IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`In re Patent of: Michael J. Koss, et al.
`U.S. Patent No.:
`10,469,934 Attorney Docket No.: 50095-0018IP2
`Issue Date:
`November 5, 2019
`
`Appl. Serial No.: 16/375,879
`
`Filing Date:
`April 5, 2019
`
`Title:
`SYSTEM WITH WIRELESS EARPHONES
`
`
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF UNITED STATES PATENT
`NO. 10,469,934 PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§311–319, 37 C.F.R. §42
`
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`III. 
`
`B. 
`
`C. 
`
`I. 
`II. 
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 
`REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ............................ 1 
`A.  Grounds for Standing ............................................................................ 1 
`B. 
`Challenge Under 42.104(b) and Relief Requested ................................ 1 
`’934 PATENT .................................................................................................. 3 
`A.  Overview ............................................................................................... 3 
`B. 
`Claim Construction ............................................................................... 4 
`IV.  THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE ............................ 5 
`A. 
`[GROUND 1A] – Obviousness over Haupt and Seshadri .................... 5 
`1. 
`Overview of Haupt ...................................................................... 5 
`2. 
`Overview of Seshadri .................................................................. 7 
`3. 
`Haupt modified by Seshadri ........................................................ 8 
`[GROUND 1B] – Obviousness over Haupt, Seshadri, and Paulson ... 35 
`1. 
`Haupt and Seshadri Modified By Paulson ................................ 35 
`[GROUND 1C] – Obviousness over Haupt, Seshadri, and Rao ......... 42 
`1. 
`Haupt and Seshadri in View of Rao .......................................... 42 
`[GROUND 1D] – Obviousness over Haupt, Seshadri, Rao, and
`Paulson ................................................................................................ 51 
`[GROUND 1E] – Obviousness over Haupt, Seshadri, Rao, and
`Rosener ................................................................................................ 51 
`1. 
`Overview of Rosener ................................................................ 51 
`2. 
`Haupt, Seshadri, and Rao in view of Rosener .......................... 51 
`
`D. 
`
`E. 
`
`i
`
`

`

`F. 
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`[GROUND 1F] – Obvioussness over Haupt, Seshadri, Rao, Rosener,
`and Paulson .......................................................................................... 67 
`V.  DISCRETION UNDER §314(a) SHOULD NOT PRECLUDE
`INSTITUTION .............................................................................................. 68 
`A. 
`The General Plastic Factors Favor Institution .................................... 68 
`B. 
`The Fintiv Factors Favor Institution ................................................... 70 
`VI.  CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 75 
`VII.  MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R § 42.8(a)(1) ......................... 76 
`A. 
`Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) .......................... 76 
`B. 
`Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ................................... 76 
`C. 
`Lead And Back-Up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ............... 77 
`D. 
`Service Information ............................................................................. 77 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`
`
`EXHIBITS
`
`APPLE-1001
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934 to Koss, et al. (“the ’934 patent”)
`
`APPLE-1002
`
`Excerpts from the Prosecution History of the ’934 patent (“the
`Prosecution History”)
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`Declaration of Jeremy R. Cooperstock
`
`APPLE-1004
`
`Certified English-language translation of WIPO PCT App. Pub.
`No. WO 2006/042749 to Haupt et al. (“Haupt”)
`
`APPLE-1005
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,401,219 to Hankey et al. (“Hankey”)
`
`APPLE-1006
`
`[RESERVED]
`
`APPLE-1007
`
`U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2006/0166716 to Seshadri et al.
`(“Seshadri”)
`
`APPLE-1008
`
`U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2008/0076489 to Rosener et al.
`(“Rosener”)
`
`APPLE-1009
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,745 to Rao et al. (“Rao”)
`
`APPLE-1010
`
`U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2006/0026304 to Price et al. (“Price”)
`
`APPLE-1011
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,551,940 to Paulson et al. (“Paulson”)
`
`APPLE-1012
`
`U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2008/0052698 to Olson et al. (“Olson”)
`
`APPLE-1013
`
`U.S. Pat. App. No. 2005/0037818 to Seshadri et al. (“Seshadri-
`818”)
`
`APPLE-1014
`
`Plaintiff KOSS Corporations’ Preliminary Infringement
`Contentions, KOSS Corporation v. Apple Inc., 6:20-cv-00665
`(WDTX)
`
`iii
`
`

`

`APPLE-1015
`
`APPLE-1016
`
`APPLE-1017
`
`APPLE-1018
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`Example Order Governing Proceedings - Patent Case
`
`Agreed [Proposed] Scheduling Order, KOSS Corporation v.
