`
`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 IPR2017-00353
`Patent No. 8,983,134
`____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. ALAN BOVIK IN SUPPORT OF PATENT
`OWNER RESPONSE PURSUANT TO
`37 C.F.R. § 42.120
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 1
`
`Exhibit 2007
`IPR2017-00353
`Petitioner- Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al.
`Patent Owner- Image Processing Technologies LLC
`
`Exhibit 2007
`IPR2017-01218
`Petitioner- Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al.
`Patent Owner- Image Processing Technologies LLC
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`I.
`
`Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
`
`A. Background and Qualifications ....................................................................... 2
`
`B. Materials Considered ....................................................................................... 7
`
`C. Claim Construction .......................................................................................... 8
`
`1. “forming at least one histogram . . . said at least one histogram referring to
`classes defining said target” ................................................................................ 9
`
`2. “wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises determining
`X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of boundaries of the target.”
`
`14
`
`II. Summary of Opinions ........................................................................................... 15
`
`III. My Analysis of Claims 1 and 2 ............................................................................ 15
`
`A. Summary ........................................................................................................ 15
`
`B. Discussion of References .............................................................................. 16
`
`1. Gilbert .........................................................................................................16
`
`2. Hashima ......................................................................................................18
`
`3. Ueno ............................................................................................................22
`
`C. The Asserted References Do Not Teach or Suggest All Elements of
`the ’134 Patent ............................................................................................... 24
`
`1. Gilbert Does Not Teach or Suggest Claim Elements [1a], [1b], and [1c] .25
`
`2. Hashima Does Not Teach or Suggest Claim Elements [1a] and [1c] ........32
`
`3. Ueno Does Not Teach or Suggest Claim Element [1c] ..............................37
`
`D. A POSA Would Not Have Selected and Combined the Asserted
`References...................................................................................................... 40
`
`1. A POSA Would Not Have Selected and Combined Gilbert and Hashima 40
`
`2. A POSA Would Not Have Selected and Combined Gilbert and Ueno......45
`
`IV. Concluding Statement ........................................................................................... 48
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`
` 2
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`LIST OF APPENDICES
`
`APPENDIX A
`
`Dr. Alan Bovik Curriculum Vitae
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
` 3
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2006 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`I hereby declare that all the statements made in this Declaration are of my
`
`own knowledge and true; that all statements made on information and belief are
`
`believed to be true; and further that these statements were made with the
`
`knowledge that willful false statements and the like so made are punishable by
`
`fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and that such willful false
`
`statements may jeopardize the validity of the application or any patent issue
`
`thereupon.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
`
`America that the following is true and correct.
`
`Dated: August 25, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted
`
`
`___________________
`
`Alan Bovik
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 4
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained by counsel for Image Processing Technologies
`
`LLC (“Image Processing” or “Patent Owner”) as an expert consultant in regards to
`
`inter partes review proceeding IPR2017-00353 for U.S. Patent No. 8,983,134.
`
`2.
`
`In IPR2017-00353, I understand that Petitioners, Samsung Electronics
`
`Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung” or “Petitioners”)
`
`challenged the validity of Claims 1 and 2 of the ’134 Patent.
`
`3.
`
`I understand that the Board instituted an inter partes review on the
`
`following Grounds: Claims 1 and 2 as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`
`Gilbert in view of Hashima; Claims 1 and 2 as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`
`over Ueno in view of Gilbert. Paper No. 12 (Institution Decision) at 29.
`
`4.
`
`I was asked to consider whether the instituted claims of the U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,983,134 (“the ’134 Patent”) (Ex. 1001), which are claims 1 and 2,
`
`would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSA”) as of the
`
`date of the invention.
`
`5.
`
`Based on my analysis of the ’134 Patent and my understanding of the
`
`state of the relevant prior art as well as the specific references relied upon by the
`
`Petitioner for the ground that was instituted by the Board, it is my opinion that the
`
`challenged claims would not have been obvious to a POSA as of the date of the
`
`invention.
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
` 5
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`A. Background and Qualifications
`
`6.
`
`This is a summary of my background and qualifications. I set forth
`
`my background in more detail in my Curriculum Vitae which is attached as
`
`Appendix A.
`
`7.
`
`I hold a Ph.D. in in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the
`
`University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (awarded in 1984). I also hold a
`
`Master's degree in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of
`
`Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (awarded in 1982).
`
`8.
