throbber
Petitioner’s Oral Hearing Demonstratives
`
`Apple Inc. (Petitioner)
`v.
`Koss Corporation (Patent Owner)
`
`Case No. IPR2021-00592
`U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`Before Hon. Patrick R. Scanlon, David C. McKone, and Gregg I. Anderson
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`APPLE 1033
`Apple v. Koss
`IPR2021-00592
`
`

`

`Instituted Grounds
`
`Obviousness Ground
`
`Claim(s) Challenged
`
`Haupt, Seshadri, Rao
`
`Haupt, Seshadri, Rao, Paulson
`
`Haupt, Seshadri, Rao, Rosener
`
`Haupt, Seshadri, Rao, Rosener,
`Paulson
`
`1, 2, 9, 32, 47, 52, 53, 54, 56–57
`3, 5, 7
`
`10, 14, 15, 23, 24, 33–36, 42,
`43, 46, 48–51, 55
`11, 16, 19, 21, 25, 28, 30, 37,
`39, 45
`
`* Independent claims noted in red
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`

`

`Table Of Contents
`
`The ’934 Patent
`
`Discussion of Key Topics
`1 – Haupt and Seshadri Render Obvious Headphone’s Configured
`to “Initiate Transmission of a Request To a Remote, Network-
`connected Server” (Claim 1)
`2 – Koss’s Purported Concerns of Firmware Upgrades Are
`Misplaced (Claims 1, 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46)
`3 – Haupt Renders Obvious Transmitting Data About the
`Headphone Assembly” (Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45)
`4 – Paulson Renders a “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious (Claims 37
`and 39)
`5 – Haupt and Seshadri Render the Claimed DSP Obvious (Claims
`52-53 and 56-57)
`6 – Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness Are Absent – No Nexus
`
`4
`
`7
`
`22
`
`37
`
`46
`
`50
`
`55
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`3
`
`

`

`The ’934 Patent
`
`“The ’934 patent relates to wireless
`earphones that receive audio data
`over a network.”
`Petition at 3 (citing APPLE-1001, 1:66-2:17)
`
`“In one general aspect, the present
`invention is directed to a wireless
`earphone that comprises a
`transceiver circuit for receiving
`streaming audio from a data
`source, such as a digital audio
`player or a computer, over an ad
`hoc wireless network.”
`
`APPLE-1001, 1:66-2:3
`
`APPLE-1001 at Figure 3
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`

`

`The ’934 Patent – Claim 1
`
`1. A headphone assembly comprising:
`first and second earphones, wherein each of the first and second earphones
`comprises an acoustic transducer; and
`an antenna for receiving wireless signals from a mobile, digital audio player via
`one or more ad hoc wireless communication links;
`a wireless communication circuit connected to the antenna, wherein the wireless
`communication circuit is for receiving and transmitting wireless signals to and from the
`headphone assembly;
`a processor;
`a memory for storing firmware that is executed by the processor;
`a rechargeable battery for powering the headphone assembly; and
`a microphone for picking up utterances by a user of the headphone assembly;
`
`wherein the headphone assembly is configured to play, by the first and second
`earphones, digital audio content transmitted by the mobile, digital audio player via the
`one or more ad hoc wireless communication links;
`wherein the processor [of the headphone assembly] is configured to, upon
`activation of a user-control of the headphone assembly, initiate transmission of a
`request to a remote, network-connected server that is in wireless communication with
`the mobile, digital audio player; and
`wherein the headphone assembly is for receiving firmware upgrades
`transmitted from the remote, network-connected server.
`
`and
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`APPLE-1001 (’934 patent) at 18:2-32.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Six Topics For Discussion
`
`1. Haupt and Seshadri Render Obvious Headphone’s Configured
`to “Initiate Transmission of a Request To a Remote, Network-
`connected Server” (Claim 1)
`2. Koss’s Purported Concerns of Firmware Upgrades Are
`Misplaced (Claims 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46)
`3. Haupt Renders Obvious Transmitting Data About the
`Headphone Assembly” (Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45)
`4. Paulson Renders a “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious (Claims 37
`and 39)
`5. Haupt and Seshadri Render the Claimed DSP Obvious (Claims
`52-53 and 56-57)
`6. Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness Are Absent – No Nexus
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`

