throbber
Case 3:18-cv-01788-VC Document 113 Filed 08/27/18 Page 1 of 8
`
`Jamie B. Beaber (Pro Hac Vice)
`jbeaber@mayerbrown.com
`Kfir B. Levy (State Bar No. 235372)
`klevy@mayerbrown.com
`James A. Fussell, III (Pro Hac Vice)
` jfussell@mayerbrown.com
`Tiffany A. Miller (Pro Hac Vice)
`tmiller@mayerbrown.com
`William J. Barrow (Pro Hac Vice)
` wbarrow@mayerbrown.com
`MAYER BROWN LLP
`1999 K Street NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`Phone: 202.263.3000
`Robert G. Pluta (Pro Hac Vice)
`rpluta@mayerbrown.com
`MAYER BROWN LLP
`71 South Wacker Drive
`Chicago, IL 60606
`Phone: 312.701.8641
`Patricia L. Peden State Bar No. 206440
` Patricia.peden@leclairryan.com
`LECLAIRRYAN LLP
`44 Montgomery Street
`Suite 3200
`San Francisco, CA 94104
`Phone: 415.913.4932
`Attorneys for Plaintiff MAXELL, LTD.
`Michael J. Newton State Bar No. 156225
` mike.newton@alston.com
`ALSTON & BIRD LLP
`2828 North Harwood Street, Suite 1800
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Phone: 214.922.3400
`Attorney for Defendant ASUSTeK Computer Inc.
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
` SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788-VC_
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`
`MAXELL, LTD.,
`Plaintiff,
`v.
`ASUSTeK Computer Inc. and ASUS
`Computer International
`Defendants.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788- VC
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION & PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`IPR2020-00408
`Apple EX1015 Page 1
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-01788-VC Document 113 Filed 08/27/18 Page 2 of 8
`
`Plaintiff Maxell, Ltd. (“Maxell” or “Plaintiff”) and Defendants ASUSTeK
`
`Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer International (“ASUS” or “Defendant”) submit
`
`the following Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement for the asserted
`
`claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,403,226 (the ’226 Patent), 9,544,517 (the ’517 Patent),
`
`6,430,498 (the ’498 Patent), 6,243,340 (the ’340 Patent), 6,973,334 (the ’334 Patent),
`
`7,551,209 (the ’209 Patent), and 9,451,229 (the ’229 Patent).
`
`I.
`
`CONSTRUCTION OF CLAIM TERMS UPON WHICH THE PARTIES
`AGREE (4-3(A))
`
`The parties have met and conferred, and have reached agreement on the
`
`following terms:
`
`Claim Term
`“residual storage of a (the) battery”
`(’340 Patent, Claim 1)
`“when the residual storage of a battery
`decreases”
`(’340 Patent, Claim 1)
`“detecting a decrease in a residual
`storage of a battery”
`(’340 Patent, Claim 1)
`“managing information (intermediate
`information)”/ “managing information”
`(’340 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`Agreed Construction
`“remaining battery charge”
`
`“when the remaining battery
`charge decreases”
`
`“detecting a decrease in a
`remaining battery charge”
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`-2-
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788- VC
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION & PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2020-00408
`Apple EX1015 Page 2
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-01788-VC Document 113 Filed 08/27/18 Page 3 of 8
`
`Preambles are limiting
`
`Preambles: “A cellular telephone used in
`a CDMA system”
`and
`“A method of controlling a cellular
`telephone used in a CDMA system, said
`cellular telephone including a transmitter
`having a variable amplitude amplifier
`and a power amplifier”
`(’334 Patent, Claims 1 and 4)
`
`“detecting an achromatic portion”
`(’209 Patent, Claims 1, 3, 5, and 6)
`
`“detecting a white portion”
`
`II.
`
`EACH PARTY’S PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF DISPUTED
`TERMS TOGETHER WITH IDENTIFICATION OF SUPPORTING
`INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE (4-3(B))
`Exhibit A-1 hereto sets forth Maxell’s constructions and identified support
`
`including intrinsic and extrinsic evidence regarding disputed claim terms for the
`
`asserted patents.
`
`Exhibit B-1 hereto sets forth ASUS’s constructions and identified support
`
`including intrinsic and extrinsic evidence regarding disputed claim terms for the
`
`asserted patents.
`
`III. THE MOST SIGNIFICANT TERMS FOR CONSTRUCTION (4-3(C))
`The parties have collectively identified the following terms as the most
`
`significant to the resolution of this case:
`
`No. Claim Term
`“MPEG Method” (’229 Patent, Claims 1, 5, and 9)
`1
`“said walking navigation information” (’498 Patent, Claims 1,
`2
`5, and 10)
`“white balance controlling means” (’209 Patent, Claim 1)
`-3-
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788- VC
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION & PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`3
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2020-00408
`Apple EX1015 Page 3
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-01788-VC Document 113 Filed 08/27/18 Page 4 of 8
`
`4
`
`“recording means for recording data on said information
`recording medium” (’340 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`In addition, the parties individually identify each of the below terms as most
`
`significant:
`
`6
`
`7
`
`No. Maxell Terms
`5
`“wherein the zoom operation unit is interlocked with an optical
`zoom mechanism” (’517 patent, Claim 3)
`“a function defining a relation between bias data and gain data
`stored in said memory” (’334 patent, Claims 1 and 4)
`“variable amplitude amplifier” (’334 Patent, Claims 1 and 4)
`ASUS Terms
`“increases gradually to the maximum value (’334 Patent,
`Claims 1 and 4)
`“a device for getting location information denoting a present
`place of said portable terminal” (’498 Patent, Claims 1, 5, and
`10)
`“object distance detecting means” (’209 Patent, Claims 1, 3, 5,
`and 6)
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`Of the foregoing ten terms, the parties identify the following terms as claim
`
`dispositive, in view of ASUS’s contention that such terms are indefinite:
`
`• “said walking navigation information” (’498 Patent, Claims 1, 5, and 10)
`
`• “white balance controlling means” (’209 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`• “wherein the zoom operation unit is interlocked with an optical zoom
`mechanism” (’517 patent, Claim 3)
`
`• “increases gradually to the maximum value (’334 Patent, Claims 1 and 4)
`
`• “a device for getting location information denoting a present place of said
`portable terminal” (’498 Patent, Claims 1, 5, and 10)
`
`• “object distance detecting means” (’209 Patent, Claims 1, 3, 5, and 6)
`
`-4-
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788- VC
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION & PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2020-00408
`Apple EX1015 Page 4
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-01788-VC Document 113 Filed 08/27/18 Page 5 of 8
`
`ASUS also contends that the following terms are likely to be claim
`
`dispositive with respect to the issue of infringement:
`
`• “MPEG method” (‘229 Patent, Claims 1, 5, and 9)
`
`• “recording means for recording data on said information recording medium”
`(’340 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`IV. ANTICIPATED LENGTH OF TIME FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`HEARING (4-4(D))
`The parties anticipate that three hours will be sufficient for a claim
`
`construction hearing on all of the most significant terms for construction.
`
`V.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF WITNESSES FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`HEARING (4-3(E))
`Maxell expects to proffer testimony either live or via declaration from the
`
`following experts: Dr. Vijay Madisetti, Dr. Michael Braasch, Dr. Brana Vojcic, Dr.
`
`Shukri Souri, and Dr. Joshua Phinney. Each expert is expected to provide testimony
`
`about how the disputed claim terms would have been understood by a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed inventions. A summary of each
`
`expert’s anticipated testimony is appended hereto at Exhibits A-2 – A-6.
`
`Additionally, Maxell may call any of these experts to testify live to rebut any such
`
`testimony proffered by ASUS.
`
`ASUS expects to proffer testimony either live or via declaration from the
`
`following experts: Dr. Barmak Mansoorian, Mr. Scott Andrews, Dr. Zhi Ding, Dr.
`
`Dan Schonfeld, and Dr. Masud Mansuripur. A summary of each expert’s anticipated
`
`-5-
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788- VC
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION & PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2020-00408
`Apple EX1015 Page 5
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-01788-VC Document 113 Filed 08/27/18 Page 6 of 8
`
`testimony is appended hereto at Exhibits B-2 – B-6. Additionally, ASUS may call
`
`any of these experts to testify live to rebut any such testimony proffered by Maxell.
`
`Dated: August 27, 2018
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Jamie B. Beaber
`Jamie B. Beaber (Pro Hac Vice)
`jbeaber@mayerbrown.com
`Kfir B. Levy (State Bar No. 235372)
`klevy@mayerbrown.com
`James A. Fussell, III (Pro Hac Vice)
` jfussell@mayerbrown.com
`Tiffany A. Miller (Pro Hac Vice)
`tmiller@mayerbrown.com
`William J. Barrow (Pro Hac Vice)
` wbarrow@mayerbrown.com
`MAYER BROWN LLP
`1999 K Street NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`Phone: 202.263.3000
`Robert G. Pluta (Pro Hac Vice)
`rpluta@mayerbrown.com
`MAYER BROWN LLP
`71 South Wacker Drive
`Chicago, IL 60606
`Phone: 312.701.8641
`Patricia L. Peden State Bar No. 206440
` Patricia.peden@leclairryan.com
`LECLAIRRYAN LLP
`44 Montgomery Street
`Suite 3200
`San Francisco, CA 94104
`Phone: 415.913.4932
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`MAXELL, LTD.
`
`-6-
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788- VC
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION & PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2020-00408
`Apple EX1015 Page 6
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-01788-VC Document 113 Filed 08/27/18 Page 7 of 8
`
`Dated: August 27, 2018
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Michael J. Newton
`Michael J. Newton (CA State Bar No. 156225)
`Email: mike.newton@alston.com
`Derek S. Neilson (pro hac vice)
`Email: derek.neilson@alston.com
`Brady R. Cox (pro hac vice)
`Email: brady.cox@alston.com
`Sang (Michael) Lee (pro hac vice)
`Email: michael.lee@alston.com
`Fannyben D. Patel (pro hac vice)
`Email: fanny.patel@alston.com
`ALSTON & BIRD LLP
`2828 North Harwood Street, Suite 1800
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Telephone: (214) 922-3400
`Facsimile: (214) 922-3899
`Marsha E. Diedrich (CA Bar. No. 93709)
`Email: marsha.diedrich@alston.com
`H. James Abe (CA Bar. No. 265534)
`Email: james.abe@alston.com
`ALSTON & BIRD LLP
`333 South Hope Street, 16th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`Telephone: (213) 576-1000
`Facsimile: (213) 576-1100
`Attorney for Defendants ASUSTeK Computer
`Inc. and ASUS Computer International
`
`-7-
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788- VC
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION & PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2020-00408
`Apple EX1015 Page 7
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-01788-VC Document 113 Filed 08/27/18 Page 8 of 8
`
`ATTESTATION OF CONCURRENCE IN FILING
`In accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1, I attest the concurrence in the filing
`of this document has been obtained from Michael J. Newton.
`/s/ Patricia L. Peden
`Patricia L. Peden
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented
`to electronic service are being served this 27th day of August, 2018 with a copy of
`this document via electronic mail.
`
`Dated: August 27, 2018
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Victoria Balestrieri
`Victoria Balestrieri
`
`-8-
`Case No. 3:18-cv-01788- VC
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION & PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2020-00408
`Apple EX1015 Page 8
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket