UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`RESIDEO TECHNOLOGIES, INC. &
`CENTRAL SECURITY GROUP – NATIONWIDE, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`v.
`UBIQUITOUS CONNECTIVITY, LP,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case: IPR2021-01355
`U.S. Patent No. 10,344,999
`____________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. §42
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`US Patent and Trademark Office
`PO Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`

`

`I.
`
`A.
`B.
`C.
`D.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8 ................................. 1
`Real Party in Interest (37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(1)) .......................................... 1
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(2)) ................................................... 1
`Designation of Counsel (37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(3)) ...................................... 3
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(4)) ............................................ 3
`FEES (37 C.F.R. §42.103) ............................................................................. 3
`II.
`III. REQUIREMENTS (37 C.F.R. §42.104) ...................................................... 4
`A.
`Standing (§42.104(a)) ................................................................................ 4
`B.
`Challenges (§42.104(b)(1)-(2)) ................................................................. 4
`C.
`Claim Construction (§42.104(b)(3)).......................................................... 5
`D.
`Unpatentability of the Construed Claims (§42.104(b)(4)) ........................ 5
`E.
`Supporting Evidence (§42.105(b)(5)) ....................................................... 5
`INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 6
`IV.
`PROSECUTION HISTORY ........................................................................ 6
`V.
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 7
`A. Microcontroller .......................................................................................... 7
`B.
`Energy Conservation Mode ....................................................................... 9
`VII. THE CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE ..................................................10
`A.
`Priority Date ............................................................................................10
`B.
`Prior Art ...................................................................................................10
`1.
`Oinonen ....................................................................................10
`2.
`Whitley.....................................................................................11
`
`i
`
`

`

`Bielski ......................................................................................12
`3.
`Wu ............................................................................................13
`4.
`Suzuki ......................................................................................14
`5.
`Ehlers .......................................................................................15
`6.
`Yamashita ................................................................................16
`7.
`Menard .....................................................................................17
`8.
`Tessier ......................................................................................18
`9.
`VIII. GROUNDS OF INVALIDITY ...................................................................19
`A.
`Ground 1A: Oinonen, Whitley, and Tessier ............................................19
`1.
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................19
`2.
`Claim 1: [1Pre] A system configured to communicate with a
`cellular remote unit, the system comprising: ...........................22
`Claim 4: The system of claim 1, wherein the environmental
`device is configured to turn on or off responsive to the control
`instruction. ...............................................................................32
`Claim 5: The system of claim 1, wherein the environmental
`device is configured to raise or lower a setting associated with
`the environmental device responsive to the control instruction.
` .................................................................................................33
`Claim 6: The system of claim 1, wherein the cellular
`communications network includes a data bearer service. .......33
`Claim 7: The system of claim 1, wherein the cellular remote
`unit is a mobile remote unit. ....................................................34
`Claim 9: [9A] The system of claim 1, wherein the cellular
`communications network includes a data bearer service; and 34
`Claim 10: The system of claim 1, wherein the microcontroller
`is configured to process the environmental information into the
`representation. ..........................................................................34
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`ii
`
`

`

`9.
`
`10.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Claim 11: The system of claim 1, wherein the environmental
`device comprises a thermostat. ................................................35
`Claim 12: The system of claim 1, wherein the environmental
`device comprises at least one of a light or an alarm system....35
`Count 1B: Oinonen, Whitley, Tessier, and Ehlers ..................................36
`1.
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................36
`2.
`Claim 2: The system of claim 1, wherein the command
`indicates to enter an energy conservation mode, and the energy
`conservation mode is associated with multiple environmental
`devices that are in communication with the communication
`interface, the multiple environmental devices including the
`environmental device. ..............................................................38
`Claim 3: The system of claim 1, wherein the command is
`associated with an icon stored on the cellular remote unit. .....41
`Claim 8: The system of claim 1, wherein the command is an
`energy conservation command associated with multiple
`environmental devices that are in communication with the
`communication interface, the multiple environmental devices
`including the environmental device. ........................................43
`Claim 13: The system of claim 1, wherein the wireless circuit
`is configured to receive a third message from an external web
`service, the third message including another command for the
`environmental device; and wherein the microcontroller is
`configured to generate another control instruction from the
`another command included in the third message and to send
`the another control instruction to the environmental device via
`the communication interface to change an operation of the
`environmental device. ..............................................................43
`Claim 14: The system of claim 1, wherein the first message,
`upon receipt by the cellular remote unit, causes the cellular
`remote unit to display one or more icons stored on the cellular
`remote unit. ..............................................................................45
`Count 1C: Oinonen, Whitley, and Suzuki ...............................................46
`
`6.
`
`iii
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`

