UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`WAVEMARKET, INC. D/B/A/ LOCATION LABS
`
`Petitioner,
`
`CALLWAVE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2014-TBD
`
`Patent 6,771,970
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF SCOTT HOTES, Ph.D. FOR INTER PARTES
`REVIEW OF US. PATENT NO. 6,771,970
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-312 AND 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.100-106, 108
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 1
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`WAVEMARKET, INC. D/B/A/ LOCATION LABS
`
`Petitioner,
`
`CALLWAVE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2014-TBD
`
`Patent 6,771,970
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF SCOTT HOTES, Ph.D. FOR INTER PARTES
`REVIEW OF US. PATENT NO. 6,771,970
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-312 AND 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.100-106, 108
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 1
`
`
`
`I, 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 Partes Review of US. Patent No.
`
`6,771 ,970 (the "'970 Patent") to Meir Dan.
`
`2.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have studied:
`
`(a)
`
`US. Patent No. 6,771,970 ("the '970 Patent") (Exhibit 1101)
`
`(b)
`
`File History for US. Patent No. 6,771,970 (Exhibit 1111), and the
`
`prior art cited against the claims by the USPTO
`
`US. Provisional Application No. 60/157,643 (Exhibit 1102)
`
`US. Patent No. 6,243,039 ("Elliot") (Exhibit 1110)
`
`US. Patent No. 6,321,092 ("Fitch") (Exhibit 1105)
`
`(0
`
`US. Patent No
`
`. 6,002,936 ("Roel-Ng et al.") (Exhibit 1107)
`
`(g)
`
`US. Patent No
`
`. 6,741,927 ("Jones") (Exhibit 1108)
`
`(h)
`
`US. Patent No
`
`. 5,758,313 ("Shah") (Exhibit 1109)
`
`Decision - Institution of Inter Partes Review - 37 CPR. §42.108
`
`dated May 9, 2014 ("Decision"; Exhibit 1104)
`
`Ix.)
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 2
`
`
`
`(j)
`
`A Comparison of IVHS Progress in the United States, Europe and
`
`Japan, R.L. French and Associates, February 18, 1984 (Exhibit 1113)
`
`(k)
`
`FAA Historical Chronology, 1926-1996 (Exhibit 1112)
`
`(1)
`
`The Evolving Roles of Vehicular Navigation, Robert L. French, R.L.
`
`French and Associates, Fort Worth, Texas (1987) (Exhibit 1114)
`
`(m)
`
`Ericsson Review, No. 4, 1999 - The Telecommunications Technology
`
`Journal
`
`--
`
`"Ericsson's Mobile Location Solution"
`
`("Ericsson
`
`Publication") (Exhibit 1115)
`
`(n)
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of US. Patent No. 6,771,970 Pursuant
`
`to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-312 and 37 CPR. §§ 42.100-106, 108 (to be
`
`filed with this Declaration).
`
`In forming the opinions expressed below, I have considered:
`
`(a)
`
`(b)
`
`The documents listed above
`
`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.
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 3
`
`
`
`Qualifications and Professional Experience
`
`4.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Science degree in mathematical physics from Case
`
`Western University in 1987 and a Ph.D. in particle physics from the University of
`
`California in 1992.
`
`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.
`
`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 Emeryville, California
`
`Since the inception of the company, I have been instrumentally involved in
`
`4
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 4
`
`
`
`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-
`
`5
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 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++,
`
`PERL, Java, and Unix.
`
`9.
`
`In the field of the alleged invention of the '970 Patent, a 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 filing of the '970
`
`provisional patent application and the issuance of the '970 patent). Specifically,
`
`my experience (1) in the industry, (2) with undergraduate and post—graduate
`
`students, (3) with colleagues from 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 and capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the field of the
`
`alleged invention of the '970 Patent.
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 6
`
`
`
`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, one
`
`of ordinary skill in the art 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 CDPD.
`
`14.
`
`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),
`
`EDACS (Enhanced Digital Access Communication Systems) and MSAT (Mobile
`
`‘ See, e.g., Exhibit 1112.
`
`2 See, Exhibit 1113.
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 7
`
`
`
`Satellite Communication Systems) were available for locating objects such as
`
`vehicles and objects.
`
`15.
`
`Based on my experience and knowledge in the industry, one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art was also well aware of location determination systems and networks that
`
`possessed an architecture and functionality that included an interface acting
`
`between various positioning systems, networks or techniques (like the ones noted
`
`above) on one hand, and user or system applications on the client side (e. g.,
`
`location requesting or dependent applications). See, Ericsson Publication (Exhibit
`
`1115), pp. 214, 219, Figure 1, Figure 6. One component known by those skilled in
`
`the art to be part of this interface is a so-called "Mobile Positioning Center" or
`
`"MPC." This is a term of art. One skilled in the art was aware that a MPC can be
`
`generally described as a gateway between a network and system and/or user
`
`applications. Ericsson Publication, p. 219. One skilled in the art was also well-
`
`aware that a MPC was configured to make a determination between various
`
`positioning systems, networks or techniques as to which stem or technique to
`
`utilize in response to a request to locate a particular mobile station.
