Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________
`LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`LITL LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`__________
`
`IPR Case No. IPR2021-00786
`U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`__________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §311 ET SEQ. AND 37 C.F.R. §42.100 ET SEQ.
`(CLAIMS 1-20 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,880,715)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`
`DESCRIPTION
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,880,715 ("the '715 Patent")
`
`Prosecution History of the '715 Patent
`
`JP 1994-242856 to Shimura
`
`Certified English translation of JP 1994-242856 ("Shimura")
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2005/0062715 to Tsuji et al. ("Tsuji")
`
`Windows XP Home Edition: The Missing Manual (2nd Edition)
`("Pogue")
`
`Declaration of Jean Ward
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Jean Ward
`
`Claim Listing
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2008/0059888 to Dunko ("Dunko")
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0034042 to Hisano et al. ("Hisano")
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2005/0122318 to Tonouchi et al. ("Tonouchi")
`
`JP 2002-258982 to Kiyoyuki
`
`Certified English translation of JP 2002-258982 ("Kiyoyuki")
`
`JP 1996-179851 to Shigeo
`
`Certified English translation of JP 1996-179851 ("Shigeo")
`
`DE 1031455A1 to Schweizer
`
`Certified English translation of DE 1031455A1 ("Schweizer")
`
`EXHIBIT
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`1011
`1012
`1013
`1014
`1015
`1016
`1017
`1018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`EXHIBIT
`1019
`
`DESCRIPTION
`Clifford & Gomez, Measuring Tilt with Low-g Accelerometers
`(2005) ("Freescale")
`
`1020
`1021
`1022
`1023
`1024
`1025
`1026
`1027
`1028
`1029
`1030
`1031
`1032
`1033
`1034
`1035
`
`1036
`1037
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,493,216 to Lin ("Lin")
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,151,105 to Park et al. ("Park")
`
`Ride, MIT's $100 Laptop (2005) ("MIT")
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,882,335 to Saarinen ("Saarinen")
`
`Panasonic CF-19 Operating Instructions
`
`Panasonic CF-T8 Operating Instructions
`
`Hardy, Lenovo ThinkPad X61 Tablet PC Review (2007)
`
`Lenovo ThinkPad X61 Tablet Service and Troubleshooting Guide
`
`Dell Latitude XT Tablet
`
`Motion Computing M1400 Tablet PC User Guide
`
`Motion Computing M1400 Tablet PC Addendum
`
`HP Compaq Tablet PC TC1100 QuickSpecs
`
`Sony Vaio VGN-UX280P (UX Series MicroPC) Spec Sheet
`
`Declaration of Michael J. Hopkins
`
`Declaration of Liliana Nunez
`
`WaybackMachine Archive of https://www.windows-help-
`central.com/show-desktop-icon-in-xp-missing.html
`
`Excerpts of Windows XP Hacks & Mods: For Dummies
`
`Excerpts of Windows XP in a Nutshell (2nd Edition)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`EXHIBIT
`1038
`
`DESCRIPTION
`U.S. Pat. No. 5,559,670 (“Flint”)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`V.
`
`Page
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`I.
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8 .................................... 2
`A.
`Real Parties-In-Interest (§42.8 (b)(1)) ................................................... 2
`B.
`Related Matters (§42.8 (b)(2)) .............................................................. 2
`C.
`Lead and Backup Counsel (§42.8 (b)(3)) .............................................. 2
`D.
`Service Information (§42.8 (b)(4)) ........................................................ 2
`FEE FOR IPR (37 C.F.R. §42.15(a) and §42.103) ......................................... 3
`III.
`IV. REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.104 ............................. 3
`A. Grounds for Standing (§42.104(a)) ....................................................... 3
`B.
`Identification of Challenged Claims (§42.104(b)(1)) ........................... 3
`C.
`Grounds of Challenge (§42.104(b)(2)) ................................................. 3
`PROPOSED GROUNDS SHOULD NOT BE DENIED
`INSTITUTION ON ANY DISCRETIONARY GROUND ............................ 4
`A.
