Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`Paper No.
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLE, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`
`v.
`
`MEMORYWEB, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00031
`
`
`DECLARATION OF EUGENE LHYMN
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`Paper No.
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLE, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`
`v.
`
`MEMORYWEB, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00031
`
`
`DECLARATION OF EUGENE LHYMN
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`I, Eugene Lhymn, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I make this declaration based upon my own personal knowledge and, if
`
`called upon to testify, would testify competently to the matters stated herein.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained on behalf of MemoryWeb, LLC, (“MemoryWeb”
`
`or “Patent Owner”) as an independent expert consultant to provide this declaration
`
`concerning whether certain references could have been found by an ordinarily
`
`skilled searcher’s diligent search in connection with U.S. Patent No. 10,621,228
`
`(“the ‘228 patent”).
`
`3.
`
`I am being compensated at my standard hourly rate of $600 per hour
`
`for the time I spend on this matter. My compensation is not based on the content of
`
`my opinions or the resolution of this matter, and I have no other interest in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`4.
`
`In this declaration, I offer opinions concerning whether the Aperture 3
`
`User Manual (“A3UM”) reference relied on by Petitioner Apple Inc. (“Apple”)
`
`could have been found by a skilled searcher’s diligent search on September 3, 2021
`
`or at any time during the 3 months preceding that date. The substance and bases of
`
`my opinions appear below.
`
`
`
`1
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`5.
`In formulating my opinions, I have relied on my knowledge, training,
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`and experience, which I will summarize below. A copy of my curriculum vitae (CV)
`
`is appended to this declaration.
`
`6.
`
`I am the CEO and Founder of Sherman Patent Search Group (“SPSG”),
`
`patent search firm based in Pasadena, California. SPSG is a patent search firm that
`
`has technical experience that spans across all technology areas. Currently, I
`
`supervise four SPSG employees who run patent research projects.
`
`7.
`
`I am also currently CEO and Founder of Visualize (VIP), a computer
`
`vision A.I. patent search startup headquartered in Pasadena, CA. VIP developed an
`
`A.I. image similarity SaaS platform that automates design patent searches.
`
`Currently, I supervise five VIP employees who manage our R&D, tech stack, and
`
`sales.
`
`8.
`
`I received a Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering from Penn
`
`State University in 2004.
`
`9.
`
`Between 2000 and 2004 is worked an engineer at Bayer Corporation,
`
`Applied Research Lab (PSU) and Air Products and Chemicals.
`
`10. Between 2004 and 2005, I was employed as a patent examiner in Art
`
`Unit 3727 at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. During my time as an
`
`examiner, I searched for prior art and issued office actions.
`
`
`
`2
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`11. Between 2005 and 2012, I was employed as a senior patent analyst at
`
`Cardinal Intellectual Property Inc. My job responsibilities included performing
`
`patent searches, including prior art searches.
`
`12.
`
`I have extensive experience performing patent searches. Throughout
`
`my career, I have personally performed approximately 3,000 searches. I have
`
`managed or supervised approximately 7,000 additional patent searches. I have
`
`personally performed more than 500 patent searches in the software field. The prior
`
`art searches include invalidity, clearance, and patentability searches.
`
`13. Based on my education and experience, I am qualified to render
`
`opinions on prior art invalidity searches and prior art in the software field, including
`
`the prior art at issue here.
`
`II. LEGAL STANDARDS
`14.
`I understand that a petitioner, or the real party in interest or privy of the
`
`petitioner, in an inter partes review that results in a final written decision is estopped
`
`from requesting or maintaining a proceeding before the Office grounds that the
`
`petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised during the inter partes review in
`
`accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1):
`
`The petitioner in an inter partes review of a claim in a patent under this
`chapter that results in a final written decision under section 318(a), or
`the real party in interest or privy of the petitioner, may not request or
`maintain a proceeding before the Office with respect to that claim on
`
`
`
`3
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`any ground that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised
`during that inter partes review.
`15.
`I further understand that a petitioner reasonably could have raised a
`
`ground and/or reference during an inter partes review when any ground and/or
`
`reference is known to the petitioner or when an ordinarily skilled searcher
`
`conducting a reasonably diligent search would have been expected to discover the
`
`ground and/or reference.
`
`16.
`
`I further understand that one way of showing an ordinarily skilled
`
`searcher’s reasonably diligent search is to identify the relevant search string and
`
`search source that could identify the allegedly unavailable prior art and explain why
`
`such a criterion would be part of a skilled searcher’s diligent search.
`
`17.
`
`I further understand that although physical prior art devices cannot be
`
`raised during inter partes review, a petitioner is estopped from raising grounds that
`
`include physical prior art devices if petitioner knew of or a skilled searcher
`
`conducting a diligent search reasonably could have been expected to discover one
`
`or more prior art printed publications, patent or non-patent, that are cumulative of
`
`the physical prior art device.
`
`III. OPINIONS
`14.
`I understand that Unified Patents, LLC (“Unified”) filed a petition for
`
`inter partes review challenging claims 1-7 of the ‘228 patent on September 3, 2021.
`
`
`
`4
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`I understand that Unified asserted four unpatentability grounds based on the
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`following references:
`
` U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0122153 (“Okamura”)
`
` U.S. Patent No. 6,714,215 (“Flora”)
`
` U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0163971 (“Wagner”)
`
` U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0172551 (“Gilley”)
`
`15.
`
`I understand that in this proceeding, Apple has challenged claims 1-19
`
`of the ‘228 patent based on the Aperture 3 User Manual (“A3UM”) and U.S. Patent
`
`Publication No. 2010/0058212 (“Belitz”).
`
`16.
`
`I understand that MemoryWeb has accused Apple of infringing one or
`
`more claims of the ‘228 patent in a case currently pending in the United States
`
`District Court for the Northern District of California that was originally filed on May
`
`25, 2021. Specifically, I understand that MemoryWeb’s complaint accuses Apple’s
`
`iOS, macOS, and iPadOS photo applications of infringing one or more claims of the
`
`‘228 patent.
`
`17. As discussed more fully below, it is my opinion that A3UM and Belitz
`
`would have been found by a searcher of ordinary skill through reasonable diligence
`
`in the relevant timeframe.
`
`18. As more fully explained below, A3UM and Belitz were present in
`
`search results generated by very straightforward search strings employing keywords
`5
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`directly extracted from the claims and abstract of the ‘228 patent, CPC classification
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`codes of the ‘228 patent (i.e., G06F 16/51), references cited directly on the face of
`
`the ‘228 patent, and simple citation searching. A3UM was present in multiple
`
`searches that an ordinary searcher through reasonable diligence would have
`
`conducted in searching for prior art in the relevant timeframe. The fact that A3UM
`
`showed up in multiple search strategies is especially informative that an ordinary
`
`searcher through reasonable diligence would and should have identified A3UM in
`
`the relevant timeframe.
`
`A. The ‘228 Patent
`19. The ‘228 patent is entitled “Method and Apparatus for Managing
`
`Digital Files” and was issued on April 14, 2020.
`
`20. The ‘228 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application No. 16/578,238,
`
`filed on September 20, 2019. The ‘228 patent is a continuation of U.S. Patent
`
`Application No. 16/536,300 filed on August 8, 2019, which is a continuation of U.S.
`
`Patent Application No. 15/375,927, filed on December 12, 2016, now U.S. Patent
`
`No. 10,423,658, which a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 14/193,426,
`
`filed on February 28, 2014, now U.S. Patent No. 9,552,376, which is a continuation-
`
`in-part of U.S. Patent Application No. 13/157,214, filed on June 9, 2011, now U.S.
`
`Patent No. 9,098,531.
`
`21. Claim 1 of the ‘228 patent is reproduced below:
`
`
`
`6
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`1. A method comprising:
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`responsive to a first input, causing a map view to be displayed on an
`
`interface, the map view including:
`
`(i) an interactive map;
`
`(ii) a first location selectable thumbnail image at a first location on the
`
`interactive map; and
`
`(iii) a second location selectable thumbnail image at a second location
`
`on the interactive map;
`
`responsive to an input that is indicative of a selection of the first location
`
`selectable thumbnail image, causing a first location view to be
`
`displayed on the interface, the first location view including (i) a first
`
`location name associated with the first location and (ii) a
`
`representation of at least a portion of one digital file in a first set of
`
`digital files, each of the digital files in the first set of digital files being
`
`produced from outputs of one or more digital imaging devices, the
`
`first set of digital files including digital files associated with the first
`
`location;
`
`responsive to an input that is indicative of a selection of the second location
`
`selectable thumbnail image, causing a second location view to be
`
`displayed on the interface, the second location view including (i) a
`7
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`second location name associated with the second location and (ii) a
`
`representation of at least a portion of one digital file in a second set of
`
`digital files, each of the digital files in the second set of digital files
`
`being produced from outputs of the one or more digital imaging
`
`devices, the second set of digital files including digital files associated
`
`with the second location; and
`
`responsive to a second input that is subsequent to the first input, causing a
`
`people view to be displayed on the interface, the people view
`
`including:
`
`(i) a first person selectable thumbnail image including a representation
`
`of a face of a first person, the first person being associated with
`
`a third set of digital files including digital photographs and
`
`videos;
`
`(ii) a first name associated with the first person, the first name being
`
`displayed adjacent to the first person selectable thumbnail
`
`image;
`
`(iii) a second person selectable thumbnail image including a
`
`representation of a face of a second person, the second person
`
`being associated with a fourth set of digital files including
`
`digital photographs and videos; and
`8
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`(iv) a second name associated with the second person, the second
`
`name being displayed adjacent to the second person selectable
`
`thumbnail image.
`
`B.
`22.
`
`Search Process
`I have been asked by counsel for MemoryWeb whether a certain
`
`reference would have been found by an ordinarily skilled searcher’s reasonably
`
`diligent search.
`
`23. Specifically, I have been asked to provide an opinion as to whether the
`
`A3UM and Belitz references detailed below would have been located by an
`
`ordinarily skilled searcher’s reasonably diligent search on or before September 3,
`
`2021 (the “Timeframe” or relevant timeframe) by someone searching for prior art in
`
`the technical field of the ’228 patent.
`
`24.
`
`In particular, I focused on the subject matter of claims 1-19 of the ‘228
`
`patent. To the extent an asserted claim is a dependent claim, I also focused on the
`
`subject matter of the claims on which they depend.
`
`25. An ordinarily skilled searcher conducting a reasonably diligent search
`
`with regard to claims 1-19 of the ‘228 patent in the Timeframe would have
`
`conducted a search for prior art references to the ‘228 patent in a variety of ways.
`
`This includes using search terms, patent classification codes, citations, cross-
`
`citations among prior art references, assignee-based searching, inventor-based
`
`
`
`9
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`searching, jurisdiction-based searching, looking at the art cited during prosecution,
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`physical product searching, and/or combinations thereof.
`
`26. A skilled searcher has many other options available to find prior art.
`
`This includes speaking with the client to identify what prior art or prior art devices
`
`they are aware of to generate potential leads, or, if they are not aware of any such
`
`art, researching websites and scientific literature for information regarding prior art
`
`devices. I also understand that parties in a litigation can contact a manufacturer of a
`
`prior art device either informally or through discovery and request documents
`
`regarding prior art devices. A skilled searcher could also take the client’s feedback
`
`into account to expand and/or revise its search strategies. For instance, a skilled
`
`searcher could learn of potentially relevant prior art that is in an unrelated field from
`
`the client and revise the search strategy accordingly. A skilled searcher could also
`
`speak with the client to identify known prior art based on its prosecution of its own
`
`patents. A skilled searcher could further search for prior art from a defendant that is
`
`accused of infringing the patent.
`
`27.
`
`If using patent classification codes, an ordinarily skilled searcher during
`
`the Timeframe could determine the classifications of the ‘228 patent by checking
`
`www.uspto.gov or http://www.espacenet.com to identify current CPC or IPC
`
`classifications, since classification schedules are commonly subject to revision. A
`
`skilled searcher would be aware that the ‘228 patent is classified in specific CPC or
`10
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`IPC classifications, including specific parent classifications and specific child
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`subclass classifications, such as: CPC classifications G06F16/51, G06F16/58,
`
`G06F16/901, G06F16/907, G06F3/0481, G06F16/5866; and IPC classifications
`
`G06F16/51, G06F16/5866, G06F16/901, G06F16/907, and G06F3/0481.
`
`28. An ordinarily skilled searcher conducting a reasonably diligent search
`
`would iteratively search through individual classification codes, combined with
`
`keyword search strings of a subject patent to incrementally and reasonably increase
`
`the scope of the prior art search. According to the above public patent office indexes,
`
`the relevant classifications of claims 1-19 of the ‘228 patent, include at least the
`
`below:
`
` CPC class G06F (Electrical Digital Data Processing), subclass 16/51
`
`(Indexing; data structures therefor; storage structures) (relevant to the ‘228
`
`patent)
`
` CPC class G06F (Electrical Digital Data Processing), subclass 3/0481
`
`(based on specific properties of the displayed interaction object or a
`
`metaphor-based environment, e.g., interaction with desktop elements like
`
`windows or icons, or assisted by a cursor’s changing behaviour or
`
`appearance) (relevant to the ‘228 patent)
`
`29.
