`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`________________
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`________________
`
`
`TELIT WIRELESS SOLUTIONS INC., TELIT COMMUNICATIONS
`PLC, SIERRA WIRELESS AMERICA, INC., SIERRA WIRELESS, INC.,
`and RPX CORP.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`M2M SOLUTIONS LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`________________
`Case IPR2016-000551
`
`Patent 8,648,717 B2
`________________
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Demonstrative Exhibits for Oral Hearing
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Case IPR2016-01073 has been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`IPR 2016‐00055
`U.S. Patent 8,648,717
`
`TELIT WIRELESS SOLUTIONS INC., TELIT COMMUNICATIONS
`PLC, SIERRA WIRELESS AMERICA, INC., SIERRA WIRELESS,
`INC., and RPX CORP.
`vs.
`M2M SOLUTIONS LLC
`
`
`
`Incoming Calls
`
`Mom
`
`(040) 111‐1111
`
`Dad
`
`(040) 222‐2222
`
`Aunt
`Nancy
`(040) 333‐3333
`
`Grandma
`
`(040) 444‐4444
`
`Grandpa
`
`(040) 555‐5555
`
`Incoming Caller List
`A: (040) 111‐1111
`B:
`(040) 222‐2222
`C:
`(040) 333‐3333
`D: (040) 444‐4444
`E:
`(040) 555‐5555
`
`Programmable
`Communicator
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 1:31‐36, 10:8‐31,
`3:24‐28, 7:9‐14
`2
`
`
`
`Incoming Calls
`
`Incoming Caller List
`A: (040) 111‐1111
`B:
`(040) 222‐2222
`C:
`(040) 333‐3333
`D: (040) 444‐4444
`E:
`(040) 555‐5555
`
`Programmable
`Communicator
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 1:31‐36, 10:8‐20
`3
`
`Mom
`
`(040) 111‐1111
`
`Dad
`
`(040) 222‐2222
`
`Aunt
`Nancy
`(040) 333‐3333
`
`Grandma
`
`(040) 444‐4444
`
`Grandpa
`
`(040) 555‐5555
`
`
`
`Incoming Calls
`
`Incoming Calls
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 10 lines 8-11
`
`ist serves to
`
`Furthermore, the feature, which
`Ex. 1101, Col. 10 lines 8‐11
`causes the communicator to) rejectaall calls but those from
`
`4
`
`
`
`Incoming Calls
`
`Incoming Caller List
`A: (040) 111‐1111
`B:
`(040) 222‐2222
`C:
`(040) 333‐3333
`D:
`(040) 444‐4444
`E:
`(040) 555‐5555
`
`Programmable
`Communicator
`
`Unknown
`Caller
`(040) 666‐6666
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 10 lines 8‐11,
`Col. 9 lines 58‐60
`5
`
`Mom
`
`(040) 111‐1111
`
`Dad
`
`(040) 222‐2222
`
`Aunt
`Nancy
`(040) 333‐3333
`
`Grandma
`
`(040) 444‐4444
`
`Grandpa
`
`(040) 555‐5555
`
`
`
`Outgoing Calls
`
`
`
`MomMom
`
`
`
`(040) 111‐1111(040) 111‐1111
`
`Dad
`
`(040) 222‐2222
`
`Aunt
`Nancy
`(040) 333‐3333
`
`Grandma
`
`(040) 444‐4444
`
`Grandpa
`
`(040) 555‐5555
`
`Outgoing Caller List
`
`A: (040) 111‐1111(040) 111‐1111
`B:
`(040) 222‐2222
`C:
`(040) 333‐3333
`D: (040) 444‐4444
`E:
`(040) 555‐5555
`
`Programmable
`Communicator
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 10 lines 28‐37, Fig. 3
`6
`
`
`
`Programming
`Transmitter
`
`Program Outgoing
`Caller List
`
`“one or more
`wireless
`transmissions”
`
`“the transmissions
`including the at least
`one telephone
`number or IP address
`and the coded
`number”
`Ex. 1101, Claim 1, Col. 10 lines 5‐37
`
`“authenticating … if at least one
`transmission contains a coded number”
`
`Outgoing Caller List
`A: (040) 111‐1111
`B:
`C:
`D:
`E:
`
`7
`
`
`
`Remote Monitoring
`
`. . .
