Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FACEBOOK, INC., WHATSAPP INC.,
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC USA, INC., UNILOC LUXEMBOURG, S.A.,
`Patent Owners
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`TITLE: SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSTANT VOIP MESSAGING
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,535,890
`(PETITION 1 OF 2 – CLAIMS 1-6, 9, 40-43, 46)
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`
`
`Page
`
`
`I. Mandatory Notices Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(A)(1) ........................................ 1
`A.
`Real Party-In-Interest under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ............................ 1
`B.
`Related Matters under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ..................................... 1
`C.
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .................. 3
`D.
`Service Information .............................................................................. 4
`E.
`Power of Attorney ................................................................................ 4
`Fee Payment - 37 C.F.R. § 42.103 ................................................................. 4
`II.
`III. Requirements for Inter Partes Review under 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.104 and
`42.108 ............................................................................................................. 5
`A. Grounds for Standing under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ............................. 5
`B.
`Identification of Challenge under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) and
`Statement of Precise Relief Requested ................................................ 5
`IV. Technology Background Relevant to a Person of Ordinary Skill in the
`Art ................................................................................................................... 6
`The ’890 Patent ............................................................................................... 8
`V.
`VI. Claim Construction Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(B)(3) .................................... 9
`VII. Claims 1-6, 9, 40-43, and 46 Are Unpatentable ............................................. 9
`A.
`Brief Summary and Date Qualification of the Prior Art .................... 10
`
`Overview of Zydney [Ex. 1003] .............................................. 10
`
`Overview of Shinder [Ex. 1008] .............................................. 15
`
`Overview of Appelman [Ex. 1004] .......................................... 17
`
`Overview of Martin-Flatin [Ex. 1009] ..................................... 22
`B. Ground 1: Claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 9, 40, 42, 43, 46 Are Obvious Over
`Zydney ................................................................................................ 25
`
`Claim 1 (Independent) ............................................................. 25
`(a)
`“An instant voice messaging system for delivering
`instant messages over a packet-switched network,
`the system comprising:” (Preamble, Claim 1) ............... 25
`
`
`
`
`
`-i-
`
`
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`“a client connected to the network, the client
`selecting one or more recipients, generating an
`instant voice message therefor, and transmitting
`the selected recipients and the instant voice
`message therefor over the network; and,” (Claim
`1[a]) ................................................................................ 28
`(i)
`“a client connected to the network” .................... 28
`(ii)
`“the client selecting one or more recipients” ...... 30
`(iii) “generating an instant voice message
`therefor” ............................................................... 31
`(iv) “and transmitting the selected recipients and
`the instant voice message therefor over the
`network; and” ...................................................... 35
`“a server connected to the network, the server
`receiving the selected recipients and the instant
`voice message therefor, and delivering the instant
`voice message to the selected recipients over the
`network, the selected recipients enabled to audibly
`play the instant voice message, and the server
`temporarily storing the instant voice message if a
`selected recipient is unavailable and delivering the
`stored instant voice message to the selected
`recipient once the selected recipient becomes
`available.” (Claim 1[b]) ................................................. 39
`(i)
`“a server connected to the network” ................... 39
`(ii)
`“the server receiving the selected recipients
`and the instant voice message therefor” .............. 40
`(iii) “and delivering the instant voice message to
`the selected recipients over the network, the
`selected recipients enabled to audibly play
`the instant voice message” .................................. 40
`(iv) “the selected recipients enabled to audibly
`play the instant voice message” .......................... 41
`-ii-
`
`
`
`
`(b)
`
`(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“and the server temporarily storing the
`instant voice message if a selected recipient
`is unavailable” ..................................................... 41
