`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC., HUAWEI DEVICE CO. LTD., HUAWEI
`TECHNOLOGIES CO. LTD., HUAWEI DEVICE (DONGGUAN) CO. LTD.,
`HUAWEI INVESTMENT & HOLDING CO. LTD., HUAWEI TECH.
`INVESTMENT CO. LTD., HUAWEI DEVICE (HONG KONG) CO. LTD.
`Petitioners
`v.
`
`CYWEE GROUP LTD.
`(record) Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2019-XXX
`Patent No. 8,552,978
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ET SEQ.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`NOTICE OF LEAD AND BACKUP COUNSEL; SERVICE INFORMATION ..... 1
`NOTICE OF THE REAL-PARTIES-IN-INTEREST ............................................... 2
`NOTICE OF RELATED MATTERS ........................................................................ 2
`GROUNDS FOR STANDING .................................................................................. 3
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED .............................................. 3
`THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW ........................ 4
`I.
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 4
`A.
`Prosecution History and Issued Claims ................................................. 8
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 11
`A.
`Claim 10—”spatial reference frame” and similar terms ..................... 12
`B.
`Claim 10—”rotation output” ............................................................... 15
`GROUNDS .............................................................................................................. 15
`III. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 80
`
`
`
`II.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit No.
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`Description
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,552,978 (“the ’978 patent”).
`Declaration of Professor Majid Sarrafzadeh.
`C.V. of Professor Majid Sarrafzadeh.
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,089,148 (“Bachmann”).
`U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2004/0095317 (“Zhang”).
`U.S. Pat. 7,158,118 (“Liberty”).
`Return of Service for Cywee Group Ltd. v. Google, Inc., Case
`No. 1-18-cv-00571, (D. Del.).
`Return of Service for Cywee Group Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies
`Co., Inc. et al., Case No. 2-17-cv-00495, (E.D. Tex.).
`File History of U.S. Pat. App. 13/176,771.
`Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement in Cywee
`Group Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al., Case No. 2-
`17-cv-00140, (E.D. Tex.).
`Exhibit E (Claim chart with of U.S. Pat. No. 8,552,978) to
`CyWee’s Complaint in Cywee Group Ltd. v. Google, Inc., Case
`No. 1-18-cv-00571, (D. Del.)
`Institution Decision for IPR2018-01257 (Paper 8)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioners respectfully request inter partes review under 35 U.S.C. §311 of
`
`claims 10 and 12 of U.S. Pat. No. 8,552,978 (“the ’978 patent”). This Petition is
`
`being submitted concurrently with a motion for joinder with Google LLC v. Cywee
`
`Group Ltd., IPR2018-01257 (“the Google IPR”), which the Board instituted on
`
`December 11, 2018. This Petition is substantially identical to the Petition in the
`
`Google IPR; it contains the same grounds (based on the same prior art
`
`combinations and supporting evidence) against the same claims. The only changes
`
`address the different petitioners and counsel, as well as the intervening rule change
`
`regarding claim construction.
`
`NOTICE OF LEAD AND BACKUP COUNSEL; SERVICE INFORMATION
`Lead Counsel: Kristopher L. Reed (Reg. No. 58,694); Tel: 303.571.4000
`
`Backup Counsel: Benjamin M. Kleinman (Reg. No. 66,856); Tel:
`
`415.576.0200
`
`Backup Counsel: Norris P. Boothe (Reg. No. 74,983); Tel: 650.462.5305.
`
`Address of lead counsel: Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Two
`
`Embarcadero Center 19th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111.
`
`Please address all correspondence to the lead counsel at the addresses shown
`
`above. Petitioners consent to electronic service by email at:
`
`HuaweiCywee@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NOTICE OF THE REAL-PARTIES-IN-INTEREST
`The real-parties-in-interest are the Petitioners.
`
`NOTICE OF RELATED MATTERS
`The ’978 patent is asserted in the following matters:
`
` Cywee Group Ltd. v. Google, Inc., Case No. 1-18-cv-00571, (D. Del.);
`
` Cywee Group Ltd. v. ZTE Corporation et al., Case No. 3-17-cv-
`
`02130, (S.D. Cal.);
`
` Cywee Group Ltd. v. HTC Corporation et al., Case No. 2-17-cv-
`
`00932, (W.D. Wash.);
`
` Cywee Group Ltd. v. Motorola Mobility LLC, Case No. 1-17-cv-
`
`00780, (D. Del.);
`
` Cywee Group Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies Co., Inc. et al., Case No.
