Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00222
`Patent 8,243,723
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`I.
`II.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1
`Identification of challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)) .......................................... 2
`A. Identification of challenge and statement of relief requested ....................... 2
`B. Meaningful distinction between Vuori and Stubbs ....................................... 3
`III. The ’723 Patent .................................................................................................. 4
`A. Overview of the ’723 Patent ......................................................................... 4
`B. POSITA ......................................................................................................... 5
`C. Claim construction ........................................................................................ 6
`1. “intercom mode” (Claims 4, 6, and 8) .................................................. 6
`IV. Claims 1-8 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 ........................................... 6
`A. Ground 1: Claim 1 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
`obvious over Vuori. ...................................................................................... 7
`1. Vuori ...................................................................................................... 7
`2. Claim 1 .................................................................................................. 8
`B. Ground 2: Claims 2-7 are obvious over Vuori and Malik .......................... 17
`1. Malik....................................................................................................17
`2. KSR .....................................................................................................19
`3. Claim 2: “wherein the instant voice message includes one or more
`files attached to an audio file” .............................................................21
`4. Claim 3: “controlling a method of generating the instant voice
`message based upon the connectivity status of said one or more
`recipient” .............................................................................................22
`5. Claim 4: “wherein said method of generating said instant voice
`message is selected from a group comprising a record mode and an
`intercom mode” ...................................................................................25
`6. Claim 5: “wherein said record mode is selected as a default when
`at least one recipients are unavailable” ...............................................27
`7. Claim 6: “wherein said intercom mode is selected as a default
`when at least one recipients are available” .........................................28
`8. Claim 7: “wherein said record mode comprises the steps of: [7.1]
`recording the instant voice message; [7.2] receiving a stop
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`indicator; and [7.3] transmitting the recorded instant voice message
`after the receipt of said stop indicator” ...............................................29
`C. Ground 3: Claim 8 is obvious over Vuori, Malik, and Lerner ................... 34
`1. Lerner ..................................................................................................34
`2. KSR .....................................................................................................35
`3. Claim 8: “wherein said intercom mode comprises the steps of:
`[8.1] buffering each of a plurality of successive portions of the
`instant voice as the instant message is recorded; [8.2] transmitting
`from each successive buffered portion; and [8.3] delivering each
`successive portion to the recipients wherein the recipients audibly
`playing each successive portion as it is delivered.” ............................37
`D. Ground 4: Claims 1-7 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
`obvious over Stubbs and Abburi. ................................................................ 43
`1. Stubbs ..................................................................................................43
`2. Abburi ..................................................................................................44
`3. KSR .....................................................................................................45
`4. Claim 1 ................................................................................................47
`5. Claim 2 ................................................................................................58
`6. Claim 3 ................................................................................................60
`7. Claim 4 ................................................................................................63
`8. Claim 5 ................................................................................................65
`9. Claim 6 ................................................................................................67
`10. Claim 7 ................................................................................................70
`E. Ground 5 – Claim 8 is obvious over Stubbs, Abburi, and Lerner .............. 73
`1. Claim 8 ................................................................................................73
`V. Mandatory notices under 37 C.F.R. §42.8 .......................................................75
`A. Real parties-in-interest (§42.8(b)(1)) .......................................................... 75
`B. Notice of related matters (§42.8(b)(2)) ....................................................... 75
`C. Lead and back-up counsel with service information (§42.8(b)(3) and
`(4)) ............................................................................................................... 79
`VI. Grounds for standing ........................................................................................79
`VII. Conclusion ........................................................................................................80
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`Exhibit
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`Rojas, U.S. Patent No. 8,243,723 (earliest priority date December 18,
`2003; filed March 4, 2009; issued August 14, 2012).
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 8,243,723.
`
`Declaration of Leonard J. Forys, Ph.D.
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Leonard J. Forys, Ph.D.
`
`Vuori, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0146097 (filed
`July 23, 2001, published October 10, 2002).
`
`SMSS, Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UTMS);
`Technical realization of the Short Message Service (SMS) (3G TS
`23.040 version 3.5.0 Release 1999) (published on August 16, 2000).