`
`[
`
`16.
`
`Based on my experience and knowledge in the industry, one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art 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.
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 8
`
`
`
`17. All of the concepts set forth in the '970 patent were disclosed, for example,
`
`in the Ericsson Publication (Exhibit 1015). Figures 1 and 6 from the publication
`
`are reproduced below.
`
`Figure I
`The mobile location solution has been dessgned to handle a variety of posmomng methods
`and IlppllCdIlOn Interfaces.
`
` Bill ng
`
`CAMI
`
`1A8
`
`
`
`
` .A
`A f.2»
`Ul YOA F OTD
`
`
`{if
`
`,
`Single cell TA
`E ~CC-l - TA
`
`."‘-1
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 9
`
`
`
`05M -.enter
`
`Ei-I In; -: 1M
`I
`.301?"
`
`-'\1r‘.
`
`"-"_.1'|"l!!- :r:
`
`~=r-I'-.w
`
`NW! :IDUIIL.“ L-fl'i
`
`System app! carons
`
`Ceiiular PS
`
`
`
`
`Other
`
`'
`
`P-'-sst-='-nlng procedures
`
`MPS
`
`Posmon ng gateway
`
`Posmcnmg applcatir':ns
`
`MUS
`
`The location system and techniques described by Ericsson were designed to handle
`
`a variety of positioning methods and application interfaces. The system is
`
`described as having three main components: (1) a positioning subsystem (e.g., GPS,
`
`cellular, etc.), (2) the MPC that functions as middleware between the location
`
`subsystems and a location service client, retrieving data from positioning
`
`subsystems and converting it into positioning information for the
`
`client/applications, and (3) the location client subsystem, including applications
`
`that make use of positioning information, such applications can be either internal
`
`or external. Ericsson Publication, pp. 219-220.
`
`10
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 10
`
`
`
`Relevant legal Standards
`
`18.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether the claims of
`
`the '970 Patent 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 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, the differences
`
`between the prior art and the claimed subject, and any secondary considerations or
`
`evidence of nonobviousness.
`
`19.
`
`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
`
`11
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 11
`
`
`
`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 '970 Patent
`
`20.
`
`The '970 Patent was filed on October 2, 2000 but claims priority to a
`
`provisional application3 filed on October 4, 1999.4 The '970 Patent acknowledges
`
`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, AMPS (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." ('970 Patent, col. 1, 11. 11-21). The '970
`
`3 Exhibit 1112.
`
`4 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 its provisional application to claim
`
`an earlier priority date.
`
`12
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 12
`
`
`
`Patent acknowledges 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." (‘970 Patent, 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
`
`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."
`
`('970 Patent, col. 1, 11. 38-49).
`
`13
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 13
`
`
`
`21.
`
`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. 11, 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."
`
`('970 Patent, col. 1, 11. 60-67).
`
`22.
`
`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
`
`over a communications network. 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
`
`14
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 14
`
`
`
`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 property 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
`
`determination system; said location determination system
`
`being arranged to receive said mobile platform location
`
`information and to forward it to said subscriber.
`
`23. Annotated Figure 1 illustrates the main components of the location
`
`determination system of the '970 Patent:
`
`15
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 15
`
`
`
`Subscriber
`
`a
`
`Plurality of remote
`tracking systems
`
`Mobile platforms
`
`
`
`Location determination
`system
`
`Communication
`system
`
`24. 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 "communication sub-system" (3) to obtain the location of "mobile
`
`platforms" (21-24). ('970 Patent , col 4, 11. 12-22). In some embodiments, the
`
`subscriber can interact with the location determination system through a "Website"
`
`16
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 16
`
`
`
`(5) and a "map server" (4) to display the location on a web browser running on the
`
`subscriber‘s computer. ('970 Patent , col. 5, 11. 3—24). The Patentee does not
`
`claim to have invented any of these elements and has merely combined existing
`
`technology and prior art.
`
`('970 Patth , col 1, 11. 10-67).
`
`25.
`
`The references discussed herein teach all claimed elements, including those
`
`found missing on the Patent Office's Decision of May 9, 2014 (Exhibit 1104).
`
`Generally speaking, Fitch teaches a system capable of locating a mobile station or
`
`device by using an interface between one or more different types of location
`
`finding equipment or techniques, and the client side location requesting
`
`applications. Roel-Ng et al. also teaches such as system, that also includes an
`
`interface, including a Mobile Positioning Center (MPC), between a plurality of
`
`mobile station positioning networks or technologies on the one hand, and client-
`
`side location requesting applications on the other. Roel-Ng et al. more specifically
`
`teaches structuring the MPC such that it receives information concerning which
`
`positioning technologies that mobile stations present within the network are
`
`capable of performing, as well as information associated with a location request
`
`(e.g., quality of service demands), and utilizing both types of information to
`
`determine not only which positioning technologies are available for use when
`
`attempting to locate a particular mobile station, but is also able to select an
`
`available positioning technology that additionally fulfills any requirements
`
`17
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 17
`
`
`
`associated with the location request. Roel-Ng et al. teaches that providing the
`
`MPC with this structure and functionality, the system is provided with greater
`
`flexibility which allows for the selection of the best positioning method on a case-
`
`by—case basis.
`
`Claim Constructions
`
`26.
`
`It is my understanding that in 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:
`
`0
`
`"mobile platforms" means a mobile device with a tracking unit, e.g., cell
`
`phones, and motor vehicles.
`
`(see e.g., col. 3, ll. 58-col. 4, ll. 5 of the '970
`
`Patent).
`
`0
`
`"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.
`
`0
`
`"a communication system" means communication hardware, software or
`
`protocols for receiving and transmitting location information and requests
`
`18
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 18
`
`
`
`for location information. (see e.g., col. 4, 11. 46-62 of the '970 Patent).
`
`0
`
`"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).
`
`I understand that claim terms may be construed differently in litigation and
`
`the district court due to the application of 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 plaintiff‘s 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 infi'ingement 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.
`
`19
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 19
`
`
`
`Fitch, US. 6,321,092, "Multiple Input Data Management For Wireless
`Location Based Applications
`
`27. As a preliminary and very fundamental matter, one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art would certainly recognize that computerized systems such as the one described
`
`in Fitch carries out its various functions through the interaction of hardware and
`
`software components. Thus, at the time of the invention described in the '970
`
`patent, the system described by Fitch would operate by, at least in part, the
`
`execution of stored computer readable program code.
`
`28.
`
`Fitch (Exhibit 1105) discloses systems and methods that employ multiple
`
`location finding equipment, communicating with a centralized Location Finding
`
`System or Location Manager 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
`
`plaform (114). The LFS (116) receives location information from
`
`20
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 20
`
`
`
`the LFEs (I04, 106, I08 and 110) andprovides 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 example, depending
`
`on the needs of the applications (118). Multiple inputs may also be co-
`
`processed for enhanced accuracy.
`
`(Fitch, Abstract).
`
`(emphasis added)
`
`Fitch also clearly teaches the alleged point of novelty of the '970
`
`Patent, which is a system that includes "middleware" interfacing between
`
`multiple remote tracking systems (e.g., LFEs) and location requests from a
`
`user/subscriber made through applications (e.g., 226, 228, 230) :
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. a processing system is interposed between the LFEs
`
`and the wireless location applications such that the
`
`applications can access location information in a manner that
`
`is independent of the location finding technology employed by
`
`the LFEs.
`
`Fitch, col. 3, 11. 4—9; emphasis added.
`
`For example, Figures 1 and 2 of Fitch highlight major elements of the
`
`'970 Patent, and more specifically discloses systems having the above-
`
`described functionality. For instance, Fitch discloses a platform (114;
`
`Figure 1), Location Finding System (LFS, 116; Figure 1), Wireless Location
`
`21
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 21
`
`
`
`Interface (WLI; 224), Location Manger (LM, 214), and "LFCs5" interfacing
`
`between the location requests initiated by a user or subscriber through the
`
`applications (118, 226, 228, 230), and the multiple location tracking systems
`
`or LPEs (104, 106, 108, 202, 204, 206). Figure 2 is reproduced below.
`
`LFS
`
`V
`
`ELOCITY
`
`200
`
`;~"214 i
`' 216
`i
`
`226
`
`APPLICATION
`
`228 - ~.
`
`.
`
`'
`MULTI-
`.217
`INPUT
`PROCESSING '
`
`
`APPLICATION
`
`.
`
` 230
`
`APPLICATION
`
`
`
`
`
`202
`
`204
`
`§
`
`210
`
`LFE2
`
`LFCz
`
`206
`
`212
`
`I
`
`FIG.2
`
`
`
`T“
`
`
`
`With regard to the use of location requesting applications with multiple
`
`types of remote tracking systems Fitch discloses:
`
`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 global positioning system
`
`(GPS) and the use of cell/sector location. The types of equipment
`
`5 The meaning of the acronym "LFC" is not provided in the '970 Patent.
`22
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 22
`
`
`
`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.
`
`Fitch, col. 1, 11. 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 LF E 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
`
`technologies can be readily deployed and existing applications can
`
`exploit such new technologies without compatibility issues.
`
`Fitch, col. 2, 11. 26-41; emphasis added.
`
`23
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 23
`
`
`
`Roel—Ng et al., US. 6,002,936, "System and Method for Informing Network of
`
`Terminal-Based Positioning Method Capabilities
`
`29.
`
`Roel-Ng et a1. is directed to telecommunications systems and methods for
`
`determining the location of mobile stations (MS) that may utilize one or more
`
`network-based (e.g., cellular network telecommunications based location systems)
`
`or terminal-based (e.g., global positioning system (GPS)) positioning systems or
`
`techniques. Figures 3 and 4, reproduced below.
`
`
`
`FIG. 3
`
`24
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 24
`
`
`
`Terminal—based positioning capabilities
`sent
`to MSC/VLR
`
`
`
`
`
`Positioning capabilities sent to MPC
`
`Positioning request sent
`
`to MPG
`
`400
`
`410
`
`420
`
`
`
`
`Network—
`- - sed positioning
`method
`chosen
`
`?
`425
`
`Y
`
`
`
`Positioning request and
`melhod sent
`to MSC/VLR
`
`Positioning request and
`method sent
`to 850
`
`BSC obtains
`positioning data
`
`Positioning data sent
`to MPC
`
`MS location
`determined
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`430
`
`
`
`435
`
` 4,50
`
`455
`
`
`
`
`#60
`
`Positioning request and
`method sent
`to MSC/VLR
`
` 440
`
`Positioning request and
`method sent
`to BSC
`
`
`
`
`85C sends positioning
`request to MS
`
`MS collects
`positioning data
`
`470
`
`
`
`475
`
` 44s
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MS has
`calculation
`ability9
`
`MS determines
`its location
`
`485
`
`490
`
`MS sends positioning
`data to MPC
`
`MS location determined
`
`495
`
`
`
`
`
`30.
`
`Of note is the following portion of the Roel—Ng et al. disclosure:
`
`With reference now to FIG. 3 of the drawings, when a Requesting
`
`Application (RA) 380 sends a positioning request for a particular
`
`Mobile Station (MS) 300 to a Mobile Positioning Center (MPC) 370
`
`serving the Location Area (LA) 305 that the MS 300 is currently
`
`located in, the RA 380 can also include quality of service information,
`
`such as the data rate and/or the reliability of the positioning
`
`information returned by the cellular network (MPC 370) performing
`
`the positioning. In order to meet these quality of service demands, the
`
`MPC 3 70 must choose the optimum positioning method available.
`
`25
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 25
`
`
`
`Positioning methods can be network-based, e.g., Timing Advance (TA)
`
`method, Time of Arrival (TOA) method, or Angle of Arrival (AOA)
`
`method, or terminal-based, e.g., Global Positioning System (GPS)
`
`method, Observed Time Difference (OTD) method, or Enhanced OTD
`
`method. In orderfor the MPC 3 70 to have knowledge of the
`
`terminal-based positioning methods, this information must be sent
`
`to the MPC 3 70 prior to receiving a positioning request.
`
`Roel—Ng et al., col. 4, 11. 41-59; emphasis added.
`
`With reference now to FIG. 4 of the drawings, after the classmark
`
`information 310, including the MS 300 positioning capabilities, has
`
`been sent to the MSC/VLR 350 (step 400) and forwarded to the MPC
`
`370 (step 410), when a positioning request comes in to the MPC 370
`
`(step 420), the MPC 3 70 must then determine the optimum
`
`positioning method based upon the available network-based and
`
`terminal-based positioning methods and the quality of service
`
`requested by the RA 380 (step 425). Once the positioning method has
`
`been chosen, e. g., either a network-based or a terminal-based
`
`method (step 425), the positioning request, along with the
`
`positioning method, is sent to the serving MSC/VLR 350 (steps 430
`
`and 440). The serving MSC/VLR 350 then forwards the positioning
`
`request to a serving Base Station Controller (BSC) 340 (steps 435 and
`
`445).
`
`Roel-Ng et al., col. 5, 11. 30-44; emphasis added.
`
`31.
`
`Thus Roel—Ng et al. also discloses systems and techniques which include an
`
`interface comprising at least a Mobile Positioning Center (MPC 370) between
`
`multiple location tracking systems (e.g., network-based and terminal-based
`
`26
`
`Location Labs Exhibit 1116 Page 26
`
`
`
`systems/methods) and positioning requests submitted through one or more
`
`applications (e.g
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
