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 IPR2017-00224
`Patent 8,724,622
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`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 Dahod- and Vuori-based petitions ............ 3
`III. The ’622 Patent .................................................................................................. 4
`A. Overview of the ’622 Patent ......................................................................... 4
`B. POSITA ......................................................................................................... 5
`C. Claim construction ........................................................................................ 5
`1. “object field” (Claim 1) ......................................................................... 6
`2. “action field” (Claim 1) ......................................................................... 6
`3. “identifier field” (Claim 1) .................................................................... 7
`4. “source field” (Claim 1) ........................................................................ 7
`5. “destination field” (Claim 1) ................................................................. 7
`6. “display[ing] at least one of the plurality of instant voice
`messages” (claim 16)............................................................................. 7
`IV. Claims 3, 4, 6-8, 10-19, 21-23, and 38 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103
`
`8
`A. Ground 1: Claims 3, 4, 7-8, 11-13, 18, 21-23, and 38 are unpatentable
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Dahod. .................................. 9
`1. Dahod .................................................................................................... 9
`2. Claim 3 ................................................................................................10
`3. Claim 4: “wherein the instant voice message includes an action
`field identifying one of a predetermined set of permitted actions
`requested by the user.” ........................................................................17
`4. Claim 7: “wherein the instant voice message includes a source
`field including a unique identifier associated with at least one of a
`given one of the plurality of instant voice message client systems
`that created the instant voice message and a given one of the
`plurality of users using the given one of the plurality of instant
`voice message client systems.” ...........................................................17
`5. Claim 8: “wherein the instant voice message includes a destination
`field including a unique identifier associated with at least one of a
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`given one of the plurality of instant voice message client systems
`identified as a recipient of the instant voice message and a given
`one of the plurality of users using the given one of the plurality of
`instant voice message client systems.” ................................................19
`6. Claim 11: “[11.1] wherein, upon receipt of an instant voice
`message, the communication platform system determines if there is
`the current connection to one of the plurality of instant voice
`message client systems identified as a recipient of the instant voice
`message, and [11.2] if there is no connection with the one of the
`plurality of instant voice message client system identified as the
`recipient, the instant voice message is stored and [11.3] delivered
`when the one of the plurality of instant voice message client
`systems identified as the recipient re-established a connection.” .......21
`7. Claim 12: “wherein the communication platform system updates
`the connection information for each of the instant voice message
`client systems by periodically transmitting a connection status
`request to the given one of the plurality of instant voice message
`client systems.” ....................................................................................22
`8. Claim 13: “wherein each of the instant voice message client
`systems comprises an instant voice messaging application
`generating an instant voice message and transmitting the instant
`voice message over the packet-switched network to the messaging
`system.” ...............................................................................................24
`9. Claim 18: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes an audio file creation system creating an audio file for the
`instant voice message based on input received via an audio input
`device coupled to the client device.” ...................................................25
`10. Claim 21: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`displays a list of one or more potential recipients for the instant
`voice message.” ...................................................................................27
`11. Claim 22: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`displays an indicia for each of the one or more potential recipients
`indicating whether the potential recipient is currently available to
`receive an instant voice message.” ......................................................27
`12. Claim 23: “wherein the instant voice message application
`generates an audible or visual effect indicating receipt of an instant
`voice message. .....................................................................................28
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`13. Claim 38 ..............................................................................................28
`B. Ground 2: Claims 6, 10, and 14-17 are obvious over Dahod and Hogan ... 32
`1. Hogan ..................................................................................................32
`2. KSR .....................................................................................................33
`3. Claim 6: “wherein the instant voice message includes an identifier
`field including a unique identifier associated with the instant voice
`message.” .............................................................................................34
`4. Claim 10: “a message database storing the instant voice messages
`received from the instant voice message client systems.” ..................36
`5. Claim 14: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes a message database storing the instant voice message,
`wherein the instant voice message is represented by a database
`record including a unique identifier.” .................................................39
`6. Claim 15: “[15.1] wherein the message database includes a
`plurality of instant voice messages recorded by a user of the client
`device and [15.2] instant voice messages received over the packet-
`switched network.” ..............................................................................41
`7. Claim 16: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`displays at least one of the plurality of instant voice messages
`stored in the message database.” .........................................................45
`8. Claim 17: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes a file manager system performing at least one of storing,
`deleting and retrieving the instant voice messages from the
`message database.” ..............................................................................46
`C. Ground 3: Claim 19 is obvious over Dahod and Logan ............................. 48
`1. Logan ...................................................................................................48
`2. KSR .....................................................................................................49
`3. Claim 19: “wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes an encryption/decryption system for encrypting the instant
`voice messages to be transmitted over the packet-switched network
`and decrypting the instant voices messages received over the
`packet-switched network.” ..................................................................49
`V. Mandatory notices under 37 C.F.R. §42.8 .......................................................50
`A. Real parties-in-interest (§42.8(b)(1)) .......................................................... 50
`B. Notice of related matters (§42.8(b)(2)) ....................................................... 51
`
`
`
`- iii -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`C. Lead and back-up counsel with service information (§42.8(b)(3) and
`(4)) ............................................................................................................... 55
`VI. Grounds for standing ........................................................................................55
`VII. Conclusion ........................................................................................................56
`
`
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`Rojas, U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622 (filed July 11, 2012, issued May
`13, 2014).
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622.
`
`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).
`
`
`
`- v -
`
`

`
`Exhibit
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`Description
`
`Clarke et al., Experiments with packet switching of voice traffic, IEE
`Proceedings, G - Electronic Circuits and Systems, Vol. 130, Pt. G,
`N.4, pp. 105-113 (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).
`
`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).
`
`1022
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Fifth Edition.
`
`1023
`
`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.
`
`
`
`- vi -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`This exhibit list covers two inter partes review petitions being filed against
`
`the ’622 patent. Not all exhibits are used in each petition, but all are used in the
`
`single declaration that supports both petitions.
`
`
`
`- vii -
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`The Examiner erroneously issued U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622. (Ex. 1001, “the
`
`’622 Patent.”) The ’622 Patent is directed to methods, systems and programs “for
`
`instant voice messaging over a packet-switched network…” (’622 Patent,
`
`Abstract.) In the Notice of Allowance dated March 6, 2014, the Examiner stated
`
`the claims were allowable over the art cited in this Petition, Dahod, because the
`
`Examiner wrongly believed: “applicant’s instant voice messaging system that has
`
`an object field including a digitized audio file, nor does the instant voice
`
`messaging system include displaying a list of recipients for an instant voice
`
`message.” (Ex. 1002, ’622 Prosecution History, p.41.) However, these limitations
`
`were both known and broadly used in similar instant messaging systems –
`
`including Dahod’s. The Examiner apparently did not understand that the “object
`
`field including a digitized audio file” was rendered obvious in view of Dahod,
`
`where Dahod states that “the new [voice instant message] VIM may optionally
`
`include or attach the original VIM.” (Ex. 1009, Dahod, [0090].)
`
`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. 8,724,622
`Identification of challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))
`
`II.
`
`Identification of challenge and statement of relief requested
`A.
`Petitioner respectfully requests inter partes review and cancellation of
`
`challenged claims based on seven grounds in two petitions as follows:
`
`Petition 2 (the current petition):
`Ground
`References
`
`1
`
`2
`3
`
`Dahod1, 2
`
`Dahod and Hogan3
`Dahod and Logan4
`
`Claims Challenged
`Basis
`§ 103 3, 4, 7-8, 11-13, 18, 21-
`23, and 38
`§ 103 6, 10, and 14-17
`§ 103 19
`
`
`
`
`1 During prosecution of U.S. Pat. No. 7,535,890, a patent to which the ’622
`
`Patent claims priority, the Patentee did submit a §1.131 affidavit alleging a
`
`conception date before August 15, 2003. (’890 Prosecution History, 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.
`
`2 Dahod (Ex. 1009) was filed on August 1, 2002, and is prior art under
`
`§102(e).
`
`3 Hogan (Ex. 1010) was issued on April 8, 1997, and is prior art under
`
`§102(b).
`
`4 Logan (Ex. 1011) was issued on March 24, 1998, and is prior art under
`
`§102(b).
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`1
`
`Petition 1 (co-pending petition):
`Claims Challenged
`Basis
`Ground
`References
`Vuori5 and the SMS Specification
`§ 103 3, 4, 6-8, 11-13, 18, and
`(“SMSS”)6
`21-23
`Vuori, the SMSS, and Holtzberg7 § 103 10 and 14-17
`8 § 103 19
`
`2
`
`3
`
`Vuori, the SMSS, and Väänänen
`
`Vuori
`
`4
`
`
`§ 103 38
`
`B. Meaningful distinction between Dahod- and Vuori-based petitions
`
`As can be seen, none of the prior art overlaps between the Petitions. Both
`
`Petitions should be instituted because there are meaningful distinctions between
`
`Vuori and Dahod. (Ex. 1003, ForysDec. ¶331.)
`
`
`5 Vuori (Ex. 1005) published on October 10, 2002, and is prior art under §
`
`102(b).
`
`6 SMSS (Ex. 1006) published on August 16, 2000, and is prior art under §
`
`102(b).
`
`7 Holtzberg (Ex. 1007) issued on September 23, 2003, and is prior art under
`
`§102(e).
`
`8 Väänänen (Ex. 1008) was filed on August 8, 2001, and is prior art under §
`
`102(e).
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`For example, Dahod better teaches the “object field including a digitized
`
`audio file” recited in independent claim 3. Specifically, Dahod explicitly discloses
`
`that a “new [voice instant message] VIM may optionally include or attach the
`
`original VIM.” (Dahod, [0090].)
`
`Vouri was not cited in an office action against the ’622 Patent during
`
`prosecution and is not susceptible to a potential §325(d) attack.
`
`The Board should institute both the Dahod and Vuori Grounds.
`
`III. The ’622 Patent
`
`A. Overview of the ’622 Patent
`
`The ’622 Patent is directed to methods, systems and programs “for instant
`
`voice messaging over a packet-switched network…” (’622 Patent, Abstract.)
`
`As illustrated in FIG. 2, reproduced below, the ’622 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., 4:66-
`
`5:10) The selected recipient[s] can play the audible instant voice message. (Id.)
`
`The server in the ’622 Patent comprises a “client manager” that provides
`
`“contact presence (connection) information and message scheduling and delivery”
`
`for the connected recipient[s]. (Id., 14:67-15:3.) For example, when the server
`
`receives an instant voice message, if the recipient is not connected to the server
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`(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., 16:35-
`
`40.)
`
`As explained in greater detail below, the ’622 Patent is merely an obvious
`
`combination of elements that were known in the art.
`
`B.
`
`POSITA
`
`With respect to the ’622 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. ¶30.)
`
`C. Claim construction
`
`Claim terms of the ʼ622 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). Under BRI, claim
`
`terms are given their ordinary and customary meaning as understood by one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art, unless the patentee “demonstrate[s] an intent to deviate
`
`from the ordinary and accustomed meaning of a claim term by including in the
`
`specification expressions of manifest exclusion or restriction, representing a clear
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`disavowal of claim scope.” In re Am. Acad. Of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1365
`
`(Fed. Cir. 2004).9
`
`1.
`
`“object field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the object field is a block of
`
`data being carried by the message object, which may be, for example, a digitized
`
`instant voice message.” (’622 Patent, 14:37-40.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “object field” means “a field
`
`containing a block of data carried in an instant voice message.” (ForysDec. ¶108.)
`
`2.
`
`“action field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the action field is selected from
`
`a list of permitted actions, which among other actions includes: connect,
`
`disconnect, subscribe, unsubscribe, and post message.” (’622 Patent, 14:7-10
`
`(emphasis added)10.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “action field” means “a
`
`message field identifying a permitted action.” (ForysDec. ¶110.)
`
`
`9 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.
`
`10 Unless otherwise noted, any emphasis in a citation has been added.
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`3.
`
`“identifier field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the ID field represents a unique
`
`identifier for the message object.” (’622 Patent, 14:17-19.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “identifier field” means “a
`
`message field including a unique identifier for the message.” (ForysDec. ¶112.)
`
`4.
`
`“source field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the source field is a globally
`
`unique identifier (‘GUID’) that uniquely identifies the sender of the message.”
`
`(’622 Patent, 14:19-21.)
`
`116. Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “source field” means
`
`“a message field identifying the sender of the message.” (ForysDec. ¶114.)
`
`5.
`
`“destination field” (Claim 1)
`
`The ’622 Patent provides that the “content of the destination field is a GUID
`
`of an intended IVM recipient of the instant voice message.” (’622 Patent, 14:36-
`
`37.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent the term “destination field” means “a
`
`message field identifying the recipient of the message.” (ForysDec. ¶116.)
`
` “display[ing] at least one of the plurality of instant voice
`6.
`messages” (claim 16)
`
`Claim 16 recites, “wherein the instant voice messaging application displays
`
`at least one of the plurality of instant voice messages stored in the message
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`database.” The ’622 Patent does not provide a clear definition of this claim
`
`element. However, the ’622 Patent describes that a “display device 216 is
`
`connected to the IVM client 208 to display instant voice messages recorded and/or
`
`received by a user of the IVM client 208.” (’622 Patent, 7:15-17.) The ’622 Patent
`
`also provides that the “user can select the instant voice message from a listing of
`
`available instant voice messages displayed on the IVM client 208.” (’622 Patent,
`
`13:4-7.) A listing of available voice messages would include information
`
`identifying each voice message, for example a time received, sender, or message
`
`title. (ForysDec. ¶117.)
`
`Thus, in the context of the ’622 Patent “display[ing] at least one of the
`
`plurality of instant voice messages” means “displaying the content or identifying
`
`information of at least one of the plurality of instant voice messages.” (ForysDec.
`
`¶118.)
`
`IV. Claims 3, 4, 6-8, 10-19, 21-23, and 38 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.
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`A. Ground 1: Claims 3, 4, 7-8, 11-13, 18, 21-23, and 38 are
`unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Dahod.
`
`Dahod teaches or suggests each feature recited by claims 3, 4, 7-8, 11-13,
`
`18, 21-23, and 38.
`
`1.
`
`Dahod
`
`Like the ’622 Patent, Dahod is directed to instant messaging systems
`
`including voice messages delivered over a mobile communications network.
`
`Dahod
`
`teaches “[a]dvanced communications
`
`features …
`
`in a mobile
`
`communications network having at least one mobile switching center and at least
`
`one mobile station subsystem.” (Dahod, Abstract.) For example, Dahod provides
`
`that “[d]ata calls typically make use of the Internet, which is an example of a
`
`packet-switching medium.” (Id., [0020].) Dahod additional teaches, among other
`
`things, that “[w]hen a user logs on to an IM service, the software lets a server
`
`know that the user is available to receive messages. To send a message to someone
`
`else, the user begins by selecting that person’s name, usually from a contact list the
`
`user has built.” (Dahod, [0028].)
`
`As illustrated in FIG. 4, reproduced below, Dahod provides “an example of a
`
`push to talk feature.” (Id., [0046].) Dahod continues, a “user 510 indicates that a
`
`push to talk session should commence with another user 515 (step 2010). …
`
`IMG 520 responds to the interpretation by establishing a voice connection to MS
`
`512 of user 510 and another voice connection to MS 517 of user 515 (step 2015).
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`One or both of the voice connections may rely on … Internet based
`
`communications technology such as voice over IP...” (Id.)
`
`
`
`(Dahod, FIG. 4)
`
`
`
`
`2.
`
`Claim 3
`
`a)
`
`[3.P]: “A system”
`
`Dahod discloses an “enhanced mobile communications system” which
`
`“may include a half-duplex mobile communications session (e.g., walkie-talkie
`
`style) between a first conventional MS and a second conventional MS, and/or an
`
`instant voice message system.” (Dahod, [0043].) Thus, Dahod teaches a system.
`
`(ForysDec. ¶334.)
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`[3.1]: “a network interface connected to a packet-
`b)
`switched network”
`
`Dahod provides that “[d]ata calls typically make use of the Internet, which is
`
`an example of a packet-switching medium.” (Dahod, [0020]; ForysDec. ¶335.) For
`
`example, Dahod provides that:
`
`FIG. 2 shows in more detail the signaling and user traffic interfaces
`between a [Base Station] BS 107 and an [Mobile Switching Center]
`MSC 110 in a CDMA mobile network. The BS 107 communicates
`signaling information using an SS7-based interface for controlling
`voice and data circuits known as the “A1” interface. An interface
`known as “A2” carries user traffic (such as voice signals) between
`the switch component 204 of the MSC and the BS 107. An interface
`known as “A5” is used to provide a path for user traffic for circuit-
`switched data calls (as opposed to voice calls) between the source BS
`and the MSC.
`(Dahod, [0018].) The network interfaces between a base station and a mobile
`
`switching center are further illustrated in FIG. 2, reproduced and annotated below.
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`
`
`
`(Dahod, FIG. 2, annotated.) As shown, Dahod’s “A5” interface is used to provide a
`
`path for user traffic for circuit-switched data calls from a base station to a mobile
`
`switching center. (ForysDec. ¶337.) Thus, Dahod describes network interfaces
`
`between a base station and a mobile switching center, as claimed. (ForysDec.
`
`¶336.) Therefore, Dahod teaches or suggests a network interface connected to a
`
`packet-switched network. (ForysDec. ¶337.)
`
`[3.2]: “a messaging system communicating with a
`c)
`plurality of instant voice message client systems via the
`network interface;”
`
`FIG. 4, reproduced below, and FIG. 12 of Dahod illustrate the “use of
`
`[Simple IP protocol] SIP to initiate multiple two party calls to the Softswitch.”
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`(Dahod, [0085].) Dahod’s Softswitch then “establishes communication with the
`
`MSC via SS7. … Although the call flow described assumes that the VIM group
`
`can be handled on a single [Internet media gateway mechanism] IMG, multiple
`
`IMGs may be used with (voice over IP) VoIP bearer between them (not shown for
`
`simplicity).” (Id.)
`
`
`(Dahod, FIG. 4.) Thus, Dahod describes how its system provides communications
`
`between multiple instant voice messaging system clients. (ForysDec. ¶340.)
`
`Therefore, Dahod teaches or suggests this limitation. (ForysDec. ¶341.)
`
`[3.3]: “a communication platform system maintaining
`d)
`connection information for each of the plurality of instant
`voice message client systems indicating whether there is a
`current connection to each of the plurality of instant voice
`message client systems”
`
`Dahod teaches or suggests a communication platform system (i.e., central
`
`server) maintaining connection information for each of the plurality of instant
`
`voice message client systems indicating whether there is a current connection to
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`each of the plurality of instant voice message client systems (i.e., tracks which
`
`users are online). (ForysDec. ¶342.) For example, Dahod provides that:
`
`According to the peer-to-peer approach (used by, e.g., ICQ), a
`central server keeps track of which users are online and the users’
`unique Internet Protocol (IP) addresses. (An IP address identifies a
`computer, which allows the computer to send and receive data via the
`Internet.) After a user logs on, the server provides the user’s
`computer with the IP addresses of each other user on the user’s
`contact list who is currently logged on.
`(Dahod, [0030].) In view of the foregoing, Dahod describes how its central
`
`server keeps track of the client systems that are currently connected and online.
`
`(ForysDec. ¶343.) Therefore, Dahod teaches or suggests this limitation. (ForysDec.
`
`¶344.)
`
`[3.4.1]: “wherein the messaging system receives an
`e)
`instant voice message from one of the plurality of instant
`voice message client systems”
`
`Dahod teaches or suggests wherein the messaging system receives an instant
`
`voice message from one of the plurality of instant voice message client systems.
`
`(ForysDec. ¶345.) For example, Dahod describes the transmission of an instant
`
`voice message from one user to another, namely:
`
`A user 510 indicates that a push to talk session should commence with
`another user 515 (step 2010). …One or both of the voice connections
`may rely on… Internet based communications technology such as
`voice over IP or Internet multicasting, through another IMG such as
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`IMG 550. … When one of the users 510, 515 signals a switch to talk
`mode (step 2030), e.g., by pressing a handset key or by starting to
`speak, IMG 520 causes the voice signal from the user to be
`transmitted to the other users in the session (step 2035), and ignores
`voice signals from the other users (step 2040) so that only one user
`can speak at a time. If Internet multicasting is used, the voice signal
`from the user is distributed in packets through the Internet to
`corresponding IMGs.
`(Dahod, [0046].) The foregoing is further illustrated in FIG. 4, reproduced below.
`
`
`(Dahod, FIG. 4.) In light of the foregoing, Dahod describes the transmission of an
`
`instant voice message from one user to another over a packet-based network.
`
`(ForysDec. ¶346.) Thus, Dahod teaches or suggests wherein the messaging system
`
`receives an instant voice message from one of the plurality of instant voice
`
`message client systems. (ForysDec. ¶347.)
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,724,622
`[3.4.2]: “wherein the instant voice message includes
`f)
`an object field including a digitized audio file”
`
`An object field is “a field containing a block of data carried in an instant
`
`voice message.” (§III.C.1.) In Dahod, the object field is rendered obvious by a
`
`voice instant message (“VIM”) that includes or attaches an original VIM. (Dahod,
`
`[0090-0091]; ForysDec. ¶348.) Unfortunately, during the prosecution of the ’622
`
`Patent, the Examiner considered U.S. Pat. No. 7,372,826 (the patent granted based
`
`on Dahod) and stated in the ’622 Patent’s Notice for Allowance that “[n]either
`
`does the prior art teach applicant’s instant voice messaging system that has an
`
`object field including a digitized audio file, nor does the instant voice messaging
`
`system include displaying a list of recipients for an instant voice message.” (Ex.
`
`1002, ’622 Prosecution History, p.41.) However, the Examiner overlooked key
`
`elements of