`
`If using search terms, an ordinarily skilled searcher could have
`
`conducted a prior art search for the ‘228 patent using a variety of prior art search
`11
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`databases, including both patent and non-patent literature databases. An ordinarily
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`skilled searcher could also have conducted a prior art search for the ‘228 patent using
`
`prior art search databases indexing English language references as well as foreign
`
`language references. During the Timeframe, there were several prior art search tools
`
`available, including Patworld. Patworld is a prior art search tool that provides prior
`
`art searching functionality across patent prior art databases in both English and
`
`foreign languages. Patworld includes (and did include during the Timeframe) search
`
`features to search across all patent fields, including titles, abstracts, claims, detailed
`
`description, classification codes, citations, and full text. Patworld also includes
`
`English titles and abstracts of foreign language references. An ordinarily skilled
`
`searcher during the Timeframe would have understood this and, using Patworld as
`
`one of their search tools, would have used English keywords to search for prior art
`
`references.
`
`30. Non-patent literature prior art search databases that an ordinarily skilled
`
`searcher would have used during the Timeframe, include at least Google, the Internet
`
`Archive Wayback Machine, and eBay. Google, Wayback Machine, and eBay permit
`
`searches of non-patent literature using search terms (or URL’s for Wayback
`
`Machine). I have been using Google, Wayback Machine, and eBay’s websites as a
`
`source to perform prior art searching on non-patent literature since before the
`
`Timeframe. Based on my personal experience with Google, Wayback Machine, and
`12
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`eBay’s websites, they all provide the same prior art searching features for non-patent
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`literature as it did back in the Timeframe. An ordinarily skilled searcher during the
`
`Timeframe would have understood Google, Wayback Machine, and eBay’s
`
`websites’ prior art searching features and would have used it (or a similar non-patent
`
`literature searching tool) to search for prior art references related to the ‘228 patent.
`
`An ordinarily skilled searcher during the Timeframe would also be aware that non-
`
`patent literature search tools often have less sophistication and advanced searching
`
`features, such as proximity searching or wildcard term searching (i.e., searching for
`
`all iterations of the term mark*). Thus, it is common to encounter higher result hit
`
`counts in non-patent literature databases, such as Google, Wayback Machine, and
`
`eBay.
`
`31. An ordinarily skilled searcher could have used multiple different
`
`techniques for identifying prior art references, including generating search strings
`
`using terms from the claims and specification of the ‘228 patent. An ordinarily
`
`skilled searcher during the Timeframe would have generated and used multiple
`
`different search strings, and variations thereof, to identify relevant references, and
`
`would have run each of these search strings in prior art searching tools, such as
`
`Patworld. These search strings would have been generated in a variety of ways,
`
`including using terms from the ‘228 patent claims or abstract, and synonyms of those
`
`
`
`13
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`terms, different logical search operators (e.g., AND, OR), and proximity operators
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`to require combinations of terms together.
`
`32. Based on my experience and review of claims 1-19 of the ‘228 patent,
`
`it is my opinion that an ordinarily skilled searcher during the Timeframe would have
`
`generated at least the following search strings (or very similar search strings) and
`
`used these search strings to locate prior art references related to the subject matter
`
`of claims 1-19 or the ‘228 patent:
`
` CTA1:(metadata* and imag*): This string incorporates terms that
`
`appear in the claims and abstract of the ‘228 patent.
`
` CTA:(map* and thumbnail* and imag*): This string incorporates terms
`
`that appear in the claims of the ‘228 patent.
`
`
`In addition to running each of the search strings identified above, an
`
`33.
`
`ordinarily skilled searcher would have additionally combined these search strings
`
`with one or more classification codes in order to further narrow the field of search
`
`to relevant prior art references that satisfy the search string and that are labelled with
`
`the searched classification code. An example classification code that is relevant to
`
`the ’228 patent is identified above. Based on my experience and review of the ‘228
`
`
`1 CTA is a search command for searching in title, abstract, and claims.
`
`
`
`14
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`patent (including claims 1-19 of the ‘228 patent), it is my opinion that an ordinarily
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`skilled searcher in the Timeframe would have performed some combined prior art
`
`searching by combining the classification code identified above with the search
`
`strings identified above.