`
`Holtzberg, U.S. Patent No. 6,625,261 (filed December 20, 2000,
`issued September 23, 2003).
`
`Väänänen, U.S. Patent No. 7,218,919 (filed August 8, 2001, issued
`May 15, 2007).
`
`Dahod et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0022208
`(filed on August 1, 2002, published February 5, 2004).
`
`Hogan et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,619,554 (filed June 8, 1994, issued
`April 8, 1997).
`
`Logan et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,732,216 (filed October 2, 1996, issued
`March 24, 1998).
`
`Peersman et al., The Global System for Mobile Communications
`Short Message Service, IEEE Personal Communications (June 2000).
`
`SMS Forum, SMPP v3.4 Protocol Implementation guide for GSM /
`UMTS, Version 1.0 (May 30, 2002).
`
`
`
`- iii -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`Description
`
`Clarke et al., Experiments with packet switching of voice traffic, IEE
`Proceedings G - Electronic Circuits and Systems, Vol.130, Pt. G, No.
`4, pp. 105-13 (August 1983).
`
`Oouchi et al., Study on Appropriate Voice Data Length of IP Packets
`for VoIP Network Adjustment, Proceedings of the IEEE Global
`Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM) 2002, V. 2, Taipei,
`Taiwan, 2002, pp. 1618–1622.
`
`Lotito et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,625,081 (filed November 30, 1982,
`issued November 25, 1986).
`
`Pershan, U.S. Patent No. 5,260,986 (filed April 23, 1991, issued
`November 9, 1993).
`
`Old Version of AOL Instant Messenger 2.1 Download, retrieved
`from http://www.oldapps.com/aim.php?old_aim=4#screenshots.
`
`Malik, Patent Publication No. 2003/0219104 (filed August 19, 2002,
`published November 27, 2003).
`
`Staack et al., WO Patent Publication No. 02/07396 (filed July 13,
`2000, published January 24, 2002).
`
`Lerner et al., U.S. Patent No. 6,192,395 (filed December 17, 1999,
`issued February 20, 2001).
`
`Stubbs, WO Patent Publication No. 99/63773 (filed June 3, 1999,
`published December 9, 1999).
`
`Abburi, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0147512 (filed
`on February 1, 2002, published August 7, 2003).
`
`Exhibit
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890.
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`

`
`Exhibit
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`Description
`
`Day et al., A Model for Presence and Instant Messaging, Network
`Working Group, RFC 2778, pp. 1-17 (February 2000).
`
`International Telecommunication Union, General Aspects of Digital
`Transmission Systems, Terminal Equipments, Pulse Code
`Modulation (PCM) of Voice Frequencies, ITU-T Recommendation
`G.711., pp. 1-10 (ITU 1993).
`
`Gayomali, C., “The text message turns 20: A brief history of SMS,”
`The Week,
`December
`3,
`2012,
`retrieved
`from
`http://www.theweek.com/articles/469869/text-message-turns-20-
`brief-history-sms.
`
`
`
`- v -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`The Examiner erroneously issued U.S. Patent No. 8,243,723 (Ex. 1001, “the
`
`’723 Patent.”). The ’723 Patent is directed to an instant voice messaging system
`
`(and method) for delivering instant messages over a packet-switched network…”
`
`(’723 Patent, Abstract.) In the Notice of Allowance dated March 30, 2012, the
`
`Examiner stated the claims were allowable because the Examiner wrongly believed
`
`that the prior art failed to disclose: “applicant’s method of instant voice messaging
`
`that associates a subset of nodes with a client and transmits a signal to a client that
`
`includes a list of the recorded connectivity status for each of the nodes in the sub-
`
`set corresponding to the client…” (Ex. 1002, ’723 Prosecution History, p. 17.)
`
`However, this limitations was both known and broadly used in similar instant
`
`messaging systems. For example, Vuori describes a short voice message presence
`
`service that monitors presence information, stores the information, and distributes
`
`the information. Additionally, Abburi, submitted herewith as Exhibit 1023,
`
`provides a network where each device receives information indicating which of the
`
`corresponding user’s buddies or contacts are online and available.
