PRESENTATION OF PETITIONER
`INGENICO INC.
`
`IPR2019-00879 (U.S. Patent No. 9,059,969)
`
`IPR2019-00929 (U.S. Patent No. 9,774,703)
`
`1
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 1
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`“NE W” PORTABLE DEVICE
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), 2:23-3:6 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (’703 Patent), 2:29-3:15 (emphasis added).
`
`2
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 2
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`INTERACTIVE USER INTERFACE
`
`Interactive User Interface: “a presentation (display) with which a
`user may interact to result in the computer (portable device) taking
`action responsively.”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Construction for Interactive User Interface, Paper 41
`(Petitioner’s Reply), pg. 1.
`IPR2019-00929, Construction for Interactive User Interface, Paper 31
`(Petitioner’s Reply), pg. 1.
`
`“A POSITA would have understood that a ‘user interface’ is an
`interface that enables a user to interact with a computer.”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1002 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 30.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 29.
`
`User interface: The combination of menus, screen design, keyboard
`commands, command language and help screens, which create the
`way a user interacts with a computer. Mice, touch screens and other
`input hardware is also included. A well-designed user interface is
`vital to the success of a software package. In time, interactive
`video, voice recognition and natural language understanding will
`be included.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1009 (Definition of “user interface”, The
`Computer Glossary), pg. 420.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1009 (Definition of “user interface”, The
`Computer Glossary), pg. 420.
`
`3
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 3
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`VARIETY OF WAYS TO INTERACT
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent),1:46-61.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (’703 Patent), 1:51-66.
`
`4
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 4
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`PARENT PROSECUTION
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1014 (Prosecution History for U.S. Patent No. 7,861,006,
`Amendment After Final under 37 CFR 1.116), p. 331, 332 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1019 (Prosecution History for U.S. Patent No. 7,861,006,
`Amendment After Final under 37 CFR 1.116), p. 331, 332 (emphasis added).
`
`5
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 5
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`INTERACT WITH COMPUTER
`
`Sample displays are presented in the drawings. A number of the
`
`displays respond to text inputs from an input component to elicit a
`
`responsive action from the terminal…For example, inputting
`
`registration information to screen 515 in Fig. 5, if successful, will
`
`produce a follow-up screen 517 and otherwise produces an error
`
`message.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Paper 001 (Petition), pg. 13-14.
`
`Sample displays are provided in the drawings of the ’703 patent. A
`
`number of the displays respond to text inputs from an input
`
`component to elicit a responsive action from the terminal…For
`
`example, inputting registration information to screen 515 in Figure 5,
`
`if successful, will produce follow-up screen 517 and otherwise
`
`produces an error message.
`
`IPR2019-00929, Paper 002 (Petition), pg. 11.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), 7:53-56 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (’703 Patent), 8:3-7 (emphasis added).
`
`6
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 6
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIM 1 (‘969 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), Claim 1.
`
`7
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 7
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIM 55 (’703 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), Claim 55.
`
`8
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 8
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`TUNNELING THROUGH
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), Abstract (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), 1:11-14 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), 1:36-40 (emphasis added).
`
`9
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 9
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`REMOVAL OF “TUNNELING” FROM CLAIMS AND
`SPECIFICATION
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), Abstract.
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), 1:13-18.
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), 1:40-45 (emphasis added).
`
`10
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 10
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6E.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6E.
`
`11
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 11
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6F.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6F.
`
`12
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 12
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6G.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6G.
`
`13
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 13
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6A.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6A.
`
`14
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 14
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6E.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6E.
`
`15
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 15
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6H.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6H.
`
`16
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 16
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6I.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 6I.
`
`17
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 17
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IIDA INTERACTS WITH VARIETY OF
`TRADITIONAL USER INTERFACES
`
`“Iida’s vague, passing reference to [10-keys]…”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Paper 043 (Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply), pg. 19.