`

`Six Topics For Discussion
`
`1. Haupt and Seshadri Render Obvious Headphone’s
`Configured to “Initiate Transmission of a Request To a
`Remote, Network-connected Server” (Claim 1)
`2. Koss’s Purported Concerns of Firmware Upgrades Are
`Misplaced (Claims 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46)
`3. Haupt Renders Obvious Transmitting Data About the
`Headphone Assembly” (Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45)
`4. Paulson Renders a “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious (Claims 37
`and 39)
`5. Haupt and Seshadri Render the Claimed DSP Obvious (Claims
`52-53 and 56-57)
`6. Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness Are Absent – No Nexus
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`7
`
`

`

`The ’934 Patent – Claim 1
`
`1. A headphone assembly comprising:
`first and second earphones, wherein each of the first and second earphones
`comprises an acoustic transducer; and
`an antenna for receiving wireless signals from a mobile, digital audio player via
`one or more ad hoc wireless communication links;
`a wireless communication circuit connected to the antenna, wherein the wireless
`communication circuit is for receiving and transmitting wireless signals to and from the
`headphone assembly;
`a processor;
`a memory for storing firmware that is executed by the processor;
`a rechargeable battery for powering the headphone assembly; and
`a microphone for picking up utterances by a user of the headphone assembly;
`
`wherein the headphone assembly is configured to play, by the first and second
`earphones, digital audio content transmitted by the mobile, digital audio player via the
`one or more ad hoc wireless communication links;
`wherein the processor is configured to, upon activation of a user-control of
`the headphone assembly, initiate transmission of a request to a remote, network-
`connected server that is in wireless communication with the mobile, digital
`audio player; and
`wherein the headphone assembly is for receiving firmware upgrades transmitted
`from the remote, network-connected server.
`
`and
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`APPLE-1001 at 18:2-32
`
`8
`
`

`

`Developed Record
`
`Dr. Cooperstock
`
`APPLE-1027 at ¶ 26 (cited at Reply at 8)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`

`

`Haupt
`
`Petition
`
`Petition at 6; APPLE-1004 at Figure 1 (annotated)
`
`“Haupt’s headphones are ‘an active network element, or [] a web client that provides an
`internet service such that other network elements can likewise access it.’ APPLE-1004,
`3:22-24. To accomplish this goal, Haupt provides ‘WLAN headphones … for wireless
`audio file transfer, as long as the receiver is within the transmission range of a WLAN
`access point…’ APPLE-1004, 2:22-24.”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Petition at 5
`
`10
`
`

`

`Haupt
`
`Petition
`“Haupt discloses that the main audio source for its headphones is a server accessed
`over WLAN. See APPLE-1004, FIG. 1, 6:16-7:31. However, it was well-known in the art
`that wireless headphones like Haupt’s could connect to a local digital media player (e.g.,
`a cellular telephone or MP3 player) and reproduce music stored there. See APPLE-
`1004, 1:13-29, 16:15-19, 19:10-19 . . . .”
`
`Petition at 9
`
`Haupt
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 19:10-21
`(cited at Petition at 6, 9, 29)
`
`

`

`Haupt
`
`Petition
`“Haupt discloses that the main audio source for its headphones is a server accessed
`over WLAN. See APPLE-1004, FIG. 1, 6:16-7:31. However, it was well-known in the art
`that wireless headphones like Haupt’s could connect to a local digital media player (e.g.,
`a cellular telephone or MP3 player) and reproduce music stored there. See APPLE-
`1004, 1:13-29, 16:15-19, 19:10-19 . . . .”
`
`Petition at 9
`
`Haupt
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 16:10-19
`
`

`

`Seshadri
`
`Petition
`
`Petition at 8
`“Seshadri describes “a modular wireless headset with which to service multiple
`incoming audio streams.” APPLE-1007, Abstract. Seshadri’s headset is quite similar
`to Haupt’s headphones. APPLE-1003, ¶40. However, whereas Haupt focuses on
`extending direct access to audio sources by making the headphone unit an active
`network element (see APPLE-1004, 3:22-4:10, 9:14-26), Seshadri focuses on
`providing access to multiple audio sources and transitioning between them (see
`APPLE-1007, ¶¶0009, 0024, 0067).”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Petition at 7
`
`13
`
`

`

`Seshadri
`
`Petition
`“Thus, Seshadri’s headphones allow a user to receive audio from any of his/her
`portable devices and are configured to allow the user to easily transition between
`these audio sources. See APPLE-1007, ¶¶0005-0007, 0043, 0067-0068; APPLE-
`1003, ¶42. For example, “[w]hen a second audio stream becomes available, an alert
`may be provided to users via the user interface,” and “prompt the user to select how the
`multiple audio streams are to be serviced.” APPLE- 1007, ¶0068.”
`
`Petition at 8
`
`Seshadri
`
`Seshadri at ¶ 0068 (cited at Petition at 8)
`
`Seshadri at ¶ 0043 (cited at Petition at 8)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`14
`
`

`

`Petition’s Combination of Haupt and Seshadri
`
`Petition
`
`Petition at 6
`Petition at 8
`“Based on Seshadri and his/her general knowledge, a POSITA would have found it
`obvious to modify Haupt’s WLAN headphones—which already include a
`transmitter/receiver with both WLAN and Bluetooth interfaces—so they could access
`both remote servers via WLAN (as taught by Haupt) and local devices such as PDAs
`and MP3 players via either WLAN or piconet, i.e., ad hoc network, (as taught by
`Seshadri). APPLE-1003, ¶47. A POSITA would have found it obvious to implement
`these modified WLAN headphones so they utilize techniques similar to those described
`by Seshadri to transition between various audio sources and their respective audio
`streams. Id.”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Petition at 10
`
`15
`
`

`

`Petition’s Combination of Haupt and Seshadri
`
`Petition
`
`Petition at 6; Reply at 4
`
`“Further, a POSITA would have found it obvious that Seshadri’s base unit 16 (e.g., PDA
`30 or cellphone 36) would be able to communicate with and receive audio files from a
`server (e.g., public server OS) in the same manner as the operating element BE
`taught by Haupt with respect to FIG. 3. See APPLE-1004, 9:2-8, 10:7-24; APPLE-1003,
`¶100. This would have provided a source for the audio streams to which Seshadri
`teaches the base units 16 have access. See APPLE-1007, ¶0024; APPLE-1003, ¶100.”
`Petition at 29
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`16
`
`

`

`Petition’s Combination of Haupt and Seshadri
`
`Petition at 6; Reply at 4
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 10:7-24 (cited at Petition at 29)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`17
`
`

`

`Patent Owner Mischaracterizes the Petition and Haupt
`
`POR
`
`POR at 17
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`18
`
`

`

`Petition’s Combination of Haupt and Seshadri
`
`Reply
`
`Petition at 6; Reply at 4
`“Consistent with this description in the Petition, Haupt gives an explicit example of its
`headphones being connected with a PDA or pocket PC (like Haupt’s operating element
`BE or Seashdri’s base unit 16), where the PDA or pocket PC (referred to as first client
`C1) can ‘play live internet radio, or . . . make use of internet telephoning (voice over
`IP).’ APPLE-1004, 16:15-19 (cited at Pet., 9-10, 32-33). A POSITA would have known
`or at least found it obvious that the ‘live internet radio’ or ‘voice over IP’ would be
`provided by a remote public server, like Haupt’s OS. APPLE-1025, ¶18.”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Reply at 4
`
`19
`
`

`

`Petition’s Combination of Haupt and Seshadri
`
`Sur-Reply
`
`Sur-Reply at 4
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`20
`
`

`

`What Haupt Actually Teaches
`
`Haupt
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 16:10-19 (cited at Petition at 9, Reply at 4-5, 8)
`
`Dr. Cooperstock
`
`APPLE-1027 at ¶ 26 (cited at Reply at 8)
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`21
`
`

`

`Six Topics For Discussion
`
`1. Haupt and Seshadri Render Obvious Headphone’s Configured
`to “Initiate Transmission of a Request To a Remote, Network-
`connected Server” (Claim 1)
`2. Koss’s Purported Concerns of Firmware Upgrades Are
`Misplaced (Claims 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46)
`3. Haupt Renders Obvious Transmitting Data About the
`Headphone Assembly” (Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45)
`4. Paulson Renders a “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious (Claims 37
`and 39)
`5. Haupt and Seshadri Render the Claimed DSP Obvious (Claims
`52-53 and 56-57)
`6. Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness Are Absent – No Nexus
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`22
`
`

`

`The ’934 Patent – Claim 1
`
`1. A headphone assembly comprising:
`first and second earphones, wherein each of the first and second earphones
`comprises an acoustic transducer; and
`an antenna for receiving wireless signals from a mobile, digital audio player via
`one or more ad hoc wireless communication links;
`a wireless communication circuit connected to the antenna, wherein the wireless
`communication circuit is for receiving and transmitting wireless signals to and from the
`headphone assembly;
`a processor;
`a memory for storing firmware that is executed by the processor;
`a rechargeable battery for powering the headphone assembly; and
`a microphone for picking up utterances by a user of the headphone assembly;
`
`wherein the headphone assembly is configured to play, by the first and second
`earphones, digital audio content transmitted by the mobile, digital audio player via the
`one or more ad hoc wireless communication links;
`wherein the processor is configured to, upon activation of a user-control of the
`headphone assembly, initiate transmission of a request to a remote, network-
`connected server that is in wireless communication with the mobile, digital audio
`player; and
`wherein the headphone assembly is for receiving firmware upgrades
`transmitted from the remote, network-connected server.
`
`and
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`APPLE-1001 at 18:2-32
`
`23
`
`

`

`Haupt and Rao Render Firmware Limitation Obvious
`
`Petition
`“Haupt describes the audio files received by and played back by its WLAN headphones
`‘can be stored and transmitted in a compressed form, e.g. MP3, MP3pro, WMA, Ogg
`Vorbis, etc.’ APPLE-1004, 9:28-30. However, in order to play back these files, the
`headphones require hardware and/or software ‘for decompressing the compressed
`audio signals.’ APPLE-1004, 9:30-10:5. In one embodiment, ‘this necessary software
`can also be transferred along with, or prior to, the audio data,’ which is
`advantageous because ‘different versions of such headphones from different
`manufacturers’ can be ‘provided with the newest software version.’ Id.”
`
`Haupt
`
`Petition at 31
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`24
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 9:30-10:5
`(cited at Petition at 31)
`
`

`

`Haupt and Rao Render Firmware Limitation Obvious
`
`Petition
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`25
`
`Petition at 13
`
`

`

`POR Posits a Nonsensical Reading of Haupt
`
`POR
`
`POR at 24
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`26
`
`

`

`POR Posits a Nonsensical Reading of Haupt
`
`Dr. Cooperstock
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`27
`
`APPLE-1027, ¶ 29
`(cited at Reply at 9-10)
`
`

`

`The ’934 Patent – Claims 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46
`
`33. The headphone assembly of claim 32,
`wherein each of the first and second
`earphones comprise earbuds.
`
`APPLE-1001 at 22:14-15
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`28
`
`

`

`Rosener Renders Earbuds Obvious
`
`Rosener
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`29
`
`Rosener (APPLE-1008) at FIG. 5,
`(cited at Petition at 49, 57)
`
`

`

`PO Argues Earbuds Are Outside POSITA’s Skill
`
`Sur-Reply
`
`Sur-Reply at 13-14
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`30
`
`

`

`Rosener Renders Earbuds Obvious
`
`Petition
`“That a POSITA would have known how to implement wireless headphones like Haupt’s
`in any of the form factors taught by Rosener is consistent with the detail provided in the
`’934 Patent. The ’934 Patent does not provide a POSITA with any specific
`teachings that would enable any given form and size of its headphones. APPLE-
`1003, ¶65. For example, the ’934 Patent provides general teachings that implementing
`the transceiver circuit 100 as a single integrated circuit ‘is conducive to miniaturizing the
`components of the earphone 10, which is advantageous if the earphone 10 is to be
`relatively small in size, such as an in-ear earphone.’ APPLE-1001, 6:43-53.
`
`Yet, the ’934 Patent does not provide any specific teachings that would have
`enabled the POSITA to implement the transceiver circuit 100 as a single
`integrated circuit, beyond the POSITA’s own skill. See id.; APPLE-1003, ¶66. The
`‘934 patent thus concedes that a person of skill would have had the knowledge
`necessary to implement the headphones taught therein in any of the disclosed
`form factors. A person with that level of skill would have been able to implement
`Haupt’s headphones in any of the forms taught by Rosener, and would have had a
`reasonable expectation of success in doing so. APPLE-1003, ¶66”
`
`Petition at 50-51 (citing In re Epstein)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`31
`
`

`

`Rosener Renders Earbuds Obvious
`
`’934 Patent
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`32
`
`APPLE-1001, FIG. 3, 6:43-48
`(cited at Petition at 3, 50-51)
`
`

`

`POR Argues Earbuds Are Outside POSITA’s Skill
`
`Dr. Cooperstock
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`33
`
`APPLE-1027, ¶ 45
`
`

`

`POR Argues Earbuds Are Outside POSITA’s Skill
`
`POR
`
`POR at 44
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`34
`
`

`

`Petition Cites Hankey to Demonstrate POSITA’s
`Knowledge of Rechargable Batteries
`Petition
`“Further, it was well known that wireless headphones and headsets similar to Haupt’s
`were powered by rechargeable batteries. For example, Hankey describes that,
`‘[t]raditionally, known headset circuitry is powered through a battery even if an external
`power supply is present. The power drained from the battery is then recharged using
`power from the external power supply.’ APPLE-1005, 27:4-7.”
`
`Hankey
`
`Petition at 25
`
`Hankey (APPLE-1005) at FIG. 10A
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`35
`
`

`

`Hankey Demonstrates POSITA’s Knowledge of Firmware
`Uploads with Rechargable Batteries
`Dr. Cooperstock
`“[E]ven if Patent Owner is correct that certain types of firmware upgrades involve high
`power consumption, a POSITA would have known how to implement the prior art
`combinations to avoid this issue. For example, Patent Owner and its expert do not
`consider that a POSITA would have understood that a battery used in prior art
`combinations involving Rosener could be charged by an external power source
`when the headphones initiate a firmware upgrade. . . . This solution would have also
`been within the capability of a POSITA at least in view of Hankey’s corroborating
`disclosure that suggests permitting firmware download and installation when the
`headset is charging, which includes providing firmware upgrade capability when a device
`is plugged in and not relying solely on battery power to ensure continued power through
`the upgrade process. See APPLE-1005, 26:52-60.”
`
`APPLE-1027 at ¶ 47
`(cited at Reply at 15-16)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Hankey (APPLE-1005) at 26:52-60
`(cited at Reply at 15-16)
`
`36
`
`

`

`Six Topics For Discussion
`
`1. Haupt and Seshadri Render Obvious Headphone’s Configured
`to “Initiate Transmission of a Request To a Remote, Network-
`connected Server” (Claim 1)
`2. Koss’s Purported Concerns of Firmware Upgrades Are
`Misplaced (Claims 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46)
`3. Haupt Renders Obvious Transmitting Data About the
`Headphone Assembly” (Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45)
`4. Paulson Renders a “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious (Claims 37
`and 39)
`5. Haupt and Seshadri Render the Claimed DSP Obvious (Claims
`52-53 and 56-57)
`6. Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness Are Absent – No Nexus
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`37
`
`

`

`The ’934 Patent – Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45
`
`7. The headphone assembly of claim 1, wherein
`upon activation of the microphone by the user,
`data are transmitted about the headphone
`assembly to a remote device.
`
`APPLE-1001 at 20:29-35
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`38
`
`

`

`Haupt Teaches Transmission of Data About Headphone
`
`Petition
`“As described with regard to limitation 3[a], Haupt’s processor (i.e., central control unit
`SE) is capable of processing audible utterances by the microphone of the headphone
`unit. APPLE-1003, ¶132. Haupt describes that its ‘microphones can be addressed and
`activated, e.g. via the internet’ such that ‘audio signals recorded by the microphones can
`then be sent to various IP addresses in the internet.’ APPLE-1004, 19:31-20:3.”
`
`Petition at 48.
`
`Haupt
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 21:27-22:2
`(cited at Petition at 48-49)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`39
`
`

`

`POR Fails to Account for Haupt’s Complete Teachings
`
`POR at 35
`
`Petition at 47
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`40
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 22:11-14
`(cited at Petition at 46-47)
`
`

`

`POR Fails to Account for Haupt’s Complete Teachings
`
`POR at 36-37
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`41
`
`

`

`POR Fails to Account for Haupt’s Complete Teachings
`
`Dr. Cooperstock
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`42
`
`APPLE-1027 at ¶¶ 52
`(cited at Reply at 18-19)
`
`

`

`POR Fails to Account for Haupt’s Complete Teachings
`
`Dr. Cooperstock
`
`APPLE-1027 at ¶ 53
`(cited at Reply at 18-19)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`43
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Ever-Shifting Theory
`
`POR
`
`Sur-Reply
`
`POR at 36-37
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Sur-Reply at 10
`
`44
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s New Theory Inconsistent with Haupt
`
`Sur-Reply
`
`Haupt
`
`Sur-Reply at 10
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`45
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 21:27-22:2
`(cited at Petition at 48-49, Reply at 18-19)
`
`

`

`Six Topics For Discussion
`
`1. Haupt and Seshadri Render Obvious Headphone’s Configured
`to “Initiate Transmission of a Request To a Remote, Network-
`connected Server” (Claim 1)
`2. Koss’s Purported Concerns of Firmware Upgrades Are
`Misplaced (Claims 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46)
`3. Haupt Renders Obvious Transmitting Data About the
`Headphone Assembly” (Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45)
`4. Paulson Renders a “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious (Claims
`37 and 39)
`5. Haupt and Seshadri Render the Claimed DSP Obvious (Claims
`52-53 and 56-57)
`6. Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness Are Absent – No Nexus
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`46
`
`

`

`The ’934 Patent – Claims 37 and 39
`
`37. The headphone assembly of claim 36,
`wherein the processor is for:
`processing audible utterances by the user
`picked up by the microphone in response to
`activation of the microphone by the user; and
`transmitting a communication based on the
`audible utterances via the one or more ad hoc
`wireless communication links.
`
`APPLE-1001 at 22:35-42
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`47
`
`

`

`Paulson Renders “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious
`
`Petition
`“Paulson also describes that ‘switch 330 may be arranged to provide push-to-talk
`functionality.’ Id. Activation and deactivation of switch 330 thereby allows a user to mute
`and unmute microphone 130 through physical actuation. APPLE-1003, ¶56. A POSITA
`would have found it obvious to modify Haupt such that Haupt’s WLAN headphones
`include a switch to mute and unmute the microphone (as taught by Paulson) . . . .”
`Petition at 43
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`48
`
`

`

`Ability to Implement was Within a POSITA’s Skill
`
`Dr. Cooperstock
`“Rather, to realize the Haupt-Seshadri-Rao-Paulson wireless earphones, the
`POSITA would have simply incorporated a button that is appropriately-sized for
`small earphones into the Haupt-Seshadri-Rao earphone to provide Paulson’s
`push-to-talk functionality. . . . Indeed, Hankey provides corroborating descriptions of
`an earbud headset that includes a rechargeable battery, a microphone, and buttons. See
`APPLE-1005, FIG. 1, 10:6-38.Thus, the size would not have discouraged a POSITA from
`applying Paulson’steachings to the Haupt-Seshadri-Rao-Rosener earphones.”
`APPLE-1027, ¶ 56 (cited at Reply, 20-21)
`
`Hankey (APPLE-1005), FIG. 1, 10:6-22
`(cited at Reply, 20-21)
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`49
`
`

`

`Six Topics For Discussion
`
`1. Haupt and Seshadri Render Obvious Headphone’s Configured
`to “Initiate Transmission of a Request To a Remote, Network-
`connected Server” (Claim 1)
`2. Koss’s Purported Concerns of Firmware Upgrades Are
`Misplaced (Claims 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46)
`3. Haupt Renders Obvious Transmitting Data About the
`Headphone Assembly” (Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45)
`4. Paulson Renders a “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious (Claims 37
`and 39)
`5. Haupt and Seshadri Render the Claimed DSP Obvious
`(Claims 52-53 and 56-57)
`6. Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness Are Absent – No Nexus
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`50
`
`

