`
`
`Paper 49
`Entered: September 14, 2021
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`___________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`___________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`COREPHOTONICS, LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`___________
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`___________
`
`Record of Oral Hearing
`Held: August 12, 2021
`_____________
`
`
`
`
`Before BRYAN F. MOORE, JOHN F. HORVATH, and
`MONICA S. ULLAGADDI, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
`
`
`
`MICHAEL PARSONS, ESQUIRE
`
`Haynes & Boone, LLP
`
`6000 Headquarters Drive
`
`Suite 200
`
`Plano, TX 75024
`
`
`ON BEHALF OF PATENT OWNER:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MARC FENSTER, ESQUIRE
`Russ, August & Kabat
`12424 Wilshire Blvd.
`12th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90025
`
`
`
`
`The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on Thursday, August
`12, 2021, commencing at 12:59 p.m., EDT, at the U.S. Patent and
`Trademark Office, by video/by telephone, before Chris Hofer, Notary
`Public.
`
`
`
`
`
` 2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
` - - - - -
`
`
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Good afternoon everyone. This is
`
`Judge Horvath at the Patent Trial & Appeal Board. With me
`
`today are Judges Ullagaddi and Moore and we here for oral
`
`argument in Apple, Inc. v. Corephotonics, Ltd , case No. IPR
`
`2020-00905 in which Apple challenges the patentability of
`
`certain claims in U.S. patent No. 10,225,479 B2 which is
`
`assigned to Corephotonics. Can I ask counsel for Apple to
`
`please introduce yourself.
`
`10
`
`
`
`MR. PARSONS: Judge Horvath, this is Michael Parsons
`
`11
`
`with Haynes & Boone representing Petitioner Apple.
`
`12
`
`
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Parsons. And
`
`13
`
`will you be presenting the argument on behalf of Apple today?
`
`14
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`MR. PARSONS: Yes, I will be. Thank y ou.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Thank you, sir. And counsel for
`
`16
`
`Corephotonics, please introduce yourself.
`
`17
`
`
`
`MR. FENSTER: Yes. Good morning, Your Honor. This is
`
`18
`
`Marc Fenster with Russ, August & Kabat and I'll be presenting
`
`19
`
`argument on behalf of the Patent Owner Cor ephotonics. With me
`
`20
`
`on the line are my colleagues Neil Rubin and James Tsuei.
`
`21
`
`
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Fenster. So
`
`22
`
`before we begin I'd like to address some administrative issues
`
`23
`
`and provide you with some guidance. Before I do that though I 'd
`
`24
`
`like to thank you for participating in this hearing remotely and
`
`
`
`
`
` 3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`for also agreeing to allow this hearing to be recorded in order to
`
`be presented at the InSide PTAB conference or event to be held
`
`later this month.
`
`
`
`Now this is the first time, for me anyw ay, that we've done
`
`one of these hearings via Webex. I think this is a new
`
`technology platform we're trying. I don't expect there to be any
`
`technical issues. We've already had a few with audio but those
`
`were mostly, I think at least on my part -- just -- I didn't unmute
`
`myself and I think that's -- so there's a little bit of a learning
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`curve here. Hopefully we won't have any technical issues that
`
`11
`
`we have to resolve, but in the event that we do, please try to let
`
`12
`
`us know and we will of course suspend the proceeding until we
`
`13
`
`can resolve that issue and try and keep track of the time so that
`
`14
`
`no one's time is lost.
`
`15
`
`
`
`Let's see. I think, as I said, a portion at least of this
`
`16
`
`hearing is going to be recorded to be presented at the InSide
`
`17
`
`PTAB event. I will note that Patent Owner Corephotonics has
`
`18
`
`produced evidence of secondary considerations of
`
`19
`
`nonobviousness. That evidence is currently under seal and so it's
`
`20
`
`possible that to the extent that evidence will be discussed at
`
`21
`
`today's hearing, a portion of this heari ng will have to be
`
`22
`
`conducted under seal. That portion of course will not be
`
`23
`
`recorded and will not be shown at the InSide PTAB event.