`Apple Inc., 6:20-cv-00665 (WDTX)
`
`Katie Buehler, “Texas Patent Trials Halted Due to COVID-19
`Spike,” Law360, available at
`https://www.law360.com/ip/articles/1330855/texas-patent-
`trials-halted-due-to-covid-19-spike.
`
`Scott McKeown, District Court Trial Dates Tend to Slip After
`PTAB Discretionary Denials, available at
`https://www.patentspostgrant.com/district-court-trial-dates-
`tend-to-slip-afterptab-discretionary-denials/ (Jul. 24, 2020)
`
`APPLE-1019
`
`Amended Agreed Scheduling Order, Fintiv, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.,
`Civil Action No. A-19-CV-1238 (WDTX)
`
`APPLE-1020
`
`Letter from Michael Pieja to Darlene F. Ghavimi re Conditional
`Stipulation dated February 26, 2021
`
`APPLE-1021
`
`Constantine A. Balanis, Antenna Theory: A Review, 80
`Proceedings of the IEEE 7 (1992)
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`I.
`INTRODUCTION
`Apple Inc. (“Petitioner” or “Apple”) petitions for inter partes review
`
`(“IPR”) under 35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319 and 37 C.F.R. § 42 of claims 1-6, 8, 10-20,
`
`22-29, 31-36, 38-42, 44, 58-62 (“Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No.
`
`10,469,934 (“’934 patent”).
`
`II. REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`A. Grounds for Standing
`Apple certifies that the ’934 patent is available for IPR. This petition is
`
`being filed within one year of service of a complaint against Apple. Apple is not
`
`barred or estopped from requesting this review.
`
`B. Challenge Under 42.104(b) and Relief Requested
`Apple requests an IPR on the grounds below. Additional explanation and
`
`support for each ground is set forth in the expert declaration of Dr. Cooperstock,
`
`referenced throughout this petition. See generally APPLE-1003.
`
`Ground
`
`’934 Patent Claims
`
`Basis for Rejection
`
`Ground 1A
`Ground 1B
`
`58, 59
`60, 61
`
`Ground 1C
`
`1, 2, 8, 32, 62
`
`Ground 1D
`
`3-6
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 over Haupt, Seshadri
`35 U.S.C. § 103 over Haupt, Seshadri,
`Paulson
`35 U.S.C. § 103 over Haupt, Seshadri,
`Rao
`35 U.S.C. § 103 over Haupt, Seshadri,
`Rao, Paulson
`
`1
`
`

`

`Ground
`
`’934 Patent Claims
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`Basis for Rejection
`
`Ground 1E
`
`Ground 1F
`
`10, 13-15, 18, 22-24,
`27, 31, 33-36, 38, 41,
`42, 44
`11, 12, 16, 17, 19, 20,
`25, 26, 28, 29, 39, 40
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 over Haupt, Seshadri,
`Rao, Rosener
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 over Haupt, Seshadri,
`Rao, Rosener, Paulson
`
`
`
`The ’934 patent claims priority to a number of U.S. patent applications, the
`
`earliest of which was filed on April 7, 2008 (i.e., the “Critical Date”). See APPLE-
`
`1001, 1:3-30. Petitioner does not concede that the Challenged Claims are entitled
`
`to the claimed priority but applies prior art before the alleged date:
`
`Reference
`
`Prior Art Date
`
`Basis
`
`Haupt
`
`Seshadri
`
`Paulson
`
`Rao
`
`Rosener
`
`04/27/2006
`
`07/27/2006
`
`01/08/2004
`
`03/10/2004
`
`08/07/2006
`
`§102(b)
`
`§102(b)
`
`§102(e)
`
`§102(e)
`
`§102(e)
`
`
`The prior art combinations and obviousness rationales advanced in this
`
`Petition were not before the Office during examination. While it appears the
`
`Office may have evaluated Rosener during examination, Rosener is only relied
`
`upon herein with respect to certain dependent claim features. All grounds are
`
`based primarily on Haupt and Seshadri, which were never presented to the Office.
`2
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`III.
`
`’934 PATENT
`A. Overview
`The ’934 patent relates to wireless earphones that receive audio data over a
`
`network. APPLE-1001, 1:65-2:16. Figure 3 (below) shows components of
`
`earphone 10, including transceiver circuit 100 and peripheral components, such as
`
`power source 102, microphone 104, one or more acoustic transducers 106, and
`
`antenna 108. Id., 6:26-51; APPLE-1003, ¶18.
`
`The wireless headphones of the ’934 patent allow their wearer to listen to
`
`audio generated from data representing digital audio content such as music or
`
`speech. The headphones may include a user control that, when activated, causes
`
`the earphone to transmit a request via a wireless network to a remote server.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`APPLE-1001, 14:51-57.
`
`B. Claim Construction
`The USPTO applies the Phillips standard, under which claim terms are
`
`given their ordinary and customary meaning to a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`at the Critical Date (“POSITA”)1 in the context of the patent’s disclosure. Thorner
`
`v. Sony Comput. Entm’t Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365–66 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
`
`“[C]laim terms need only be construed to the extent necessary to resolve the
`
`controversy,” and none require construction here. Wellman, Inc. v. Eastman Chem.
`
`Co., 642 F.3d 1355, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2011). Petitioner reserves the right to respond
`
`to any constructions that may later be offered by Patent Owner or adopted by the
`
`Board. Petitioner is not waiving any arguments under 35 U.S.C. §1122 or claim-
`
`construction arguments that may be raised in litigation.
`
`
`1 See APPLE-1003, ¶¶33-34 (defining a POSITA).
`
`2 In co-pending litigation Apple has asserted that certain limitations are indefinite
`
`under §112. The grounds of this petition apply even in light of these argu-
`
`ments. Apple’s §112 arguments assert that a POSITA would be unable to reasona-
`
`bly ascertain the breadth of certain limitations. Yet the grounds herein apply to the
`
`most restrictive interpretation of the claims, permitting evaluation of the grounds
`
`despite Apple’s indefiniteness arguments.
`
`4
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`IV. THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE
`A.
`[GROUND 1A] – Obviousness over Haupt and Seshadri
`1. Overview of Haupt
`Haupt describes a “headphone unit” that “wirelessly receiv[es] first signals
`
`which contain audio signals.” APPLE-1004, Abstract. More specifically, Haupt
`
`describes a wireless headphone unit that has “at least one electroacoustic
`
`transducer and a transmitter/receiver unit for wireless reception of first signals,
`
`which contain audio signals that can be played back on the electroacoustic
`
`transducer ….” Id., 3:27-29.
`
`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.
`
`Haupt describes “a transmission system” that includes various servers that
`
`communicate information wirelessly using access points as well as via the Internet.
`
`APPLE-1004, 6:16-25. Each access point and the headphone unit includes a
`
`wireless local area network (“WLAN”) interface that facilitates wireless
`
`communication between devices. See APPLE-1004, 18:30-19:21. An example
`
`transmission system is shown in Figure 1 of Haupt (below).
`
`5
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`APPLE-1004, Figure 1 Annotated
`
`
`
`According to Haupt’s first embodiment (shown in FIG. 2), a WLAN-enabled
`
`
`
`headphone unit communicates with a server to receive music or other audio via the
`
`Internet. See APPLE-1004, 6:16-8:6; APPLE-1003, ¶38. The headphone unit’s
`
`WLAN interface connects wirelessly with a remote server (e.g., a public or private
`
`server) via a wireless access point. See APPLE-1004, 7:10-28, 18:30-19:21;
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶38. Music and other audio content is streamed to (i.e., directly to)
`
`the headphone unit from an Internet server via the wireless access point. See
`
`APPLE-1004, 7:30-8:6, 10:11-13, 12:19-21, 19:10-21; APPLE-1003, ¶38.
`
`Haupt’s wireless headphone unit includes a “transmitter/receiver unit EE”
`
`that enables wireless communication between the headphone unit and other
`
`network device. See APPLE-1004, 20:8-22. Haupt describes that
`
`6
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`transmitter/receiver unit EE can communicate using both WLAN and Bluetooth.
`
`APPLE-1004, 20:14-16, 20:28-30; APPLE-1003, ¶39.
`
`2. Overview of Seshadri
`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).
`
`Specifically, as shown in Figure 3 (below), Seshadri discloses distinct
`
`sources of digital audio 30-37, each including a WLAN RF interface 39 and
`
`Bluetooth-based ad hoc communication link 38. See APPLE-1007, ¶¶0040-0043.
`
`Seshadri teaches that its “wireless headset 10 may be wirelessly coupled with any
`
`one of the devices 30-37” through its WLAN or “piconet” (e.g., Bluetooth)
`
`interfaces 38/39. APPLE-1007, ¶¶0040-0042; APPLE-1003, ¶41. “Thus, for
`
`example, if headset 10 and cellular telephone 36 were unable to establish a piconet
`
`connection via piconet RF interfaces 38 due to distance between the devices[,
`
`t]hese devices would be able to establish a wireless communication link via the
`
`WLAN RF interfaces 39 and access point 21.” Id.
`
`7
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`APPLE-1007, Figure 3 (Annotated)
`
`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. Thus, Seshadri improves on the “[s]imple headsets [that] cannot
`
`service multiple audio sources.” APPLE-1007, ¶0008.
`
`3. Haupt modified by Seshadri
`A POSITA would have found it obvious to modify Haupt based on Seshadri
`
`such that Haupt’s WLAN headphones include the capability to not only
`
`8
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`communicate with servers via WLAN (as taught by Haupt), but to also
`
`communicate with local audio sources via both WLAN and ad-hoc networks (as
`
`taught by Seshadri). APPLE-1003, ¶43.
`
`Haupt and Seshadri are analogous art. Both describe technologies related to
`
`wireless headsets/headphones. See APPLE-1004, 1:10-11; APPLE-1007, ¶0003;
`
`APPLE-1011, 1:33-45. Both wireless headsets/headphones are configured to
`
`receive and reproduce both audio streams and voice communications (e.g., voice
`
`over IP). See APPLE-1004, 16:2-8, 19:10-21; APPLE-1007, ¶¶0024, 0047, 0050;
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶44. Both wireless headsets/headphones are configured with
`
`WLAN and ad-hoc (e.g., Bluetooth) interfaces, such that the headphone/headset is
`
`capable of communicating via either protocol. See APPLE-1004, 17:22-29, 22:28-
`
`23:2; APPLE-1007, ¶0042; APPLE-1003, ¶44. And the wireless
`
`headsets/headphones in both Haupt and Seshadri are configured to include a
`
`microphone. See APPLE-1004, 16:2-8, 22:11-26; APPLE-1007, ¶0024; APPLE-
`
`1003, ¶45.
`
`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; APPLE-1007
`
`9
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`¶¶0024, 0040-0042, 0047, 0067-0068; APPLE-1003, ¶¶47-48.
`
`For example, Seshadri recognizes the benefits of coupling wireless
`
`headphones to all of a user’s devices that might store audio for or provide audio to
`
`the user. See APPLE-1007, ¶¶0007-0009; APPLE-1003, ¶46. As described above,
`
`Seshadri teaches wireless headsets/headphones configured to allow a user to
`
`connect to these devices and select between multiple available audio streams. See
`
`APPLE-1007, ¶¶0024, 0040-0042, 0047, 0067-0068; APPLE-1003, ¶46.
`
`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. This combination comports with Haupt, which
`
`recognize that there may be times “when the headphones are no longer within the
`
`transmission range of a WLAN access point.” APPLE-1004, 9:22-23; see also
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶47.
`
`Thus, a POSITA would have been motivated to modify Haupt’s WLAN
`
`10
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`wireless headphones to include the capability of using both WLAN and ad-hoc
`
`networks (e.g., Bluetooth) to communicate with local devices to allow the
`
`headphones to communicate with these devices irrespective of whether a WLAN
`
`access point is available. APPLE-1003, ¶48. As recognized by Seshadri, “[d]ual
`
`communication pathways allow communications to be switched between
`
`pathways, dependent on factors such as audio quality, signal strength, and
`
`available bandwidth.” APPLE-1007, ¶0042. A POSITA would have recognized
`
`the benefits (e.g., audio quality, signal strength, and available bandwidth) of
`
`enabling Haupt’s WLAN wireless headphones to communicate with local devices
`
`via either of these communication pathways. Further, this modification of Haupt’s
`
`WLAN wireless headphones would allow the headphones to conserve battery
`
`power. APPLE-1007, ¶0054.
`
`
`
`Limitation 58[pre]: “A headphone assembly comprising:”
`
`The ’934 patent uses “headphone assembly” to refer to a broader category of
`
`headphone devices that generate audio. APPLE-1001, FIGS. 1c, 9, 4:1-7; APPLE-
`
`1003, ¶68. One example of Haupt’s wireless headphones is illustrated in FIG. 3,
`
`which is provided below in comparison to an example embodiment of the claimed
`
`headphone assembly of the ’934 patent:
`
`11
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`APPLE-1004, Figure 2
`
`
`
`APPLE-1001, Figure 1C
`
`
`
`
`
`Limitation 58[a]: “first and second earphones, wherein each of the first and
`
`second earphones comprises an acoustic transducer; and”
`
`Haupt teaches a wireless headphone assembly that includes the claimed
`
`“first and second earphones,” each including “an acoustic transducer.” APPLE-
`
`1003, ¶69.3
`
`Haupt describes a wireless headphone unit that includes “at least one
`
`electroacoustic transducer and a transmitter/receiver unit for wireless reception of
`
`first signals, which contain audio signals that can be played back on the
`
`electroacoustic transducer.” APPLE-1004, Abstract 3:27-29.4 In discussing Figure
`
`
`3 In the context of wireless headphones, a POSITA would have understood a trans-
`
`ducer as a device that converts one form of energy to another form—e.g., a speaker
`
`that converts electrical signals into sound. Id.
`
`4 Emphasis added throughout, unless otherwise noted.
`12
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`7, Haupt also describes components in its “block diagram for the wireless
`
`headphones” as also including “at least one electroacoustic transducer W.” Id.,
`
`20:8-12.
`
`A POSITA would have recognized that the multiple recitations in Haupt of
`
`“at least one electroacoustic transducer” disclose embodiments in which the
`
`wireless headphone unit includes multiple electroacoustic transducers. APPLE-
`
`1003, ¶71. That is, a POSITA would have understood that Haupt discloses both
`
`(1) monaural devices with a single speaker, or transducer, to provide audio to one
`
`ear and (2) binaural devices in which the headphone/headset unit includes two
`
`speakers, or transducers, one for each ear. Id. Indeed, the example headphones
`
`and headsets illustrated in FIGS. 2 and 5 all include two earphones, and a POSITA
`
`would have understood that each of these earphones would have included an
`
`electroacoustic transducer. See APPLE-1004, FIGS. 2, 5, 19:10-21 (referring to
`
`“headphones K” with the plural, indicating multiple transducers); APPLE-1003,
`
`¶71.
`
`To the extent that Patent Owner improperly argues that Haupt does not
`
`disclose that each earphone in its headphone unit included a transducer, that would
`
`have been obvious to a POSITA, in light of Haupt’s multiple descriptions of “at
`
`least one electroacoustic transducer W” being present in a wireless headphone unit
`
`that includes left and right earphones, and the knowledge of a POSITA that
`
`13
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`headphones in that form required two transducers, one for each ear. APPLE-1003,
`
`¶72. Indeed, Seshadri teaches “[w]ireless headphone(s)…including either one or
`
`both of earpieces 12A and 12B,” where each earpiece includes a speaker module
`
`47 that includes a speaker 66 (i.e., an electroacoustic transducer). See APPLE-
`
`1007, ¶¶0046-0047, 0051-0052.
`
`A POSITA would have understood that integrating an acoustic transducer in
`
`each of the left and right headphones would have allowed them to output audio
`
`respectively to the user’s left and right ears, and would have been motivated to do
`
`so to accommodate stereo audio playback. APPLE-1003, ¶73.
`
`
`
`Limitation 58[b]: “an antenna for receiving wireless signals from a mobile,
`
`digital audio player via one or more ad hoc wireless communication links,
`
`wherein the mobile, digital audio player is a first digital audio source;”
`
`Haupt’s WLAN headphones include “a transmitter-receiver unit (EE) for
`
`wirelessly receiving first signals containing audio signals” where the “transmitter-
`
`receiver unit (EE) is configured for wirelessly emitting the identification network
`
`signal of the wireless headphones.” APPLE-1004, Abstract. More specifically,
`
`Haupt describes that the “headphones have a transmitter/receiver unit EE for
`
`wireless transmission and reception” of signal communications and a “buffer
`
`P…connected to the transmitter/receiver unit EE” “for temporary storage of the
`
`14
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`signals received by the transmitter/receiver unit EE.” Id., 20:8-17.
`
`As discussed in Section IV.A.1, supra, Haupt describes that the transmitter-
`
`receiver unit (EE) of its headphones is configured to communicate using
`
`Bluetooth, which is an ad hoc wireless protocol. APPLE-1004, 20:8-30; APPLE-
`
`1003, ¶75. Further, as described Section IV.A.3, supra, the combination of Haupt
`
`and Seshadri teaches headphones that could connect with various local devices via
`
`either WLAN or an ad-hoc network. APPLE-1003, ¶75. In this combination, the
`
`wireless headphones would have utilized transmitter-receiver unit (EE) to
`
`communicate with mobile, digital audio players (e.g., PDA 30 or cellphone 36
`
`taught by Seshadri) via either the WLAN or ad-hoc interfaces of the transmitter-
`
`receiver unit (EE). Id.
`
`The following annotation of Seshadri’s Figure 3 illustrates Seshadri’s
`
`cellphone 36 as a “first digital audio source” and Seshadri’s PDA 30 as “a second
`
`digital audio source that is different from the first digital audio source.” APPLE-
`
`1003, ¶76.
`
`15
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`While Haupt does not use the word “antenna,” a POSITA would have
`
`recognized that Figure 7’s block diagram illustrates the transmitter-receiver unit
`
`(EE) as including an antenna. Id., ¶77.
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`
`
`Further, a POSITA would have understood that, in order to “wirelessly
`
`transmit[] and receiv[e],” Haupt’s transmitter-receiver unit (EE) would have
`
`included one or more antennas. APPLE-1003, ¶78. At a minimum, a POSITA
`
`would have found the use of an antenna obvious: Seshadri describes a receiver
`
`module 41 that is similar to Haupt’s transmitter-receiver unit (EE), and teaches,
`
`e.g., that “receiver module 41 receives inbound RF signal 68 from base unit 16 via
`
`antenna 46.” APPLE-1007, ¶0053. A POSITA would have understood that
`
`integration of an antenna in the wireless headphone unit would have been
`
`advantageous to effectively and reliably transmit or receive wireless signals.
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶78 (citing APPLE-1021, 1).
`
`17
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`Additionally, Haupt discloses the “wireless headphones substantially contain
`
`all of the necessary hardware elements that are needed for both the downloading as
`
`well as playback of audio files downloaded accordingly from the internet,” which
`
`would have obviously included an antenna. APPLE-1004, 9:23-26; APPLE-1003,
`
`¶79.
`
`
`
`Limitation 58[c]: “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;”
`
`As discussed with reference to limitation 58[b], Haupt describes wireless
`
`headphones that include “a transmitter-receiver unit (EE) for wirelessly receiving
`
`first signals containing audio signals,” in which the “transmitter-receiver unit (EE)
`
`is configured for wirelessly emitting the identification network signal of the
`
`wireless headphones.” APPLE-1004, Abstract. As shown in Haupt’s Figure 7
`
`(below), Haupt’s wireless headphone unit includes a circuit, i.e., the
`
`transmitting/receiving unit EE, that is a wireless communication circuit.
