`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC,
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`BLITZSAFE TEXAS, LLC
`
`Patent Owner
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,155,342
`Filing Date: June 27, 2006
`Issue Date: April 10, 2012
`
`Title: MULTIMEDIA DEVICE INTEGRATION SYSTEM
`
`____________
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00926
`
`____________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`I.
`II. U.S. PATENT 8,155,342 ................................................................................. 3
`A. Overview ............................................................................................... 3
`B.
`Priority Claim: The Effective Filing Date of the ’342 Patent is June
`27, 2006 ................................................................................................. 9
`1.
`The ’961 Application ................................................................ 10
`2.
`The ’909 Application ................................................................ 11
`3.
`The ’667 Application ................................................................ 12
`4.
`The ’847 Application ................................................................ 13
`Prosecution History of “integration subsystem” ................................. 13
`C.
`Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ....................................................... 14
`D.
`III. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 15
`IV. CLAIMS 49-64, 66, 68-88, 94-97, 99-111, 113, 115, 116, 119 AND
`120 OF THE ’342 PATENT ARE UNPATENTABLE ................................ 15
`A.
`The Prior Art ....................................................................................... 16
`1. Michmerhuizen .......................................................................... 16
`2. Marlowe .................................................................................... 19
`3.
`ID3v2 ......................................................................................... 21
`B. Ground 1: Claims 49-60, 62-64, 71, 73-84, 86-88, 95, 97, 99-107,
`109-111, 113, and 120 are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
`anticipated by Michmerhuizen ............................................................ 22
`1.
`Claim 49 .................................................................................... 22
`2.
`Claim 50 (and similarly claims 74 and 99): “said
`integration subsystem is positioned within the car
`audio/video system” and claim 51 (and similarly claim
`75): “said first wireless interface is positioned within the
`car audio/video system” ............................................................ 36
`Claim 52 (and similarly claim 76): “said second wireless
`interface is positioned within the portable device” ................... 37
`Claim 53 (and similarly claim 77): “said integration
`subsystem receives a control command issued at the car
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`audio/video system in a format incompatible with the
`portable device processes the control command into a
`formatted command compatible with the portable device
`and dispatches the processed control command to the
`portable device for execution thereby” ..................................... 37
`Claim 54 (and similarly claim 78): “said integration
`subsystem receives data generated by the portable device
`in a format incompatible with the car audio/video system,
`processes the data into formatted data compatible with
`the car audio/video system, and transmits the processed
`data to the car audio/video system for subsequent display
`of the processed data on a display of the car audio/video
`system” ...................................................................................... 37
`Claim 55 (and similarly claims 79 and 102): “said
`integration subsystem further comprises a voice
`recognition subsystem for receiving and processing
`spoken control commands issued by a user” ............................ 38
`Claim 56 (and similarly claims 83 and 106): “said
`integration subsystem generates a device presence signal
`and transmits the device presence signal to the car
`audio/video system to maintain the car audio/video
`system in a state responsive to the portable device” ................. 38
`Claim 57 (and similarly claims 80 and 103): “said
`integration subsystem instructs said portable device to
`play a desired file in response to a spoken command
`processed by the voice recognition subsystem” ....................... 40
`Claim 58 (and similarly claims 81 and 104): “said
`integration subsystem further comprises a speech
`synthesizer for generating synthesized speech
`corresponding to data generated by the portable device.” ........ 40
`10. Claim 59 (and similarly claims 82 and 105): “said
`integration subsystem transmits the synthesized speech to
`the car audio/video system for subsequent playing of the
`synthesized speech by the car audio/video system” ................. 41
`11. Claim 60 (and similarly claims 84 and 107): “the portable
`device comprises a portable receiver” ...................................... 42
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`12. Claim 62 (and similarly claims 86 and 109): “the portable
`device comprises a portable digital media player,” claim
`63 (and similarly claims 87 and 110): “the portable
`digital media player comprises a video device, a portable
`media center, a portable media player, an MP3 player, an
`MP4 player, a WMV player, an Apple iPod, or an Apple
`video iPod,” claim 64 (and similarly claims 88 and 111)
`“the portable device comprises a cellular telephone” ............... 43
`13. Claim 71 (and similarly claims 95 and 100): “the audio
`file comprises a song stored on the portable device” ............... 43
`Independent claim 73 ................................................................ 43
`14.