`

`1.
`2.
`3.
`
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................46
`Claim 15: [15PRE] A base unit comprising: ...........................48
`Claim 16: The base unit of claim 15, wherein the
`microcontroller is configured to: determine from a first class in
`which the first cellular remote unit is assigned that the first
`cellular remote unit is authorized to change the environmental
`characteristic, and determine from a second class in which the
`second cellular remote unit is assigned that the second cellular
`remote unit is unauthorized to change the environmental
`characteristic, the second class being different from the first
`class. .........................................................................................54
`Claim 17: The basic unit of claim 15, wherein the control
`instruction causes the environmental device to raise or lower a
`setting associated with the environmental device. ..................55
`Claim 18: The base unit of claim 15, wherein the first
`command indicates to perform the same operation to change
`the environmental characteristic as the second command. ......55
`Claim 19: The base unit of claim 15, wherein the first
`environmental information is indicative of a first measurement
`of the environmental characteristic, and the second
`environmental information is indicative of a second
`measurement of the environmental characteristic. ..................56
`Claim 20: The base unit of claim 15, wherein the
`communication interface is configured to communicate
`wirelessly with the environmental device. ..............................56
`Claim 21: The base unit of claim 15, wherein the
`environmental device comprises at least one of a light, a
`thermostat, or an alarm system. ...............................................56
`Claim 22: The base unit of claim 15, wherein the second
`message is received from the first cellular remote unit using a
`data bearer service. ..................................................................56
`Count 1D: Oinonen, Whitley, and Menard .............................................57
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`D.
`
`iv
`
`

`

`1.
`2.
`3.
`
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................57
`Claim 23: 23[Pre] A base unit comprising: .............................58
`Claim 24: The base unit of claim 23, wherein the
`microcontroller is configured to determine from a first class in
`which the first cellular remote unit is assigned and a second
`class in which the second cellular remote unit is assigned that
`the command from the first cellular remote unit should be
`reported to the second cellular remote unit, the first class being
`different from the second class. ...............................................62
`Count 1E Oinonen, Whitley, and Yamashita ..........................................63
`1.
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................63
`2.
`Claim 25: [25Pre] A base unit comprising: .............................65
`Count 2A: Bielski and Wu ......................................................................69
`1.
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................69
`2.
`Claim 1: [1Pre] ........................................................................72
`3.
`Claim 3 .....................................................................................79
`4.
`Claim 4:....................................................................................80
`5.
`Claim 5 .....................................................................................80
`6.
`Claim 6 .....................................................................................80
`7.
`Claim 7 .....................................................................................81
`8.
`Claim 9: [9A] ...........................................................................81
`9.
`Claim 10 ...................................................................................81
`10.
`Claim 11 ...................................................................................82
`11.
`Claim 12 ...................................................................................82
`Count 2B: Bielski, Wu, and Ehlers .........................................................83
`1.
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................83
`
`v
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`

