IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Harald Philipp
`In re Patent of:
`8,432,173
`U.S. Patent No.:
`April 30, 2013
`Issue Date:
`Appl. Serial No.: 13/118,280
`Filing Date:
`May 27, 2011
`Title:
`Capacitive Position Sensor
`
`
`
`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. 8,432,173 PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319, 37 C.F.R. § 42
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Harald Philipp
`In re Patent of:
`8,432,173
`U.S. Patent No.:
`April 30, 2013
`Issue Date:
`Appl. Serial No.: 13/118,280
`Filing Date:
`May 27, 2011
`Title:
`Capacitive Position Sensor
`
`
`
`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. 8,432,173 PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319, 37 C.F.R. § 42
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`A. Grounds for Standing ............................................................................ 1
`B.
`Challenge and Relief Requested ........................................................... 1
`
`A.
`B.
`C.
`
`Trent ...................................................................................................... 7
`Engholm ................................................................................................ 9
`Bryan ................................................................................................... 12
`
`B.
`
`A. GROUND 1: Claims 1-2, 8-11, and 17-19 are rendered obvious by
`Trent in light of the knowledge of a POSITA. .................................... 15
`Ground 2: Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-19 are rendered obvious by Trent
`in view of Engholm, and further in light of the knowledge of a
`POSITA. .............................................................................................. 32
`Ground 3: Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-19 are rendered obvious by Bryan
`in view of Trent and Engholm, and further in light of the knowledge
`of a POSITA. ....................................................................................... 49
`
`C.
`
`ii
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`Institution Should Not be Denied Under § 314(a) .............................. 67
`A.
`Factor 1: Institution Supports Stays in Parallel Proceedings ................. 68
`Factor 2: Timing of Final Written Decision and ITC Conclusion .......... 69
`Factor 3: Early Stage of Parallel Proceedings .......................................... 70
`Factor 4: The Petition Raises Unique Issues ............................................. 71
`Factor 5: Petitioners’ Involvement in Parallel Proceedings .................... 73
`Factor 6: Other Considerations Support Institution ............................... 73
`B.
`Institution Should Not be Denied Under § 325(d) .............................. 73
`
`A. Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ..................... 74
`B.
`Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ............................... 75
`C.
`Lead And Back-Up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ........... 75
`D.
`Service Information ........................................................................... 76
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Exhibit No.
`
`Description
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,432,173
`
`Declaration of Dr. Ben Bederson
`
`CV of Dr. Ben Bederson
`
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 8,432,173
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0252109 A1 (“Trent”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,229,456 (“Engholm”)
`
`US Patent No. 5,559,301 (“Bryan”)
`
`Certain Touch-Controlled Mobile Devices, Computers, And
`Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1162, Order 15
`(“Claim Construction Decision”)
`EP 1273851 A2
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`Bederson 1994 - Pad++: A Zooming Graphical Interface for
`Exploring Alternate Interface Physics
`Rogers 1996 - Tossing Objects in a Desktop Environment
`
`iv
`
`
`
`
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`1028
`
`1029
`
`1030
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`Rogers 1996 Figure
`
`Bederson 2000 - Fisheye Menus
`
`Chipman 2004 - SlideBar: Analysis of a linear input device
`
`Browne 2000 - Designing a Collaborative Finger Painting
`Application for Children
`US3482241
`
`US4136291
`
`US5463388
`
`Tarr 2000 - Workshop on Multi-Dimensional Separation of
`Concerns in Software Engineering
`Adobe 1990 - Adobe Photoshop User Guide
`
`PalmPilot 1997 - PalmPilot Handbook
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`173 Patent Claims Grouping for IPR Petition
`
`Microsoft - The Windows Interface Guidelines
`
`Certificates of Service against Petitioners
`
`v
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`Cypress Semiconductor Corp. and STMicroelectronics, Inc (collectively
`
`“Petitioners”) petition for Inter Partes Review of claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-19 (the
`
`“Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 8,432,173 (“the ‘173 Patent”) (Ex-1001),
`
`currently assigned to Neodron Ltd. (“Patent Owner”). The grounds presented in
`
`this petition are substantively identical to the grounds previously presented to the
`
`Office in IPR2020-00267. IPR2020-00267 was instituted but was dismissed
`
`following institution due to settlement. Petitioners therefore ask that the office re-
`
`institute proceedings for the ’173 Patent for same reasons the office previously
`
`instituted, as set forth below.
`
` REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR
`A. Grounds for Standing
`
`Petitioners certify that the ’173 Patent is available for IPR. Petitioners are
`
`not barred or estopped as this being filed within one year of service of a complaint
`
`against any of the Petitioners. See Ex. 1032 (service of complaints).
`
`B. Challenge and Relief Requested
`
`Petitioners request IPR and cancellation of the Challenged Claims on the
`
`grounds below, as explained herein and in Ex. 1002:
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`Ground
`1
`
`’173 Claims
`1-2, 8-11, and 17-19
`
`2
`
`3
`
`1-3, 5-12, and 14-19
`
`1-3, 5-12, and 14-19
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`Basis
`§ 103 – Patent Publication
`2004/0252109 (“Trent”) in light of
`the knowledge of a POSITA
`§ 103 – Trent in view of US Patent
`No. 6,229,456 (“Engholm”) and the
`knowledge of a POSITA.
`§ 103 – Patent No. 5,559,301
`(“Bryan”) in view of Trent, Engholm,
`and the knowledge of a POSITA
`
`
`The earliest possible priority for the ‘173 Patent is the provisional patent
`
`application filed October 20, 2006. All prior art references asserted in this petition
`
`are U.S. patents or U.S. patent publications that were published more than one year
`
`before the earliest possible filing date that could be afforded the ‘173 Patent, as
`
`shown below:
`
`Reference
`Trent
`
`Engholm
`Bryan
`
`Date
`December 16, 2004
`(published)
`May 8, 2001 (issued)
`September 24, 1996 (issued)
`
`Section
`102(b)
`
`102(b)
`102(b)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
` OVERVIEW OF THE ’173 PATENT
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`The ‘173 Patent describes an alleged improvement to electromechanical
`
`controls, such as the dial on an oven or TV. It utilizes known capacitive sensors
`
`and the known concept of measuring displacement from point A to point B on that
`
`sensor (e.g., angular rotation around a circle) to set and adjust a parameter, such as
`
`the temperature of a cooking oven or volume of an MP3 player. Ex-1001 at 5:27‐
`
`37, 7:55‐57, 7:45‐49.
`
`The patent explains that capacitive touch sensors, including those that are
`
`linear, curved, or circular, “have been known for many years” and were used to
`
`adjust parameters, such as the temperature on “a cooking apparatus.” Id. at 2:11-
`
`12, 1:45‐49. The patent also admits that such prior art sensors included multiple
`
`modes to allow fine adjustment of a parameter. Id. at 1:47‐2:44. For example, the
`
`patent describes prior art patent application EP1273851, which discloses a sensor
`
`having parameter values “mapped onto the [sensor] strip” that covered the entire
`
`temperature range from the minimum value (i.e., “the off condition of the domestic
`
`appliance”) to the “maximum value.” Id. at 1:54‐58. A user selects a temperature
`
`using a “finger touch on the capacitive touch sensor.” Id. at 1:50‐54, 2:29‐31. If
`
`the user touched the strip for ten seconds, the sensor would enter a “zoom mode.”
`
`Id. at 1:64‐67. In the zoom mode, the parameter values would be remapped onto
`
`the sensor strip to include only 10% of the original parameter range. Id. at 1:67‐
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`2:8. Zoom mode allowed the user to make a “finer adjustment” of temperature
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`because a smaller temperature range was mapped onto the strip. Id. at 2:2‐10.
`
`However, prior art implementations of the zoom function allegedly had
`
`“limitations regarding the manner in which the transition [was] effected from the
`
`full range mode to the zoom mode,” such as the ten-second wait time to switch to
`
`the zoom mode in EP1273851. Id. at 2:51‐56.
