Filed on behalf of: Google Inc. and LG Electronics, Inc.
`
`By: Naveen Modi (Google_LG-CoreWireless-IPR@paulhastings.com)
`
`Joseph E. Palys (Google_LG-CoreWireless-IPR@paulhastings.com)
`
`Daniel Zeilberger (Google_LG-CoreWireless-IPR@paulhastings.com)
`
`Paul Hastings LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`GOOGLE INC.,
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`CORE WIRELESS LICENSING S.A.R.L.
`Patent Owner
`
`____________________
`
`Patent No. 7,072,667
`____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF CHRIS G. BARTONE, Ph.D., P.E.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Google_LG Exhibit 100(cid:27)
`
`Page 1 of 128
`
`
`
`By: Naveen Modi (Google_LG-CoreWireless-IPR@paulhastings.com)
`
`Joseph E. Palys (Google_LG-CoreWireless-IPR@paulhastings.com)
`
`Daniel Zeilberger (Google_LG-CoreWireless-IPR@paulhastings.com)
`
`Paul Hastings LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`GOOGLE INC.,
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`CORE WIRELESS LICENSING S.A.R.L.
`Patent Owner
`
`____________________
`
`Patent No. 7,072,667
`____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF CHRIS G. BARTONE, Ph.D., P.E.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Google_LG Exhibit 100(cid:27)
`
`Page 1 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1
`I.
`Qualifications .................................................................................................. 1
`II.
`Summary of Opinions ..................................................................................... 3
`III.
`IV. Level of Ordinary Skill ................................................................................... 4
`V.
`The ’667 Patent ............................................................................................... 4
`VI. Claim Construction ......................................................................................... 6
`VII. The Prior Art Discloses All of the Features of Claims 1-15 the ’667
`Patent .............................................................................................................. 9
`A.
`Claims 1-3 and 8-14 of the ’667 Patent ............................................... 9
`Overview of Staack .................................................................... 9
`1.
`Staack Discloses the Features of Claims 1-3 and 8-14 ............ 15
`2.
`Claims 5, 6, 7, and 15 of the ’667 Patent ........................................... 65
`Overview of Reed ..................................................................... 65
`1.
`The Combination of Staack and Reed Discloses the
`2.
`Features of Claims 5-7 and 15 ................................................. 67
`Claim 4 of the ’667 Patent .................................................................. 86
`Overview of Johansson ............................................................ 86
`1.
`The Combination of Staack and Johansson Discloses the
`2.
`Features of Claim 4 .................................................................. 93
`VIII. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 101
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`-i-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 2 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I, Chris Bartone, declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`
`I have been retained by Google Inc. and LG Electronics, Inc. as an
`
`independent expert consultant in this proceeding before the United States Patent
`
`and Trademark Office (“PTO”) regarding U.S. Patent No. 7,072,667 (“the ’667
`
`patent,” which I understand is Ex. 1001 in this proceeding) based on my
`
`experience, education, and knowledge in the field of wireless telecommunications,
`
`including wireless location systems. I have been asked to consider whether certain
`
`references disclose the features recited in claims 1-15 of the ’667 patent. My
`
`opinions are set forth below.
`
`2.
`
`I am being compensated at my rate of $690 per hour for the time I
`
`spend on this matter, and no part of my compensation is dependent on the outcome
`
`of this proceeding. I have no other interest in this proceeding.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`3.
`I earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from
`
`The Pennsylvania State University in 1983. In addition, I earned a Master’s of
`
`Science degree in Electrical Engineering from the Naval Postgraduate School in
`
`1987, with an emphasis in communications engineering. I earned a Ph.D. in
`
`Electrical Engineering from Ohio University in 1998, with an emphasis in
`
`electromagnetics, antennas, and navigation systems.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Page 3 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4.
`
`From 1983 to 1998, prior to my full-time position at Ohio University,
`
`I worked as an electronics engineer at the Naval Air Warfare Center in Patuxent
`
`River, Maryland. In 1998, after being awarded a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering, I
`
`joined the faculty of Ohio University as a Visiting Assistant Professor. I was
`
`promoted to Assistant Professor in 1999, to Associate Professor in 2004, and
`
`became a full Professor in 2009.
`
`5. My teaching at Ohio University has covered undergraduate and
`
`graduate level courses in electrical engineering. At the graduate level, I teach
`
`courses in the area of radar systems, navigation systems, microwave and antenna
`
`theory, and communications systems. In addition to my teaching, I have led and
`
`performed various research efforts involving communications systems and
`
`location-based technologies.
`
`6.
`
`Based on my experience and education, I believe that I am qualified to
`
`opine as to knowledge and level of skill of one of ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time of the alleged invention of the ’667 patent (which I further describe below)
`
`and what such a person would have understood at that time, and the state of the art
`
`during that time.
`
`7. My curriculum vitae, which includes a more detailed summary of my
`
`background, experience, and publications, is attached as Appendix A.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Page 4 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`III. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS
`8.
`All of the opinions contained in this Declaration are based on the
`
`documents I reviewed, my knowledge, and professional judgment. In forming the
`
`opinions expressed in this Declaration, I reviewed the ’667 patent (Ex. 1001); the
`
`prosecution file history for the ’667 patent (which I understand is Ex. 1002 in this
`
`proceeding); PCT Publication No. WO 00/36430 to Staack et al. (“Staack”) (which
`
`I understand is Ex. 1003 in this proceeding), U.S. Patent No. U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,275,707 to Reed et al. (“Reed”) (which I understand is Ex. 1004 in this
`
`proceeding), U.S. Patent No. 6,442,391 to Johansson et al. (“Johansson”) (which I
`
`understand is Ex. 1005 in this proceeding), PCT Application No. WO 03/056853
`
`(“the ’853 PCT”) (which I understand is Ex. 1006 in this proceeding), excerpts
`
`from the file history for PCT Application No. WO 03/056853 (which I understand
`
`is Ex. 1007 in this proceeding), and any other materials I refer to in this declaration
`
`in support of my opinions, while drawing on my experience and knowledge of
`
`communications systems and location-based technologies.
`
`9.
`
`Based on my experience and expertise, it is my opinion that certain
`
`references disclose all the features recited in claims 1-15 of the ’667 patent, as I
`
`discuss in detail below.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Page 5 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL
`10. Based on my knowledge and experience, I understand what a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art would have known at the time of the alleged invention.
`
`My opinions herein are, where appropriate, based on my understandings as to one
`
`of ordinary skill in the art at that time.
`
`11.
`
`In my opinion, based on the materials and information I have
`
`reviewed, and on my extensive experience in the technical areas relevant to the
`
`’667 patent in the early 2000s, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had
`
`an undergraduate degree in electrical engineering, physics, or equivalent and a
`
`minimum of two years of professional experience in the relevant field of wireless
`
`telecommunications, including wireless location systems. I apply this
`
`understanding in my analysis herein.
`
`V. THE ’667 PATENT
`12. The ’667 patent, entitled “Location Information Service for a Cellular
`
`Telecommunications Network,” issued on July 4, 2006, from U.S. Application No.
`
`10/029,940, which was filed on December 31, 2001. (Ex. 1001.) I have been asked
`
`to assume for purposes of this proceeding that the effective date of the ’667 patent
`
`is December 31, 2001, which is the filing date of the ’667 patent. I apply this
`
`understanding in my analysis herein.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Page 6 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`13. The’667 patent discloses a location information service for mobile
`
`stations in a cellular telecommunications network that enables mobile stations to
`
`receive information about their location within the network. (Ex. 1001, 1:8-11.)
`
`The ’667 patent alleges that the service is provided without requiring pre-
`
`registration of a subscriber that uses the mobile station for the location information
`
`service. (See e.g., id., 1:52-65.)
`
`14. Fig. 1 illustrates a block diagram of a cellular mobile
`
`telecommunications network that includes a location information service. (Id.,
`
`2:40-42)
`
`
`
`(Id., Fig. 1.)
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Page 7 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15. The ’667 patent includes four independent claims, claims 1, 10, 12,
`
`and 13. I have been asked to consider claims 8 and 9 as requiring the limitations of
`
`independent claim 1 in addition to the limitations recited in each respective claim
`
`given the ambiguity whether claims 8 and 9 are recited as dependent or
`
`independent claims. In my opinion, my analysis applying the prior art and opinions
`
`relating to claims 8 and 9 are the same regardless of whether these claims are
`
`considered dependent upon claim 1 or are independent claims that include the
`
`limitations of claim 1. Claims 2-7 depend directly or indirectly from claim 1 and
`
`claims 14 and 15 depend directly or indirectly from claim 13.
`
`16.
`
`In my opinion, as explain further below, the features recited in claims
`
`1-15 characterize conventional location based features used in networking systems
`
`known prior to the time of the alleged invention for the ’667 patent, e.g., as
`
`disclosed in Staack, Reed, and Johansson.
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`17.
`I understand that a claim subject to inter partes review receives the
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification and file history of
`
`the patent in which it appears. I also understand that any term that is not construed
`
`should be given its plain and ordinary meaning under the broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation. I have followed these principles in my analysis. I discuss certain
`
`claim terms below and what I understand to be Petitioners’ construction of these
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Page 8 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`terms, which I apply in my analysis. For the remaining claim terms in the ’667
`
`patent, I apply the plain and ordinary meaning under the broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation.
`
`18.
`
`I understand that Petitioners have proposed that the broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation of the claimed term “location message server” is “a server
`
`that generates location finding information.” I agree with this construction based
`
`on the claims and specification of the ’667 patent. For example, claim 1 recites that
`
`a request for location finding information be sent to a location message server, and
`
`that data corresponding to the location finding information be sent from the
`
`location message server. (Ex. 1001 at 6:40-42, 6:46-47; see also id., 8:4-23.) While
`
`the ’667 patent specification does not define the term “location message server,” it
`
`does refer to a “location messaging server 11,” which is described as generating
`
`location finding information. (See, e.g., id., 3:36-40, 3:49-52, 4:8-14, 4:35-39.).
`
`The construction is also consistent with my review of the file history, the
`
`knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art, and I have applied this understanding
`
`in my analysis.
`
`19.
`
`I also understand that Petitioners have proposed that the broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation of the claimed “without pre-registering the mobile station
`
`[for / with] the location finding service” is “without recording that a mobile station
`
`can take part in a location finding service prior to a request for location finding
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Page 9 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`information.” I agree with this construction based on the claims and specification
`
`of the ’667 patent. For instance, considering the “pre” aspect of the “pre-
`
`registering,” the claims promote a temporal or reference-based requirement relative
`
`to something in the claims. (See also Ex. 1001 at 1:46-48, 1:66-2:5, 5:28-30, 6:31-
`
`35.) In addition, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the
`
`term “register” was known at the time of the alleged invention for the ’667 patent
`
`to be consistent with entering data in a record, which was a common understanding
`
`of the term. (See, e.g., Ex. 1009 at 3.) And the claims and specification explain that
`
`any pre-registering of the mobile station is “for” or “with” the location finding
`
`service. (See e.g., Ex. 1001 at 6:50-51, 8:25-26.) The construction is also consistent
`
`with my review of the file history, the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art,
`
`and I have applied this understanding in my analysis.
`
`20.
`
`I have also been asked to assume that the “circuitry operable to”
`
`perform functions in claims 13 and 15 is “a mobile station (MS), or equivalents
`
`thereof,” which I have applied in my analysis.
`
`21.
`
`I have further been asked to analyze claims 8, 9, and 13 under the
`
`assumption that the recited apparatuses are configured to, or perform, the recited
`
`method steps. As I discuss below, the prior art is configured to, and performs, these
`
`features.
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Page 10 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VII. THE PRIOR ART DISCLOSES ALL OF THE FEATURES OF
`CLAIMS 1-15 THE ’667 PATENT
`22.
`
`I have reviewed several references, discussed further below, that I
`
`understand are prior art to the ’667 patent. In my opinion, these references disclose
`
`all features of claims 1-15 of the ’667 patent.
`
`A. Claims 1-3 and 8-14 of the ’667 Patent
`23.
`In my opinion, Staack discloses all of the features recited in claims 1-
`
`3 and 8-14 of the ’667 patent.
`
`1. Overview of Staack
`Staack describes a locating system for mobile stations. (See Ex. 1003,
`
`24.
`
`Abstract.) Staack discloses that Figure 1, recreated below, describes a cellular
`
`radio network including base-stations 1 to 9 that each has one or more transceivers
`
`that transmit and receive radio signals to mobile stations. (Id., 1:10.)1
`
`
`1 My citations to Staack refer to the format of (page no.:line number(s)) where
`
`appropriate.
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Page 11 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Id., Fig. 1.) ‘When a mobile station is in a cell it communicates with the base-
`
`station transceiver associated with that cell.” (Id., 1:11-12.)
`
`25.
`
`Staack explains that,
`
`[F]igure 2 includes a mobile locating unit (MLU) 30
`connected to base-stations 1 to 9 of figure 1 via mobile
`service centres (MSCs) 31 to 34. The MLU has access to
`information from the base-stations and data stored in a
`coverage database 35a and uses them to estimate the
`geographic location of mobile stations 36,37 (e.g. cellular
`telephone handsets) in the system. The basic principle
`used to locate the mobile stations is as follows. The
`database 35a stores, for each cell, the geographic location
`of that cell's base-station and an indication of, when a
`mobile station is in that cell, whether or not the mobile
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Page 12 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`station's timing advance should be used to estimate the
`mobile station's location.
`
`(Id., 6:26-7:6.)
`
`
`
`(Id., Fig. 2.) Staack states that “[t]he process of estimating the mobile's location
`
`could be initiated by the sending of a message from the mobile to the MLU over
`
`the radio system.” (Id., 8:1-2.)
`
`26.
`
`Staack explains that “[o]nce the location of the mobile station has
`
`been determined the MLU can transmit that information to the mobile station or
`
`another unit” and that “[s]ome convenient ways for this to be done are by text or
`
`voice messages over the radio system. For instance, in a GSM system text
`
`messages could be sent by SMS (short message service) or USSD (unstructured
`
`supplementary services data).” (Id., 9:12-16.) “The MLU could determine the
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Page 13 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`location of the mobile relative to geographical features in the database and
`
`generate a message to report the location relative to those features . . . .” (Id., 9:23-
`
`25.)
`
`27.
`
`Staack also discusses that,
`
`If the MLU is capable of receiving messages from a user
`of the mobile (e.g. by the SMS system) the user could, by
`means of a message, request the MLU to use its database
`to perform a calculation and report the result by a
`message. For example, the user could request the MLU to
`suggest a route from the mobile's location to a specified
`location, or to calculate the distance from the mobile's
`location to a specified location. The MLU could also
`suggest a route from the mobile's current location to a
`present location such as the mobile user's home. The
`mobile user's home location could be determined by the
`MLU from
`information available from
`the radio
`network's billing centre or subscriber database. Using
`estimates of driving speeds and travel costs the MLU
`could report estimated journey times and costs for
`suggested routes.
`
`(Id., 10:1-11.)
`
`28.
`
`Staack also discloses a signaling scheme relating to Fig. 7 (reproduced
`
`below) that involves a request by a mobile station MS1 for information on the
`
`location of another mobile station MS2. (See id., 13:4-5.).
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`Page 14 of 128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Id., Fig. 7.)
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 15 of 128
`
`
`
`Id., Fig. 7. (continued).) Staack explains that,
`
`
`
`
`
`MS1 is operable according to the WAP (wireless access
`protocol) and has a WAP user agent 51 and a WAP
`repository 52. Also illustrated in figure 7 are a WAP
`gateway 53, a WTA server 54 and a mobile network 55
`in which the mobile station MS2 is operable. The WTA
`server has access to a location information server 56, and
`the mobile network includes an MLC (mobile location
`centre) 57 which could be in accordance with GSM
`03.71. The mobile location centre 57 provides a service
`for determining the location of MS2, and preferably also
`stores the last known location of MS2. The location
`information server 56 includes a geographical database of
`verbal descriptions of locations, whereby a descriptive
`phrase may be generated
`in response
`to
`location
`information as provided from the location information
`server. The verbal descriptions may be supplemented or
`replaced by graphical pictures comprising a map. In that
`case the geographical database may include a map
`database performing mapping from location information
`to map extracts.
`
`(Id., 13:6-18.)
`
`29.
`
`Staack discloses processes where the user of MS1 inputs the identity
`
`of MS2 and MS1 sends a request for a URL for the same location description
`
`service, where the URL includes the identity of MS2. MS1 sends the request to
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`Page 16 of 128
`
`
`
`WAP gateway 53, which forwards the request to WTA server 54, which in turn
`
`extracts the identity of MS2 from the URL. (Id., 13:19-24.) WTA server 54
`
`contacts a gateway mobile location centre (GMLC), which contacts the HLR of
`
`MS2 to determine which “network and visitor MSCNLR MS2 is currently
`
`operating in. The GMLC then requests the position of MS2 from the visitor
`
`MSC/VLR- The visitor MSC/VLR determines the location of MS2 and returns the
`
`result to the GMLC,” which returns the result to WTA server 54. (Id., 13:27-14: 1.)
`
`30.
`
`Staack explains that the WTA server 54 and location information
`
`server can be within the GIVILC node and are seen as logical services. (Id., 14:12-
`
`15.) Also, Staack discloses that “[f]or reasons of confidentiality it is preferred that
`
`a list of entities that are permitted to be given location information on a mobile
`
`station such as MS2 is stored” and that “[s]uch a list may be stored at the
`
`respective HLR” such that “When the WTA contacts the HLR of MS2 the HLR
`
`may check that MS1 is permitted to receive location information about MS2 and
`
`otherwise causes the request from MS1 to be rejected.” (Id. 14:17-21.)
`
`2.
`
`Staack Discloses the Features of Claims 1-3 and 8-14
`
`31. As described below, Staack discloses the features of claim 1:
`
`1.a. A method of
`
`Staack discloses a process for estimating the location
`
`of a mobile unit in a cellular radio system. For
`
`providing a location
`
`Page 17 of 128
`
`15
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`finding service to mobile
`
`example, Staack states,
`
`stations in a cellular
`
`telecommunications
`
`of a mobile unit in a cellular radio
`
`A method for estimating the location
`
`network, comprising:
`
`system, comprising: identifying a cell
`
`of the system in which the mobile unit
`
`is located; estimating the distance of
`
`the mobile unit from the base-station
`
`of the cell; determining the location of
`
`the base-station; determining bearing
`
`information associated with the cell,
`
`the bearing information defining a
`
`direction; and calculating a location
`
`offset from the base-station by the
`
`said distance in the said direction to
`
`estimate the location of the mobile
`
`unit.
`
`(Staack, Abstract.) Staack states that the disclosed
`
`“invention relates to a system for estimating the
`
`locations of mobile stations in a cellular radio system. .
`
`. [f]or example, the mobile stations could be mobile
`
`telephones in a cellular telephone system.” (Id., 1:1-4;
`
`see also id., Figs. 1-7; discussion of Staack above in
`
`Page 18 of 128
`
`
`
`“‘“"”
`
`paragraphs 24-30; citations and analysis below
`
`regarding the remaining limitations of this claim-)
`
`FIG. 7
`
`.”:T:.?
`L§EH
`norm
`
`Rnvosnowv
`
`}
`(._.',”::A,,
`
`fig
`“$2”
`
`56
`
`5!
`
`"
`'
`5
`E3
`/53.
`,;;g,;
`:H¢le«>
`stmsfl
`N‘U°_"vg“"(
`
`0 —. ww mos KEOLESI
`
`|M'O‘IM‘hO~ RI
`
`5' ‘Oh I62
`
`(9
`
`OOGQDNAVE
`POSIH
`IEOIES ‘OR M31
`
`C
`6)an
`Pom E
`
`D-«rs
`vs:
`
`Xl§P\Av Ms? Lo run
`
`Page 19 of 128
`
`17
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`USER
`AGENT
`
`WAP
`GAT EWAY
`
`WTA
`SERVER
`
`GMLC
`
`HLR
`
`VMSC
`I VLR
`
`LOC
`SERVER
`
`ANDIOR APPICT RE}
`
`FIG. 7CONT'D
`
`l_b_ sending a request for
`
`Staack discloses sending a request for location finding
`
`location finding
`
`information from a mobile station as a message
`
`information from a
`
`through the network to a location message server.
`
`mobile station as a
`
`Staack discloses this step in two ways.
`
`message through the
`
`network to a location
`
`message SCl'VCI';
`
`First, in connection with operations performed relating
`
`to Figure 2, Staack describes sending a request for
`
`location finding information from a mobile stations
`
`(e.g., mobile handsets 36, 37 (Fig. 2)) as a message
`
`through a network to a location message server (e_g_,
`
`Page 20 of 128
`
`18
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`IVILU 30 (Fig. 2).) For example, Staack discloses that
`
`“[t]he estimation of the mobile's location is suitably
`
`initiated by a message from the mobile requesting
`
`estimation of its location .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`(Staack, 3:23-24.)
`
`Staack also states that,
`
`The system of figure 2 includes a mobile
`
`locating unit (MLU) 30 connected to base-
`
`stations 1 to 9 of figure 1 via mobile service
`
`centres (MSCS) 31 to 34. The 1VlLU has
`
`access to information from the base-stations
`
`and data stored in a coverage database 35a
`
`and uses them to estimate the geographic
`
`location of mobile stations 36,37 (e.g_
`
`cellular telephone handsets) in the system.
`
`(Id., 6:25-7:1.)
`
`Page 21 of 128
`
`19
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Page 22 of 128
`
`(Id., Fig. 2.) Staack further describes that its disclosed
`
`system can get the estimate of the location or any other
`
`information that can be derived from a geographical
`
`database 35b. (Id., 9:17-22.) Staack also states,
`
`If the MLU is capable of receiving messages
`
`from a user of the mobile (e.g. by the SMS
`
`system)
`
`the user could, by means of a
`
`message,
`
`request
`
`the MLU to use its
`
`database to perform a calculation and report
`
`the result by a message. For example, the
`
`user could request the IVILU to suggest a
`
`route from the mobile's
`
`location to a
`
`specified location,
`
`or
`
`to calculate
`
`the
`
`distance from the mobile's location to a
`
`specified location.
`
`20
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`(Id., 10:l—6.)
`
`The second way Staack discloses this limitation relates
`
`to the operations performed in connection with Figure
`
`7. For example, Staack explains, “Figure 7 illustrates a
`
`signalling scheme whereby one mobile station may
`
`request and receive information on the location of
`
`another mobile station-” (Id. , 12:26-27; see also id.,
`
`Fig. 7.) “In connection with this signalling method the
`
`location of the latter mobile station may be determined
`
`in accordance with the procedures described above .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`(Id., 12:27-28.) Staack states that “[t]he signalling
`
`scheme illustrated in figure 7 involves a request by a
`
`mobile station MSl (illustrated at 50) for information
`
`on the location of another mobile station MS2.” (Id. ,
`
`13:4-5.) Staack describes how MSl sends a request for
`
`location finding information for the other stations MS2
`
`as a message through the network to a location
`
`message server (e.g., WTA 54):
`
`The operation of the signalling scheme of
`
`Page 23 of 128
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`figure 7 is as follows. The WAP user agent
`
`51 makes a request for the URL (uniform
`
`resource locator) of the location description
`
`service. The URL specifies a WAP deck to
`
`interface to the location information service.