`

`Claim 2 .....................................................................................84
`2.
`Claim 8 .....................................................................................84
`3.
`Claim 13 ...................................................................................84
`4.
`Claim 14 ...................................................................................84
`5.
`Count 2C: Bielski, Wu, and Suzuki ........................................................84
`1.
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................84
`2.
`Claim 15: [15Pre] ....................................................................85
`3.
`Claim 16 ...................................................................................86
`4.
`Claim 17 ...................................................................................87
`5.
`Claim 18 ...................................................................................87
`6.
`Claim 19 ...................................................................................87
`7.
`Claim 20 ...................................................................................87
`8.
`Claim 21 ...................................................................................87
`9.
`Claim 22 ...................................................................................88
`Count D: Bielski, Wu, and Menard .........................................................88
`1.
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................88
`2.
`Claim 23: [23Pre] ....................................................................88
`3.
`Claim 24 ...................................................................................90
`Count 2E: Bielski, Wu, and Yamashita ...................................................90
`1.
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................90
`2.
`Claim 25: [25Pre] ....................................................................90
`
`H.
`
`I.
`
`J.
`
`vi
`
`

`

`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
` Page(s)
`
`Cases
`Resideo Techs., Inc. v. Ubiquitous Connectivity, LP,
`No. IPR2019-01336, Paper 38 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 26, 2021) ................................. 7, 9
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. §102 ..................................................................................................passim
`35 U.S.C. §103 ................................................................................................... 4, 5, 6
`35 U.S.C. §282(b) ...................................................................................................... 7
`35 U.S.C. §311 ........................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §312 ........................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §313 ........................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §314 ........................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §315 ........................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §316 ........................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §317 ........................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §318 ........................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §319 ........................................................................................................... 6
`Other Authorities
`37 C.F.R. §42 ............................................................................................................. 6
`37 C.F.R. §42.8 ...................................................................................................... 1, 3
`37 C.F.R §42.10(b) .................................................................................................... 3
`37 C.F.R. §42.100(b) ................................................................................................. 7
`
`vii
`
`

`

`37 C.F.R. §42.103 ...................................................................................................... 3
`37 CPR. §42.103 ...................................................................................................... 3
`37 C.F.R. §42.104 .................................................................................................. 4, 5
`37 CPR. §42.104 .................................................................................................. 4, 5
`37 C.F.R. §42.105(b)(5) ............................................................................................. 5
`37 CPR. §42.105(b)(5) ............................................................................................. 5
`
`viii
`
`Viii
`
`

`

`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`Short Name
`999 Patent
`999 File History
`
`Jeffay Declaration
`
`Jeffay CV
`
`335 File History
`397 File History
`532 File History
`823 File History
`935 File History
`655 File History
`Motion
`Complaint
`Zatkovich
`Declaration
`
`Oinonen
`
`Bielski
`
`Wu
`
`Reserved
`Ehlers
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 10,344,99
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 10,344,999
`Declaration of Kevin Jeffay under 37
`C.F.R. §1.68
`Curriculum Vitae of Kevin Jeffay
`Provisional Patent Application No.
`60/522,887 File History
`U.S. Patent No. 6,990,335 File History
`U.S. Patent No. 7,257,397 File History
`U.S. Patent No. 7,668,532 File History
`U.S. Patent No. 7,643,823 File History
`U.S. Patent No. 8,064,935 File History
`U.S. Patent No. 9,602,655 File History
`CPS Energy’s Motion to Dismiss
`Complaint for Patent Infringement
`
`Declaration of Ivan Zatkovich
`
`Ubiquitous’ Response to CPS Energy’s
`Motion to Dismiss
`U.S. Patent No. 6,275,710 (Oinonen)
`European Patent Application No. 1391861
`(Bielski)
`System integration of WAP and SMS for
`home network system (Wu)
`Reserved
`U.S. Patent Pub. 2004/0117330 (Ehlers)
`
`Exhibit
`EX1001
`EX1002
`
`EX1003
`
`EX1004
`
`EX1005
`
`EX1006
`EX1007
`EX1008
`EX1009
`EX1010
`EX1011
`EX1012
`EX1013
`
`EX1014
`
`EX1015
`
`EX1016
`
`EX1017
`
`EX10181
`
`EX1019
`EX1020
`
`1
`
`All citations to EX1018 are to the publication’s page numbering.
`
`ix
`
`