`(vi) “…and delivering the stored instant voice
`message to the selected recipient once the
`selected recipient becomes available” ................. 42
`Claim 3 (Dependent): “The instant voice messaging
`system according to claim 1, wherein the packet-
`switched network is the Internet.” ........................................... 43
`Claim 5 (Dependent): “The instant voice messaging
`system according to claim 1, wherein the server delivers
`the instant voice message to the selected recipients that
`are available.” ........................................................................... 44
`Claim 6 (Dependent): “The instant voice messaging
`system according to claim 1, wherein the client records
`the instant voice message in an audio file, transmits the
`audio file to the server, and the server delivers the audio
`file to the selected recipients, the selected recipients
`being enabled to audibly play the audio file.” ......................... 44
`Claim 9 (Dependent): “The instant voice messaging
`system according to claim 1, wherein the client is
`enabled to attach one or more files to the instant voice
`message and the selected recipients are enabled to store
`or display the one or more attached files.” .............................. 45
`(i)
`“wherein the client is enabled to attach one
`or more files to the instant voice message” ......... 46
`“…and the selected recipients are enabled to
`store or display the one or more attached
`files” .................................................................... 48
`Claim 40 (Independent) ........................................................... 49
`
`Claims 42, 43, 46 (Dependent) ................................................ 51
`
`C. Ground 2: Claim 2 is Obvious Over Zydney in View of Shinder ..... 53
`
`(v)
`
`(ii)
`
`-iii-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 2 (Dependent): “The instant voice messaging
`system according to claim 1, wherein the packet-
`switched network is a local network” ...................................... 53
`D. Ground 3: Claims 4 and 41 Are Obvious Over Zydney in view
`of Appelman and Martin-Flatin.......................................................... 59
`
`Claim 4 (Dependent): “The instant voice messaging
`system according to claim 1, wherein the client requests a
`list of recipients associated with the client from the server
`and the server transmits the list of recipients to the client
`for selection of the one or more recipients.” ............................ 59
`Claim 41 (Dependent) .............................................................. 70
`
`VIII. Conclusion .................................................................................................... 71
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-iv-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`List of Exhibits
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Description of Document
`Ex. No
`1001 U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890 to Michael J. Rojas
`1002 Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D.
`PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US00/21555 to Herbert Zydney et
`1003
`al. (filed August 7, 2000, published February 15, 2001 as WO
`01/11824 A2) (with line numbers added) (“Zydney”)
`1004 U.S. Patent No. 6,750,881 to Barry Appelman (filed February 24,
`1997, issued June 15, 2004) (“Appelman”)
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`Excerpts from MARGARET LEVINE YOUNG, INTERNET: THE
`COMPLETE REFERENCE (McGraw-Hill/Osborne, 2d ed. 2002)
`
`Excerpts from HARRY NEWTON, NEWTON’S TELECOM DICTIONARY
`(Telecom Books, 16th ed. 2000) (dated library copy)
`
`1007 U.S. Patent No. 6,757,365 B1 to Travis A. Bogard (filed October 16,
`2000, issued June 29, 2004)
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`Excerpts from DEBRA LITTLEJOHN SHINDER, COMPUTER
`NETWORKING ESSENTIALS (Cisco Press, 2002) (“Shinder”)
`
`J.P. Martin-Flatin, Push vs Pull in Web-Based Network Management,
`Proceedings of the Sixth IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on
`Network Management, 1999 (“Martin-Flatin”)
`
`RANDY J. HINRICHS, INTRANETS: WHAT’S THE BOTTOM LINE? (Sun
`Microsystems Press, 1997)
`
`Excerpts from MICROSOFT COMPUTER DICTIONARY (Microsoft Press,
`3d ed. 1997)
`
`Robert M. Metcalfe et al., Ethernet: Distributed Packet-Switching
`for Local Computer Networks, Communications of the ACM, Vol.
`19, No. 7 (June 1976)
`
`-v-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`List of Exhibits
`
`
`
`Ex. No
`1013
`
`Description of Document
`PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US00/21555 to Herbert Zydney et
`al. (filed August 7, 2000, published February 15, 2001 as WO
`01/11824 A2) (as-published version without added line numbers)
`
`1014
`
`Library of Congress stamped/dated copy of excerpts from DEBRA
`LITTLEJOHN SHINDER, COMPUTER NETWORKING ESSENTIALS (Cisco
`Press, 2001)
`1015 U.S. Patent No. 7,016,978 to Dale Malik et al. (filed April 29, 2002,
`issued March 21, 2006) (“Malik”)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-vi-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`This is a petition for Inter Partes Review of claims 1-6, 9, 40-43, and 46 of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890 [Ex. 1001] (“’890 patent”).
`
`I. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(A)(1)
`A. Real Party-In-Interest under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)
`Facebook, Inc. and WhatsApp Inc. (“Petitioners”) are the real parties-in-
`
`interest to this inter partes review petition.
`
`B. Related Matters under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)
`The ’890 patent is the subject of two pending requests for inter partes review
`
`(IPR2017-00220 and IPR2017-00221) filed by Apple Inc. on November 14, 2016.
`
`The Petitioners herein are not parties to IPR2017-00220 or IPR2017-00221 and were
`
`not involved in the preparation of those petitions. The Board issued a decision on
`
`May 25, 2017 to institute inter partes review based on IPR2017-00221. The Board
`
`denied the institution of inter partes review for IPR2017-00220 on May 25, 2017.
`
`Concurrent with the filing of this Petition, the Petitioners are filing a second
`
`petition for inter partes review to address claims not addressed by the present
`
`Petition. More specifically, the present Petition addresses claims 1-6, 9, 40-43, and
`
`46, while the other concurrently-filed petition addresses claims 14, 15, 17-20, 23,
`
`28, 29, 31-34, 37, 51-54, 57, 62-65, and 68. The Petitioners filed their challenges
`
`against these claims in two separate petitions to allow each petition to provide a more
`
`complete and thorough treatment of each claim.
`
`
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`The ’890 patent is also the subject of two pending litigations involving the
`
`Petitioners: Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Facebook, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00728-JRG
`
`(E.D. Tex. Filed July 5, 2016) and Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. WhatsApp, Inc., Case
`
`No. 2:16-cv-00645-JRG (E.D. Tex. Filed June 14, 2016), which have been
`
`consolidated for pretrial purposes with Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Samsung
`
`Electronics America, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00642-JRG (E.D. Tex.).
`
`The Petitioners are also aware of the following additional pending litigations
`
`involving the ’890 patent: Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Tencent America LLC et al.,
`
`Case No. 2:16-cv-00694-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Apple Inc., Case
`
`No. 2:16-cv-00638-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Blackberry
`
`Corporation et al., Case No. 2:16-cv-00639-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et
`
`al. v. Snap Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00696-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al.
`
`v. AOL Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00722-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v.
`
`Green Tomato Limited, Case No. 2:16-cv-00731-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc.
`
`et al. v. Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC., Case No. 2:16-cv-00732-JRG (E.D.
`
`Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Avaya Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00777-JRG (E.D.
`
`Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Telegram Messenger, LLP, Case No. 2:16-cv-
`
`00892-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. HTC America, Inc., Case No.
`
`2:16-cv-00989-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Kyocera America, Inc. et
`
`al., Case No. 2:16-cv-00990-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. LG
`
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`Electronics U.S.A., Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00991-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc.
`
`et al. v. Motorola Mobility LLC, Case No. 2:16-cv-00992-JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc
`
`USA, Inc. et al. v. ZTE (USA), Inc. et al., Case No. 2:16-cv-00993-JRG (E.D. Tex.);
`
`Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Huawei Device USA, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:16-cv-00994-
`
`JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Google, Inc., Case No. 2:17-cv-00214-
`
`JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Google, Inc., Case No. 2:17-cv-00224-
`
`JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Google, Inc., Case No. 2:17-cv-00231-
`
`JRG (E.D. Tex.); Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. KIK Interactive, Inc., Case No. 2:17-cv-
`
`00347-JRG (E.D. Tex.); and Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Hike Ltd., Case No. 2:17-cv-
`
`00349-JRG (E.D. Tex.). Although the Petitioners are not parties to these other
`
`litigations, because they involve allegations of infringement of the ’890 patent, they
`
`may be impacted by a decision by the Board in this IPR proceeding.
`
`C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)
`Petitioners provide the following designation of counsel.
`
`LEAD COUNSEL
`
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`
`Heidi L. Keefe (Reg. No. 40,673)
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`FB_Uniloc2_890_PTAB_IPR@cooley.com
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTN: Patent Group
`1299 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
`Suite 700
`Washington, DC 20004
`Tel: (650) 843-5001
`
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`Phillip E. Morton (Reg. No. 57,835)
`pmorton@cooley.com
`FB_Uniloc2_890_PTAB_IPR@cooley.com
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTN: Patent Group
`1299 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
`Suite 700
`Washington D.C. 20004
`Tel: (703) 456-8668
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`LEAD COUNSEL
`
`Fax: (650) 849-7400
`
`
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`
`Fax: (703) 456-8100
`Mark R. Weinstein (Admission pro hac
`vice pending)
`mweinstein@cooley.com
`Tel: (650) 843-5007
`Fax: (650) 849-7400
`
`
`
`Service Information
`D.
`This Petition is being served to the current correspondence address for the
`
`’890 patent, Legacy Town Center, 7160 Dallas Parkway, Suite 380, Plano, Texas
`
`75024. The Petitioners consent to electronic service at the addresses provided above
`
`for lead and back-up counsel.
`
`Power of Attorney
`E.
`Filed concurrently in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b).
`
`II.
`
`FEE PAYMENT - 37 C.F.R. § 42.103
`This Petition requests review of twelve (12) claims. A payment of $23,000 is
`
`submitted herewith, based on a $9,000 request fee (for up to 20 claims), and a post-
`
`institution fee of $14,000 (for up to 15 claims). This Petition meets the fee
`
`requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 312(a)(1). If additional fees are due at any time during
`
`this proceeding, the Director is hereby authorized to charge such fees to Cooley
`
`LLP’s deposit account number 50-1283.
`
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`III. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW UNDER 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.104
`AND 42.108
`A. Grounds for Standing under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)
`The Petitioners certify that the ’890 patent is available for inter partes review
`
`and that the Petitioners are not barred or otherwise estopped from requesting inter
`
`partes review on the grounds identified herein.
`
`B.
`
`Identification of Challenge under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) and
`Statement of Precise Relief Requested
`The Petitioners respectfully request that the Board initiate inter partes review
`
`of claims 1-6, 9, 40-43, and 46 on the following grounds (independent claims shown
`
`in bold):
`
`Ground
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`Claims
`1, 3, 5, 6, 9,
`40, 42, 43, 46
`2
`
`4, 41
`
`Basis for Challenge
`Unpatentable over Zydney (Ex. 1003), under § 103(a)
`
`Unpatentable over Zydney (Ex. 1003) in view of
`Shinder (Ex. 1008), under § 103(a)
`Unpatentable over Zydney (Ex. 1003) in view of
`Appelman (Ex. 1004) and Martin-Flatin (Ex. 1009),
`under § 103(a)
`
`Part VII below explains why the challenged claims are unpatentable based
`
`on these grounds. These references were not cited during the original prosecution
`
`of the ’890 patent or in the separate IPR petitions filed by Apple Inc. on the ’890
`
`patent (IPR2017-00220 and IPR2017-00221). Submitted with the present Petition
`
`is a Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D. [Ex. 1002] (“Lavian”), a technical expert with
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`decades of relevant technical experience. (Lavian, ¶¶1-10, Ex. A.)
`
`IV. TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND RELEVANT TO A PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL
`IN THE ART
`As explained by Dr. Lavian, a person of ordinary skill in the art for purposes
`
`of the ’890 patent would have possessed at least a bachelor’s degree in computer
`
`science, computer engineering, or electrical engineering with at least two years of
`
`experience in development and programming relating to network communication
`
`systems (or equivalent degree or experience). (Lavian, ¶¶13-15.)
`
`As discussed in more detail below, the ’890 patent relates generally to instant
`
`messaging systems. The term “instant messaging” or “IM” generally refers to a
`
`technology that allows two or more people to exchange information with other users,
`
`including text, voice data, and/or files. (Id., ¶¶31, 32.)
`
`Instant messaging technologies date back to at least the 1960s with the MIT
`
`“Interconsole Messages” system, which allowed users to exchange textual messages
`
`over a network. (Id., ¶33.) Through the 1980s and 1990s, companies such as
`
`CompuServe, Commodore, and America Online (AOL), among others, released
`
`instant messaging solutions to the public, some of which became immensely
`
`popular. (Id., ¶¶34-37.) For example, by 2002, AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), the
`
`instant messaging service offered by AOL, had more than 100 million registered
`
`users. (Id., ¶38.)
