throbber
PETITIONER
`
`I N T E R P A R T E S R E V I E W C A S E N O .
`
`I P R 2 0 1 6 - 0 1 6 8 8 : U . S . P A T E N T N O . 9 , 3 0 0 , 7 9 2
`
`TWILIO INC.
`TWILIO INC.
`PETITIONER
`

`
`O C T O B E R 2 5 , 2 0 1 7
`
`Twilio Inc., EX 1036
`
`

`

`Instituted Claims
`1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15,
`and 17
`
`Disclaimed Claims
`3, 5, 7, 12, 14, and 16
`
`2
`
`

`

`The only elements in dispute
`
`EX. 1001 at cl. 1
`
`3
`
`

`

`Previous IPRs denied—lack of “notification event”
`
`Paper 10, Decision to Institute at 17
`
`4
`
`

`

`Construction of “notification event”
`
`Paper 10, Decision to Institute at 10
`
`5
`
`

`

`Bennett teaches everything besides “notification events”
`
`Paper 10, Decision to Institute at 19
`
`6
`
`

`

`PO makes four arguments
`
`Paper 15, PO Response at ii
`
`7
`
`

`

`PO’s first argument
`
`Paper 15, PO Response at ii
`
`8
`
`

`

`Bennett teaches “actions”
`
`From Bennett:
`
`Petition at 38; EX 1003 (Bennett) at 15:66-16:1
`
`9
`
`

`

`Bennett teaches “actions”
`
`EX 1003 at 13:1-23, Petition at 38
`
`10
`
`

`

`PO’s expert on “actions”
`
`EX 1035 at 21:12-22, Paper 18 (Reply at 16-17)
`
`11
`
`

`

`PO’s expert on “actions”
`
`EX 1035 at 18:13-23, Paper 18 (Reply at 10)
`
`12
`
`

`

`PO’s expert on “actions”
`
`EX 1035 at 18:24-19:5, Paper 18 (Reply at 10)
`
`13
`
`

`

`Bennett teaches “actions”
`
`Petition at 38; EX 1003 (Bennett) at 15:66-16:1
`
`14
`
`

`

`Bennett teaches “actions”
`
`EX 1003 at 13:1-23, Petition at 38
`
`15
`
`

`

`PO on “actions”
`
`Paper 15, PO Response at 19 and 21.
`
`16
`
`

`

`PO on “actions”
`
`Paper 15, PO Response at 26
`
`17
`
`

`

`Bennett teaches “actions”
`
`From Bennett:
`
`Petition at 38; EX 1003 (Bennett) at 15:66-16:1
`
`18
`
`

`

`Bennett teaches “actions”
`
`EX 1003 at 13:1-23, Petition at 38
`
`19
`
`

`

`Bennett teaches “actions”
`
`Petition at 38-39; EX1003, Fig. 3
`
`20
`
`

`

`Campbell discloses “actions”
`
`Petition at 44.
`
`21
`
`

`

`Campbell discloses “actions”
`
`Petition at 44; EX1004 at [0015]-[0018]
`
`22
`
`

`

`Campbell discloses “notification events”
`
`Paper 10, Decision to Institute at 10
`
`23
`
`

`

`Campbell discloses “notification events”
`
`Petition at 44-47; Reply at 12; EX1004 at [0041]; EX1002 at ¶¶114-118
`
`24
`
`

`

`PO’s expert on “notification events”
`
`EX 1035 at 21:12-22, Paper 18 (Reply at 16-17)
`
`25
`
`

`

`PO’s expert on “notification events”
`
`Reply at 11-12; EX1035 at 21:23-22:16
`
`26
`
`

`

`PO’s second argument
`
`Paper 15, PO Response at ii
`
`27
`
`

`

`Bennett discloses requiring acknowledgment
`
`Paper 10, Decision to Institute at 19.
`
`28
`
`

`

`Bennett discloses requiring acknowledgment
`
`Petition at 38
`
`29
`
`

`

`Bennett discloses requiring acknowledgment
`
`Petition at 38; EX1003 at 12:33-41, 14:29-36
`
`30
`
`

`

`Bennett discloses requiring acknowledgment
`
`Petition at 38-39; EX1003, Fig. 3
`
`31
`
`

`

`Bennett discloses requiring acknowledgment
`
`Petition at 38; EX1003 at 16:1-10
`
`32
`
`

`

`Campbell discloses requiring acknowledgment
`
`Petition at 44-45
`
`33
`
`

`

`Campbell discloses requiring acknowledgment
`
`Petition at 45; EX1004 at [0027]
`
`34
`
`

`

`PO’s third argument
`
`Paper 15, PO Response at iii
`
`35
`
`

`

`Petition: Bennett-Campbell
`
`Petition at i and 4.
`
`36
`
`

`

`Decision: Bennett-Campbell
`
`Paper 10, Decision to Institute at 12 and 23.
`
`37
`
`

`

`Campbell used for “notification event”
`
`Petition at 44 and 50.
`
`38
`
`

`

`Receiving an acknowledgement element
`
`EX 1001 at cl. 1
`
`39
`
`

`

`Transmitting a message and receiving acknowledgement
`
`EX 1001 at cl. 1
`
`40
`
`

`

`PO’s fourth argument
`
`Paper 15, PO Response at iii
`
`41
`
`

`

`Bennett, Campbell, and the ’792 are analogous
`
`Petition at 44; Paper 15, Reply at 3; EX1003 at Abstract; EX1004 at Abstract; EX1002 at ¶¶67-69, 114-118.
`
`42
`
`

`

`Bennett can and would use Campbell’s informative
`message to inform the user why she is receiving a code
`
`Petition at 54; Paper 15, Reply at 4; EX1002 at ¶125
`
`43
`
`

`

`Combining Bennett and Campbell would have been
`obvious to a POSA
`
`Paper 15, Reply at 5; EX1002 at ¶68
`
`44
`
`

`

`Combining Bennett and Campbell would have been
`obvious to a POSA
`
`Paper 15, Reply at 5; Petition at 55-56; EX1002 at ¶130; EX1003 at 16:39-43
`
`45
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket