Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82 Filed 12/20/19 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1312
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`SEVEN NETWORKS, LLC
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Civil Action No. 2:19-cv-115-JRG
`
`v.
`
`APPLE INC.
`
`Defendant.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`P.R. 4-3 JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`Pursuant to Patent Rule 4-3 and the Court’s Docket Control Order (Dkt. 39), Plaintiff
`
`SEVEN Networks, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “SEVEN”) and Defendant Apple Inc. (“Defendant” or
`
`“Apple”) hereby file this Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement.
`
`I.
`
`TERMS ON WHICH THE PARTIES AGREE [P.R. 4-3(A)(1)]
`
`In accordance with Patent Rule 4-2(c), the parties met and conferred to narrow the list of
`
`disputed claim terms and phrases for their P.R. 4-1 lists and P.R. 4-2 exchange of preliminary
`
`claim construction and extrinsic evidence. The parties were able to reach an agreement on the
`
`meaning of the claim terms or phrases set forth in Exhibit A.
`
`II.
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTIONS AND EVIDENCE FOR DISPUTED TERMS
`[P.R. 4-3(A)(2)]
`
`Exhibit B sets forth Plaintiff’s and Apple’s proposed respective constructions or
`
`indefiniteness positions for each disputed claim term, phrase, or clause of the patents-in-suit.
`
`Included in Exhibit B is an identification of all references from the specification or prosecution
`
`history that support each party’s position, and an identification of any extrinsic evidence known
`
`1
`
`APPLE 1014
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82 Filed 12/20/19 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 1313
`
`to a party on which it intends to rely either to support its position or to oppose any other party’s
`
`position, including, but not limited to, as permitted by law, dictionary definitions, citations to
`
`learned treatises and prior art, and testimony of percipient and expert witnesses.
`
`III. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING LENGTH [P.R. 4-3(A)(3)]
`
`The Claim Construction hearing is scheduled for March 16, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. The
`
`parties expect to use the time that the Court makes available on that day.
`
`IV. WITNESSES, INCLUDING EXPERTS, FOR THE CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`HEARING [P.R. 4-3(A)(4)]
`
`The parties do not expect to present live testimony of witnesses at the Claim Construction
`
`Hearing. As noted in Exhibit B, the parties may submit expert declarations from Dr. Mark Jones,
`
`Dr. Hugh Smith, and/or Dr. Michael Goodrich (in support of Plaintiffs) and Dr. Henry Houh, Dr.
`
`Adam Porter, and/or Dr. Stephen Wicker (in support of Apple). Per P.R. 4-3(b), each party has
`
`served today on the other party a disclosure of any expert testimony consistent with Fed. R. Civ.
`
`P. 26(a)(2)(B(i)-(ii) or 26(a)(2)(C) for any expert on which it intends to rely to support its
`
`proposed claim construction or indefiniteness position or to oppose any other party’s proposed
`
`claim construction or indefiniteness position as referenced in the parties’ 4-2 disclosure.
`
`V.
