UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`___________________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`___________________
`
`
`ALIGN TECHNOLOGY, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`3SHAPE A/S
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2022-00145
`U.S. Patent RE48,221
`_____________________
`
`
`PETITION (2 of 2) FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. RE48,221
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1
`I.
`II. GROUNDS FOR STANDING (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(A)) ........................... 2
`III.
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(B)) ................ 3
`IV. THE CHALLENGED PATENT ............................................................ 4
`A.
`RE’221 ...................................................................................... 4
`B.
`Independent Claims..................................................................... 5
`C.
`IPR and Reissue History .............................................................. 7
`D.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art .............................................. 11
`E.
`Claim Construction ................................................................... 11
`PRIOR ART ..................................................................................... 12
`V.
`VI. GROUNDS....................................................................................... 12
`A. Ground 1: Claims [1, 19] 20-44 are unpatentable as obvious under 35
`U.S.C. § 103 based on Boerjes and Marvit. .................................. 12
`1.
`Boerjes ........................................................................... 12
`2. Marvit ............................................................................ 13
`3.
`Claim 33......................................................................... 14
`(a)
`[33.P]/[1.P]/[19.P]: “A scanning system for scanning a
`3D environment, the scanning system comprising:”..... 14
`[33.1]/[1.1]/[19.1]: “a handheld device including an
`optical scanner, wherein the 3D environment to be
`scanned is selected by pointing the optical scanner at the
`3D environment” .................................................... 15
`[33.2]/[1.2]/[19.2]: “at least one display remotely
`connected to the handheld device” ............................ 15
`[33.3.1]/[1.3.1]: “wherein the handheld device is adapted
`for performing at least one scanning action in a physical
`3D environment, and” ............................................. 16
`[33.3.2]/[1.3.4]/[19.3.2]: “the at least one display is
`adapted for visually representing the physical 3D
`environment; and” .................................................. 16
`[33.4]/[1.4]-[1.5]/[19.3.3], [19.5]: “wherein the handheld
`device includes at least one motion sensor for remotely
`
`(b)
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`(e)
`
`(f)
`
`- i -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`(g)
`
`4.
`5.
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`controlling the display to adjust the view with which the
`3D environment is represented on the display” ........... 17
`(i)
`Boerjes ......................................................... 17
`(ii) Marvit .......................................................... 17
`(iii) Motivation to Combine ................................... 18
`(iv) Expectation of Success ................................... 20
`[33.5]/[1.6]/[19.7]: “wherein the at least one motion
`sensor is an accelerometer, gyro, or magnetometer.”.... 21
`(i)
`Boerjes ......................................................... 21
`(ii) Marvit .......................................................... 21
`(iii) Motivation to Combine ................................... 21
`(iv) Expectation of Success ................................... 22
`Claim 34/Element [1.4] .................................................... 22
`Claim 35......................................................................... 23
`(a)
`“…at least one button and a touch-sensitive element” .. 23
`(b)
`“…on a cart.” ......................................................... 23
`Claim 36......................................................................... 24
`Claim 37/Elements [19.3.1] and [19.6] ............................... 24
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 24
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 25
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 26
`Claim 38......................................................................... 26
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 26
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 26
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 27
`Claim 39......................................................................... 27
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 27
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 28
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 28
`10. Claim 44/Element [19.4] ................................................... 28
`11. Claim 20......................................................................... 29
`
`6.
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`- ii -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`12. Claim 21......................................................................... 29
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 29
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 29
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 30
`13. Claim 22......................................................................... 30
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 30
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 30
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 31
`14. Claim 23......................................................................... 31
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 31
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 32
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 32
`15. Claim 24......................................................................... 32
`16. Claim 25......................................................................... 33
`17. Claim 26......................................................................... 33
`18. Claim 27......................................................................... 33
`19. Claim 28......................................................................... 34
`20. Claim 30......................................................................... 34
`21. Claim 31......................................................................... 35
`22. Claim 40......................................................................... 35
`23. Claim 41......................................................................... 35
`24. Claim 42......................................................................... 36
`25. Claim 29......................................................................... 36
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 36
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 37
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 37
`26. Claim 32......................................................................... 37
`27. Claim 43......................................................................... 37
`B. Ground 2: Claims [1, 19] 20-44 are unpatentable as obvious under 35
`U.S.C. § 103 based on Boerjes, Gandyra, and Marvit. .................... 38
`1.