`Independent claim 97 ................................................................ 45
`15.
`16. Claim 101: “the audio file is received by the portable
`device”....................................................................................... 46
`17. Claim 113: “The system of claim 97, wherein said
`integration subsystem channels video generated by the
`portable device to the car audio/video system over the
`wireless communication link for subsequent playing of
`the audio on the car audio/ video system, the video
`corresponding to a video file played by the portable
`device”....................................................................................... 47
`Independent claim 120 .............................................................. 47
`18.
`C. Ground 2: Claims 66, 69, 70, 72, 94, 96, 116, and 119 are invalid
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Michmerhuizen ..................... 49
`1.
`Claim 66 (and similarly claim 94) ............................................ 49
`2.
`Claim 69 (and similarly claim 116): “the video file
`comprises a video clip stored on the portable device” ............. 51
`Claim 70 (and similarly claim 119): “said integration
`subsystem receives video generated by the portable
`device in a first format incompatible with the car
`audio/video system, processes the video into processed
`video in a second format compatible with the car
`audio/video system, and transmits the processed video to
`the car audio/video system for subsequent display of the
`processed video on a display of the car audio/video
`system” ...................................................................................... 51
`
`3.
`
`iii
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`4.
`
`E.
`
`Claim 72 (and similarly claim 96): “the portable device is
`connected to the Internet, and said integration device
`processes information generated by the portable device
`and transmits processed information to the car
`audio/video system so that the display of the car
`audio/video system operates as an Internet browser” ............... 52
`D. Ground 3 Claims 66, 68, 94 and 115 are invalid under 35 U.S.C.
`§ 103 as obvious over Michmerhuizen in view of ID3v2 ................... 53
`1.
`Claim 66 (and similarly claim 94) ............................................ 53
`2.
`Claim 68 (and similarly claim 115) obvious: “the video
`file comprises a picture stored on the portable device” ............ 56
`Ground 4: Claims 49-64, 66, 69-88, 94-97, 99-111, 113, 116, 119, and
`120 are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Michmerhuizen
`in view of Marlowe ............................................................................. 57
`1.
`Claim 49 .................................................................................... 57
`2.
`Claim 50 (and similarly claims 74 and 99), and claim 51
`(and similarly claim 75) ............................................................ 64
`Claim 52 (and similarly claim 76) ............................................ 64
`3.
`Claim 53 (and similarly claim 77) ............................................ 64
`4.
`Claim 54 (and similarly claim 78) ............................................ 64
`5.
`Claim 55 (and similarly claims 79 and 102) ............................. 65
`6.
`Claim 56 (and similarly claims 83 and 106) ............................. 65
`7.
`Claim 57 (and similarly claims 80 and 103) ............................. 65
`8.
`Claim 58 (and similarly claims 81 and 104) ............................. 65
`9.
`10. Claim 59 (and similarly claims 82 and 105) ............................. 66
`11. Claim 60 (and similarly claims 84 and 107) ............................. 66
`12. Claim 61 (and similarly claims 85 and 108): “the portable
`receiver comprises a digital audio broadcast (DAB)
`receiver, a high definition (HD) radio receiver, or a
`satellite receiver” ....................................................................... 66
`13. Claim 62 (and similarly claims 86 and 109), claim 63
`(and similarly claims 87 and 110), claim 64 (and
`similarly claims 88 and 111) ..................................................... 66
`14. Claim 66 (and similarly claim 94) ............................................ 67
`
`iv
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`F.
`
`15. Claim 69 (and similarly claim 116) .......................................... 68
`16. Claim 70 (and similarly claim 119) .......................................... 68
`17. Claim 71 (and similarly claims 95 and 100) ............................. 68
`18. Claim 72 (and similarly claim 96) ............................................ 69
`19. Claim 73 .................................................................................... 69
`20. Claim 97 .................................................................................... 70
`21. Claim 101 .................................................................................. 72
`22. Claim 113 .................................................................................. 72
`23.
`Independent Claim 120 ............................................................. 73
`Ground 5 Claims 66, 68, 94 and 115 are invalid under 35 U.S.C.
`§ 103 as obvious over Michmerhuizen in view of Marlowe and ID3v2
` ............................................................................................................. 74
`V. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1) ........................ 74
`A.
`REAL PARTY-IN-INTEREST UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ....... 74
`B.
`RELATED MATTERS UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ................... 74
`C.
`LEAD AND BACK-UP COUNSEL .................................................. 76
`D.
`SERVICE INFORMATION ............................................................... 77
`VI. PAYMENT OF FEES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.103 ..................................... 77
`VII. GROUNDS FOR STANDING UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(A) ................. 78
`VIII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 78
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
` Page(s)
`
`Federal Cases
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG et al.,
`2:17-cv-00418, E.D. Tex., May 11, 2017 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Daimler AG et al.,
`2:17-cv-00422, E.D. Tex., May 12, 2017 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Honda Motor Co., Ltd. et al.,
`2-15-cv-01274, E.D. Tex., July 16, 2015 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Hyundai Motor Co. et al.,
`2-15-cv-01275, E.D. Tex., July 16, 2015 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Mazda Motor Corporation et al.,
`2:17-cv-00423, E.D. Tex., May 12, 2017 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas LLC v. Mitsubishi Electric Corporation et al.,
`2:17-cv-00430, E.D. Tex., May 15, 2017 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. et al.,
`2-15-cv-01276, E.D. Tex., July 16, 2015 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Robert Bosch LLC et al.,
`2:17-cv-00105, E.D. Tex., February 3, 2017 ...................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Subaru Corporation et al.,
`2:17-cv-00421, E.D. Tex., May 12, 2017 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Tata Motors Ltd. et al.,
`2:17-cv-00424, E.D. Tex., May 12, 2017 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Toyota Motor Corp. et al.,
`2:15-cv-01277, E.D. Tex., July 16, 2015............................................................ 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Volkswagen Group of Am., Inc. et al.,
`2-15-cv-01278, E.D. Tex., July 16, 2015 ........................................................... 75
`Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd. et al.,
`2:17-cv-00420, E.D. Tex., May 12, 2017 ........................................................... 75
`
`
`
`vi
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha,
`IPR2016-01357, Paper 19 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 6, 2017) ............................................. 1
`Marlowe Patent Holdings LLC v. DICE Electronics, LLC et al.,
`3:10-cv-01199 (D.N.J.) ....................................................................................... 75
`Marlowe Patent Holdings LLC v. Ford Motor Company,
`3:10-cv-07044 (D.N.J.) ....................................................................................... 76
`Federal Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 102(a) ................................................................................................... 22
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ............................................................................................. 19, 22
`35 U.S.C. § 102(e) ....................................................................................... 16, 22, 41
`35 U.S.C. § 103 .................................................................................................passim
`Regulations
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1) .............................................................................................. 74
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) .............................................................................................. 74
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) .............................................................................................. 74
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .............................................................................................. 76
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(a) ................................................................................................. 76
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) ................................................................................................ 77
`37 C.F.R. § 42.15(a) ................................................................................................. 77
`37 C.F.R. § 42.24 ..................................................................................................... 80
`37 C.F.R. § 42.24(d) ................................................................................................ 80
`37 C.F.R. § 42.103 ................................................................................................... 77
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(A).............................................................................................. 78
`
`
`
`vii
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`Other Authorities
`https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3003 ............................................................................ 21
`www.id3.org ............................................................................................................. 21
`
`
`
`
`
`viii
`
`

`

`
`
`Exhibit
`1001
`1002
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`1011
`1012
`1013
`
`1014
`1015
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`EXHIBITS
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 8,155,342 (“the ’342 patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,870,142 (“Michmerhuizen”)
`U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/789,176 (“Michmerhuizen
`Provisional”)
`ID3v2 Made Easy (available at www.id3.org/easy.html, print date
`May 12, 2003) and 1999 ID3v2 – Informal Standard (available at
`www.id3.org/id3v2.3.0.html, print date May 12, 2003)
`(collectively “ID3v2”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0215102
`(“Marlowe”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,188,186 (“Meyer”)
`Excerpt from file history of U.S. Patent No. 7,188,186
`U.S. Patent Application No. 11/475,847 (“the ’847 application”)
`U.S. Patent Application No. 11/071,667 (“the ’667 application”)
`U.S. Patent Application No. 10/732,909 (“the ’909 application”)
`U.S. Patent Application No. 10/316,961 (“the ’961 application”)
`Copy of ’342 Patent (With New Matter Highlighted)
`Portions of Plaintiff's Infringement Contentions Exhibit B, served
`September 2017 in Blitzsafe Texas, LLC v. Bayerische Motoren
`Werke AG et al., 2:17-cv-00418 (E.D. Tex.)