`The Three References Were Not "Presented to the Office" .................. 4
`B.
`Even If a Reference Was "Presented to the Office," the Office
`Made a Material Error by Overlooking Its Impact................................ 6
`VI. RELEVANT INFORMATION CONCERNING THE '715 PATENT ........... 7
`A. Overview of the '715 Patent .................................................................. 7
`B.
`Prosecution History of the '715 Patent ................................................ 13
`C.
`Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ....................................................... 14
`D.
`Claim Listing ....................................................................................... 14
`VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION—37 C.F.R. §42.104 (b)(3) ..............................15
`A.
`"execution component" ....................................................................... 15
`1.
`[1e], [17d], and [20e] ................................................................ 16
`2.
`[1f], [17e], [20f] ........................................................................ 19
`3.
`[8] .............................................................................................. 22
`4.
`[13] ............................................................................................ 23
`-iv-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`B.
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`[16], [17f], and [17g] ................................................................ 25
`5.
`"content mode" in [2] and [3] .............................................................. 27
`B.
`VIII. PRECISE REASONS FOR RELIEF REQUESTED ....................................29
`A.
`Summary of the Prior Art Applied in This Petition ............................ 29
`1.
`Overview of Shimura ................................................................ 29
`2.
`Overview of Tsuji ..................................................................... 34
`3.
`Overview of Pogue.................................................................... 37
`Ground 1: Shimura in view of Tsuji renders Claims 1 and 20
`obvious. ............................................................................................... 42
`1.
`Combination of Shimura and Tsuji (hereafter "Shimura-
`Tsuji combination") .................................................................. 42
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 51
`2.
`Claim 20 .................................................................................... 60
`3.
`Ground 2: Shimura in view of Tsuji and Pogue renders Claims
`2-19 obvious. ....................................................................................... 62
`1.
`Combination of Shimura, Tsuji, and Pogue (hereafter
`"Shimura-Tsuji-Pogue combination") ...................................... 62
`Claim 2 ...................................................................................... 63
`2.
`Claim 3 ...................................................................................... 68
`3.
`Claim 4 ...................................................................................... 68
`4.
`Claim 5 ...................................................................................... 70
`5.
`Claim 6 ...................................................................................... 71
`6.
`Claim 7 ...................................................................................... 75
`7.
`Claim 8 ...................................................................................... 76
`8.
`Claim 9 ...................................................................................... 81
`9.
`10. Claim 10 .................................................................................... 81
`11. Claim 11 .................................................................................... 85
`12. Claim 12 .................................................................................... 88
`13. Claim 13 .................................................................................... 92
`14. Claim 14 .................................................................................... 95
`-v-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`C.
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`15. Claim 15 .................................................................................... 95
`16. Claim 16 .................................................................................... 98
`17. Claim 17 .................................................................................... 99
`18. Claim 18 .................................................................................. 102
`19. Claim 19 .................................................................................. 102
`
`-vi-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Page(s)
`
`Cases
`Amazon.com, Inc. v. VB Assets, LLC
`IPR2020-01346, slip op. (P.T.A.B. Feb. 4, 2021) ............................................ 4, 7
`Cellco P’ship v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd.
`IPR2020-01117, slip op. (PTAB Feb. 3, 2021) ................................................ 6, 7
`CIM Maintenance Inc. v. P&RO Solutions Group, Inc.
`IPR2017-00516, slip op. (PTAB June 22, 2017) ................................................ 38
`FLIR Sys., Inc. v. Leak Surveys, Inc.
`IPR2014-00411, slip op. (PTAB Sept. 5, 2014) ................................................. 37
`LiTL LLC v. Lenovo (United States) Inc. and Lenovo (Beijing) Limited
`Case No. 1:20-cv-00689 (D. Del.) ........................................................................ 2
`Oticon Medical AB v. Cochlear Limited
`IPR2019-00975, slip op. (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019) .............................................. 6
`Phillips v. AWH Corp.
`415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) .......................................................................... 15
`Shenzhen Zhiyi Tech. Co. Ltd. v. iRobot Corp.
`IPR2017-02137, slip op. (P.T.A.B. Apr. 2, 2018) ................................................ 5
`Solvay USA Inc. v. WorldSource Enterprises
`LLC, PGR2019-00046, slip op. (P.T.A.B. Aug. 13, 2019) .................................. 5
`Williamson v. Citrix Online LLC
`792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) .......................................................................... 15
`Workspot, Inc. v. Citrix Systems, Inc.
`IPR2019-01002, slip op. (PTAB Nov. 20, 2019) ...............................................38
`
`Zip Top, LLC v. Stasher, Inc.
`IPR2018-01216, slip op. (P.T.A.B. Jan. 17, 2019) ............................................... 5
`
`-vii-
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. §102(a) ........................................................................................ 29, 34, 37
`35 U.S.C. §102(b) ........................................................................................ 29, 34, 37
`35 U.S.C. §102(e) .................................................................................................... 34
`35 U.S.C. §112, ¶6 ................................................................................................... 15
`35 U.S.C. §325(d) .............................................................................................. 4, 5, 7
`Other Authorities
`37 C.F.R. §42.8 .......................................................................................................... 2
`37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(1) ................................................................................................. 2
`37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(2) ................................................................................................. 2
`37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(3) ................................................................................................. 2
`37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(4) ................................................................................................. 2
`37 C.F.R. §42.15(a) .................................................................................................... 3
`37 C.F.R. §42.100 .................................................................................................... 15
`37 C.F.R. §42.103 ...................................................................................................... 3
`37 C.F.R. §42.104 ...................................................................................................... 3
`37 C.F.R. §42.104(a) .................................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. §42.104(b)(1) ............................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. §42.104(b)(2) ............................................................................................. 3
`37 C.F.R. §42.104(b)(3) ........................................................................................... 15
`83 Fed. Reg. No. 197, 51340 (Oct. 11, 2018) .......................................................... 15
`M.P.E.P. §2181.I.A .................................................................................................. 15
`
`-viii-
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`The 20 challenged claims are directed to a computer with multiple computer
`
`I.
`
`system configurations, related features, and a graphical user interface with various
`
`views of computer content, all of which were well-known before the priority date.
`
`This computer is configurable between these configurations, including a laptop
`
`mode where the keyboard is accessible to the user and easel and frame modes
`
`where it is not. But these computer system configurations, and computers
`
`configurable to transition between them, were well-known before the priority date.
`
`Related claimed features include detection of the computer system configuration
`
`based on sensor(s), corresponding changes in the view of computer content, and
`
`well-known standard computer components, such as a CPU and keyboard. Further
`
`related claimed features include variations in the displayed views of computer
`
`content, including a home view, channel view, screen saver, and ways in which to
`
`navigate and use the displayed content. But likewise, these and other claimed
`
`features were well-known before the priority date.
`
`Three prior art references—Shimura, Tsuji, and Pogue—in various
`
`combinations render obvious all 20 challenged claims. This petition requests that
`
`the Board find unpatentable and cancel all challenged claims.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8
`A. Real Parties-In-Interest (§42.8 (b)(1))
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1), Petitioner Lenovo (United States) Inc. is
`
`a real party-in-interest. Petitioner is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of
`
`Lenovo Group Limited. Because Lenovo (Beijing) Limited has been named as a
`
`defendant in the "related matter" identified pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) (i.e.,
`
`LiTL LLC v. Lenovo (United States) Inc. and Lenovo (Beijing) Limited, Case No.
`
`1:20-cv-00689 (D. Del.)), Lenovo (Beijing) Limited is also a real party-in-interest.
`
`B. Related Matters (§42.8 (b)(2))
`The patent at issue, U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715 ('715 Patent"), is the subject
`
`of the following district court proceeding: LiTL LLC v. Lenovo (United States), Inc.
`
`and Lenovo (Beijing) Limited, Case No. 1:20-cv-00689 (D. Del.).
`
`C. Lead and Backup Counsel (§42.8 (b)(3))
`Petitioner appoints Martin Bader (Reg. No. 54,736) of Sheppard, Mullin,
`
`Richter & Hampton LLP as Lead Counsel, and appoints Nam Kim (Reg. No
`
`64,160), and Michael Hopkins (Reg. No. 75,019), of the same firm as Back-Up
`
`Counsel. An appropriate Power of Attorney is filed concurrently herewith.
`
`Service Information (§42.8 (b)(4))
`D.
`Service of any documents to Counsel can be made via hand delivery to
`
`Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, 12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200, San
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`Diego, California 92130. Petitioner consents to service by email at LegalTm-
`
`LNV-LTL@sheppardmullin.com.
`
`III. FEE FOR IPR (37 C.F.R. §42.15(a) and §42.103)
`Petitioner has paid the required fees. The Office is authorized to charge any
`
`fee deficiency, or credit any overpayment, to Deposit Account No. 50-4561.
`
`IV. REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.104
`A. Grounds for Standing (§42.104(a))
`Petitioner certifies that the '715 Patent is available for IPR and that the
`
`Petitioner is not barred or estopped from challenging the claims thereof.
`
`Identification of Challenged Claims (§42.104(b)(1))
`B.
`This Petition challenges the validity of Claims 1-20 of the '715 Patent.
`
`C. Grounds of Challenge (§42.104(b)(2))
`The Grounds of unpatentability presented in this Petition are as follows.
`
`Ground Basis
`
`References
`
`Challenged Claim
`
`1
`2
`
`§103 Obvious over Shimura in view of Tsuji
`§103 Obvious over Shimura in view of Tsuji
`and Pogue
`
`1, 20
`2-19
`
`
`The '715 Patent issued from U.S. Application No. 14/680,422, filed April 7,
`
`2015, which is a continuation of Application No. 12/416,496 (U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,003,315), which is a continuation-in-part of Application No. 12/170,939 (U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,289,688) and Application No. 12/170,951 (U.S. Patent No.
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`8,624,844), and claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/041,365,
`
`filed April 1, 2008. Without conceding valid priority entitlement, for purposes of
`
`this Petition only, it is assumed that April 1, 2008 marks the earliest effective
`
`priority date (the "Critical Date") of the '715 Patent.
`
`V.
`
`PROPOSED GROUNDS SHOULD NOT BE DENIED INSTITUTION
`ON ANY DISCRETIONARY GROUND
`The Board should decline to exercise its discretion to deny institution under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d). The Section 325(d) analysis follows a two-part framework.
`
`Amazon.com, Inc. v. VB Assets, LLC, IPR2020-01346, slip op. at 6-7 (P.T.A.B.
`
`Feb. 4, 2021) (Paper 7). The Board first determines "whether the art or arguments
`
`presented in the Petition are the same or substantially the same as those previously
`
`presented to the Office." Id. If the answer is no, the inquiry ends there. But if the
`
`answer is yes, the Board then determines "whether the petitioner has demonstrated
`
`a material error by the Office in its prior consideration of that art or arguments."
`
`Id.
`
`A. The Three References Were Not "Presented to the Office"
`Of the three references relied upon, two were neither cited during
`
`prosecution nor relied upon by the Examiner. The only remaining reference—
`
`Shimura—was merely cited in an information disclosure statement ("IDS") and not
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`relied upon or substantively considered by the Examiner in any way. EX-1002,
`
`402. Therefore, all three references fail to satisfy part one.
`
`The PTAB has "consistently held that a reference that was neither applied
`
`against the claims nor discussed by the Examiner does not weigh in favor of
`
`exercising our discretion under § 325(d)." Solvay USA Inc. v. WorldSource
`
`Enterprises, LLC, PGR2019-00046, slip op. at 14 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 13, 2019) (Paper
`
`7). This includes "[m]ere citation in an IDS." Id.; Zip Top, LLC v. Stasher, Inc.,
`
`IPR2018-01216, slip op. at 35 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 17, 2019) (Paper 14) ("mere citation
`
`to a reference by the Examiner does not establish that the Examiner substantively
`
`considered the merits of" the reference) (collecting cases). Further, Shimura is just
`
`one of nearly 200 references cited in nineteen pages of cited references. Shenzhen
`
`Zhiyi Tech. Co. Ltd. v. iRobot Corp., IPR2017-02137, slip op. at 10 (P.T.A.B. Apr.
`
`2, 2018) (Paper 9) (declining to exercise 325(d) discretion where reference "was
`
`merely included in the approximately fifteen pages of cited references").
`
`Additionally, the Shimura-Tsuji Combination is not cumulative of the art
`
`relied upon by the Examiner. The Examiner relies on an "orientation sensing
`
`mechanism" in U.S. Pub. No. 2008/0059888 ("Dunko") as disclosure of the "detect
`
`a current computer system configuration" limitations of the '715 Patent'. EX-1002,
`
`228-253. However, Dunko's "orientation sensing mechanism" merely senses
`
`whether the device is in portrait or landscape mode using an accelerometer or
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`gyroscope. EX-1010, ¶¶ 10-11. This is not the same structure disclosed by, nor
`
`does it serve the same purpose as the Shimura-Tsuji Combination, which uses a
`
`gravity sensor and a hinge rotation sensor to "detect a current computer system
`
`configuration" such as the '715 Patent's laptop, easel, and frame modes. VIII.B.1.
`
`Indeed, following the Dunko rejection, the patentee amended the claims to recite
`
`that the detected configuration include the operability/position of the keyboard.
`
`EX-1002, 207-211. Dunko's portrait/landscape detection could not accomplish
`
`this, but the Shimura-Tsuji combination does. VIII.B.1-VIII.B.2. Therefore, for at
`
`least this reason, the Shimura-Tsuji combination is not cumulative of Dunko
`
`because "it is solving a problem that is close to that of the '[715] Patent" using
`
`"different structures that serve different purposes." Oticon Medical AB v. Cochlear
`
`Limited, IPR2019-00975, slip op. at 15-16 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019) (Precedential)
`
`(Paper 15).
`
`B.
`
`Even If a Reference Was "Presented to the Office," the Office
`Made a Material Error by Overlooking Its Impact
`Even if the Board finds that Shimura was previously "presented to the
`
`Office," to the extent the Examiner considered Shimura, it "misapprehend[ed] or
`
`overlook[ed] specific teachings of the relevant prior art [i.e., Shimura] where those
`
`teachings impact patentability of the challenged claims." Cellco P'ship v. Huawei
`
`Device Co., Ltd., IPR2020-01117, slip op. at 12 (PTAB Feb. 3, 2021) (Paper 10).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`Here, the Examiner did not rely upon or substantively considered Shimura. Thus,
`
`the Examiner overlooked specific teachings of Shimura that impact the
`
`patentability of the claims challenged in this Petition. Id. Similarly, the "fact that
`
`[the references in the Petition were] not the basis of rejection weighs strongly
`
`against exercising [the Board's] discretion to deny institution under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 325(d)." Id.
`
`Moreover, the Examiner did not consider Shimura in combination with
`
`either Tsuji or Pogue. Id. at 14 (declining to exercise Section 325(d) discretion
`
`where "[reference] [is] cited and discussed during prosecution" but "the
`
`combination of [that reference and another reference] as asserted in the Petition has
`
`not been substantively evaluated by the Office"); Amazon.com, at 9 (Paper 7).
`
` Therefore, the Board should decline to deny institution under Section
`
`325(d).
`
`VI. RELEVANT INFORMATION CONCERNING THE '715 PATENT
`A. Overview of the '715 Patent
`The '715 Patent is directed to a computer that "permit[s] the user to
`
`transition the device from one configuration to another during its use" and includes
`
`"a graphical user interface that organizes interface elements into views of computer
`
`content for presentation to [the] user." EX-1001, Abstract. The plurality of
`
`computer system configurations include a laptop mode (e.g., FIG 1 below) where a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`display component 102 is pivotably coupled to a base 104 that includes a keyboard
`
`106. EX-1001, 19:12-31.
`
`In laptop mode, the keyboard is accessible to the user. EX-1007, ¶¶48-49.
`
`Other computer system configurations include an easel mode (FIG. 4 below)
`
`and a frame mode (FIG. 26 below). EX-1001, 19:51-52, 24:37-41.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`In the easel and frame modes, the keyboard is "concealed and not easily
`
`accessible" to the user. EX-1001, 24:61-62. E.g., in the easel mode, the keyboard
`
`is "on the other side" of the portable computer from the "display screen" and in the
`
`frame mode, "the keyboard [is] 'face down' on the surface." EX-1001, 19:61-64,
`
`24:37-41. Where it is undesirable for keys to be pressed, "software and/or
`
`hardware protection may be provided" to prevent the recognition or pressing of
`
`keys." EX-1001, 24:49-53. At the Critical Date, portable computers configurable
`
`into a plurality of display modes, including the laptop, easel, and frame modes, that
`
`were also capable of preventing recognition of keyboard input, were known in the
`
`art. EX-1007, ¶¶65-81.
`
`The displayed content of the portable computer of the '715 Patent can be
`
`automatically or manually rotated by 90° or 180° so that the displayed content is
`
`oriented properly for an intended user. EX-1001, 20:10-15, 24:63-25:20. E.g.,
`
`where the rotation is automated, the portable computer uses an orientation (or
`
`mode) sensor that detects whether the portable computer is in a laptop mode or an
`
`easel mode and adjusts the display accordingly. EX-1001, 20:20-24. The
`
`orientation (or mode) sensor may be located in a hinge assembly and "may be used
`
`to determine a precise relative orientation[, such as an angle,] of the base
`
`component 104 with respect to the display component 102 … to determine [a given
`
`display mode.]" EX-1001, 20:30-35, 70:2-6, 25-30. In some embodiments, the
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`orientation sensor may be located in a display component 102 or base 104 and may
`
`include an accelerometer "whose output is fed to the computer operating system
`
`(or to dedicated logic circuitry) which then triggers a display inversion as
`
`appropriate." EX-1001, 20:24-26, 35-38.
`
`The computer of the '715 Patent may further include a processor, which
`
`"usually executes an operating system which may be, for example, the Windows-
`
`based operating systems," such as "Windows XP." EX-1001, 68:14-15, 69:13-17.
`
`Together, these " define a computer platform for which application programs …
`
`are written." EX-1001, 69:26-28.
`
`Moreover, the '715 Patent discloses a "graphical user interface [GUI] that …
`
`provides a clear overview of the entire computing environment and searching
`
`capability within the environment." EX-1001, 20:62-66. The '715 Patent describes
`
`various views, including a "home view," (or "home screen"), an example
`
`architecture of which is depicted in FIG. 11 (below). EX-1001, 31:8-20, FIG. 11.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`
`
`The home view "displays a plurality of modes of content 172," such as "web,"
`
`"applications," and "channels," which may be displayed in any configuration
`
`recognized by those skilled in the art, including "a 'desktop' and icon
`
`configuration." EX-1001, 22:14-23.
`
`As mentioned above, one mode of content disclosed by the '715 Patent is a
`
`"channel" mode that includes "channel views" and "channel page views."1 EX-
`
`1001, 21:20-23. An "example of a channel may include a 'photo frame' channel in
`
`which the portable computer may be configured to display a pre-selected image or
`
`
` The '715 Patent refers to both "channel views" and "channel page views"
`interchangeably and can therefore be the same view. EX-1001, 51:62-65, 52:62-
`65.
`
` 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`set of images," an example of which is shown in FIG. 24. EX-1001, 21:48-51,
`
`54:20-28.
`
`The '715 Patent also describes a "screen saver view," which "may be activated by
`
`the computer system remaining idle for a period of time" and can display pictures
`
`
`
`and videos. EX-1001, 32:7-15.
`
`Challenged Claims 1 and 2 are representative.
`
`Prosecution History of the '715 Patent
`B.
`The '715 Patent was allowed after one Office Action and claim amendments.
`
`EX-1002, passim. In the April 19, 2017 Office Action the Examiner rejected
`
`pending independent Claim 1 as obvious over "Creating a Digital Home
`
`Entertainment System with Windows Media Center" by Miller, 2006 ("Miller") in
`
`view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2008/0059888 ("Dunko") and pending independent
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`Claim 21 (which issued as Claim 17) as obvious over Miller in view of Dunko and
`
`further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2005/0221865 ("Nishiyama"). EX-1002,
`
`228-253. Applicant amended independent Claims 1 and 21 and added a similarly-
`
`worded new independent Claim 24. EX-1002, 206-211. Subsequently, all pending
`
`claims were allowed. EX-1002, 161-174. However, as demonstrated below, these
`
`claims were squarely within the prior art, including the prior art relied upon in this
`
`Petition.
`
`C. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (hereafter "POSITA") would have had at
`
`least a Bachelor's degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, or
`
`Computer Science, plus two to three years of work experience in designing
`
`hardware and/or software aspects of user interfaces for computing devices and be
`
`familiar with designs of the user interface employed and displayed by the operating
`
`system and its organization of content and functionality. EX-1007, ¶¶24-28.
`
`Alternatively, the POSITA would also have received a graduate degree such as
`
`Master's or PhD degree in the same field with at least one year of the same work
`
`experience. Id.
`
`D. Claim Listing
`EX-1009 is a claim listing that enumerates each claim element.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION—37 C.F.R. §42.104 (b)(3)
`The claim construction standard defined in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d
`
`1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) applies to this proceeding. 83 Fed. Reg. No. 197, 51340
`
`(Oct. 11, 2018); 37 C.F.R. 42.100. Words in a claim are given their plain meaning,
`
`which is the meaning understood by a POSITA after reading the entire patent.
`
`Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1312–13.
`
`Petitioner proposes that only the terms below in the Challenged Claims
`
`require express construction for purposes of the current validity challenges.
`
`Petitioner reserves the right to respond to any constructions that LiTL may offer or
`
`that the Board may adopt. Petitioner is not waiving any arguments concerning
`
`indefiniteness or claim scope that may be raised in other proceedings.
`
`"execution component"
`A.
`Claim limitations construed below directly or indirectly include "an
`
`execution component" configured to perform recited functions.
`
`For purposes of this Petition only, "execution component" is assumed to be a
`
`means-plus-function limitation under 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶6. Williamson v. Citrix
`
`Online LLC, 792 F.3d 1339, 1348-50 (Fed. Cir. 2015); M.P.E.P. § 2181.I.A
`
`(identifying "component for" as a non-structural generic placeholder).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715
`(IPR2021-00786)
`
`
`[1e], [17d], and [20e]
`1.
`The functions of limitations [1e], [17d], and [20e] are listed in the table
`
`below:
`
`[1e]
`
`[17d]
`
`[20e]
`
`detect[ing]
`a current computer system
`configuration from
`at least a first computer
`system configuration
`where the keyboard is
`operable
`to receive input from an
`operator of the computer
`system
`to control the computer
`system
`and a second computer
`system configuration
`where the keyboard is
`inoperable
`to receive input from the
`operator of the co