`
`“Iida’s single, passing reference to [10-keys]…”
`
`IPR2019-00929, Paper 032 (Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply), pg. 14.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 68 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida),¶ 68 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 144 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 144 (emphasis added).
`
`18
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 18
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 4C.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 4C.
`
`19
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 19
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 5.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 5.
`
`20
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 20
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 4A.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 4A.
`
`21
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 21
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 4D.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 4D.
`
`22
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 22
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IIDA’S EXAMPLE INTERFACES
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 151 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 151 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 83 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 83 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 85 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 85 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 89 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 89 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 99 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 99 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 121 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 121 (emphasis added).
`
`23
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 23
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIM 93 (’703 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), Claim 93 (emphasis added).
`
`24
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 24
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 1A.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 1A.
`
`25
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 25
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 1B.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 1B.
`
`26
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 26
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), Fig. 10a, Fig.10b.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (’703 Patent), Fig. 10.
`
`27
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 27
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CODE TO PROVIDE A COMMUNICATIONS NODE
`
`“A POSITA thus knows from Iida that the control unit 60 executes code ‘to
`
`provide a communications node on the terminal to facilitate communications
`
`to the portable device and to a communications network node through the
`
`terminal network communication interface.’”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1002 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 53.
`
`“A POSITA thus would have understood from these teachings of Iida that the
`
`control unit 60 executes code ‘to provide a communications node on the
`
`terminal to facilitate communications to the portable device and to a
`
`communications network node through the terminal network communication
`
`interface.’”
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 68.
`
`“A POSITA would understand Iida to mean that the camera necessarily includes
`
`code for establishing the camera as a node in Bluetooth or HomeRF to
`
`coordinate communication and establish a link with the second wireless
`
`communication unit 68 of the terminal.”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1002 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 54.
`
`“A POSITA would have understood that camera 12 necessarily includes code for
`
`establishing the camera as a node in Bluetooth or HomeRF to coordinate
`
`communication and establish a link with the second wireless communication
`
`unit 68 of terminal 14.”
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 69.
`
`28
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 28
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CODE WAS UNDERSTOOD
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (’969 Patent), 28:27-34.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (’703 Patent), 29:12-19.
`
`“The ’969 patent recognizes that a POSITA would not need to see a disclosure of
`code to set up the camera as a node. Rather than spelling out third program code
`in the specification, for ‘enabling access of information between nodes’ the ’969
`patent simply refers to ‘standard development tools such as, but not limited to...’ Ex.
`1001, C28:L27-34. It was understood by the ’969 patent and Iida that a POSITA
`would have had the knowledge to employ suitable code for carrying out the
`functions of communicating between the camera and the terminal.”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1002 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 55.
`
`“The ’703 patent recognizes that a POSITA would not need to see a disclosure of
`code to set up the camera as a node. The ’703 patent simply refers to ‘standard
`development tools such as, but not limited to...’ Ex. 1001, C29:L13-19. It was
`understood by the ’703 patent and Iida that a POSITA would have had the
`knowledge to employ suitable code for carrying out the functions of
`communicating between the camera and the terminal.”
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 71.
`
`29
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 29
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`DR. BUTLER DISCUSSES “COMMUNICATIONS NODE”
`
`“Q. Well, a communications node is a node; correct?
`
`MR. CHUEBON: Objection to form.
`
`A. I would say that a node capable of communication would be a
`
`communications node.”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1047 (Deposition of Kevin Butler), 66:21-67:1.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1047 (Deposition of Kevin Butler), 66:21-67:1.
`
`Q. So is it fair to say that that phone is providing a
`
`communications node?
`
`MR. CHUEBON: Objection to form.
`
`A. It’s clear that there would need to be some code on that
`
`phone in order to establish that.
`
`Q. “That” being the communications node?
`
`A. “That” being the ability to communicate image data wirelessly
`
`to an image server over the Internet.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1047 (Deposition of Kevin Butler), 62:9-16.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1047 (Deposition of Kevin Butler), 62:9-16.