`
`In addition, all other limitations of the challenged claims were broadly
`
`applied and known in the industry, and there was nothing novel about the manner
`
`in which those limitations were combined. Accordingly, the Petition should be
`
`granted and trial instituted on all of the challenged claims as set forth below.
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`Identification of challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))
`
`II.
`
`A.
`
`Identification of challenge and statement of relief requested
`
`During prosecution of U.S. Pat. No. 7,535,890, a patent to which the ’723
`
`Patent claims priority, the Patentee did submit a §1.131 affidavit alleging a
`
`conception date before August 15, 2003. (Ex. 1024, ’890 Prosecution History, pp.
`
`89-135.) Even if the affidavit meets §1.131 standards, which it does not, all the
`
`applied references in this Petition are still prior art.
`
`Petitioner respectfully requests inter partes review and cancellation of
`
`challenged claims based on five grounds, as follows:
`
`Ground
`1
`2
`
`References
`Vuori1
`Vuori and Malik2
`
`Basis Claims Challenged
`§ 103 1
`§ 103 2-7
`
`
`1 Vuori (Ex. 1005) published October 10, 2002, and is prior art under
`
`§102(b).
`
`2 Malik (Ex. 1019) filed Aug 19, 2002, and is prior art under §102(e).
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`
`Vuori, Malik, and Lerner3
`Stubbs4 and Abburi5
`Stubbs and Lerner
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`§ 103 8
`§ 103 1-7
`§ 103 8
`
`3
`4
`5
`
`
`B. Meaningful distinction between Vuori and Stubbs
`
`All Grounds should be instituted because there are meaningful distinctions
`
`between Vuori and Stubbs. (Ex. 1003, ForysDec., ¶225.)
`
` Vuori better teaches the “transmitting a signal to a client including a list of
`
`the recorded connectivity status for each of the nodes in the sub-set corresponding
`
`to the client” recited in independent claim 1. For example, Vuori describes a short
`
`voice message presence service that monitors presence information, stores the
`
`information, and distributes the information. (Vuori, [0043].) Meanwhile, Stubbs
`
`provides a more detailed description of the structure and functionality of a packet-
`
`switched network. (See e.g., Stubbs, FIG. 3 and 4:1-5.) The Board should institute
`
`both the Vuori and Stubbs Grounds.
`
`
`3 Lerner (Ex. 1021) issued February 20, 2001, and is prior art under §102(b).
`
`4 Stubbs (Ex. 1022) published December 9, 1999, and is prior art under
`
`§102(b).
`
`5 Abburi (Ex. 1023) filed February 1, 2002, and is prior art under §102(e).
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`III. The ’723 Patent
`
`A. Overview of the ’723 Patent
`
`The ’723 Patent is directed to methods, systems and programs “for instant
`
`voice messaging over a packet-switched network…” (’723 Patent, 4:33-35.)
`
`As illustrated in FIG. 2, reproduced below, the ’723 Patent provides a
`
`plurality of instant voice message (IVM) clients over a packet-switched network.
`
`(Id., 6:61-7:2.) Input is provided at a sending client, one or more recipients are
`
`selected, and the instant voice message is transmitted to the recipients. (Id., 4:60-
`
`5:6) The selected recipient[s] can play the audible instant voice message. (Id.)
`
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`(’723 Patent, FIG. 2.)
`
`
`
`The server in the ’723 Patent comprises a “client manager” that provides
`
`“contact presence (connection) information and message scheduling and delivery”
`
`for the connected recipient[s]. (Id., 14:62-65.) For example, when the server
`
`receives an instant voice message, if the recipient is not connected to the server
`
`(i.e., unavailable), the server temporarily saves the message and delivers the
`
`message when the recipient[s] connects to the server (i.e., available). (Id., 16:27-
`
`35.)
`
`As explained in greater detail below, the ’723 Patent is merely an assembly
`
`of elements that were known in the art.
`
`B.
`
`POSITA
`
`With respect to the ’723 Patent, a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`(POSITA) would have a B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Science,
`
`or an equivalent field as well as at least 3–5 years of academic or industry
`
`experience in communications systems, particularly in messaging systems, data
`
`networks including VoIP and mobile telephony, or comparable industry experience
`
`(ForysDec., ¶31.)
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`C. Claim construction
`
`Claim terms of the ʼ723 Patent are interpreted according to their broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation (BRI) in light of the specification. 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b);
`
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131, 2142 (2016).6
`
`1.
`
` “intercom mode” (Claims 4, 6, and 8)
`
`
`
`The ’723 Patent provides that “[t]he ‘intercom mode’ represents realtime
`
`instant voice messaging.” (’723 Patent, 11:29-30.) Thus, for purposes of this
`
`opinion, under
`
`the BRI standard,
`
`the
`
`term “intercom mode” means
`
`“a mode for transmitting an instant voice message in realtime.” (ForysDec., ¶103.)
`
`In intercom mode, the transmission of the message may begin before the message
`
`is completed (Id.)
`
`IV. Claims 1-8 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103
`
`The Petition and Petitioner’s Declarant Leonard Forys, who has nearly 50
`
`years of experience in the telecommunications industry, demonstrate a reasonable
`
`likelihood that the Petitioner will prevail with respect to each Ground.
`
`
`6 Petitioner reserves the right to present different constructions in another
`
`forum where a different claim construction standard applies. Petitioner further
`
`reserves the right to challenge indefiniteness of all claim terms in litigation.
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`A. Ground 1: Claim 1 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
`obvious over Vuori.
`
`Vuori teaches or suggests each feature recited by independent claim 1.
`
`(ForysDec., ¶104.)
`
`1.
`
`Vuori
`
`Like the ’723 Patent, Vuori is directed to short voice message (SVM) service
`
`method, apparatus, and system. (Vuori, Title.) More specifically, Vuori provides
`
`method for sending a SVM, which is “recorded in the sending terminal and sent to
`
`a SVM service center (SVMSC)” the “second terminal may then commence a
`
`bidirectional communication so that an instant voice message session can be
`
`established.” (Id., Abstract.)
`
`Vuori provides a method “where the sender first determines whether the
`
`intended recipient is available by means of a presence service and the intended
`
`recipient has effectively acquiesced to availability by previously joining a ‘buddy
`
`list’ or otherwise subscribing to the service.” (Id., [0035].)
`
`Vuori’s SVMSC is “able to check the availability of the second terminal by
`
`means 322 for checking such availability.” (Id.) Like the ’723 Patent, if the
`
`“second terminal is available, the SVMSC immediately sends the received voice
`
`message to the second terminal by means 324.” (Vuori, [0050].) If the recipient is
`
`determined unavailable, the voice message “may be stored temporarily in a means
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`326 for storing short voice messages in the SVMC until it is determined that the
`
`second terminal is available.” (Id., [0051].)
`
`2.
`
`Claim 1
`
`[1.P]: “A method for instant voice messaging over a
`a)
`packet-switched network”
`
`Vuori is directed to a method for sending “a short voice message (SVM).”
`
`(Vuori, Abstract.) The SVM is recorded in the sending terminal and sent to a SVM
`
`service center (SVMSC). (Id.) After accepting the receipt of a message, a “second
`
`terminal may then commence a bidirectional communication so that an instant
`
`voice message session can be established” across a packet-switched network. (Id.
`
`(emphasis added7).) For example, Vuori additionally provides that its messaging
`
`system may be carried out over “a packet-based infrastructure via the General
`
`Packet Radio Service
`
`(GPRS) and subsequently
`
`the Universal Mobile
`
`Telecommunications System (UMTS).” (Id., [0039].) Vuori teaches using a
`
`packet-based infrastructure to carry out the bidirectional instant voice messaging
`
`sessions. (ForysDec., ¶108.) Thus, Vuori teaches or suggests this limitation. (Id.,
`
`¶109.)
`
`
`7 Unless otherwise noted, any emphasis in a citation has been added.
