Owner of U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309
`
`Owner of U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309
`
`
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-001
`
`

`

` Petitioner Does Not Meet Proof/Production Burdens
` ’309 Not Obvious Over Cited References
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0132405 (“AbiEzzi”), and
` U.S. Patent No. 8,156,528 (“Baumgartner”)
`
` Expert not Credible
` Previously Afforded Little Weight by the Board
` Opinions Unsupported by Factual Citations
`
` No Motivation or Methods to Combine the References
` Secondary Considerations Favor Nonobviousness
`
`2
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-002
`
`

`

` Burden rests solely on the Petitioner to demonstrate by a preponderance of
`evidence. 37 C.F.R § 42.1(d).
` The burden of both proof and production remains with the Petitioner for the
`duration of the Inter Partes Review proceedings. In re Magnum Oil Tools Int'l, Ltd.,
`829 F.3d 1364, 1375-1376 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (determining that the Board’s application
`of a shift of the burden of production on the issue of obviousness to the patentee
`after the institution decision was incorrect).
`
`3
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-003
`
`

`

` Petitioner Does Not Meet Proof/Production Burdens
` ’309 Not Obvious Over Cited References
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0132405 (“AbiEzzi”), and
` U.S. Patent No. 8,156,528 (“Baumgartner”)
`
` Expert not Credible
` Previously Afforded Little Weight by the Board
` Opinions Unsupported by Factual Citations
`
` No Motivation or Methods to Combine the References
` Secondary Considerations Favor Nonobviousness
`
`4
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-004
`
`

`

`With users often having thousands of songs, instrumental selections or
`other musical or audio content (hereafter, generally denoted as
`"songs" irrespective of the nature of the music or other audible
`content) stored on such a device, there is a considerable challenge to
`providing remote selection of content while minimizing latency in the
`process. User satisfaction is closely related to how quickly and easily
`content may be selected. With current approaches by others, it may
`typically take what feels like a long time for a user to be able to select
`a song remotely from an Apple iPod player when the player is
`connected to a base unit or remote network access device.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309, Specification, col. 2, ln. 3-14.
`
`5
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-005
`
`

`

`Accordingly, faster and more flexible access to the
`content of a portable digital music player is desired.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309, Specification, col. 2, ln. 23-24 and Fig. 8
`
`6
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-006
`
`

`

`To imbue one of ordinary skill in the art with
`knowledge of the invention in suit, when no prior art
`reference or references of record convey or suggest
`that knowledge, is to faii Victim to the insidious effect
`of a hindsight syndrome wherein that which only the
`inventor taught is used against its teacher:
`
`WIL. Gore &Assocs.,inc. v. Gariock, inc, 1’21 F.2d 1540, 1553
`
`(Fed. Cir. 1983) (Emphasis added).
`
`7
`
`0
`
`0
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-007
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,909,309, pgs. 2-6 (References cited by Applicant during prosecution)
`
`8
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-008
`
`

`

` Neither Baumgartner nor AbiEzzi disclose, associated with the media device, “a
`processor unit adapted to execute computer instructions stored in the memory and
`causing the media device to operate in said first mode or said second mode…”
` Neither Baumgartner nor AbiEzzi disclose the processor because Baumgartner
`operating as a first mode device and AbiEzzi operating as a second mode device
`do not yield a “media device operable in first and second modes” and thus do not
`require a processor to operate in both modes.
` No identification of a media source which is a media server
`
`9
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-009
`
`

`

`Remote from Baumgartner (Fig. 4), remote from AbiEzzi (excerpt of Fig. 2), and assortment of remote controls
`
`10
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-010
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,909,309 (Fig. 2A and Excerpt of Fig. 3
`
`11
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-011
`
`

`

`Remote Unit Controller
`(RUG)
`
`Bidirectional
`Control Signa|
`Flow—Remote to
`Ease via RF
`
`Base Unit
`Controller
`BUC
`
`
`
`Uptlflnfll ASH
`
`Modules
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309, Fig. 4
`
`FIG. 4
`
`12
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309, Fig. 4
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-012
`
`

`

`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309, Fig. 1
`
`112
`
`13
`
`US. Patent No. 8,090,309, Fig. 1
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-013
`
`

`

`
`
`14
`
`AbiEzzi (Fig. 2)
`
`AbiEzzi (Fig.2)
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-014
`
`

`

`“It is improper, in determining whether a
`person of ordinary skill would have been
`led to this combination of references,
`simply to “[use] that which the inventor
`taught against its teacher.””
`
`In re Sang Su Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2002)
`(quoting W.L. Gore v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540,
`1553, (Fed.Cir.1983))
`
`15
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-015
`
`