`

`Exhibit
`EX1021
`EX1022
`
`EX1023
`
`EX1024
`
`Short Name
`Menard
`Reserved
`
`Whitley
`
`Song
`
`EX1025
`
`SMS Specification
`
`Reserved
`
`Kanma
`
`Lee Declaration
`Hall-Ellis Declaration
`
`EX1026
`
`EX1027
`
`EX1028
`EX1029
`EX1030
`
`EX1031
`
`EX1032
`
`EX1033
`
`EX1034
`
`EX1035
`
`EX1036
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent Pub. 2002/0177428 (Menard)
`Reserved
`WIPO Publication No. 99/49680
`(PCT/US99/06429) (Whitley)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,393,297 (Song)
`Universal Mobile Telecommunications
`System (UTMS); Technical realization of
`the Short Message Service (SMS) (3G TS
`23.040 version 3.5.0 Release 1999)
`Reserved
`Home Appliance Control System Over
`Bluetooth with a Cellular Phone (Kanma)
`Statutory Declaration of Rupert Lee
`Declaration of Dr. Sylvia D. Hall-Ellis
`Dr. Sylvia D. Hall-Ellis CV
`Library Catalog: MARC Record –
`Computer Networks
`OCLC Bibliographic Database: MARC
`Record – Computer Networks
`Library of Congress Authorities: MARC
`Record – “Computer networks $v
`Periodicals” sh2008101495
`Library of Congress Authorities: MARC
`Record – “Integrated services digital
`networks $v Periodicals” sh86000852
`Library of Congress Authorities: MARC
`Record – “Integrated services digital
`networks $v Periodicals” sh85099890
`Library of Congress Authorities: MARC
`Record – “Telecommunication system $v
`Periodicals” sh2010115961
`
`x
`
`

`

`Exhibit
`
`EX1037
`
`EX1038
`
`EX1039
`
`EX1040
`
`EX1041
`
`EX1042
`
`EX1043
`
`EX1044
`
`EX1045
`EX1046
`EX1047
`EX1048
`
`EX1049
`
`EX1050
`
`Short Name
`
`Wu
`
`Zatkovich Deposition
`I
`Zatkovich Deposition
`II
`
`Suzuki
`
`Yamashita
`Tessier
`
`Description
`Library of Congress Authorities: MARC
`Record – “Digital communications $v
`Periodicals” sh85037972
`System integration of WAP and SMS for
`home network system (Wu)
`Dictionary of Electrical and Computer
`Engineering, McGraw-Hill, 2004
`Zatkovich Deposition Transcript – July 7,
`2020
`Zatkovich Deposition Transcript – July 8,
`2020
`Order Denying CPS Energy Motion to
`Dismiss
`Complaint for Patent Infringement of U.S.
`Patent No. 10,344,999
`Japanese Patent Application No.
`2002247657
`U.S. Patent No. 6,909,891
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0194456
`16/503,883 Application File History
`17/183,782 Application File History
`CSG Complaint for Patent Infringement of
`U.S. Patent No. 10,344,999
`CSG Complaint for Patent Infringement of
`U.S. Patent Nos. 8,064,935 and 9,602,655
`
`xi
`
`

