September 27, 2001
`Issued:
`August 10, 2004
`Inventors: Angelo Salvucci, Don E. Reich, Kurt E. Warner, and
`William C. Cook
`REAL-TIME INCIDENT AND RESPONSE
`INFORMATION MESSAGING INA SYSTEM FOR THE
`AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION THAT AN EMERGENCY
`CALL HAS OCCURRED FROM A
`TELECOMMUNICATION DEVICE
`
`
`Title:
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`
`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`I. 
`II. 
`III. 
`IV. 
`
`V. 
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`Introduction .................................................................................. 1 
`Grounds for Standing – 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ............................ 2 
`Fee for Inter Partes Review – 37 C.F.R. § 42.15(a) ..................... 3 
`Mandatory Notices – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8 ......................................... 3 
`Real Party-In-Interest – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) .................. 3 
`Related Matters – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ............................ 3 
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .......... 3 
`Service Information – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ...................... 3 
`Overview of The ’356 Patent ........................................................ 3 
`A. The Effective Filing Date for the ’356 Patent: ................................. 3 
`B. The Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art of the ’356 Patent ............ 4 
`C. Overview of the ’356 Patent’s Technology ........................................ 4 
`VI. 
`Identification of Challenge – 37 C.F.R. § 41.104(b) .................... 9 
`A. Claim Construction – 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3) ................................ 9 
`B. Claims 1–28 are unpatentable in light of Markowitz,
`Antonucci, Tsumpes, Balachandran, BellSouth TR 73577, and
`NENA-04-001 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103. ............................ 10 
`i.  Markowitz, Antonucci, Tsumpes, Balachandran,
`BellSouth TR 73577, and NENA-04-001 are non-
`redundant, complementary references that one of
`ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine. .... 11 
`Claims 1, 5, and 15 are anticipated by Markowitz . ............. 13 
`Claim 1 ............................................................................... 13 
`Claim 5 ............................................................................... 20 
`Claim 15 ............................................................................. 22 
`iii.  Claims 2 and 16 are obvious in light of Markowitz in
`combination with BellSouth TR 73577. ................................ 24 
`Claim 2 ............................................................................... 24 
`Claim 16 ............................................................................. 28 
`
`ii. 
`
`i
`
`

`

`v. 
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`iv.  Claims 3, 7, 17, 19, and 21 are obvious in light of the
`combination of Markowitz and Antonucci. ........................... 29 
`Claim 3 ............................................................................... 29 
`Claim 7 ............................................................................... 30 
`Claim 17 ............................................................................. 31 
`Claim 19 ............................................................................. 33 
`Claim 21 ............................................................................. 33 
`Claim 4 is obvious in light of the combination of
`Markowitz, BellSouth TR 73577, and Antonucci. ................ 34 
`Claim 4 ............................................................................... 34 
`vi.  Claims 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 20, and 22 are obvious in
`light of the combination of Markowitz, Tsumpes, and
`Antonucci. ............................................................................... 35 
`Claim 6 ............................................................................... 35 
`Claim 8 ............................................................................... 36 
`Claim 9 ............................................................................... 36 
`Claim 10 ............................................................................. 40 
`Claim 11 ............................................................................. 40 
`Claim 12 ............................................................................. 41 
`Claim 13 ............................................................................. 42 
`Claim 14 ............................................................................. 44 
`Claim 20 ............................................................................. 44 
`Claim 22 ............................................................................. 45 
`vii.  Claim 18 is obvious in light of the combination of
`Markowitz, Antonucci, Tsumpes, and BellSouth TR
`73577. ...................................................................................... 46 
`Claim 18 ............................................................................. 46 
`viii.  Claims 23 and 26 are anticipated by Antonucci. .................. 49 
`Claim 23 ............................................................................. 49 
`Claim 26 ............................................................................. 53 
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`ix.  Claim 24 is obvious in light of the combination of
`Markowitz, Antonucci, and NENA-04-001. .......................... 55 
`Claim 24 ............................................................................. 55 
`Claim 25 is obvious in light of the combination of
`Antonucci and Balachandran. ............................................... 56 
`Claim 25 ............................................................................. 56 
`xi.  Claim 27 is obvious in light of the combination of
`Antonucci, Markowitz, and Balachandran. .......................... 57 
`Claim 27 ............................................................................. 57 
`xii.  Claim 28 is obvious in light of the combination of
`Markowitz and Balachandran. .............................................. 58 
`Claim 28 ............................................................................. 58 
`CONCLUSION ............................................................................ 60 
`
`x. 
`
`VII. 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`
`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases
`Garmin Int’l, Inc. v. Cuozzo Speed Techs. LLC,
`IPR2012-00001, Paper 59 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 13, 2013) ............................ 10
`
`
`In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech Ctr.,
`367 F. 3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2004) ............................................................ 10
`Other Authorities
`MPEP § 2111............................................................................................... 9
`Rules
`37 C.F.R. § 41.100(b) .................................................................................. 9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`
`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit
`No.
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`1027
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 6,775,356 to Salvucci et al. (“’356 Patent”)
` issued from: U.S. Patent App. No. 09/967,291
` entitled: “Real-Time Incident and Response
`Information Messaging In a System for the Automatic
`Notification That an Emergency Call Has Occurred
`From a Telecommunication Device”
` filed: September 27, 2001
` issued: August 10, 2004
`U.S. Patent No. 6,295,346 to Markowitz at al. (“Markowitz”)
` entitled: “Automated Emergency Notification System”
` filed: July 13, 1998
` issued: September 25, 2001
`U.S. Patent No. 6,587,545 to Antonucci et al. (“Antonucci”)
` entitled: “System for Providing Expanded Emergency
`Service Communication in a Telecommunication
`Network”
` filed: Oct. 23, 2000
` issued: July 1, 2003
`U.S. Patent No. 6,442,241 to Tsumpes (“Tsumpes”)
` entitled: “Automated Parallel and Redundant
`Subscriber Contact and Event Notification System”
` filed: July 17, 2000
` issued: August 27, 2002
`International Publication No. WO 98/27714 to Balachandran
`(“Balachandran”)
` entitled: “Emergency Call Initiator”
` published: June 25, 1998
`Declaration of John R. Melcher (“Melcher Decl.”)
`The file wrapper for U.S. Patent App. No. 09/967,291 (the
`“’291 Application”)
`
`v
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`Exhibit
`No.
`1028
`
`1029
`
`1030
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`1033
`
`1034
`
`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`Description
`The file wrapper for U.S. Patent App. No. 09/712,660 (the
`“’660 Application”)
`The file wrapper for U.S. Patent App. No. 10/722,677 (the
`“’677 Application”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,195,126 to Carrier et al. (“Carrier”)
` entitled: “Emergency Alert and Security Apparatus
`and Method”
` filed: May 9, 1993
` issued: March 16, 1993
`U.S. Patent No. 5,805,670 to Pons et al. (“Pons”)
` entitled: “Private Notification System for
`Communicating 9-1-1 Information”
` filed: March 19, 1996
` issued: September 8, 1998
`U.S. Patent No. 6,151,385 to Reich et al. (“Reich”)
` entitled: “System for the Automatic Notification that a
`9-1-1 Call Has Occurred”
` filed: December 20, 1999
` issued: November 21, 2000
`U.S. Patent No. 6,201,856 to Orwick, et al. (“Orwick”)
` entitled: “Emergency Telephone Call Notification
`Service System and Method”
` filed: December 15, 1998
` issued: March 13, 2001
`U.S. Patent No. 5,761,278 to Pickett, et al. (“Pickett”)
` entitled: “Integrated Data Collection and Transmission
`for 9-1-1 Calls for Service”
` filed: February 28, 1997
` issued: June 2, 1998
`
`vi
`
`

`

`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`Exhibit
`No.
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1038
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 5,799,061 to Melcher et al. (“Melcher ’061”)
` entitled: “Computer Integrated Telephony System for
`the Processing of 9-1-1 Calls for Service”
` filed: June 4, 1996
` issued: August 25, 1998
`Complaint for Patent Infringement, No. 1:13-cv-276-LPS (D.
`Del. Feb. 19, 2013)
`1037 Waiver of the Service of Summons, No. 1:13-cv-276-LPS (D.
`Del. May 6, 2013)
`BellSouth Technical Reference 73577 (“BellSouth TR
`73577”)
` entitled: TR 73577 Issue A – Enhanced 911 File
`Transfer System (FTS) Database Activity Update
`Service for PBX User/ALI Customer’s Network
`Interface Specifications
` published: June 1993
` available at:
`http://wholesale.att.com/reference_library/guides/tech_
`ref/TR-73577.pdf
`BellSouth Technical Reference 73576 (“BellSouth TR
`73576”)
` entitled: TR 73576 Issue A – Enhanced 911 for
`PBX/ALI Service Network Interface Specifications
` published: June 1993
` available at:
`http://wholesale.att.com/reference_library/guides/tech_
`ref/TR-73576.pdf
`
`1039
`
`vii
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`Exhibit
`No.
`1040
`
`
`
`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`Description
`National Emergency Number Association Standard (“NENA-
`04-001”)
` entitled: NENA-04-001 Issue 1 – NENA General
`Standards for E9-1-1 PSAP Equipment
` published: June 20, 1996
` available at:
`http://www.nena.org/resource/collection/6366E817-
`C855-4776-AF3A-F9F715D1AF12/NENA_04-001-
`v1_E9-1-1_PSAP_Equipment.pdf
`
`viii
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`I.
`INTRODUCTION
`Petitioner Intrado, Inc. respectfully requests inter partes review
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`for all claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,775,356 (Ex. 1021, the “’356 Patent”),
`
`filed September 27, 2001. As shown in this petition and as set forth by
`
`John R. Melcher in his declaration (Ex. 1026), each and every limitation
`
`of each and every claim was taught in U.S. Patent No. 6,295,346 (Ex.
`
`1022, “Markowitz”), U.S. Patent No. 6,587,545 (Ex. 1023, “Antonucci”),
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,442,241 (Ex. 1024, “Tsumpes”), Int’l Publ’n No. WO
`
`98/27714 (Ex. 1025, “Balachandran”), BellSouth Technical Reference
`
`73577 Issue A (Ex. 1038, “BellSouth TR 73577”), or National
`
`Emergency Number Association Technical Reference NENA-04-001
`
`Issue 1 (Ex. 1040, “NENA-04-001”). These references, each prior art to
`
`the ’356 Patent, separately and in combination render each claim of the
`
`’356 Patent unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103.
`
`The technology claimed in the ’356 Patent was known in the art
`
`before the ’356 Patent’s earliest priority date, and is therefore not
`
`eligible for patent protection. The ’356 Patent is directed to systems and
`
`methods for providing notice of an emergency call based on subscriber-
`
`and emergency-related information collected because of the call. The
`
`1
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`references presented in this petition are each related to emergency
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`telephone services and each disclose providing notice of an emergency
`
`call based on subscriber- and emergency-related information collected in
`
`response to the call. Each claim of the ’356 Patent is either anticipated
`
`or rendered obvious by one or more of these references.
`
`II. GROUNDS FOR STANDING – 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)
`Intrado certifies that the ’356 Patent is available for inter partes
`
`review. Intrado certifies that it is not barred or estopped from
`
`requesting inter partes review of the claims of the ’356 Patent on the
`
`grounds identified in this Petition: Neither Intrado, nor any party in
`
`privity with Intrado, has filed a civil action challenging the validity of
`
`any claim of the ’356 Patent. The ’356 Patent has not been the subject of
`
`a prior instituted inter partes review by Intrado or a privy of Intrado.
`
`Intrado filed this petition within one year of May 3, 2013, the date it
`
`waived service of 911 Notify’s complaint in 911 Notify, LLC v. Intrado,
`
`Inc., No. 1:13-cv-276-LPS (D. Del.) (the “Delaware Litigation”). Intrado
`
`has not been served with any other complaint alleging infringement of
`
`the ’356 Patent.
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`III. FEE FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW – 37 C.F.R. § 42.15(a)
`The Director is authorized to charge the fee specified by 37 C.F.R.
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`§ 42.15(a) to Deposit Account No. 506293.
`
`IV. MANDATORY NOTICES – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8
`Real Party-In-Interest – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1): The real party in
`
`interest is Intrado, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of West Corporation.
`
