UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. AND
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`IMAGE PROCESSING TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`____________________
`
`Case No. IPR2017-00353
`U.S. Patent No. 8,983,134
`____________________
`
`PETITIONER’S DEMONSTRATIVES FOR ORAL HEARING
`(EXHIBIT 1012)
`
`
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG EXHIBIT 1012
`Samsung v. Image Processing Techs.
`
`
`
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. AND
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`IMAGE PROCESSING TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`____________________
`
`Case No. IPR2017-00353
`U.S. Patent No. 8,983,134
`____________________
`
`PETITIONER’S DEMONSTRATIVES FOR ORAL HEARING
`(EXHIBIT 1012)
`
`
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG EXHIBIT 1012
`Samsung v. Image Processing Techs.
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`U.S. PATENT No. 8,983,134
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc.,
`CASE IPR2017-00353
`v.
`Image Processing Technologies, LLC,
`Oral Argument
`February 21, 2018
`
`Samsung’s Demonstrative Exhibits
`
`Petitioners,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`1
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`Overview of the ’134 Patent
`
`Claim Construction
`
`Instituted Grounds for Review
`
`Gilbert + Hashima
`Ueno + Gilbert
`
`2
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`Overview of the ’134 Patent
`
`Claim Construction
`
`Instituted Grounds for Review
`
`Gilbert + Hashima
`Ueno + Gilbert
`
`3
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`The 134 Pawn!
`
`The ’134 Patent
`
`Patent N0.:
`Date of Patent:
`
`IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD
`
`Filed:
`
`Mar. 17, 2014
`
`US 8,983,134 B2
`*Mar. 17, 2015
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`(30:)
`
`Foreign Application Priority Data
`
`Jul. 26, 1996
`
`(FR) ...................................... 96 09420
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`4
`
`4
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent, Claim 1
`
`1[pre]
`1[a]
`1[b]
`1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`5
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent, Claim 2
`
`’134 Patent, Claim 2
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`2. The process according to claim 1 further comprising
`
`drawing a tracking box around. the tcrget.
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`6
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`’134 Patent, Claims 1, 2
`
`Three Disputed Elements
`“A process of tracking a target in an input signal implemented using a system comprising an image
`processing system, the input signal comprising a succession of frames, each frame comprising a
`succession of pixels, the target comprising pixels in one or more of a plurality of classes in one or
`more of a plurality of domains, the process performed by said system comprising, on a frame-by-
`frame basis:”
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a plurality of classes in the
`one or more of a plurality of domains, said at least one histogram referring to classes defining
`said target; and”
`“identifying the target in said at least one histogram itself”
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises determining X minima and maxima
`and Y minima and maxima of boundaries of the target.”
`“The process according to claim 1 further comprising drawing a tracking box around the target.”
`
`7
`
`Element
`
`1[pre]
`
`1[a]
`
`1[b]
`
`1[c]
`
`2
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Example of Claimed Invention
`
`Ex. 1001 at Fig. 15
`
`8
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Forming at Least One Histogram
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`’134 Patent, Fig. 16
`’134 Patent, Fig. 17
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`Ex. 1001 at Figs. 16, 17
`
`9
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Identifying Target in Histogram Itself
`“identifying the target in said at least one histogram itself”
`’134 Patent, Fig. 16
`’134 Patent, Fig. 17
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[b]
`
`Ex. 1001 at Figs. 16, 17; Reply at 9, 28; Petition at 8-9
`
`10
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Determining X and Y Minima and Maxima
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`’134 Patent, Fig. 16
`’134 Patent, Fig. 17
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001 at Figs. 16, 17; Reply at 9, 28; Petition at 8-9
`
`11
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`Overview of the ’134 Patent
`
`Claim Construction
`
`Instituted Grounds for Review
`
`Gilbert + Hashima
`Ueno + Gilbert
`
`12
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Construes Two Terms
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`13
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`PO’s Incorrect Construction: 1[a] Forming the Histogram
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`14
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`PO’s Incorrect Construction: 1[a] Forming the Histogram
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`•PO originallyinterpreted “one or more” as “two or more”:
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in two or more
`classes that are in two or more domains” PO Prel. Resp. at 15
`•Rejected by the Board in Institution Decision:
`•Board found PO construction would render “one or more” superfluous
`•Board construed “to encompass at least oneclass from among a plurality
`of possible classes and at least onedomain from among a plurality of
`possible domains” Institution Decision at 9-10
`
`15
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`PO’s Construction Is Narrower Than District Court Construction
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`•PO now proposes a further narrow construction, interpreting
`“referring to”as “made up only of”PO Resp. at 5
`•District Court found a broader construction:
`“forming at least one histogram … at least one histogram
`being formed of pixels in the one or more classes that
`define said target” PO Resp. at 5
`
`16
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`PO’s Construction Is Narrower Than The Board’s Decision
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`•PO now proposes a further narrow construction, interpreting
`“referring to”as “made up only of”PO Resp. at 5
`•Board applied a broader interpretation:
`“Specifically, claim 1, which uses the open-ended transition
`‘comprising,’ recites that the target comprises pixels in one or
`more of a plurality of classes and that the histogram is formed from
`those pixels, but it does not preclude the histogram from also
`including other pixels outside the target.” Institution Decision at 19-20
`
`17
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`PO’s Incorrect Construction Is Inconsistent With The Plain Meaning
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`•PO’s construction interpreting “referring to”as “made up only of”
`is incorrect PO Resp. at 5
`“Referring to” classes does not require excluding
`pixels in any class that does not define the target.
`Reply at 4-5
`
`18
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`PO’s Construction Is Inconsistent With The Specification
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`’134 Patent, Fig. 12
`Patent Owner admits:
`“the target in Figure 12 is defined
`by, for example, ‘significant speeds’
`(see Ex. 1001 at 21:37-40).”
`PO Resp. at 11
`But the histograms include
`pixels that fall outsideof the
`class of “significant speeds”
`defined by La, Lb, Lc, and Ld
`Reply at 5-6.
`
`Ex. 1001; Reply at 5-6.
`
`19
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`Patent Owner’s Expert Disagrees With Patent Owner
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`PO argues Figure 17 supports
`But PO’s expert insists that
`its construction PO Resp. at 10
`Figure 17 does notshow claim 1:
`’134 Patent, Fig. 17
`Q.
`Do you --do you see the line Ybin Figure 17?
`A.
`I do.
`…
`Q.
`So the line Yb, though, is on the --it bounds the maximum
`X axis value of the face; right?
`A.
`… And again, as I said earlier, it is my belief that this
`Ex. 1011 (BovikDep. Tr.) at50:2-51:22
`
`embodiment isn’t directed toward claim 1 in any case.
`
`20
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`PO’s Incorrect Construction: 1[c] X and Y Min and Max
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`21
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`PO’s Incorrect Construction: 1[c] X and Y Min and Max
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`PO does not formally propose a construction
`•Instead argues that “forming the histogram” must “exclude actions
`taken after creating the histogram.” PO Resp. at 13; Reply at 9
`Rejected by the Board in Institution Decision :
`“claim 1 does not precludecreating a histogram, and then
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima
`of boundaries of the target from that histogram, from both
`being part of the ‘forming’ step.” Institution Decision at 20
`PO Resp. at 13; Reply at 9; Institution Decision at 20
`
`22
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`PO’s Construction Is Inconsistent With The Specification
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`PO argues determination must be
`made without taking any additional
`’134 Patent, Fig. 17
`actions after creating the histogram
`But patent describes
`•histograms are formed,
`• thenpeaks are used to calculate
`X/Y minima/maxima of the target
`PO’s construction excludes this
`embodiment Reply at 9
`
`23
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 4
`
`PO’s Construction Is Inconsistent With The Claims
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`“The process according to claim 1, wherein forming the at least one
`histogram further comprises successively increasing the size of a selected
`area until the boundary of the target is found.
`“Forming” the histogram
`cannot exclude subsequent
`steps, or claim 4 would not
`be functional. See iterative
`steps of Figs. 21, 22, 23
`Reply at 10
`
`24
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`Overview of the ’134 Patent
`
`Claim Construction
`
`Instituted Grounds for Review
`Gilbert + Hashima
`
`Gilbert + Hashima
`Ueno + Gilbert
`
`25
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Obviousness Over Gilbert and Hashima
`PO disputes the disclosure of only certain limitations
`and only under its own proposed constructions
`Claim Element
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[pre]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[a]
`1[b]
`Not Disputed
`1[c]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`2
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`
`Board’s
`Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Board’s
`Preliminary
`Construction
`
`PO’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`Gilbert
`
`Hashima
`
`PO’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`26
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Obviousness Over Gilbert and Hashima
`There is no dispute that claims 1 and 2 are
`invalid under the Board’s preliminary constructions
`Claim Element
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[pre]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[a]
`Not Disputed
`1[b]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[c]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`2
`
`
`Board’s Board’s
`
`Preliminary Preliminary
`
`ConstructionConstruction
`
`Gilbert
`
`
`
`HashimaHashima
`
`Board’s
`Preliminary
`Construction
`
`PO’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`PO’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`Not Disputed
`Disputed
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`Disputed
`Not Disputed
`
`Not Disputed
`
`27
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent, Claim 1
`
`1[pre]
`1[a]
`1[b]
`1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`28
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Overview of Gilbert
`•Gilbert published in IEEE Transactions
`on Pattern Analysis and Machine
`Intelligence in January 1980
`Petition at 11
`•Creates projection histograms of
`pixels having intensity values that
`classify them as part of the target
`•Projection histograms identify
`Petition at 42; Ex. 1002 (Hart Decl.) ¶ 98; Reply at 14-15
`target and determine its minimum
`and maximum extent in the X-Y
`coordinate space
`Petition at 16-17, 43-44; Ex. 1002 (Hart Decl.) ¶¶
`101-104 (incorporating chart at VII.B.4, pp. 70-74);
`Reply at 16
`
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert) at 47, 51; Petition at 11; Reply at 14-16
`
`29
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Overview of Hashima
`•Hashima patent granted
`May 28, 1996
`Petition at 19-20
`•Creates projection
`histograms of black pixels in a
`black-and-white target
`Reply at 8, 15
`•Projection histograms identify
`target and determine its minimum
`and maximum extent in the X and
`Y directions
`Petition at 16-17, 22-25, 43-44; Ex. 1002 (Hart Decl.)
`¶¶ 101-104 (incorporating chart at VII.B.4, pp. 70-74);
`Reply at 19, 22-23
`
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima); Petition at 19-20, 22-25, 43; Reply at 8, 15, 19, 22-23
`
`30
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent, Element 1[a]
`
`1[pre]
`1[a]
`1[b]
`1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`31
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`preliminary construction
`
`Gilbert Discloses 1[a] Under Board’s Construction: Not Disputed
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`•PO does not dispute Gilbert discloses 1[a] under the Board’s
`•PO only disputes whether the intensity histogramof Gilbert
`satisfies 1[a] under PO’s proposed construction
`“Gilbert’s intensity histogramsdo not satisfy this limitation because they
`do not use only those classes defining the target, they form from all
`intensity values of all pixels in a region.”
`PO Resp. at 38
`•Does noteven address Gilbert’s projection histogram in
`the ResponseReply at 14
`PO Resp. at 38; Reply at 13-14
`
`32
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Gilbert Discloses 1[a] Under PO’s Construction: Not Disputed
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`Even under PO’s proposed
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert) at 50-51
`construction, Gilbert’s projection
`histogramsdisclose element 1[a]
`•Pixels of certain intensity values are
`classified as target pixels
`• Onlypixels in the target intensity
`class are formed into projection
`histograms in X-and Y-coordinate
`space
`Reply at 14-15
`
`PO does not dispute
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`Ex. 1005 at 50-51; Ex. 1002 at ¶ 100; Reply at 14-15
`
`33
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`Hashima Discloses 1[a] Under Board’s Construction: Not Disputed
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`•PO does not dispute that Hashima disclose 1[a] under the
`•PO only disputes whether Hashima disclose 1[a] under
`PO’s proposed construction:
`“a histogram which ‘refers to classes defining said target’
`must include only those classes that define a target”
`PO Resp. at 39
`
`Board’s preliminary construction
`
`34
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[a]
`
`Hashima Discloses 1[a] Under PO’s Construction
`“forming at least one histogram of the pixels in the one or more of a
`plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains, said at
`least one histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`Even under PO’s proposed construction, Hashima
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima)
`discloses element 1[a]
`• Only blackpixels of target (black circle with white
`triangle) are included in projection histograms.
`PO’s expert admits white pixels are not counted:
`Q. But you would agree that the projection histograms in Figure 6
`include the black pixels, but they don’t include the white pixels
`in the target; right?
`A. Well, I mean --I mean, let me be more precise. Okay? So if I say
`they’re not included, they are included. It’s just that they don’t
`Ex. 1011 (BovikDep. Tr.) at 119:16-23
`
`contribute to the height of the histogram there.
`
`35
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent, Element 1[b]
`
`1[pre]
`1[a]
`1[b]
`1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`36
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[b]
`
`Gilbert Discloses 1[b]
`“identifying the target in said at least one histogram itself”
`Gilbert discloses 1[b]
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert)
`•Gilbert identifies missile target in projection
`histograms themselves:
`The target location, orientation, and structure are
`characterized by the pattern of 1 entries in the binary
`picture matrix, and the target activity is characterized by a
`sequence of picture matricies. In the projection processor,
`these matrices are analyzed field-by-field at 60 fields/s.
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert) at 50; Petition at 16-17
`Petition at 16-17, 43-44, 67; Ex. 1002 (Hart Decl.) ¶¶ 101-102 (incorporating chart VII.B.4, pp. 70-72); Reply at 16-19
`
`37
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[b]
`
`Gilbert and ’134 Patent Identify Target the Same Way
`“identifying the target in said at least one histogram itself”
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert)
`’134 Patent, Fig. 17
`Form histogram of those pixels
`having a selected intensity
`range and identify the target in
`the resulting histograms
`Form histogram of those pixels
`having a selected movement
`range and identify the target in
`the resulting histograms
`Reply at 17-18
`
`38
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[b]
`
`Hashima Discloses 1[b]: Not Disputed
`“identifying the target in said at least one histogram itself”
`PO does not disputeHashima discloses 1[b]
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima)
`•Hashima identifies target by counting peaks and
`valleys in projection histograms
`
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at 9:8-17
`Petition at 22-25, 43-44; Ex. 1002 (Hart Decl.) ¶¶ 61-66, 101-102 (incorporating chart at VIII.B.4 at pp. 70-72); Reply at 19
`
`39
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent, Element 1[c]
`
`1[pre]
`1[a]
`1[b]
`1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`40
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Gilbert Discloses 1[c] Under Board’s Interpretation: Not Disputed
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`•PO admits that Gilbert discloses 1[c] under the Board’s
`interpretation in the Institution Decision
`“The projection histogram . . . can be used to find the X and Y minima and maxima
`of the target.”PO Resp. at 30
`•PO only disputes whether Gilbert discloses 1[c] under PO’s
`“The determination of X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target is disclosed in Gilbert as occurring only after complete
`histogram formation”PO Resp. at 30
`
`construction:
`
`41
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Gilbert Discloses 1[c] Under PO’s Construction
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`Even under PO’s proposed construction,
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert)
`Gilbert discloses element 1[c]
`•X/Y min/max are immediately known from the
`Gilbert projection histograms - e.g., “nose” and
`“tail” points
`•Thus, forming the histogram also determines the
`X/Y min/max
`PO’s expert argues using nose and tail points as
`X/Y min/max is subject to noise
`•But claim 1 recites no requirement of noise immunity
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert) at 50-51; Figs. 3, 4; Petition at 44; Reply at 21-22
`
`42
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Hashima Discloses 1[c] Under Board’s Interpretation: Not Disputed
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`•PO admits that Hashima discloses 1[c] under the Board’s
`interpretation in the Institution Decision
`•PO only disputes whether Hashima discloses 1[c] under
`“the projection histograms are formed and then used to determine aspects of
`the target” PO Resp. at 31
`“Hashima discloses determining X and Y minima and maxima of the boundaries
`of a target … , but the determination is not made until afterthe histogram is
`already formed....” PO Resp. at 31
`
`PO’s construction:
`
`43
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Hashima Discloses 1[c] Under PO’s Construction
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`Even under PO’s proposed construction, Hashima
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima)
`discloses element 1[c]
`•X and Y min and max are immediately known from the
`projection histograms as points Xb1, Xb2, Yb1, and Yb2
`•Thus, forming the histogram also determines the X and
`Y min and max
`•Hashima also expressly uses X/Y min/max points to
`calculate the center point (mx, my) of the target:
`mx=(Xb1 +Xb2)/2
`my=(Yb1+Yb2)/2
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at 11:13-25
`
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at Figs. 6, 10, 15; Reply at 22-24
`
`44
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Obviousness Over Gilbert And Hashima
`Gilbert
`Hashima
`’134 Patent
`
`Motivation to Combine
`
`45
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`A POSAWould Have Combined Gilbert and Hashima
`It would have been obvious to combine Gilbert and Hashima:
`•Both use image processing to identify and track a target
`Petition at 34
`•Both employ a camera that keeps target in field of view and recognize
`importance of finding the center
`Petition at 34-35
`•Both analyze brightness levels to distinguish target from background
`•Both form projection histograms of pixels meeting brightness
`Petition at 35-36
`classification criteria for target identification
`Petition at 36-37
`•Hashima proposes a simpler tracking method based on target end
`points (X/Y max/min) that could benefit Gilbert
`Petition at 38
`Reply at 34-38
`
`46
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`A POSAWould Have Combined Gilbert and Hashima
`•Contrary to PO’s argument, both rely on assumptions about
`target structure to track image Reply at 25
`•Gilbert: elongated missile shape and target, background, and plume
`brightness
`•Hashima: fiducial target shape and coloring
`•Contrary to PO’s argument, Hashima is not restricted to tracking a
`slow-moving target:
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at 25:31-33
`
`47
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`Overview of the ’134 Patent
`
`Claim Construction
`
`Instituted Grounds for Review
`
`Gilbert + Hashima
`Ueno + Gilbert
`
`Ueno + Gilbert
`
`48
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Obviousness Over Ueno and Gilbert
`PO disputes the disclosure of only certain limitations
`and only under its own proposed constructions
`Claim Element
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[pre]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[a]
`1[b]
`Not Disputed
`1[c]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`2
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`
`Board’s
`Preliminary
`Construction
`
`Board’s
`Preliminary
`Construction
`
`PO’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`Disputed
`
`Ueno
`
`Gilbert
`
`PO’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`49
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Obviousness Over Ueno and Gilbert
`There is no dispute that claims 1 and 2 are
`invalid under the Board’s preliminary constructions
`Claim Element
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[pre]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[a]
`Not Disputed
`1[b]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`1[c]
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`2
`
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`Not Disputed
`Disputed
`Not Disputed
`
`
`
`UenoUeno
`
`Gilbert
`
`
`Board’s Board’s
`
`Preliminary Preliminary
`
`ConstructionConstruction
`
`PO’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`Board’s
`Preliminary
`Construction
`
`PO’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`Not Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`Disputed
`
`50
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent, Claim 1
`
`1[pre]
`1[a]
`1[b]
`1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`51
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Overview of Ueno
`•Ueno issued on September 22, 1992
`•Apparatus for detecting a face and
`centering it in a image frame for a
`video conference
`•Projection histograms along the
`X-and Y-axes are used to determine
`the size and location of a face in a
`video image
`
`52
`
`Ex. 1007 (Ueno) at 7:17-20; Fig. 3; Reply at 25-27
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent, Element 1[c]
`
`1[pre]
`1[a]
`1[b]
`1[c]
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`53
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Ueno Discloses 1[c] Under Board’s Interpretation: Not Disputed
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`•PO admits that Ueno discloses 1[c] under the Board’s
`interpretationin the Institution Decision
`“the top and bottom [Y max/min] of the head are determined from the y-axis
`histogram, and the left and right ends [X max/min] of the head are located using
`the x-axis histogram.” PO Resp. at 33
`•PO only disputes whether Ueno discloses 1[c] under PO’s
`“Therefore, X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of boundaries of the
`target are not determined while forming the at least one histogram.”
`PO Resp. at 33
`
`construction:
`
`54
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Ueno Discloses 1[c] Under PO’s Construction
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`Y minima and maxima are
`Ex. 1007 (Ueno) at Fig. 3
`determined directly from the point
`where the Y-projection histogram
`exceeds a threshold
`Ex. 1007 (Ueno) at 7:17-20
`
`Reply at 26-27
`
`55
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Ueno Discloses 1[c] Under PO’s Construction
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`X minima and maxima are
`Ex. 1007 (Ueno) at Fig. 3
`determined directly from the
`X-projection histogram
`Ex. 1007 (Ueno) at 7:21-25
`
`Reply at 26-27
`
`56
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`’134 Patent
`Claim 1[c]
`
`Ueno Discloses 1[c] Under PO’s Construction
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of
`boundaries of the target.”
`Ex. 1007 (Ueno) at Fig. 3
`Ueno analyzes
`’134 Patent, Fig. 17
`completed histogram
`to determine X and Y
`minima and maxima,
`just like embodiment
`of Figure 17 in the
`’134 Patent
`
`Ex. 1001, Reply at 27-28
`
`57
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`Obviousness Over Ueno And Gilbert
`Gilbert
`’134 Patent
`
`Motivation to Combine
`
`Ueno
`
`58
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`A POSAWould Have Combined Ueno and Gilbert
`It would have been obvious to combine Ueno and Gilbert:
`•Both describe image processing systems that use
`the digital output of a video camera system to identify and track
`a target on a frame-by-frame basis
`Petition at 60-61
`•Both form histograms of pixel brightness in order to
`identify target
`Petition at 61-62
`•While Gilbert forms three tracking windows to track target,
`background, and plume, it would benefit from Ueno’s simple
`tracking box surrounding only the target, which is less distracting
`for the user
`Petition at 62-63
`
`Petition at 60-63
`
`59
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`A POSAWould Have Combined Ueno and Gilbert
`•Contrary to PO’s argument, both rely on assumptions about
`target structure to track image
`•Gilbert: elongated missile shape and target, background, and plume
`brightness
`•Ueno: head and shoulder shape and orientation
`•Contrary to PO’s argument, Ueno is not restricted to tracking a
`slow-moving target
`•Both Ueno and Gilbert process video image data on a frame-by-frame basis
`Reply at 30; Petition at 60-61
`Reply at 30; Petition at 60-61
`
`60
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`
`
`Thank You
`
`Thank You
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`61
`
`61
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1012
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e) and § 42.105 that on
`
`February 13, 2018, a true and correct copy of PETITIONER’S DEMONSTRATIVES
`
`FOR ORAL HEARING was served via express mail on the Patent Owner at the
`
`following correspondence address of record:
`
`Gregory Nelson
`FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
`222 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 700
`West Palm Beach, FL 33401
`
`Gregory Nelson
`FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
`997 Lennox Drive, Bld. 3
`Lawrenceville, NJ 08648
`
`
`
`Copies were also sent to Patent Owner’s litigation counsel via electronic mail:
`
`S. Calvin Capshaw
`CAPSHAW DERIEUX, LLP
`114 E. Commerce Ave.
`Gladewater, TX 75647
`ccapshaw@capshawlaw.com
`
`Michael N. Zachary
`ANDREWS KURTH KENYON LLP
`1801 Page Mill Road, Suite 210
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`MichaelZachary@AndrewsKurthKenyon.com
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Christopher J. Coulson
`Mark Chapman
`Rose Cordero Prey
`ANDREWS KURTH KENYON LLP
`One Broadway
`New York, NY 10004
`ChrisCoulson@AndrewsKurthKenyon.com
`MarkChapman@AndrewsKurthKenyon.com
`RosePrey@AndrewsKurthKenyon.com
`
`/s/ Marc Pensabene .
`Marc Pensabene (Reg. No. 37,416)
`O’Melveny & Myers LLP
`Times Square Tower, 7 Times Square
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: (212) 326-2000
`
`Attorney for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