`File History of the ’342 Patent
`Declaration of James T. Geier
`The audio/mpeg Media Type, Network Working Group, available
`at https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3003, November 2000 (“IETF”).
`Advanced Audio Distribution Profile Specification, Adopted
`version 1.0., Bluetooth Audio Video Working Group, available at
`https://5series.net/forums/attachments/bluetooth-cell-phone-forum-
`26/16361d1141774343-samsung-phone-sends-music-5-series-out-
`a2dp_spec_v10.pdf, May 22, 2005.
`Hillyard, Jason, Creating audio applications with Bluetooth, EE
`Times, available at
`https://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1277103, April
`18, 2003.
`
`ix
`
`

`

`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`Petitioner BMW of North America, LLC (“BMWNA,” or “Petitioner”),
`
`requests Inter Partes Review of claims 49-64, 66, 68-88, 94-97, 99-111, 113, 115,
`
`116, 119 and 120 of U.S. Patent No. 8,155,342 (EX1001, “the ’342 patent”), filed
`
`on June 27, 2006, to Ira Marlowe. The patent is currently assigned to Blitzsafe
`
`Texas, LLC. (“Blitzsafe” or “Patent Owner”) based on Patent Office records.
`
`Shortly after the Board terminated a prior IPR on this patent just prior to
`
`reaching a final written decision (in IPR2016-00418), Blitzsafe sued BMWNA
`
`(and many others). A month after Blitzsafe identified the claims it would assert in
`
`infringement contentions, nearly all defendants asked the Board to restart the prior
`
`IPR and issue a final decision. As discussed during a call in that matter, the parties
`
`intended to save both the resources of the Board and the parties by only including
`
`grounds for which a record was already developed. The Board declined that
`
`request and declined to reinstitute a proceeding on the original grounds a few days
`
`ago. Accordingly, as expressly provided by the statute and the Board’s rules,
`
`BMWNA is not estopped from filing a new Inter Partes Review petition.
`
`Last fall, the Board made its decision in General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd.
`
`v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, IPR2016-01357, Paper 19 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 6, 2017). In
`
`that case, the Board denied institution of a second set of follow-on petitions that
`
`challenged the same claims as the first set of petitions by modifying the prior
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`grounds to address the Board’s concerns using prior art from a search conducted
`
`after the Board denied institution. Id. at 10. But that is not the case here.
`
`In preparing the invalidity contentions served in February 2018, BMWNA
`
`discovered new prior art—Michmerhuizen—that has never been before the Board
`
`or the patent examiner in a newly commissioned search. The new art was
`
`undiscovered by a prior art search conducted in August 2017. This prior art
`
`anticipates not only the previously challenged claims but also over twenty other
`
`claims, which this petition challenges for the first time.1 BMWNA discovered this
`
`better prior art only after it asked the Board to reinstitute the old IPR in
`
`IPR2018-00090.
`
`Unlike General Plastic, this is not a case where petitioner “modified its
`
`challenges in the follow on petitions in an attempt to cure the deficiencies that the
`
`Board identified in its first-filed petitions,” or even a case where the preliminary
`
`response or institution decision in the earlier proceeding provided additional
`
`guidance. The merits arguments in both the preliminary response and decision on
`
`institution presented issues already known from the record of previously-
`
`terminated IPR2016-00418. Accordingly, BMW gained no tactical advantage
`
`
`1 Petitioner believes that claims 58-61, 69, 72, 81-88, 96, 104, 105, 107, 108, 116,
`
`and 119 have not been challenged in any prior IPR petition for the ’342 patent.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`from them. Indeed, because the new art anticipates the claims, the guidance from
`
`all prior IPRs is of little-to-no value.
`
`Accordingly, because this petition relies on new art that went undiscovered
`
`until recently, despite reasonable efforts prior to filing of IPR2018-00090, and
`
`because the purpose of the prior IPR2018-00090 was to save the Board’s
`
`resources, not to gain an unfair tactical advantage, the Board should not exercise its
`
`discretion to deny this petition. Indeed, doing so would chill future efforts of
`
`parties to use USPTO resources efficiently when a patent owner employs the tactic
`
`of asking the Board to terminate a nearly completed IPR with the intent of turning
`
`around and suing others.
`
`For the reasons below, the Board should institute inter partes review of the
`
`’342 patent because Petitioner establishes a reasonable likelihood of success that
`
`claims 49-64, 66, 68-88, 94-97, 99-111, 113, 115, 116, 119 and 120 are
`
`unpatentable under each of the proposed grounds.
`
`II. U.S. PATENT 8,155,342
`A. Overview
`
`The ’342 patent discloses a multimedia device integration system that
`
`controls a portable device from a car audio/video system via an “integration
`
`subsystem” (see EX1001, Abstract), and wireless integration between the car
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`audio/video system and a portable audio/video device via the integration
`
`subsystem. See EX1014 (’342 Patent File History), p. 600-601). Id.
`
`That integration is achieved by positioning the integration subsystem either
`
`within the portable device or within the car audio/video system to integrate the two
`
`devices, as shown in FIGS. 18 and 19. See id.; see also Ex. 1001, FIGS. 18 and 19
`
`and 33:43-35:32; EX1015, ¶16.
`
`
`
`The ’342 patent contains six independent claims (1, 25, 49, 73, 97, and 120),
`
`four of which are challenged herein (49, 73, 97, and 120). Non-challenged
`
`independent claims 1 and 25 recite an “integration subsystem” connected to the
`
`portable device, and in wireless communication with a car audio/video system.
`
`Challenged independent claims 49, 73, 97, and 120 recite the “integration
`
`subsystem” being connected to the car audio/video system, and in wireless
`
`communication with the portable device. EX1015, ¶17. Figs. 18 and 19 of the
`
`’342 patent file history, annotated below, illustrate the different configurations:
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`EX1014, 824 (FIG. 18, annotated)
`Corresponding to unchallenged
`Claims 1 and 25
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`In the embodiment corresponding to the challenged independent claims (illustrated
`
`EX1014, 825 (FIG. 19, annotated)
`Corresponding to unchallenged
`Claims 49, 73, 97, 120
`
`
`
`in FIG. 19), the integration subsystem (1032) in the a car audio/video system
`
`(1010) is in communication with a first wireless interfaces (1016), which
`
`establishes a wireless link (1022) with a second wireless interface (1026) in the
`
`portable device (1024) for exchanging communications (e.g., commands, audio,
`
`etc.). EX1001, 34:19-35:32; EX1015, ¶18.
`
`The language of each of the challenged independent claims is recited below:
`
`49. A multimedia device integration system, comprising:
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`an integration subsystem in communication with a car
`audio/video system; and
`a first wireless interface in communication with said
`integration subsystem, said first wireless interface
`establishing a wireless communication link with a second
`wireless interface in communication with a portable device
`external to the car audio/video system,
`wherein said integration subsystem obtains, using said
`wireless communication link, information about an audio
`file stored on the portable device, transmits the information
`to the car audio/video system for subsequent display of the
`information on a display of the car audio/video system,
`instructs the portable device to play the audio file in
`response to a user selecting the audio file using controls of
`the car audio/video system, and receives audio generated by
`the portable device over said wireless communication link
`for playing on the car audio/video system.
`
`73. A multimedia device integration system, comprising:
`an integration subsystem in communication with a car
`audio/video system; and
`a first wireless interface in communication with said
`integration subsystem, said first wireless interface
`establishing a wireless communication link with a second
`wireless interface in communication with a portable device
`external to the car audio/video system,
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`
`
`wherein said integration subsystem obtains, using said
`wireless communication link, information about an audio
`file received by the portable device, transmits the
`information to the car audio/video system for subsequent
`display of the information on a display of the car
`audio/video system, instructs the portable device to play the
`audio file in response to a user selecting the audio file using
`controls of the car audio/video system, and receives audio
`generated by the portable device over said wireless
`communication link for playing on the car audio/video
`system.
`
`97. A multimedia device integration system, comprising:
`first and second wireless interfaces establishing a wireless
`communication link between a car audio/video system and a
`portable device external to the car audio/video system; and
`an integration subsystem in communication with said wireless
`communication link,
`wherein said integration subsystem channels audio generated
`by the portable device to the car audio/video system using
`the wireless communication link for subsequent playing of
`the audio on the car audio/video system, the audio
`corresponding to an audio file played by the portable
`device, and
`wherein said integration subsystem receives a control
`command issued by a user through one or more controls of
`the car audio/video system in a format incompatible with
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`
`
`the portable device, processes the control command into a
`formatted command compatible with the portable device,
`and dispatches the formatted command to the portable
`device for execution thereby.