`

`AbiEzzi (Original Fig. 2 and Fig. 2 Annotated by Petitioner)
`
`16
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-016
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309, Fig. 1
`
`17
`
`US. Patent No. 8,090,309, Fig. 1
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-017
`
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309, Claim 9 and Fig. 2A and excerpt of Fig. 1
`
`18
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-018
`
`

`

`_, 312
`
`CONTROL I
`
`REHOTE
`
`19
`
`Baumgartner (Fig. 3)
`
`Baumgartner (Fig. 3)
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-019
`
`

`

` The Board may consider the “…comprehensive record that contains
`the arguments and evidence presented by the parties and…” should
`consider all evidence within “the four corners of that record.” In re
`Watts, 354 F.3d 1362, 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks
`and citation omitted)
`
` No intentional waiver of any argument, unlike explicit waiver during
`argument during In re Nuvasive, Inc., 842 F.3d 1376, 1380 (Fed. Cir.
`2016).
`
`20
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-020
`
`

`

` Petitioner Does Not Meet Proof/Production Burdens
` ’309 Not Obvious Over Cited References
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0132405 (“AbiEzzi”), and
` U.S. Patent No. 8,156,528 (“Baumgartner”)
`
` Expert not Credible
` Previously Afforded Little Weight by the Board
` Opinions Unsupported by Factual Citations
`
` No Motivation or Methods to Combine the References
` Secondary Considerations Favor Nonobviousness
`
`21
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-021
`
`

`

`Ex. 2011, Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review in case IPR2015-01463, at 15,
`FN1 (PTAB Jan. 13, 2016) and Ex. 2012, Decision Denying Institution of Inter
`Partes Review in case IPR2015-01464 at 14, FN2 (PTAB Jan. 13, 2016).
`
`22
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-022
`
`

`

`Ex. 2005 pg. 1-3 (illustrating copying between expert declaration and Petition).
`
`23
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-023
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 24.
`
`24
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-024
`
`

`

`“Common knowledge and common sense,”
`even if assumed to derive from the agency's
`expertise, do not substitute for authority when
`the law requires authority.”
`
`In re Sang Su Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (citing
`Allentown Mack, 522 U.S. at 376, 118 S.Ct. 818).
`
`25
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-025
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 21
`
`26
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-026
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 23-24
`
`27
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-027
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 30-33.
`
`28
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-028
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 30 and Mercer Declaration, pg. 15-16.
`
`29
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-029
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 76-77 and Excerpt of AbiEzzi Fig. 2 as annotated by Petitioner
`
`30
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-030
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 74-75 and Excerpt of AbiEzzi Fig. 2 as annotated by Petitioner
`
`31
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-031
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition pg. 81-91 (Mercer testifying
`that “skilled artisan, POSITA, artisan, one of skill
`in the art, and one of ordinary skill in the art do
`not appear in Mercer’s Declaration)
`
`32
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-032
`
`

`

`W 92
`
`-
`
`Home- Network:
`
`T”
`
`l
`
`9* {n
`CU £11
`
`“:13
`
`n
`KPmdlfli'n-ity Stalin-n
`"
`'
`
`
`i
`a
`
`E
`
`31. AEEnibuibEI‘hniaciaifuhflislfl-hphnhuflia
`
`mhflunniaciatmahrflmi" WWW.
`
`mmdfimfihammwflfiflmmafifl!
`
`fimnflumffljdmbmia'fimhgm"1flisphrflfii1mnmcbflmflunnfi
`
`ErlIlI‘. WM‘M. mmhafimm
`
`dwina]fl:atalhmsamh”hnigaln...iifi"haflinamjidln
`
`
`flujiehmlnlind'llnaailspuzyhflhwflisumufaflumimluffl!
`
`jflmhnhuflnmmflnhmmnmasfllmfliadfi H.
`
`33
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-033
`
`

`

`“[T]he legal determination of [non]obviousness
`may include recourse to logic, judgment, and
`common sense, in lieu of expert testimony.”
`
`Wyers v. Master Lock Co., 616 F.3d 1231, 1239 (Fed. Cir.
`2010). (Emphasis added).
`
`34
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-034
`
`

`

` Petitioner Does Not Meet Proof/Production Burdens
` ’309 Not Obvious Over Cited References
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0132405 (“AbiEzzi”), and
` U.S. Patent No. 8,156,528 (“Baumgartner”)
`
` Expert not Credible
` Previously Afforded Little Weight by the Board
` Opinions Unsupported by Factual Citations
`
` No Motivation or Methods to Combine the References
` Secondary Considerations Favor Nonobviousness
`
`35
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-035
`
`

`

` The problem identified by the ’309 patent is unsolved by the references.
` References are self-contained and highly integrated systems.
` References solve different, unrelated problems.
` Klemets and Barton are red herring arguments addressing totally unrelated art.
`
`36
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-036
`
`

`

`“[R]eferences to “common sense”—whether to supply a
`motivation to combine or a missing limitation—cannot be
`used as a wholesale substitute for reasoned analysis and
`evidentiary support, especially when dealing with a
`limitation missing from the prior art references specified.”
`
`Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc., 832 F.3d 1355, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2016), cert. denied.
`
`37
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-037
`
`

`

`Mercer Declaration, paragraph 25.
`
`38
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-038
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 42 and Mercer Declaration, first sentence of paragraph 26.
`
`39
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-039
`
`

`

`Mercer Declaration, paragraph 26.
`
`40
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-040
`
`

`

`Mercer Declaration, paragraph 27.
`
`41
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-041
`
`

`

`Mercer Deposition, pg. 48-50.
`
`42
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-042
`
`

`

` U.S. Pub. No 2003/0236906 (“Klemets”)
`“This invention relates to streaming media, and particularly to client-side
`caching of streaming media content.”
`Klemets at [0001].
`
` U.S. Patent No. 8,577,205 (“Barton”)
`“The invention relates to the time shifting of television broadcast signals.
`More particularly, the invention relates to the real time capture, storage, and
`display of television broadcast signals and the transfer and playback of said
`television broadcast signals from a DVD player/recorder.”
`Barton, col. 1:16-21
`
`43
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-043
`
`

`

` Petitioner Does Not Meet Proof/Production Burdens
` ’309 Not Obvious Over Cited References
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0132405 (“AbiEzzi”), and
` U.S. Patent No. 8,156,528 (“Baumgartner”)
`
` Expert not Credible
` Previously Afforded Little Weight by the Board
` Opinions Unsupported by Factual Citations
`
` No Motivation or Methods to Combine the References
` Secondary Considerations Favor Nonobviousness
`
`44
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-044
`
`

`

` George was acclaimed and commercially successful.
` George’s success was due to several features, but the “flagship feature” was its
`remote control.
` The remote control solved the problem of “providing remote selection of content
`while minimizing latency in the process.” ’309 patent, col. 2:6-9 as embodied in the
`challenged claims.
`
`45
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-045
`
`

`

`4.5 of 5 stars
`
`Best of Show award at
`Macworld Expo
`
`“Taking the desktop audio system
`several steps beyond a pair of
`speakers and an iPod dock, the
`George promises an enticing
`combination of advanced
`features…”
`
`46
`
`Excerpts from
`Macworld Review (Ex.
`2008, available at
`http://www.macworld
`.com/article/1059553/
`george.html)
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-046
`
`

`

`Take control
`
`The flagship feature of the George is its remote control.
`Unlike most compact stereo systems, which feature a set
`of controls on the system itself and another, more
`limited, set on a remote control, Chestnut Hill has placed
`all the controls—and there’s an wide array—on a
`removable panel. When inserted into the control “dock”
`between the speakers, the remote looks and functions
`as if it’s simply another part of the system. But pull
`gently on the top of the panel and it pops free, offering
`full control—via ZigBee radio-frequency (RF) wireless
`technology—from up to 30 feet away.
`
`Excerpts from Macworld Review (Ex. 2008, available at
`http://www.macworld.com/article/1059553/george.html)
`
`47
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-047
`
`

`

`“The remote is an impressive piece of technology.”
`
`“…none [of the other products on the market] will give
`you exactly what the George offers: a compact but
`great-sounding system with a unique and compelling
`combination of features. You’ll have to decide for
`yourself how much that’s worth.”
`
`48
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-048
`
`

`

`The Lowdown
`
`The George is an impressive package of technology. a great iPod speaker
`
`system. and a very good desktop stereo. It provides excellent sound quality.
`
`is easy to use. and offers unique features not found on any other audio
`
`system we've seen. The fact that it's got room to grow—in terms of both
`
`software and hardware—means it shouldn't be obsolete in a year or two.
`
`49
`
`Excerpts fromMacworldReview (Ex. 2008. available at
`
`http://www.maowor1d.oom/artic]e/ 1059663/ge orge.htrnl)
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-049
`
`

`

`Excerpt from PCMAG.com review (Ex. 2009,
`available online at http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2088451,00.asp)
`
`50
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-050
`
`