`
`2-17-cv-00495, (E.D. Tex.);
`
` Cywee Group Ltd. v. LG Electronics, Inc. et al., Case No. 3-17-cv-
`
`01102, (S.D. Cal.);
`
` Cywee Group Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al., Case No. 2-
`
`17-cv-00140, (E.D. Tex.);
`
` Cywee Group Ltd. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 4-14-cv-01853, (N.D. Cal.).
`
`The ’978 patent has been challenged in the Google IPR. Petitioners have
`
`concurrently filed a motion to join that proceeding. The ’978 patent is also at issue
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`
`
`in Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Cywee Group Ltd., IPR2019-00534, in which
`
`that petitioner has also requested to join the Google IPR. Petitioners are also
`
`concurrently filing a petition challenging claims 1 and 3-5 of U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,441,438 along with a motion to join Google LLC v. Cywee Group Ltd., IPR2018-
`
`01258, which the Board instituted on December 11, 2018.
`
`GROUNDS FOR STANDING
`Petitioners hereby certify that the patent for which review is sought is
`
`available for inter partes review, and that the Petitioners are not barred or estopped
`
`from requesting an inter partes review on the grounds identified in the petition. In
`
`particular, inter partes review IPR2018-01257 was instituted on December 11,
`
`2018 (Ex. 1012) and this petition is being filed no later than one month after that
`
`date and accompanied by a motion for joinder to that IPR, pursuant to 37 CFR §
`
`42.122(b).
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED
`Petitioners respectfully request that claims 10 and 12 of the ’978 patent be
`
`canceled based on the following grounds:
`
`Ground 1: Claims 10 and 12 are obvious over Zhang and Bachmann.
`
`Ground 2: Claims 10 and 12 are obvious over Liberty and Bachmann.
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`
`
`THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`This petition presents “a reasonable likelihood that the Petitioners would
`
`prevail with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition,” 35
`
`U.S.C. §314(a), as shown in the Grounds explained below.
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`The present petition is supported by the declaration of Prof. Majid
`
`Sarrafzadeh (Ex. 1002). Professor Sarrafzadeh holds the title of Distinguished
`
`Professor of Computer Science & Electrical Engineering at the University of
`
`California, Los Angeles. Professor Sarrafzadeh’s CV is included as Exhibit 1003.
`
`The ’978 patent relates to 3D pointing devices. (Ex. 1001, Title). The ’978
`
`patent describes the function of a 3D pointing device as “detecting motions of the
`
`device and translating the detected motions to a cursor display such as a cursor
`
`pointing on the screen...of a 2D display device....” (Ex. 1001, 1:31-33)(Ex. 1002,
`
`¶26). For example, a 3D pointing device could be a kind of computer mouse that
`
`detects movements and rotations of the mouse in three dimensions, allowing the
`
`movements and rotations to be translated into actions on a computer. (Ex. 1001,
`
`1:52-61)(Ex. 1002, ¶26). An example of such a device 110 (and a corresponding
`
`display 120) is shown in Fig. 1 of the ’978 patent, reproduced below:
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`To keep track of the motions and rotations of a 3D pointing device, the ’978
`
`patent proposes using three kinds of sensors: rotation sensors (for detecting the
`
`angular velocity of rotation), accelerometers (for detecting axial accelerations), and
`
`magnetometers (for detecting the local magnetic field). (Ex. 1001, Fig. 4)(Ex.
`
`1002, ¶27). These sensors are mounted in or on the 3D pointing device, and
`
`provide information on the movements and rotations of the device. (Ex. 1002,
`
`¶27).
`
`The ’978 patent also purports to provide methods of using data output from
`
`the rotation sensors, accelerometers and magnetometers to calculate the orientation
`
`of the 3D pointing device. (Ex. 1001, 4:15-57)(Ex. 1002, ¶28). The “orientation”
`
`of the device (also called the “attitude” or “tilt” of the device) is the direction of
`
`the device, e.g. the angles between the device and the axes of any given coordinate
`
`system. (Ex. 1001, 1:62-64)(Ex. 1002, ¶28). For example, Fig. 2 of the ’978 patent
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`
`
`shows the same device 110 in a different “orientation”, having been rotated about
`
`the x-axis by 90 degrees:
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1001, 2:11-14)(Ex. 1002, ¶28).
`
`While the ’978 patent acknowledges the existence of prior-art 3D pointers
`
`using sensors to detect and calculate orientation, the ’978 patent criticizes the
`
`specific devices mentioned as allegedly unable to calculate orientation accurately.
`
`(Ex. 1001, 2:41-3:52)(Ex. 1002, ¶33). The ’978 patent purports to provide a
`
`solution1 to the alleged deficiencies of the prior art, by using additional sensors and
`
`
`
`1 Orientation may be expressed in a number of equivalent ways, such as with a
`
`quaternion. (Ex. 1002, ¶¶28-32).
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`
`
`“compensating” the output of the sensors to improve the accuracy of the
`
`orientation calculation. (Ex. 1001, 1:22-27).
`
`To “compensate” the output of the sensors, the ’978 patent discloses a
`
`mathematical method using quaternions. (Ex. 1001, 16:5 et seq.)(Ex. 1002, ¶34).
`
`As explained by Professor Sarrafzadeh, a “quaternion” is a way to represent an
`
`orientation (rotation angles) using a four-valued vector. (Ex. 1002, WO-32).
`
`Quaternion math operations (such as multiplication) are defined differently than
`
`for standard vectors, and can sometimes be used for efficient calculation of
`
`rotations. (Ex. 1002, WO-32).
`
`A basic sketch of the ’978 patent
`
`method can be seen in Fig. 7, which is
`
`reproduced at right. The method of Fig. 7
`
`obtains measured angular velocities at
`
`step 715 (Ex. 1001, 16:27-30) and
`
`measured axial accelerations in step 725
`
`(Ex. 1001, 16:60-64). The method then
`
`calculates a predicted set of axial
`
`accelerations at step 730. (Ex. 1001,
`
`17:2-9). By comparing the actual and
`
`predicted accelerations (step 735), the
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`
`
`method purports to improve the estimate of orientation (called the “updated state
`
`(3rd quaternion)” in box 735). (Ex. 1001, 18:25-55)(Ex. 1002, ¶34).
`
`A.
`
`Prosecution History and Issued Claims
`
`This petition challenges independent claim 10 and dependent claim 12. As
`
`originally filed, claim 10 (then numbered claim 12), read as follows:
`
`“12. A method for compensating rotations of a 3D pointing device,
`
`comprising:
`
`generating an orientation output associated with an orientation
`of the 3D pointing device associated with three coordinate axes of a
`global reference frame associated with Earth;
`generating a rotation output associated with a rotation of the 3D
`pointing device associated with three coordinate axes of a spatial
`reference frame associated with the 3D pointing device; and
`using the orientation output and the rotation output to generate a
`transformed output associated with a fixed reference frame associated
`with a display device.”
`
`(Ex. 1009, p. 044-045). The claim was thus directed to generating a rotation output
`
`(i.e. output of rotation sensors), calculating orientation output, and then somehow
`
`“using” orientation output and rotation output to generate a “transformed output.”
`
`The Examiner initially rejected all original claims for double patenting, and
`
`as anticipated or obvious over U.S. Pat. Pub 2009/0262074 to Nasiri. (Ex. 1009,
`
`pp. 071-089). The applicants responded by requesting an interview. (Ex. 1009, pp.
`
`060-066). In the interview request, the applicants’ representative argued that Nasiri
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`
`
`did not teach using a global reference frame associated with Earth, and that Nasiri
`
`“only briefly talks about ‘magnetometers.’” (Ex. 1009, pp. 060-066).
`
`The applicants then submitted an amendment. (Ex. 1009, pp. 040-055). In
`
`the amendment, the applicants modified claim 12 to add several limitations. First,
`
`the applicants added language to claim 12 requiring generating signal sets
`
`associated with accelerometers and magnetometers. (Ex. 1009, pp. 044-045).