`
`34. An ordinarily skilled searcher conducting a reasonably diligent search
`
`during the Timeframe would review references cited on the face of patents reviewed
`
`during the search. Patent references cited on the face of reviewed patents can be
`
`obtained via Patworld, and non-patent literature references cited on the face of
`
`reviewed patents can be obtained via the USPTO PAIR system, or Google, amongst
`
`other non-patent literature sources. This citation approach is effective in developing
`
`a “trail” of prior art for review by an ordinarily skilled searcher.
`
`35.
`
`In addition, an ordinarily skilled searcher conducting a reasonably
`
`diligent search during the Timeframe would review all references cited on the face
`
`of ‘228 patent. Patent references cited on the face of ‘228 can be obtained via
`
`Patworld, and non-patent literature references cited on the face of ‘228 can be
`
`obtained via the USPTO PAIR system, or Google, amongst other non-patent
`
`literature sources. Moreover, an ordinarily skilled searcher would review those
`
`references cited on the face of ‘228 patent for further citations or disclosure of
`
`additional prior art. This citation approach is effective in developing a “trail” of
`
`prior art for review by an ordinarily skilled searcher.
`15
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`36. An ordinarily skilled searcher would also obtain physical prior art (e.g.,
`
`manuals, textbooks, physical products) as part of a reasonably diligent search. In
`
`many cases, physical prior art is readily available, and may contain more detailed or
`
`comprehensive disclosure than what is available digitally. This is especially true
`
`with older prior art, and for certain types of physical prior art, such as manuals. As
`
`discussed above, well-known physical prior art sources include eBay, among others.
`
`37. An ordinarily skilled searcher could also have limited the search results
`
`to the earliest priority date of the ‘228 patent, namely before June 9, 2011.
`
`38.
`
`I conducted an investigation in September 2023 to determine whether
`
`A3UM and Belitz would have been identified by an ordinarily skilled searcher
`
`through reasonable diligence in the Timeframe using available prior art searching
`
`resources. As part of this investigation, I ran search strings that a skilled searcher
`
`would have generated to identify relevant prior art references for claims 1-19 of the
`
`‘228 patent through prior art searching tools available and widely used by prior art
`
`searchers in the Timeframe (e.g., Patworld, Google, Wayback Machine, and eBay).
`
`Based on my experience, all of the search tools used, including Patworld, Google,
`
`Wayback Machine, and eBay, work in materially the same way as they did during
`
`the Timeframe.
`
`39. With the above background in mind, it is my opinion that an ordinarily
`
`skilled searcher conducting a reasonably diligent search in the Timeframe would
`16
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`have found and readily identified A3UM and Belitz. An ordinarily skilled searcher
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`would typically expect to review a thousand or more references generated by
`
`reasonable search strings in an effort to find the most relevant prior art references.
`
`As explained further below, the references of interest were contained in multiple
`
`different searches generating even smaller (more focused) numbers of “hits”,
`
`indicating they would and should have been found a skilled searcher conducting a
`
`prior art search in the Timeframe. Details of my search are provided below.
`
`C. The Aperture 3 User Manual
`40. The Aperture 3 User Manual (“A3UM”) is a manual for Apple’s
`
`Aperture 3 product. Manuals are easily accessible and are publicly available through
`
`a variety of public search tools, such as Wayback Machine, Google, and eBay.
`
`41. Running the search string (metadata* and imag*) identified above,
`
`through the Patworld prior art search tool for global patents within classification
`
`CPC G06F 16/51 (Electrical Digital Data Processing), returned a list of 141 search
`
`results. The search string returned patents that include variations of “metadata” and
`
`“image” in the title, abstract, or claims of the references. This search, which is
`
`effectively the same search tool and the same prior art databases during the
`
`Timeframe, returned U.S. Patent No. 7,859,543 (Salvador, Ex. 2101) as among the
`
`141 search results. In particular, Salvador was the 100th result out of 141. Ex. 2100
`
`is a true and correct copy of these Patworld search results.
`
`
`
`17
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`42. As discussed above, a skilled searcher of ordinary skill conducting a
`
`reasonably diligent search in the Timeframe would review the references cited on
`
`the face of the patents reviewed during the search. In this case, Salvador cites an
`
`Apple Aperture manual on its face, namely: “Apple Computer, Inc. Technical
`
`Manual, Aperture Getting Started, 2006.”
`
`Ex. 2101, cover
`
`
`
`43. As discussed above, a skilled searcher can easily obtain digital copies
`
`of non-patent references via Google. Running the search string “apple aperture
`
`manual” in Google (as shown below) returns a hit titled “How to find the Aperture
`
`User Manual” under the first result. Ex. 2102 is a true and correct printout of these
`
`Google search results.
`
`
`
`18
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`44. Ex. 2103 is a true and correct printout of the webpage at
`
`https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-250000352. As shown below, the “How
`
`to find the Aperture User Manual” webpage contains an Internet Archive Wayback
`
`Machine link to the Aperture 3 User Manual:
`
`45. Ex. 2104 is a true and correct printout of the webpage at
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20180504121246/http://documentation.apple.com/en/apert
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`ure/usermanual/index.html. The Wayback Machine indicates that this URL was
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`archived on May 4, 2018 and that the first archive of this URL was February 13,
`
`2010.
`
`46. Clicking “Aperture 3 User Manual” near the top of this URL (Ex.
`
`2104) as shown below leads to the following URL:
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20180418021025/http://documentation.apple.com/en/a
`
`perture/. Ex. 2105 is a true and correct copy of this URL.
`
`47. From there, clicking “View as PDF,” as shown below leads to the
`
`
`
`following URL:
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20170106175757/http://documentation.apple.com/en/a
`
`perture/usermanual/Aperture%203%20User%20Manual%20(en).pdf, which
`
`contains a PDF copy of the Aperture 3 User Manual.
`
`
`
`20
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`
`
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`48.
`
` Ex. 2106 is a true and correct printout of the webpage at
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20170106175757/http://documentation.apple.com/en/a
`
`perture/usermanual/Aperture%203%20User%20Manual%20(en).pdf. Ex. 2107 is
`
`a true and correct copy of the PDF downloaded from this URL. The Wayback
`
`Machine indicates that this webpage was archived on January 6, 2017. According
`
`to the Wayback Machine, the earliest date this URL was archived was October 11,
`
`2011.
`
`49.
`
`In addition, an ordinarily skilled searcher conducting a reasonably
`
`diligent search in the Timeframe could also search Google for The Aperture 3
`
`Manual. Searching Google for “Aperture 3 Manual” produces numerous websites
`
`that contain A3UM, such as User Manual Wiki, at the following URL:
`
`https://usermanual.wiki/apple/Aperture3.1938174072. Ex. 2108 is a true and correct
`
`printout from this URL.
`
`50. Additionally, as discussed above, a skilled searcher of ordinary skill
`
`conducting a reasonably diligent search in the Timeframe would be aware that
`
`physical copies of older technical manuals are easily accessible online, via eBay.
`21
`
`
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`Physical copies of technical manuals obtained directly from their source can be ideal
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`to a skilled searcher so as to ensure the technical manual is complete. Running the
`
`search string “Apple Aperture Manual” in eBay returns numerous listings of
`
`Aperture 3 installation DVD’s, which contain the official technical manual of
`
`Aperture 3. Based on my experience, eBay works in materially the same way as
`
`they did during the Timeframe. Ex. 2109 shows that Aperture DVDs were indeed
`
`available during the relevant Timeframe.
`
`51.
`
`In addition, as discussed above, a skilled searcher of ordinary skill
`
`during the Timeframe would review all references cited on the face of ‘228 patent.
`
`One of the references on the face of ‘228 patent is Hoffman (“Create Great iPhone
`
`Photos”). Hoffman mentions the Apple Aperture product on page 18, mentioning
`
`“Events and Faces” sorting features. Ex. 2004, 18. The ‘228 patent claims a “map
`
`view” and “people view” which would prompt a skilled searcher to identify Apple
`
`Aperture as being relevant to the search.
`
`52. As discussed above, a skilled searcher can easily obtain digital copies
`
`of non-patent prior art via Google. Running the search string “apple aperture
`
`manual” in Google, returns the following 1st webpage hit: “How to find the Aperture
`
`User Manual.” This webpage contains a Wayback Machine link to the A3UM:
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20180504121246/http://documentation.apple.com/en/apert
`
`
`
`22
`
`MemoryWeb Ex. 2111
`Apple v. MemoryWeb - IPR 2022-00031
`
`
`
`Patent No. 10,621,228
`IPR2022-00031
`
`ure/usermanual/index.html, which includes a PDF copy of the AU3M published in
`
` Declaration of Eugene Lhymn
`
`
`
`July 23, 2010, as discussed above
`
`53. Additionally, as discussed above, an ordinarily skilled searcher
`
`conducting a reasonably diligent search in the Timeframe would be aware that
`
`physical copies of older technical manuals are easily accessible online, via eBay.
`
`Physical copies of technical manuals obtained directly from its source can be ideal
`
`to a skilled searcher so as to ensure the technical manual is
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