`Gandyra.......................................................................... 38
`
`- iii -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`2.
`
`3.
`4.
`5.
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`Independent Claim 33 ...................................................... 39
`(a) Elements [33.P]-[33.3.2]/[1.P]-[1.3.4]/[19.P]-[19.3.2].. 39
`(b) Elements [33.4]/[1.4]-[1.5]/[19.3.3], [19.5] ................ 39
`(i)
`Boerjes ......................................................... 39
`(ii) Gandyra........................................................ 39
`(iii) Motivation to Combine (Boerjes-Gandyra)........ 40
`(iv) Expectation of Success ................................... 41
`(v) Marvit .......................................................... 42
`(vi) Motivation to Combine (Boerjes-Gandyra-
`Marvit) ......................................................... 42
`(vii) Expectation of Success ................................... 43
`(c) Elements [33.5]/[1.6]/[19.7] ..................................... 44
`Claims 34-36................................................................... 45
`Claim 37/Elements [19.3.1] and [19.6] ............................... 45
`Claim 38......................................................................... 45
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 45
`(b) Gandyra................................................................. 45
`(c) Marvit ................................................................... 46
`(d) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 46
`Claim 39......................................................................... 46
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 46
`(b) Gandyra................................................................. 46
`(c) Marvit ................................................................... 47
`(d) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 47
`Claim 44/Element [19.4] ................................................... 47
`Claim 20......................................................................... 47
`Claim 21......................................................................... 47
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 47
`(b) Gandyra................................................................. 48
`(c) Motion to Combine and Expectation of Success .......... 48
`10. Claim 22......................................................................... 48
`
`6.
`
`7.
`8.
`9.
`
`- iv -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 48
`(b) Gandyra................................................................. 48
`(c) Marvit ................................................................... 49
`(d) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 49
`11. Claim 23......................................................................... 49
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 49
`(b) Gandyra................................................................. 49
`(c) Marvit ................................................................... 50
`(d) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 50
`12. Claim 24-28, 30-32, and 40-43 .......................................... 50
`13. Claim 29......................................................................... 51
`(a) Boerjes .................................................................. 51
`(b) Gandyra................................................................. 51
`(c) Marvit ................................................................... 52
`(d) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 52
`C. Ground 3: Claims [1, 19] 20-27 and 33-44 are unpatentable as obvious
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based Quadling and Marvit. ....................... 52
`1.
`Quadling......................................................................... 52
`2.
`Independent Claim 33 ...................................................... 54
`(a) Elements [33.P]/[1.P]/[19.P]..................................... 54
`(b) Element [33.1]........................................................ 54
`(c) Element [33.2]........................................................ 54
`(d) Element [33.3.1] ..................................................... 55
`(e) Element [33.3.2] ..................................................... 55
`(f)
`Elements [33.4]/[1.4]-[1.5]/[19.3.3], [19.5] ................ 55
`(i) Quadling....................................................... 55
`(ii) Marvit .......................................................... 56
`(iii) Motivation to Combine ................................... 56
`(iv) Expectation of Success ................................... 58
`(g) Element [33.5]........................................................ 58
`Claim 34......................................................................... 58
`
`3.
`
`- v -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`(a) Quadling................................................................ 58
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 59
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 59
`Claim 35......................................................................... 60
`(i) Quadling....................................................... 60
`(ii) Marvit .......................................................... 60
`(a) Element 35[b] ........................................................ 60
`(i) Quadling....................................................... 60
`(ii) Marvit .......................................................... 61
`(iii) Motivation to Combine ................................... 62
`(iv) Expectation of Success ................................... 62
`Claim 36......................................................................... 62
`(a) Quadling................................................................ 62
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 63
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 63
`Claim 37/Elements [19.3.1] and [19.6] ............................... 63
`(a) Quadling................................................................ 63
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 64
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 65
`Claim 38......................................................................... 65
`(a) Quadling................................................................ 65
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 65
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 66
`Claim 39......................................................................... 66
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 67
`Claim 44......................................................................... 67
`9.
`10. Claim 20......................................................................... 68
`11. Claim 21......................................................................... 68
`12. Claim 22......................................................................... 68
`(a) Quadling................................................................ 68
`
`8.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`- vi -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 69
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 69
`13. Claim 23......................................................................... 69
`(a) Quadling................................................................ 69
`(b) Marvit ................................................................... 70
`(c) Motivation to Combine and Expectation of Success .... 70
`14. Claims 24-27, 40-41, and 43.............................................. 70
`15. Claim 42......................................................................... 71
`VII. PETITIONER IS UNAWARE OF SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS. . 71
`VIII. NONE OF THE DISCRETIONARY DENIAL FACTORS WEIGH
`AGAINST INSTITUTION.................................................................. 72
`A.
`§ 325(d)................................................................................... 72
`B.
`§ 314(a) ................................................................................... 72
`IX. MANDATORY NOTICES (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(A)(1)) .............................. 75
`A.
`Real Party In Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)) .............................. 75
`B.
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)) ...................................... 75
`C.
`Lead and Back-up Counsel (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)) ...................... 76
`D.
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)) ................................ 76
`X. CONCLUSION ................................................................................. 77
`
`
`- vii -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Exhibit No.
`1001
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221 to Öjelund et al. (“RE’221”)
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. RE48,221 (“Prosecution History”)
`
`Declaration of Dr. Chandrajit Bajaj (“Bajaj Decl.”) in support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Chandrajit Bajaj
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0298017 to Boerjes et al.
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0212756 to Marvit et al.
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0087050 to Gandyra
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0020910 to Quadling et al.
`Öjelund Provisional, U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/420,138
`(filed December 6, 2010)
`Giammanco et al., “Using 3D Laser Scanning Technology to Create
`Digital Models of Hailstones,” American Meteorological Society,
`July 2017.
`Ireland et al., “3D surface imaging in dentistry – what we are
`looking at,” British Dental Journal, Vol. 205, No. 7, October 11,
`2008.
`U.S. Patent No. 6,485,413 to Boppart et al.
`Orhan H. Karatas and Ebubekir Toy, “Three-dimensional imaging
`techniques: A literature review,” European Journal of Dentistry,
`Vol. 8, No. 1, March 2014.
`B. H. Broadbent, “A New X-Ray Technique and Its Application to
`Orthodontia,” The Angle Orthodontist, Vol. I, No. 2, February 4,
`1931.
`
`- viii -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit No.
`
`1015
`
`1016
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`1020
`1021
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`1025
`1026
`1027
`1028
`1029
`
`1030
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`Description
`Nathan S. Birnbaum and Heidi B. Aaronson, “Dental impressions
`using 3D digital scanners: virtual becomes reality,” Compend.
`Contin. Educ. Dent., Vol. 29, No. 8, October 2008; pp. 494, 496,
`498-505
`U.S. Patent No. 5,131,844 to Marinaccio et al.
`U.S. Patent No. 6,592,371 to Durbin et al.
`Hajeer et al., “Current Products and Practices Applications of 3D
`imaging in orthodontics: Part II,” Journal of Orthodontics, Vol. 31,
`No. 2, June 2004; pp. 154-162
`U.S. Patent No. 5,722,412 to Pflugrath et al.
`U.S. Patent No. 6,645,148 to Nguygen-Dinh et al.
`U.S. Patent No. 5,181,181 to Glynn
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2006/0092133 to Touma et al.
`Bornik et al., “A Hybrid User Interface for Manipulation of
`Volumetric Medical Data,” 3DUI ’06: IEEE Symposium on 3D
`User Interfaces, March 2006; pp. 29-36
`U.S. Patent No. 6,227,850 to Chishti et al.
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0009308 to Wen et al.
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0110469 to Kopelman
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0062557 to Dillon et al.
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2007/0031774 to Cinader, Jr. et al.
`U.S. Patent No. 9,329,675 to Öjelund et al.
`
`Inter Partes Review Certificate, U.S. Patent No. 9,329,675 K1 to
`Öjelund et al.
`
`- ix -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit No.
`
`1031
`
`1032
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1037
`
`1038
`
`1039
`
`1040
`
`1041
`
`1042
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`Description
`Final Written Decision for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No.