`
`The ‘173 Patent purports to improve on the prior art with a two-mode
`
`circular capacitive touch sensor, as shown below in Figures 1 and 2A:
`
`
`
`Figure 1 shows “a first mode of operation in which a user’s finger is used to select
`
`a cooking temperature” of 175° C. Id. at 7:61‐63. Figure 2A shows a “second
`
`mode of operation” that is “automatically enter[ed] ... after a temperature has been
`
`selected in the first mode of operation.” Id. at 8:9‐12. In the second mode, a “user
`
`is able to increase or decrease the temperature selected in a first mode” by
`
`“displac[ing] their finger in proximity with the sensing element 100 in an anti-
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`clockwise direction to decease the temperature....” Id. at 8:13‐23. However, the
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`temperature is changed only if the displacement along the sensing path exceeds a
`
`“threshold angle,” such as 20°. Id. at 8:15‐20. When that threshold is exceeded,
`
`the temperature changes only by 1° C. Id. This adjustment method is allegedly
`
`“advantageous[]” because it provides a “finer” resolution that “allows a user to
`
`accurately select a desired temperature.” Id. at 8:30‐36.
`
` PATENT PROSECUTION HISTORY
`
`The ‘173 Patent issued from Application 13/332,945, which is a
`
`continuation of two prior applications, 12/703,614, and 11/868,566, and which
`
`further claims priority to provisional application 60/862,385 filed on October 20,
`
`2006. Application 13/332,945 was filed on May 27, 2011. A first notice of
`
`allowance was issued on June 19, 2012 (with no intervening office actions having
`
`been issued). Ex-1004, at 184. After payment of the issue fee, the applicant
`
`withdrew the application from issue and submitted some additional prior art for
`
`consideration by the examiner on November 5, 2012. Id., at 23. The examiner
`
`issued a second notice of allowance on January 3, 2013 (again without any
`
`substantive intervening office action). Id., at 14. The issue fee was paid and the
`
`application issued as patent 8,432,173 on April 30, 2013. Id., at 1. None of the
`
`prior art references in this petition was considered by the examiner during
`
`prosecution of the 13/332,945 application or any related applications.
`
`5
`
`
`
` LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`
`As has been accepted in previous proceedings involving the ’173 Patent, a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art with respect to the ’173 Patent should have a
`
`bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering, computer engineering, computer
`
`science, or a related field, and at least two years of experience in the research,
`
`design, U.S. Patent No. 8,432,173 development, and/or testing of touch sensors,
`
`human-machine interaction and interfaces, and/or graphical user interfaces, and
`
`related firmware and software, or the equivalent, with additional education
`
`substituting for experience and vice versa. Ex-1008, p. 8; Ex-1002, ¶¶30-32.
`
` CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`Petitioners interpret the claims of the ‘173 Patent according to the Phillips
`
`claim construction standard. 83 Fed. Reg. 51340, 51340-44 (Oct. 11, 2018);
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Petitioners do not believe
`
`that any term requires explicit construction for the purposes of resolving the
`
`patentability of the Challenged Claims based on the grounds presented herein.
`
`Nonetheless, Petitioners note the following constructions from previous litigation
`
`involving the ’173 Patent:
`
`Term
`a sensing element that
`comprises a sensing path
`that comprises a length
`
`Construction
`a physical electrical sensing element
`made of conductive substances that
`comprises a path for sensing that is
`determined for each use that
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`Term
`
`object
`
`displacement
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`Construction
`comprises a length
`either an inanimate object, such as a
`wiper, pointer, or stylus, or
`alternatively, a human finger or other
`appendage any of whose presence
`adjacent the element will create a
`localized capacitive coupling from a
`region of the element back to a circuit
`reference via any circuitous path,
`whether galvanically or
`nongalvanically
`distance and direction of movement
`
`See Ex. 1008 at 18-25. Petitioners do not dispute these constructions.
`
` OVERVIEW OF PRIOR ART
`
`A. Trent
`
`Trent is titled “Closed-loop sensor on a solid-state object position detector.”
`
`Trent discloses several methods related to the construction and use of a closed loop
`
`capacitive positioning sensor, including its use as a capacitive rotary dial for
`
`software control of, for example, audio parameters such as volume, balance, treble,
`
`and bass. Trent discloses both the physical sensor, such as in Figures 4 and 5, and
`
`several different uses of the capacitive sensors for user interfaces, such as in Figure
`
`36.
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`
`Trent discloses several different ways to use its sensors to control various
`
`parameters in a computing system. For example, Trent discloses using its closed
`
`loop sensors to measure an “absolute position” of a user’s touch on the sensor.