`

`I.
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8
`
`A.
`
`Real Party in Interest (37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(1))
`
`The real parties in interest are Petitioners Resideo Technologies, Inc. and
`
`Central Security Group – Nationwide, Inc. d/b/a Alert360.
`
`City of San Antonio by and through its agent, City Public Service Board of
`
`San Antonio d/b/a CPS Energy, Ademco, Inc., Honeywell International Inc.2,
`
`Guardian Security Systems, Inc. d/b/a Alert 360, Alert 360 Holdco, Inc., Alert 360
`
`Opco, Inc., Alert 360 Topco, Inc., and Alarm.com Incorporated may also be real
`
`parties in interest.
`
`B.
`
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(2))
`
`On July 14, 2020, Patent Owner filed a complaint against City of San Antonio
`
`by and through its agent, City Public Service Board of San Antonio d/b/a CPS
`
`Energy (hereinafter, “CPS Energy”) in the United States District Court for the
`
`Western District of Texas (No. 5-20-cv-00815) alleging infringement of the 999
`
`Patent. EX1043.
`
`On December 9, 2020, Patent Owner filed a complaint against Central
`
`Security Group – Nationwide, Inc., d/b/a “Alert 360” (hereinafter, “CSG”) in the
`
`2 Honeywell International Inc. indicated through its counsel that it does not believe
`
`it is an RPI. Petitioner lists it herein out of an abundance of caution.
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma (No. 4:20-cv-
`
`00649) alleging infringement of the 999 Patent. EX1049.
`
`Previously, on July 12, 2018, and July 17, 2018 respectively, Patent Owner
`
`filed a complaint against CPS Energy in the United States District Court for the
`
`Western District of Texas and against CSG in the United States District Court for
`
`the Northern District of Oklahoma alleging infringement of two patents related to
`
`the 999 patent (“Co-Pending Litigation”) - U.S. Pat. Nos. 9,603,655 (the “655
`
`Patent”) and 8,064,935 (the “935 Patent”). EX1013, EX1050. Petitioners Resideo
`
`and CSG filed IPRs on the 655 Patent and the 935 Patent on July 15, 2019 (Resideo)
`
`and on September 13, 2019 (CSG). IPR2019-01336 and IPR2019-01335; IPR2019-
`
`01609 and IPR2019-01610. The IPRs for each of the 655 and 935 Patents were
`
`joined.
`
`On January 26, 2021 the PTAB issued its Final Written Decision with respect
`
`to the 655 Patent, finding that claims 1, 3-8, 10, and 12-24 are unpatentable. On
`
`January 26, 2021, the PTAB issued its Final Written Decision with respect to the
`
`935 Patent, finding that claims 1-11 and 13-22 are unpatentable. The decision
`
`relating to the 655 Patent was appealed to the Federal Circuit as Case No. 21-1813
`
`and -1814.
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`C.
`
`Designation of Counsel (37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(3))
`
`Lead counsel is S. Benjamin Pleune (Reg. No. 52,421), of Alston & Bird LLP,
`
`One South at the Plaza, 101 South Tryon Street, Suite 4000, Charlotte, NC 28280-
`
`4000, Tel: 704.444.1000, Fax: 704.444.1111. Backup counsel is Christopher T.L.
`
`Douglas (Reg. No. 56,950) and Lauren N. Griffin (Reg. No. 77,865), of Alston &
`
`Bird LLP, One South at the Plaza, 101 South Tryon Street, Suite 4000, Charlotte,
`
`NC 28280-4000, Tel: 704.444.1000, Fax: 704.444.1111.
`
`Further backup counsel to Petitioner CSG include Anita Spieth (pro hac vice
`
`motion to be filed); John Calhoun (pro hac vice motion to be filed); and Peter Flynn
`
`(Reg. No. 68,382) all of Choate, Hall & Stewart LLP, Two International Place,
`
`Boston, MA 02221, Tel: 617.248.5000, Fax. 617.248.4000. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R
`
`§42.10(b), Powers of Attorney are being submitted with this Petition.
`
`D.
`
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(4))
`
`Petitioners consent to electronic service directed to ben.pleune@alston.com,
`
`christopher.douglas@alston.com, lauren.griffin@alston.com, aspieth@choate.com,
`
`jcalhoun@choate.com, and pflynn@choate.com.
`
`II.
`
`FEES (37 C.F.R. §42.103)
`
`Petitioners authorize Account No. 16-0605 to be charged for any fees.
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`III. REQUIREMENTS (37 C.F.R. §42.104)
`
`A.
`
`Standing (§42.104(a))
`
`Petitioner certifies that the 999 Patent is available for review and that
`
`Petitioner is not barred or estopped.
`
`B.
`
`Challenges (§42.104(b)(1)-(2))
`
`Petitioner requests cancellation of the claims in the 999 Patent on the
`
`following grounds:
`
`1A: Claims 1, 4-7, and 9-12 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over
`
`Oinonen, Whitley, and Tessier.
`
`1B: Claims 2, 3, 8, and 13-14 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over
`
`Oinonen, Whitley, Tessier, and Ehlers.
`
`1C: Claims 15-22 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Oinonen,
`
`Whitley, Ehlers, and Suzuki.
`
`1D: Claims 23-24 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Oinonen,
`
`Whitley, and Menard.
`
`1E: Claim 25 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Oinonen, Whitley,
`
`and Yamashita.
`
`2A: Claims 1, 3-7, and 9-12 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over
`
`Bielski and Wu.
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`2B: Claims 2, 8, and 13-14 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over
`
`Bielski, Wu, and Ehlers.
`
`2C: Claims 15-22 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Bielski, Wu,
`
`and Suzuki.
`
`2D: Claims 23-24 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Bielski, Wu, and
`
`Menard.
`
`2E: Claim 25 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Bielski, Wu, and
`
`Yamashita.
`
`C.
`
`Claim Construction (§42.104(b)(3))
`
`Constructions are provided in Section VI.
`
`D.
`
`Unpatentability of the Construed Claims (§42.104(b)(4))
`
`The claims are unpatentable as provided in Section VII.
`
`E.
`
`Supporting Evidence (§42.105(b)(5))
`
`Exhibit numbers of the evidence relied upon to support the challenge and the
`
`relevance of the evidence to the challenge raised are included below.
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`IV.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`The 999 Patent is broadly directed to a known control system in which
`
`environmental characteristics of a building can be monitored and controlled by a
`
`user with a mobile device. EX1003, ¶43. More specifically, the 999 Patent is directed
`
`to the transmission of messages between a mobile device and a base station, which
`
`are used to control and monitor environmental devices. Id. Patent Owner did not
`
`invent cellular phones, cellular networks, base stations, or communication between
`
`devices; nor does Patent Owner purport to have done so. See e.g., EX1025; EX1003,
`
`¶33. Instead, Patent Owner asserts that its invention is directed to a base unit that is
`
`connected to and communicates through a cellular network. EX1014 at 22-23, 60;
`
`EX1003, ¶148.
`
`But prior IPR petitions have now confirmed that cellular network connectivity
`
`and bidirectional communications with a base station were not new. And the new
`
`claims of the 999 Patent merely add additional known concepts, such as combining
`
`elements into a single housing or requiring user authorization.
`
`Accordingly, Petitioner petitions under 35 U.S.C. §§311-319 and 37 C.F.R.
`
`§42 and submits that the challenged claims should be canceled.
`
`V.
`
`PROSECUTION HISTORY
`
`During prosecution, Patent Owner made numerous arguments about the
`
`central references, specifically Kates. EX1002, pp. 131-132, 178, 185-189, 208-216;
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`EX1003, ¶¶120-133. Patent Owner primarily argued that Kates did not disclose
`
`bidirectional communication (i.e. “second digital communications message”), but
`
`the Examiner was not persuaded. EX1003, ¶126; EX1002, pp. 185-186. Only after
`
`Patent Owner amended Claim 1 to include the “housing” limitation did the Examiner
`
`allow the case. EX1003, ¶¶132-134; EX1002, pp. 321-322, 330-332, 335; See also,
`
`EX1003, ¶¶118-135. However, the Examiner did not have the benefit of the majority
`
`of the references relied on in the present petition and did not specifically address any
`
`of them in an office action.
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`The claims are construed herein “using the same claim construction standard
`
`that would be used to construe the claim in a civil action under 35 U.S.C. §282(b).”
`
`37 C.F.R. §42.100(b) (Nov. 13, 2018). Unless otherwise specified, the terms
`
`discussed herein are to be construed to have their plain meaning.
`
`A. Microcontroller
`
`During the IPR proceedings on the 655 and 935 Patent, Patent Owner argued
`
`that microcontroller was limited to a device with the following features: special-
`
`purpose computing device, CPU, main memory, timing circuits, I/O circuitry,
`
`designed for a minimal quantity of chips, and programmed to handle a particular
