`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Title: SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSTANT VOIP MESSAGING
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,535,890
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`SNAP INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC USA, INC. and UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.
`Patent Owners
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent 7,535,890 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1
`I.
`II. Requirements under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ............................................................ 2
`A.
`Identification of challenge and statement of relief requested .................... 2
`III. The ’890 Patent .................................................................................................. 4
`A. Overview .................................................................................................... 4
`B. Claims ......................................................................................................... 5
`1.
`Independent Claims ............................................................................ 5
`2. Dependent Claims ............................................................................... 7
`C. Prosecution History .................................................................................... 8
`IV. Claim construction ............................................................................................. 9
`A. POSITA ...................................................................................................... 9
`B. “External Network” .................................................................................... 9
`V. State of the Art .................................................................................................12
`A. Storing-or-delivering an instant voice message based on recipient
`availability was well-known. .................................................................... 12
`B. Different types of networks were well-known. ........................................ 15
`C. Distributed server architecture was well-known ...................................... 17
`D. Packet-switched networks were well-known ........................................... 19
`VI. Ground 1: Malik and Väänänen Render Obvious Claims 1-3, 5, 14, 15, 17, 19,
`28, 29, 31, 33, 40, 42, 51, 53, 62, and 64. ........................................................20
`A. Overview of Malik ................................................................................... 20
`B. Overview of Väänänen ............................................................................. 22
`C. KSR for the Malik-Väänänen Combination ............................................. 23
`1. Recipient Selection ...........................................................................23
`2. Transmitting Recipient Information .................................................24
`3. Same Field ........................................................................................25
`Independent Claim 1 ................................................................................. 26
`1.
`[1.P]: “An instant voice messaging system for delivering instant
`messages over a packet-switched network, the system
`comprising” .......................................................................................26
`
`D.
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`

`

`
`
`2.
`3.
`
`4.
`5.
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`[1.1a]: “a client connected to the network” ......................................27
`[1.1b]: “the client selecting one or more recipients” ........................27
`a) Malik .........................................................................................27
`b) Väänänen ...................................................................................28
`c) KSR ............................................................................................28
`[1.1c]: “generating an instant voice message therefor” ....................29
`[1.1d]: “transmitting the selected recipients and the instant voice
`message therefor over the network” .................................................29
`a) Malik .........................................................................................29
`b) Väänänen ...................................................................................30
`c) KSR ............................................................................................30
`[1.2a]: “a server connected to the network” .....................................31
`[1.2b]: “the server receiving the selected recipients and the
`instant voice message therefor” ........................................................31
`[1.2c]: “delivering the instant voice message to the selected
`recipients over the network” .............................................................31
`[1.2d]: “the selected recipients enabled to audibly play the instant
`voice message” .................................................................................32
`10. [1.2e]: “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.” ...........................................................32
`a) Malik .........................................................................................32
`b) Väänänen ...................................................................................33
`c) KSR ............................................................................................33
`E. Dependent Claims 2, 3, and 5 ................................................................... 34
`1. Dependent Claim 2: local network ...................................................34
`a) Malik .........................................................................................34
`b) Väänänen ...................................................................................34
`c) KSR ............................................................................................34
`2. Dependent Claim 3: Internet .............................................................35
`3. Dependent Claim 5: delivery to available recipient[s] .....................35
`
`6.
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`

`

`
`
`F.
`
`d)
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`Independent Claim 14 ............................................................................... 35
`1. Additional limitations in claim 14 ....................................................38
`a)
`[14.P]: a plurality of packet-switched networks .......................38
`b)
`[14.1a]: local network ...............................................................38
`c)
`[14.1b]: external recipients connected to an external network .38
`(1) KSR to incorporate FIG. 3’s Internet into FIG.