`
`. . .
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 2 lines 4‐8
`
`8
`
`
`
`Remote Monitoring System
`
`Monitored
`Technical Device
`
`Programmable
`Communicator
`
`Alarm
`System
`
`9
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 2:4‐8, 6:4‐12,
`
`
`
`Monitoring Device/ Monitoring Device/ Monitoring Device/
`
`
`Programming Programming Programming
`
`
`TransmitterTransmitterTransmitter
`
`Cell
`Phone
`
`(040) 222‐2222
`or
`
`PC
`
`192.168.2.119
`
`
`
`‘717 Patent
`
`
`US 8,648,717 B2
`(lo) Patent No.
`oz United States Patent
`
`
`
`
`
`“Feb. 11, 2014 Wesby-van Swaay is Date of Patemt:
`
`CTL) Applica: MEM (SL) Fick! ofCiewitieation SearchPROGHASIMABLE DOOMNDCATONE
`
`
`EPC
`cccseooene BETAINE SIRE FREE) TVDCOMET CR;
` tities LLC,
`
`Hi
`L
`
`‘Steatforsupen-Avea (GB)
`weet
`j
`25%,
`18, 490.12
`Ts,
`
`
`(72) MOONS; 4ESMSH, a82,4K 41, 435;liven: Eveline Weibyevne Sissy,
`
`
`
`
`Seeaifoestupenr-Avee (CEI)
`3142, 373, 375
`
`Seoapplication file forcorpkew search history.
`
` (TA) Assignee:
`
`me
`(581
`Meferenees Cited
`
`(9) Notice:
`Subject io any
`disclaimer, theterm of!
`US, PATERNT [O°MENTS
`
`
`
`
`
`‘717 Patent
`
`uSOGET LTE
`
`
`
`US 8,648,717 B2
`
`
` 9
`face means 140 10 generste alam mestages in response
`Additional codex may be used by authenticated callers
`changes in status conditions.
`Said prograrumable interface
`interrogate thestatusconditionoftheprogrammablecommu-
`
`all
`mannerofsensordevicesforthe
`—_nicator, ofto-imerrogatethe status.of data monitoringdevices
`I devices and sensors:
`communicaior is wired or wirelessly attached
`request for informa-
`s
`y.
`in the application for an improvedchildcom-
`
`,
`ctor,oily personsknowingthesecret PUK codewould
`
`
`
`The periodic statisreport means 130 may beprogrammed
`be shtetochangethecalling sumber. Thisprovidestheessca
`
`
`
`{o provide data oa the current status of the programmable
`gia] security for the parents.
`Furthermore, the feature, which
`
`
`communicator as well as data from one or more devices.—Couses the communicator to reject all calls but those from
`Tooth module40.
`e
`
`‘which may beconnected tothe communicator via the BIW19 \G)°%one yumbers onthepermitted valkrs list sores. Wo
`caoe'(hd
`e
`communicators
`shield thechild fromunwelcomecomet.
`SMS mes:
`In theeasethat the programmable communicator
`is unable
`The followingexample demecstrates how
`
`tomake an immatiateconnection with the link telephone i Sras
`
`
`Ukcade A040 TE LITT
`PUK eee Bt
`(
`SSMS 3. PUK eneC: G40333 3333
`
`SMS4. PUKcode D04048Leak
`SSMS §. PUK aneBren498 4585
`
`phases, a pro-programmingphase andan active phase.
`In the
`AtoBim
`the five messages
`
`rogramming phase,thecommunicator is programmed ¢od
`
`
`‘with the number it sancallwhich comprises # unique cod
`
`
`which makepossible the existence
`of a newand improved communicating apparatus to address
`
`
`Ex. 1101 at col. 9 lines 16‐21
`the communication needs ofchildren and elderly persons and
`or programmabledata tags for monitoring the status ofasso-
`ciated technical equipment.
` Ex. 1101 at col. 9 lines 16-21
`
`
`
`Claim Construction
`Claim Construction
`
`
`
`Claims Control
`
`“It is a bedrock principle of patent law that the claims of a patent
`define the invention to which the patentee is entitled the right to
`exclude. … The written description part of the specification itself
`does not delimit the right to exclude. That is the function and
`purpose of claims. … [I]f we once begin to include elements not
`mentioned in the claim, in order to limit such claim, we should
`never know where to stop[.] [T]the claims made in the patent are
`the sole measure of the grant"
`Phillips, v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312 (Fed. Cir.) (en banc) (citations and internal quotations omitted)
`
`
`
`Claims Control
`
`“When claim language has as plain a meaning on an issue as the
`language does here, leaving no genuine uncertainties on
`interpretive questions relevant to the case, it is particularly
`difficult to conclude that the specification reasonably supports a
`different meaning.
`
`* * *
`Sipnet suggests in various ways that the specification does not
`adequately describe or enable the systems or processes involving
`a query about current connection status under Straight Path’s
`claim construction. But written‐description and enablement
`challenges were not, and could not have been, part of the inter
`partes review that is now before us.”
`Straight Path IP Group, Inc. v. Sipnet EU S.R.O., 806 F.3d 1356, 1361 and 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (cited in M2M’s
`Response, p. 4).
`
`
`
`Claims Control
`
`“Our analytical focus must begin with and remain
`centered on the language of the claims themselves.”
`Storage Tech. Corp. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 329 F3d 823, 830 (Fed. Cir. 2003);
`Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Novel Labs. Inc., 749 F.3d 1349, 1354‐55 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
`
`“No matter how great the temptations of fairness or policy
`making, courts do not rework claims. They only interpret them.
`* * *
`Ambiguity, undue breadth, vagueness, and triviality are matters
`which go to claim validity for failure to comply with 35 USC § 112‐
`para. 2, not to interpretation or construction.”
`Intervet Am., Inc. v. Kee‐Vet Labs., Inc., 887 F.2d 1050, 1054, 12 USPQ2d at 1477 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (emphasis in
`original)
`
`
`
`Single vs. Multiple Transmissions
`
`Single vs. Multiple Transmissions
`
`
`
`“One or More Wireless Transmissions”
`
`Claim Language:
`. . .
`
`. . .
`
`Ex. 1101 at col. 12 lines 39‐43, 49‐51
`
`
`
`Board’s Decision
`
`“If there are multiple transmissions, we see no
`reason why the ‘at least one telephone number or
`IP address and the coded number’ need to be in a
`single transmission, as Patent Owner contends.”
`
`Decision, p. 8 lines 27‐30
`
`
`
`M2M’s Infringement Contention
`
`. . .
`
`Ex. 1102, p. 4 ¶ 4, P. 6 ¶, 2
`
`
`
`Obviousness
`
`Single vs. Multiple Transmissions
`
`
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Design Choice:
`Expert Savolainen:
`“… it was a matter of design choice and would have been
`obvious to send the PIN code and telephone number in the
`same (one) or separate (multiple) transmissions, depending
`on the desired level of security.”
`
`“For higher security applications … a [POSA] would have
`wanted the coded number in every transmission in order to
`‘provide better security’ ([Ex. 1121 Konchitsky Tr.] at
`164:10-21) … This would ensure that every transmission
`was received from an authenticated sender”
`
`Ex. 1105, p. 55 ¶ 115; cited in Petition p. 25
`
`
`
`M2M’s Trial Expert
`
`Q. Can you think of reasons why it would be better
`to have the pin code and the phone number in a
`single transmission as opposed to two transmissions?
`A. ... Yeah, I think that it would be ‐‐ it would be ‐‐ for
`example, provide better security. [Later changed to: it
`potentially could provide better security in certain
`circumstances]
`Q. How so?
`A. Because ‐‐ because when they are together,
`then it is kind of safer to get into the system
`this way …
`
`Ex. 1121, Tr. p. 164:10‐21 (Konchitsky); cited in Petition p. 24
`
`
`
`“configured to and permitted to …”
`
`Outbound Call Screening?
`
`
`
`Incoming vs. Outgoing Calls
`
`Ex. 1101, pp. 6‐7 (excerpts)
`
`
`
`“configured to and permitted to …”
`‘717 Patent
`
`Van Bergen
`
`Ex. 1101, p. 7,
`Fig. 3 excerpt
`
`Ex. 1113, 10:35‐37
`
`
`
`Incoming vs. Outgoing Calls
`
`District Court:
`
`Ex. 1109, Court’s Memorandum Opinion on
`Claim Construction, p. 7 lines 12‐18
`
`
`
`Incoming vs. Outgoing Calls
`
`M2M:
`“Here that permitted caller claim term is absent
`from the ‘717 patent claims that are the subject
`of the present Petition.”
`
`Preliminary Response, p. 6
`
`
`
`Incoming Calls
`
`Incoming Calls
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 10 lines 8-11
`
`ist serves to
`
`Furthermore, the feature, which
`Ex. 1101, Col. 10 lines 8‐11
`causes the communicator to) rejectaall calls but those from
`
`27
`
`
`
`M2M’s Alleged
`Outgoing Call Screening
`
`Ex. 1101, Col. 2 lines 17‐23, cited in
`M2M’s Response p. 17
`
`
`
`No Keypad
`
`No Keypad
`
`simple pin connection to rec arge the saery, Ex. 1101, Col. 3 lines 24-28
`
`In this context the requirement is for an ee
`whichmaybesewnintotheaimingofa jacket, orotheree
`mobile phone platform comprising no keypadordis}
`Ex. 1101, Col. 3 lines 24‐28
`of clothing, havingonlyt SSbutton protruding
`
`Ko
`
`
`
`“configured to and permitted to …”
`
`M2M’s Argument in IPR:
`
`Response, p. 19
`
`M2M’s Argument in ‘717 Patent Prosecution:
`
`Ex. 1104, p. 31
`
`
`
`Obviousness
`
`“configured to and permitted to …”
`
`
`
`Call Screening
`Alternate Grounds 8‐14
`
`Ex. 1102, p. 5
`
`
`
`Call Screening
`Alternate Grounds 8‐14
`Van Bergen:
`“The alarm linked GSM mobile unit 16 (ALU)
`is preferably a GSM mobile unit without
`keypad. It may be but is not limited to being a
`FALCOM A2 GSM mobile unit.”
`Ex. 1113, 7:32‐33
`
`FALCOM A2:
`
`Ex. 1130, p. 78
`
`
`
`Van Bergen
`Van Bergen
`
`
`
`Van Bergen
`
`Programmable
`Communicator in
`Monitored
`Technical Device
`
`Monitoring
`Device &
`Programming
`Transmitter
`
`Ex. 1113, Figure 1
`
`
`
`Van Bergen
`
`Programmable
`Interface
`
`Processing
`Module
`
`Monitored Technical
`Device
`
`Ex. 1113, Figure 2
`
`
`
`Van Bergen
`• “programming of the CELL‐EYE via validated
`incoming calls”(Ex. 1113, p. 1, Abstract.)
`• “secure communication conditioned on the
`use of two valid PIN codes”(Ex. 1113, p. 4 lines 14‐15.)
`• “Remote programming: ... the numbers that
`must be dialed when an alarm condition is
`detected”(Ex. 1113, p. 2 line 51 – p. 3 line 4.)
`
`
`
`Van Bergen
`
`Van Bergen
`
`. . .
`
`
`
`wien me
`
`
`t has the facility for an internal or external SIM card,
`
`The alarm linked GSM mobile unit 16 (ALU)is preferably a GSM
`Ex. 1113, 7:32‐35
`mobile unit without Keypad, it may be but is not limited to being a FALCOM A2 GSM mobile unit with
`modem, This unit is a fully type approved
`
`Ex. 1113, 4:12‐13
`
`Ex. 1113, 4:12-13
`
`Ex. 1113, 7:32-35
`
`
`
`‘717 Patent vs. Van Bergen
`
`‘717 Patent vs. Van Bergen
`
`
`USOOGET LIBS
`
`
`
`
`
`United States Patent (iu) Patent Not=US 8,648,717 B2
`
`
`
`fs) Date of Patemt:
`“Feb, 11,
`2014
`Wesby-van Swa
`
`
`PROGHAMIMABLE COMMISDC ATOR
`(58) Field ofCasalficatian Search
`
`
`
`on
`FAM Sn, ED Tt ca
`MIMSelutioas LIC
`iCTI) Appin a)
`
`
`
`liveuee:
`Eveline Weshy-vi §
`
`
`Assignee:
`
`call or
`meat
`or int
`phone
`
`
`the potentially farm
`from mobik
`
`
`
`Ex. 1101, col. 7 lines 42‐46
`
`th} and a rechargeable battery and antenna and a basic two-way
`
`
` parents ‘who nepresent a healthrisk due to the
`
`secure in the knowledge
`that
`
`separate context,
`microphonedevice and remotely pre-programmable identity
`telephone soluti
`
`
`burt whichis vers:
`
`modulelinkingit to a single mobile orfixed telephone.
`
`
` making useof
`
`Ex. 1101, col. 7 lines 42-46
`
` fixeddevice whichisable to
`
`select oneormore apparatuses smart clothes communi
`In sporisareas such as on lakeswhere there may be people
` ams tagembeckled
`
`using canoes,
`each of theselected numberof apparatuses tobe linkedtothe
`
`
`ina life
`ry serve foalert a centr
`control point that a
`fixed telephone.
`mobile or
`
`
`
`farther object of the present invention to provide a
`person
`isindifficulty
`andalsotoalert otherpersons inthearea 35,
`
`
`
`
`in gototheir rescue.
`mablecommunica
`ius, which comprises
`
`
`
`Inanadditional application area, skiers in difficulty weld
`a processing means to process coded
`transmissions and per-
`
`
`
`
`benefit from a smart
`clothes user-programmable communi-
`mit only transmissions comprising a coded number, which
`
`cations tag attached to their clothing. which is pre-pro-
`determines the
`authenticity ofthe message,to be allowed to
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`grammed to be linked with«fixed or mobile telephone and 4). program the number to which the said apparatus be Hinked.
`
`
`
`
`need only have
`its protruding button pressed te make com-
`Tt isa furtherobject of
`the present invention tprovide
`
`
`central alarmpoint
`
`
`lecommuni jons apparatus, which comprises
`munication witha
`pov
`
`
`
`ent suchasin theease ofthesmart
`In an additional
`applicationarea
`a wrist strup,oran attch
`there exists thenced fora
`1 alarm means which can be
`
`
`
`
`
`user-programmable remote wireless
`communications data
`clothes
`application,
`anda
`
`
`
`
`mise a message Wo hesent tothe
`tag, whichcan
`beused torelay informationabout thestatusof 4 programmed such that it can:
`
`
`th the said apparatusis linked
`
`
`a remotepiece of technical equipment such asavending fixed or mobile numberto w
`
`
`machine. Home networkscould be simplified by making use
`in the case that the wrist
`strap be broken or undone orin the
`
`
`
`
`ofthe existing mobile
`network infrastructure to relay data
`case thuthe said aftachmcat be brokenor
`displaced from an
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`about the status ofhome applianceortoindicate whether a initial position of equilibri
`
`dooris open orclosed. isafurther object of the present inventionto provide aPacket switched technologies suchas so It
`
`
`
`
`GPRSmay be used as the radio access technology fo com-
`programmablecommunicationsapparatus, which mayhav
`
`
`nunicate the status ofthetechoi
`sepirate pressure sensitive means
`er displaceable means
`
`which becomes activated in thepressed position ordispla
`
`cations platform, which ean be combined
`position respectively
`suchthatitis able togenera
`
`
`with remote health monitoring technology to assist doctors 35 or data message when pressure is removed or whenthe dis-
`
`
`laced
`position. Such a few.
`with remote diagnosis of patients
`
`
`
`the need foe the
`Inan addi
`
`
`
` able to work &
`
`communications which i
`wrist strap feature ofthe previousobject suchthat whenthe
`
`
`west worncomm
`ns
`network is temporarily overloaded such that it bas the
`torisremoved fromthewrist the pecs
`i
`
`tostore
`sensitive means or displaceable means can prove the
`oundbyteorconven it using «sure
`
`
`
`
`
`voice recognition sofware suchthat it ean be forwarded as
`requiredakimmess
`
`
`soon as the network capacity hecomes less leaded Itisafurther object of the preseat invention to provide 4
`
`Further
`totheselimitationsof existing technologies,
`and so
`programmablecomm
`apparatus, which comprises
`
`
`
`
`nown, nO portable communication apparatus is
`a heat sensor, which eandetect that
`the comm
`
`
`
`
`available which serves fo offeranimproved pro- 43 toaheat sourceadjacent such as the skin of a child
`
`
`
`
`tor which isdinected towardsthespe-
`means {0 generate analarm message if the heat sourceis
`
`
`
`
`
`problemarea as outlined,
`removed.
`
`
`
`
`Van Bergen
`• Remote activation (Ex. 1113, 2:25‐28, 4:9‐20)
`• Remote deactivation (Ex. 1113, 4:9‐10)
`• Remote programming (Ex. 1113, 2:51‐3:2, 8:49‐50)
`• Remotely activating alarms (Ex. 1113, 2:35‐36)
`• Remotely immobilizing the car (Ex. 1113, 2:27‐28, 2:44‐50)
`• Remotely interrupt current to the ignition system (Ex. 1113,
`7:49‐50)
`• Remotely interrupt fuel flow to the engine system (Ex. 1113, 7:51)
`• Remote activation of location monitoring (Ex. 1113, 4:43 , 7:1‐4)
`• Remotely updating the authentication code (Ex. 1113, 2:51‐3:4)
`• Remotely updating telephone numbers (Ex. 1113, 2:51‐3:4, 7:1‐3; 10:33‐
`• Remotely updating stored numbers, codes or
`parameters of the system (Ex. 1113, 11:12‐16)
`
`34, 11:14‐16)
`
`
`
`1(b)
`
`Claim Element
`
`Claim Element 1(b)
`
`“the programmable interface is programmable by
`wireless packet switched data messages”
`Ex. 1101, Col. 12:37‐38
`
`Van Bergen:
`“a reset function which resets [i.e. deactivates] the
`output signals of the alarm sensor interface after the
`reception of digital inputs from the ALU 16 via the
`modem 15 …”
`Ex. 1113, 6:37–38
`
`
`
`1(b)
`
`Claim Element
`
`Wireless Reset Function
`
`Van Bergen:
`
`ALU is “an alarm linked GSM mobile unit”; “a
`fully type approved cellular phone.”
`Ex. 1113, Abstract, 6:34
`
`Modem is “for the reception and transmission of
`DATA and SMS messages via the GSM mobile
`network”
`Ex. 1113, 10:12–13,
`cited in Decision, p. 24
`
`
`
`1(b)
`
`Claim Element
`
`All Wireless Programming
`
`Van Bergen:
`“[T]he CELL‐EYE system can only be activated, de‐
`activated or programmed via an incoming call to
`the ALU 16 and its associated modem.”
`
`Ex. 1113, 4:9‐10
`
`
`
`1(b)
`
`Claim Element
`
`Savolainen’s Expert Testimony
`
`The Falcom A2 ALU “can relay control signals
`that it receives through the GSM network from
`the RMU, but it doesn't by itself generate
`control signals.”
`
`Ex. 2010, 31:25‐32:3
`
`
`
`Claim Element
`
`1(b) M2M incorrectly argues that ALU
`autonomously generates Result Codes
`
`“ ‘result codes’ generated by ALU 16 itself.”
`Response, p. 24
`
`
`
`1(b)
`
`Claim Element
`
`Result Codes are
`Network‐Originated
`Q. Would the "okay" result code be something that
`was generated by the Falcom [ALU] itself?