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`[1.1]: “monitoring a connectivity status of nodes
`b)
`within the packet-switched network, said connectivity status
`being available and unavailable”
`
`The ’723 Patent acknowledges that monitoring connectivity status within a
`
`packet network was a known concept. (’723 Patent, 2:30-42; §110.)
`
`As illustrated in FIG. 7, reproduced below, Vuori describes an SVM
`
`presence service “adapted to keep track of ‘presence’ of SVM service users and
`
`principals interact with such an adapted system via an SVM presence UA 276 and
`
`an SVM watcher UA 278.” (Vuori, [0046].) Vuori relies on the Internet Standard,
`
`IETF RFC 2778 (Ex. 1025, RFC 2778) entitled “A Model for Presence and Instant
`
`Messaging” dated February 2000. (Vuori, [0043]). Thus, systems providing
`
`presence information were known in the art. (ForysDec., ¶70 and ¶111.)
`
`(Vuori, FIG. 7.)
`
`
`
`FIG. 10, reproduced below, illustrates that Vuori’s presence information
`
`comprises a number of elements, “[e]ach such element comprises a status marker
`
`298, 300 (which might convey information such as on-line/off-line/busy/away/do
`
`not disturb), … and optional other presence markups 306, 308.” (Vuori, [0047].)
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`Vuori continues, “[s]tatus 298, 300 is further defined, as guided by the model to
`
`have at least two states that interact with instant message delivery—open
`
`[available], in which short voice messages will be accepted, and closed
`
`[unavailable], in which short voice messages will not be accepted.” (Id., [0047];
`
`ForysDec., ¶83.) FIG. 10 is a copy of Fig. 5 of the aforementioned RFC 2778.
`
`(ForysDec., ¶112.)
`
`(Vuori, FIG. 10.)
`
`
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`The foregoing portions and Figures illustrate how Vuori tracked the
`
`
`
`presence, or connectivity status, of its users. (ForysDec., ¶112.) By tracking
`
`whether a user was on-line/off-line/busy/away/do not disturb, these presence
`
`markers indicate whether the user is connected to the packet-switched network.
`
`(Vuori, [0047]; ForysDec., ¶112.) Further, status 298, 300 “open” and “closed”
`
`mean available and unavailable, respectively. (Vuori, [0047]; ForysDec., ¶112.)
`
`Thus, Vuori teaches or suggests this limitation. (ForysDec., ¶113.)
`
`[1.2]: “recording the connectivity status for each of
`c)
`the nodes”
`
`Vuori provides that its SVM presence service “serves to accept SVM
`
`presence information e.g. on a line 250, store it, and distribute it, e.g., on a line
`
`252. An SVM presentity 254 is a client that provides the presence information on
`
`the line 250 to be stored and distributed.” (Vuori, [0043].) Vuori explicitly teaches
`
`storing the presence information. (ForysDec., ¶115.) Vuori thus teaches or suggests
`
`this limitation. (Id., ¶116.)
`
`d)
`
`[1.3]: “associating a sub-set of the nodes with a client”
`
`The term “client” means “a computing device capable of transmitting voice
`
`data over a network.” (ForysDec., ¶117.) Thus, the ’723 Patent “contact list” is an
`
`example of such an association. (Id.) Vuori teaches or suggests associating a sub-
`
`set of the nodes with a client through his disclosure of a “buddy list.” (Id., ¶118.)
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`For example, Vuori provides that in an instant messaging context, “the
`
`sender first determines whether the intended recipient is available by means of a
`
`presence service and the intended recipient has effectively acquiesced to
`
`availability by previously joining a ʻbuddy list’ or otherwise subscribing to the
`
`service.” (Vuori, [0035].)
`
`Further, as illustrated in FIG. 3, reproduced below and annotated to highlight
`
`the plurality of clients and sub-set of nodes, Vuori provides that “GSM Network
`
`Subsystem 56… is connected to a base station subsystem (BSS) 68 as well other
`
`base station subsystems 70 for communication with a plurality of mobile stations,
`
`the figure showing only one mobile station 72 for convenience.” (Vuori, [0037].)
`
`Vuori continues, “[t]he BSS 68 includes one or more base transceiver stations
`
`(BTS) 74…” (Id.)
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`
`
`(Vuori, FIG. 3, annotated.)
`
`
`
`The illustrated mobile stations are computing devices capable of transmitting
`
`voice data over a network. (ForysDec., ¶120.) So, the illustrated mobile stations are
`
`clients, as recited in claim 1. Thus, Vuori teaches or suggests this limitation. (Id.)
`
`[1.4]: “transmitting a signal to a client including a list
`e)
`of the recorded connectivity status for each of the nodes in
`the sub-set corresponding to the client”
`
`Vuori provides that in an instant messaging context, “the sender first
`
`determines whether the intended recipient is available by means of a presence
`
`service and the intended recipient has effectively acquiesced to availability by
`
`previously joining a ‘buddy list’ or otherwise subscribing to the service.” (Vuori,
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`[0035].) Vuori teaches a buddy list that would have been available to a potential
`
`sender. (ForysDec., ¶124.) According to Vuori, when a user joins a buddy list, he
`
`or she acquiesces to availability. (Id.) More specifically, by joining Vuori’s buddy
`
`list, a user allows his/her presence information (i.e., connectivity) to be transmitted
`
`to all of the nodes associated with that user’s buddy list. (Id.)
`
`Vuori tracks presence information including information such as whether a
`
`user is on-line/off-line/busy/away/do not disturb. (Vuori, [0047]; §IV.A.2.b.)
`
`Vuori additionally provides:
`
`An SVM presence service 248 serves to accept SVM presence
`information e.g. on a line 250, store it, and distribute it, e.g., on a line
`252. An SVM presentity 254 is a client that provides the presence
`information on the line 250 to be stored and distributed. Another set
`of clients called SVM watchers such as an SVM watcher 256 in FIG.
`7, receives SVM presence information on the line 252 from the SVM
`presence service 248.
`
`(Id., [0043].)
`
`
`
`Vuori
`
`teaches distributing
`
`the presence
`
`information. (Dec., ¶125.)
`
`Distributing connectivity information “on a line” means to distribute the
`
`information to other users connected to the network. (Id.) Vuori’s data
`
`transmission would have be transmitted over an electrical signal. (Id.) Thus, Vuori
`
`teaches or suggests this limitation. (Id., ¶126.)
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`[1.5]: “receiving an instant voice message having one
`f)
`or more recipients”
`
`Vuori provides that the SVMSC includes “means 320 for receiving an SVM
`
`from the first terminal spoken by the first user intended by the first user for
`
`delivery to the second user at the second terminal.” (Vuori, [0050].) Further, Vuori
`
`provides that a user manipulates “the menu key to select one or more intended
`
`recipients.” (Id., [0033].) Vuori teaches that its SVMSC receives a short voice
`
`message from a first terminal. (ForysDec., ¶128.) Thus, Vuori teaches or suggests
`
`this limitation. (Id., ¶129.)
`
`[1.6]: “delivering the instant voice message to the one
`g)
`or more recipients over a packet-switched network”
`
`Vuori provides that the SVMSC receives an SVM user intended for delivery
`
`to the second user. (Vuori, [0050]; §IV.A.2.f.) Further, Vuori’s system may use
`
`packet-based infrastructure for delivering messages. (Vuori, [0039]; §IV.A.2.a.)
`
`Vuori additionally provides that “[a]ssuming the recipient 32 decides to
`
`accept the SVM, a step 36 is executed in which the short voice message service
`
`center provides delivery of the SVM to the recipient for playback...” (Vuori,
`
`[0035].) The short voice messages are delivered over the packet-switched network.
`
`(ForysDec., ¶132.) Thus, Vuori teaches or suggests this limitation. (Id., ¶133.)
