`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.,
`Patent Owner
`
`____________________
`
`Patent No. 9,414,199
`____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. GABRIEL ROBINS IN SUPPORT OF PETITION
`FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,414,199
`
`
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS ................................................. 1
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`INFORMATION CONSIDERED ................................................................... 6
`
`IV. RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS ............................................................. 7
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Claim Interpretation .............................................................................. 7
`
`Perspective of One of Ordinary Skill in the Art .................................... 7
`
`Obviousness ........................................................................................... 8
`
`V.
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................... 11
`
`VI. SUMMARY OF MY OPINIONS ................................................................. 12
`
`VII. TECHNOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ........................................................ 12
`
`VIII. THE ’199 PATENT ....................................................................................... 21
`
`IX. PROSECUTION HISTORY ......................................................................... 23
`
`X.
`
`BLEGEN AND MONTEVERDE ................................................................. 25
`
`A. Overview of Blegen (Ex. 1004) .......................................................... 25
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Overview of Monteverde (Ex. 1005) .................................................. 26
`
`Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 28
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Preamble: “A method for delivering information to two
`or more user devices, the method comprising: ......................... 28
`
`Element [1a]: retrieving the information from one or
`more data records that associate the information with
`[1a.i] one or more predetermined locations, [1a.ii] a
`predetermined maximum amount of time, [1a.iii] a
`predetermined likelihood, and [1a.iv] one or more
`predetermined actions; and ....................................................... 30
`
`i
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`Element [1b]: “for each of the two or more user devices:” ...... 45
`
`Element [1c]: “predicting whether the user device will be
`at any of the one or more predetermined locations within
`the predetermined maximum amount of time with at least
`the predetermined likelihood; and” ........................................... 45
`
`Element [1d]: “in response to the predicting that the user
`device will be at any of the one or more predetermined
`locations within the predetermined maximum amount of
`time with at least the predetermined likelihood,
`performing the one or more predetermined actions;” ............... 47
`
`Element [1e]: “wherein at least one of the actions
`includes delivering the information to the user device.” .......... 49
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`D.
`
`Claim 2: “The method of claim 1 wherein predicting comprises:
`analyzing a location history of the user device.” ................................ 51
`
`XI. BLEGEN, MONTEVERDE AND SCHMIDT ............................................. 53
`
`A. Overview of Schmidt (Ex. 1006) ........................................................ 53
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Claim 3: “The method of claim 1 wherein predicting comprises:
`analyzing a location history of the user device for day- and
`time-based patterns related to a current time and a current day.” ....... 55
`
`Claim 4: “The method of claim 1 wherein predicting comprises:
`analyzing a location history of the user device for movement
`patterns related to a current location of the user device.” ................... 60
`
`Claim 5: “The method of claim 1 further comprising: analyzing
`a location history of the user device for patterns that involve
`day- and time-based and movement related to a current time, a
`current day, and a current location of the user device.” ...................... 63
`
`XII. CHARLEBOIS AND GILLIES .................................................................... 66
`
`A. Overview of Charlebois (Ex. 1007) .................................................... 66
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`
`
`
`
`Overview of Gillies (Ex. 1008) ........................................................... 68
`
`Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 69
`
`-ii-
`
`
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`Preamble: “A method for delivering information to two
`or more user devices, the method comprising:” ....................... 69
`
`Element [1a]: “retrieving the information from one or
`more data records that associate the information with
`[1a.i] one or more predetermined locations, [1a.ii] a
`predetermined maximum amount of time, [1a.iii] a
`predetermined likelihood, and [1a.iv] one or more
`predetermined actions; and” ..................................................... 71
`
`Element [1b]: “for each of the two or more user devices:” ...... 87
`
`Element [1c]: “predicting whether the user device will be
`at any of the one or more predetermined locations within
`the predetermined maximum amount of time with at least
`the predetermined likelihood; and” ........................................... 87
`
`Element [1d]: “in response to the predicting that the user
`device will be at any of the one or more predetermined
`locations within the predetermined maximum amount of
`time with at least the predetermined likelihood,
`performing the one or more predetermined actions;” ............... 89
`
`Element [1e]: “wherein at least one of the actions
`includes delivering the information to the user device.” .......... 90
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`Claim 2: “The method of claim 1 wherein predicting comprises:
`analyzing a location history of the user device.” ................................ 91
`
`Claim 3: “The method of claim 1 wherein predicting comprises:
`analyzing a location history of the user device for day- and
`time-based patterns related to a current time and a current day.” ....... 91
`
`Claim 4: “The method of claim 1 wherein predicting comprises:
`analyzing a location history of the user device for movement
`patterns related to a current location of the user device.” ................... 94
`
`Claim 5: “The method of claim 1 further comprising: analyzing
`a location history of the user device for patterns that involve
`day- and time-based and movement related to a current time, a
`current day, and a current location of the user device.” ...................... 95
`
`
`
`
`
`-iii-
`
`
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`XIII. CHARLEBOIS, GILLIES, AND FROLOFF ................................................ 97
`
`A. Overview of Froloff (Ex. 1009) .......................................................... 98
`
`B.
`
`Claims 1-5 ........................................................................................... 99
`
`XIV. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................102
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-iv-
`
`
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`
`1.
`
`I, Dr. Gabriel Robins, declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`2.
`
`I have been retained by Apple Inc. (“Apple”) as an independent expert
`
`consultant in this proceeding before the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`(“USPTO”).
`
`3.
`
`I have been asked to consider whether certain references teach or
`
`suggest the features recited in Claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199 (“the ’199
`
`Patent”) (Ex. 1001)1. My opinions and the bases for my opinions are set forth
`
`below.
`
`4.
`
`I am being compensated at my ordinary and customary consulting rate
`
`for my work. My compensation is in no way contingent on the nature of my
`
`findings, the presentation of my findings in testimony, or the outcome of this or
`
`any other proceeding. I have no other financial interest in this proceeding.
`
`II. BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`5.
`All of my opinions stated in this declaration are based on my own
`
`personal knowledge and professional judgment. In forming my opinions, I have
`
`relied on my knowledge and experience in designing, developing, researching, and
`
`
` Where appropriate, I refer to exhibits that I understand are attached to the petition
`
` 1
`
`for Inter Partes Review of the ’199 Patent.
`
`1
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`
`teaching the technology referenced in this declaration.
`
`6.
`
`I am over 18 years of age and, if I am called upon to do so, I would be
`
`competent to testify as to the matters set forth herein. I understand that a copy of
`
`my current curriculum vitae, which details my education as well as my
`
`professional and academic experience, is being submitted as Exhibit 1016. The
`
`following provides a brief overview of some of my experience that is relevant to
`
`the matters set forth in this declaration.
`
`7.
`
`In 1992, I received my Ph.D. degree in Computer Science from the
`
`University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA), where I held an IBM Graduate
`
`Fellowship and received a Distinguished Teaching Award. I joined the
`
`Department of Computer Science at the University of Virginia in 1992 as Assistant
`
`Professor of Computer Science, where I have been working continuously to
`
`present.
`
`8.
`
`In 1994, I received the National Science Foundation Young
`
`Investigator Award from the U.S. National Science Foundation (a $312,500
`
`research grant awarded by the government to only a few university professors per
`
`year). In 1995, I received a Lilly Foundation Teaching Fellowship, as well as the
`
`Packard Foundation Fellowship (an $875,000 research grant awarded to only three
`
`dozen computer scientists in the past three decades, and the first one ever awarded
`
`at the University of Virginia).
`
`2
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`In 1996, I received an All-University Outstanding Teaching Award,
`
`9.
`
`and a two-year-early promotion to Associate Professor with tenure. In 1997, I
`
`received the Walter N. Munster Endowed Chair and a Faculty Mentor Award. In
`
`1998, I was invited to join the Army Science Board, the top technical advisory
`
`board to the United States Army on science, technology, and engineering. On
`
`numerous occasions I also advised the U.S. Government and the Department of
`
`Defense on matters of defense and national security, and over the years I was
`
`entrusted with high-level security clearances.
`
`10.
`
`In 2002, I was promoted to full Professor with tenure, and in 2007, I
`
`received the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) Outstanding
`
`Paper Award. In 2013, I received the Best Presentation Award from the IEEE
`
`International Conference on Localization and Global Navigation Satellite Systems.
`
`11.
`
`I have performed and directed computer science research continuously
`
`for the past three decades. Over the years I have published over 100 refereed
`
`research articles, including papers on subjects such as computer chip design,
`
`integrated circuits, algorithms, radio frequency identification, among other topics
`
`in computer science and electrical engineering. My research has been published in
`
`numerous leading conferences and flagship journals. I also published a book,
`
`several book chapters, and four dozen technical reports. I directed dozens of Ph.D.
`
`and Masters students and trained them in performing scientific research, publish
`
`3
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`peer-reviewed papers, and author their doctoral dissertations and Masters theses.
`
`12. For example, I performed research and published multiple peer-
`
`reviewed papers on the subject of object localization, which entails providing an
`
`indoor geo-location (GPS-like) capability for automatically determining the
`
`positions of objects. I also directed a Ph.D. dissertation, as well as several
`
`undergraduate theses, on this topic (geo-location).
`
`13.
`
`In particular, in 2010 I published two papers which present a practical
`
`framework to determine the locations or positions of objects within arbitrary
`
`environments (either indoors or outdoors), entitled “Object Localization Using
`
`RFID” (Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Wireless Pervasive
`
`Computing - ISWPC 2010, Italy, May 2010, pages 301-306. Ex. 1010,
`
`http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/5483750/ ), and “Efficient RFID-
`
`Based Mobile Object Localization” (Proceedings of the IEEE International
`
`Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and
`
`Communications - WiMob 2010, Canada, October, 2010, pages 683-690, Ex.
`
`1011, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/5644853/ ).
`
`14.
`
`In 2011, I published a follow-up invited paper entitled “An RFID-
`
`Based Object Localization Framework” in the International Journal of Radio
`
`Frequency Identification Technology and Applications (Special Issue on RFID-
`
`Enhanced Technology Intelligence and Management, Vol. 3, No. 1/2, 2011, pp. 2-
`
`4
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`30, Ex. 1012), which further developed, streamlined, and generalized the
`
`geolocation system proposed in my two earlier papers described above.
`
`15. Even as early at 2010, several years before the priority date of the
`
`’199 Patent, my papers already noted that “Location-awareness of mobile objects
`
`is the key to numerous emerging ubiquitous computing applications” (Ex. 1011,
`
`Abstract), “Object localization is a key primitive in pervasive computing
`
`environments, where numerous applications depend on the rapid and accurate
`
`position estimation of objects” (Ex. 1010, Abstract), and “Numerous ubiquitous
`
`computing applications depend on the ability to locate objects as a key
`
`functionality” (Ex. 1012, Abstract).
`
`16. On another research front, I performed research and published peer-
`
`reviewed papers regarding physically unclonable functions (PUFs), with
`
`application areas including authentication, security, and privacy.
`
`17.
`
`In 1996, I served as General Chair of the Physical Design Workshop,
`
`and in 1997 I co-Founded the International Symposium on Physical Design
`
`(ISPD). I served on the technical program committees of numerous leading
`
`conferences, and on the Editorial Board of the Institute for Electrical and
`
`Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Book Series. I served as Associate Editor of IEEE
`
`Transactions on Very Large Scale Integrated (VLSI) Systems, the Journal of
`
`Electrical and Computer Engineering, and the journal Informatics. I refereed and
`
`5
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`reviewed scientific papers for numerous leading journals, conferences, book
`
`publishers, and institutions. I served as a grant proposal reviewer for federal
`
`research funding agencies as well as for private foundations.
`
`18. Over the last three decades, I have taught numerous computer science
`
`courses, including graduate and undergraduate courses on integrated circuits and
`
`chip design, algorithms, discrete mathematics, computer theory, problem solving,
`
`and other aspects of computer science and engineering. I have advised and
`
`directed dozens of computer science graduate students (including Ph.D. and
`
`Masters candidates) who went on to successful careers in industry, research,
`
`academia, and government. I am a member of leading professional societies such
`
`as the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) and the Institute for Electrical
`
`and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). My research has been supported by
`
`governmental agencies such as the U.S. National Science Foundation, the National
`
`Institute of Health, and the Department of Defense. My work has been featured
`
`numerous times in the popular media, including in newspapers and magazines.
`
`III.
`
`INFORMATION CONSIDERED
`19.
`
`In preparation for this declaration, I have considered the materials
`
`discussed in this declaration, including, for example, the ’199 Patent, the
`
`references cited by the ’199 Patent, the prosecution history of the ’199 Patent,
`
`various background articles and books referenced in this declaration, and the prior
`
`6
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`art references analyzed in this declaration. In addition, my opinions are also based
`
`on my education, training, experience, and knowledge in the relevant fields.
`
`IV. RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS
`20.
`I am not an attorney and offer no legal opinions. For the purposes of
`
`this Declaration, I have been informed about certain aspects of the law that are
`
`relevant to my analysis.
`
`A. Claim Interpretation
`21.
`I have been informed and understand that in an inter partes
`
`proceeding, “a claim in an unexpired patent shall be given its broadest reasonable
`
`construction in light of the specification of the patent in which it appears.” I have
`
`been asked to interpret the claims of the ’199 Patent using this standard.
`
`22.
`
`I have been informed and understand that claim construction is a
`
`matter of law and that the final claim constructions for this proceeding will be
`
`determined by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
`
`B.
`23.
`
`Perspective of One of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`I have been informed and understand that a patent is to be understood
`
`from the perspective of a hypothetical “person of ordinary skill in the art”
`
`(“POSITA”). Such an individual is considered to possess normal skills and
`
`knowledge in a particular technical field (as opposed to being a genius). I
`
`understand that in considering what the claims of a patent require, what was known
`
`7
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`prior to that patent, what a prior art reference discloses, and whether an invention
`
`is obvious or not, one must use the perspective of such a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art.
`
`C. Obviousness
`24.
`I have been informed and understand that a patent claim is obvious
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and therefore invalid, if the claimed subject matter, as a
`
`whole, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art as of the
`
`priority date of the patent based on one or more prior art references and/or the
`
`knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`25.
`
`I understand that an obviousness analysis must consider (1) the scope
`
`and content of the prior art, (2) the differences between the claims and the prior art,
`
`(3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, and (4) secondary considerations,
`
`if any, of non-obviousness (such as unexpected results, commercial success, long-
`
`felt but unmet need, failure of others, copying by others, and skepticism of
`
`experts).
`
`26.
`
`I understand that a prior art reference may be combined with other
`
`references to disclose each element of the invention under 35 U.S.C. § 103. I
`
`understand that a reference may also be combined with the knowledge of a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art, and that this knowledge may be used to combine
`
`multiple references. I further understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is
`
`8
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`presumed to know the relevant prior art. I understand that the obviousness analysis
`
`may take into account the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would employ.
`
`27.
`
`In determining whether a prior art reference would have been
`
`combined with other prior art or other information known to a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art, I understand that the following principles may be considered:
`
`a. whether the references to be combined involve non-analogous art;
`
`b. whether the references to be combined are in different fields of
`
`endeavor than the alleged invention in the Patent;
`
`c. whether the references to be combined are reasonably pertinent to the
`
`problems to which the inventions of the Patent are directed;
`
`d. whether the combination is of familiar elements according to known
`
`methods that yields predictable results;
`
`e. whether a combination involves the substitution of one known
`
`element for another that yields predictable results;
`
`f. whether the combination involves the use of a known technique to
`
`improve similar items or methods in the same way that yields
`
`predictable results;
`
`g. whether the combination involves the application of a known
`
`technique to a prior art reference that is ready for improvement, to
`
`9
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`
`yield predictable results;
`
`h. whether the combination is “obvious to try”;
`
`i. whether the combination involves the known work in one field of
`
`endeavor prompting variations of it for use in either the same field or
`
`a different one based on design incentives or other market forces,
`
`where the variations are predictable to a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art;
`
`j. whether there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior
`
`art that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the
`
`prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to
`
`arrive at the claimed invention;
`
`k. whether the combination requires modifications that render the prior
`
`art unsatisfactory for its intended use;
`
`l. whether the combination requires modifications that change the
`
`principle of operation of the reference;
`
`m. whether the combination is reasonably expected to be a success; and
`
`n. whether the combination possesses the requisite degree of
`
`predictability at the time the invention was made.
`
`28.