`
`OTHER ISSUES [P.R. 4-3(A)(5)]
`
`The parties are currently unaware of any other issues which might appropriately be taken
`
`up at a prehearing conference prior to the Claim Construction Hearing.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82 Filed 12/20/19 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 1314
`
`Dated: December 20, 2019
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Sam Baxter
`Samuel F. Baxter
`Texas State Bar No. 01938000
`sbaxter@mckoolsmith.com
`Jennifer Truelove
`jtruelove@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`104 East Houston, Suite 300
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Telephone: (903) 923-9000
`Facsimile: (903) 923-9099
`
`Kevin Burgess
`kburgess@mckoolsmith.com
`Seth R. Hasenour
`shasenour@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`300 W. 6th Street, Suite 1700
`Austin, Texas 78701
`Telephone: (512) 692-8704
`
`Radu Lelutiu
`rlelutiu@mckoolsmith.com
`Kevin Schubert
`kschubert@mckoolsmith.com
`Lauren Fornarotto
`lfornarotto@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`One Manhattan West
`395 9th Avenue, 50th Floor
`New York, NY 10001
`Telephone: (212) 402-9400
`
`Eric Hansen
`ehansen@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
`Dallas, Texas 75201
`Telephone: (214) 978-4000
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`SEVEN NETWORKS, LLC
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82 Filed 12/20/19 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 1315
`
`Dated: December 20, 2019
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /s/ Ruffin Cordell
`Ruffin Cordell (Lead Counsel)
`cordell@fr.com
`Texas Bar Number 04820550
`Indranil Mukerji
`mukerji@fr.com
`Massachusetts Bar Number 644059
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1000 Maine Avenue SW, Suite 1000
`Washington, DC 20024
`Telephone: 202-783-5070
`Facsimile: 202-783-2331
`
`Benjamin C. Elacqua
`Texas Bar Number 24055443
`elacqua@fr.com
`John P. Brinkmann
`Texas Bar Number 24068091
`brinkmann@fr.com
`Kathryn Quisenberry
`Texas Bar Number 24105639
`quisenberry@fr.com
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1221 McKinney Street, Suite 2800
`Houston, TX 77010
`Telephone: 713-654-5300
`Facsimile: 713-652-0109
`
`Betty Chen
`Texas Bar No. 24056720
`bchen@fr.com
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`500 Arguello Street, Suite 500
`Redwood City, CA 94063
`Telephone: 650-839-5070
`Facsimile: 650-839-5071
`
`Noah Graubart
`Georgia Bar Number 141862
`graubart@fr.com
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1180 Peachtree Street NE, 21st Floor
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`Telephone: 404-582-5005
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82 Filed 12/20/19 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 1316
`
`Facsimile: 404-582-5002
`
`Melissa Smith
`Texas Bar No.24001351
`melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com
`GILLAM & SMITH, LLP
`303 South Washington Avenue
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Telephone: 903-934-8450
`Facsimile: 903-934-9257
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
`APPLE INC.
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82 Filed 12/20/19 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 1317
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document has
`
`been served on all counsel of record via the Court’s ECF system on December 20, 2019.
`
`
`
`/s/ Sam Baxter
`Samuel F. Baxter
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-1 Filed 12/20/19 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1318
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit A: Agreed Terms
`
`1. United States Patent No. 9,769,176 (“The ’176 Patent”)
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`Agreed Construction
`
`1, 14
`
`
`
`“is send”
`
`“is sent”
`
`2. United States Patent No. 9,648,557 (“The ’557 Patent”)
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`Agreed Construction
`
`1, 14
`
`
`
`“connectivity rule”
`
`“rule regarding connecting to a network”
`
`3. United States Patent No. 10,027,619 (“The ’619 Patent”)
`
`Claims
`
`22, 37,
`51
`
`
`“remote device”
`
`Term
`
`Agreed Construction
`
`“a computing device that is physically distinct from the claimed
`device”
`
`Exhibit A to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`
`Page 1
`
`7
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 1 of 64 PageID #: 1319
`
`
`
`
`1.
`
`United States Patent No. 9,369,539 (“The ’539 Patent”)
`
`Exhibit B: Disputed Claim Terms and Evidence
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`1.
`
`7
`
`Term
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`“a processor configured
`for”
`
`This claim term does not invoke 35
`U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 6. No construction is
`necessary, the term is not subject to § 112
`¶ 6, and is not indefinite.1
`
`This is a means-plus-function term under
`35 U.S.C. 112 ¶ 6.
`
`Function:
`
`
`1 SEVEN’s position: SEVEN objects to each of the thirteen “processor” terms Apple alleges are in means-plus-function format (claim
`term #1, 4, 7, 10, 11, 14, 20, 21, 23, 31, 34, 39, and 43). These terms are the subject of Apple’s Opposed Motion to Supplement Its
`Invalidity Contentions (Dkt. 81). Unless and until the Court grants this motion, which it should not for the reasons SEVEN will
`identify in its forthcoming Opposition, these terms are not in the case. To the extent the Court orders that the “processor” terms are in
`the case and find that they are governed by 35 U.S.C. 112(6), SEVEN asserts that the function is recited in the body of the claim and
`that there is definite corresponding structure described in the specification for each of the “processor” terms. SEVEN reserves the
`right to identify more specific disclosure from the specification once Apple provides the required analysis of why these terms are
`allegedly indefinite and/or the Court grants Apple’s motion.
`Apple’s position: Apple’s positions regarding the thirteen “processor” terms were properly and timely disclosed for at least the
`reasons outlined in Apple’s Opposed Motion to Supplement Its Invalidity Contentions (Dkt. 81). The terms were included in Apple’s
`P.R. 4-1 Statement, Apple’s P.R. 4-2 Statement, and even SEVEN’s P.R. 4-2 Statement. SEVEN has chosen not to identify any
`functions or corresponding structures for any of these terms and has therefore waived the right to do so. SEVEN purports to
`“reserve[] the right to identify more specific disclosure from the specification” regarding these terms at some unspecified future date.
`Apple does not agree that SEVEN has any such right to reserve. Apple will seek to strike any future disclosures of evidence or
`positions regarding these terms. Moreover, to the extent SEVEN fails to disclose by the Court’s P.R. 4-3 deadline any expert
`disclosures for these terms under P.R. 4-3(b), SEVEN has waived any right to do so, and Apple will seek to strike any such belatedly
`disclosed expert testimony.
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 1
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 2 of 64 PageID #: 1320
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:2
`’539 Patent: Claims 7-12, columns 5-31,
`Figs. 2 and 6-9 and corresponding
`description; corresponding disclosures in
`incorporated provisional applications.
`
`March 30, 2016 miscellaneous. incoming
`letter.
`
`April 11, 2016 notice of allowance,
`including examiner interview summary
`and examiner amendment.
`
`April 13, 2016 amendment after notice of
`allowance.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`IEEE Dictionary at 872; Computer
`Desktop Encyclopedia at 188 and 793;
`Microsoft Dictionary at 132 and 423;
`Merriam Webster 1 at 290 and 990;
`Merriam Webster 2 at 290 and 990;
`Hargrave’s Communications Dictionary
`at 410; McGraw Hill at 1676; IBM
`
`querying a user by displaying a
`notification on a user interface of the
`mobile device to select whether to enter a
`power save mode; upon selection by a
`user of entering the power save mode for
`the mobile device, optimizing traffic at
`the mobile device by blocking
`transmission of at least some traffic from
`the mobile device.
`
`Structure:
`Indefinite
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’539 patent at Abstract; 8:20-36; 8:47-50;
`9:11-25; 10:18; 11:55-66; 24:63-65;
`27:26-40; 28:15-67; 29:65-30:5; FIG. 8;
`FIG. 9.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`
`2 All parties reserve the right to rely upon any intrinsic or extrinsic evidence identified by any other party, and any evidence obtained
`through claim construction discovery. In addition, each party reserves the right to amend, correct, or supplement its claim
`construction positions and supporting evidence in response to any change of position by any other party, or for other good cause.
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 2
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 3 of 64 PageID #: 1321
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`2.
`
`1, 7
`
`“delayed for download”
`
`Dictionary at 136-137 and 533; Chambers
`Dictionary at 251 and 918.
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`plain and ordinary meaning
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’539 Patent: Claims 1 and 7, columns 4-5,
`8, 14, 16, 20, 24-30; Figs. 2-6 and
`corresponding description; corresponding
`disclosures in incorporated provisional
`applications.
`
`March 30, 2016 miscellaneous. incoming
`letter.
`
`April 11, 2016 notice of allowance,
`including examiner interview summary
`and examiner amendment.
`
`April 13, 2016 amendment after notice of
`allowance.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`“move the timing for download to a time
`after the download was originally
`scheduled”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’539 patent at 8:30-38; 16:57-17:4; 20:14-
`32; 24:50-53; 25:66-26:4.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Google, LLC,
`No. 2:17-cv-00442-JTG, Dkt. 342 (Claim
`Construction Memorandum and Order) at
`14-16 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 23, 2018)
`
`Dictionary definition of “delay” from
`Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary
`329 (11th ed. 2009)
`
`Dictionary definition of “delay” from
`Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary
`241 (2009)
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 3
`
`10
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 4 of 64 PageID #: 1322
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 4
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 5 of 64 PageID #: 1323
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.
`
`United States Patent No. 9,438,550 (“The ’550 Patent”)
`
`Term
`#
`
`3.
`
`Claims
`
`1, 4,
`15, 20,
`21, 32
`
`Term
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`“application data request” plain and ordinary meaning, which is a
`“request for application data”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’550 patent: Abstract, Figs. 1-6, Col. 1:9-
`2:62, Col. 5:1-62, Col. 6:1-7:26, Col.
`7:49-8:43, Col. 9:1-24; Col. 9:52-13:11
`
`’881 application: SEVEN_APPLE-
`000008699
`
`’249 application: SEVEN_APPLE-
`000009468, SEVEN_APPLE-000009483,
`SEVEN_APPLE-000009503-9504,
`SEVEN_APPLE-000009604-5,
`SEVEN_APPLE-000009682
`
`’550 FH: 2/11/16, 3/3/16 Remarks,
`6/14/16 NOA
`
`IPR2018-01102, IPR2018-0113, and
`IPR2018-01114
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Google, 17-CV-
`00442-JRG, Dkt. 342 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 23,
`2018) (finding no construction necessary
`for “content request” for U.S. Patent No.
`
`plain and ordinary meaning, which is
`“a request for data initiated by an
`application”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’550 Pat. History, Office Action
`Response, March 3, 2016
`
`’550 Pat. History, Notice of Allowance,
`June, 14, 2016
`
`’550 Pat. History, Interview Summary,
`June, 14, 2016
`
`’550 Pat. at 3:38-62, 5:1-35, 7:17-36,
`7:53-64, 9:1-24; Figs. 1, 2, 3; 5, 6; claims
`1, 4, 15, 20, 21, 32
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`Dictionary definition of “application”
`from Newton’s Telecom Dictionary (19th
`ed. 2003)
`
`Dictionary definition of “request”
`from Newton’s Telecom Dictionary (19th
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 5
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 6 of 64 PageID #: 1324
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`4.
`
`15, 32
`
`“a processor configured
`to”
`
`9,247,019).
`
`Microsoft Dictionary at 31; Oxford
`Dictionary at 20; IEEE dictionary at 46.
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`This claim term does not invoke 35
`U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 6. No construction is
`necessary, the term is not subject to § 112
`¶ 6, and is not indefinite.
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’550: Abstract, Figs. 1-6, Col. 1:11-2:23,
`2:27-3:17, 3:25-5:35, 5:44-62, 6:1-47,
`6:62-9:24, 9:27-49, 9:52-13:11
`
`’550 FH: 2/11/16, 3/3/16 Remarks,
`6/14/16 NOA
`
`’249 provisional: SEVEN_APPLE-
`000009360, 9449-450, 9503-10, 9604-6
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Google, 17-CV-
`00442-JRG, Dkt. 342 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 23,
`2018) (neither party raising issues that “a
`processor configured to” was subject to §
`112 ¶ 6 for U.S. Patent No. 8,811,952).
`
`ed. 2003)
`
`Dictionary definition of “transaction”
`from Hargrave’s Communication
`Dictionary, IEEE Press (2001)
`
`This is a means-plus-function term under
`35 U.S.C. 112 ¶ 6.
`
`Function:
`(for claim 15)
`send application data requests to a host
`over a first connection at a first frequency,
`receive data from the network responsive
`to the sent application data requests, select
`a power management mode from a
`plurality of power management modes
`based on an amount of battery power
`remaining on the mobile device, wherein
`the selection of a power management
`mode is further based on the amount of
`battery power remaining being below a
`predetermined amount, change the
`frequency that application data requests
`are sent from the first frequency to a
`second frequency associated with the
`selected power management mode, exit
`the low power mode when an amount of
`battery power remaining is above a
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 6
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 7 of 64 PageID #: 1325
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`
`IPR2018-01113, Paper 28; IPR2018-
`01114, Paper 27; IPR2018-01102, Paper
`26 (showing Apple’s counsel, Google,
`and Samsung all believed no construction
`necessary for this term for U.S. Patent No.
`8,811,952).
`
`IEEE Dictionary at 872; Computer
`Desktop Encyclopedia at 188 and 793;
`Microsoft Dictionary at 132 and 423;
`Merriam Webster 1 at 290 and 990;
`Merriam Webster 2 at 290 and 990;
`Hargrave’s Communications Dictionary
`at 410; McGraw Hill at 1676; IBM
`Dictionary at 136-137 and 533;
`Chambers Dictionary at 251 and 918.
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`predetermined amount.