`

`The ’934 Patent – Claims 52-53 and 56-57
`
`52. The headphone assembly of claim 1,
`wherein the processor comprises a digital
`signal processor that provides a sound quality
`enhancement for the audio content played by
`the acoustic transducers.
`
`APPLE-1001 at 24:1-4
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`51
`
`

`

`Haupt and Seshadri Render Claimed DSP Obvious
`
`Petition
`“A POSITA would have understood that use of digital signal processing (DSP)
`functions (as taught by Seshadri) with the processor of Haupt’s WLAN
`headphones is one of several design choices to provide signal processing
`complementary to Haupt’s audio amplifier to enhance the signal quality of the audio
`content played by the acoustic transducers. As noted above, Seshadri teaches that
`its processor performs numerous DSP functions, and it would have been obvious to
`a POSITA to modify the processor of Haupt’s WLAN headphones to include a DSP to
`perform sound quality enhancement, as claimed. See APPLE-1007, ¶0052; APPLE-
`1003, ¶117.”
`
`Petition at 37-38
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`52
`
`

`

`Haupt and Seshadri Render Claimed DSP Obvious
`
`Seshadri
`
`Seshadri (APPLE-1007) at FIG. 6, ¶¶ 0052, 0054
`(cited at Petition at 37-38, Reply at 21-22)
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`53
`
`

`

`Haupt and Seshadri Render Claimed DSP Obvious
`
`Dr. Cooperstock
`
`APPLE-1027, ¶ 63 (cited at Reply, 22)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`54
`
`

`

`Six Topics For Discussion
`
`1. Haupt and Seshadri Render Obvious Headphone’s Configured
`to “Initiate Transmission of a Request To a Remote, Network-
`connected Server” (Claim 1)
`2. Koss’s Purported Concerns of Firmware Upgrades Are
`Misplaced (Claims 33-37, 39, 42-43, and 45-46)
`3. Haupt Renders Obvious Transmitting Data About the
`Headphone Assembly” (Claims 7, 21, 30, and 45)
`4. Paulson Renders a “Push-To-Talk” Button Obvious (Claims 37
`and 39)
`5. Haupt and Seshadri Render the Claimed DSP Obvious (Claims
`52-53 and 56-57)
`6. Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness Are Absent – No Nexus
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`55
`
`

`

`Inappropriate Incorporation by Reference
`
`Petitioner Reply
`“Koss’s entire analysis on nexus is limited to a few paragraphs, none
`of which include evidence sufficient to establish a prima facie legally
`sufficient relationship between claim 1 and the AirPod Products. See
`POR, 32-34. In the first paragraph, Koss baselessly concludes that the
`“AirPods Products are the ‘headphone assembly’ of claim 1” of the ’934
`Patent while only identifying a subset of features recited in claim 1. Id.,
`32. In the subsequent paragraphs, Koss focuses on the necessity for
`firmware upgrades with reference to the AirPod Products. Id., 33. But each
`of Koss’s allegations are conclusory and insufficient to show the required
`nexus. Demaco Corp., 851 F.2d at 1392.”
`
`Reply at 23-24
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`56
`
`

`

`Coextensiveness and Presumption of Nexus
`
`Legal Principles
`
`“A ‘nexus’ between secondary
`considerations evidence and a claimed
`invention is required for the evidence
`to be given substantial weight in the
`obviousness analysis.”
`
`Petitioner Reply at 23
`(citing Demaco, 851 F.2d 1387, 1392 (Fed. Cir. 1988))
`
`“…the proponent of the secondary
`considerations evidence bears the
`initial burden of establishing nexus…”
`Petitioner Reply at 23
`(citing Brown, 229 F.3d 1120, 1130 (Fed. Cir. 2000))
`
`“Koss does not prove that AirPod
`Products are coextensive with claim
`1, and therefore holds the burden
`to prove nexus since it is not
`entitled to any presumption of
`nexus.”
`
`Petitioner Reply at 23
`(citing FOX Factory, 944 F.3d 1366, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`57
`
`