`
`Second, the applicants specified that the “orientation output” must be “based on the
`
`first signal set, the second signal set and the rotation output or based on the first
`
`signal set and the second signal set”. (Id.). Third, the applicants specified that “the
`
`orientation output and the rotation output is generated by a nine-axis motion sensor
`
`module,” and that a “resultant deviation including a plurality of deviation angles”
`
`must be obtained “using” a “plurality of measured magnetisms Mx, My, Mz and a
`
`plurality of predicted magnetism Mx’, My’ and Mz’ for the second signal set.”
`
`(Id.).
`
`Following the amendment, the Examiner allowed the claims without further
`
`comment. (Ex. 1009, pp. 024-027). As issued, independent claim 10 reads as
`
`follows:
`
`“10. A method for compensating rotations of a 3D pointing device,
`comprising:
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`
`
`generating an orientation output associated with an orientation
`of the 3D pointing device associated with three coordinate axes of a
`global reference frame associated with Earth;
`generating [sic] a first signal set comprising axial accelerations
`associated with movements and rotations of the 3D pointing device in
`the spatial reference frame;
`generating a second signal set associated with Earth’s
`magnetism;
`generating the orientation output based on the first signal set,
`the second signal set and the rotation output or based on the first
`signal set and the second signal set;
`generating a rotation output associated with a rotation of the 3D
`pointing device associated with three coordinate axes of a spatial
`reference frame associated with the 3D pointing device; and
`using the orientation output and the rotation output to generate a
`transformed output associated with a fixed reference frame associated
`with a display device, wherein the orientation output and the rotation
`output is generated by a nine-axis motion sensor module;
`obtaining one or more resultant deviation including a plurality
`of deviation angles using a plurality of measured magnetisms Mx,
`My, Mz and a plurality of predicted magnetism Mx’, My’ and Mz’
`for the second signal set.”
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`
`
`II.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION2
`
`“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.” 37
`
`C.F.R. §42.100(b); Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 195 L. Ed. 2d 423 (2016).
`
`For this proceeding, claim terms are presumed to take on their broadest reasonable
`
`ordinary meaning, which is explained in certain instances below. The constructions
`
`below are for the purpose of this petition only, and Petitioners reserve the right to
`
`
`2 To the extent the Board construed the terms differently than proposed in this
`
`petition in its Institution Decision in IPR2018-01257, Petitioners consent in the
`
`alternative to the Board’s constructions therein. Also, although the claim
`
`construction standard has changed from BRI to Phillips for petitions filed after
`
`November 13, 2018, the Board should apply the BRI standard to the instant
`
`petition because Petitioners are simply seeking joinder as co-petitioners to the
`
`Google IPR. If the Board deems that the rules require application of the Phillips
`
`standard to this petition, Petitioners seek waiver of such rule(s) pursuant to 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.5(b). Alternatively, Petitioners submit that application of the Phillips
`
`standard would not change the constructions set forth herein or in the Institution
`
`Decision, and would not affect the analysis or rationale behind the Institution
`
`Decision in the Google IPR. See Ex. 1012.
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`
`
`change these constructions as appropriate in future proceedings. Petitioners also do
`
`not concede, by seeking this petition, that the challenged claims are of definite
`
`scope or properly described under 35 U.S.C. §112.
`
`A. Claim 10—”spatial reference frame” and similar terms
`
`Claim 10 uses the phrases “spatial reference frame” and “spatial reference
`
`frame associated with the 3D pointing device.” These phrases should be
`
`interpreted to mean “a reference frame associated with the 3D pointing device,
`
`which always has its origin at the same point in the device and in which the axes
`
`are always fixed with respect to the device.” (Ex. 1002, ¶37).
`
`The ’978 patent states as follows concerning the spatial reference frame:
`
`“There are two reference frames, such as the spatial pointer
`
`reference frame and the display frame, associated with the
`
`pointing device 110 and the display device 120, respectively. The
`
`first reference frame or spatial pointer reference frame associated
`
`with the pointing device 110 is defined by the coordinate axes XP,
`
`YP and ZP as shown in FIG. 1.”
`
`(Ex. 1001, 1:39-1:45)(Emphasis added)(Ex. 1002, ¶40). Thus, the “spatial pointer
`
`reference frame” is shown by the coordinate axes XP, YP and ZP in Fig. 1. Figure
`
`1 is reproduced here.
