UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_______________
`
`
`
`
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC., LG ELECTRONICS, U.S.A., LG ELECTRONICS
`MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC.
`Petitioners
`v.
`
`
`CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORP.
`Patent Owner
`
`PETITION
`To Institute an Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,059,015
`under
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq.
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................... iv 
`
`EXHIBIT LIST ........................................................................................................ vi 
`
`I. 
`
`II. 
`
`III. 
`
`§ 42.22(a)(1) — A STATEMENT OF THE PRECISE RELIEF
`REQUESTED .................................................................................................. 1 
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 
`
`§ 42.104(a) – GROUNDS FOR STANDING ................................................. 2 
`
`IV.  MANDATORY NOTICES ............................................................................. 3 
`
`V. 
`
`§ 42.104(b) – IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGES ................................. 4 
`
`A. 
`
`B. 
`
`§ 42.104(b)(1)-(2)—Claims, Statutory Grounds, and Prior Art ........... 4 
`
`§ 42.104(b)(3)—How the Challenged Claims Are To Be
`Construed ............................................................................................... 6 
`
`VI.  SUMMARY OF THE ‘015 PATENT AND ITS PROSECUTION
`HISTORY ........................................................................................................ 6 
`
`A. 
`
`B. 
`
`The ‘015 Patent ..................................................................................... 6 
`
`Prosecution History ............................................................................... 9 
`
`VII.  § 42.104(b)(4) – HOW THE CONSTRUED CLAIMS ARE
`UNPATENTABLE ........................................................................................ 10 
`
`A.  Ground #1: Claims 1, 2, 4, and 6 of the ‘015 Patent are Invalid
`under 35 U.S.C. § 102 over Hristov .................................................... 10 
`
`B. 
`
`C. 
`
`Ground #2: Hristov renders claims 5, 7, 13, 15, 17-19, 21 and 22
`obvious ................................................................................................ 21 
`
`Ground #3: Boie and Andre renders claims 1, 2, 4-7, 13, 17-19,
`21, and 22 obvious............................................................................... 30 
`
`D.  Ground #4: Boie, Andre, and Hristov render claim 15 obvious ......... 54 
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`
`VIII.  CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 54 
`
`
`
`VIII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ ..54VIII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ ..54
`
`iii
`
`
`
`iiiiii
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases 
`
`In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr.,
`367 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2004).............................................................................. 6
`Multiform Dessicants, Inc. v. Medzam, Ltd.,
`133 F.3d 1473 (Fed. Cir. 1998).............................................................................. 6
`York Prods., Inc. v. Central Tractor Farm & Family Ctr.,
`99 F.3d 1568 (Fed. Cir. 1996)................................................................................ 6
`Statutes 
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102 ........................................................................................................ 10
`35 U.S.C. § 102(a) ..................................................................................................... 5
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ..................................................................................................... 4
`35 U.S.C. § 102(e) ...................................................................................... 1, 5, 6, 10
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ................................................................................................... 21
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a)(Pre-AIA) .................................................................................1, 4
`35 U.S.C. § 311 .......................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. § 312 .......................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. § 313 .......................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. § 314 .......................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. § 315 .......................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. § 316 .......................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. § 317 .......................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. § 318 .......................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. § 319 .......................................................................................................... 1
`Regulations 
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ..................................................................................................... 1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) ................................................................................................ 6
`37 C.F.R. § 42.101 ..................................................................................................... 2
`37 C.F.R. § 42.101(a) ................................................................................................. 2
`37 C.F.R. § 42.101(b) ................................................................................................ 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.101(c) ................................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ................................................................................................. 2
`
`
`
`iv
`
`

`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) ................................................................................................ 4
`
`37 C.F.R. §42.104(b) .............................................................................................. ..437 C.F.R. §42.104(b) .............................................................................................. ..4
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1) ............................................................................................ 4
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1) .......................................................................................... ..437 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1) .......................................................................................... ..4
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3) ............................................................................................ 6
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3) .......................................................................................... ..637 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3) .......................................................................................... ..6
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) .......................................................................................... 10
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) ........................................................................................ ..1o37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) ........................................................................................ ..1o
`37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1) .............................................................................................. 1
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1) ............................................................................................ ..137 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1) ............................................................................................ ..1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ................................................................................................ 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) .............................................................................................. ..337 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) .............................................................................................. ..3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ................................................................................................ 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) .............................................................................................. ..337 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) .............................................................................................. ..3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ................................................................................................ 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .............................................................................................. ..337 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .............................................................................................. ..3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ................................................................................................ 4
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) .............................................................................................. ..437 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) .............................................................................................. ..4
`
`
`
`v
`
`

`
`Exhibit No.