`
`120. A multimedia device integration system, comprising:
`first and second wireless interfaces establishing a wireless
`communication link between a car audio/video system and a
`portable device external to the car audio/video system; and
`an integration subsystem in communication with said wireless
`communication link,
`wherein said integration subsystem instructs the portable
`device to play an audio file in response to a user selecting
`the audio file using controls of the car audio/video system,
`wherein said integration subsystem channels audio generated
`by the portable device to the car audio/video system using
`the wireless communication link for subsequent playing of
`the audio on the car audio/video system, the audio
`corresponding to the audio file played by the portable
`device, and
`wherein said integration subsystem receives data generated by
`the portable device in a format incompatible with the car
`audio/video system, processes the data into formatted data
`compatible with the car audio/video system, and transmits
`the processed data to the car audio/video system for
`subsequent display of the processed data on a display of the
`car audio/video system.
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`B.
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`Priority Claim: The Effective Filing Date of the ’342 Patent is
`June 27, 2006
`
`The ’342 patent (EX1001) was filed on June 27, 2006; as a continuation-in-
`
`part (CIP) of Ser. No. 11/071,667
`
`(EX1009, “the ’667 application”), filed
`
`March 3, 2005; which was a CIP of Ser.
`
`No. 10/732,909 (EX1010, “the ’909
`
`application”) filed December 10, 2003;
`
`which was a CIP of Ser. No. 10/316,961
`
`(EX1011, “the ’961 application”) filed
`
`December 11, 2002. See EX1001.
`
`EX1012 highlights the new matter
`
`added at each successive application in
`
`the priority chain of the ’342 patent.
`
`EX1015, ¶19. The table below identifies the highlighted portions in EX1012:
`
`Color
`
`Pink
`
`Application Adding
`Highlighted Portions
`’909 application
`
`Portions Having Highlighted New Matter
`
`Col.:Ln.: 3:3, 7:17-22, 27:10-28:3.
`
`Figures: 8A, 8B, 9.
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`
`
`Blue
`
`’667 application
`
`Yellow
`
`’847 application
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`Abstract: Lines 1-23.
`
`Col.:Ln.: 1:15-2:39, 2:45-64, 3:9,10,22, 3:44-
`5:6, 6: 3,14,18,22, 7:19, 7:23-64, 8:38-9:65,
`14:65, 15:67, 16:49-50, 16:62-17:1, 17:34-54,
`18:26-38, 19:12-26, 20:7-18, 20:54-66, 21:36-
`48, 23:53-24:41, 25:11, 26:24-30, 26:66, 27:6-
`9,12,26,29-30,38,40-41,42-43,60-61,66-67,
`28:3-33:42.
`
`Figures: 10, 11A, 11B, 12A, 12B, 13A, 13B,
`14-17.
`
`Abstract: Last 5 lines.
`
`Col.:Ln.: 1:6-13, 3:29-43, 5:7-62, 7:65-8:34,
`21:1, 26:55-57, 29:17, 33:43-38:67.
`
`Figures: 18-24.
`
`
`The earliest effective filing date of all claims is June 27, 2006. Every claim
`
`requires first and second wireless interfaces and an integration subsystem using a
`
`wireless link (i.e., wireless functionality), which was not supported until the ’847
`
`application, filed June 27, 2006. See EX1012, 5:7-62, 7:65-8:34, 21:1, 26:55-57,
`
`29:17, 33:43-38:67, FIGS. 18-24. As explained below, none of the priority
`
`documents support these claim elements. EX1015, ¶20.
`
`1.
`
`The ’961 Application
`
`The ’961 application provides no support for a wireless link, let alone any
`
`wireless functionality. Thus, the 342 patent claims are not entitled to the filing
`
`date of the ’961 application. EX1015, ¶21.
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`
`
`2.
`
`The ’909 Application
`
`Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,155,342
`
`The ’909 application, a CIP of the ’961 application, lacks support for
`
`wireless communication with the portable device as required by at least claims 49
`
`and 73 (“...establishing a wireless communication link with a second wireless
`
`interface in communication with a portable device") and their dependent