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`The ’890 patent also acknowledges that instant messaging solutions were
`
`known in the art. The Background section of the patent explains that known instant
`
`messaging (“IM”) systems generally included client devices, IM software installed
`
`on those client devices, and IM servers. (’890, 2:23-27.) IM systems communicated
`
`over a packet-switched network, such as the Internet. (Id., 1:26-27, 2:23-27.) The
`
`IM server maintained a list of users that were currently “online” and able to receive
`
`messages and presented this list to the users via the instant messaging software. (Id.,
`
`2:27-30; Lavian, ¶41.) A user could select one or more recipients and send them a
`
`message. (’890, 2:31-33; Lavian, ¶¶31, 41-43.) The IM server would transmit the
`
`message to the recipients and the message would be displayed to the recipients by
`
`the IM software. (’890, 2:33-35.)
`
`Instant messaging services typically required that the user have software (an
`
`IM client) that allowed a user to send messages to others. The messages would
`
`typically be communicated to a server which would either deliver the message to the
`
`recipients, or store them at the server if the recipient was not currently available.
`
`(Lavian, ¶¶31, 42, 43.) IM clients typically varied in terms of what types of
`
`information they could transmit, how they indicate availability of other users,
`
`whether and how they secure the communications, and other details. (Id., ¶32.)
`
`
`
`
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`V. THE ’890 PATENT
`The ’890 patent purports to describe a system and method for delivering
`
`instant voice messages over a packet-switched network. (’890, Abstract.) The
`
`disclosed system includes a client such as a VoIP telephone or PC computer
`
`“enabled for IP telephony” that is connected to a server and instant voice message
`
`(“IVM”) recipients through a network(s). (Id., 1:32-39, 2:49-60, 6:51-58.)
`
`In one embodiment, when a user chooses to send an IVM, the IVM client
`
`displays a “list of one or more IVM recipients.” (Id., 7:55-58.) This recipient list is
`
`provided and stored by an IVM server. (Id.) Once recipients are selected, the user
`
`records a message, such as by using a microphone to record a digitized audio file.
`
`(Id., 7:64-8:1.) The patent states that one or more files may be attached to the instant
`
`voice message, such as by using a conventional “drag-and-drop” technique. (Id.,
`
`12:18-31, 13:26-31.)
`
`Once the voice message is generated, the client transmits the voice message
`
`to the server for delivery to one or more recipients. (Id., 8:17-25.) After receiving
`
`the IVM, the server transmits the voice message to the one or more recipients. (Id.,
`
`8:17-19.) If the recipient is “available” (currently connected to the IVM server), it
`
`will receive the instant voice message. (Id., 8:22-24.) If a recipient is unavailable
`
`(offline), the server temporarily saves the voice message and transmits it once the
`
`recipient becomes available. (Id., 8:24-29.) The recipient is notified of the new
`
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`voice message and can play the audio file. (Id., 8:19-22.) If the message has
`
`attachments, the recipient can also access the attached files. (Id., 12:63-13:3.)
`
`This Petition addresses claims 1-6, 9, 40-43, and 46. Claims 1 and 40 are
`
`independent claims. Claims 2-5 depend from claim 1, and claims 41-43, and 46
`
`depend from claim 40.
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(B)(3)
`The Petitioners do not contend that any term from the ’890 patent requires an
`
`explicit construction in order to understand how the claims apply to the prior art
`
`cited below. The Petitioners respectfully request that the Board adopt the broadest
`
`reasonable construction consistent with the ordinary and customary meaning of the
`
`challenged claims. See, e.g., Facebook, Inc. v. EveryMD LLC, IPR2014-00242,
`
`Paper 15 (May 21, 2014) (“[W]e cannot discern how the constructions proffered by
`
`Petitioner add any clarity to the claim terms, which, though broad, are relatively
`
`simple. Therefore, for purposes of this Decision, we conclude that no explicit
`
`construction is necessary….”).