`
`task. EX1003, ¶183; Resideo Techs., Inc. v. Ubiquitous Connectivity, LP, No.
`
`IPR2019-01336, Paper 38 at 10-11 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 26, 2021) (citing PO Resp. 12).
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`This construction finds no support in the 999 Patent. EX1001; EX1003, ¶184.
`
`Rather, the 999 Patent broadly describes a “microcontroller” that resides within the
`
`base unit and/or system and that is responsible only for the processes of
`
`“generat[ing]” and “send[ing].” EX1003, ¶185.
`
`The relevant figure describing the microcontroller is void of the other
`
`components listed by Patent Owner. EX1001, Fig. 4; EX1003, ¶186.
`
`EX1001, Fig. 4 (annotated). Moreover, the “microcontroller” in the base unit is
`
`described as communicating with other components, “operating a number of
`
`separate subsystems,” and containing application software for “provid[ing] for
`
`autonomous control.” EX1001, 4:57:59, 10:35-38; EX1003, ¶187. The specification
`
`also describes that the remote unit can also comprise a “microcontroller” that is
`
`“electrically interconnected with random access memory” and that controls power.
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`EX1001, 4:18-22; EX1003, ¶187. The specification describes no other processing or
`
`components of the “microcontroller.” EX1001; EX1003, ¶187.
`
`Contemporaneous dictionaries confirm that “microcontroller” is not a special
`
`component. EX1003, ¶188. For example, the Dictionary of Electrical and Computer
`
`Engineering published by McGraw Hill in 2004, defines microcontroller as follows:
`
`“A microcomputer, microprocessor, or other equipment used for precise process
`
`control in data handling, communication, and manufacturing.” EX1003, ¶189;
`
`EX1039, p. 14.
`
`In the 655 and 935 IPRs, the Board construed “microcontroller” to mean a
`
`“microcomputer, microprocessor, or other equipment used for process control.”
`
`EX1003, ¶190; Resideo Techs, No. IPR2019-01336, Paper 38 at 14. Petitioners
`
`agrees this is the proper construction of “microcontroller.” EX1003, ¶190.
`
`B.
`
`Energy Conservation Mode
`
`In IPR2019-01355, Patent Owner’s expert Mr. Zatkovich’s stated that
`
`managing the thermostat when no one is occupying a home is “[c]ertainly” energy
`
`conservation. EX1003, ¶193; EX1041, 9:13-10:11. Petitioners agree with Mr.
`
`Zatkovich and believes that the term “energy conservation mode” should be
`
`construed consistent with its plain and ordinary meaning. EX1003, ¶191.
`
`Specifically, a “mode of operation that conserves energy.” Id.
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`The 999 Patent supports this construction. The specification states “[u]pon
`
`entering [energy conservation] mode the base control unit 16 adjusts air handling
`
`systems, open or close dampers, open or close window coverings, and adjust
`
`operation of a hot water heater to conserve power consumption of the home.”
`
`EX1001, 7:9-13; EX1003, ¶192 (emphasis added).
`
`VII. THE CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE
`
`Each of the arguments is made from the standpoint of a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art (“POSITA”) in the field of the 999 Patent. Patent Owner proposes that
`
`the POSITA is a person having at least a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering
`
`or computer science, and at least two years of industry experience in the fields of
`
`computers and communications. EX1003, ¶10.
`
`A.
`
`Priority Date
`
`The earliest possible priority date of the 999 Patent is November 18, 2004—
`
`the filing date of Application No. 60/522,887.
`
`B.
`
`Prior Art
`
`1.
`
`Oinonen
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,275,710 to Oinonen et al. (“Oinonen”) was issued on August
`
`14, 2001. EX1016. Oinonen is prior art under 35 U.S.C. §102(b). Oinonen was not
`
`considered during prosecution.
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`Oinonen discloses transmission of data between telecommunications
`
`terminals where a first telecommunication terminal monitors and controls peripheral
`
`devices, such as a heating system. EX1003, ¶¶201-202; EX1016, 3:66-4:3, 6:60-67.
`
`2. Whitley
`
`WIPO Publication No. 99/49680 (PCT/US99/06429) to Whitley et al.
`
`(“Whitley”) published on September 30, 1999. EX1023. Whitley is prior art under
`
`35 U.S.C. §102(b). Whitley was not considered during prosecution.3
`
`Whi