`
`I am a tenured full Professor and I hold the Cockrell Family Regents
`
`Endowed Chair at the University of Texas at Austin. My appointments are in the
`
`Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, the Department of Computer
`
`Sciences, and the Department of Biomedical Engineering. I am also the Director
`
`of the Laboratory for Image and Video Engineering (“LIVE”).
`
`9. My research is in the general area of digital television, digital cameras,
`
`image and video processing, computational neuroscience, and modeling of
`
`biological visual perception. I have published over 800 technical articles in these
`
`areas and hold seven U.S. patents. I am also the author of The Handbook of Image
`
`and Video Processing, Second Edition (Elsevier Academic Press, 2005); Modern
`
`Image Quality Assessment (Morgan & Claypool, 2006); The Essential Guide to
`
`Image Processing (Elsevier Academic Press, 2009); and The Essential Guide to
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
` 6
`
`

`

`Video Processing (Elsevier Academic Press, 2009); and numerous other
`
`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`publications.
`
`10.
`
`I will receive the 2017 Edwin H. Land Medal from the Optical
`
`Society of America in September 2017 with citation: For substantially shaping the
`
`direction and advancement of modern perceptual picture quality computation, and
`
`for energetically engaging industry to transform his ideas into global practice. I
`
`also received a Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Achievement in
`
`Engineering Development, for the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, in
`
`October 2015, for the widespread use of my video quality prediction and
`
`monitoring models and algorithms that are widely used throughout the global
`
`broadcast, cable, satellite and internet Television industries.
`
`11. Among other awards and honors, I have received the 2013 IEEE
`
`Signal Processing Society’s “Society Award,” which is the highest honor accorded
`
`by that technical society (“for fundamental contributions to digital image
`
`processing theory, technology, leadership and education”). In 2005, I received the
`
`Technical Achievement Award of the IEEE Signal Processing Society, which is
`
`the highest technical honor given by the Society, for “broad and lasting
`
`contributions to the field of digital image processing”; and in 2008 I received the
`
`Education Award of the IEEE Signal Processing Society, which is the highest
`
`education honor given by the Society, for “broad and lasting contributions to image
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
` 7
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`processing, including popular and important image processing books, innovative
`
`on-line courseware, and for the creation of the leading research and educational
`
`journal and conference in the image processing field.”
`
`12. My technical articles have been widely recognized as well, including
`
`the 2009 IEEE Signal Processing Society Best Journal Paper Award for the paper
`
`“Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity,” published
`
`in IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, volume 13, number 4, April 2004; this
`
`same paper received the 2017 IEEE Signal Processing Society Sustained Impact
`
`Paper Award as the most impactful paper published over a period of at least ten
`
`years; the 2013 Best Magazine Paper Award for the paper “Mean squared error:
`
`Love it or leave it?? A new look at signal fidelity measures,” published in IEEE
`
`Transactions on Image Processing, volume 26, number 1, January 2009; the IEEE
`
`Circuits and Systems Society Best Journal Paper Prize for the paper “Video quality
`
`assessment by reduced reference spatio-temporal entropic differencing,” published
`
`in the IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 23,
`
`no. 4, pp. 684-694, April 2013.
`
`13.
`
`I received the Google Scholar Classic Paper Award twice in 2017, for
`
`the paper “Image information and visual quality,” published in the IEEE
`
`Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 430-444, February 2006 (the
`
`main algorithm developed in the paper, called the Visual Information Fidelity (VIF)
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
` 8
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`Index, is a core picture quality prediction engine used to quality-assess all encodes
`
`streamed globally by Netflix), and for “An evaluation of recent full reference
`
`image quality assessment algorithms,” published in the IEEE Transactions on
`
`Image Processing, vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 3440–3451, November 2006. (the picture
`
`quality database and human study described in the paper, the LIVE Image Quality
`
`Database, has been the standard development tool for picture quality research since
`
`its first introduction in 2003). Google Scholar Classic Papers are very highly-cited
`
`papers that have stood the test of time, and are among the ten most-cited articles in
`
`their area of research over the ten years since their publication.
`
`14.