`2 of Malik. ......................................................................39
`[14.1d]: transmission over the local network and the external
`network .....................................................................................40
`[14.2a]: a server connected to the external network .................40
`e)
`[14.2c]: delivery over the external network ..............................40
`f)
`G. Dependent claims 15, 17, and 19 ............................................................. 41
`1. Dependent Claim 15: local server ....................................................41
`2. Dependent Claim 17: Internet ...........................................................43
`3. Dependent Claim 19: delivery to available recipient[s] ...................43
`Independent Claim 28 ............................................................................... 43
`1. Additional Limitations in Claim 28 ..................................................46
`a)
`[28.P]: a plurality of packet-switched networks .......................46
`b)
`[28.1a]: external network ..........................................................47
`c)
`[28.1b]: recipients connected to a local network ......................47
`d)
`[28.1d]: transmission over the external network ......................47
`e)
`[28.2a], [28.2b]: external server system ...................................48
`f)
`[28.2c]: routing ..........................................................................48
`g)
`[28.3a], [28.3b], [28.3e]: local server receiving and delivering
`the message ...............................................................................49
`(1) KSR – Modify Malik Server Communications
`to Server Forwarding Voice Messages ...........................49
`2. Dependent Claim 29: external recipients..........................................51
`3. Dependent Claim 31: Internet ...........................................................53
`4. Dependent Claim 33: delivery to available recipient[s] ...................53
`Independent Claim 40 ............................................................................... 53
`
`H.
`
`I.
`
`
`
`- iii -
`
`

`

`J.
`
`K.
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`1. Dependent Claim 42: delivery to available recipient[s] ...................55
`Independent Claim 51 ............................................................................... 55
`1. Dependent Claim 53: delivery to available recipient[s] ...................57
`Independent Claim 62 ............................................................................... 57
`1. Dependent Claim 64: delivery to available recipient[s] ...................59
`VII. Ground 2: Malik, Väänänen, and Deshpande Render Obvious Claims 4, 18,
`32, 41, 52, and 63. ............................................................................................59
`A. Dependent claims 4, 18, 32, 41, 52, and 63: server providing a list of
`recipients for client selection. ................................................................... 59
`1. Dependent Claim 4 ...........................................................................59
`a) Malik-Väänänen ........................................................................59
`b) Deshpande .................................................................................60
`c) KSR ............................................................................................61
`2. Dependent Claim 18 .........................................................................62
`3. Dependent Claim 32 .........................................................................63
`4. Dependent Claim 41 .........................................................................64
`5. Dependent Claim 52 .........................................................................64
`6. Dependent Claim 63 .........................................................................65
`Ground 3: Malik, Väänänen, and Abburi Render Obvious Claims 6, 20,
`VIII.
`34, 43, 54, and 65. ............................................................................................65
`A. Dependent Claims 6, 20, 34, 43, 54, 65: audio file .................................. 65
`1. Claim 6 ..............................................................................................65
`a) Malik-Väänänen ........................................................................65
`b) Abburi .......................................................................................66
`c) KSR ............................................................................................66
`2. Claim 20 ............................................................................................67
`3. Claim 34 ............................................................................................67
`4. Claim 43 ............................................................................................68
`5. Claim 54 ............................................................................................68
`6. Claim 65 ............................................................................................68
`IX. Mandatory notices under 37 C.F.R. §42.8 .......................................................68
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`A. Real parties-in-interest (§42.8(b)(1)) ....................................................... 68
`B. Notice of related matters (§42.8(b)(2)) .................................................... 68
`C. Lead and back-up counsel (§42.8(b)(3)) .................................................. 72
`D. Service Information (§42.8(b)(4)) ............................................................ 73
`E. Power of Attorney .................................................................................... 74
`X. Payment of Fees – 37 C.F.R. § 42.103 ............................................................74
`XI. Grounds for standing ........................................................................................74
`XI. Conclusion ........................................................................................................75
`
`
`
`
`
`- v -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`EXHIBIT
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
`1001
`
`1002
`1003
`
`1004
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`1013
`
`Rojas, U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890 (filed December 18, 2003,
`issued May 19, 2009).
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`Declaration of Leonard J. Forys, Ph.D., filed as Ex. 1003 in
`Apple Inc. v. Uniloc USA, Inc., Case IPR2017-00221
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Leonard J. Forys, Ph.D.
`
`Vuori, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0146097
`(filed July 23, 2001, published October 10, 2002).
`
`Wu et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No.
`2002/0023131 (filed March 19, 2001, published February 21,
`2002).
`
`Malik, U.S. Patent No. 7,123,695 (filed August 19, 2002, issued
`October 17, 2006).
`
`Väänänen, WO Patent Publication No. 02/17658 (filed August
`20, 2001, published February 28, 2002).