`
`I understand that in determining whether a combination of prior art
`
`references renders a claim obvious, it is helpful to consider whether there is some
`
`10
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references and a reasonable
`
`expectation of success in doing so. I understand, however, that a teaching,
`
`suggestion, or motivation to combine is not required.
`
`V. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`29.
`I am familiar with the level of ordinary skill in the art with respect to
`
`the ’199 Patent around its filing date.2 Based on my experience working, teaching,
`
`and conducting research in the relevant fields, and based on my review of the ’199
`
`Patent specification, claims, file history, and prior art, I believe one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art around the filing of the ’199 Patent would have been someone with a
`
`bachelor’s degree in computer science or equivalent, and at least two years of
`
`experience or research in software engineering, and/or computer systems.
`
`Additional education could substitute for work experience and vice versa.
`
`30.
`
`In determining the level of ordinary skill in the art, I considered, for
`
`example, the type of problems encountered in the art, prior art solutions to those
`
`problems, the rapidity with which innovations are made, the sophistication of the
`
`technology, and the educational level of active workers in the field.
`
`
` 2
`
` My opinions expressed in this declaration are the same whether the ’199 Patent is
`
`entitled to a priority date at its provisional filing (Mar. 7, 2013) or actual filing
`
`(Feb. 24, 2014).
`
`11
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`31. My opinions concerning the ’199 Patent claims and the prior art are
`
`from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”), as set
`
`forth above.
`
`VI. SUMMARY OF MY OPINIONS
`32.
`I have been asked to consider whether the claims of the ’199 Patent
`
`are obvious over certain prior art references. As explained below in detail in this
`
`declaration, it is my opinion that:
`
`(1) Claims 1-2 of the ’199 Patent are obvious over U.S. Patent Pubs.
`
`2010/0082397 (“Blegen,” Ex. 1004) and 2012/0259704 (“Monteverde” Ex.
`
`1005);
`
`(2) Claims 3-5 of the ’199 Patent are obvious over Blegen, Monteverde, and
`
`U.S. Patent Pub. 2012/0226554 (“Schmidt,” Ex. 1006);
`
`(3) Claims 1-5 of the ’199 Patent are obvious over U.S. Patent Pubs.
`
`2009/0125321 (“Charlebois,” Ex. 1007) and 2010/0151882 (“Gillies,” Ex.
`
`1008);
`
` (4) Claims 1-5 of the ’199 Patent are obvious over Charlebois, Gillies, and
`
`U.S. Patent Pub. 2012/0089465 (“Froloff,” Ex. 1009).
`
`VII. TECHNOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
`33. As discussed in Section VIII below, the ’199 Patent is directed to
`
`location-based information delivery, such as advertisements that target customers
`
`12
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`based on their current or predicted future locations, as well as on their users’
`
`profiles. Ex. 1001, Abstract, 1:46-2:27. There is a vast corpus of prior art on this
`
`topic, including entire annual conferences, many published books, and hundreds of
`
`published papers, dating back to the early 2000’s, none of which were cited by the
`
`’199 Patent nor relied upon during its prosecution history. Discussed below is only
`
`a small sampling from the vast prior art related to location-based information
`
`delivery, such as advertising applications that target users / customers based on
`
`their current and/or predicted future locations.
`
`34. For example, the First International Workshop on Location- and
`
`Context-Awareness (LoCA) was held in 2005 in Germany, and its published
`
`proceedings in book form (Strang et al, 2005, Exhibit 1013) comprised many
`
`disclosures of location-aware and context-aware information delivery, including
`
`specifically in advertising applications. Selected relevant excerpts from this
`
`publication include the following:
`
` “Many pervasive computing applications rely on real time location to start
`and manage interaction with people in a detected area. Time and space
`information are therefore basic elements in arranging mobile context aware
`services which take into account context factors such as who, why, where,
`when. … Nevertheless, there are some kinds of application, as for instance
`advertising messages, which require interaction to start autonomously.
`People who are around should be attracted by some customized message
`exactly arranged on his personal profile and current position in a display
`
`13
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`
`neighborhood.” Id., 52 (emphasis added)3.
`
`“The Value Added Service (VAS) provider offers location based and
`pervasive services to subscribers (registered users) or to ephemeral users
`(pay per view model). VAS might offer a wide range of services, such as
`indoor/outdoor navigation, proximity services (e.g., find-friend), positioning
`and point-of-interest, tracking person’s location (e.g., children, elderly),
`localized advertisement and content delivery (e.g., city sightseeing), and
`emergency (e.g., E911).” Id., 294-295 (emphasis added).
`
`
`
`35. One of the chapters / papers in this published conference proceedings,
`
`entitled “Prediction of Indoor Movements Using Bayesian Networks” (Strang et al
`
`2005, Exhibit 1013, 211-222) teaches the probabilistic prediction of users’
`
`locations and the duration of their stay in those predicted locations:
`
`“We investigate to which extend the movement of people working in an
`office building can be predicted based on room sequences of previous
`movements. Our hypothesis is that people follow some habits, but interrupt
`their habits irregularly, and sometimes change their habits.” Id., 211
`(emphases added).
`
`
`
` 3
`
` Citations to non-patent publications refer to page numbers of the original
`
`publication. Citations to patent publications refer to the paragraph numbers.
`
`Citations to the prosecution history (Ex. 1002) refer to the exhibit page numbers.
`
`14
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`
`
`“We model the scenario by a dynamic Bayesian network and evaluate
`accuracy of next room prediction and of duration of stay… Our results show
`that the Bayesian network predictor reaches a next location prediction
`accuracy of up to 90% and a duration prediction accuracy of up to 87% with
`variations depending on the person and specific predictor set-up.” Id., 211
`(emphases added).
`
`36. Another section / paper in the same proceedings (Strang et al 2005,
`
`Exhibit 1013) uses a probabilistic model to predict the user’s future locations based
`
`on past locations:
`
`
`“Based on this research, we are now implementing a prediction system of
`likely locations and operations. We plan to use a probabilistic model to
`describe transitions of locations and relations between different radii size
`locations. We are thinking to create a probabilistic model where a significant
`location at a given time can be determined from the significant location at
`the previous time and the significant location at the same time with larger
`radius. The model may be used not only to predict future locations, but also
`to improve accuracy of significant locations of smaller radii because we can
`choose the most probable location among several candidates.” Id., 167-168
`(emphasis added).
`
`37. Yet another section / paper in the same proceedings (Strang et al,
`
`2005, Exhibit 1013) predicts the user’s future locations as well as the duration of
`
`stay at those locations:
`
`15
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`“In our case we predict future locations of a person and additionally the
`duration of stay and the time when the person is probably changing to a new
`location.” Id., 214 (emphasis added).
`
`38. The Second International Workshop on Location and Context-
`
`Awareness (LoCA) was held in 2006 in Ireland, and its published proceedings in
`
`book form (Hazas et al, 2006, Exhibit 1014) included many sections / papers on
`
`location-aware and context-aware information delivery, as well as probabilistic
`
`route prediction based on likelihoods, including in advertising applications, for
`
`example:
`
`“In the evaluation of a specific WRC combination one of the walks was used
`to find the normalization parameters and the other was used to test how well
`the WRC combination could predict the route of the walk with normalized
`measurements. In the test the location accuracy in terms of correctly
`estimated cells and the average likelihood of the measurements with respect
`to the probabilistic model of the localization system were collected. The
`probabilistic model used was constructed from the calibration set. The
`average likelihood was collected to show how close the actual measured
`values come to the calibration measurements after they have been
`normalized. The average likelihood is calculated by averaging the likelihood
`for each measurement looked up in the probabilistic model.” Id., 43
`(emphasis added).
`
`39. The Third International Workshop on Location and Context-
`
`Awareness (LoCA) was held in 2007 in Germany, and its published proceedings in
`
`16
`
`APPLE EXHIBIT 1003
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Gabriel Robins
`U.S. Patent No. 9,414,199
`book form (Hightower et al, 2007, Exhibit 1015) included many sections / papers
`
`on location-aware and context-aware information delivery, including advertising
`
`specifically. This 2007 publication describes many practical applications of
`
`location-aware and context-aware information delivery to users, as well as
`
`predicting users’ movements and future locations, based on users’ profiles,
`
`including in applications such as advertising, tourism, shopping, traveling,
`
`navigation, location prediction, and instant messaging. Selected relevant excerpts
`
`from this 2007 publication include the following:
`
`“Places for Tourist