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`1004
`
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`1011
`1012
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Document
`U.S. Patent No. 8,059,015 to XiaoPing (filed on May 18, 2006)
`(issued on Aug. 23, 2011)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,463,388 to Boie (filed on Jan. 29, 1993) (issued
`on Oct. 31, 1995) (“Boie”)
`Exhibit Number Not Used
`U.S. Patent No. 7,821,502 to Hristov (filed July 5, 2006) (issued
`Oct. 26, 2010) (“Hristov”)
`U.S. Provisional App. No. 60/697,613 (filed on Jul. 8, 2005)
`Exhibit Number Not Used
`Exhibit Number Not Used
`Exhibit Number Not Used
`Exhibit Number Not Used
`Declaration of Dr. Wright
`File History of the ‘015 patent
`U.S. Patent No. 7,844,914 to Andre et al. (published Apr. 20,
`2006) (“Andre”)
`
`vi
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`I.
`
`§ 42.22(a)(1) — A STATEMENT OF THE PRECISE RELIEF
`REQUESTED
`
`Petitioners, LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., LG
`
`Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. (collectively “Petitioners”), respectfully
`
`request that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) institute inter
`
`partes review (“IPR”) under 35 U.S.C. § 311–319 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq.,
`
`and cancel claims 1, 2, 4, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 8,059,015 (“the ’015 patent”)
`
`(Ex. 1001), assigned to Cypress Semiconductor Corp. (“Cypress”), as being invalid
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) to U.S. Patent No. 7,821,502 to Hristov (“Hristov”)(Ex.
`
`1004) and claims 1, 2, 4-7, 13, 15, 17-19, 21, and 22 as being invalid under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 103(a)(Pre-AIA), in light of: (1) Hristov; (2) U.S. Patent No. 5,463,388 to
`
`Boie (“Boie”)(Ex. 1002) with U.S. Pat. No. 7,844,914 to Andre et al.
`
`(“Andre”)(Ex. 1012); and (3) Boie, Andre, and Hristov.
`
`II.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`The ’015 patent claims a method performed on a capacitance sensing device
`
`that includes well known features that were already disclosed in the prior art: it
`
`uses less sensor elements than keys. See Ex. 1001 at 1:20-63. With respect to the
`
`admitted prior art, Fig. 1A of the ‘015 patent illustrates a conventional keyboard
`
`100 that includes a keyboard architecture where every row and every column is
`
`connected to a pin. Id. However, the only purported improvement to this
`
`conventional keyboard is illustrated in Fig. 6A of the ‘015 patent, which merely
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`illustrates three pre-defined areas corresponding to an equal number of keys
`
`assigned to a fewer number of sensor elements. Id. at 25-40. That is, according to
`
`the ‘015 patent, the only inventive concept is reducing the number of sensor
`
`elements such that at least one of the sensor elements corresponds to multiple keys.
`
`This is expressed in the claims as “wherein at least one of the plurality of sensor
`
`elements corresponds to multiple pre-defined areas.”1
`
`However, the mere concept of using fewer sensor elements than keys was
`
`not new, and was well within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art. For
`
`example, as explained below, this exact feature is taught in at least Hristov and
`
`Boie.