`
`Deshpande, U.S. Patent Application Publication No.
`2003/0046273 (filed August 28, 2001, published March 6,
`2003).
`
`Daniell et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No.
`2004/0068545, (filed December 19, 2002, published April 8,
`2004).
`
`Aoki et al., “The IMX Architecture Interoperability with
`America Online’s Instant Messaging Services,” June 15, 2000.
`
`Excerpts from Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 5th ed. (2002).
`
`Excerpt from Webster’s New World College Dictionary, 4th ed.,
`New York: MacMillan, 1999.
`
`
`
`- vi -
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`DESCRIPTION
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`Staack et al., WO Patent Publication No. 02/07396 (filed July
`13, 2000, published January 24, 2002)
`
`Abburi, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0147512
`(filed February 1, 2002, published August 7, 2003).
`
`Old Version of AOL Instant Messenger 2.1 Download, retrieved
`from http://www.oldapps.com/aim.php?old_aim=4#screenshots.
`
`Clarke et. al., Experiments with packet switching of voice
`traffic, IEE Proceedings G - Electronic Circuits and Systems,
`V.130, N.4 , pp. 105-113 (August 1983).
`
`Sharma, VoP (voice over packet), IEEE Potentials, V. 21, N. 4,
`October/November 2002, pp. 14-17.
`
`Schuh et al., WO Patent Publication No. 2003/024027 (filed
`August 21, 2002, published March 20, 2003).
`
`Lotito et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,625,081 (filed November 30,
`1982, issued November 25, 1986).
`
`Pershan, U.S. Patent No. 5,260,986 (filed April 23, 1991, issued
`November 9, 1993).
`
`Hogan et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,619,554 (filed June 8, 1994,
`issued April 8, 1997).
`
`International Telecommunication Union, General Aspects of
`Digital Transmission Systems, Terminal Equipments, Pulse
`Code Modulation (PCM) of Voice Frequencies, ITU-T
`Recommendation G.711., pp. 1-10 (ITU 1993).
`
`Oouchi et al., Study on Appropriate Voice Data Length of IP
`Packets for VoIP Network Adjustment, Proceedings of the IEEE
`Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM) 2002,
`V. 2, Taipei, Taiwan, 2002, pp. 1618–1622.
`
`1025
`
`Locascio, U.S. Patent No. 6,603,757 (filed April 14, 1999,
`issued August 5, 2003).
`
`
`
`- vii -
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`1028
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`DESCRIPTION
`
`Peersman et al., The Global System for Mobile
`Communications Short Message Service, IEEE Personal
`Communications (June 2000).
`
`SMPP v3.4 Protocol Implementation guide for GSM / UMTS
`(May 30, 2002).
`
`Webster’s New World Dictionary and Thesaurus, 2nd ed.
`(2002).
`
`
`This Exhibit list covers all of the Exhibits cited by Dr. Forys in his
`
`Declaration, Ex. 1003, but not all exhibits are used in this petition.
`
`
`
`- viii -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 311 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.100, Petitioner Snap Inc.
`
`
`
`(“Snap”) respectfully requests inter partes review of claims 1–6, 14, 15, 17–20, 28,
`
`29, 31–34, 40–43, 51–54, and 62–65 of U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890 B2 (“’890
`
`Patent”). Snap is filing concurrently herewith a Motion for Joinder pursuant to 35
`
`U.S.C. § 315(c) and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.22 and 42.122(b), requesting that the Board
`
`institute inter partes review and join the present proceeding with pending
`
`proceeding IPR2017-00221.
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890 (Ex. 1001, “’890 Patent.”) is directed to an instant
`
`voice messaging system for delivering instant messages (IM) over a packet-
`
`switched network. (’890 Patent, Abstract.) The inventor incorrectly perceived that
`
`“no instant messaging vendor is concentrating on voice” at the time. (Ex. 1002,
`
`’890 Patent File History, 96.) The alleged “innovation,” characterized by the
`
`inventor, is nothing more than “instant voice,” by combining well-known instant
`
`messaging features in a voice messaging system, as admitted during prosecution.
`
`(Id., 90, 96.)
`
`The Examiner erroneously issued the ’890 Patent alleging a patentable
`
`limitation that was a well-known IM technique and already applied in many voice-
`
`messaging systems:
`
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`
`a server that temporarily stores an instant voice message if a recipient
`is unavailable and delivers the stored instant voice message when the
`recipient becomes available.
`(Id., 45.)
`
`For example, Malik teaches that a voice instant message (VIM) server
`
`temporarily stores the VIM for the unavailable recipient until the server delivers
`
`the VIM when the recipient later becomes available. (Ex. 1007, Malik, 3:20-21,
`
`5:21-27 3:20-21.)
`
`In addition, all other limitations of the challenged claims were broadly
`
`applied and well known in the industry, and there was nothing novel about how
`
`those limitations were combined. Accordingly, the Petition should be granted and
`
`trial instituted on all the challenged claims as set forth below.
`
`II. Requirements under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`Identification of challenge and statement of relief requested
`A.
`Petitioner respectfully requests inter partes review and cancellation of
`
`challenged claims based on three grounds1 as follows:
`
`
`
`1 Snap’s grounds 1-3 correspond to, and recite the same claims as, grounds 5-7 in
`
`Exhibit 1003 (the Forys Declaration) and Apple’s instituted petition in IPR-00221
`
`(the “Original Petition”).
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Ground Statute
`1
`§ 103
`
`2
`
`3
`
`§ 103
`
`§ 103
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`Claims
`1-3, 5, 14, 15,
`17, 19, 28, 29,
`31, 33, 40, 42,
`51, 53, 62, 64
`4, 18, 32, 41,
`52, 63
`6, 20, 34, 43,
`54, 65
`
`Prior Art
`Malik2 and Väänänen3
`
`Malik, Väänänen, and
`Deshpande4
`Malik, Väänänen, and
`Abburi5,6
`
`
`
`
`2 Malik (Ex. 1007) filed August 19, 2002, and is prior art under §102(e).
`
`3 Väänänen (Ex. 1008) published on February 28, 2002, and is prior art under
`
`§102(b).
`
`4 Deshpande (Ex. 1009) filed on August 28, 2001, published March 6, 2003, and is
`
`prior art under §§102(a) and 102(e).
`
`5 Abburi (Ex. 1015) filed on February 1, 2002, published on August 7, 2003, and is
`
`prior art under §§102(a) and 102(e).
`
`6 In its Decision on the Original Petition, the Board instituted trial on claims 6, 20,
`
`34, 43, 54, and 65 as obvious over Malik and Väänänen and obvious over Malik,
`
`Väänänen, and Abburi. Apple Inc. v. Uniloc USA, Inc., Case IPR2017-00221, slip
`
`op. at 36, 39 (PTAB May 25, 2017) (Paper 9). Petitioner requests inter partes
`
`review on both grounds.
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`III. The ’890 Patent
`A. Overview
`The ’890 Patent is directed to “an instant voice messaging system” for
`
`“delivering instant messages over a packet-switched network.” (’890 Patent,
`
`Abstract.) The ’890 Patent’s system comprises a client, a server, and selected
`
`recipient[s] connected through a network. (Id., 2:49-60.) At the client, one or more
`
`recipients may be selected, and an instant voice message is generated. (Id.) The
`
`selected recipient[s] and the generated message are transmitted over the network to
`
`the server. (Id.) The server delivers the received message to the selected
`
`recipient[s] over the network. (Id.) The selected recipient[s] can audibly play
`
`message. (Id.)
`
`The ’890 Patent’s server provides “contact presence (connection)
`
`information and message scheduling and delivery” for the connected recipient[s].
`
`(Id., 14:60-63.) For example, when the server receives an instant voice message, if
`
`the recipient is not connected to the server (i.e., unavailable), the server
`
`temporarily saves the message and delivers the message when the recipient[s] is
`
`available. (Id., 8:22-29.)
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`B. Claims
`Independent Claims
`1.
`The challenged claims include six sets of claims. Claims 1, 14, 28, 40, 51,
`
`and 62 are the independent claims. Claim 1 is representative7:
`
`• An instant voice messaging system for delivering instant
`messages over a packet-switched network,
`the system
`comprising:
`• a client connected to the network, the client
`o selecting one or more recipients,
`o generating an instant voice message therefor, and
`o transmitting the selected recipients and the instant voice
`message therefor over the network; and
`• a server connected to the network, the server
`o receiving the selected recipients and the instant voice
`message therefor, and
`o 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
`o temporarily storing the instant voice message if a
`selected recipient is unavailable and
`
`
`7 Formatting added.
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`o delivering the stored instant voice message to the
`selected recipient once the selected recipient becomes
`available.
`(’890 Patent, Claim 1.)
`
`The other independent claims recite substantially similar limitations. The
`
`differences among the independent claims mostly relate to various types of
`
`network(s) connecting the client, server(s), and recipient(s). Based on these
`
`differences, the six independent claims can be categorized into three groups. (Forys
`
`Dec., ¶56.)
`
`Group 1: independent claims 1 and 40 relate to a system/method for
`
`delivering an instant voice message over a packet-switched network. The
`
`“client,” “server,” and “recipient(s)” are all connected to this network. (Forys Dec.,
`
`¶57.)
`
`Group 2: independent claims 14 and 51 relate to a system/method for
`
`delivering an instant voice message over a plurality of packet-switched networks
`
`(including “local network” and “external network”).The “client” is connected to
`
`the “local network.” The “[external] server” and the “external recipient(s)” are
`
`connected to the “external network.” (Forys Dec., ¶58.)
`
`Group 3: independent claims 28 and 62 also relate to a system/method for
`
`delivering an instant voice message over a plurality of packet-switched networks
`
`(including “local network” and “external network”). However, the message flow of
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`claims 28 and 62 is almost the reverse of claims 14 and 51. In claims 28 and 62,
`
`the “client” is connected to the “external network” while the “recipient(s)” are
`
`connected to the “local network.” Claims 28 and 62 further recite an “external
`
`server” connected to the “external network,” and a “local server” connected to the
`
`“local network.” In addition, the “external server” forwards the instant voice
`
`message to the “local server” for delivery because claims 28 and 62 recite that the
`
`“external server” routes and the “local server” receives the message. (Forys Dec.,
`
`¶59.)
`
`Dependent Claims
`
`2.
`The challenged dependent claims recite additional well-known limitations.
`
`Claim 2 relates to a local network. Claims 3, 17, 31 relate to the Internet. Claims 5,
`
`19, 33, 42, 53, 64 relate to delivering the message to available recipient[s]. Claims
`
`4, 18, 32, 41, 52, 63 relate to the server providing a list of recipients for client
`
`selection. Claims 6, 20, 34, 43, 54, 65 relate to recording, transmitting, and
`
`delivering the message in the form of an audio file. (Forys Dec., ¶60.)
`
`In addition, claim 15 recites a local server receiving and delivering the
`
`message to local recipient[s]. Claim 29 recites “external recipient[s]” connected to
`
`the external network.
`
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`Prosecution History
`
`C.
`The Examiner allowed the ’890 Patent because the applied references
`
`supposedly fail to teach or render obvious “a server that temporarily stores an
`
`instant voice message if a recipient is unavailable and delivers the stored instant
`
`voice message when the recipient becomes available.” (’890 File History, 45.) But
`
`a server storing-or-delivering an instant voice message based on recipient
`
`availability was widely known well before the earliest possible priority date of the
`
`’890 Patent. (Forys Dec., ¶63.)
`
`Patentee did submit a §1.131 affidavit alleging a conception date before
`
`August 15, 2003. (’890 File History, 89-135.) Even if the affidavit meets §1.131
`
`standards, which it does not, all the applied references in this Petition are still prior
`
`art.
`
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`IV. Claim construction8
`POSITA
`A.
`Regarding the ’890 Patent, a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA)
`
`would have at least the equivalent of a Bachelor degree in Electrical Engineering,
`
`Computer Science, or an equivalent field as well as at least 3–5 years of academic
`
`or industry experience in communications systems, messaging systems, data
`
`networks including VoIP, and mobile telephony, or comparable industry
`
`experience. (Forys Dec., ¶30.)
`
`“External Network”
`
`B.
`Independent claims 14, 28, 51, and 62 recite an “external network.” Under
`
`the BRI, the term “external network” means “a network that is outside another
`
`network.” (Forys Dec., ¶64.) One example would be the Internet, as found in
`
`dependent claims 17 and 31.
`
`
`8 For consistency in view of Snap’s Motion for Joinder, this Petition states the
`
`same claim interpretations herein that were stated in the Original Petition in
`
`IPR2017-00221. Snap also reserves the rights to maintain or revisit claim
`
`constructions in litigation and to challenge indefiniteness of all claim terms in
`
`litigation.
`
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`The context of the claims supports this construction. The claims recite “an
`
`
`
`external network outside the local network.” (’890 Patent, Claims 14, 51.) The
`
`plain meaning of the word “external” further supports this construction. (Ex. 1013,
`
`Webster’s, 503 (defining “external” as “on or having to do with the outside; outer;
`
`exterior”).) (Forys Dec., ¶65.)
`
`The context of the claims also supports that the Internet is an example of the
`
`“external network,” reciting, “wherein the external network is the Internet.” (’890
`
`Patent, Claims 17, 31; Forys Dec., ¶66.)
`
`The specification does not provide an embodiment that specifically refers to
`
`the term “external network.” The specification only recites the claimed “external
`
`network” in Section “SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION,” with the same level of
`
`details as the claims (e.g., reciting “an external network outside the local
`
`network”). (Ex. 1001, 3:24-4:26; Forys Dec., ¶67.)
`
`FIG. 5 of the ’890 Patent provides an exemplary “global instant voice
`
`messaging (IVM) system 500” that utilizes both local networks and/or the
`
`Internet.9 (Ex. 1001, 15:24-25; Forys Dec., ¶68.)
`
`
`9 However, this embodiment does not explicitly refer to the term, “external
`
`network.”
`
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`
`
`
`(’890 Patent, FIG. 5.)
`
`In FIG. 5, the “global IVM system 500 comprises the local IVM system 510,
`
`global IVM server system 502, and global IVM clients 506 and 508 that are
`
`optionally connected via local IP network 504.” (’890 Patent, 15:28-31.) The
`
`Internet and/or local networks allow local clients and global clients to
`
`communicate messages with each other: “global IVM server system 502 is
`
`connected to the IP network (i.e., Internet) 102 for enabling the local IVM clients
`
`206, 208…in the local IVM system 510 to generate and send instant voice
`
`messages to the global IVM clients 506, 508, as well as the local IVM clients 206,
`
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`208 to receive instant voice messages from the global IVM clients 506, 508.” (Id.,
`
`15:31-38; FIG. 5.)
`
`Accordingly, based on the claim context, the plain meaning, and the
`
`specification, the term “external network” means “a network that is outside another
`
`network.” (Forys Dec., ¶70.)
`
`V.
`
`State of the Art
`
`Prior to the alleged invention, all the technology at issue was broadly applied
`
`and well known in the field of messaging systems. (Forys Dec., ¶71.) No
`
`individual elements of the challenged claims were novel at the time, and there was
`
`nothing novel about how those elements were combined. (Id.) Further, there were
`
`no technological barriers to combining these elements. (Id.)
`
`As explained by Apple’s expert Dr. Forys, with 50 years of relevant
`
`experience, voice messaging, SMS, and voice over packet networks are all
`
`decades-old technologies. (Forys Dec., ¶¶88-100.) The additional features in the
`
`challenged claims were also widely known. (Forys Dec., ¶71.)
`
`A.
`
`Storing-or-delivering an instant voice message based on recipient
`availability was well-known.
`
`Recipient availability information was well-known to early AOL
`
`subscribers. (Forys Dec., ¶72.) AOL’s Instant Messenger provided presence
`
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890
`
`
`information (e.g., “online” indications) as early as 1997. (Ex. 1016, AOL IM;
`
`Forys Dec., ¶72.)
`
`Using recipient availability information, many IM systems already utilized
`
`the technique of queuing text IMs for later delivery once the recipients become
`
`available. (Malik, 3:24-26.) In “many instant messaging communications, if a user
`
`is not present to receive an instant message, the instant message can still be …
`
`queued in the IM server.” (Id., 3:16-18.) The IM Server “will hold the message
`
`until the user is present again on the instant messaging network.” (Id., 3:20-21.)
`
`So, the message “is delivered to the user as soon as the user is present” on the
`
`network. (Id., 3:22-23; Forys Dec., ¶73.)
`
`In view of the above queuing technique already known in “many instant
`
`messaging communications,”