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1002, ¶41). As can be seen from Fig. 1, the spatial pointer reference frame is a
`
`reference frame associated with the 3D pointing device, which has its origin at a
`
`point in the device. (Ex. 1002, ¶¶41-45).
`
`Furthermore, as shown in Fig. 2, when the device is rotated, the axes XP, YP
`
`and ZP rotate with the device. (Ex. 1002, ¶¶45-46). Figure 2 is reproduced below,
`
`and shows a 90-degree roll of the device, with correspondingly rotated axes YP and
`
`ZP:
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1002, ¶¶42-43). For that reason, in the spatial pointer reference frame, the
`
`origin and axes of the frame stay fixed with respect to the device. (Ex. 1002, ¶¶42-
`
`46). Note that the ’978 patent treats each of the phrases “spatial reference frame”
`
`and “spatial pointer reference frame” as referring to a device-centered frame of
`
`reference analogous to the XP, YP and ZP axes. (Ex. 1001, 9:19-20, 1:39-47, 3:6-
`
`7)(Ex. 1002, ¶39-42). Because “spatial reference frame” already refers to a frame
`
`with its origin in the device, the longer phrase “spatial reference frame associated
`
`with the 3D pointing device” has the same meaning, as CyWee concedes. (Ex.
`
`1002, ¶¶38-41; Ex. 1010, p. 2).
`
`Thus, the phrases “spatial reference frame” and “spatial reference frame
`
`associated with the 3D pointing device” should both be interpreted to mean “a
`
`reference frame associated with the 3D pointing device, which always has its
`
`origin at the same point in the device and in which the axes are always fixed with
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`
`
`respect to the device.” (Ex. 1002, ¶¶37-47). Cywee agreed to these constructions
`
`during a co-pending litigation. (Ex. 1010, p. 2).
`
`B. Claim 10—”rotation output”
`
`Claim 10 uses the phrase “rotation output.” In the specification, the ’978
`
`patent makes clear that the rotation output is the output of a rotation sensor (a
`
`sensor that detects rotation). For example, the ’978 patent states:
`
`The rotation sensor generates a rotation output associated with a
`
`rotation of the 3D pointing device associated with three coordinate
`
`axes of a spatial reference frame associated with the 3D pointing
`
`device.
`
`(Ex. 1001, 7:61-64)(Emphasis added)(Ex. 1002, ¶50).
`
`Thus, “rotation output” should be interpreted in accordance with the
`
`specification as “output of a rotation sensor.” (Ex. 1002, ¶¶48-52).
`
`GROUNDS
`Ground 1. Claims 10 and 12 are obvious over Zhang in view of Bachmann.
`
`Claims 10 and 12 are unpatentable as obvious over U.S. Pat. App. Pub.
`
`2004/0095317 (“Zhang”)(Ex. 1005), in view of U.S. Pat. No. 7,089,148
`
`(“Bachmann”)(Ex. 1004).
`
`Zhang was published on May 20, 2004, and is thus prior art under pre-AIA
`
`35 U.S.C. §102(b). Bachmann issued on August 8, 2006, and is thus also prior art
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`
`
`under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §102(b). Zhang and Bachmann are analogous art,
`
`because they are in the same field and reasonably related to the problems facing
`
`the named inventors, as shown by the discussion below.
`
`Neither Zhang nor Bachmann are listed as prior art of record on the face of
`
`the ’978 patent.
`
`Overview of the Combination
`
`Claim 10 is directed to a method for compensating rotations of a 3D pointing
`
`device. The combination of Zhang and Bachmann, broadly speaking, uses Zhang ‘s
`
`3D pointing device together with Bachmann’s extra sensors and method for
`
`compensating rotations.
`
`Zhang teaches a “a handheld pointing device” that is used for a “computer
`
`pointing control system.” (Ex. 1005, Abstract)(Ex. 1002, ¶53). Such a computer
`
`pointing control system is shown, for example, in Fig. 2 of Zhang (reproduced
`
`below), where the handheld device (a 3D pointer) has reference numeral 100:
`
`-16-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inside Zhang’s device 100, there are several
`
`sensors that detect the orientation of the device. Zhang
`
`explains:
`
`“A universal pointing control system for
`televisions and computer displays
`is
`disclosed. The system is comprised of a
`remote handheld device, a display control
`unit and a command delivery unit. The
`remote handheld device includes a set of orientation
`sensors that detect the device’s current orientation.”