`Related Matters – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2): The ’356 Patent is
`
`subject to the Delaware Litigation.
`
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3):
`
`Lead Counsel
`Donald E. Tiller
`Reg. No. 62,779
`don.tiller@skiermontpuckett.com
`phone: 214-978-6600
`facsimile: 214-978-6601
`
`Back-up Counsel
`Alexander E. Gasser
`Reg. No. 48,760
`alex.gasser@skiermontpuckett.com
`phone: 214-978-6600
`facsimile: 214-978-6601
`
`Service Information – 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4): Service on Petitioner
`
`may be by mail or hand delivery to: Skiermont Puckett LLP, 2200 Ross
`
`Ave., Suite 4800W, Dallas, Texas 75201.
`
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE ’356 PATENT
`A. The Effective Filing Date for the ’356 Patent:
`The ’356 Patent issued from U.S. Patent Application No.
`
`09/967,291 (the “’291 Application”), filed September 27, 2001. The ’291
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`Application is designated as a continuation-in-part of U.S. Patent
`
`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`Application No. 09/712,660, filed November 30, 2000. Thus, the effective
`
`filing date of the ’356 Patent is no earlier than November 30, 2000.
`
`B. The Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art of the ’356 Patent
`The person of ordinary skill in the art in the field of the ’356
`
`Patent at the time the application for the patent was filed would have
`
`had the following qualifications or their equivalent: 8–10 years’
`
`experience working with computer telephony integration in emergency
`
`telecommunications systems. Such a person would have a working
`
`knowledge of and experience with: 9-1-1 and related abbreviated
`
`number telecommunication systems, 9-1-1 selective router and related
`
`switching and interconnection technology, and the interconnection and
`
`associated integration or amalgamation of distributed databases and
`
`other data sources. Ex. 1026 at ¶ 28.
`
`C. Overview of the ’356 Patent’s Technology
`The ’356 Patent is directed to a service for automatically
`
`messaging predetermined devices in the event of an emergency
`
`telephone call. Ex. 1021 at Abstract. The technology recognizes that an
`
`emergency call has been made, identifies the caller as a service
`
`subscriber, collects data relevant to the caller and the emergency, and
`
`4
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`forwards emergency- and caller-related information as predetermined
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`by the subscriber. Id. at 5:58 – 6:30.
`
`This technology purportedly improved the state of emergency
`
`telecommunications by enabling the automatic collection and
`
`forwarding of emergency-related information in “real time” without
`
`relying on the emergency dispatcher or waiting for the appropriate
`
`service to respond to the emergency. Id. at 4:47 – 5:2. As characterized
`
`in the patent,
`
`None of the prior art provide for communicating emergency
`telephone call notices to designated parties that includes
`real-time information about the incident or emergency that
`is being reported, collected within an interval between a
`time that the emergency call is recognized and a response is
`initiated, automatically and immediately while the incident
`is being reported.
`Id. at 4:47–53.
`
`The ’356 Patent is directed to “provid[ing] real-time information
`
`about the incident or emergency that is being reported, automatically,
`
`with or without human intervention.” Id. at 4:54–58. This technology is
`
`meant to notify the service subscriber, or parties predetermined by the
`
`subscriber, that the emergency call has been made and provide
`
`5
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`information useful in responding to the emergency (i.e., “real-time
`
`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`data”), regardless of how or when the emergency personnel respond:
`
`An important advantage is that designated parties are
`notified that a 9-1-1 call has been placed, even though it may
`not have been answered or responded to by emergency
`personnel. This is a very useful and unique feature because
`even when personnel are too busy to act after answering a 9-
`1-1 call a notified party is informed not only that the call was
`placed but also the nature of the call.
`Id. at 4:64 – 5:2.
`
`In accordance with an aspect of the invention, the real-time
`incident and response information includes the location of
`the mobile communications device from the location system
`(for wireless calls), and one or more of incident-specific
`information, person-specific information, and vehicle-specific
`information.
`Id. at 5:51–56.
`
`The real-time data may be collected directly from the caller, from
`
`a database, or from information embedded in the call. For example, the
`
`call itself may be recorded and included in the notification message:
`
`For wireline telephony devices, when the ANI [Automatic
`Number Identification] is recognized during the ALI
`[Automatic Location Identification] database query, this
`
`6
`
`