`
`VII. CLAIMS 1-6, 9, 40-43, AND 46 ARE UNPATENTABLE
`Claims 1-6, 9, 40-43, and 46 are unpatentable based on the following grounds:
`
`Ground
`1
`
`Claims
`1, 3, 5, 6, 9,
`40, 42, 43, 46
`
`Basis for Challenge
`Unpatentable over Zydney (Ex. 1003), under § 103(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`Ground
`2
`
`Claims
`2
`
`3
`
`4, 41
`
`Basis for Challenge
`Unpatentable over Zydney (Ex. 1003) in view of Shinder
`(Ex. 1008), under § 103(a)
`Unpatentable over Zydney (Ex. 1003) in view of
`Appelman (Ex. 1004) and Martin-Flatin (Ex. 1009),
`under § 103(a)
`
`This Petition will first provide an overview of each of the prior art references
`
`cited in the three grounds listed above, and will then discuss those grounds in the
`
`order in which they are listed above.
`
`A. Brief Summary and Date Qualification of the Prior Art
` Overview of Zydney [Ex. 1003]
`Zydney is a published PCT application that describes a system for voice
`
`communication that enables a user to send instant voice messages, which Zydney
`
`calls “voice containers.” (Zydney, Ex, 1003, 2:2-3.) The system transmits the voice
`
`containers “instantaneously or stored for later delivery,” depending on whether or
`
`not the recipient is currently online. (Id., 1:19-22, 15:8-21.) Zydney qualifies as
`
`prior art vis-à-vis the ’890 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (pre-AIA) because
`
`Zydney was published on February 15, 2001, more than one year before the earliest
`
`patent application filing date for the ’890 patent.
`
`The Petitioners also note that the Zydney reference contains page numbers but
`
`does not contain line numbers. Accordingly, for convenience of the Board and ease
`
`of reference, the Petitioners have attached a copy of Zydney in Exhibit 1003 that
`
`
`
`
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`adds line numbers to the left of each page (beginning on page 1), to facilitate precise
`
`citation to the passages of the reference cited in this Petition. Any citations to line
`
`numbers of Zydney in this Petition and in the Lavian Declaration, therefore, refer to
`
`these added line numbers as shown in Exhibit 1003. A copy of the original Zydney
`
`reference (without line numbers) is submitted as Exhibit 1013.
`
`The system of Zydney is generally shown in Figure 1A, reproduced below.
`
`(Zydney, Fig. 1A.)
`
`
`
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`Three key components of the system include the “SENDER PC SOFTWARE
`
`AGENT” shown on the left (22), the “RECIPIENT PC SOFTWARE AGENT”
`
`shown on the right (28), and the “CENTRAL SERVER” shown in the middle (24)
`
`of Figure 1A. (Id., 10:19-11:1.) Zydney explains that the sender and recipient
`
`software agents may work on any suitable client device such as “a personal
`
`computer, wireless handheld computer such a personal data assistant (PDA), digital
`
`telephone, or beeper.” (Id., 11:14-20.) Central server (24) facilitates instant voice
`
`messaging between the sender and the recipient. (Id., 10:20-11:1.) The sender,
`
`recipient, and central server communicate with each other using a communications
`
`network, as shown with the bottom cloud labeled “INTERNET” in Figure 1A. (Id.,
`
`Fig. 1A; see also id., 5:4-5, 5:15-18, 10:11-14, 14:2-5.)1
`
`Sending a voice instant message from a sender to a recipient in Zydney is
`
`straightforward. A message sender (originator) “selects one or more intended
`
`recipients from a list of names that have been previously entered into the software
`
`agent.” (Id., 14:17-19.) The sender also “digitally records messages for one or more
`
`
`1 Figure 1A also depicts an alternative embodiment in which a sender and recipient
`
`can communicate using phones (32, 34) connected over the Public Switched
`
`Telephone Network (PSTN). (Id., Fig. 1A.) This Petition will focus on the Internet-
`
`connected embodiment described in the text.
`
`
`
`
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`recipients using a microphone-equipped device and the software agent. The
`
`software agent compresses the voice and stores the file temporarily on the PC if the
`
`voice will be delivered as an entire message.” (Id., 16:1-4; see also id., 20:11-14,
`
`21:11-16 (describing “the recording of one or more voice packet messages on a
`
`personal computer” as “voice files [that] can be played and recorded using voice
`
`container enabled devices.”).)2 The voice message is placed into a “voice
`
`container,” which can be transmitted to the destination. (Id., 10:20-11:3.)