`
`III. § 42.104(a) – GROUNDS FOR STANDING
`
`Petitioners hereby certify that the ‘015 patent for which review is sought is
`
`available for IPR. Specifically: (1) none of the Petitioners is an owner of the ‘015
`
`patent, see § 42.101; (2) before the date on which this Petition for review was filed,
`
`none of the Petitioners and the Petitioners’ real party-in-interest filed a civil action
`
`challenging the validity of a claim of the ‘015 patent, see § 42.101(a); (3)
`
`Petitioners requesting this proceeding have not filed this Petition more than one
`
`1 This is the basis on which the claims were allowed. See Office Action of June
`
`10, 2011. Ex. 1011 at CY00001837.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`year after September 3, 2013, the date on which at least one of the Petitioners,
`
`Petitioners’ real party-in-interest, or a privy of Petitioners were served with a
`
`complaint alleging infringement of the ‘015 patent, see § 42.101(b); and (4)
`
`Petitioners, Petitioners’ real party-in-interest, or a privy of Petitioners are not
`
`estopped from challenging the claims on the grounds identified in this Petition, see
`
`§ 42.101(c).
`
`IV. MANDATORY NOTICES
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1), Petitioners are the real party-in-interest
`
`for this Petition. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2), the other judicial or
`
`administrative matters that would likely affect, or be affected by, a decision in this
`
`proceeding are: Cypress Semiconductor Corp. v. LG Electronics, Inc., Case No.
`
`4:13-cv-04034-SBA (N.D. Cal) (asserting infringement of the ’015 patent); Inter
`
`Partes Review of U.S. 8,519,973; and Inter Partes Review of U.S. 8,004,497.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3), Petitioner provides the following
`
`designation of counsel:
`
`
`
`Email:
`Postal:
`
`Hand
`Delivery:
`Telephone:
`
`
`
`Lead Counsel
`Jason Shapiro (Reg. # 35,354)
`jshapiro@rothwellfigg.com
`ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST &
`MANBECK, P.C.
`607 14th Street, N.W., Suite 800
`Washington, DC 20005
`Same as Postal
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`Soumya Panda (Reg. #60,447)
`Spanda@rothwellfigg.com
`ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST &
`MANBECK, P.C.
`607 14th Street, N.W., Suite 800
`Washington, DC 20005
`Same as Postal
`
`202-783-6040
`
`202-783-6040
`
`3
`
`

`
`202-783-6031
`202-783-6031
`Facsimile:
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4), papers concerning this matter should be served
`
`on Jason Shapiro as identified above, and as appropriate to the foregoing
`
`mailing/email addresses.
`
`V.
`
`§ 42.104(b) – IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGES
`A.
`§ 42.104(b)(1)-(2)—Claims, Statutory Grounds, and Prior Art
`Petitioners are requesting inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1, 2,
`
`4-7, 13, 15, 17-19, 21, and 22 of the ‘015 patent as invalid under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`102(b) and obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Independent claim 1 of the ‘015
`
`patent recites a method comprising the following steps:
`
`assigning a plurality of keyboard keys to correspond to pre-
`defined areas of a sensing surface of a sensing device having a
`plurality of sensor elements and a plurality of capacitance sensing pins
`to couple the plurality of sensor elements to a processing device,
`wherein the pre-defined areas are disposed adjacent to one another
`and wherein at least one of the plurality of sensor elements
`corresponds to multiple pre-defined areas;
`determining a position of a presence of the conductive object on
`the sensing device by measuring capacitance on the plurality of
`capacitance sensing pins; and
`selecting a keyboard key of the plurality of keyboard keys when
`the position of the presence of the conductive object is determined to
`be within the pre-defined area of the sensing device corresponding to
`the keyboard key.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`Ex. 1001 at 24:6-20.
`Independent claim 7 recites features analogous to those recited for claim 1.
`
`Ex. 1010 at ¶ 69. In this regard, independent claim 7 is directed to an apparatus
`
`having a processing device operable to perform the method steps of claim 1.