`
`30
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 30
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIMS 56 AND 75 (’703 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), Claims 55, 56, 71, 75 (emphasis added).
`
`31
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 31
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIM 3 (‘969 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), Claims 1, 2, 3 (emphasis added).
`
`32
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 32
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`US 2003/0020813 (“IIDA”)
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), Claims 75, 76, 113 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), Claims 75, 76, 113 (emphasis added).
`
`33
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 33
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIMS 61, 62 (’703 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), Claims 55, 61, 62 (emphasis added).
`
`34
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 34
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIMS 110, 111 (’703 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), Claims 104, 110, 111 (emphasis added).
`
`35
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 35
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`DOWNLOADING PROGRAM CODE IS SAME AS
`DOWNLOADING OTHER DATA
`
`“The communications just discussed facilitate the download of image data
`in Iida. The same process steps could just as easily have asked for program
`code to be downloaded. The process of downloading data is the same
`regardless of the information content of that data. Program code is data.
`Given that Iida discloses communications that facilitate the download of
`data, the data requested may be any data including program code as recited
`in claim 7. Furthermore, claim 7 provides no function for the downloaded
`program code, other than to be received by the terminal. The claim does not
`require execution of the downloaded code. Thus, it is clear that
`downloading of code in claim 7 is no different from the downloading of any
`other kind of data. The only difference relates to the information content of
`what gets received. Thus, claim 7 is anticipated for the same reasons as
`those given for claim 6.”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1002 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 68.
`
`“Claims 61 and 110 both recite that executing fourth program code stored
`on the portable device memory causes a communication to be transmitted
`to the communications network to facilitate the download of program code
`from the communications network node to the terminal. As discussed in
`connection with claims 59 and 108, execution of program code stored on
`the memory of camera 12 causes camera 12 of Iida to transmit a
`communication to image server 18 to download content from image server
`18 to terminal 14. See Ex. 1003, [0127], [0128]. Claims 61 and 110 do not
`provide any function for the program code, other than to be received and
`stored, and do not require the execution of the downloaded code. The
`downloading of code in claims 61 and 110, therefore, is no different from
`the downloading of any other kind of content that is disclosed by Iida. The
`only difference between program code and other content relates to the
`information content of that which is downloaded. Thus, claims 61 and 110
`are disclosed by Iida for the same reasons as discussed above for claims 59
`and 108.”
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 105.
`
`36
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 36
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`Praxair Distribution, Inc. v. Mallinckrodt Hosp. Prod. IP
`Ltd., 890 F.3d 1024 (Fed. Cir. 2018)
`
`“Claim limitations directed to printed matter are not entitled to patentable
`
`weight unless the printed matter is functionally related to the substrate on
`
`which the printed matter is applied. E.g., In re Distefano, 808 F.3d 845, 848
`
`(Fed. Cir. 2015); In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385 (Fed. Cir. 1983). While early
`
`cases developing this doctrine applied it to claims literally encompassing
`
`‘printed’ materials, e.g., In re Russell, 48 F.2d 668, 669 (CCPA 1931) (claim to
`
`phonetically-arranged directory was printed matter), our cases have not
`
`limited the doctrine to that particular factual context, e.g., King Pharm., Inc. v.
`
`Eon Labs, Inc., 616 F.3d 1267, 1279 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (holding that a claimed
`
`step of informing someone about an inherent property of a method was
`
`printed matter). Rather, we have held that a claim limitation is directed to
`
`printed matter ‘if it claims the content of information.’ DiStefano, 808 F.3d at
`
`848.”
`
`Praxair Distribution, Inc. v. Mallinckrodt Hosp. Prod. IP Ltd., 890 F.3d 1024, 1031-
`1032 (Fed. Cir. 2018).
`
`“Rather, the printed matter must be interrelated with the rest of the claim.
`
`For example, in Ngai, 367 F.3d at 1339, there was no functional relationship
`
`between claimed instructions and a diagnostic kit, as the instructions ‘in no
`
`way depend[ed] on the kit, and the kit [did] not depend on the’ instructions.”
`
`Praxair Distribution, Inc. v. Mallinckrodt Hosp. Prod. IP Ltd., 890 F.3d 1024, 1032
`(Fed. Cir. 2018) (citing In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2004)).
`
`37
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 37
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`Ex parte Nehls, 88 U.S.P.Q.2d 1883 (BPAI 2008)
`
`“The recited sequences are not functionally related to the computer
`
`system carrying out the comparison because the computer compares a
`
`target sequence to a database the same way regardless of whether the
`
`database includes any of SEQ ID NOs 9 – 1008: the SEQ ID NOs and the
`
`computer do not depend on each other for their function.”
`
`Ex Parte Nehls, 88 U.S.P.Q.2d 1883 (BPAI 2008) (precedential).
`
`38
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 38
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
`
`Representative Claim 1
`
`In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 1581 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
`
`“The printed matter cases have no factual relevance where ‘the invention as
`
`defined by the claims requiresthat the information be processed not by the
`
`mind but by a machine, the computer.’ Id.(emphasis in original). Lowry’s data
`
`structures, which according to Lowry greatly facilitate data management by
`
`data processing systems, are processed by a machine.”
`
`In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
`
`39
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 39
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIMS 4, 7, 16 (‘969 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 13, 15, 16(emphasis added).
`
`40
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 40
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`“FACILITATE SYNCHRONIZING”
`CLAIM 10 (’969 Patent)
`CLAIMS 65, 114 (’703 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1001 (‘969 Patent), Claims 2, 10.
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (‘703 Patent), Claims 65, 114.
`
`41
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 41
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`“FACILITATE THE TRANSMISSION OF A LIVE DATA FEED”
`CLAIM 66 (’703 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1001 (’703 Patent), Claim 66 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), Claims 127, 153 (emphasis added).
`IPR2019-00929, EX. 1003 (Iida), Claims 127, 153 (emphasis added).
`
`42
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 42
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT NO. 6,467,087 (“YANG”)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1006 (Yang), 2:25-29 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1006 (Yang), 2:52-63.
`
`43
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 43
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier),
`¶¶ 133, 134
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 133.
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 134.
`
`44
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 44
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART (“POSITA”)
`
`Petitioner proposes that a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”)
`
`would have
`
`“a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer
`
`Science, Computer Engineering or related discipline, and experience in
`
`programming software for computer peripheral devices and databases
`
`/ servers and would have had a working understanding of computer
`
`hardware, operating systems, encryption, data storage, user interfaces,
`
`and peripheral and portable device communication protocols (e.g.,
`
`parallel ports, serial ports, RS-232, USB, Bluetooth, WiFi and the like).”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Paper 016 (Decision Granting Institution of Inter PartesReview),
`pg. 23 (citing IPR2019-00879, Paper 001 (Petition), pg. 12-13).
`
`IPR2019-00929, Paper 016 (Decision Granting Institution of Inter PartesReview),
`pg. 20 (citing IPR2019-00929, Paper 002 (Petition), pg. 9-10).
`
`“Petitioner’s proposed qualifications are commensurate with the
`
`technology and claims of the ’969 patent, and we adopt them for the
`
`purposes of this Decision.”
`
`IPR2019-00879, Paper 016 (Decision Granting Institution of Inter Partes
`Review), pg. 24.
`
`“Accordingly, we adopt Petitioner’s description of a POSITA for purposes
`
`of this Decision.”
`
`IPR2019-00929, Paper 016 (Decision Granting Institution of Inter Partes
`Review), pg. 22.
`
`45
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 45
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT NO. 5,784,461 (“SHAFFER”)
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1006 (Shaffer), 2:6-9.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1028 (Shaffer), 2:6-9.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1006 (Shaffer), 6:11-14.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1028 (Shaffer), 6:11-14.
`
`46
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 46
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`CLAIMS 74, 89, 100, 123 (’703 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1027 (Declaration of James T. Geier), ¶ 145.