`
`(Ex. 1005, ¶0008)(Emphasis added)(Ex. 1002, ¶54).
`
`Zhang discloses that the device 100 has several different orientation sensors.
`
`The orientation sensors are arranged on a circuit board in the housing of the device,
`
`as shown in Fig. 3 of Zhang, reproduced at right. In Fig. 3, numeral 160 is the
`
`-17-
`
`
`
`
`
`circuit board, while numerals 120 and 130 are sensors. (Ex. 1005, ¶0025)(Ex.
`
`1002, 155-56). Numeral 120 is “a two-axis magnetic
`
`field sensor 120 [that] is used to detect the device’s
`
`orientation relative to the direction of the earth’s
`
`magnetic field 25.” (Ex. 1005, ¶0026)(Ex. 1002, ¶¶57-
`
`58). Numeral 130 is an “accelerometer sensor 130 [that]
`
`contains
`
`two orthogonally arranged acceleration
`
`detectors.” (Ex. 1005, ¶0027)(Ex. 1002, 157-58).
`
`Numeral 110 is a microcontroller for performing
`
`calculations. (Ex. 1005, ¶0025)(Ex. 1002, ¶59).
`
`A system diagram of Zhang’s device 100 is shown in Fig. 5, reproduced
`
`below at right. (Ex. 1005, ¶0029)(Ex. 1002, ¶59). In Fig. 5, the two sets of two
`
`sensors (magnetometers 120 and accelerometers 130) are shown on the left side
`
`(the Petitioners have placed a red-dashed box around the numerals 120 and 130).
`
`These sensors output signals to circuits 111-112, 121-124 and 131-134. (Ex. 1005,
`
`¶0029)(Ex. 1002, ¶60). These circuits condition the sensor output, convert it to
`
`digital format, and pass the digital data to the microcontroller (MCU) 110. (Ex.
`
`1005, ¶0029)(Ex. 1002, ¶60). The MCU 110 determines the device’s orientation,
`
`including azimuth and inclination angles (yaw and pitch). (Ex. 1005, ¶0029)(Ex.
`
`1002, ¶60). These angles are shown in Figs. 4(a) and 4(b), reproduced below.
`
`-18-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1002, ¶58). After Zhang’s device calculates its own orientation, Zhang’s
`
`system translates those angles into a display command (e.g. moving a cursor), by
`
`translating the angles into screen coordinates. (Ex. 1005, 7E0024, 0030)(Ex. 1002,
`
`¶60).
`
`Zhang’s primary embodiment has a four-axis sensor module (compared to
`
`the “nine-axis sensor module” required by claim 10). Zhang explains that more
`
`sensors can be used, and that different kinds of sensors can be used. For example,
`
`Zhang states that gyro sensors (angular rate sensors that measure “rotation output”)
`
`could be used:
`
`“The orientation sensors’ mechanisms are shown in
`FIGS. 4a and 4b. The orientation sensor demonstrated in
`
`-19-
`
`
`
`
`
`FIG. 4a is a magnetic field sensor, whereas the one in
`FIG. 4b is an accelerometer sensor. However, the
`orientation detection may not be limited to these types
`of sensors. Other sensors, for example, a gyro sensor,
`can also be used in the pointing control system.”
`
`(Ex. 1005, ¶0026)(Emphasis added)(Ex. 1002, ¶61). Zhang also mentions that
`
`accelerometers, magnetometers and gyro (angular rate) sensors can be used in
`
`combination. (Ex. 1005, 7E0006, 0026, claim 2)(Ex. 1002, ¶62).
`
`Bachmann, in turn, provides an example of a nine-axis sensor system that
`
`combines accelerometers, magnetometers and angular rate detectors (e.g.
`
`gyroscopes), as suggested by Zhang. Bachmann, for example, states:
`
`“In another sensor embodiment, the magnetometers and
`accelerometers are supplemented with angular rate
`detectors configured to detect the angular velocity of the
`sensor (comprising so-called Magnetic, Angular Rate,
`Gravity (MARG) sensors). Each MARG sensor contains
`angular
`rate
`detectors,
`accelerometers,
`and
`magnetometers.”