`
`Dependent claims 2, 4-6, 13, 15, 17-19, 21, and 22 recite well known features
`
`further defining the pre-defined areas and sensing device. Ex. 1010 at ¶¶ 70-81.
`
`The following prior art references provide evidence of the unpatentability of
`
`the challenged claims:
`
`Ground
`No.
`1
`
`Claim No(s).
`
`1, 2, 4, and 6
`
`Proposed Statutory Rejections for the Claims
`of the ’343 Patent
`Are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) over
`Hristov
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`7, 13, 15, 17-19,
`21, and 22
`
`Are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`Hristov
`
`1, 2, 4-7, 13, 17-
`19, 21, and 22
`
`Are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`Boie and Andre
`
`15
`
`Is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the
`Boie, Andre, and Hristov
`
`Boie (issued Oct. 31, 1995) qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`Andre (filed on September 16, 2005 and published April 20, 2006) qualifies as
`
`prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) & (e). Hristov (filed on July 5, 2006), claims
`
`priority to U.S. Provisional App. No. 60/697,613 (filed on Jul. 8, 2005) (Ex. 1005).
`
`The subject matter of Hristov is supported by U.S. Provisional App. No.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`60/697,613 is the same as the subject matter of Hristov. Ex. 1010 at ¶ 84.
`
`Accordingly, Hristov qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`§ 42.104(b)(3)—How the Challenged Claims Are To Be Construed
`
`B.
`A claim in an unexpired patent is to be given its “broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation in light of the specification in which it appears.” 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.100(b).2 Claim terms are given their ordinary and accustomed meaning as
`
`would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, unless the inventor, as a
`
`lexicographer, has set forth a special meaning for a term. Multiform Dessicants,
`
`Inc. v. Medzam, Ltd., 133 F.3d 1473, 1472 (Fed. Cir. 1998); York Prods., Inc. v.
`
`Central Tractor Farm & Family Ctr., 99 F.3d 1568, 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1996). Thus,
`
`solely for this proceeding, the terms of claims 1, 2, 4-7, 13, 15, 17-19, 21, and 22
`
`should be given their plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`VI. SUMMARY OF THE ‘015 PATENT AND ITS PROSECUTION
`HISTORY
`A. The ‘015 Patent
`
`
`2 Because the claim construction standard in an IPR is different than that used in
`
`litigation, Petitioners expressly reserve the right to present different constructions
`
`of terms in the Related Litigations. See In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367
`
`F.3d 1359, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`The ’015 patent is directed to “an apparatus and method for selecting a
`
`keyboard key based on a position of a presence of a conductive object on a sensing
`
`device and a pre-defined area of the keyboard key.” Ex. 1001 at 3:34-37. In this
`
`regard, the ’015 patent teaches that “multiple keyboard keys can be assigned to
`
`pre-determined areas on a single sensor element.” Id. at 4:14-16. For example, the
`
`‘015 patent teaches that a first keyboard key A “is assigned between 1 and 3 in the
`
`x-direction, and between 5 and 7 in the y-direction (e.g., {1<X<3 & 5<Y<7}).” Id.
`
`at 4:18-21.
`
`Fig. 6A of the ‘015 patent (reproduced below), illustrates a single sensor
`
`element having three keyboard keys assigned to the sensor element. Id. at 18:25-
`
`26.
`
`
` Fig. 6C of the ‘015 patent (reproduced below) illustrates an embodiment of
`
`a processing device coupled to a sensing device.