`

`Unclaimed Features in the Apple AirPods
`
`Petitioner Reply
`“Koss’s own secondary considerations evidence establishes that various
`AirPod Products include the following unclaimed features:
`(a) the first-generation AirPods had sensors that ‘detect when AirPods are in
`ear and can automatically play and pause music’ (KOSS-2030),
`(b) the second-generation AirPods had a proprietary system-in-package
`(SiP) chip (Apple H1 chip) that delivered ‘performance efficiencies, faster
`connect times, more talk time’ (KOSS-2031),
`(c) the AirPods Pro had adaptive noise cancelling feature that ‘uses two
`microphones’ on a single earphone ‘combined with advanced software to
`continuously adapt to each individual ear and headphone fit’ (KOSS-
`2032), and
`(d) all AirPod Products ‘feature the same great battery life…with up to five
`hours of listening time’ (KOSS-2032).
`
`Reply at 24-25; Fox Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC, 944 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`58
`
`

`

`Unclaimed Features in the Apple Airpods
`
`PO Sur-Reply
`“…other features identified by
`Apple, while unclaimed, are
`not for improving the ‘heart,’ or
`purpose, of the ’934 Patent.”
`FOX Factory, 944 F.3d at 1375
`(finding unclaimed feature
`significant because it went to
`the ‘heart’ or purpose of the
`challenged patent).
`
`Fox Decision
`“In this case, however, because
`there are one or more features
`not claimed by the '027 patent
`that materially impact the
`functionality of the X-Sync
`products, including the >80%
`gap filling feature claimed in the
`'250 patent, nexus may not be
`presumed.”
`
`Sur-Reply at !!
`
`Fox, 944 F.3d at 1376 (cited by Sur-Reply at !!)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`59
`
`

`

`No Nexus Between Claims and Apple Airpods
`
`Reply
`Commercial success evidence “is relevant in the obviousness context only if
`there is proof that the sales were a direct result of the unique characteristics of
`the claimed invention…” In re Huang, 100 F. 3d 135, 140 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
`Petitioner Reply at 25-26
`
`“For example, Koss acknowledges that ‘claim 1 requires that the
`server to which the headphone assembly initiates
`transmission of the request also transmits the firmware
`upgrades to the headphone assembly.’ POR, 23. Yet, Koss
`does not present a single piece of evidence to show that the
`same server to which it alleges the ‘Hey Siri’ request initiated
`by the user of the headphones is transmitted is also the same
`server that transmits the firmware upgrades. See POR, 32-34.
`That is, Koss focuses solely on the necessity of firmware upgrades
`without addressing the server that provides them—a required
`limitation of the claims. Id.”
`
`Petitioner Reply at 24
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`60
`
`

`

`Other Reference Slides
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6161
`
`

`

`Patent Owner Acknowledges No New Arguments
`
`Sur-Reply
`
`Sur-Reply at 3
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`62
`
`

`

`Haupt
`
`Petition
`“Haupt describes that its wireless headphone unit may take the form of a headset that
`includes a microphone. See, e.g., APPLE-1004, 16:2-8; APPLE-1003, ¶95. . . . “The
`headset can also contain another microphone for implementing an active noise
`compensation.” APPLE-1004, 22:25-26.”
`
`Petition at 26
`
`Haupt
`
`Haupt (APPLE-1004) at 22:35-361
`(cited at Petition at 26)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`63
`
`

`

`The ’025 Patent – Claim 1
`
`1. A system comprising:
`a mobile, digital audio player that stores digital audio content; and
`a headphone assembly, separate from and in wireless communication with the
`mobile digital audio player, wherein the headphone assembly comprises:
`first and second earphones, wherein each of the first and second
`earphones comprises an acoustic transducer;
`an antenna for receiving wireless signals from the mobile, digital audio
`player via one or more ad hoc wireless communication links;
`a wireless communication circuit connected to the at least one antenna,
`wherein the at least one wireless communication circuit is for receiving and
`transmitting wireless signals to and from the headphone assembly;
`a processor;
`a rechargeable battery for powering the headphone assembly; and
`a microphone for picking up utterances by a user of the headphone
`assembly; and
`a remote, network-connected server that is in wireless communication with the
`mobile, digital audio player;
`wherein the mobile, digital audio player is for transmitting digital audio content to
`the headphone assembly via the one or more ad hoc wireless

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