`
`47
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 47
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT NO. 6,088,805 (“DAVIS”)
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1029 (Davis), 1:40-45 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1029 (Davis), 1:52-59 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1029 (Davis), 5:44-46 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1029 (Davis), 6:9-13 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1029 (Davis), 6:31-46 (emphasis added).
`
`48
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 48
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`BUTLER DEPOSITION
`
`Q. Like what?
`
`A. A process can be a user.
`
`Q. A process? A computer process?
`
`A.
`
`It all --- it all depends on the context that we’re talking about users in.
`
`Q. In the context of Davis, is it always a human being?
`
`A. That appears to be the case.
`
`Q. All right. So then it says the “user sends a request to a server via a client.”
`
`“Client” means computer; right?
`
`A. The client appears to refer to a computer, yes.
`
`Q. All right. So the user is sitting at a computer sending a digital --- digital
`
`certificate to get access to a server in this example; correct?
`
`A. That’s correct.
`
`Q. So access is granted to the user by giving access to the client computer;
`
`correct?
`
`A. The user using the client at that particular time will gain access.
`
`Q. Because the client gained access; correct?
`
`A. Because the user gained access.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1047 (Deposition of Kevin Butler), 91:7-92:5.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1047 (Deposition of Kevin Butler), 91:7-92:5.
`
`Q. Access for users and clients; correct?
`
`A. It is --- I disagree with the “clients” part. Davis isn’t designed with the goal of
`
`allowing authorization to a particular client.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1047 (Deposition of Kevin Butler), 96:21-24.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1047 (Deposition of Kevin Butler), 96:21-24.
`
`49
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 49
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`EXPLICIT MOTIVATION TO COMBINE IIDA AND FUJI GUIDE
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), Claim 153.
`IPR2019-00929, Ex. 1003 (Iida), Claim 153.
`
`IPR2019-00929, EX. 1027 (GeierDeclaration), ¶ 145.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1004 (FujiFilmSoftware Quick
`Start Guide), pg. 7.
`
`50
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 50
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`FIRST AND SECOND PROGRAM CODE
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1004 (FujiFilmSoftware Quick Start Guide), pg. 38.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1004 (FujiFilmSoftware Quick Start Guide), pg. 17.
`
`51
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 51
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`THIRD PROGRAM CODE
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), Claim 113.
`
`52
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 52
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`FOURTH PROGRAM CODE
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), FIG. 4C.
`
`53
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 53
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`THE FUJI GUIDE IS PRIOR ART (‘969 Patent)
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1004 (FujiFilmSoftware Quick Start Guide), p. 3.
`
`54
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 54
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`THE FUJI GUIDE WAS PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE
`
`“We have interpreted § 102 broadly, finding that even
`relatively obscure documents qualify as prior art so long
`as the relevant public has a means of accessing them.”
`
`“Subsequently, we explained that ‘[a]ccessibility goes to
`the issue of whether interested members of the relevant
`public could obtain the information if they wanted to’ and
`‘[i]f accessibility is proved, there is no requirement to
`show that particular members of the public actually
`received the information.’”
`
`“Accordingly, ‘[a] reference will be considered publicly
`accessible if it was ‘disseminated or otherwise made
`available to the extent
`that persons interested and
`ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art exercising
`reasonable diligence, can locate it.’”
`
`GoPro, Inc. v. Contour IP Holding LLC, 908 F.3d 690, 693
`(Fed. Cir. 2018) (citing cases).
`
`55
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 55
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`WIDENER DECLARATION - THE FUJI GUIDE WAS
`PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE BEFORE CRITICAL DATE
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1005 (Widener Declaration), ¶¶3-5.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1005 (Widener Declaration), Exhibit B.
`
`56
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 56
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`WIDENER DECLARATION
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1005 (Widener Declaration), Exhibit C.
`
`57
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 57
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`WIDENER DECLARATION
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1005 (Widener Declaration), Exhibit E.