`

`Another major draw of the George is its advanced remote control. Basically. the
`
`system is the remote: the entire control panel just clicks into the front of the
`
`dock to recharge. There is an optional (350) remote charger if you wish to. say
`
`keep the controller on a bedside table, as well as an optional cover for the
`
`vacant space left when the remote is off the dock. All of the George's functions,
`
`excluding the subwoofer knob on the back panel. can be operated via the
`
`buttons on the remote. Its range is listed as up to 25 feet. but I had some luck
`
`Excerptfrom PCMAG.comreview (Ex. 2009.
`
`available ordine at http:l/www.pcmag.corn/article2/O.2817.2088461.00.asp)
`
`51
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-051
`
`

`

`Though it's not the most beautiful system out there (it’s a bit plain—looking), the
`
`Chestnut Hill Sound George IS nonetheless the new king of the iPod clock
`
`mountain. Its fantastic sound would be enough to secure this title but when you
`
`throw wireless operation and ease of use into the mix, it's quite simple: The
`
`George kicks butt .
`
`.
`
`. and for $550, it had better!
`
`52
`
`Excerptfrom PCMAG.comreview (Ex. 2009.
`
`available ordine at http:l/www.pemag.eorn/artiele2/O.2817.2088461.00.asp)
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-052
`
`

`

`QCHEsmUTHILLsounD
`
`GEORGE RECDEVI-‘5 EDITOR’S CHOICE AVNARDS FROM
`
`PC MGAZINE, LAPTOP AND LIACILIPE
`
`Newton, Mass, April 27, 2007 -Chestnut Hill Sound’s first product, GEORGE, a
`digital audio system for the iPod, has receh'ed Editor’s Choice Awards from PC
`Magazine, LapTop and Mac | Life. GEORGE was launched in January at CBS and
`Macworld, where it also won a Best of Show award from Mamorld M
`'
`
`“We are delighted with the acclaim that GEORGE has received from the
`marketplace,” said Steve Krampf, CEO of Chestnut Hill Sound. “GEORGE is
`designed to ofifer constnners superb audio and value. With GEORGE, consumers
`can easily add new software upgrada via a USB port and can support future
`hardware updates with optional modules.”
`
`
` Newton, Mus. April 2?. noes—Chest:th Hill Sound‘s first product,GEflRGE, a
`
`system fortheiPn-d, hasreoeiuedEditor's [hoirenn'arth finrnPE
`GEORGE is the first digital music system to combine an iPod playback system,
`-
`-
`“My.
`fullfeature wireless remote, BANDIESS AM/FM radio and alarm system in one
`and Hill: I life;
`was launch-ed III
`at CE and
`product. Chestnut Hill Sound developed GEORGE specifically to work with the W '
`"
`mod mdithnbeencefiedm mmpplepemmme mm_ GEORGES
`where it also won a Best of Show award from Harv-mid Magazine.
`available for purchase at select Apple Stores, wwwapplesom and
`www.chillsounicom for $549 and 3599 MSRP with a remote
`
`stand.
`
`About Chestnut Hill Sound
`Based in Newton Massachusetts, Chestnut Hill Sound is defining digital audio for
`the home by providing breakthrough solutions for a new generation oflisteners.
`The companyr has created the world’s first central platform for the playback of
`digital audio content. Its flagship product GEORGE is the only digital audio
`system that enables users to easily access, full}r control and conveniently listen to
`their iPod music collectiom.
`
`CHS was founded by audio and technology pioneers seasoned in developing and
`producing professional and consumer digital audio g'stems, computer software
`and buildingand managing early-stage technology companies. For more details,
`visit tmwnhillsmmdnom.
`Ex. 2016, Press Release
`For More Information:
`Faith Goldshore
`Media Suategies
`faithgoldshore®chillsoun¢com
`(617) 618-1800 3: mo
`
`Schwartz Communications
`george@schwartz—pr.oom
`
`Mummammsmmmmmm BANDLES mwmdchmt Hmsound
`
`tnr. Appkandimdareuadunarksdnpplecompem,m.regimedintheu5.andothercoumries.
`
`Ex. 2016, Press Release
`
`53
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-053
`
`

`

`@CHESTI‘IUTHILLSOUHD
`
`CHI‘SINUT HILL SOUND WINS BEST 0]? SHOW AT MAC‘WDRID
`
`GEORGE“ DIGITAL AUDI 0 SYSTEM FOR THE IIIE'ODml DEBUI‘S
`
`HANDED, WWGSCQ 1mm 12, ML Chmflm Wm” he
`momeGEORGE digital audio systemforflneinrd, was harmed
`fi‘gflW‘éfiflgflfigmm]mflfiiflflfiflmlfld
`markethnnomdwiflmmawardatflaeaoovfixpo-
`TheMammfidBestofShowAwanls'mpresentedeachyearattheMacwofld
`Conferencefizanaotoflhehestproductsmakingflleirdebut atthe ammaltL'a-de
`Show. Mauvde editorsroam the Macworld Expo slloii-trfloorJ searchingforfloe
`hesthardware andsoftwaredelrutingatthe armualMactradeewnt. Froma
`crmsded. field, the editors selected uproducts, unveiling Bat of Showwinners at
`asmeialpa'esentn‘lion.
`
`We'vefirundawaytosharefloevmhestproducts ondisplayat MammfldExpo
`wit]: Expo attendees," said Jason Snell, VPjEditorial DirectorofMaCi-Jorld. "Our
`Featumdeentn‘lionaflowodustohonortheBatofSJmWWirmers inpthic,
`demonstralingwhyuureditors pcidcedthanasthehesttlleMacmfldl-asto
`
`The Mamvufld Vida: Podoast‘i-‘ideu Podeast #5 features profiles oftheminners
`andsmnehighfightsoffllepresemafimhostedhyEdfiofiallfimcmrJasonSImfl
`mdevsDnectorJnnlhlrymple.
`
`$359359]?mtemfi?$fisprwam?mfimmfifguméhfieby
`iPodhas ampletelychmgailamvmfimmpqfic deEDRGE represtsa
`hetterwayto arpeneneeyouriPodathomehyglmgyoufullcolrtrolowaryour
`music fromyourplaceofoornfort. CHSiscmnmittedto creating digitalst
`Ex. 2015, Press Release (pg. 1)
`innovations that define mast—generation home audio.”
`
`MACWDRID. SAN FRANCHISE, January? 12. 21]}? — Chmtunt Hill Sound line, the
`ofthe GEORGE digital audio system forthe iPod, was harmed
`with a flea ofshowewarfl from the Edllflfi offlmmfl dun-mg the Mam-mid
`Expo & Golfierenee. GEDRGE. was the only product in the iPod audio system
`marleethonoredmflianawardatthesuosfispo.
`
`-
`the
`"w IVE
`fumda“qFtDSh-aldE WIT-[EH
`‘ E
`“1th Expo attendees," said Jason SnellJI WfEditonal Director of Maeworld. "Our
`Featured Presentation allowed us to hmor the Best of Showwirmers in public,
`denunstmting filly our editors picked them as IIan the Mac mfld has to
`Eflir-u
`
`54
`
`GEORGE attends the famed iPod navigation with the industry’s only wirelas
`remote that fully controls iPod functions. GEORGE includes a high quality
`AMfm radio that features the maflcet's only patert pending BANDIESSmtuner
`and a mulli—alann clock system. GEORGE oHers consumers the first digital audio
`system ardmitected for field upgrades forfuture digital audio sources. The
`
`companyalsoannounoeditsfirstmodule: aoonsurner—inslnllahle,no
`
`Ex. 2015, Press Release (pg. 1)
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-054
`
`

`

` The ’309 patent is cited on the face of Ko, but not addressed
`in prosecution history.
` The Ko patent claims a device operating in first or second
`modes to access a variety of content.
` The Ko patent purports to solve the same issue as the ’309
`patent.
`
`55
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-055
`
`

`

`The ’309 Patent
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,702,279 (“Ko”)
`
`“[T]he system may control a remote
`device (personal computer, etc.) which
`can then act as a server of music and
`other files to the base unit…or as a
`streaming audio source.”
`
`“A portable multimedia player…is
`used to wirelessly access and control a
`media server…that is streaming digital
`media by way of a wireless interface to
`a media unit (such as a stereo/
`speakers in the case of streaming
`digital audio).”
`
`The ’309 patent, col. 8:11-15.
`
`Ko, col. 2:17-23.
`
`56
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-056
`
`

`

`First Mode of ’309 (claim 1) vs. Ko (claim 1)
`
`57
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-057
`
`

`

`Second Mode of ’309 (claim 1) vs. Ko (claim 1)
`
`58
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-058
`
`

`

`Claim 9 of ’309 and Ko (structure)
`
`59
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-059
`
`

`

`Claim 9 of ’309 and Ko (first mode)
`
`60
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-060
`
`

`

`Claim 9 of ’309 and Ko (second mode)
`
`61
`
`CHS Ex. 2017-061
`
`