Paper No. ____
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`NIKE, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`MAYFONK ATHLETIC, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Issue Date: October 14, 2014
`Title: Athletic-Wear Having Integral Measuring Sensors
`_______________
`
`Inter Partes Review Case No. Unassigned
`____________________________________________________________
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.1-80, 42.100 et seq.
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial & Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OOF CONTTENTS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Pateent No. 8,8600,584
`
`
`
`Pettition for Inteer Partes Reeview
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INNTRODUCCTION ....................
`
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PPage
`
`
`
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`..................................
`
`
`I. 
`..... 1 
`
`..... 1 
`
`
`
`A.
`
`
`Real Party-In-Innterest Unnder 37 C.FF.R. § 42.8
`(b)(1) ........................
`..... 1 
` 
`42.8(b)(2)
`
`
`B.
`
`Relatted Matterss Under 377 C.F.R. §
`
`) .................................
`..... 1 
` 
`
`
`C.
`
`
`
`
`Leadd and Back--Up Counssel Under 337 C.F.R. §§ 42.8(b)(33) .............
`..... 1 
` 
`..... 2 
`
`D.
`
`
`
`
`
`8(b)(4) .....F.R. § 42.8nder 37 C.Frmation Unice of Infor  Noticce of Servi
`..... 2 
`
`
`E.
`
`
`Poweer of Attornney ............................................
`
`..................................
` 
`
`
`OR INTERR PARTES
`..... 2 
`REVIEW
`
`MENTS FOIII.  RREQUIREM
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Reeview Fee uunder 37 CC.F.R. §§ 442.15 and 442.103 ......
`..... 2 
`A.
` 
`..... 2 
`
`
`B.
`anding Un  Grouunds for Sta
`
`der 37 C.FF.R. § 42.1
`
`04(a) .........................
`
`
`42.104(b) and Precisse
`
`
`C.
`
`
`Identtification oof Challengge under 377 C.F.R. §
` 
`
`..................................
`..... 2 
`
`
`
`
`Relieef Requesteed ...............................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ARE ND 15-27 A4, 6-13, ANLAIMS 3-4ENGE: CLD CHALLEIV.  DDETAILED
`
`
`
`
`UNPATENNTABLE .....................................................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`..................................TICES ......ORY NOTII.  MMANDATO
`
`
`
`
`
`Admittedd Prior Artt in the ’58
`
`
`
`
`..................................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`..................................
`
`4 Patent ...
`
`
`
`Summaryy of the ’5
`
`
`
`.................on History .84 Patent PProsecutio
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claims oof the ’584 Patent .......................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`..................................
`
`
`..................................
`
`..................................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`The ’’584 Patennt ................................................
`1. 
`
`Summaryy of the ’5
`
`84 Patent ..................
`2. 
`3. 
`4. 
`
`
`
`l of Ordinaary Skill inn the Art ....................
`Leve
`
`
`
`
`Claimm Construcction ..........................................
`1. 
`
`
`
`Legal Ovverview ......................................
`2. 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The Exteernal Compputing Devvice and Coomputing UUnit Are
`
`
`
`“Specificcally Pairedd, Definedd By At Le
`
`ast One Off A Wired
`
`..... 3 
`..... 3 
`..... 3 
`..... 6 
`..... 7 
`..... 9 
`... 10 
`... 10 
`... 10 
`
`A B C D E
`
`A B C
`
` 
`
`U A
`
`A.
`
` 
` 
`
`B C
`
`B.
`C.
`
`

`
`
`
`TABLE OOF CONTTENTS
`
`(coontinued)
`
`
`
`U.S. Pateent No. 8,8600,584
`
`
`
`Pettition for Inteer Partes Reeview
`
`
`
`PPage
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Serial Coonnection AAnd Wirelless Bondinng Which
`
`Enables Thhe
`
`
`Computing Unit Too Authenti
`
`
`
`cate The Iddentity Of f The Exterrnal
`Computi
`
`
`
`
`Prior To CCommuniccating Elecctrical Signnals
`ng Device
`
`
`
`Therewitth” (Claimms 3, 12) ....................
`... 11 
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claims 15 Cannot RRequire Reeal Time CConditioninng of Signaals
`
`
`by Both tthe Compuuting Unit
`
`
`and the Exxternal Commputing
`
`
`
`Device fofor Displayy by the Samme Visual
`
`User Interrface .........
`
`
`
`3. 
`
`4. 
`
`D E F
`
`... 12 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owwner’s Claaim Interprretations inn the Litigaation – “Peeak
`... 12 
`
`
`
`
`
`Performaance Quanttity” and ““Activity PPrograms” ..................
`
`ms 3-4, 6-nders Claimlyneux Ren  Grouund 1: Mol
`
`
`
`D.
`
`13, 15-20 OObvious ...
`... 13 
`21-27 .......
`... 27 
`E.
`
`
`
`
`
`Grouund 1 (contt’d): Molynneux Rendders Obviouus Claims
` 
`
`
`F.
`
`
`
`
`
`Grouund 2: Garddner Rendeers Obviouus Claims 221-27 in viiew of Telller
` 
`... 36 
`
`
`
`
` ...........................................................................
`
`..................................
`... 44 
`
`
`
`
`
`THE GROOUNDS FOOR REVIEEW IS REDDUNDAN
`T ..............
`V.  NNONE OF
`... 45 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`..................................................SION .........VI.  CCONCLUS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`..................................
`
`83605.1
`WEST\25418
`
`ii
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584 (“’584 patent”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584 prosecution history
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584 – Infringement Contentions of Patentee
`dated Jan. 20, 2015, against Nike, Inc., in Case No. 3:14-cv-00423
`
`Declaration of Dr. Darrin Young
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,689,437 (“Teller”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,454,002 (“Gardner”)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0247306 (“Case
`’306”)
`
`1008
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,172,722 (“Molyneux”)
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,172,722 Priority Application 61/200,953 filed
`Dec. 5, 2008 (“Molyneux”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,171,331 (“Vock”)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0021269 (“Shum”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,013,007 (“Root”)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0260421A1 (“Berner”)
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`iii
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`I.
`
`
`
`
`
`INNTRODUUCTION
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Pateent No. 8,8600,584
`
`
`
`Pettition for Inteer Partes Reeview
`
`
`
`er”) petitioons the Bo
`
`
`
`ard to instiitute an intter
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NNike, Inc. (“NIKE” orr “Petition
`
`
`
`
`partes rreview of, aand to canccel as unpaatentable, cclaims 3-44, 6-13, 15--27 of U.S..
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent NNo. 8,860,5584 (“the ’’584 patentt”) (Ex. 10001). NIKEE demonsttrates in thiis
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`of the cha
`
`
`
`llenged claaims
`
`
`
`have befoore it duringg prosecut
`
`
`
`ion.
`
`
`
`petitionn a reasonabble likelihoood that it will prevaail on each
`
`
`
`
`
`based on prior art referencess the USPTTO did not
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`II. MMANDATOORY NOTTICES
`
`
`
`AA.
`
`
`
` REALL PARTY-IIN-INTERESST UNDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`37 C.F.R.. § 42.8(B)((1)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Nike, Inc. is the real pparty-in-intterest for thhis petitionn.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`B.
`
` RELA
`
`
`
`
`ATED MATTTERS UNDDER 37 C.FF.R. § 42.8
`
`
`
`(B)(2)
`
`
`
`TThe ’584 paatent is a reelated divisional pateent of U.S.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 8,253,5866. Both thee
`
`
`
`N B
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`’584 and ’586 patents are prresently thee subject o
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`f the followwing lawsuuit which mmay
`
`
`
`
`
`r be affect
`affect o
`
`
`
`
`ed by a deccision in thhis proceedding: Mayfyfonk, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v. Nike, Innc.,
`
`D. Ore.
`
`
`
`
`, Case No. 3:14-cv-000423-MO.
`
`
`
`
`
`CC.
`
`
`
`LEAD
`
`
`
`
`D AND BACCK-UP COUUNSEL UNDDER 37 C.FF.R. § 42.88(B)(3)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PPetitioner pprovides the followin
`
`
`
`g designatiion of counnsel. Leadd counsel i
`
`
`
`
`
`s
`
`
`
`Edwardd H. Sikorski (Reg. NNo. 39,478)), backup ccounsel is JJames M. HHeintz (Reeg.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`828), both
`No. 41,
`
`at email aaddress: Ni
`
`
`
`ke-Mayfoonk-IPR@@dlapiper.ccom. Posttal
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and hannd deliveryy for both iss DLA Pipper LLP (UUS), 401 B
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Street, Suiite 1700, SSan
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Diego, CCalifornia 92101-42997. Telephhone for MMr. Sikorskki is (619) 6699-2645;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`telephonne for Mr. Heintz is ((703) 773--4148; the
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`fax for booth is (6199) 764-66455.
`
`
`
`
`
`83605.1
`WEST\25418
`
`1
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Pateent No. 8,8600,584
`
`
`
`Pettition for Inteer Partes Reeview
`
`
`
` NOTIICE OF SERRVICE OF IINFORMATTION UNDEER 37 C.F.RR. § 42.8(BB)(4)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DD.
`
`
`
`NNIKE may be served
`
`
`
`
`
`at the leadd counsel adddress proovided abovve, and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`consentts to electroonic servicce at the e-mmail addreess provideed above. AA copy of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`this
`
`
`
`petitionn, in its entiirety, has bbeen servedd on the atttorney of rrecord for tthe ’584
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`patent, aas indicateed in the atttached Cerrtificate of f Service.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EE.
`
`
`
`
`
`POWWER OF ATTTORNEY
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AA power off attorney wwith the deesignation oof counsel
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`in accordaance with 337
`
`
`
`
`
`C.F.R. §§ 42.10(b) is being fiiled concurrrently herrewith.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`III. RREQUIREEMENTS FFOR INTEER PARTEES REVIEEW
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`A.
`
`
`
`
`
`INTEER PARTES SREVIEW FFEE UNDERR 37 C.F.RR. §§ 42.15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` AND 42.1003
`
`
`
`The undersiigned authhorizes the Director too charge anny additionnal fees or
`
`
`
`A T
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`credit anny overpayyments in cconnectionn with this
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition too Deposit AAccount N
`
`
`
`o.
`
`
`
`50-14422, referencing Attornney Dockett No. 2479558-0001033.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`B.
`
` GRO
`
`UNDS FOR
`
`STANDINGG UNDER 3
`
`
`
`7 C.F.R. §§ 42.104(A
`
`)
`
`
`
`Petitioner ccertifies thaat the patennt for whicch review iis sought iss available
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`for
`
`B P
`
`
`
`inter paartes revieww and that Petitioner is not barrred or estoppped fromm requestingg
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`inter paartes revieww challengging the pattent claimss on the groounds idenntified hereein.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CC.
`
`
`
`IDEN
`ON OF CHA
`UNDER 37
`NTIFICATIO
`ALLENGE U
`
`
`
`PRECCISE RELIEEF REQUESSTED
`
`
`
`C.F.R. § 442.104(B)
`
`AND
`
`
`
`
`
`PPetitioner reequests revview of claaims 3-4, 66-13, 15-277 of the ’5884 patent, aand
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`cancelattion of thoose claims aas invalid bbased on thhe followinng groundss:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`83605.1
`WEST\25418
`
`2
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Pateent No. 8,8600,584
`
`
`
`Pettition for Inteer Partes Reeview
`
`Groundd 1. Claimms 3-4, 6-133, and 15-220 and 21--27 are obvvious unde
`
`r 35 U.S.CC. §
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`103(a) ((pre-AIA) over Molyyneux.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Groundd 2. Claimms 21-27 arre obvious under 35 UU.S.C. § 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`r 03(a) (pre--AIA) over
`
`
`
`
`
`Gardnerr in view oof Teller.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TTHRESHOOLD REQQUIREMEENT: A peetition for iinter partees review mmust
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`demonsstrate “a reaasonable liikelihood tthat the Pettitioner woould prevaiil with resppect
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`to at leaast one of tthe claims challengedd in the pettition.” 355 U.S.C. § 3314(a). Thhis
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitionn meets thaat thresholdd. All elemments of claaims 3, 4,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6-13, 15-227 were weell
`
`
`
`
`
`known iin the art, aand arrangged or combbined in thhe same maanner as cllaimed, lonng
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`before tthe ’584 paatent was ffiled. Below is a full
`
`
`
`statement
`
`
`
`of the reassons for thhe
`
`
`
`
`
`relief reequested, inncluding hhow the chaallenged cllaims shouuld be consstrued for
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`purposees of this petition. Addditional support is sset forth in
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Darrin YYoung subbmitted herrewith as EExhibit 10004.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IV. DDETAILEDD CHALLLENGE: CCLAIMS 33-4, 6-13,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNPATENNTABLE
`
`
`
`AND 15-227 ARE
`
`U A
`
`A.
`
`’584 PATEENT
`
`
`
`Summarry of the ’5584 Paten
`
`
`
`t
`
` THE
`
`1.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TThe ’584 patent has ffour indeppendent claaims, each
`
`
`
`
`
`system
`
`
`
`or methodd for trackking or shaaring athleetic data.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`83605.1
`WEST\25418
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`the Declarration of DDr.
`
`
`
`
`
`directed tto a netwoorked
`
`
`
`
`
`(’584 Pattent, Ex. 1
`
`001,
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`claims 1, 3, 12, 21.) It claims a priority filing date of April 9, 2009; it was itself
`
`
`
`filed on Aug. 22, 2012, and issued on Oct. 14, 2014.1
`
`
`
`The ’584 patent discloses a system “for measuring, processing and
`
`displaying the various parameters of an athlete’s performance including real time
`
`display and data transmission.” (Id., 1:22-25.) A computing unit 430 and sensor
`
`440 are integrated with an article of clothing. (Id., 7:38-41.) The sensor 440
`
`senses movement related to athletic performance, and the computing unit 430 can
`
`process the sensor data to obtain performance data such as “the maximum height
`
`having been jumped by an athlete.” (Id., 6:36-37.) (Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶14.)
`
`
`
`The clothing-integrated computing unit 430 transmits performance data to an
`
`intermediate device that the inventor coined a “personal computing device 410
`
`(otherwise known as a personal processing unit PPU elsewhere in this disclosure)”
`
`(Id., 7:34-36; 8:59-60). The PPU 410, in turn, transmits data to a website 400 so
`
`
`1 As of Jan. 14, 2013, the 9-month waiting period was eliminated for inter partes
`
`review of patents whose effective filing date is before March 16, 2013, permitting
`
`IPRs to be filed immediately upon issuance of the patent. “Section 311(c) of title
`
`35, United States Code, shall not apply to a petition to institute an inter partes
`
`review of a patent [with an effective filing date prior to March 16, 2013].” (P.L.
`
`112-274, Section 1, para. (d)(1)).
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`4
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`that users can “share, compare, socialize, or compete utilizing specific details
`
`
`
`about their sport.” (Id., 7:20-22.) A high level illustration appears in Figure 4:
`
`
`
`
`
`In Figure 4, “sensor 440 measures a quantifiable athletic performance
`
`parameter that is transmitted via a bus (not shown) and read into the computing
`
`unit 430 that is onboard the article of clothing. This computing unit 430 transmits
`
`the sensor data to a personal computing device PPU 410 that digests and processes
`
`the sensor information utilizing Mayfunk software 420. Additionally, if the owner
`
`of the PPU 410 so desires he or she may forward the athletic sensor data to the
`
`Mayfunk website with a few keystrokes, button presses, or touch screen
`
`commands.” (Id., 7:38-47.) The inventor’s “vision is designed to track one or more
`
`of an athlete’s performance in any sport and deliver real-time data on personal
`
`computing devices such as a general Personal Processing Units (PPUs)” (Id., 5:48-
`
`51) and the “PPU data is transmitted or uploaded to Mayfunk.com social website
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`5
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`for athletes. The athlete can compete with peers, socialize, analyze his/her
`
`
`
`performance ‘bar’ data, and compare data results from previous performances and
`
`peers.” (Id., 9:6-9.) (Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶¶14-16.)
`
`Admitted Prior Art in the ’584 Patent
`
`2.
`Of course, the ’584 patent recognized that it was already known in the prior
`
`art to “provide[] shoes and boots that include technology for measuring and
`
`monitoring certain aspects of individual or athlete performance.” (Id., 1:29-31;
`
`3:3-8.) In the “BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION” section, the ’584
`
`specification discusses several prior art solutions for measuring and monitoring
`
`individual or athletic performance with athletic wear having integrated sensors.
`
`See, e.g., id. at 1:50-54 (“This reference patent [NIKE’s U.S. Published
`
`Application 2007/0021269 to Shum; Ex. 1011] discusses displaying information
`
`for pedometer type speed and/or distance measure outlets, GPS data, step impact
`
`force, jump height data, pulse rate, body temperature, blood pressure and hydration
`
`levels.”); 3:3-5 (“Additionally, methods are disclosed [in prior art U.S. 7,171,331
`
`to Vock; Ex. 1010] for determining speed or distance traveled of moving persons
`
`by utilizing sensors selectively insertable within shoes.”). (Young Decl., Ex. 1004,
`
`¶17.)
`
`The ʼ584 patent states that the inventors’ “vision is designed to track one or
`
`more of an athlete’s performance in any sport and deliver real-time data on
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`6
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`personal computing devices such as a general Personal Processing Units (PPUs),
`
`
`
`PDAs, mp3 players, … cell phones, [etc.].” “The new Mayfunk technology
`
`requires data measuring one or more athletic performance parameters to be
`
`uploaded or transmitted from the onboard sensor system to the generic PPUs,
`
`PDAs, mp3 players, … cell phone etcetera [sic].” (Id., 5:48-62.) But the ʼ584
`
`specification also recognizes that it was already known in the art to include sensors
`
`in a shoe-based system to determine and report athletic parameters, such as
`
`distance and speed, to computing devices such as a display, a watch, or MP3
`
`player. (Id., 1:46-50; 3:3-8, 3:65-4:3.) (Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶18.)
`
`These admissions about the prior art are binding on the patentee. See
`
`Pharmastem Therapeutics, Inc. v. Viacell, Inc., 491 F.3d 1342, 1362 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2007) (“Admissions in the specification regarding the prior art are binding on the
`
`patentee for purposes of a later inquiry into obviousness.”); MPEP § 2129
`
`(admitted prior art “can be relied upon for both anticipation and obviousness
`
`determinations”); Ex parte McGaughey, 6 USPQ2d 1334, 1337 (B.P.A.I. 1988)
`
`(upholding the use of patent owner admissions in reexamination).
`
`Summary of the ’584 Patent Prosecution History
`
`3.
`The ’584 issued on October 14, 2014, and is a divisional of application
`
`
`
`12/429,246, filed on April 24, 2009, now U.S. Patent No. 8,253,586. (Ex. 1001,
`
`front page and 1:7-9.)
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`7
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`The divisional application 13/591,895 for the ’584 patent contained 2 claims
`
`
`
`but a Preliminary Amendment increased that number to 20 claims. The application
`
`was the subject of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (“PTO”) First Action
`
`Interview Pilot Program whose Pre-Interview Communication dated September 10,
`
`2013, cast a rejection of all claims as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) by
`
`Vock 2008/0306707. (Ex. 1002, at pp. 121-125.) After submitting a Proposed
`
`Amendment that increased the number of claims to 29 (Ex. 1002, pp. 99-111) and
`
`presumably having an interview with the examiner (see Ex. 1002, p.67), the
`
`examiner issued a rejection on February 5, 2014, relying on the same Vock
`
`reference to reject almost all claims. (Ex. 1002, pp.75-89.) The examiner gave
`
`reasons for allowing claims 1-2 (“The prior art does not disclose a social
`
`networking system for the sharing of athletic statistics, comprising: means for
`
`controlling a sensor or array of sensors. This feature in combination with the rest of
`
`the claim limitations is not anticipated or rendered obvious by the prior art of
`
`record.”; Ex. 1002, p.86), and for allowing dependent claims 23-26 (“The prior art
`
`does not disclose that the personal computing client software application
`
`additionally enables the at least one personal processing unit to be operable to
`
`configure at least one of said computing units to control the operation of associated
`
`sensors and acquire athletic statistics data through the uploading of activity
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`8
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`programs to said computing units.”; Ex. 1002, pp. 85-86.) (See Young Decl., Ex.
`
`
`
`1004, ¶19.)
`
`Applicant submitted a Response and Amendment which changed the claim
`
`lineup to claims 1-20 and 23-29 (Ex. 1002, pp. 57-69). Applicant argued for the
`
`patentability of new limitations added to claims 3-20, in particular “the claims have
`
`been amended to specify the nature of the pairing between the computing unit and
`
`the external computing device as either a wired serial connection or an
`
`authenticated wireless bond (such as a Bluetooth connection). Support for this
`
`limitation is found in Figure 10, which details the connection between these
`
`components.” (Ex. 1002, pp. 67-68.) (See Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶20.)
`
`The PTO issued a Notice of Allowance noting specific Reasons for
`
`Allowance for each of independent claims 1, 3, 12 and 21. (Ex. 1002, pp. 28-29.)
`
`Claims of the ’584 Patent
`
`4.
`Briefly summarized, independent claims 3 and 12 are similar in substance
`
`but one is a system (claim 3) and the other is a method (claim 12). Their elements
`
`are also listed in a slightly different order. They recite the computing unit and
`
`sensor; the external computing device that can be wired or wirelessly connected to
`
`the computing unit (see Summary of the ’584 Patent Prosecution History
`
`above); and the remote server communicatively connected to the external
`
`computing device.
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`9
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Pateent No. 8,8600,584
`
`
`
`Pettition for Inteer Partes Reeview
`Inndependennt claim 21 recites pluural compuuting units
`
`and sensoors, and a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`server thhat stores aathletic staatistic data acquired ffrom the coomputing uunits. A
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“personnal processiing unit” (ssee Ex. 1001, 7:35) aand its softtware can rreceive datta
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`from thee server, annd can connfigure asppects of a c
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`omputing
`
`
`
`unit’s senssors.
`
`B.
`
`
`
`
`
`LEVEEL OF ORDDINARY SK
`E ART
`ILL IN THE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`B A
`
`
`
`A person off ordinary skill in thee art for thee ’584 pateent in 20099 (when thee
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`earlier aapplicationn for the ’586 patent wwas filed)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`would havve had at leeast a
`
`
`
`
`
`Bacheloor’s degreee in Electrical Engineeering or ann equivalennt and onee or more yyears
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`of experrience worrking with sensor devvices and ccommunicaation mechhanisms.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Youngg Decl., Ex. 1004, at ¶¶46.)
`
`
`
`
`
`CC.
`
`
`
` CLAI
`IM CONSTR
`RUCTION
`1. Legal Overrview
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AA claim subbject to inter partes rreview is ggiven its “bbroadest reaasonable
`
`
`
`construcction in ligght of the sspecificatioon of the paatent in whhich it appeears.” 37
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`C.F.R. §§ 42.100(bb). In acco
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`rdance witth the Triall Practice GGuide, petiitioner herreby
`
`
`
`
`
`providees “a simplee statemennt that the cclaim term
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`s are to be given theiir broadestt
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`reasonaable interprretation, ass understoood by one oof ordinaryy skill in thhe art and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`consisteent with thee disclosurre.” 77 Fedd. Reg. 48
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`constructi
`Board aapplies the broadest rreasonable
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`764. Moreeover, “beccause the
`
`
`
`
`
`on standarrd, the Boaard’s
`
`
`
`
`
`construcction may not be the same as thhat adoptedd by a distrrict court, wwhich mayy
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`apply a different sstandard.” Samsung EElecs. Co. v. Virginiaa Innov. Scci., Inc.,
`
`
`
`
`
`83605.1
`WEST\25418
`
`10
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`IPR2013-000569, Paper 9 (PTAB Oct. 30, 2013). This petition uses the broadest
`
`
`
`reasonable interpretation standard, but Petitioner reserves the right to take different
`
`claim construction positions in other forums or situations where claim construction
`
`standards are different, or to the extent the constructions proposed herein do not
`
`resolve whatever controversies will exist at that time. Moreover, Petitioner
`
`believes certain claims of the ’584 patent are deficient under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
`
`2. The External Computing Device and Computing Unit Are
`“Specifically Paired, Defined By At Least One Of A Wired
`Serial Connection And Wireless Bonding Which Enables The
`Computing Unit To Authenticate The Identity Of The External
`Computing Device Prior To Communicating Electrical Signals
`Therewith” (Claims 3, 12)
`
`This claim limitation present two options that could be interpreted in
`
`different ways, but Patent Owner made clear during prosecution that this phrase
`
`requires “either a wired serial connection [on the one hand] or an authenticated
`
`wireless bond (such as a Bluetooth connection) [on the other].” As explained
`
`above, this phrase was not only added but also emphasized during prosecution to
`
`distinguish claims 3-20 over the Vock prior art. Accordingly, “authentication” is
`
`only applicable to the “wireless” option in claims 3 and 12, such as a Bluetooth
`
`connection. The “wired serial connection” option has no authentication
`
`requirement. This phrase means: “specifically paired, defined by at least one of
`
`(A) an authenticated wireless bonding (such as a Bluetooth connection) which
`
`enables the computing unit to authenticate the identity of the external computing
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`11
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`device prior to communicating electrical signals therewith, and (B) a wired serial
`
`
`
`connection.” (Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶¶49-51.)
`
`3.