`
`Zydney describes at least two modes in which voice messages can be
`
`transmitted: a “pack and send” mode and an “intercom” mode. This Petition will
`
`focus primarily on the “pack and send” mode as it is more pertinent to the challenged
`
`claims of the ’890 patent.
`
`Zydney explains that “[a] pack and send mode of operation is one in which
`
`the message is first acquired, compressed and then stored in a voice container 26
`
`which is then sent to its destination(s).” (Id., 11:1-3; see also id., Fig. 4.) The
`
`software agent compresses and stores the voice container on the sender’s client
`
`device. (Id., 16:3-4, 12:1-8, 10:20-11:3.) The sender also can include “multimedia
`
`attachments” with the voice message, such as graphics. (Id., 19:2-8, 22:17-20, Fig.
`
`
`2 Unless otherwise indicated, all underlining or boldface type in quotations
`
`appearing in this Petition has been added for emphasis.
`
`
`
`
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`6.) The software agent then transmits the voice container (and any attachments) to
`
`either the central server for delivery or, alternatively, directly to the recipient. (Id.,
`
`12:1, 12:20-23, 16:7-10.)
`
`If the recipient is online, it receives the voice container immediately. (Id.,
`
`1:21-22 (“routed to the appropriate recipients instantaneously.”).) If the recipient is
`
`offline, the server stores the voice container until the recipient is available, as shown
`
`in Figure 4. (Id., 13:12-15, 14:9-11, Fig. 4 (“if recipient is not online, client sends
`
`voice container to server file”).) The central server can later forward the stored voice
`
`container to the recipient once it logs in. (Id., claim 1, 14:14-16, Fig. 4 (“recipient
`
`logs on to internet or intranet,” “server recognizes recipient, downloads voice
`
`container”), 16:10-12 (“If the intended recipient has a compatible active software
`
`agent on line after log on, the central server downloads the voice recording almost
`
`immediately to the recipient.”).)
`
`Once the recipient’s software agent receives the voice container, it unpacks
`
`the voice container and any attachments, and presents them to the recipient. (Id.,
`
`Fig. 18, 35:20-22.) The software agent can then audibly play the voice message to
`
`the recipient through the speakers or headset attached to the device. (Id., 13:19-22,
`
`14:14-16, 16:10-14.)
`
`
`
`
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
` Overview of Shinder [Ex. 1008]
`Shinder, entitled “Computer Networking Essentials,” is a textbook published
`
`by Cisco Systems, a well-known supplier of networking equipment. (Lavian, ¶66.)
`
`Shinder purports to provide an introduction to the concepts of computer networking.
`
`(Shinder, Introduction, p.xxii.) Shinder qualifies as prior art under at least 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 102(b) (pre-AIA) because it was published more than one year before the earliest
`
`patent application to which the ’890 could claim priority. (Ex. 1014.)
`
`This Petition cites Shinder solely in connection with Ground 2 and dependent
`
`claim 2 reciting: “The instant voice messaging system according to claim 1, wherein
`
`the packet-switched network is a local network.” Shinder confirms that a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would have found nothing inventive or non-obvious about
`
`the claimed “local network.” The use of local networks such as local area networks
`
`(LANs) was so prevalent that anyone who has worked for a medium or large
`
`corporation or organization would likely have encountered them. (Lavian, ¶¶68, 74,
`
`152.) As explained in Shinder: “It seems that in any business facility you enter, there
`
`is a computer (or several) on every desktop, all of them linked to an internal LAN,
`
`the external Internet, and a few remote private networks for good measure.”
`
`(Shinder, p.19.) If the Board is reading this Petition on a computer, the chances are
`
`high that the computer is linked to some kind of local network.
`
`
`
`
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`Shinder explains that a local area network or “LAN” is a local network
`
`typically limited to a particular geographic area. (Id., p.24 (“A local-area network
`
`(LAN) is a network that is confined to a limited geographic area.”); id., pp.34, 663.)
`
`“LANs connect workstations, peripherals, terminals, and other devices in a single
`
`building or other geographically limited area.” (Id., p.663; id. p.24.) One of the
`
`most prevalent technologies for linking computers in a LAN was known as
`
`“E