`Apple Inc.
`
`IPR2018-00289 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,872,646)1
`
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`Thomas W. Kelton
`Calmann J. Clements
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`January 24, 2019
`
`1 Samsung Electronics America, Inc., which filed a petition in IPR2018-01383, has been joined as a
`party to this proceeding.
`
`1
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 1 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`Argument
`
`The prior art renders each and every element of the
`challenged claims obvious.
`
`The term glitch, properly construed, is taught by the
`McMahan reference.
`
`A POSITA would have combined the teachings of
`McMahan with those of Pasolini and Goldman.
`
`2
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 2 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Issue #1:
`The prior art renders each and every element of the
`challenged claims obvious.
`
`3
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 3 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Pasolini and Goldman teach receiving motion data from
`a motion sensor
`
`Claim 1[a]:
`receiving motion data from a motion
`sensor in a device, the motion sensor
`sensing motion along three axes
`
`APPL-1003, Fig. 1; Petition at 29.
`
`APPL-1003, 3:17-20; Petition at 29.
`
`APPL-1004, p 1; Petition at 29.
`
`4
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 4 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`McMahan teaches removing glitches
`
`Claim 1[b]:
`verifying whether the motion data
`includes one or more glitches and
`removing the one or more glitches from
`the motion data
`
`APPL-1005, 4:26-30; Petition at 30.
`
`APPL-1005, 4:35-38; Petition at 31.
`
`APPL-1005, 5:46-48; Petition at 31.
`
`APPL-1005, Fig. 3 (annotated); Petition at 31.
`
`5
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 5 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Pasolini, Goldman, and Mizell teach determining an idle
`sample value for a dominant axis
`
`Claim 1[c]:
`determining an idle sample value for a dominant axis of the device, the dominant axis
`defined as the axis with a largest effect from gravity among the three axes, the idle
`sample value comprising an average of accelerations over a sample period along the
`dominant axis recorded when the device goes to idle mode after a period of inactivity
`
`APPL-1004, p. 2; Petition at 32-33.
`
`APPL-1003, 5:41-48; Petition at 33-34.
`
`APPL-1007, p. 1; Petition at 34-35.
`
`6
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 6 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Pasolini and Goldman teach registering a motion of the
`device
`
`Claim 1[d]:
`registering a motion of the device based on the motion data from the motion
`sensor
`
`APPL-1004, p. 1; Petition at 37.
`
`7
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 7 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Pasolini and Goldman teach determining whether the
`motion caused a change in the dominant axis
`
`Claim 1[e]:
`determining whether the motion caused a change in the dominant axis
`
`APPL-1003, 5:31-41; Petition at 38.
`
`8
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 8 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Pasolini and Goldman teach waking the device
`
`Claim 1[f]:
`waking up the device when the motion of the device indicates the change in the dominant
`axis of the device, the dominant axis being the axis with the largest effect from gravity
`among the three axes.
`
`APPL-1003, 5:31-41; Petition at 39.
`
`9
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 9 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Issue #2:
`The term glitch, properly construed, is taught by the
`McMahan reference.
`
`10
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 10 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`°646 Patent, Claim 1
`’646 Patent, Claim 1
`
`
`
`1. A method comprising:
`receiving motion data from a motion sensorin a device,the
`motion sensor sensing motion along three axes;
`verifying whether the motion data includes one or more
`glitches and removing the one or more glitches from the
`motion data;
`determining an idle sample value for a dominant axis ofthe
`device, the dominant axis defined as the axis with a
`largest effect from gravity among the three axes, the idle
`sample value comprising an average of accelerations
`over a sample period along the dominant axis recorded
`when the device goes to idle mode after a period of
`inactivity;
`registering a motion ofthe device based on the motion data
`from the motion sensor;
`determining whether the motion caused a change in the
`dominant axis; and
`waking up the device when the motion of the device indi-
`cates the change in the dominant axis of the device, the
`dominantaxis being the axis with the largest effect from
`gravity amongthe three axes.
`
`
`
`11
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 11 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`The specification describes “glitch” as a datum outside
`an acceptable range.
`
`APPL-1001, 6:35-40; Petition at 7.
`
`APPL-1001, 3:13-27; Petition at 8.
`
`Petition at 7-8.
`
`12
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 12 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Patent Owner seeks to limit glitches to only motion
`that does not warrant waking the device
`Patent Owner describes the claimed “glitch” as follows:
`
`Patent Owner Response at 6.
`
`Patent Owner Response at 7.
`
`13
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 13 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Glitches include extremely unlikely, malfunctioning,
`and abnormal data
`
`APPL-1001, 6:35-40; Petition at 7.
`
`APPL-1001, 5:19-23; Reply at 7.
`
`APPL-1001, 3:33-37; Reply at 8.
`
`APPL-1001, 6:56-65; Reply at 7-8.
`
`14
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 14 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Glitches are treated differently than jostles and bumps.
`
`Patent Owner Response at 6.
`
`APPL-1001, 4:61-5:2; Reply at 8-9.
`
`APPL-1001, Fig. 3; Reply at 7.
`
`15
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 15 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Glitches are removed/discarded
`
`APPL-1001, 5:19-23; Reply at 8.
`
`APPL-1001, Fig. 6; Reply at 9.
`
`APPL-1001, 6:56-65; Reply at 7-8.
`
`16
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 16 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Proper construction of “glitch”
`
`Claim
`
`Specification
`
`APPL-1001, 6:35-40; Reply at 6.
`
`Construction
`
`APPL-1001, 5:19-23; Reply at 8.
`
`Petition at 7-8.
`
`17
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 17 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`McMahan teaches verifying and removing a glitch
`
`APPL-1005, 4:26-30; Petition at 30.
`
`Petition at 31.
`
`APPL-1005, 4:24-44; Petition at 31; Reply at 11.
`
`18
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 18 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Issue #3:
`A POSITA would have combined the teachings of
`McMahan with those of Pasolini and Goldman.
`
`19
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 19 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`A POSITA would have combined McMahan with
`Pasolini and Goldman
`
`APPL-1010 at ¶82; Petition at 25
`
`20
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 20 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`A POSITA would have combined McMahan with
`Pasolini and Goldman
`• Pasolini and Goldman uses accelerometers to detect motion:
`
`APPL-1003, 3:17-20; Petition at 29.
`
`APPL-1004, p 1; Petition at 29.
`
`• McMahan teaches a known
`technique to remove data glitches
`from accelerometer data:
`
`Petition at 31.
`21
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 21 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`A POSITA would have combined McMahan with
`Pasolini and Goldman
`
`• POSITAs desired removing signals errors because removing signal errors
`from accelerometer data would provide more reliable accelerometer data:
`
`• McMahan teaches that removing glitches would be a more “accurate reflection
`of the stimulus that the sensor is designed to monitor”:
`
`APPL-1010, ¶82; Petition at 26
`
`APPL-1010, ¶82; APPL-1005, 4:29-30;
`Petition at 26
`
`22
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 22 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`McMahan is broadly applicable to accelerometers and
`other sensors
`Patent Owner characterizes McMahan’s teachings as a “sensor-specific technique”
`and argues that McMahan is not applicable to Pasolini.
`Response at 18-20.
`
`However, McMahan is not “sensor-specific”:
`
`APPL-1005, 3:28-31; Reply at 19.
`
`APPL-1005, 3:37-40; Reply at 19.
`
`23
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 23 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Conclusion
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`The references relied upon in the Petition render
`each of the claims obvious.
`
`The term glitch, properly construed, is taught by
`McMahan.
`
`The McMahan reference is properly combinable with
`Pasolini and Goldman.
`
`24
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 24 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`
`
`Petitioner
`Apple Inc.
`
`IPR2018-00289 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,872,646)1
`
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`Thomas W. Kelton
`Calmann J. Clements
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`January 24, 2019
`
`1 Samsung Electronics America, Inc., which filed a petition in IPR2018-01383, has been joined as a
`party to this proceeding.
`
`25
`
`IPR2018-00289
`APPL-1017 / Page 25 of 25
`Apple v. Uniloc
`
`