`
`Claims 15 Cannot Require Real Time Conditioning of Signals
`by Both the Computing Unit and the External Computing
`Device for Display by the Same Visual User Interface
`
`Claim 13 is a dependent claim that requires the claimed “computing unit” to
`
`condition signals from a sensor, in real time, into data useable by a visual user
`
`interface. Claim 15 depends from claim 13, but contemplates that those same
`
`signals are conditioned in real time by the “external computing device” for use by
`
`the same visual user interface. Petitioner cannot offer a construction to reconcile
`
`the mismatch between claim 15 (and claim 6) and the disclosure in the ’584 patent.
`
`(Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶52.)
`
`4.
`
`Patent Owner’s Claim Interpretations in the Litigation –
`“Peak Performance Quantity” and “Activity Programs”
`
`Patent Owner provided Petitioner with infringement contentions on Jan. 20,
`
`2015. (Ex. 1003.) Those contentions reflect Patent Owner’s interpretation of
`
`several claim terms. Among them, “peak performance quantity” in claims 4 and
`
`13 is apparently interpreted in those contentions to include “calories burned” and
`
`“number of steps taken,” among other things. (Ex. 1003, pp.15-16, 43-47.)
`
`Patent Owner’s contentions also reveal its view that “activity programs”
`
`recited in claims 21 and 23 (the term also appears in claim 22) encompass an
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`12
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`activity
`
`
`
`“goal.” (EEx. 1003,
`
`
`
`U.S. Pateent No. 8,8600,584
`
`
`
`Pettition for Inteer Partes Reeview
`tting
`
`
`p.65 (“thee uploadingg of activitty programms (e.g., se
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`of [a] NNike Fuel ggoal …)” (eemphasis aadded).)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DD.
`
`
`
` GROUND 1: MO
`RENDERS
`OLYNEUX
`
`
`
`CLAIMS 3--4, 6-13, 155-20 OBVIIOUS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CClaims 3-4,, 6-13, 15-220 would hhave been
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`obvious unnder 35 U..S.C. § 1033
`
`
`
`(pre-AIAA) over U.S. Patent 88,172,722 (“Molyneuux”) (Ex. 11008), and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`specifical
`
`ly in
`
`
`
`view off subject mmatter discloosed in Moolyneux’s ppriority appplication ffiled Decemmber
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5, 2008 (Ex. 10099). The ’5884 patent claims an e
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`arliest prioority date oof April 244,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2009. SSubject maatter from MMolyneux’’s ’953 prioority appli
`
`
`
`
`
`cation (Exx. 1009) is
`
`
`
`prior artt to the ’5884 patent uunder 35 U.S.C. § 1022(e) (pre-AAIA).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MMolyneux ddiscloses aan athletic pperformancce monitorring systemm for team
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`sports eenvironmennt. Individduals such as team plaayers carryy one or mmore shoe-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1009,
`borne seensor devicces (#106;
`
`
`
`
` p.22 (¶43)); Ex. 10088, 9:36-52)) that gatheer
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and trannsmit data real-time tto a portable receiverr (#108; Exx. 1009, p.224 (¶48); EEx.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`0:41-45).
`1008, 1
`
`
`
`
`The gatherred data is transmitteed to a remmote devicee (#120) whhich
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(¶50, 51); could innclude a seerver (p.25 Ex. 1008,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 11:13-26)). The servver 120 cann be
`
`
`
`
`
`
`lar phone,
`a serverr or a cellu
`
`
`
`a laptop coomputer orr “any desiired type oof output
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`device tthat includes a humann perceptibble interfacce and/or thhat generaates output””
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Ex. 10009, p.26 (¶¶51); Ex. 1
`
`
`
`
`
`008, 11:200-26).
`
`83605.1
`WEST\25418
`
`13
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Pateent No. 8,8600,584
`
`
`
`Pettition for Inteer Partes Reeview
`
`
`
`
`
`MMolyneux’ss system alllows “teamm players aand coachees to look
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`at both thee
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`individuual and teaam data andd determinne various ffeatures orr characteriistics of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`play….”” (Ex. 10009, p.45 (¶994); Ex. 10008, 23:45
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-47.) “Thee coaches aand/or teamm
`
`
`
`
`
`time (e.g.,
`memberrs can evalluate the daata in real
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`on the siddelines, in tthe coach’ss
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`box) duuring the gaame or practice sessioon to betteer understannd whetheer a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`combination of players is woorking….”” (Id.; Ex.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1008, 23:551-55.) In
`
`
`
`addition, tthe
`
`
`
`data cann be loggedd during thhe game “aand later doownloadedd or otherwwise accesseed
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`for use bby the indiividual plaayers, coachhes, etc. Thhe variouss player’s ddata also coould
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`be interrcommuniccated to on
`
`
`
`
`
`e another vvia peer-too-peer netwworking so
`
`
`
`
`
`that playe
`
`rs
`
`
`
`could coompare perrformance quickly annd easily, ee.g., on thee sidelines,, in the loccker
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`room, etc.” (Ex. 11009, p.45 (¶93); Ex.. 1008, 23::36-44.)