`
`Trent also discloses using “relative positions (or motions)” of a user’s touch. See,
`
`e.g., Ex-1005, [0074]. Each of these modes of operation can be used to control
`
`parameters in several ways, such as “to indicate a starting value for a controlled
`
`parameter,” Ex-1005, [0092], or to indicate “correspondence between the motion
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`of the user’s input object and the corresponding variation in the controlled
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`parameter,” Ex-1005, [0139]. Trent explains that “[i]n general, any application
`
`parameter or control that needs to vary over a large range of possible values can
`
`benefit from the present invention.” Ex-1005, [0142].
`
`B.
`
`Engholm
`
`Engholm is titled “Method and apparatus for facilitating user interaction
`
`with a measurement instrument using a display-based control knob.” Engholm
`
`discloses “facilitating user interaction with a ... control knob glyph corresponding
`
`to a user-adjustable parameter.” Ex-1006, Abstract. The “control knob glyph” has
`
`an indicator and a “circular drag area through which the indicator can be rotated.”
`
`Id. Engholm explains that “the location of the indicator within the drag area”
`
`responds to inputs of “rotational movement” and updates “the value of the
`
`parameter changed in response to such inputs.” Id. Engholm also discloses several
`
`input mechanisms of the prior art, such as the sliders depicted in Figure 1a.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Engholm states that: “one problem with sliders is the inability to make fine
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`
`adjustments. Rather, the user is limited by how finely he or she can move slide
`
`box 102 in a ‘click and drag’ manner, as well as how ‘sensitivity’ parameters for
`
`the slider are set up.” Ex-1006, 1:39-44. Another problem of the prior art devices
`
`discussed by Engholm is “that they lack the intuitive clockwise vs.
`
`counterclockwise mapping to increasing value vs. decreasing value found in
`
`manual control knobs to which people are accustomed.” Ex-1006, 2:5-9.
`
`To address this and other problems, Engholm discloses that “a control knob
`
`glyph corresponding to a user-adjustable parameter of the measurement instrument
`
`is displayed, the control knob glyph having an indicator and a partially circular
`
`drag area through which the indicator can be rotated in both a clockwise and a
`
`counterclockwise manner. Inputs indicating amounts of rotational movement for
`
`the indicator can be received, and the location of the indicator within the drag area
`
`and the value of the parameter is changed in response to such inputs.” Ex-1006,
`
`2:21-29.
`
`Examples of Engholm’s “control knob glyphs” are depicted in Figures 4A-
`
`E:
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`
`Engholm’s solution is designed for use with “touchscreens.” Ex-1006, 4:5-
`
`10. Engholm also discloses threshold and sensitivity settings for such inputs to
`
`accommodate for “bounce situations” when a user touches the touchscreen. Id. at
`
`10:11-56. “A bounce situation refers to the situation where, due to finger
`
`placement (for a touchscreen) or cursor/pointer placement, very slight movements
`
`of the user's finger or the cursor/pointer indicate a change in value, so that it is easy
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`for a user to unintentionally indicate frequent changes in position.” Ex-1006,
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`10:12-18. Engholm thus discloses a “debounce value” to help filter out and ignore
`
`small motions that do not correspond to actual intended touches or displacements.
`
`C. Bryan
`
`Bryan is titled “Touchscreen interface having pop-up variable adjustment
`
`displays for controllers and audio processing systems.” Bryan implements a
`
`touchscreen (22) system in an audio device, such as a keyboard, for example in
`
`Figure 1:
`
`Bryan explains that several controls need to be packed into a fairly small space, so
`
`“the use of a relatively small, flat panel touchscreen is desirable for these
`
`applications.” Ex-1007, 1:37-38. An example of the touch screen and associated
`
`user interfaces for audio parameter control is shown in Figures 3 and 4A-E:
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`Bryan further discloses flow charts and algorithms for how a user can set
`
`and adjust the parameters that are controlled by the different modes of touch input,
`
`for example in Figure 8.
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
` APPLICATION OF PRIOR ART TO CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`
`As detailed in this petition, Petitioners have a reasonable likelihood of
`
`success of proving the challenged claims unpatentable.
