Filed on behalf of: Bank of America, N.A.
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Bank of America, N.A.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Nant Holdings IP, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Case No. IPR2021-01080
`U.S. Patent No. 8,463,030
`
`DECLARATION OF PROF. JEFFREY J. RODRIGUEZ, PHD IN SUPPORT
`OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,463,030
`
`Mail Stop: Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 1 of 105
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`V.
`
`Introduction......................................................................................................1
`I.
`Qualifications and Background .......................................................................2
`II.
`III. Materials Considered.......................................................................................5
`IV. Legal Principles ...............................................................................................9
`A.
`Legal Standard.......................................................................................9
`B.
`Anticipation...........................................................................................9
`C.
`Obviousness.........................................................................................11
`The ’030 Patent..............................................................................................14
`A.
`Challenged Claims ..............................................................................14
`B.
`Overview .............................................................................................14
`C.
`File History..........................................................................................24
`D. Date of Invention.................................................................................25
`VI. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art .................................................................25
`VII. Technology Background................................................................................28
`A.
`Recognizing Objects Using the Visual Appearance of Objects
`Was Well Known in the Art................................................................28
`Recognizing Objects Using Symbols Was Well Known in The
`Art........................................................................................................30
`VIII. Prior Art References ......................................................................................35
`A.
`Ogasawara ...........................................................................................35
`B.
`Bolle ....................................................................................................46
`IX. Claim Construction........................................................................................54
`X.
`Summary of Opinions....................................................................................56
`XI. Ground 1: Claims 1–4, 6–7, 19, 21, 25–26, 29–32, and 36–37 Are
`Obvious in View of Ogasawara and Bolle ....................................................56
`A. Motivation to Combine .......................................................................56
`B.
`Claim 1 ................................................................................................63
`Preamble: “A transaction system comprising:”........................63
`
`“a mobile device configured to acquire data related to an
`
`
`B.
`
`i
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 2 of 105
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`object” .......................................................................................64
`“an object identification platform configured to obtain
`the acquired data,”.....................................................................65
`“recognize the object as a target object based on the
`acquired data, and”....................................................................68
`“determine object information associated with the target
`object; and” ...............................................................................73
`“a content platform configured to obtain the object
`information, and” ......................................................................75
`“initiate a transaction associated with the target object
`with a selected account over a network based on the
`object information.” ..................................................................77
`Claim 2 ................................................................................................79
`C.
`Claim 3 ................................................................................................80
`D.
`Claim 4 ................................................................................................85
`E.
`Claim 6 ................................................................................................86
`F.
`Claim 7 ................................................................................................88
`G.
`Claim 19 ..............................................................................................90
`H.
`Claim 21 ..............................................................................................91
`I.
`Claim 25 ..............................................................................................91
`J.
`Claim 26 ..............................................................................................93
`K.
`Claim 29 ..............................................................................................94
`L.
`M. Claim 30 ..............................................................................................94
`N.
`Claim 31 ..............................................................................................95
`O.
`Claim 32 ..............................................................................................96
`P.
`Claim 36 ..............................................................................................98
`Q.
`Claim 37 ..............................................................................................99
`XII. Ground 2: Claims 1–4, 6–7, 19, 21, 25–26, 29–32, and 36–37 are
`Anticipated by Ogasawara...........................................................................100
`XIII. Secondary Considerations ...........................................................................101
`XIV. Conclusion ...................................................................................................101
`
`
`
`ii
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 3 of 105
`
`

`

`DECLARATION OF PROF. JEFFREY J. RODRIGUEZ., Ph.D.
`
`I, JEFFREY J. RODRIGUEZ, declare the following:
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`1.
`I have been retained by Petitioner (or “Bank of America”) in this Inter
`
`Partes Review proceeding as an independent expert to provide my expert opinions
`
`regarding the validity of the claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,463,030 (the “’030 patent”)
`
`in view of the state of the art as of November 6, 2000.
`
`2.
`
`Specifically, I have been asked to consider and provide my opinions on
`
`the technical subject matter of the ’030 patent and the application of various prior
`
`art references. In particular, I have been asked to consider what a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would have understood from the claims and specification of the ’030
`
`patent, whether certain references disclose or suggest the features recited in the
`
`claims of the ’030 patent, and whether a person of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`have had reason to combine certain references to arrive at the claimed subject matter.
`
`3.
`
`My opinions are presented both in this Declaration and in the Petition
`
`for Inter Partes Review, which it supports. In many, if not most, cases the language
`
`used to express my opinions in both documents is substantially the same. This is
`
`because I worked with counsel to capture my opinions in the Petition initially. My
`
`opinions, as reflected in the Petition, were then incorporated into my Declaration. I
`
`make this statement to explain the work process and underscore that the opinions in
`
`1
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 4 of 105
`
`

`

`this Declaration are my own, were formed by me, and were documented in the
`
`manner described. As detailed herein, it is my opinion that each of the challenged
`
`claims (as defined herein) is anticipated and/or rendered obvious by the prior art. If
`
`requested, I am prepared to testify about my opinions expressed herein.
`
`II. Qualifications and Background
`4.
`I am over the age of 18 and I am competent to write this declaration. I
`
`have personal knowledge, or have developed knowledge, of the technologies and
`
`prior art discussed in this Declaration, based upon my education, training, and
`
`experience.
`
`5.
`
`I am an Associate Professor with tenure in the Department of Electrical
`
`and Computer Engineering at The University of Arizona, where I serve as Director
`
`of the Signal and Image Laboratory. I have been on the faculty of The University of
`
`Arizona since 1990, holding the rank of Assistant Professor from 1990 to 1997, and
`
`Associate Professor with tenure since 1997. During 2003 to 2008, I was Co-Director
`
`of Connection One, a National Science Foundation industry/university cooperative
`
`research center for communication circuits and systems.
`
`6.
`
`I have a Bachelor of Science degree from The University of Texas at
`
`Austin (1984), a Master of Science degree from Massachusetts Institute of
`
`Technology (1986), and a Ph.D. from The University of Texas at Austin (1990), all
`
`in Electrical Engineering.
`
`2
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 5 of 105
`
`

`

`7.
`
`I teach courses at both the graduate and undergraduate level. The
`
`courses I have taught include Digital Image Processing, Digital Image Analysis,
`
`Digital Signal Processing, Advanced Digital Signal Processing, Signals and
`
`Systems, and Circuit Analysis. In 1992, I was awarded the Outstanding Teaching
`
`Award by the IEEE and Eta Kappa Nu (IEEE-HKN), given by the students at the
`
`University of Arizona to one outstanding professor each year.
`
`8.
`
`My research activity is generally directed to systems for digital
`
`signal/image/video processing and analysis. My current research activities include
`
`adversarial machine learning, analysis of uncertainty in machine-learning systems,
`
`automated image analysis of sweat pore activation, deep-learning classification of
`
`chest X-ray images, convolutional neural networks for driver distraction detection,
`
`and automated algorithms for object detection and tracking in video. My research
`
`has also included automated image segmentation algorithms and error concealment
`
`methods for H.264/AVC video communication.
`
`9.
`
`One of my recent research projects involves the design and
`
`development of a real-time image and video processing system for automated
`
`detection and behavioral analysis of zebrafish for use in ototoxicity assessment of
`
`drugs. The system we designed and built includes an array of Raspberry Pi
`
`microcomputer systems configured for parallel video capture of sixteen zebrafish
`
`populations. Each Raspberry Pi features a system on a chip, which includes a CPU,
`
`3
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 6 of 105
`
`

`

`a video graphics processing unit (GPU), and a memory system. Our zebrafish
`
`analysis system automatically captures and transmits compressed MPEG video data
`
`to a local personal computer or to a high-performance computing cluster to decode
`
`the video and implement customized algorithms for detection of zebrafish pose and
`
`motion, resulting in automated assessment of zebrafish swimming behavior.
`
`10.
`
`In other work, I directed the development of efficient algorithms for
`
`improved error concealment in compressed video bitstreams. Using the information
`
`of Intra prediction modes from a corrupted H.264/AVC bitstream, we developed a
`
`spatial error concealment method, which improved the concealment performance
`
`and the visual quality of the damaged Intra frames. In addition, we proposed a
`
`content-adaptive temporal error concealment method for packet losses occurring in
`
`the Inter frames of a compressed video bitstream.
`
`11.
`
`I am a Senior Member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
`
`Engineers (IEEE) and the IEEE Signal Processing Society. I served as General Chair
`
`of the 2016 IEEE Southwest Symposium on Image Analysis and Interpretation
`
`(SSIAI), and General Chair of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Image
`
`Processing (ICIP). In addition, during 2005-2011, I served on the IEEE Signal
`
`Processing Society Technical Committee on Image, Video, and Multidimensional
`
`Signal Processing. During 1996-2000, I was Associate Editor of the IEEE
`
`Transactions on Image Processing. Over the years, I have served on numerous other
`
`4
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 7 of 105
`
`

`

`professional committees, and I have served as a technical reviewer for numerous
`
`journals and professional conferences.
`
`12. My research has resulted in more than 140 technical publications,
`
`including journal articles, conference proceedings publications, and book chapters.
`
`Over the past 30 years, I have trained hundreds of students in image and video
`
`processing, including directing the research of numerous graduate students, resulting
`
`in more than 50 graduate theses and dissertations.
`
`13. A detailed listing of my education, work experience, honors, awards,
`
`professional associations, publications, etc., is included in my curriculum vitae,
`
`which is included as Exhibit 1004.
`
`III. Materials Considered
`14.
`In forming my opinions, I have reviewed the following documents:
`
`Ex. No.
`1001
`
`Brief Description
`U.S. Patent No. 8,463,030
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 8,463,030
`
`Declaration of Jeffrey Rodriguez, Ph.D.
`
`Curriculum vitae of Jeffrey Rodriguez, Ph.D.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,512,919, entitled “Electronic Shopping
`System Utilizing a Program Downloadable Wireless
`Videophone” to Nobuo Ogasawara
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,546,475, entitled “Produce Recognition
`System” to Rudolf M. Bolle, et al.
`
`5
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 8 of 105
`
`

`

`Ex. No.
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`Brief Description
`L. O’Gorman and R. Kasturi, Document Image Analysis,
`IEEE Computer Society Executive Briefing (IEEE Computer
`Society Press, 1997)
`
`U.S. Patent Provisional Application No. 60/246,295
`
`Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement,
`NantWorks, LLC and Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of
`America Corporation and Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-
`7872-GW-PVC (C.D. Cal. June 10, 2021), ECF No. 103
`
`Plaintiffs NantWorks, LLC and Nant Holdings IP, LLC
`Preliminary Infringement Contentions, NantWorks, LLC and
`Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of America Corporation and
`Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-7872-GW-PVC (C.D. Cal.
`March 4, 2021)
`
`Stipulation Regarding Asserted Prior Art, NantWorks, LLC
`and Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of America Corporation
`and Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-7872-GW-PVC (C.D.
`Cal. June 15, 2021), ECF No. 104
`
`Defendants’ Preliminary Invalidity Contentions, NantWorks,
`LLC and Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of America
`Corporation and Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-7872-GW-
`PVC (C.D. Cal. April 8, 2021)
`
`Complaint For Patent Infringement, NantWorks, LLC and
`Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of America Corporation and
`Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-7872-GW-PVC (C.D. Cal.
`August 27, 2020), ECF No. 1
`
`First Amended Complaint For Patent Infringement,
`NantWorks, LLC and Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of
`America Corporation and Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-
`7872-GW-PVC (C.D. Cal. Nov. 11, 2020), ECF No. 40
`
`Defendants Bank of America Corporation and Bank of
`America, N.A.’s Answer to First Amended Complaint,
`
`6
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 9 of 105
`
`

`

`Ex. No.
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`Brief Description
`Affirmative Defenses, and Counterclaims, NantWorks, LLC
`and Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of America Corporation
`and Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-7872-GW-PVC (C.D.
`Cal. Nov. 11, 2020), ECF No. 99
`
`Civil Minutes (Scheduling Order), NantWorks, LLC and Nant
`Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of America Corporation and Bank
`of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-7872-GW-PVC (C.D. Cal. Nov.
`11, 2020), ECF No. 91
`
`Plaintiffs NantWorks, LLC and Nant Holdings IP, LLC
`Preliminary Election of Asserted Claims, NantWorks, LLC
`and Nat Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of America Corporation
`and Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-7872-GW-PVC (C.D.
`Cal. May 11, 2021)
`
`Defendants’ Preliminary Election of Asserted Prior Art,
`NantWorks, LLC and Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Bank of
`America Corporation and Bank of America, N.A., 2:20-CV-
`7872-GW-PVC (C.D. Cal. May 27, 2021)
`
`Declaration of Silvia Hall-Ellis, Ph.D., and accompanying
`Attachments 1a-1f and 2.
`
`Ancora Technologies, Inc v. TCT Mobile (US), Inc., et al.,
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-GW(ADSx), ECF No. 65 (C.D. Cal.
`Nov. 12, 2020)
`
`BlackBerry Limited v. Facebook, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:18-
`cv-01844-GW(KSx), ECF No. 652 (C.D. Cal. Feb 13, 2020)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,947,571, entitled “Cell Phones With
`Optical Capabilities, and Related Applications” to Geoffrey
`B. Rhoads, et al.
`
`15. My opinions set forth in this Declaration are based on my education,
`
`training, experience, and the content of the references considered. In preparing this
`
`7
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 10 of 105
`
`

`

`Declaration, I have relied on my own knowledge and experience, such as my work
`
`experience in the field of electrical and computer engineering, including image and
`
`video processing, my experience in teaching those subjects, and my experience in
`
`working with others involved in this field. I also relied on other materials cited in
`
`this Declaration.
`
`16. Although this Declaration refers to selected portions of the cited
`
`references for the sake of brevity, it should be understood that a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would have viewed the references cited herein in their entirety and in
`
`combination with other references cited herein or cited within the references
`
`themselves. The references used in this Declaration, therefore, should be viewed as
`
`being incorporated herein in their entirety.
`
`17.
`
`I am not, and never was, an employee of Bank of America, N.A. or
`
`Bank of America Corporation. I have been engaged in the present matter to provide
`
`my independent analysis of the issues raised in the petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`of the ’030 patent. I am receiving no compensation for this Declaration beyond my
`
`normal hourly compensation based on my time actually spent studying the matter,
`
`and I will not receive any added compensation based on the outcome of the Inter
`
`Partes Review of the ’030 patent. My compensation is in no way contingent on the
`
`nature of my findings, the presentation of my findings in testimony, or the outcome
`
`of any proceeding.
`
`8
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 11 of 105
`
`

`

`IV. Legal Principles
`18.
`I am not an attorney and offer no opinions on the law. I am, however,
`
`informed on the following legal principles, which I have applied in formulating my
`
`opinions stated in this Declaration. My understanding of the relevant law, as
`
`discussed below, was provided by Petitioner’s counsel.
`
`Legal Standard
`A.
`19. While I understand that patent challengers must prove invalidity by
`
`clear and convincing evidence in a district court proceeding under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 282(a), I understand that the challenger’s burden of providing invalidity in an inter
`
`partes review proceeding is preponderance of the evidence under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 316(e)—i.e., the challenged claims are more likely than not unpatentable.
`
`I
`
`understand that the standard for institution of an inter partes review is whether there
`
`is a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail with respect to at least
`
`one of the claims challenged in the petition under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
`
`B.
`20.
`
`Anticipation
`I understand and have been informed that in order for an inventor to be
`
`entitled to a patent, the invention must be “new.” There are a number of ways that
`
`an invention can be “anticipated,” that is, not new.
`
`21. A patent claim is invalid as anticipated if each limitation of the patent
`
`claim is found either expressly or inherently in a single item of prior art. While a
`
`prior art reference need not use the same words as a patent claim to anticipate the
`
`9
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 12 of 105
`
`

`

`claim, the prior art reference must describe the requirements of the claim with
`
`sufficient clarity such that a person having ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”)
`
`(described in Section VI below) would have been able to make and use the claimed
`
`invention based on the reference and his or her knowledge in the applicable technical
`
`field.
`
`22.
`
`The disclosure of a feature of a claimed invention can be either
`
`“express,” meaning that the text, figures, or other content of a reference actually
`
`teaches the aspects of the patent claim, or the disclosure can be “inherent.” An
`
`express disclosure does not need to use the same words as the patent claim being
`
`considered, and does not need to be depicted in exactly the same way, but the
`
`disclosure must actually convey the claimed invention to a POSITA using some
`
`combination of words, figures, data, or other portions of the reference. I have been
`
`informed and understand that in order to establish that an element of a claim is
`
`“inherent” in the disclosure in a prior art reference, it must be clear to a POSITA that
`
`the missing element is an inevitable part of what is explicitly described in the
`
`reference, and that it would have been recognized as necessarily present by a
`
`POSITA. Inherency cannot be established by probabilities or possibilities, and the
`
`mere fact that something may result from a given set of circumstances is not enough
`
`to establish inherency.
`
`23.
`
`Finally, I further understand that to anticipate a claim, the elements of
`
`10
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 13 of 105
`
`

`

`the claim must be found in the prior art reference “arranged as in the claim.” I have
`
`been informed that this means that the elements of the prior art reference may not be
`
`recombined in a way that is not taught in the prior art to arrive at the invention;
`
`instead, the prior art must teach the claimed subject matter in the arrangement
`
`required by the claims.
`
`C.
`24.
`
`Obviousness
`I understand and have been informed that in order for an inventor to be
`
`entitled to a patent, the invention must be nonobvious. I have been informed and
`
`understand that subject matter claimed in a patent is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103
`
`if a POSITA at the time the alleged invention was made would have had reason to
`
`combine or modify the disclosures of one or more prior art references to arrive at the
`
`claimed subject matter. A claim may be unpatentable even if each claim limitation
`
`is not present or disclosed in a single prior-art item.
`
`25.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a claim is unpatentable as
`
`obvious and therefore invalid if the differences between the invention and the prior
`
`art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time
`
`the invention was made to a POSITA to which the subject matter pertains. A
`
`POSITA is presumed to have knowledge of the relevant prior art at the time of the
`
`claimed invention.
`
`26.
`
`I have been informed and understand that obviousness is based on the
`
`11
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 14 of 105
`
`

`

`scope and content of the prior art, the differences between the prior art and the claim,
`
`the level of ordinary skill in the art, and secondary considerations of obviousness
`
`and nonobviousness to the extent such indicia exist. I have been advised that the
`
`following evidence (often referred to as “secondary considerations”), when present,
`
`must be considered before forming a conclusion that a claimed invention is obvious:
`
`(1) the invention’s commercial success, (2) long-felt but unresolved needs, (3) the
`
`failure of others, (4) skepticism by experts, (5) praise by others, (6) teaching away
`
`by others, (7) recognition of a problem, and (8) copying of the invention by
`
`competitors.
`
`27.
`
`I have been informed and understand that the determination of whether
`
`the asserted claims would have been obvious to a POSITA and, therefore, invalid, is
`
`not governed by any rigid test or formula. A determination that a claim is obvious
`
`is, instead, based on a common-sense determination that the claimed invention is
`
`merely a combination of known limitations to achieve predictable results. I
`
`understand that any of the following rationales are acceptable justifications to
`
`conclude that a claim would have been obvious: (1) the claimed invention is a
`
`combination of known prior art methods to yield predictable results; (2) the claimed
`
`invention is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain
`
`predictable results; (3) the claimed invention uses known techniques to improve
`
`similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (4) the claimed invention
`
`12
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 15 of 105
`
`

`

`applies a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for
`
`improvement to yield predictable results; (5) the claimed invention was “obvious to
`
`try”—it was obvious to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable
`
`solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, to achieve the claim invention;
`
`(6) there was known work in one field of endeavor that may prompt variations of it
`
`for use in either the same field or a different one to arrive at the claimed invention
`
`based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been
`
`predictable to a POSITA; or (7) there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in
`
`the prior art that would have led a POSITA to modify the prior art reference to
`
`combine prior art teachings to arrive at the claimed inventions.
`
`28.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a claim may be obvious in
`
`light of a single reference, without the need to combine references, and that any
`
`elements of the claim that are not found in the reference (if any) can be supplied by
`
`the common sense or knowledge of a POSITA or taught in different areas of the
`
`single reference.
`
`29.
`
`I have been informed and understand that an analysis of whether a
`
`claimed invention is obvious must not rely on a hindsight, using the claim as a
`
`template and selecting isolated disclosures from prior art references to reconstruct
`
`the claim. The analysis must proceed in the context of the time of the claimed
`
`invention and consider whether the invention as a whole would have been obvious
`
`13
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 16 of 105
`
`

`

`to a POSITA, taking into consideration any interrelated teachings of the prior art,
`
`the effects of demands known to the design community or present in the
`
`marketplace, and the background knowledge possessed by a POSITA, all in order to
`
`determine whether there was an apparent reason to combine any known elements in
`
`the fashion claimed by the patent at issue.
`
`V.
`
`The ’030 Patent
`30. U.S. Patent No. 8,463,030 entitled “Image Capture and Identification
`
`System and Process,” to applicants Boncyk et al., issued on June 11, 2013, based on
`
`application No. 13/069,124, filed March 22, 2011, and claims priority to Provisional
`
`Application No. 60/317,521, filed on September 5, 2001, and Provisional
`
`Application No. 60/246,295, filed on November 6, 2000.
`
`Challenged Claims
`A.
`I am informed that Patent Owner alleges infringement of claims 1–4, 6–7, 19,
`
`21, 25–26, 29–32, and 36–37 of the ’030 patent. I understand that Petitioner seeks
`
`review of claims 1–4, 6–7, 19, 21, 25–26, 29–32, and 36–37 of the ’030 patent in the
`
`Petition (collectively, the “challenged claims”).
`
`B.
`31.
`
`Overview
`The ’030 patent describes that a “digital image of the object is captured
`
`and the object is recognized from a plurality of objects in a database.” Ex. 1001,
`
`Abstract.
`
`32.
`
`The ’030 patent acknowledges that the use of barcodes or other
`
`14
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 17 of 105
`
`

`

`identifiers was a well-known method to identify objects in captured images. Id.,
`
`3:24–33. Specifically, the patent acknowledges that symbol identification using
`
`“marks, symbols, codes, barcodes, or characters on the object” existed for searching
`
`and retrieving data. Id., 1:35–44, 3:24–33. Indeed, the ’030 patent describes these
`
`techniques as “traditional methods for linking objects to digital information,” which
`
`include “applying a barcode, radio or optical transceiver or transmitter, or some other
`
`means of identification to the object, or modifying the data or object so as to encode
`
`detectable information in it.” Id., 3:27–33.
`
`33.
`
`To obtain the ’030 patent, Patent Owner thus claimed a particular way
`
`(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:71)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:92)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:72)(cid:70)(cid:87)(cid:86)(cid:3) (cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:3) (cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:650)(cid:71)(cid:82)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:3) (cid:86)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:86)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:3) (cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:88)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:3) (cid:68)(cid:83)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:68)(cid:85)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:70)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:3) (cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)
`
`objects in the image rather than having to add barcodes or other symbols (or
`
`otherwise modify the object):
`
`Therefore the present invention provides technology and
`processes that can accommodate linking objects and image
`to information via a network such as the Internet, which
`requires no modification to the linked object. Traditional
`methods for linking objects to digital information,
`including applying a barcode, radio or optical transceiver
`or transmitter, or some other means of identification to
`the object, or modifying the data or object so as to encode
`detectable information in it, are not required, because the
`data or object can be identified solely by its visual
`appearance…[T]he present invention allow[s] fast and
`
`15
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 18 of 105
`
`

`

`reliable detection and recognition of images and/or objects
`based on their visual appearance in an image . . . .
`
`Id., 3:24–46 (emphases added).
`
`34.
`
`The patent asserts that there is a need to identify objects that are
`
`digitally captured “without modification or disfigurement of the object, without the
`
`need for any marks, symbols, codes, barcodes, or characters on the object, [and]
`
`without the need to touch or disturb the object.” Id., 1:35–44; see also id., 1:25–32,
`
`4:19–21. The “present invention” of the patent purports to do just this—capture
`
`images and identify them without using symbols such as barcodes. Id., 3:10-33,
`
`4:19–21, 4:52–58. The alleged invention identifies the object “solely by its visual
`
`appearance.” Id.
`
`35.
`
`The ’030 patent, with reference to Figure 2 below (color added),
`
`describes the following steps to accomplish this goal.
`
`16
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 19 of 105
`
`

`

`Id., Fig. 2 (annotated).
`
`36.
`
`The mobile device [red] of the ’030 patent first acquires data related to
`
`an object. A picture of an object is taken using “a mobile device, such as a portable
`
`telephone” or a “camera-equipped mobile device.” Id., 1:49–3:6, 3:60–64, 22:29–
`
`38. Specifically, “a computer, mobile telephone, personal digital assistant, or other
`
`similar device 14 equipped with a data sensor (such as a CCD [charged-coupled
`
`device] or CMOS [complementary metal oxide semiconductor] digital camera)”
`
`may be used. Id., 5:22–26. The camera-equipped device is enabled to connect to an
`
`“Image Processor/Server 20 [blue] using a conventional digital network or wireless
`
`network means.” Id., 5:40–43; see also Fig. 2. To acquire data related to the object,
`
`a user “aligns the sensor of the data capture device 14 with the object 16 of interest.”
`
`Id., 5:25–26.
`
`17
`
`BANK OF AMERICA
`
`IPR2021-01080
`
`Ex. 1003, p. 20 of 105
`
`

`

`37.
`
`The captured data, for example, can be “represented as three separate
`
`2-D matrices of pixels, corresponding to the raw RGB (Red, Green, Blue)
`
`representation of the input image.” Id., 5:32–35.
`
`38. After