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`[1.7]: “temporarily storing the instant voice message
`h)
`if a recipient is unavailable”
`
`This limitation recites an operation that was used in SMS messaging for
`
`many years prior to the ’723 Patent. (ForysDec., ¶134.) Vuori provides that the
`
`“voice message may be stored temporarily in a means 326 for storing short voice
`
`messages in the SVMC until it is determined that the second terminal is
`
`available.” (Vuori, [0051].) Vuori stores short messages until it is determined that
`
`the second terminal is available means storing the instant voice message if the
`
`recipient is unavailable, as claimed. (ForysDec., ¶135.) Thus, Vuori teaches or
`
`suggests this limitation. (Id., ¶136.)
`
`[1.8]: “delivering the stored instant voice message to
`i)
`the recipient once the recipient becomes available”
`
`This limitation also recites an operation that was used in SMS messaging for
`
`many years prior to the ’723 Patent. (ForysDec., ¶137.) For example, Vuori
`
`provides that the SVMSC “determines the availability of the one or more intended
`
`recipients… [and] may then send the SVM immediately to those intended
`
`recipients who are available and continue attempting to send to those not then
`
`available until they become available...” (Vuori, [0034].) Vuori further discloses
`
`that the “voice message may be stored temporarily in a means 326 for storing short
`
`voice messages in the SVMC until it is determined that the second terminal is
`
`available.” (Id., [0051].) Vuori stores the instant voice message until the user
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`becomes available for a later delivery. (Id., [0035]; ForysDec. ¶¶138-139;
`
`§IV.A.2.h.) Thus, Vuori teaches or suggests this limitation. (ForysDec., ¶140.)
`
`B. Ground 2: Claims 2-7 are obvious over Vuori and Malik
`
`The combination of Vuori and Malik teaches or suggests each feature recited
`
`by claims 2-7. (ForysDec., ¶141.) Combining Vuori and Malik would have been
`
`obvious because the combination would have merely involved combining known
`
`methods to produce predictable results having a reasonable expectation of success.
`
`(Id.)
`
`1. Malik
`
`Malik relates to sending voice instant messages (VIMs). (Malik, Abstract.)
`
`FIG. 3 of Malik, reproduced below, illustrates a voice message delivery system.
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`
`
`
`(Malik, FIG. 3.)
`
`In FIG. 3, voice instant message (“VIM”) client 320 (“client”) of the second
`
`user is the sender, and VIM client 310 (“recipient”) of the first user is the receiver.
`
`(Id., [0025].) VIM clients 310 and 320 communicate with VIM server 330 via the
`
`Internet or some other communication network 325. (Id., [0026].) VIM client 320
`
`receives a request or prompt by the second user to send an instant message to the
`
`first user. (Id., [0032].) After VIM client 320 starts a voice record to generate a
`
`VIM (Id., [0033]-[0034]), VIM client 320 then sends the VIM to VIM server 330.
`
`(Id., [0035].) VIM server 330 stores the VIM in a VIM queue, and if the first user
`
`
`
`- 18 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,243,723
`(i.e., receiver) is available, VIM server 330 delivers the VIM to VIM client 310.
`
`(Id.) If the first user is offline, but later changes from offline to online, VIM server
`
`delivers the stored VIM to VIM client 310 of the first user. (Id., [0036].)
`
`2. KSR
`
`Regarding claim/features 2, 3, 4, and 6 discussed below, a POSITA would
`
`have found it obvious to enhance the system of Vuori by implementing Malik’s
`
`method for including a descriptive caption and the voice recording in an instant
`
`message to aid the recipient in understanding the contents of a voice message.
`
`(Malik, [0034]; ForysDec., ¶146.) Combining Vuori and Malik would have been
`
`obvious to a POSITA because the combination would have merely involved
`
`combining known methods to produce predictable results having a reasonable
`
`expectation of success and each system would continue to function as intended.
`
`See KSR Intern. Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007); (ForysDec., ¶146).
`
`Like the ’723 Patent, both Vuori and Malik are directed to methods and
`
`systems for generating and delivering voice messages. (Vuori, Title; Malik, Title.)
`
`Furthermore, both Vuori and Malik associate terminals, mobile stations, or mobile
`
`devices and seek to provide systems and methods for facilitating instant voice
`
`communications between nodes over a packetized network. (Vuori, [0035]