`
`
`
`83605.1
`WEST\25418
`
`14
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`As detailed below, Molyneux’s December 5, 2008, priority application
`
`
`
`expressly discloses or renders obvious the limitations recited in the listed claims.
`
`Molyneux priority application Dec. 5,
`2008 (Ex. 1009)
`Molyneux relates to “methods, operating
`systems, and generating user perceptible
`output relating to the monitoring of player
`performance during an athletic activity
`(e.g., during a game, a practice session, a
`workout, etc.), including team oriented
`athletic activities. (Molyneux, Ex. 1009,
`p.19 of 126-page .pdf, (¶35); Ex. 1008,
`7:57-61.)
`Molyneux’s system includes a plurality of
`measurement apparatus in the form of
`shoe-borne sensor units 106, at least two
`of which are carried by an individual team
`player. Figs. 3, 4.
`
`
`(Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶89.)
`
`’584 claims
`12. A method for
`measuring and
`tracking athletic
`movements over
`a computer
`network,
`comprising the
`steps of:
`
`[12a] providing a
`computing units
`[sic] configured
`to transmit and
`receive electrical
`signals relating
`to athletic
`performance
`parameters;
`
`’584 claims
`3. A system for
`tracking athletic
`movements
`comprising:
`
`
`
`[3a] computing
`unit configured to
`transmit and
`receive electrical
`signals relating to
`athletic
`performance
`parameters;
`
`
`
`With regard to the aforementioned claim element, each sensor unit 106
`
`inherently has a computing unit (e.g., a processor, not shown in Fig. 3) because a
`
`processor is needed to interface the internal sensor(s) with the TX/RX 110 and to
`
`organize or process whatever signals are exchanged through the TX/RX 110.
`
`(Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶¶92-93.) If not inherent, Petitioner submits a processor
`
`would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in order to organize information
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`15
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`or data into the protocol used to communicate through the TX/RX 110. (Ex. 1004,
`
`
`
`Molyneux priority application Dec. 5,
`2008 (Ex. 1009)
`Sensors within unit 106 can include “an
`accelerometer, a pressure sensor, or other
`force sensor that determines each time the
`player’s foot hits the ground or other data
`associated with foot motion.” (Molyneux,
`Ex. 1009, p.17 (¶56); p.23 (¶44); Fig. 3;
`Ex. 1008, 12:30-34; 9:53-67; Fig. 3.) “As
`noted above, this sensor 106 may be an
`accelerometer or a pedometer based speed
`and/or distance type sensor….”
`(Molyneux, Ex. 1009, p.22 (¶43); Ex.
`1008, 9:41-42.)
`
`The sensor unit 106 provides data real
`time to a portable receiver 108.
`(Molyneux, Ex. 1009, p.21 (¶39).
`
`’584 claims
`[12b] providing
`at least one
`sensor [and]
`
`[12g] generating
`by said sensors
`electrical signals
`relating to
`athletic
`performance
`parameters from
`the physical
`movement
`thereof;
`[12c]
`wherein said at
`least one sensor
`and said
`computing unit
`are
`communicatively
`connected to
`enable the real
`time
`transmission of
`electrical signals
`between them;
`
`¶103.)
`
`’584 claims
`[3b]
`at least one sensor
`configured to
`generate electrical
`signals relating to
`athletic
`performance
`parameters from
`physical
`movement,
`
`
`
`[3c]
`wherein said at
`least one sensor
`and said
`computing unit are
`communicatively
`connected to
`enable the
`computing unit to
`receive electrical
`signals generated
`by said at least one
`sensor in real time;
`
`
`
`With regard to the aforementioned element, the sensor and processor in unit
`
`106 are inherently connected to communicate data in real time, given that the data
`
`WEST\254183605.1
`
`16
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`is furnished to portable receiver 108 in real time. (Young Decl., Ex. 1004, ¶93-
`
`
`
`Molyneux p