`
`(for claim 32)
`monitor a remaining battery level of the
`battery, send application data requests to a
`host over a first connection at a first
`frequency, receive data from the host
`responsive to the sent application data
`requests, operate in a normal operations
`mode when a remaining battery level is
`above a predetermined amount, select a
`low power mode from a plurality of
`power management modes in order to
`conserve the remaining battery level when
`the remaining battery level is below the
`predetermined amount, wherein the low
`power mode is based on amount of battery
`power remaining on the mobile device
`being below a predetermined amount,
`change the frequency that application data
`requests are sent from the first frequency
`to a second frequency associated with the
`low power management mode, exit the
`low power management mode when the
`remaining battery level is above the
`predetermined amount; and receive a
`trigger that notifies the mobile device of
`new data, wherein the trigger at least in
`part causes the mobile device to send
`application data requests
`
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 7
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 8 of 64 PageID #: 1326
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Structure:
`Indefinite
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’550 Pat. at 2:66-67, 9:1-24, 9:28-33;
`claims 15 and 32
`
`’550 Pat. History, Office Action
`Response, March 3, 2016
`
`’550 Pat. History, Notice of Allowance,
`June, 14, 2016
`
`’550 Pat. History, Interview Summary,
`June, 14, 2016
`
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`
`5.
`
`1, 15,
`32
`
`“a predetermined
`amount”
`
`“a preset threshold”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’550 patent: Abstract, Figs. 1-6, Col. 1:9-
`3:3, 7:49-59, Col. 9:1-24; Col. 9:52-13:11
`
`’881 application: SEVEN_APPLE-
`000008699
`
`“a preset threshold for entering and
`exiting low power mode”
`
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’550 Pat. 9:1-24; claims 1, 3, 15, 19, 32
`
`’550 Pat. History, Office Action
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 8
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 9 of 64 PageID #: 1327
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`
`’249 application: SEVEN_APPLE-
`000009483, SEVEN_APPLE-000009503-
`9507
`
`’550 FH: 2/11/16, 3/3/16 Remarks,
`6/14/16 NOA
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Merriam Webster 1 at 978.
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`Response, March 3, 2016
`
`’550 Pat. History, Notice of Allowance,
`June, 14, 2016
`
`’550 Pat. History, Interview Summary,
`June, 14, 2016
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`Dictionary definition of “predetermined”
`from the American Heritage College
`Dictionary (4th ed. 2002)
`
`Dictionary definition of “amount”
`from the American Heritage College
`Dictionary (4th ed. 2002)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 9
`
`16
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`6.
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 10 of 64 PageID #: 1328
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`United States Patent No. 9,473,914 (“The ’914 Patent”)
`
`Claims
`
`
`
`Term
`
`1, 11,
`21, 27
`
`“automatically
`transmitting” /
`“automatically
`transmitted”
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`“sending content without a user indicating
`a desire to receive the download”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`(cid:1932)914 Patent at 19:52-56; 7:3-12; 16:9-12.
`
`’914 Pros. Hist., including (1) April 1,
`2016 Non-Final Rejection, (2) April 16,
`2016Applicant Remarks, and (3) July 27,
`2016 Notice of Allowance.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`
`plain and ordinary meaning
`
`To the extent the Court deems
`construction necessary:
`“sending content automatically (e.g.,
`according to a user preference setting) as
`opposed to in response to a user selection
`of the content available from the content
`provider”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`’914 Patent at Figures 1-4; 6:56-7:37,
`11:40-55, 12:39-49, 15:58-17:3, 19:50-58,
`20:1-17; Claims 1, 11, 21, 27.
`April 16, 2016 Response to Office
`Action; U.S. Application No.
`20060095339.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Merriam Webster 2 at 84.
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`7.
`
`11
`
`“a processor configured
`for”
`
`This claim term does not invoke 35
`U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 6. No construction is
`necessary, the term is not subject to § 112
`
`This is a means-plus-function term under
`35 U.S.C. 112 ¶ 6.
`
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 10
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 11 of 64 PageID #: 1329
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`
`
`Term
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`¶ 6, and is not indefinite.