`
`I have also been honored by other technical organizations, including
`
`the Society for Photo-optical and Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE), from which I
`
`received the Technology Achievement Award (2013) “For Broad and Lasting
`
`Contributions to the Field of Perception-Based Image Processing,” and the Society
`
`for Imaging Science and Technology, which accorded me Honorary Membership,
`
`which is the highest recognition by that Society given to a single individual, “for
`
`his impact in shaping the direction and advancement of the field of perceptual
`
`image processing.” I was also elected as a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and
`
`Electronics Engineers (IEEE) “for contributions to nonlinear image processing” in
`
`1995, a Fellow of the Optical Society of America (OSA) for “fundamental research
`
`contributions to and technical leadership in digital image and video processing” in
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
` 9
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`2006, and as a Fellow of SPIE for “pioneering technical, leadership, and
`
`educational contributions to the field of image processing” in 2007.
`
`15. Among other relevant research, I have worked with the National
`
`Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”) to develop high compression
`
`image sequence coding and animated vision technology, on various military
`
`projects for the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Phillips Air Force Base,
`
`the Army Research Office, and the Department of Defense. These projects have
`
`focused on developing local spatio-temporal analysis in vision systems, scalable
`
`processing of multi-sensor and multi-spectral imagery, image processing and data
`
`compression tools for satellite imaging, AM-FM analysis of images and video, the
`
`scientific foundations of image representation and analysis, computer vision
`
`systems for automatic target recognition and automatic recognition of human
`
`activities, vehicle structure recovery from a moving air platform, passive optical
`
`modeling, and detection of speculated masses and architectural distortions in
`
`digitized mammograms. My research has also recently been funded by Netflix,
`
`Qualcomm, Texas Instruments, Intel, Cisco, and the National Institute of Standards
`
`and Technology (NIST) for research on image and video quality assessment. I
`
`have also received numerous grants from the National Science Foundation for
`
`research on image and video processing and on computational vision.
`
`16. Additional details about my employment history, fields of expertise,
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`and publications are further described in my curriculum vitae, which is attached as
`
`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`Exhibit A to this declaration.
`
`B. Materials Considered
`
`17. For time spent in connection with this case, I am being compensated
`
`at my customary rate of $500/hour. My compensation is not dependent upon the
`
`outcome of this petition or any issues involved in or related to the ’134 Patent, and
`
`I have no other financial stake in this matter. I have no financial interest in, or
`
`affiliation with, any of the real parties in interest or the Patent Owner.
`
`18. The materials I considered include the ’134 Patent and the prosecution
`
`history for the ’134 Patent, the Petition from Samsung for inter partes review
`
`(Paper No. 2), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision to institute
`
`inter partes review in IPR2017-00353 (Paper No. 12), and IPT’s Preliminary
`
`Response (Paper No. 6). I also considered the materials that I refer to and that I
`
`cite in this declaration, and, to the extent I considered them relevant, the materials
`
`provided by the Petitioner.
`
`19.
`
`In addition, I have drawn on my experience and knowledge, as
`
`discussed above and described more fully in my CV.
`
`20. The opinions I express herein are given from the point of view of a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art, as described above, at the time of the invention
`
`of the ’134 Patent. Even if I do not repeat this explicitly, this is the perspective
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`that I applied in my analysis and in this declaration, unless I indicate otherwise.
`
`C. Claim Construction
`
`21.
`
`I understand that the claims and specification of a patent must be read
`
`and construed through the eyes of a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`the priority date of the claims.
`
`22.
`
`I further understand that the claim construction standard that applies
`
`for the purposes of this proceeding is the Phillips standard, under which claim
`
`terms are given the meaning that the term would have to a person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art in question at the time of the invention. I understand further that a claim
`
`term’s meaning can take into account both intrinsic evidence (the claims,
`
`specification, and prosecution history) as well as extrinsic evidence, such as
`
`dictionary definitions. I have applied this standard in claim constructions I have
`
`set forth below.
`
`23. The Board has construed term “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” not to be limited to “forming at least one histogram of the pixels in
`
`two or more classes that are in two or more domains.” D.I. 12 at 10. I have
`
`applied the Board’s construction in my analysis.
`
`24.
`
`In conducting my analysis of the challenged claims of the ’134 patent,
`
`I have applied the claim constructions below consistent with the Phillips standard.
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Elsewhere in my analysis, except when I state otherwise, I have applied the
`
`ordinary meaning of claim terms as they are used in the specification, under the
`
`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`Phillips standard.
`
`1.
`
`“forming at least one histogram . . . said at least one
`histogram referring to classes defining said target”
`
`25.