`
`The user of MSI inputs the identity of MS2,
`
`which can for example be the MSISDN of
`
`MS2. The WAP deck issues a request for a
`
`URL for
`
`the same location description
`
`service;
`
`this time the URL including the
`
`identity of MS2. MS] sends the request to
`
`the WAP gateway 53, which forwards that
`
`request to the WTA server 54. The WTA
`
`server extracts the identity of MS2 from the
`
`URL.
`
`(Id., 13:19-26.) As explained above, a G1\/[LC
`
`contacted by WTA server 54 requests and receives the
`
`position of MS2 from a Visitor MSC/VLR that MS2 is
`
`operating in, and returns the result to WTA server 54.
`
`(Id., 13127-1421; see also discussion of Staack above in
`
`paragraphs 24-30.)
`
`1.c. retrieving data from Staack discloses retrieving data from a data store
`
`Page 24 of 128
`
`22
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`a data store
`
`corresponding to the location finding information
`
`corresponding to the
`
`based on the cell occupied by at least one mobile
`
`location finding
`
`station. Staack discloses this step in two ways that
`
`information based on the
`
`track the two Ways that Staack discloses the limitations
`
`cell occupied by at least
`
`of claim element 1.b. above.
`
`one mobile station; and
`
`Following the first way Staack discloses the limitations
`
`of the claim, where a mobile station is requesting
`
`location finding information for itself, Staack describes
`
`retrieving data from a data store (e.g., database 35a
`
`(Fig. 2)) corresponding to the location finding
`
`infonnation based on the cell occupied by at least one
`
`mobile station (e.g., mobile handsets 36, 37 (Fig. 2)).
`
`For example, Staack discloses that “to estimate the
`
`location of a mobile station the MLU determines via
`
`the MSCs which cell the mobile is currently in. The
`
`MLU consults the information on that cell that is
`
`stored in the database 35a.” (Staack, 7:9—l0.)
`
`Therefore, Staack discloses that the MLU retrieves
`
`data fiom the database 35a, which is a data store,
`
`Page 25 of 128
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`corresponding to the location finding information
`
`requested by the mobile station (e_g_, handsets 36, 37)
`
`based on the cell for that mobile station. (See also id.,
`
`6:26-7:6.) Staack also explains the known operation of
`
`cells in connection with mobile stations. (See id., 1:4-
`
`19, Fig. 1.)
`
`Following the second way Staack discloses the
`
`limitations of the claim, where a mobile station
`
`requests location information regarding another mobile
`
`station, Staack describes retrieving data from a data
`
`store (e.g., a memory necessarily associated with WTA
`
`server 54 or location information server 56 (Fig. 7))
`
`corresponding to the location finding information
`
`based on the cell occupied by at least one mobile
`
`station (e.g., MS2). For example, Staack states,
`
`The GMLC contacts the HLR of MS2 (not
`
`shown in figure 7) in order to determine
`
`which network and visitor MSCNLR MS2
`
`is currently operating in. The GIVILC then
`
`requests the position of MS2 from the visitor
`
`24
`
`Page 26 of 128
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`MSC/VLR.
`
`The
`
`visitor MSC/VLR
`
`determines the location of MS2 and returns
`
`the result to the GMLC. The GMLC returns
`
`the result to the WTA server. The result
`
`may, for instance be given in coordinate
`
`form or as the identity of the cell in which
`
`MS2 lies.
`
`(Id., 13:27-14:2.) Staack also discloses that the WTA
`
`server 54 “consults location information server 56 in
`
`order to establish a description of that location — for
`
`example a place name or a street name.” (Id., 14:2-
`
`4;see also id., Figs. 1, 2, 3, 7, 2:15-28, 4122-524, 6:25-
`
`7:23, 8:8—22, 16: 1-9.)
`
`In my opinion, one of ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time of the alleged invention of the ’667 patent would
`
`have recognized from the disclosure of Staack that
`
`WTA server 54 must necessarily include a data store
`
`that stores location information of a mobile station
`
`(e-g_, MS2)- Such a skilled person would have
`
`understood this given that W IA server 54 receives
`
`Page 27 of 128
`
`25
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`location information for MS2 from the GMLC and
`
`requests description information for the received MS2
`
`location information, as disclosed by Staack. Such a
`
`skilled person would have understood that without
`
`such data store capabilities, the features disclosed by
`
`Staack would not have been able to operate as Staack
`
`discloses. Such a skilled person would have
`
`understood based on the disclosure of Staack and the
`
`knowledge of such a person at the time of the alleged
`
`invention that, without a data store, WTA server 54
`
`would not be able to store (temporarily or otherwise)
`
`the location information received from the GMLC for
`
`consultation of location information server 56.
`
`Staack discloses retrieving data from a data store
`
`corresponding to the location finding information in
`
`another way because location information server 56
`
`(shown in Fig. 7 as including database or memory)
`
`provides description data to WTA server 54 that
`
`Page 28 of 128
`
`26
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`corresponds to the location information provided by
`
`the GMLC to WTA server. (See id., 13:30-14:4; see
`
`also id., claim 10 (describing that a locating unit
`
`comprises data storage means); discussion of Staack
`
`above in paragraphs 24-30.)
`
`1.d. sending the data
`
`Staack discloses sending the data through the network
`
`through the network
`
`from the location message server as a message to the
`
`from the location
`
`mobile station that requested the location finding
`
`message SCI'VCI' 35 a
`
`information. Staack discloses this step in two ways that
`
`message to the mobile
`
`track the two ways that Staack discloses the limitations
`
`station that requested the
`
`of claim elements 1.b and 1.c. above.
`
`location finding
`
`Following the first way Staack discloses the limitations
`
`information; and
`
`of the claim, where a mobile station is requesting
`
`wherein
`
`location finding information for itself, Staack describes
`
`sending the data through the network from the location
`
`message server (e.g., MLU 30 (Fig. 2)) as a message to
`
`the mobile station (e. g., mobile handsets 36, 37 (Fig.
`
`2)) that requested the location finding information- For
`
`Page 29 of 128
`
`27
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`example, Staack discloses that,
`
`Once the location of the mobile station has
`
`been determined the 1\/[LU can transmit that
`
`information to the mobile station or another
`
`unit. Some convenient ways for this to be
`
`done are by text or voice messages over the
`
`radio system. For instance, in a GSM system
`
`text messages could be sent by SMS (short
`
`message service) or USSD (unstructured
`
`supplementary services data).
`
`(Staack, 9: 12-16; see also id. , at 10:1-1 1 :22, describing
`
`features where location information of a requesting
`
`mobile station can be reported by the MLU to the
`
`station.) For example, Staack explains that the “MLU
`
`(e.g., following a request by the user) send message
`
`periodically (e-g., every 15 minutes) to report the
`
`mobile’s location”) (id. , 10:12-13) and that descriptive
`
`information of the mobile station’s location can be
`
`reported to the user (id., at 11:3-5, 11:16).
`
`Following the second way Staack discloses the
`
`Page 30 of 128
`
`28
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Staack
`
`limitations of the claim, where a mobile station
`
`requests location information regarding another mobile
`
`station, Staack describes sending the data through the
`
`network from the location message server (e.g., WTA
`
`server 54 (Fig. 7)) as a message to the mobile station
`
`(mobile client MSI (Fig. 7)) that requested the location
`
`finding information. For example, Staac
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