`
`(Ex. 1004, 7:34-41)(Emphasis added)(Ex. 1002, ¶64). In Bachmann’s system, each
`
`type of sensor is a three-axis sensor, making the entire system (3 sensor types x 3
`
`axes per type) a nine-axis system. (Ex. 1002, ¶65).
`
`-20-
`
`
`
`
`
`Bachmann teaches combining sensor data using an attitude estimation filter
`
`to produce an estimate of the orientation of a tracked object. Bachmann explains:
`
`“[T]he filter inputs are from a three-axis accelerometer
`(hi h2 h3) 31, a three-axis magnetometer (bi b2 b3) 32,
`and a three-axis angular rate sensor (p, q, r) 33. Its
`output is a quaternion representation of the orientation
`of the tracked object q 39.”
`
`(Ex. 1004, 10:10-14)(Emphasis added)(Ex. 1002,
`
`¶66). Bachmann
`
`thus
`
`takes
`
`the output of
`
`accelerometer, magnetometer and angular rate
`
`sensors, and uses these sensor outputs to calculate
`
`an orientation of a tracked device. (Ex. 1002, ¶67).
`
`To calculate the orientation from sensor inputs, Bachman uses a filter.
`
`Bachmann’s filter mirrors the claimed calculations of the ’978 patent. (Ex. 1002,
`
`¶68). A control diagram of Bachmann’s filter process is shown in Fig. 3,
`
`reproduced at right, where the Petitioners have drawn a red-dashed box around the
`
`output, el, in the lower right.
`
`(Ex. 1004, Fig. 3)(Ex. 1002, ¶68). The output q is a quaternion representing the
`
`orientation of the tracked object in space. (Ex. 1004, 10:10-14)(Ex. 1002, ¶68).
`
`Bachmann’s filter as shown in Fig. 3 receives inputs from three sets of
`
`sensors (accelerometers, magnetometers and angular-rate sensors) marked 31, 32
`
`-21-
`
`
`
`
`
`and 33, on the left side of Fig. 3. These sensors are shown in red-dashed boxes,
`
`below:
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1002, ¶69).
`
`The output of the angular rate sensors (33) is used to calculate the
`
`orientation of the device q. The calculation is shown in the boxes along the red-
`
`dashed line that has been added to the lower portion of Fig. 3, below:
`
`-22-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1002, ¶70). In the figure, the output of the angular rate sensors (33) is a set of
`
`measured angular rates of rotation (p, q, r) about three axes. (Ex. 1004, 10:10-
`
`14)(Ex. 1002, ¶70). These rates are converted, in box 37, to a rate quaternion q.
`
`(Ex. 1004, 10:15-36)(Ex. 1002, ¶70). To the rate quaternion 1 is added a correction
`
`factor
`
` (which will be explained below), to yield a corrected rate quaternion
`
`.
`
`(Ex. 1004, 10:15-65)(Ex. 1002, ¶¶70-74). The corrected rate quaternion
`
` is then
`
`integrated in box 42 and normalized to a unit length in box 43, to yield the
`
`orientation quaternion at the output, q. (Ex. 1004, 10:15-65)(Ex. 1002, ¶¶70-74).
`
`Bachmann’s filter shown in Fig. 3 takes advantage of extra sensor
`
`measurements from the accelerometers and magnetometers via the previously-
`
`mentioned correction factor,
`
`. Bachmann calculates this correction factor
`
` in
`
`steps 34-41 of Fig. 3. There, Bachmann first obtains actual sensor measurements
`
`-23-
`
`
`
`
`
`from the accelerometers3 (31) and magnetometers (32), forming a six-valued
`
`measurement vector (h1 h2 h3 b1 b2 b3), as shown in box 34. (Ex. 1004, 10:10-14,
`
`3:13-17, 8:47-51)(Ex. 1002, ¶72). These six measurement values include three
`
`measurements of acceleration along the X, Y and Z axes of the sensors, and three
`
`measurements for magnetism, also along the X, Y and Z axes of the sensors. (Id.).
`
`The six actual measurements are then compared to six predicted measurements
`
`found in the vector (cid:1877)(cid:3364)(cid:4666)(cid:1869)(cid:3548)(cid:4667), by subtracting the predicted measurements (cid:1877)(cid:3364)(cid:4666)(cid:1869)(cid:3548)(cid:4667) from the
`
`actual measurements (h1 h2 h3 b1 b2 b3). (Ex. 1004, 8:63-9:18, 17:12-22)(Ex. 1002,
`
`¶72). This forms a six-valued error vector 44), numbered 36. (Ex. 1004, 17:12-22,
`
`9:9-14)(Ex. 1002, ¶72).
`
`The six-valued error vector (cid:2013)̅((cid:1869)(cid:3548)) is essentially a measure of how actual
`17:12-22, 9:9-14)(Ex. 1002, ¶73). The difference (cid:2013)̅((cid:1869)(cid:3548)) is utilized in boxes 38 and
`There, the filter selects a correction factor (cid:1869)(cid:4662)(cid:2013) that will minimize (cid:2013)̅((cid:1869)(cid:3548)). (Ex.
`1004, 9:9-35)(Ex. 1002, ¶73). That is, the filter will choose a correction factor (cid:1869)(cid:4662)(cid:2013)
`
`accelerometer and magnetometer measurements differ from what the filter predicts
`
`those measurements should be based on the angular rate sensor output. (Ex. 1004,
`
`41.
`
`
`
`3 The accelerometer measurements are first low-pass filtered to remove sudden
`
`accelerations. (Ex. 1004, 8:12-20)(Ex. 1002, ¶125).
`
`-24-
`
`
`
`
`
`that, when added to (cid:1869)(cid:4662), will minimize the difference between the actual
`orientation output of the filter, (cid:1869)(cid:3548). (Ex. 1002, ¶73).
`
`measurements (hi h2 h3 bi b2 b3) and the predicted measurements for those same
`
`values. (Ex. 1004, 9:9-35) (Ex. 1002, ¶73). This has the effect of compensating the
`
`The combination proposes using the 3D pointer of Zhang (modified to
`
`include additional sensors), together with Bachmann’s filter process to calculate a
`
`device orientation. Once a device orientation has been calculated, it can be
`
`converted to the coordinate system of a display device, as disclosed in both Zhang
`
`and Bachmann. The combination can be illustrated with the Figure below, created
`
`by the Petitioners, showing the relevant modifications to the Zhang pointer (adding
`
`sensors and using Bachmann’s filter calculations):
`
`(Ex. 1002, ¶93).
`
`Rationale for the Combination
`
`
`
`-25-
`
`
`
`
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of skill in the relevant timeframe4 to
`
`use Zhang’s 3D pointer with Bachmann’s sensors and filter calculations. As
`
`discussed above in the Overview section beginning on page 23, Zhang expressly
`
`states that additional sensors can be used, and in particular, that “gyro” (angular
`
`rate) sensors can be used. (Ex. 1005, ¶¶0006, 0025, 0026, claim 2)(Ex. 1002, ¶¶61-
`
`63, 94). Thus, it would have been obvious to add sensors to Zhang, including the
`
`angular rate sensors of Bachmann, based on Zhang’s express suggestion.
`
`Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill would have understood that additional
`
`sensors, and additional types of sensors, would have yielded at least two benefits.
`
`(Ex. 1002, ¶95). First, additional sensors (in particular sensor axes) and additional
`
`sensor types would have allowed the device to detect different modes of
`
`movement, for example a roll angle, thus better allowing the device to translate
`
`user movements to display operations. (Ex. 1002, ¶94). Second, additional sensor
`
`axes and sensor types would have increased the overdetermination (the amount of
`
`
`
`4 The first provisional application in the chain of applications leading to the ’978
`
`patent was filed on January 6, 2010. Petitioners disagree that this is the proper
`
`priority date, and notes that subsequent applications were continuations-in-part
`
`applications but for purposes of this Petition assumes that this date applies.
`
`-26-
`
`
`
`
`
`information beyond that necessary to determine orientation), which in turn would
`
`have enabled better error and noise control. (Ex. 1002, ¶94).
`
`Bachmann’s nine-axis sensors were also well-known in the art in the
`
`relevant timeframe. Bachmann, which issued in 2006, states that magnetic, angular
`
`rate and gravitational (acceleration) sensors were known in the art as MARG
`
`sensors, were already comm