`
`A. GROUND 1: Claims 1-2, 8-11, and 17-19 are rendered obvious by
`Trent in light of the knowledge of a POSITA.
`1.
`
`Independent claims 1, 10, and 19.
`
`Other than being drafted in different forms (claim 1 is a method, claim 10 is
`
`a computer readable medium practicing the method of claim 1, and claim 19 is an
`
`apparatus that includes a touch screen and the computer readable medium of claim
`
`10), there is no meaningful difference between the independent claims. Ex-1002,
`
`¶75. Accordingly, the duplicative elements of claims 1, 10, and 19 are discussed in
`
`a combined fashion. Exhibit 1030 includes a chart summarizing the grouping of
`
`terms across the different claims.
`
`1[pre]: “A method comprising:”
`
`Trent discloses: “The present disclosure also discloses a method of
`
`determining motion of an object on a touch sensor of an object position detector.”
`
`The method comprises receiving data of a first position of the object on a closed
`
`loop on a touch sensor of the object position detector, receiving data of a second
`
`position of the object on the closed loop, and calculating motion from the second
`
`position and the first position.” Ex-1005, [0032]. Thus, to the extent limiting,
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`Trent discloses or renders obvious the preamble of claim 1. Ex-1002, ¶¶76-77.
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`10[pre], 19[b]: “One or more computer-readable non-transitory storage
`media embodying logic that is operable when executed to”;
`
`19[pre]: “An apparatus comprising”
`
`Trent discloses that the object position detector includes a processor
`
`programmed to generate an action in response to motion on a touch sensor. Ex-
`
`1005, [0023], [0024], claim 1. Trent further discloses that the “closed loop sensor
`
`of the present invention can either use its own resources, such as a processor and
`
`sensors, or share its resources with another device.” Ex-1005, [0077]. A processor
`
`that is programmed inherently requires a storage medium to store the program.
`
`Ex-1002, ¶78. Thus, Trent discloses or renders obvious claim elements 10[pre] and
`
`19[pre], to the extent limiting, and 19[b]. Ex-1002, ¶¶78-79.
`
`1[a], 10[a]: “receiv[ing/e] one or more first signals indicating one or more first
`capacitive couplings of an object with a sensing element that comprises a
`sensing path that comprises a length, the first capacitive couplings
`corresponding to the object coming into proximity with the sensing element at
`a first position along the sensing path of the sensing element”;
`
`19[a]: “a sensing element that comprises a sensing path that comprises a
`length”;
`
`19[c]: “receive one or more first signals indicating one or more first capacitive
`couplings of an object with the sensing element, the first capacitive couplings
`corresponding to the object coming into proximity with the sensing element at
`a first position along the sensing path of the sensing element”
`
`Claim elements 1[a], 10[a], and 19[a]/[c] are substantively the same, with
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`claim 19 breaking into two limitations what claims 1 and 10 recite as a single
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`limitation.
`
`Trent discloses “a sensing element that comprises a sensing path that
`
`comprises a length,” i.e., “a physical electrical sensing element made of conductive
`
`substances that comprises a path for sensing that is determined for each use that
`
`comprises a length.” For example, Trent discloses a “touch sensor formed as a
`
`closed loop” that is “configured to sense motion of an object proximate to the
`
`closed loop.” Ex-1005, [0023]. Trent discloses that the touch sensor can be a
`
`touch pad or touch screen or tablet “such as a capacitive, resistive or inductive
`
`sensor” designed to sense motions along a substantially closed loop. Id., [0073].
`
`Trent further discloses that a capacitive sensor is preferred. Id., [0076]. Trent
`
`discloses that the “closed-loop sensor can have electrodes (or sensor pads) that are
`
`of various shapes and designs (e.g., a simple wedge or pie-shape, a lightning-bolt
`
`or zigzag design, triangles, outward spirals, or the like) configured in a closed-loop
`
`path.” Id., [0079]. In these examples, the claimed “sensing path” is determined for
`
`each use by the shape of the physical electrical sensing element, which is made of
`
`conductive substances. Ex-1002, ¶81. And the “length” is the circumference of
`
`that closed loop. Examples are shown in Figures 4 and 5:
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`
`Trent further discloses that when an input object such as a finger or pointer
`
`or stylus or pen comes into proximity with one or more of the electrodes, the
`
`electrode detects the change in capacitance. Id., [0080]. Trent further discloses
`
`that the lightning-bolt electrode design in the closed path 34 of Fig. 5 “helps spread
`
`out the signal associated with an input object across many electrodes by
`
`interleaving adjacent electrodes.” Id., [0081]. The signals from each of the
`
`electrodes in the closed loop 34 represent capacitive couplings of the input object
`
`with the electrodes. Ex-1002, ¶83.
`
`In addition to the sensors disclosed in Figures 4 and 5, Trent also discloses
`
`other configurations that can be used in linear arrangements, such as Figure 7. In
`
`such examples, the “length” is the linear extent of the electrodes.
`
`Trent discloses “[a]n object position detector is disclosed comprising a touch
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`(or proximity) sensor (or touch pad or touch screen or tablet), such as a capacitive,
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`resistive, or inductive sensor designed to sense motions along a substantially
`
`closed loop, and referred to herein as a closed-loop sensor. . . . The position of an
`
`input object (or finger or pointer or pen or stylus or implement) is measured along
`
`this loop. When the input object moves along this loop, a signal is generated that
`
`causes an action at the host device.” Ex-1005, [0073]. The signal generated by the
`
`finger or other object coming into contact with the closed-loop sensor corresponds
`
`to “receiving one or more first signals indicating one or more first capacitive
`
`couplings of an object with a sensing element” as claimed. Ex-1002, ¶85.
`
`Trent additionally discloses that “FIG. 31 illustrates two closed-loop sensors
`
`90 electrically connected with a touch pad 92. When an input object comes into
`
`contact with the touch pad 92, the input is read by the sensor inputs as changes in
`
`adjacent ones of second axis sensor inputs (demarked by x’s and represented by
`
`numeral 103 in FIG. 32).” Ex-1005, [0112]. This corresponds to “the first
`
`capacitive couplings corresponding to the object coming into proximity with the
`
`sensing element at a first position along the sensing path of the sensing element” as
`
`claimed. Ex-1002, ¶86.
`
`Thus, Trent discloses or renders obvious claim elements 1[a], 10[a], and
`
`19[a]/[c]. Ex-1002, ¶¶80-87.
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`
`1[b], 10[b], 19[d]: “determin[ing/e] based on one or more of the first signals
`the first position of the object along the sensing path”
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`Trent discloses determining a first position of the input object along the
`
`closed loop sensing path using interpolation. Ex-1005, [0080] and [0124]. Trent
`
`further discloses a preferred quadratic fitting method for interpolation Ex-1005,
`
`[0125]-[0129] and Fig. 40:
`
`
`
`Additionally, Trent discloses: “The absolute position of the input object on a
`
`one-dimensional closed-loop sensor can be reported in a single coordinate, such as
`
`an angular (θ) coordinate, and the relative positions (or motions) of the input object
`
`can be reported in the same (such as angular) units as well.” Ex-1005, [0074].
`
`Thus, Trent discloses or renders obvious claim elements 1[b], 10[b], and
`
`19[d]. Ex-1002, ¶¶88-90.
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`1[c], 10[c], 19[e]: “set[ting] a parameter to an initial value based on the first
`position of the object along the sensing path, the initial value comprising a
`particular parameter value and being associated with a range of parameter
`values, the range of parameter values being associated with the length of the
`sensing path”
`
`Trent discloses using “absolute” positioning, corresponding to the precise
`
`location that a user touches the closed-loop sensor, to set an “initial value” for a
`
`parameter in some modes. For example, Trent states: “it may occasionally be
`
`useful to use this absolute position (i.e., an exact starting point), for example, to
`
`indicate a starting value for a controlled parameter or to indicate the desired
`
`parameter to be varied.” Ex-1005, [0092].
`
`Consider, for example, this mode of operation in conjunction with Figure 36
`
`(annotated). Ex-1002, ¶92.
`
`
`
`A user may touch the “volume” closed-loop sensor in the middle, halfway
`
`between the plus and minus icons, as annotated by the red dot above. In the mode
`
`described in paragraph 92, such a touch would “indicate a starting value for a
`
`21
`
`
`
`
`controlled parameter [e.g., the volume]” of, for example, 50%. Id., ¶93. In such an
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`example, the range of parameter values must necessarily be “associated with the
`
`length of the sensing path,” because such association is necessary to assign the
`
`starting value of the parameter based on the absolute position of the input object in
`
`the loop. Id.
`
`To the extent that this element is not expressly or inherently disclosed by
`
`Trent, setting a parameter to an initial value by a touch within a “range of
`
`parameter values being associated with the length of the sensing path” would have
`
`been obvious to one of skill in the art, based on the knowledge of those in the art.
`
`Ex-1002, ¶94. For example, Trent explains several previously known “solutions.”
`
`Ex-1005, [0003], [0004]-[0011]. Such solutions, include, e.g., “A capacitive two-
`
`dimensional object position sensor that can be used for scrolling by providing a
`
`‘scrolling region,’ where users can slide their fingers to generate scrolling
`
`actions.” Ex-1005, [0011]. One of skill in the art would have been well aware of
`
`such capacitive slider operations for setting a parameter to an initial value based on
`
`its position within a range of parameter values associated with the length of the
`
`slider (the range being, for example, a minimum value on one end and a maximum
`
`value on the other). Id.
`
`Thus, Trent discloses or renders obvious claim elements 1[c], 10[c], and
`
`19[e]. Ex-1002, ¶¶91-95.
`
`22
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`
`1[d], 10[d], 19[f]: “receiv[ing/e] one or more second signals indicating one or
`more second capacitive couplings of the object with the sensing element, the
`second capacitive couplings corresponding to a displacement of the object
`along the sensing path from the first position”
`
`Trent discloses with respect to Figure 4, for example, that as the input object
`
`moves along the sensing path “clockwise toward electrodes 32 and 33, the signal
`
`registered by first electrode 31 gradually decreases as the signal registered by the
`
`second electrode 32 increases; as the input object continues to move further
`
`clockwise toward third electrode 33, the first electrode 31 signal drops off and the
`
`third electrode 33 starts picking up the input object, and so on.” Ex-1005, [0080].
`
`The signals from the second and third electrodes 32 and 33 are second capacitive
`
`couplings corresponding to displacement of the input object along the sensing path.
`
`Ex-1002, ¶96.
`
`
`
`Trent discloses that the “absolute position of the input object on the sensing
`
`path can be reported in a single coordinate, such as an angular (Θ) coordinate, and
`
`the relative positions (or motions) can be reported in the same (such as angular)
`
`units as well.” Ex-1005, [0074]. This angular reporting of the relative position
`
`23
`
`
`
`
`includes the distance of movement, just as disclosed in the ’173 Patent. Ex-1002,
`
`Case IPR2021-01128
`Attorney Docket No: 13276-0075IP1
`
`¶97.
`
`Trent also discloses “[a]n object position detector is disclosed comprising a
`
`touch (or proximity) sensor (or touch pad or touch screen or tablet), such as a
`
`capacitive, resistive, or inductive sensor designed to sense motions along a
`
`substantially closed loop, and referred to herein as a closed-loop sensor. . . . When
`
`the input object moves along this loop, a signal is generated that causes an action at
`
`the host device. For example, when the input object moves in the clockwise
`
`direction along this loop, a signal is generated that can cause the data, menu option,
`
`three dimensional model, or value of a setting to traverse in a particular direction;
`
`and when the input object moves in the counter-clockwise direction, a signal is
`
`generated that can cause traversal in an opposite direction.” Ex-1005, [0073].
`
`Thus, as in the ’173 Patent, the direction and distance of movement in Trent is
`
`described in angular units and as being in the clockwise or counter-clockwise
`
`direction. Accordingly, Trent discloses receiving signals representing capacitive
`
`couplings of the object corresponding to a displacement of the object along the
`
`sensing path, where the displacement includes both a distance and direction of
`
`motion along a sensing path. Ex-1002, ¶98.
`
`Thus, Trent discloses or renders obvious claim elements 1[d], 10[d], and
`
`19[f]. Ex-1002, ¶¶96-99.
`
`24
`
`
`
`
`1[e], 10[e], 19[g]: “determin[ing/e] based on one or more
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