`

`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`causes the selective router (8) to set up a 3-way call (or other
`voice- transfer mechanism) to the network, which will
`terminate in a voice-recording device that will record the
`call. . . . A unique identifier (ID) is assigned to the voice
`recording that will allow it to be identified and played to the
`notified party. This ID is transferred to and stored in the
`subscriber record (FIG. 5) in the real-time message (ID)
`field. . . . During the automatic notification subroutine (FIG.
`3) when the notify message is played, the real-time message
`ID in the subscriber record is used to fetch and append the
`stored voice recording to the outgoing message.
`Id. at 11:61 – 12:44. Similarly, the information about the user may be
`
`collected from a database associated with a computer-assisted dispatch
`
`device (CAD):
`
`The [system] search[es] the computer-assisted dispatch
`device (CAD), block 120 shown in FIG. 1, or other emergency
`response database . . . . The information [] from the CAD or
`other database is transferred to the 9-1-1 Notify System
`Subscriber Database (112) where it is stored and associated
`with a real-time message ID for the subscriber record.
`During the notification mode the information is incorporated
`into the outgoing notify message that is played, as part of
`the message. . . . So, for example, if someone had a heart
`attack and was taken to the hospital, the outgoing message
`
`7
`
`

`

`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`might say the “9-1-1 was dialed from 555-1212 at 3:05 PM,
`the fire department and ambulance were sent to 123 Oak
`St., and John Doe was taken to St. Elsewhere General,
`where he arrived at 3:35 PM.”
`Id. at 12:45 – 13:7. Another example of real-time data is that data
`
`collected from an automobile’s automatic crash notification (ACN)
`
`database:
`
`Automobiles equipped with ACN devices will, at the time of
`a crash, transmit information regarding location, speed,
`occupants, vehicle identification number (VIN) and vehicle
`position as well as video. This information is transmitted to
`the 911 Notify system.
`Id. at 13:8–13. As described in the patent, “real-time data” is any data
`
`that informs the response to the emergency:
`
`The invention has been described with reference to the
`insertion of real-time informational messages obtained
`directly from a Computer Assisted Dispatch Device or a
`voice-recording device. The real-time messages may include
`actual dispatch information as to what action has been taken
`by emergency personnel responding to the call. It will be
`understood by those skilled in the art that the term “real-
`time” is not limited to messages that are recorded
`concurrently with the processing of an emergency call but
`
`8
`
`

`

`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`may include messages and information that is created at a
`time that is prior to or subsequent to the call, and may
`include information accumulated over a period of time. The
`messages and information may include any computer, voice,
`audio, video, or text-based information that may be available
`at the time a 9-1-1 call occurs that may be used by the
`notified party to determine the most appropriate response.
`Id. at 17:10–25.
`
`As set forth in the following sections, the purported novelty of the
`
`’356 Patent is not at all novel. Various systems and methods for the
`
`automatic provision of emergency-related, “real-time,” information
`
`collected in response to an emergency call were known in the art.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE – 37 C.F.R. § 41.104(b)
`VI.
`A. Claim Construction – 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3)
`The claims of the ’356 Patent “are interpreted according to their
`
`broadest reasonable construction in light of [its specification].” 37
`
`C.F.R. § 41.100(b). That is, a claim term has the “ordinary and
`
`customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time of the invention” unless such meaning is inconsistent
`
`with the specification. MPEP § 2111; see also, Garmin Int’l, Inc. v.
`
`Cuozzo Speed Techs. LLC, IPR2012-00001, Paper 59 at 8 (P.T.A.B. Nov.
`
`9
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`13, 2013) (“Claim terms are also given their ordinary and customary
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`meaning as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art in
`
`the context of the entire disclosure.” (citing In re Translogic Tech., Inc.,
`
`504 F.3d 1249, 1257 (Fed. Cir. 2007)).
`
`Here, all the claim terms take on their ordinary and customary
`
`meaning as no claim term is specially defined in the specification. See
`
`In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 F. 3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
`
`For example, this means that the “real-time” limitation, as it modifies
`
`“data” and “incident and response information” in the claims, is found
`
`in a reference that discloses information that is available at the time of
`
`the emergency call that may be used by the notified party to determine
`
`the most appropriate response. See, Ex. 1021 at 17:10–25; Ex. 1026 at
`
`¶ 59.
`
`B. Claims 1–28 are unpatentable in light of Markowitz, Antonucci,
`Tsumpes, Balachandran, BellSouth TR 73577, and NENA-04-
`001 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103.
`Markowitz issued from an application filed on July 13, 1998. It
`
`qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e). Antonucci issued from an
`
`application filed on October 23, 2000. It qualifies as prior art under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(e). Tsumpes issued from an application filed on July 17,
`
`10
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`2000 and claims priority to Application No. 60/143,979, filed July 15,
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`1999. It qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e). Balachandran
`
`published on June 25, 1998. It qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`102(b). BellSouth TR 73577 published in June 1993. It qualifies as prior
`
`art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). NENA-04-001 published on June 20, 2006.
`
`It qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`i. Markowitz, Antonucci, Tsumpes, Balachandran, BellSouth TR
`73577, and NENA-04-001 are non-redundant, complementary
`references that one of ordinary skill in the art would be
`motivated to combine.
`Each of the references that Intrado relies on is directed to
`
`emergency telecommunication systems that teach integrating computer
`
`and telephony technology to collect and provide pertinent information in
`
`the event of an emergency call. Ex. 1026 at ¶¶ 60–88. One of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would consider these references when designing an
`
`emergency telecommunications system such as is described and claimed
`
`in the ’356 Patent. Id. at ¶¶ 87–88.
`
`11
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`While the references are all directed at similar technologies, each
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`expressly teaches at least one unique aspect of the technology:1
`
`Markowitz expressly teaches including information digitally extracted
`
`directly from the emergency caller’s spoken words. Id. at ¶¶ 60–68, 87–
`
`88. Antonucci expressly teaches utilizing geographic-locator and
`
`computer aided dispatch systems in the provision of emergency
`
`notification services. Id. at ¶¶ 69–75, 87–88. Tsumpes expressly teaches
`
`connecting the notified party with a predetermined telephone line at the
`
`notified party’s option. Id. at ¶¶ 76–80, 87–88. Balachandran expressly
`
`teaches automatic collection and provision of wireless location and
`
`vehicle data in the event of an automobile accident. Id. at ¶¶ 81–84, 87–
`
`88. BellSouth TR 73577 expressly teaches periodic updates of subscriber
`
`information in an emergency notification database and storing and
`
`transferring subscriber data in data packets. Id. at ¶¶ 85, 87–88. And
`
`NENA-04-001 expressly teaches the use of a voice recording device in
`
`an emergency notification system. Id. at ¶¶ 86–88.
`
`
`1 Certain of these aspects were also likely well within the knowledge of
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`12
`
`

`

`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`ii. Claims 1, 5, and 15 are anticipated by Markowitz .
`Claim 1 has six compound limitations. As set forth below, each of
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`these limitations is taught in Markowitz. See also, Ex. 1026 at ¶¶ 89–
`
`113.
`
`Limitation 1.1: A telephone service method within a telephone system
`that provides notification to identified parties that an emergency call to
`an emergency service has been made from a subscriber
`Markowitz teaches this limitation in that it teaches
`
`a method and apparatus for automatically placing phone
`calls to selected parties in response to a phone call placed by
`the calling party to an emergency service provider.
`Ex. 1022 at 1:45–49; see also, Ex. 1026 at ¶ 90.
`
`Limitation 1.2: Receiving an alert signal indicating that a call has been
`placed to said emergency service
`Markowitz teaches a method and apparatus that recognizes that
`
`an emergency call has been made by receiving an alert signal such as
`
`the emergency call number:
`
`[w]hen a calling party dials into network 110 and inputs an
`emergency phone number into network 110 for establishing
`a phone call to that emergency service provider, network 110
`recognizes the phone number as an emergency phone call by
`correlating the phone number input to network 110 by the
`calling party to an emergency phone number database
`
`13
`
`

`

`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`listing stored in database 118. If network 110 determines
`that the phone number input to the network is an emergency
`phone number, a data message is sent to outcall platform
`115 to trigger the placement of the phone calls by network
`110 to the parties at phones 150, 152, and 154, as will be
`described.
`Ex. 1022 at 3:10–38. Or, in another embodiment of the Markowitz
`
`method and apparatus, the alert signal may be the Automatic Number
`
`Identifier (ANI) of the calling party (i.e., the calling party’s telephone
`
`number):
`
`In the embodiment of FIG. 2, the calling party directly calls
`an emergency service provider. Local exchange carrier
`switch 200 knows the ANI of the calling party and also
`knows the telephone number of the party that the caller is
`calling. If the ANI of the calling party and the destination
`phone number for the call of the calling party match defined
`criteria, i.e., the ANI matches an ANI that is programmed
`into switch 200 and the destination phone number is a phone
`number to an emergency service provider, switch 200 will
`provide the ANI of the calling party to service provider
`network 110. Because switch 200 only provides the ANI of
`the calling party to network 110 if the calling party has
`initiated a phone call to an emergency service provider,
`network 110 will initiate the process to automatically notify
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`those individuals as designated by the calling party upon
`receipt of the ANI from switch 200.
`Id. at 6:5–21. Thus, Markowitz teaches this limitation. See also, Ex.
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`1026 at ¶ 94.
`
`Limitation 1.3: Collecting real-time data from message content of said
`call in response to receiving said alert signal
`Markowitz teaches that in response to the alert signal, the
`
`method/apparatus collects real-time data to inform notification of pre-
`
`determined persons. For example, Markowitz teaches identifying the
`
`calling party based on the alert signal:
`
`When the calling party 100 dials into network 110 to
`establish a phone call with an emergency service provider,
`network 110 can determine the identity of the calling party
`by reviewing the Automated Number Identifier (ANI) of the
`incoming call.
`Ex. 1022 at 3:21–25. See also, id. at 7:27–33 (“If speech recognition
`
`software was included in network 110, as described above, the calling
`
`party could identify themself to the network by speaking their
`
`subscriber code into the network.”). And Markowitz further teaches
`
`using the identity of the calling party to collect information about the
`
`calling party from a database in response to the emergency call:
`
`15
`
`

`

`Resubmitted Petition
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`Outcall platform 115 uses the identification information for
`the calling party that is accessed from subscriber data base
`120 to access information for that calling party from outcall
`database 125.
`Id. at 3:39–42. And the Markowitz system includes collecting
`
`information about which emergency provider the calling party seeks to
`
`contact:
`
`Outcall database 125 could also include a template that
`includes a pre-defined message into which the identity of the
`calling party and the identity of the emergency service
`provider that has been contacted could be inserted.
`Id. at 4:10–14.
`
`Thus, Markowitz teaches this limitation. See also, Ex. 1026 at ¶
`
`98.
`
`Limitation 1.4: Said real-time data being collected within an interval
`between a time that said emergency call is recognized and a response is
`initiated
`Markowitz teaches collecting the real-time data (e.g., the identity
`
`of the requested emergency service provider) after receiving the alert
`
`signal and before the emergency service provider has responded to the
`
`call:
`
`16
`
`

`

`
`
`Resubmitted Petition
`
`IPR2014-00505
`Patent 6,775,356
`As was previously discussed, network 110 could contain
`known speech recognition sof