`[Objection omitted]
`A. The response "okay” would be generated as a
`result of the call connecting through the GSM
`network so as the acknowledgement from the
`network side tells the Falcom A2 that the call was
`successfully connected to the other end, then the
`Falcom A2 would send an "okay" response to the
`controller.” Ex. 2010, Tr. 25:8‐20 (Savolainen).
`
`
`
`Claim Elements
`
`1(b), (g), (h)
`
`GPRS
`• 1(b): “wherein the programmable interface is
`programmable by wireless packet switched data
`messages”
`
`• 1(g): “wherein the one or more wireless
`transmissions from the programming transmitter
`comprises a General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) or
`other wireless packet switched data message”
`
`• 1(h): “… in response to programming instructions
`received in an incoming wireless packet switched
`data message”
`
`Ex. 1101, Cols. 12‐13
`
`
`
`Claim Elements
`
`1(b), (g), (h)
`
`GPRS
`Savolainen’s Expert Testimony: “By the end of
`the 1990’s, wireless communication had evolved
`from 1G to 2G to 2.5G” providing GPRS:
`
`Ex. 1105, ¶47, citing Ex. 1122, 138; Ex. 1115, 4(left):21‐26), Exs. 1116‐7
`
`
`
`Claim Elements
`
`Bettstetter
`1(b), (g), (h)
`• 2G: Circuit‐switched communication “too
`slow” and “too expensive” (Ex. 1114, 2(left):8‐27)
`
`• 2.5G: “GPRS is a new bearer service for GSM
`that greatly improves and simplifies wireless
`access to packet data networks … GPRS
`improves the utilization of the radio resources,
`offers volume‐based billing, higher transfer
`rates, shorter access times, and simplifies the
`access to packet data networks” (Ex. 1114, 3(left):1‐5)
`See Ex. 1105, ¶¶47‐48, 97, 104‐105; Petition, p. 19‐21
`
`
`
`Claim Elements
`
`1(b), (g), (h)
`
`Savolainen’s
`Expert Testimony
`• “It would have been obvious … to follow the evolution of
`wireless technology from 2G to 2G+.”
`• “this would have increased the speed of communication
`from the Cell‐Eye’s current speeds of up to 9.6 kbit/s (Ex.
`1113, 7:28) to speeds of up to several tens of kbit/s (Ex.
`1114, 2(right):13‐18).”
`• “Implementing wireless packet switched communication …
`was specified by the GSM standard.”
`• “the ‘717 Patent gives no instruction or explanation
`as to how to implement wireless packet switched or
`GPRS technologies.”
`
`Ex. 1105, p. 51 ¶ 105
`
`
`
`1(b), (g), (h)
`
`Claim Elements
`
`By 1999, GPRS used for SMS
`and Circuit‐Switched Data.
`
`• Circuit‐Switched:
`
`• SMS:
`
`Ex. 1114 at 2(right):19‐20 (Bettstetter)
`
`Ex. 1114 at 5(right):1 (Bettstetter)
`
`
`
`1(b), (g), (h)
`
`Claim Elements
`
`M2M’s Deposition Exhibit
`
`In 1998:
`“SMS delivery via GPRS is normally a more radio
`resource efficient method than SMS delivery via
`CS [circuit‐switched] GSM.”
`
`Ex. 2006, p. 10 (M2M’s Deposition Exhibit), see also
`Ex. 2010, Tr. 76‐77 (Savolainen)
`
`
`
`1(b), (g), (h)
`
`Claim Elements
`
`Cases
`
`Soverain Software v. Newegg, Inc.
`Using URLs and hypertext links instead of pre‐
`internet mail systems was an obvious progression
`in the art.
`
`Soverain Software v. Newegg, Inc., 705 F.3d 1333, 1342‐43 (Fed. Cir. 2013)
`
`Western Union Co. v. Moneygram Payment Sys. Inc.
`“[W]e find the use of an electronic transaction device
`where the prior art employed a fax machine to be an
`unpatentable improvement at a time when such a
`transition was commonplace in the art.”