`
`58
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 58
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`WIDENER DEPOSITION
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 2126 (Widener Deposition), 58:12-59:19 (emphasis
`added).
`
`59
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 59
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`ONLINE FUJI GUIDE CORROBORATES DATE OF PUBLIC
`ACCESSIBILITY
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1012 (Online Version of FujiFilmSoftware Quick Start Guide), p. 1.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1044 (Ramsdell Declaration), Exhibit A (emphasis added).
`
`60
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 60
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`THE FUJI CAMERA WAS SOLD IN 2001
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1008 (PC Magazine), p. 2.
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1011 (American Photo), p. 1.
`
`61
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 61
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`THE FUJI CAMERA WAS SOLD IN 2001
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1043 (Fuji Annual Report 2001), p. 14 (emphasis added).
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1043 (Fuji Annual Report 2001), p. 15 (emphasis added).
`
`62
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 62
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`THE FUJI CAMERA IS REFRENCED IN IIDA
`
`IPR2019-00879, Ex. 1003 (Iida), ¶ 153 (emphasis added).
`
`63
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 63
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`THE FUJI GUIDE WAS PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE
`
`“Based on these precedents, we agree with the Examiner that the
`record here indicates the Motorola Manual was publicly accessible in
`1993 and, thus, qualifies as a printed publication under § 102. First,
`the Motorola Manual was sold by a vendor to a member of the public
`in 1993 together with its accompanying mobile phone. (Radzus-
`Painter Decl. ¶¶ 7-8, Ex. H.) [ . . . ] Additionally, unlike SRI Int'l, it is
`reasonable to infer that a person of ordinary skill would have known
`that such information-- i.e., a user manual for a mobile telephone--was
`available from the vendor selling the mobile phone. [ . . . ] Thus, we
`agree with the Examiner's finding that a person of ordinary skill would
`have been able to access the Motorola Manual from the vendor as
`Radzus-Painter did.”
`
`“We are not persuaded by Appellant's contention that the record “at
`best demonstrates that [Radzus-Painter] received one copy of the
`[Motorola] Manual, but
`there is no evidence demonstrating that
`‘persons interested and ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art,
`exercising reasonable diligence,’ would have been able to locate
`another copy of the Manual.” Even if we assume arguendo that the
`copy in Radzus-Painter's possession was the only copy of
`the
`Motorola Manual, one copy of the Motorola Manual is enough to be a
`printed publication if it
`is sufficiently accessible to the public,
`regardless of whether “another copy” was available. See Klopfenstein,
`380 F.3d at 1349 (one copy displayed, no copies distributed); Hall,
`781 F.2d at 899-900 (rejecting argument that “a single catalogued
`thesis
`in one university library” is
`insufficient
`to be printed
`publication).”
`
`Ex Parte MobileMediaIdeas LLC, No. APPEAL 2014-004550, 2014 WL 2758463, at *3, *4
`(P.T.A.B. June 16, 2014) (citations omitted).
`
`64
`
`Ingenico v. IOENGINE
`IPR2019-00879 (9,059,969)
`Ingenico Inc. - Ex. 1048
`Page 64
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`

`

`THE FUJI GUIDE WAS PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE
`
`“Again, while Appellant has proffered evidence that the
`manuals were certainly of a proprietary nature, Appellant
`has not provided evidence that they were to be maintained
`as confidential. As discussed supra,
`the restrictions of
`copyright, even if spelled out explicitly in the manuals, do
`not
`rise to the level of confidentiality. Thus, while
`Appellant
`identifies
`the purpose of
`such clauses as
`preventing the manual from being disseminated to the
`public
`(App. Br.
`31), we
`find
`that
`they
`only
`address further dissemination. Such an argument would
`also require every title on a bookseller's bestsellers list, also
`barred from further reproduction and dissemination without
`consent, to be deemed to not be disseminated to the public,
`which would be absurd.”
`
`Ex Parte ePlus, No. 2010-007804, 2011 WL