`
`24
`
`
`
`Per the terms of our Order on July 6, each party will have a
`
`25
`
`total of 45 minutes argument time. Because Apple bears the
`
`
`
`
`
` 4
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`burden of demonstrating the unpatentability of the claims in this
`
`challenge, Apple will proceed first and may reserve a portion of
`
`its total argument time for rebuttal argument. Next,
`
`Corephotonics will present its response to Apple's arguments and
`
`may introduce argument on secondary considerations of
`
`nonobviousness. Corephotonics may also then reserve a portion
`
`of its total time for sur -rebuttal. As I said, because that
`
`secondary consideration evidence is under seal, we'd ask that
`
`Corephotonics present any argument on that issue at the end of
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`its response time and we'd also ask that Corephotonics let the
`
`11
`
`Board know prior to discussing any secondary considerations
`
`12
`
`evidence so that we could discontinue the recording of this
`
`13
`
`hearing and seal the remaining portion of the hearing.
`
`14
`
`
`
`After Corephotonics presents its response, Apple may
`
`15
`
`present rebuttal argument with the time it had reserved including
`
`16
`
`argument on secondary considerations of nonobvi ousness and
`
`17
`
`then Corephotonics may have the last word and present its sur-
`
`18
`
`rebuttal argument in whatever time Corephotonics has reserved
`
`19
`
`for rebuttal. Does everyone understand those instructions?
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MR. PARSONS: Yes, Your Honor.
`
`MR. FENSTER: Yes, Your Honor.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Okay. Thank you. So, Mr. Parsons,
`
`23
`
`would Apple like to reserve time for rebuttal?
`
`24
`
`
`
`MR. PARSONS: Yes, Your Honor. We'd like to reserve 15
`
`25
`
`minutes for rebuttal.
`
`
`
`
`
` 5
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: I'm sorry, I didn't catch that. How
`
`many?
`
`
`
`
`
`MR. PARSONS: Fifteen minutes.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Fifteen minutes. Okay. So I am the
`
`official timekeeper and I am just using a -- so you have 45
`
`minutes, you're reserving 15 minutes, that would give you 30
`
`minutes for your principal argument and I am just going to set
`
`my digital phone here which has a timer on it. When you begin
`
`your argument I will start the timer and I will give you a three
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`minute warning when your time is about to expire. So whenever
`
`11
`
`you're ready, you may begin.
`
`12
`
`
`
`MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Your Honor. Well, I'd like
`
`13
`
`the slide deck for IPR 2020 -905, the Petitioner's slide deck
`
`14
`
`brought up and I'll just give slide numbers to have the person
`
`15
`
`controlling flip through them.
`
`16
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`STAFF: Which one do you need?
`
`MR. PARSONS: IPR -- the 905 IPR, the Petitioner's slide
`
`18
`
`deck.
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`STAFF: Okay.
`
`MR. PARSONS: All right. Can every body see it?
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: No.
`
`MR. PARSONS: I can't see it either.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: There we go. I can see it now.
`
`MR. PARSONS: Okay. I'm not able to see it but I'll follow
`
`25
`
`a paper copy on my end. Great. And I'm ready to start, Judge
`
`
`
`
`
` 6
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`Horvath.
`
`
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Okay. Let me begin then. Okay.
`
`Begin.
`
`
`
`MR. PARSONS: Thank you. Your Honors, I'm Michael
`
`Parsons with Haynes & Boone representing Petitioner Apple
`
`today. For IPR 2020-905 that addresses the '479 patent the main
`
`issues before -- that we'd like to discuss with the Board today
`
`mostly address claim 1 of the arguments that Patent Owner has
`
`made with respect to claim 1 and particularly the issues that
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`Patent Owner has raised in its surreply.
`
`11
`
`
`
`Flipping to slide 2. The first topic that we would like to
`
`12
`
`discuss today deals with the claim construction that Patent
`
`13
`
`Owner has presented with the term in claim 1 and it's the only
`
`14
`
`claim construction dispute before the Board, and specifically
`
`15
`
`flipping to slide 2, specifically the problem with Patent Owne r's
`
`16
`
`claim construction is that it requires this concept of wide
`
`17
`
`perspective POV and that that be maintained in a fused image. If
`
`18
`
`you look at the limitation of 1(e) in slide 3 the highlighted
`
`19
`
`portion captures what's in dispute -- that limitation that's in
`
`20
`
`dispute between the parties and it says Wherein the camera
`
`21
`
`controller is further operative to output the fused image point of
`
`22
`
`view of the wide -- of the wide camera. And so what does this
`
`23
`
`mean? What this means is is that in claim 1 you have a wide
`
`24
`
`camera and a telephoto camera and each of these cameras have a
`
`25
`
`specific perspective on a scene that is overlapping between the
`
`
`
`
`
` 7
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`two of them. And so when you capture an image between these
`
`two cameras, you end up having one image on the telephoto side
`
`and one image on the wide camera side and those images will
`
`capture objects in a particular position and they will have a
`
`particular shape. And so what the parties are disputing in this is
`
`that the wide POV of the wide camera is whether or not just the
`
`object positions must be maintained or whether the object shapes
`
`must be maintained. Petitioner's construction in this regard is
`
`that limitation 1(e) should be read to output a fused image in
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`which the positions or shapes of objects reflect those of the wide
`
`11
`
`camera and Patent Owner's construction replaces the "or" with an
`
`12
`
`"and" and they think that this term means that both the shape and
`
`13
`
`the position of the objects should be maintained in the fused
`
`14
`
`image.
`
`15
`
`
`
`Now flipping to slide 4. We're referring to Patent Owner's
`
`16
`
`response here on slide 4 and what they've described POV -- point
`
`17
`
`of view -- is that it refers to how objects are seen by each sub -
`
`18
`
`camera or how the objects will be shifted and have different
`
`19
`
`perspective or shape for the two cameras . And so what this
`
`20
`
`means is is that if you're using the camera with different point of
`
`21
`
`views, like a wide and a telephoto camera with overlapping
`
`22
`
`fields of view, you can shift an object or in other words change
`
`23
`
`its position in an image or change the perspective of an object
`
`24
`
`which means to change its shape. And in reference to this
`
`25
`
`specific thing, if you look at the two images at the bottom of
`
`
`
`
`
` 8
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`slide 4 that are borrowed from the Szeliski reference , it shows
`
`two scenes that are captured with cameras that have slightly
`
`different points of view. And if you look closely you can see
`
`that there's some objects that are shifted in different positions
`
`and then there is some objects that have slightly different shapes
`
`between the two images.
`
`
`
`Now in the specification, flipping to slide 5, what w e're
`
`pointing at here is column 5 of the '479 patent. This is where it
`
`describes the concept of point of view. The first sentence is
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`what Patent Owner addressed in its response , which we just
`
`11
`
`talked about, which is that in a system where you have dual
`
`12
`
`aperture cameras of a wide and a telephoto image with an
`
`13
`
`overlapping field of view, that both that the positions in between
`
`14
`
`the two cameras can have different shapes or positions of the
`
`15
`
`objects. And if the objects have the shape of a particular
`
`16
`
`camera, then that is maintaining wide perspective POV. If the
`
`17
`
`objects maintain the positions of a particular camera, then that
`
`18
`
`ends up being position POV and so when you look --
`
`19
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: So Mr. Parsons, can I ask you a
`
`20
`
`question?
`
`21
`
`22
`
`MR. PARSONS: Yes.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: So would you agree that if I have two
`
`23
`
`images and let's say there's just an object in each image, would
`
`24
`
`you agree that there are really four possible combinations of
`
`25
`
`those two images. You could have the shape and the perspective
`
`
`
`
`
` 9
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`of the object from the wide camera, or I could have the shape and
`
`perspective of the object from the tele camera, or I could have
`
`the shape of the object from the wide camera but in the position
`
`where it would be in the tele camera, or I could have the shape of
`
`the object from t he tele camera but in the position it would be in
`
`the wide camera. Do you agree that those are the only four
`
`possibilities?
`
`MR. PARSONS: Yes, Your Honor, I do . And in fact if you
`
`look at slide 5 and the portion that we've highlighted in yellow
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`from the patent it says that exact thing. It says that the system
`
`11
`
`output image, which in this case would be the fused image, can
`
`12
`
`have the shape and position of either sub -camera or the shape or
`
`13
`
`position of a combination thereof . And so based on this
`
`14
`
`statement, I do agree with you that there are only four possible
`
`15
`
`combinations of this.
`
`16
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Okay. So given that , if I say that an
`
`17
`
`object has the -- let's say the wide position point of view -- so it
`
`18
`
`has the position the object would have if it was taken fro m the
`
`19
`
`point of view of the wide camera , would you then agree that it
`
`20
`
`can either have the wide shape or the tele camera shape? Those
`
`21
`
`are the only two possibilities; right?
`
`22
`
`23
`
`MR. PARSONS: Right.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: So why would I not distinguish
`
`24
`
`between those two possibilities? If I just say it has the wide
`
`25
`
`position point of view, then I don't know necessarily whether it
`
`
`
`
`
` 10
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`also has the wide shape point of view or the teleposition point of
`
`view, I'm sorry, the teleshape point of view? But if I say -- and
`
`there is a way to distinguish that isn't there ? Because I could say
`
`if it has the wide point of view then it has both the wide position
`
`and the wide shape. But if I just say it has the wide position
`
`point of view, then I automatically -- I would know that well, i t
`
`has the wide position point of view, not the wide point of view ,
`
`so therefore it must have the tele shape point of view. Why isn't
`
`it as simple as that?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`MR. PARSONS: Well, Your Honor, if you look at the
`
`11
`
`second portion that is highlighted in green in sl ide 5, this
`
`12
`
`specifically refers to the fact the only thing that's necessary to
`
`13
`
`maintain a wide POV is doing a registration mapping process
`
`14
`
`that matches the pixels between the telephoto image with the
`
`15
`
`wide image and so if you just want to maintain a POV of the
`
`16
`
`wide image, then all you have to do is this registration process.
`
`17
`
`If you look at the second portion highlighted in pink at the
`
`18
`
`bottom of the paragraph, it calls out a different process that's
`
`19
`
`used to therefore maintain the perspective point of view . And
`
`20
`
`this specifically says that it's also possible to perform the
`
`21
`
`registration after each sub -camera is shifted and in that case the
`
`22
`
`output of the image will retain the respective wide or tele
`
`23
`
`perspective point of view. So if you're just doing a registrati on
`
`24
`
`process which is what the claim says, if we look at the claim it
`
`25
`
`specifically says that it maintains the POV of the wide camera by
`
`
`
`
`
` 11
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`doing the registration mapping process of matching the wide
`
`pixels and the tele pixels. So based on this description here , if
`
`you're just doing that and you're not also shifting before
`
`registration, then you're just maintaining wide position POV
`
`because in order to maintain wide perspective POV with the
`
`portions of the tele image that get fused in, you have to shift
`
`those tele pixels in some way. And based on the fact that a
`
`shifting process is required more than just happens before
`
`registration mapping, that's the distinction here is that in order to
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`maintain wide perspective you have to do something in addition
`
`11
`
`to just register.
`
`12
`
`Now if we flip to slide 6 . Slide 6 shows the figure 5
`
`13
`
`embodiment from the '479 patent and this is the embodiment that
`
`14
`
`describes image fusion . And if you look at the portion on the
`
`15
`
`right this is the figure from the patent and you'll note that in st ep
`
`16
`
`506 that's where it performs the registration process. There are
`
`17
`
`only two steps that occur before that. The first one in 502 is it
`
`18
`
`just contains the images and the second step is that it rectifies
`
`19
`
`the images. Now, the rectification process here is re cited in
`
`20
`
`claim 2 so based on claim differentiation that can't be the
`
`21
`
`shifting process that is required in order to maintain the wide
`
`22
`
`perspective POV. So based on this embodiment in the
`
`23
`
`specification, the proper claim construction of this term is that if
`
`24
`
`you're just doing pixel matching to do the registration process ,
`
`25
`
`which is what the claim says, then all you're doing is maintaining
`
`
`
`
`
` 12
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`wide position POV. If you want to maintain the wide
`
`perspective, you have to do the additional step before
`
`registration and there's no mention in the claim of doing an
`
`additional shifting step in order to shift those pixels over.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: So I do have a question about this. It
`
`seems to me, and let me know if you disagree, but it seems to me
`
`that figure 5 is really the o nly figure in this patent that talks
`
`about how you create a fused image. Would you agree with that?
`
`MR. PARSONS: Correct. I agree with that.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Okay. So there are other steps in
`
`11
`
`figure 5. So if you look at step 508, it says the tele image is
`
`12
`
`resampled based on the registration map. That's step 508. Now
`
`13
`
`doesn't that mean -- doesn't resampling mean basically shifting
`
`14
`
`the tele image so that the, you know, you use this registration
`
`15
`
`map to resample the tele image, like you get something that
`
`16
`
`looks more akin to what the wide image is. Isn't that what that's
`
`17
`
`saying?
`
`18
`
`MR. PARSONS: Well, no, Your Honor. I disagree with
`
`19
`
`that because if you look back at slide 5 in the bottom of the
`
`20
`
`paragraph that we've pulled out that's in pink it requires that th e
`
`21
`
`shifting process be performed before registration. What you're
`
`22
`
`referring to in step 508 is happening after registration so that's
`
`23
`
`not shifting. What we believe that's actually doing is that it's
`
`24
`
`upscaling the image so that the objects in the two images are the
`
`25
`
`same size and in order to fuse the tele portions with the wide
`
`
`
`
`
` 13
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`portion because they have different fields of view but they're
`
`overlapping. Objects in the tele image are going to appear larger
`
`than they are in the wide image and so by resampling t he tele
`
`image it means you're actually going to scale it to the same -- so
`
`the objects are the same size as what they are in the wide image .
`
`And therefore when you pull those portions out, that they can go
`
`into the wide image at the same, you know, at the same size so
`
`you're not obscuring other portions of the image.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Okay. So let me ask you this. There
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`are other steps then in figure 5 and what is intriguing to me is
`
`11
`
`this last step which is in 510, this decision step where they
`
`12
`
`compare the pixels in the tele image to the pixels in the wide
`
`13
`
`image and determine if there's an error in that registration map .
`
`14
`
`And then if there is an error, they pick the wide image pixel.
`
`15
`
`Now, the way I look at that , and I'm taking that and I'm
`
`16
`
`considering that in combination with what they said about the
`
`17
`
`point of view shifting -- and I sort of had an image in my mind
`
`18
`
`that, you know, I could have a camera that's looking let's say
`
`19
`
`straight on at an I-beam so that all I really see is the “I” of the I-
`
`20
`
`beam; right? And let's say that's painted red. I don't see any of
`
`21
`
`the sides. But then I have another camera which is to the right
`
`22
`
`of that camera and so it has a different point of view. So now
`
`23
`
`that camera is seeing two things. It sees the red of the I-beam,
`
`24
`
`the face of the I-beam, but it also sees the side of the I-beam
`
`25
`
`which let's say is colored blue; right? So if I try to register
`
`
`
`
`
` 14
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`pixels and map pixels, I'm going to map some of the red from the
`
`tele camera, from the camera on the right, and it sees both the
`
`front of the I-beam and the side of the I-beam and so it's going to
`
`have those red pixels from the front face of the I-beam and
`
`they're going to map to the pixels that I see from the wide
`
`camera. But there's going to be pixels from the camera to the
`
`right, the tele camera that sees the side of the I-beam that's blue.
`
`Those aren't going to match anything that I see from the wide
`
`camera. So isn't that what they mean by registration error ? And
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`in that case they say choose the information from the wide
`
`11
`
`camera, so I'm throwing away the tele -perspective.
`
`12
`
`MR. PARSONS: Well, Your Honor, that concept is
`
`13
`
`actually claimed in claim 5 which also -- based on claim
`
`14
`
`differentiation -- does not determine whether or not you're
`
`15
`
`maintaining wide POV because that error process is actually
`
`16
`
`happening in a different claim. So that's not what's doing the
`
`17
`
`maintaining of the wide POV. Also that’s happening again after
`
`18
`
`the registration process and the specification specifically says
`
`19
`
`that you have to shift before registration because ot herwise you
`
`20
`
`end up with exactly this error that you described where you will
`
`21
`
`have errors between the two of them because you didn't shift the
`
`22
`
`tele pixels in to have the perspective of the wide camera before
`
`23
`
`you did the registration mapping process.
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Uh-huh. Okay.
`
`MR. PARSONS: Well, thank you, Your Honor. In light of
`
` 15
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`that discussion I'd like to skip to our second topic. So if we can
`
`go ahead and skip to slide 9. Our second topic that we'd like to
`
`discuss addresses specifically Parulski's figure 14 that we
`
`pointed to in the petition as being an image enhancement
`
`technique that broadens the depth of field of the wide image .
`
`And so what Parulski teaches is -- Parulski teaches a dual
`
`aperture camera with wide and tele lenses that overlap and what
`
`happens in figure 14 is that it's an image enhancement method
`
`and it's described as having a specific purpose.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`On slide 9, this is the figure that we provided in the
`
`11
`
`petition that was annotated by Dr. Durand and what it says in
`
`12
`
`502 is that it looks at the zoom position and if the zoom position
`
`13
`
`is such that the primary capture device is the wide camera and
`
`14
`
`the secondary capture device is the tele camera, then in 510 it
`
`15
`
`captures the wide image, in step 512 it captures the telephoto
`
`16
`
`image and in step 514 it uses the telephoto image to enhance the
`
`17
`
`depth of field of the wide image.
`
`18
`
`Now, if you flip to slide 10, this is referring to column 28
`
`19
`
`of Parulski and this further describes figure 14. It says that
`
`20
`
`figure 14 is a first type of augmentation method that' s depicted
`
`21
`
`in Parulski and specific to figure 14 . If you look at the second
`
`22
`
`portion that's highlighted in yellow there, it says that the two
`
`23
`
`images are combined into a modified image with a broadened
`
`24
`
`depth of field. So in other words, what figure 14 is doing in that
`
`25
`
`last step, it is taking portions of the secondary stage, which is
`
`
`
`
`
` 16
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`the telephoto, and then taking portions of that and combining it
`
`with the wide image to broaden the depth of the wide image
`
`which means to bring more portions of the wide image into
`
`focus.
`
`Now if we flip back to slide 8 , and specifically look at the
`
`last step in figure 14 , which is block 514 , it says that the
`
`secondary still image is used to enhance the depth of field of the
`
`primary image, for instance, where the secondary still image is
`
`used to provide an enhancement (indiscernible) used to sharpen
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`portions of the primary still image that are positioned near the
`
`11
`
`secondary focused images. So in other words, what step 514 is
`
`12
`
`doing is it's taking portions of the telephoto image and it's
`
`13
`
`identifying them based on the focus distance from the tele
`
`14
`
`camera and then it takes those and it combines them with the
`
`15
`
`wide image to produce a modified image with a broader depth of
`
`16
`
`field to bring more of the wide image into focus.
`
`17
`
`Now, Patent Owner has argued that there is no teaching in
`
`18
`
`Parulski to combine figure 14 to use the range map discussed in
`
`19
`
`figure 11. Now, but Parulski actually says it right here. It says
`
`20
`
`that it's using portions of the secondary image which in this case
`
`21
`
`would be the telephoto, to sharpen the same portions of the wide
`
`22
`
`image. And it's focusing on the portions of the telephoto image
`
`23
`
`that are at the focus distance of the telephoto image which , in
`
`24
`
`other words, means that you have to have some way to identify
`
`25
`
`what the portions of the image are that are at the telephoto focus
`
`
`
`
`
` 17
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`distance in order to identify them and extract them in order to
`
`combine them with the wide image.
`
`Now, if we go ahead and skip to slide 13, this discuses
`
`Parulski's figure 11 embodiment . And the first portion that
`
`we've called out here -- it discusses the method that Parulski
`
`uses in order to build a registration map . And what it's doing is
`
`it's correlating the pixels and portions of the two images to
`
`identify portions of the objects that are similar . And there's no
`
`dispute from Patent Owner that this is a registration map process
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`that satisfies the last portion of claim 1 that does pixel matching
`
`11
`
`between the wide and tele cameras.