`Western Union Co. v. Moneygram Payment Sys. Inc., 626 F.3d 1361, 1369‐71 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
`
`Petition, p. 21
`
`
`
`29(g)
`
`Claim Element
`
`SMS Programming
`in Van Bergen
`
`Ex. 1113, 7:38‐39
`
`Ex. 1113, 10:12‐13
`
`
`
`29(g)
`
`Claim Element
`
`M2M’s Admission –
`SMS Programming
`
`***
`
`Ex. 1121, Tr. 163:6‐20
`(Konchitsky)
`
`
`
`29(g)
`
`Claim Element
`
`SMS Programming
`
`“Remote activation: The controller of the said CELL‐
`EYE system is designed to be activated by remote
`control via an incoming call carrying a coded Short
`Message Service (SMS) message.”
`
`Ex. 1113, 2:25‐26
`
`
`
`29(g)
`
`M2M’s Admissions ‐‐
`Programming
`Named inventor, Evelyn Wesby:
`Q Would you consider a command to
`turn the interface off to be a
`programming instruction?
`A Yes, I would.
`Q Would you consider an instruction to
`turning the power on to be a
`programming instruction?
`A Yes.
`
`Claim Element
`
`Ex. 1118, 173:11‐17 (Wesby)
`
`
`
`29(g)
`
`Claim Element
`
`M2M’s Admissions –
`Programming
`
`M2M’s Trial Expert, Nettleton:
`“any command that makes the device
`do something is ‐‐ it would be a
`programming command.” Ex. 1110, 221:6‐10.
`
`
`
`29(g)
`
`Claim Element
`
`Van Bergen’s Characterization
`‐‐ Programming
`
`“Remote programming: A further advantage
`of the two‐way communication between an
`owner and the protected which is possible
`with the present invention, is the facility
`which allows the owner to remotely activate
`or program the security system.” (Ex. 1113, 2:51‐3:1)
`
`
`
`1(h)
`
`Claim Element
`
`Claim Element 1(h)
`
`“process data received through the programmable
`interface from the at least one monitored technical
`device in response to programming instructions
`received in an incoming wireless [] data message”
`
`Ex. 1101, 12:65‐13:3
`
`
`
`1(h)
`
`Claim Element
`
`Process data in response to wireless
`programming instructions
`
`• “Remote programming: ... periodic customization of
`the level of security appropriate for a particular
`situation”
`
`• “Remote programming: ... Such programming could
`include … presetting alarm parameters such as the
`numbers that must be dialled when an alarm
`condition is detected, how frequently such calls
`need to be repeated and what to do if connection to
`a particular called number is not available at the
`time.”
`Ex. 1113 at 2:51‐3:6
`
`
`
`Claim Element
`
`1(h)
`
`Process data in response to wireless
`programming instructions
`Board’s Decision:
`
`“Patent Owner has not explained sufficiently how
`receiving an alarm output signal (i.e., data) and
`determining what actions to take in response is
`not data ‘processing.’ The ’717 patent does not
`appear to have a definition of data ‘processing’
`that would exclude such data analysis.”
`
`Decision, p. 30
`
`
`
`Thank you
`
`Thank you
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a complete copy of the attached
`
`Petitioner’s Demonstrative Exhibits for Oral Hearing, is being served by
`
`electronic mail on November 30, 2016, the same day as the filing of the above-
`
`identified document in the United States Patent and Trademark Office with the
`
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board, upon the patent counsel of record for U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,648,717 at the e-mail addresses indicated in Patent Owner’s Mandatory
`
`Notices:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`jcostakos@foley.com
`
`mmoran@foley.com
`
`DATED: November 30, 2016
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz LLP
`
`Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz LLP
`ATTN: Milo Eadan
`1500 Broadway 12th floor
`New York, NY 10036
`Phone: (646) 878-0800
`Fax: (646) 878-0801
`
`By: /Milo Eadan/
`Milo Eadan
`Reg. No. 64,764
`Back-up Counsel for Petitioner
`
`