`
`I understand that Patent Owner has proposed a claim construction for
`
`the term “forming at least one histogram . . . said at least one histogram referring to
`
`classes defining said target” in claims 1 and 2 of ’134 patent of “forming at least
`
`one histogram . . . said at least one histogram being formed of pixels in the one or
`
`more classes that define said target.” I understand that Patent Owner has construed
`
`this term to mean the “at least one histogram” is composed only of pixels in at least
`
`one class defining said target. I have reviewed and agree with this proposed
`
`construction.1
`
`26. Patent Owner’s proposed construction is consistent with my opinion
`
`of how a POSA would have understood the claim term at the time of the patent as
`
`well as the embodiments I reviewed in the specification of the ’134 patent.
`
`27. A POSA would interpret a histogram “referring to classes defining
`
`said target” to apply a limitation on the histogram being formed in claim 1.
`
`Specifically, it is my opinion that, in light of the patent specification and claim 1 as
`
`
`1 As discussed above in paragraph 23, I understand the Board has held that “one or
`more classes” is sufficient for claim 1. I have applied this construction in my
`analysis.
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`a whole, a POSA would construe this term to mean that the histogram must be
`
`made up only of pixels belonging to classes which “define” the target, i.e. classes
`
`that correspond to target characteristics.
`
`28. For example, Patent Owner’s proposed construction is consistent with
`
`the surrounding claim language. For reference, the first part of claim 1 of the ’134
`
`patent is copied below, with relevant portions bolded.
`
`1. 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
`
`Ex. 1001 at 26:36–46 (emphasis added).
`
`29. The target comprises pixels in one or more of a plurality of classes in
`
`one or more of a plurality of domains. A histogram is then formed in “the one or
`
`more of a plurality of classes in the one or more of a plurality of domains”
`
`(emphasis added). The word “the” in the claim to refers back to the first reference
`
`of the pixels in a plurality of classes which make up the target. A POSA would
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`thus interpret the claim language to mean that the histogram is formed only in the
`
`classes that comprise the target.
`
`30. The plain meaning of the claim language thus supports Patent
`
`Owner’s construction of “said at least one histogram referring to classes defining
`
`said target” requiring the pixels making up the histogram to be in classes defining
`
`the target.
`
`31. Patent Owner’s proposed construction also appears consistent with the
`
`specification of the patent. For example, this limitation in forming a histogram can
`
`be seen in Figure 17, copied below.
`
`Ex. 1001 at Fig. 17.
`
`
`
`32. As seen above, Figure 17 is a “diagram illustrating histograms formed
`
`on the shape of the head of a participant in a video conference.” Ex. 1001 at 8:66–
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`67. I understand from the specification that the target of these histograms is a
`
`user’s head. See Ex. 1001 at 22:32–43. The histograms used to identify the user’s
`
`face V rely on movement, where DP=1. Ex. 1001 at 22:44–54.
`
`33.
`
`I understand from Figure 17 and the accompanying specification text
`
`that a class defining the target is based on movement. As seen in Figure 17, the
`
`user’s face V comprises edge pixels which are in the histogram and non-edge
`
`pixels which are not. As explained in the specification, this is because the greatest
`
`movement occurs at the peripheral edges of the head. Ex. 1001 at 22:44–45.
`
`34. The histograms used to identify the face end up being formed based
`
`on pixels in classes defining the target face, but not all pixels of the face are in
`
`these classes. Pixels that are not in classes defining the target are not included.
`
`35. Another example of this limitation in the embodiments of the ’134
`
`patent can be seen in Figure 12 copied below, a “two-dimensional histogram of a
`
`moving area.” Ex. 1001 at 8:54–55.
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`Ex. 1001 at Fig. 12.
`
`
`
`36. As explained by the specification, the target in Figure 12 is defined by,
`
`for example, “significant speeds.” See Ex. 1001 at 21:37–40. A POSA would
`
`recognize from the diagram of Figure 12 that the histograms are formed from
`
`pixels having significant speeds, illustrated in Figure 12 by black dots representing
`
`pixels. The black blob labeled 40 has white portions in it, indicating pixels not
`
`falling into classes defining the target.
`
`37.
`
`It is my opinion that a POSA would recognize that these handful of
`
`pixels completely surrounded by pixels of significant speeds are nevertheless likely
`
`to be pixels comprising the target. Consistent with Patent Owner’s proposed
`
`construction therefore, the histogram only includes values in the target classes, but
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`the target may comprise pixels not in these classes.
`
`2.
`
`“wherein forming the at least one histogram further
`comprises determining X minima and maxima and Y
`minima and maxima of boundaries of the target.”
`
`38.
`
`I understand that Patent Owner has proposed a claim construction for
`
`the term “wherein forming the at least one histogram further comprises
`
`determining X minima and maxima and Y minima and maxima of boundaries of
`
`the target” in claims 1 and 2 of ’134 patent wherein this term requires that the
`
`determination of X and Y boundaries of the target is done as a part of forming or
`
`creating the histogram. I have reviewed and agree with this proposed construction.
`
`39. Patent Owner’s proposed construction
`
`is consistent with my
`
`understanding of how a POSA would understand the plain meaning of the above
`
`language as well as consistent with dictionary definitions of the word “forming.”
`
`40. Based on my understanding of the ’134 patent and its specification, it
`
`is my opinion that a POSA would understand “forming the histogram” to mean
`
`“adding data to the histogram.” The specification describes, for example, “forming
`
`a histogram for pixels of the output signal within the classes selected by the
`
`classifier within each domain selected by the validation signal.” Ex. 1001 at 6:11–
`
`14. A POSA would understand this to mean that forming the histogram involves
`
`adding data based on the pixel data of the output signal.
`
`41. The patent specification goes on to say that the process “further
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`includes the steps of forming histograms along coordinate axes for the pixels
`
`within the classes selected by the classifier within each domain selected by the
`
`validation signal.” Ex. 1001 at 6:15–18. A POSA would understand that forming
`
`a histogram along coordinate axes for pixels within classes involves adding data to
`
`the histogram, for example the pixel data for the pixels falling within those classes.
`
`42.
`
`It is my opinion that A POSA at the time of the invention would thus
`
`understand that forming a histogram is the same as creating a histogram.
`
`II.
`
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS
`
`43.
`
`In this Section I present a summary of my opinions. The full
`
`statement of my opinions and the bases for my opinions are contained in the
`
`appropriate sections of my declaration. I give this summary, however, for the
`
`convenience of the reader.
`
`44. Based on my analysis of the ’134 Patent, my knowledge and
`
`experience, any references cited in this declaration, as well as the specific
`
`references relied upon by the Petitioner for the ground that was instituted by the
`
`Board, it is my opinion that the challenged claims (1 and 2) would not have been
`
`obvious to a POSA as of the date of the invention. I have considered the date of
`
`the invention of the ’134 patent to be 1996.
`
`III. MY ANALYSIS OF CLAIMS 1 AND 2
`
`A.
`
`45.
`
`Summary
`
`In my opinion Gilbert and Hashima, and Ueno and Gilbert do not
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`disclose several elements of the ’134 patent claims. Gilbert does not disclose
`
`elements [1a], [1b], or [1c]; Hashima does not disclose element [1a] or [1c]; and
`
`Ueno does not disclose element [1c].
`
`46.
`
`It is also my opinion that a POSA would not have selected and
`
`combined Gilbert and Hashima or Ueno and Gilbert to arrive at the invention of
`
`claims 1 and 2 of the’134 patent.
`
`B. Discussion of References
`
`1. Gilbert
`
`47. Gilbert is entitled “A Real-Time Video Tracking System”. Gilbert
`
`states in the first paragraph of the section Introduction:
`
`IMAGE PROCESSING methods constrained to operate on sequential
`
`images at a high repetition rate are few. Pattern recognition techniques
`
`are generally quite complex, requiring a great deal of computation to
`
`yield an acceptable classification. Many problems exist, however,
`
`where such a time-consuming technique is unacceptable. Reasonably
`
`complex operations can be performed on wide-band data in real time,
`
`yielding solutions to difficult problems in object identification and
`
`tracking.
`
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert) at 47.
`
`48. Gilbert states that the image consist of m x n pixels, and that, “pixel
`
`intensity is digitized and quantized into eight bits (256 gray levels), counted into
`
`one of six 256-level histogram memories, and then converted by a decision
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`

`

`memory to a 2-bit code indicating its classification (target, plume, or background).
`
`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`Ex. 1005 at 47–48.
`
`49. Gilbert discloses that a tracking window is placed around the target
`
`image, and:
`
`The tracking window frame is partitioned into a background region
`
`(BR) and a plume region (PR). The region inside the frame is called
`
`the target region (TR) as shown in Fig. 2. During each field, the
`
`feature histograms are accumulated for the three regions of each
`
`tracking window.
`
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert) at 47.
`
`50. Figure 2 of Gilbert shows the tracking window:
`
`51. Gilbert describes that, based on intensity of the pixels, the image is
`
`
`
`binarized into “target” and “non-target” pixels:
`
`The video processor described above separates the target image from
`
`the background and generates a binary picture, where target presence
`
`is represented by a “1” and target absence by a “0.”
`
`Ex. 1005 (Gilbert) at 48.
`
`52. The binary image is analyzed:
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`21
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`The target location, orientation, and structure are characterized by the
`
`pattern of 1 entries [that is, pattern of “1” versus “0” values] in the
`
`binary picture matrix, and the target activity is characterized by a
`
`sequence of picture matrices.
`
`Ex. 1006 (Gilbert) at 60 (explanation added in brackets for clarity).
`
`53. One analysis of the binary image is via projection histograms, for
`
`example as shown in Figure 4:
`
`
`
`Ex. 1006 (Gilbert) at 51.
`
`54. A “projection histogram” as used in Gilbert is, generally speaking, a
`
`histogram of a parameter such as based on x-axis location or y-axis location.
`
`2. Hashima
`
`55. Hashima is entitled “System for and Method of Recognizing and
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`22
`
`

`

`Tracking Target Mark”.
`
`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`56. Hashima states in the first paragraph of the section Technical Field:
`
`The present invention relates to a system for and a method of
`
`recognizing and tracking a target mark using a video camera, and
`
`more particularly to a system for and a method of recognizing and
`
`tracking a target mark for detecting the position and attitude of the
`
`target mark by processing an image of the target mark produced by a
`
`video camera, detecting a shift of the position of the target mark from
`
`a predetermined position, and controlling the position and attitude of a
`
`processing mechanism based on the detected shift.
`
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at 1:5–16.
`
`57. The system of Hashima is designed to operate in real-time based on
`
`the benefit of knowledge of the shape and color of the target (which is known in
`
`advance), and the ability of the robot hand or grip to move in six dimensions of
`
`freedom, such that Hashima can control the position and attitude of the object with
`
`respect to the video camera. Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at 1:3–12, 2:64–3:13.
`
`58. Hashima is directed to tracking a predefined mark mounted on an
`
`object with known, contrasting colors, in order for a robot to grip the object.
`
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at 1:7–16; 7:45–65. Hashima relies on knowing, for example,
`
`that the target is a triangle that rests on a post and thus is offset from a circular
`
`background of a contrasting color, Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at Figures 2 & 4 and 7:66–
`
`8:17, and uses that knowledge to track the target in three-dimensional space in
`
`19
`
`
`
`
`
`23
`
`

`

`order to guide the robot towards the target.
`
`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at Fig. 2.
`
`
`
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at Fig. 4.
`
`
`
`59. For example, Hashima computes the target’s three-dimensional shift
`
`by moving the camera along the x- and y-axes, in addition to rotating the camera
`
`about the x-, y-, and z-axes of the target coordinate system. Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at
`
`16:50–17:5. Hashima describes that changes in position between the target mark
`
`and the camera are “relatively small” because Hashima controls the camera
`
`position with respect to the target with six degrees of freedom. Ex. 1006 (Hashima)
`
`at 17:6–11.
`
`60. Figure 5 of Hashima is a flowchart illustrating a sequence for
`
`detecting the target mark. Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at 5:18–19.
`
`20
`
`
`
`
`
`24
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at Fig. 5.
`
`
`
`61. Figure 6 of Hashima is a diagram showing the X- and Y- histograms
`
`of the target mark. Ex. 1006 (Hashima) at 5:20–22.
`
`21
`
`
`
`
`
`25
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00353
`Ex. 2007 - Declaration of Dr. Bovik
`
`Ex. 12 (Hashima) at Fig. 6.
`
`
`
`3.
`
`Ueno
`
`62. Ueno is entitled “System for and Method of Recognizing and
`
`Tracking Target Mark”. Ex. 1007 (Ueno) at Title.
`
`63. Ueno states in the first paragraph of the section Field of the Invention:
`
`The present invention relates to an apparatus for encoding video
`
`signals used for a teleconference or videophone.
`
`Ex. 1007 (Ueno) at 1:8–11.
`
`64. The system of Ueno operates in a fixed, assumed background of a
`
`teleconference or videophone, and requires the assumption that (i) there is one
`
`person in the video signal; (ii) the person is moving and so can be detected by
`
`22
`
`
`