`
`12
`
`Once you have a range map, Parulski teaches in the second
`
`13
`
`portion that we've called out here on slide 13 -- is that the range
`
`14
`
`map can then be used to modify an image for a variety of
`
`15
`
`purposes. And two important things that would be relevant to
`
`16
`
`figure 14 for figuring out what portions of the telephoto image or
`
`17
`
`the telephoto focus distance is that the range map can be used to
`
`18
`
`improve object identification within the image by identifying the
`
`19
`
`continuous boundaries of the object so the shape of the object
`
`20
`
`can be defined. And then it also enables object extraction from
`
`21
`
`the errors by using that same identification of the continuous
`
`22
`
`boundaries of the object so it can be segmented within the image.
`
`23
`
`So in other words, figure 14 says that you use portions of the
`
`24
`
`telephoto image at the telephoto focus distance and then you take
`
`25
`
`those and you take them out of the telephoto and then you merge
`
`
`
`
`
` 18
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`them with the wide image to create a combined image . And what
`
`this does is it enables the in -focus portions of the telephoto
`
`image to then enhance the wide image and increase the number
`
`of -- the portions of the wide image that are in focus , which is
`
`what broadening the depth of field means.
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: So, Mr. Parsons, if I can ask you a
`
`question. So when you do this, you know, extracting an image
`
`from the telephoto lens for example, or from the tel ephoto image,
`
`extracting an object and then copying that and placing it in the
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`position of that object from the wide image , would you agree
`
`11
`
`that in doing that you are only preserving the position, the wide
`
`12
`
`position point of view and not both the wide posit ion and the
`
`13
`
`wide perspective point of view?
`
`14
`
`MR. PARSONS: Well, Your Honor, our position in the
`
`15
`
`petition was exactly that . That if you just perform the
`
`16
`
`registration process to match the tele pixels with the wide pixels
`
`17
`
`to identify where the objects are and then you just extract the
`
`18
`
`objects from the tele and use it with the wide, that that does in
`
`19
`
`fact maintain the wide position POV because the wide image is
`
`20
`
`the one that's maintained . And all of the objects that have been
`
`21
`
`moved over are in the same position and then the objects that are
`
`22
`
`moved over from the tele image would be in the same position
`
`23
`
`because you used the registration mapping process. But Parulski
`
`24
`
`isn't clear on whether or not there's a shifting process that
`
`25
`
`happens before registration. So that was our position in the
`
`
`
`
`
` 19
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`petition.
`
`But let me supplement that a little bit. On page 3 of the
`
`Patent Owner's surreply , in the second paragraph, the last
`
`sentence, they specifically say that our position of just
`
`maintaining position POV is incorrect because , and this is what
`
`they say, they say this is incorrect as it i gnores that the
`
`registering pixels to matching pixels will necessarily address
`
`both position and perspective. So in the surreply Patent Owner
`
`has taken the position it doesn't matter if you us e the registration
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`map, it does both position and perspective and there's no dispute
`
`11
`
`at the end that Parulski's registration mapping process satisfies
`
`12
`
`the limitation in the claim. So even based on Patent Owner's
`
`13
`
`position in the surreply it seems to be tha t if you just do the
`
`14
`
`registration process , based on their argument, that it would
`
`15
`
`maintain both.
`
`16
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: I'm sorry. What page number was
`
`17
`
`that from the surreply?
`
`18
`
`MR. PARSONS: Page 3 of the surreply. It's in the second
`
`19
`
`paragraph.
`
`20
`
`21
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: P age 3.
`
`MR. PARSONS: It's the last sentence of the first full
`
`22
`
`paragraph.
`
`23
`
`24
`
`JUDGE HORVATH: Okay. Okay. Thank you.
`
`MR. PARSONS: Right. Thank you. So I'll continue on.
`
`25
`
`In slide 14 Parulski provides a specific example for using the
`
`
`
`
`
` 20
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00905 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`IPR2020-00906 (Patent 10,225,479 B2)
`
`range map. For the por tion that we called out in slide 14
`
`Parulski presented an example scene where it talks about having
`
`mountains in the distance, flowers in the middle and a dog that's
`
`out of focus at five feet. Now, when you then apply the
`
`registration map data , which in this case I'll refer to as the range
`
`map, you know, several features of this scene can be modified .
`
`And if we move to slide 15 one of these methods that this
`
`example talks about is -- specifically -- is the depth of field can
`
`be
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