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`
`
`The ’015 patent teaches that a “processing device 210 coupled to a sensing
`
`device that has a capacitance sensor matrix 650 and keyboard keys A-Z 606(0)-
`
`606(25) assigned to pre-defined areas of the sensing device.” Id. at 19:63-66. The
`
`“[c]apacitance sensor matrix 600 includes eight rows 504(1)-504(8) and eight
`
`columns 505(1)-505(8).” Id. at 19:66-20:1. The “[c]olumns 505(1)-505(8) are
`
`coupled to processing device 210 using capacitance sensing pins, conductive traces
`
`502.” Id. at 20:5-6. The ‘015 patent teaches that since “sensor matrix 650 is an
`
`8x8 matrix, there are 16 total capacitance sensing pins that couple the sensor
`
`matrix 650 to the processing device 210.” Id. at 20:6-9. Additionally, “[k]eyboard
`
`keys 606(0)-606(25), which represent the letters A to Z of the alphabet, are
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`assigned to pre-defined areas of the sensing device.” Id. at 20:9-13. As explained
`
`in the Background, virtual keyboards on a touch screen were well known at the
`
`time of filing. Id. at 2:13-42 (“Virtual keyboards are a representation of a
`
`keyboard displayed on a touch screen.”).
`
`Prosecution History
`
`B.
`The application that matured into the ‘015 patent (App. No. 11/440,924)
`
`(“’924 app.”) was filed on May 25, 2006 with 26 claims, 3 of which were
`
`independent. After several iterations of office action rejections and responses, the
`
`Office issued a non-final Office Action on June 10, 2011 rejecting application
`
`claims 1-7, 9-11, 14, 15, 17-23, 26, 27, and 29 over the published application
`
`corresponding to Hristov, and indicated application claims 8, 16, 28, and 30 as
`
`reciting allowable subject matter. See Office Action of June 10, 2011 (Ex. 1011 at
`
`CY00001837). In response to this rejection, Patent Owner amended independent
`
`application claims 1 and 22 to recite the subject matter of application claim 28, and
`
`amended independent claim 6 to recite the subject matter of claim 30. Specifically,
`
`independent claims 1, 6, and 22 were amended to recite “wherein at least one of
`
`the plurality of sensor elements corresponds to multiple pre-defined areas” to place
`
`the application in condition for allowance. See Amendment of June 24, 2011 (Ex.
`
`1011 at CY00001853 - 1866). The Office subsequently issued a Notice of
`
`Allowance. Ex. 1011 at CY 00001867.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`
`VII. § 42.104(b)(4) – HOW THE CONSTRUED CLAIMS ARE
`UNPATENTABLE
`A. Ground #1: Claims 1, 2, 4, and 6 of the ‘015 Patent are Invalid
`under 35 U.S.C. § 102 over Hristov
`
`There is a reasonable likelihood that claims 1, 2, 4, and 6 are anticipated and
`
`rendered invalid by Hristov under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) for at least the reasons set
`
`forth below.
`
`Although this reference was considered during prosecution of the ’015
`
`patent, the Examiner failed to appreciate the full scope of its teachings. The
`
`purported deficiency of Hristov, “wherein at least one of the plurality of sensor
`
`elements corresponds to multiple pre-defined areas,” is plainly taught by Hristov
`
`for at least the reasons set forth below.
`
`1.
`
`Independent Claim 1
`
`Fig. 6 of Hristov, which is reproduced below, illustrates a display screen 54
`
`overlaid on a pattern of sensing electrodes 28. Ex. 1004 at 10:15-17. The display
`
`screen 54 includes a “menu of commands displayed to a user … [including] a
`
`series of box outlines in which the numbers 0 to 9 are displayed, a box outline
`
`containing the word ‘ENTER’, and a box outline of a box partially filled with
`
`shading and having gradations marked next to it representing the volume of music
`
`being played.” Id. at 10:17-23. The menu including the numbers 0 to 9 is an
`
`example of Hristov’s disclosure of the claimed feature of a plurality of keyboard
`
`keys. Ex. 1010 at ¶¶ 85-87. Each of the box outlines that define the keys such as
`10
`
`
`
`

`
`the numbers 0-9 is an example of pre-defined areas disposed adjacent to one
`
`another, and is consistent with the plain and ordinary meaning of the term
`
`adjacent, as well as Patent Owner’s use of the term “adjacent” in the ’015 patent .
`
`See Ex. 1001 at 9:15-17 and 15:1-3 (identifying, with respect to Fig. 3A, plates 301
`
`and 302 with a space in between as both “a pair of adjacent plates” and “adjacent
`
`sensor elements”). Id. Furthermore, the display screen 54 is an example of a
`
`sensing surface. Further, the display screen 54 overlaid on device 50 teaches an
`
`example of assigning a plurality of keyboard keys to correspond to pre-defined
`
`areas, as claimed. Id.
`
` 
`
`     
`
`
`
`11
`
` 
`
`

`
`Hristov teaches that the position sensor 22 “is operable to determine the position of
`
`an object along a first (x) and second (y) direction.” Ex. 1004 at 5:37-47. The
`
`sensor 22 includes a substrate 24 having an arrangement of sensing electrodes 26
`
`that define a sensing area within which the position of an object is determined. Id.
`
`The “pattern of the sensing electrodes on the substrate 24 is such as to divide the
`
`sensing area into an array (grid) of sensing cells 28 arranged into rows and
`
`columns.” Id. at 5:58-62. The disclosure of at least sensing cells 28 illustrated in
`
`Fig. 3 teaches the claimed feature of a plurality of sensor elements. Ex. 1010 at ¶¶
`
`89, 90.
`
`
`
`The position sensor 22 includes “a series of capacitance measurement
`
`channels 42 coupled to respective ones of” sensing electrodes. Ex. 1004 at 7:59-
`
`62. The measurement channels measure a capacitance of a corresponding sensing
`
`electrode. Id. at 7:65-8:14. The “signals indicative of the capacitance values
`
`measured by the measurement channels 42 are provided to processing circuitry
`
`44,” where a position is reported to a host controller 46. Id. 8:30-44. Hristov’s
`
`disclosure regarding processing circuitry teaches the claimed feature of a
`
`processing device. Ex. 1010 at ¶¶ 90, 91. The connections between at least the
`
`sensing electrodes and measurement channels teach the claimed feature of a
`
`plurality of capacitance sensing pins. Id. Furthermore, the connections between
`
`the sensing electrodes and processing circuitry 44 via the measurement channel are
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`
`exemplary disclosure of the claimed feature of a plurality of capacitance sensing
`
`pins to couple the plurality of sensor elements to a processing device. Id.
`
`As discussed above, at least the outlines of the keys disclose the claimed
`
`feature of pre-defined areas. Id. at ¶ 93. As illustrated in Fig. 6, each of the box
`
`outlines are adjacent to one another. As such, Hristov teaches wherein the pre-
`
`defined areas are disposed adjacent to one another. Id. Additionally, as
`
`illustrated above in Fig. 6 (annotated), there is a sensor element that corresponds to
`
`both the “1” and “5” keys . Accordingly, the examples in Hristov clearly disclose
`
`the claimed feature of wherein at least one of the plurality of sensor elements
`
`corresponds to multiple pre-defined areas. Id. at ¶¶ 93, 94.
`
`Thus, the combination of the display screen overlaid on the sensing
`
`electrodes, as illustrated in Fig. 6 of Hristov, teaches the claimed features of
`
`assigning a plurality of keyboard keys to correspond to pre-defined areas of a
`
`sensing surface of a sensing device having a plurality of sensor elements and a
`
`plurality of capacitance sensing pins to couple the plurality of sensor elements to
`
`a processing device, wherein the pre-defined areas are disposed adjacent to one
`
`another and wherein at least one of the plurality of sensor elements corresponds
`
`to multiple pre-defined areas. Id. at ¶¶ 93, 94.
`
`To determine an X-Y location, Hristov measures capacitance and performs
`
`interpolation. For example, Hristov teaches that “signals indicative of the
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`
`capacitance values measured by the measurement channels 42 are provided to
`
`processing circuitry 44,” where “processing circuitry is configured to determine the
`
`interpolated position of a capacitive load applied to the sensing area by an object
`
`adjacent the position sensor.” Ex. 1004 at 8:30-34. This “interpolated position of
`
`the capacitive load along the x-direction is determined from the signals from the
`
`capacitance measurement channels associated with the columns of column sensing
`
`electrodes and the interpolated position of the capacitive load along the y-direction
`
`is determined from the signals from the capacitance measurement channels
`
`associated with the rows of row sensing electrodes.” Id. at 8:34-41. As noted
`
`above, the connections between the sensing electrodes and the measurement
`
`channels disclose a plurality of capacitance sensing pins. Thus, Hristov teaches
`
`determining a position of a presence of a conductive object on the sensing device
`
`by measuring capacitance on the plurality of capacitance sensing pins. Ex. 1010
`
`at ¶¶ 96, 97.
`
`An interpolation is performed when a user selects one of the keys of Fig. 6,
`
`where the position is reported so that the controller 46 can take appropriate action
`
`by comparing the position of the touch with the positions of the currently displayed
`
`menu items. Ex. 1010 at ¶ 98. To be able to determine which key is selected, the
`
`controller 46 compares the reported position with the sensing areas. Id. Hristov
`
`teaches that “[o]nce the position of the object along the x- and y-directions has
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`
`been determined, the position is reported to a host controller 46 so that it can take
`
`appropriate action.” Ex. 1004 at 8:41-44. For example, Hristov teaches that a
`
`“user can select from the menu of commands displayed on the screen 54 by
`
`pointing at the appropriate location,” where the “position sensor reports the
`
`location of the touch to the device controller which in turn determines which
`
`command is to be executed,” which is done “by comparing the position of the
`
`touch with the positions of the currently displayed menu items.” Id. at 8:61-67
`
`(emphasis added). Hristov’s disclosure regarding determining the command
`
`selected by the user based on a comparison of the reported x-y position of the
`
`object and the positions of the keys displayed teaches selecting a keyboard key of
`
`the plurality of keyboard keys when the position of the presence of the
`
`conductive object is determined to be within the pre-defined area of the sensing
`
`device corresponding to the keyboard key. Ex. 1010 at ¶¶ 99, 100. Thus, Hristov
`
`renders claim 1 invalid.
`
`2.
`
`Dependent claim 2
`
`
`
`Claim 2 depends from claim 1, which is addressed above in Sec. VII(A)(1),
`
`and recites “wherein selecting the keyboard key comprises comparing the position
`
`of the conductive object with the pre-defined areas.” With respect to the additional
`
`limitations set forth in claim 2, Hristov teaches selecting a keyboard key by
`
`comparing the position of the conductive object with the pre-defined areas. For
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`
`instance, Hristov teaches that a “user can select from the menu of commands
`
`displayed on the screen,” and the “position sensor reports the location of the touch
`
`to the device controller which in turn determines which command is to be
`
`executed,” which is done “by comparing the position of the touch with the
`
`positions of the currently displayed menu items.” Ex. 1004 at 8:61-67 (emphasis
`
`added) and 8:30-44. The disclosure regarding determining the command selected
`
`by the user teaches selecting the keyboard key. Ex. 1010 at ¶¶ 103-105. Further,
`
`by comparing the position of the touch with the positions of the currently displayed
`
`menu items, Hristov also teaches selecting the keyboard key by comparing the
`
`position of the conductive object with the pre-defined areas. Id. Thus, Hristov
`
`renders claim 2 invalid.
`
`3.
`
`Dependent Claim 4
`
`Claim 4 depends from claim 1, which is addressed above in Section
`
`VII(A)(1), and recites “outputting keyboard data corresponding to the selected key
`
`from the processing device to a component external to the processing device.”
`
`With respect to the additional limitations set forth in claim 4, Hristov teaches
`
`outputting keyboard data corresponding to the selected key from the processing
`
`device to a component external to the processing device. For instance, Fig. 3 of
`
`Hristov (reproduced below), illustrates both processing circuitry 44 and a device
`
`controller 46.
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`
`
`
`The processing circuitry 44 receives signals from the electrodes and
`
`determines the position of the conductive object on the sensing surface. Ex. 1004
`
`at 8:30-44. The position of the object is reported to the host