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`’914 Patent at Abstract; Figures 1-4; 2:5-
`27, 2:46-61, 3:8-4:4, 4:27-44, 6:56-7:37,
`9:3-10:26, 10:44-11:19, 11:40-55, 12:39-
`49, 13:13-44, 14:31-15:34, 15:58-17:3,
`17:62-18:6, 18:22-19:21, 19:50-58, 20:1-
`17; Claims 11-20, 31-33.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`IEEE Dictionary at 872; Computer
`Desktop Encyclopedia at 188 and 793;
`Microsoft Dictionary at 132 and 423;
`Merriam Webster 1 at 290 and 990;
`Merriam Webster 2 at 290 and 990;
`Hargrave’s Communications Dictionary
`at 410; McGraw Hill at 1676; IBM
`Dictionary at 136-137 and 533; Chambers
`Dictionary at 251 and 918.
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`Function:
`Receiving a unique authentication token
`from each of a first device an indication
`of content available from a content
`provider, transmitting selected content to
`the first device in response to a user
`selection of content available from the
`content provider at the first device, and
`automatically transmitting the selected
`content to the second device, where the
`selected content is transmitted to the first
`device through a first connection and to
`the second device through a second
`connection distinct from the first
`connection.
`
`Structure:
`Indefinite
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`(cid:1932)914 Patent at 2:47-49; 3:14-21; 7:1-2;
`7:62-64; 9:62-65; 11:13-15; 15:1-2;
`15:13-29; 20:50-54.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 11
`
`18
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`8.
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 12 of 64 PageID #: 1330
`
`
`
`
`4.
`
`United States Patent No. 9,516,127 (“The ’127 Patent”)
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`24, 33,
`42
`
`“optimize traffic”
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`“schedule transmissions in a manner that
`results in the conservation of network or
`mobile device resources as a result of the
`transmissions”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’127 patent at 3:18-20; 4:29-33; 5:24-54;
`19:32-43; Fig. 1A-1; Fig. 1A-2; Fig. 1A-
`3.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Preliminary Patent Owner Response at
`51-52 (Case IPR2018-01108)
`
`SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Google, LLC,
`No. 2:17-cv-00442-JTG, Dkt. 342 (Claim
`Construction Memorandum and Order) at
`28 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 23, 2018)
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`“adjust traffic to conserve network or
`mobile device resources”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’127 Patent: Claims 24, 33, and 42;
`Abstract; Columns 3-8, 10-16, 18-19,
`Figs. 1A-2, 1A-3, 1D and corresponding
`description; corresponding disclosure in
`incorporated provisional application.
`
`June 24, 2015 Office Action.
`
`July 16, 2015 Office Action Response.
`
`August 28, 2015 Office Action.
`
`November 11, 2015 Office Action
`Response.
`
`December 7, 2015 Request for Continued
`Examination.
`
`January 26, 2016 Office Action.
`
`March 8, 2016 Office Action Response.
`
`April 26, 2016 Supplemental Office
`Action Response.
`
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 12
`
`19
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 13 of 64 PageID #: 1331
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`9.
`
`24, 33,
`42
`
`“the power save mode is
`based on a battery level
`of the mobile device”
`
`August 5, 2016 Interview Summary.
`
`August 15, 2016 Notice of Allowance.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Google, 17-CV-
`00442-JRG, Dkt. 342 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 23,
`2018).
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`plain and ordinary meaning
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’127 Patent: Claims 24, 33, and 42;
`Abstract; Columns 16, 18-19, Figs. 1A-2,
`1A-3, 1D and corresponding description;
`corresponding disclosure in incorporated
`provisional application.
`
`
`June 24, 2015 Office Action.
`
`July 16, 2015 Office Action Response.
`
`August 28, 2015 Office Action.
`
`November 11, 2015 Office Action
`Response.
`
`“the ability to enter power save mode
`depends upon the battery level of the
`mobile device”
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’127 patent at claims 24, 33, 42.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 13
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 14 of 64 PageID #: 1332
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`
`December 7, 2015 Request for Continued
`Examination.
`
`January 26, 2016 Office Action.
`
`March 8, 2016 Office Action Response.
`
`April 26, 2016 Supplemental Office
`Action Response.
`
`August 5, 2016 Interview Summary.
`
`August 15, 2016 Notice of Allowance.
`
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Google, 17-CV-
`00442-JRG, Dkt. 342 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 23,
`2018).
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`10.
`
`33
`
`“a processor in
`communication with the
`memory and configured
`to execute instructions
`stored in the memory to”
`
`This claim term does not invoke 35
`U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 6. No construction is
`necessary, the term is not subject to § 112
`¶ 6, and is not indefinite.
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`This is a means-plus-function term under
`35 U.S.C. 112 ¶ 6.
`
`Function:
`receive a selection from a user whether to
`optimize traffic of a first application
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 14
`
`21
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 15 of 64 PageID #: 1333
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`’127 Patent: Claims 33-41; Columns 3-8,
`10-23, Figs. 1A-2, 1A-3, 1D, 1E, 1G, 1I,
`2, 3, and 4 and corresponding description;
`corresponding disclosure in incorporated
`provisional application.
`
`June 24, 2015 Office Action.
`
`July 16, 2015 Office Action Response.
`
`August 28, 2015 Office Action.
`
`November 11, 2015 Office Action
`Response.
`
`December 7, 2015 Request for Continued
`Examination.
`
`January 26, 2016 Office Action.
`
`March 8, 2016 Office Action Response.
`
`April 26, 2016 Supplemental Office
`Action Response.
`
`August 5, 2016 Interview Summary.
`
`August 15, 2016 Notice of Allowance.
`
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`executing in a background of the mobile
`device;
`optimize background traffic of the first
`application;
`receive a selection from a user whether to
`enter a power save mode, where the
`power save mode is based on a battery
`level of the mobile device;
`upon selection to enter the power save
`mode, adjust a timing of activities of a
`second application executing in the
`background of the mobile device to
`reduce usage of at least one resource of
`the mobile device;
`exit the power save mode, wherein the
`power save mode is exited based on a
`battery level or in response to the user
`directing the mobile device to exit the
`power save mode.
`Structure:
`Indefinite
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’127 patent at 19:63-20:3; Fig. 4.
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Porter and/or
`Wicker
`
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 15
`
`22
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 16 of 64 PageID #: 1334
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`
`SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Google, 17-CV-
`00442-JRG, Dkt. 342 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 23,
`2018).
`
`IEEE Dictionary at 872; Computer
`Desktop Encyclopedia at 188 and 793;
`Microsoft Dictionary at 132 and 423;
`Merriam Webster 1 at 290 and 990;
`Merriam Webster 2 at 290 and 990;
`Hargrave’s Communications Dictionary
`at 410; McGraw Hill at 1676; IBM
`Dictionary at 136-137 and 533; Chambers
`Dictionary at 251 and 918.
`
`Expert Declaration of Drs. Smith, Jones,
`and/or Goodrich
`
`11.
`
`42
`
`Preamble
`
`This claim term does not invoke 35
`U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 6. No construction is
`necessary, the term is not subject to § 112
`¶ 6, and is not indefinite.
`
`INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
`’127 Patent: Claims 42-50; Columns 3-8,
`10-23, Figs. 1A-2, 1A-3, 1D, 1E, 1G, 1I,
`2, 3, and 4 and corresponding description;
`corresponding disclosure in incorporated
`provisional application.
`
`June 24, 2015 Office Action.
`
`This a means-plus-function term under 35
`U.S.C. 112 ¶ 6.
`
`Function:
`receive a selection from a user whether to
`optimize traffic of a first application
`executing in a background of the mobile
`device;
`optimize background traffic of the first
`application;
`receive a selection from a user whether to
`enter a power save mode, where the
`power save mode is based on a battery
`
`Exhibit B to Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement
`
`Page 16
`
`23
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00115-JRG Document 82-2 Filed 12/20/19 Page 17 of 64 PageID #: 1335
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`#
`
`Claims
`
`Term
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`Apple’s Proposed Construction and
`Evidence
`
`
`July 16, 2015 Office Action Response.
`
`August 28, 2015 Office Action.
`
`November 11, 2015 Office Action
`Response.
`
`December 7, 2015 Request for Continued
`Examination.
`
`January 26, 2016 Office Action.
`
`March 8, 2016 Office Action Response.
`
`April 26, 2016 Supplemental Office
`Action Response.
`
`August 5, 2016 Interview Summary.
`
`August 15, 2016 Notice of Allowance.
`
`
`EXTRINSIC EVIDE