`
`18
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`APPLE-1004, Figure 7 (Annotated)
`
`
`
`In one embodiment, Haupt describes that “transmitter/receiver unit EE forms
`
`a WLAN interface according to IEEE 802.11 X, for example,” and the
`
`“headphones can communicate wirelessly with a network by means of this WLAN
`
`interface.” Id., 20:14-16; see also id., 19:10-21. Thus, the transmitter/receiver EE
`
`is a “wireless communication circuit,” as recited in 58[c].
`
`
`
`Limitation 58[d]: “a processor;”
`
`As shown in Haupt’s Figure 7 (reproduced below), Haupt’s wireless
`
`headphones include a central control unit.
`
`19
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`
`APPLE-1004, Annotated Figure 7
`
`
`
`A POSITA would have understood that Haupt’s central control unit would
`
`generally take the form of a microcontroller or a general-purpose microprocessor,
`
`as possible design choices, either of which is a “processor.” APPLE-1003, ¶83.
`
`Haupt teaches “[t]he audio decoder AD decodes the signals buffered by the buffer
`
`P, and forwards the decoded signals to the central control unit SE.” APPLE-1004,
`
`20:17-19. Haupt further describes “[t]he signals received by the
`
`transmitter/receiver unit EE are decoded by the audio decoder AD and output to the
`
`audio amplifier AV and the transducer W via the control unit.” Id., 20:29-31.
`
`Haupt describes that buffered signals representing auxiliary information are
`
`decoded by the auxiliary information unit and “sent to the control unit SE.” Id.,
`
`20:19-22. In Haupt, the control unit SE, which represents a known processor
`
`component of related headphone devices, “is also connected to a display AE, and
`20
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`sends auxiliary information, or information in addition to the transmitted audio
`
`data, to the display AE so that this information can be displayed.” Id., 21:2-4;
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶84. A POSITA would have found it obvious from these teachings
`
`that Haupt’s central control unit was a processor, as this was one of the well-known
`
`hardware components capable of performing functionalities such as receiving
`
`audio data for playback and controlling a display. See, e.g., APPLE-1007, ¶0054;
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶84.
`
`Moreover, Haupt’s “wireless headphones substantially contain all of the
`
`necessary hardware elements that are needed for both the downloading as well as
`
`playback of audio files downloaded accordingly from the internet,” which would
`
`have obviously included a processor or CPU. APPLE-1004, 9:23-26; APPLE-
`
`1003, ¶85.
`
`
`
`Limitation 58[e]: “a rechargeable battery for powering the headphone
`
`assembly;”
`
`While “a rechargeable battery for powering the headphone” is not explicitly
`
`taught in Haupt, a POSITA would have recognized that, before the Critical Date, it
`
`was well known to include a rechargeable battery in wireless headphones to
`
`provide the power needed to operate the devices. APPLE-1003, ¶86. Indeed, for
`
`headphones to be truly “wireless,” a POSITA would have understood that they
`
`21
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`must include a portable power source, which is most commonly a rechargeable
`
`battery. Id.
`
`Further, Seshadri teaches that its wireless headphones may be powered by a
`
`rechargeable battery: “earpiece 156 and microphone 154 [may] be recharged from
`
`host device 152.” APPLE-1007, ¶0075, ¶0039. Seshadri also teaches that, in one
`
`embodiment, its “earpiece/microphone will be recharged from the cell phone
`
`battery.” Id. Thus, the combination of Haupt and Seshadri discloses the claimed
`
`rechargeable battery. APPLE-1003, ¶87.
`
`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. A
`
`POSITA would have recognized that having a rechargeable battery as a power
`
`source would improve the usability of Haupt’s headphones by not requiring the
`
`user to regularly replace a non-rechargeable battery when the power is drained.
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶88.
`
`
`
`Limitation 58[f]: “a microphone for picking up utterances by a user of the
`
`headphone assembly;”
`
`22
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0018IP2
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,934
`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,
`
`¶89. For example, describing the use of its headphones in a conference system,
`
`Haupt describes that when “a headset i