`9,329,675 in IPR2018-00197, May 29, 2019.
`U.S. Patent No. 4,342,227 to Petersen et al.
`U.S. Patent No. 5,563,343 to Shaw et al.
`Steele et al., “Bodies in motion: Monitoring daily activity and
`exercise with motion sensors in people with chronic pulmonary
`disease,” J. Rehabil. Res. Dev., Vol. 40, No. 5, Suppl. 2, October
`2003.
`Hale et al., “Measuring free-living physical activity in adults with
`and without neurologic dysfunction with a triaxial accelerometer,”
`Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., Vol. 89, No. 9, September 2008.
`Greg Welch and Eric Foxlin, “Motion Tracking: No Silver Bullet,
`but a Respectable Arsenal,” IEEE Computer Graphics and
`Applications, Vol. 22, No. 6, December 10, 2002.
`Steven Nasiri, “A Critical Review of MEMS Gyroscopes
`Technology and Commercialization Status,” InvenSense, 2005.
`Hannes Kaufmann, “Applications of Mixed Reality,” Thesis, Vienna
`University of Technology, May 27, 2009.
`Welch et al., “High-Performance Wide-Area Optical Tracking: The
`HiBall Tracking System,” Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual
`Environments, Vol. 10, No. 1, February 2001.
`Nintendo, “Introducing Wii MotionPlus, Nintendo’s upcoming
`accessory for the revolutionary Wii Remote,” The Wayback
`Machine, July 14, 2008.
`Daniel Turner, “Hack: The Nintendo Wii,” MIT Technology
`Review, July 1, 2007.
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0070684 to Haigh-Hutchinson
`
`- x -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit No.
`
`1043
`
`1044
`
`1045
`
`1046
`
`1047
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`Description
`Brad A. Myers, CRC Handbook of Computer Science and
`Engineering, 2d. Ed., Allen B. Tucker, January 27, 2003, “Graphical
`User Interface Programming”
`Foley et al., Introduction to Computer Graphics, Addison-Wesley,
`1994, “Chapter 2.2: Basic Interaction Handling”, “Chapter 6:
`Viewing in 3D”, and “Chapter 8: Input Devices, Interaction
`Techniques, and Interaction Tasks”
`Donald Hearn and M. Pauline Baker, Computer Graphics, 2d. Ed.,
`Prentice Hall, 1994, “Chapter 2: Overview of Graphics Systems”,
`“Chapter 8: Graphical User Interfaces and Interactive Input
`Methods”, and “Chapter 9: Three-Dimensional Concepts”
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 9,329,675 (“’675 Prosecution
`History”)
`3Shape A/S v. Align Technology, Inc., IPR2021-01383, Petition for
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,728,519, August 20,
`2021.
`
`- xi -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`I.
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Petitioner Align Technology, Inc., (“Petitioner”) requests inter partes review
`
`(“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. RE48,221 (“RE’221”) claims 20-44 assigned to 3Shape
`
`A/S (“PO”). The Board is presented with a unique situation here in that it already
`
`invalidated the subject matter recited in the challenged claims when it invalidated
`
`claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 9,329,675 (“the ’675 patent”) in IPR2018-00197.
`
`PO was required to submit this certificate in an IDS during reissue of the ’675
`
`patent, and a petition showing cause why the ’675 patent reissue should proceed.
`
`M.P.E.P. §1449.01(A)(5). PO should have been precluded from seeking claims
`
`that are not patentably distinct from claims that were canceled during an
`
`administrative trial under the doctrine of res judicata. MPEP §2190.
`
`None of these things happened. Instead, claims 1-44 of RE’221 proceeded to
`
`issuance without substantive examination and with invalid subject matter serving
`
`as the basis for allowance. These errors went unnoticed during reissue prosecution,
`
`requiring Align to bring this Petition to have this subject matter invalidated again.
`
`To the extent claims 20-44 are not identical to those previously invalidated,
`
`they add no patentable features. PO admits that motion sensors were well-known.
`
`Setting aside these admissions, the Petition presents several new grounds, based on
`
`never-applied prior art—Boerjes, Marvit, Gandyra, and Quadling—that explicitly
`
`teaches motion sensors, showing that this is entirely conventional functionality.
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`During reissue prosecution, the Examiner did not make a single merits-based
`
`rejection, nor address how the RE’221 claims are distinct from the cancelled ’675
`
`patent claims. Accordingly, 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) does not apply. Nor does 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 314(a), because all of the Fintiv factors weigh in favor of instituting this Petition.
`
`II. GROUNDS FOR STANDING (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
`Align certifies that RE’221 is available for IPR, and that Align is not barred
`
`or estopped from requesting IPR of RE’221. The RE’221 assignee, 3Shape A/S,
`
`filed and served a counterclaim in Civil No. 6:20-cv-00979 on December 18, 2020,
`
`alleging infringement of RE’221. This Petition is being filed within one year of
`
`service.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`
`
`III.
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))
`Align requests IPR based on the following grounds1:
`
`Ground
`
`Prior Art
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`Boerjes (EX1005) and Marvit (EX1006)
`Boerjes, Gandyra (EX1007), and Marvit
`Quadling (EX1008) and Marvit
`
`Basis
`
`§103
`§103
`§103
`
`Claims
`Challenged
`[1, 19] 20-44
`[1, 19] 20-44
`[1, 19] 20-27 and
`33-44
`
`
`
`Without conceding that RE’221 is entitled to priority benefit of December 6,
`
`2010 for its earliest-filed provisional application, the prior art qualify as prior art:
`
`• Boerjes, U.S. Publication 2009/0298017, published on December 3,
`2009, qualifies as prior art under §102(b).
`
`• Marvit, U.S. Publication 2005/0212756, published on September 29,
`2005, qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. §102(b).
`
`
`1 RE’221 claims 20-28, 30-31, and 40-42 ultimately depend from claim 1,
`
`which was cancelled in IPR2018-00197. Section IV.B. RE’221 claims 29, 32, and
`
`43 depend from claim 19, which was cancelled in IPR2018-00197. Id. Claims 1
`
`and 19 are not directly challenged since they are cancelled, but features of claims 1
`
`and 19 are addressed in substance as the challenged claims incorporate all of their
`
`features.
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`• Gandyra, U.S. Publication 2009/0087050, published on April 2, 2009,
`qualifies as prior art under §102(b).
`
`• Quadling, U.S. Publication 2005/0020910, published on January 27,
`2005, qualifies as prior art under §102(b).
`
`IV. THE CHALLENGED PATENT
`A. RE’221
`RE’221 shows a handheld device for scanning a three dimensional (“3D”)
`
`environment and remotely controlling a view of the 3D environment using a user
`
`interface including a motion sensor. EX1001, 17:66-18:18; EX1003, ¶59. In a
`
`remote control mode, a user adjusts (e.g., rotate, pan, and/or zoom) the visual
`
`representation of the scanned 3D environment on a display. EX1001, 4:13-23,
`
`4:34-40; EX1003, ¶60. The user interface functionality is provided by motion
`
`sensors in the scanning device, whose readings determine orientation of the visual
`
`display of the scanned 3D environment. EX1001, 4:41-50; EX1003, ¶60.
`
`RE’221 alleges conventional systems required an operator to move away
`
`from a patient and put down the scanning device to remotely control a visual
`
`representation of a scanned 3D environment. EX1003, ¶61. Thus, RE’221 alleges
`
`an operator can continuously work without having to release the handheld device
`
`when switching between scanning a subject and adjusting a view of previously
`
`scanned images. EX1001, 5:1-16; 5:23-26; EX1003, ¶61.
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`B.
`
`Independent Claims
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`
`Claim 33
`[33.P] A scanning system
`for scanning a 3D
`environment, the
`scanning system
`comprising
`[33.1] a handheld device
`including an optical
`scanner, wherein the 3D
`environment to be
`scanned is selected by
`pointing the optical
`scanner at the 3D
`environment; and
`[33.2] at least one display
`remotely connected to the
`handheld device
`[33.3.1]: wherein the
`handheld device is
`adapted for performing at
`least one scanning action
`in a physical 3D
`environment, and
`
`Claim 12
`[1.P] identical to [33.P]
`
`Claim 193
`[19.1] A system
`comprising:
`
`[1.1] identical to [33.1]
`
`[19.1] a handheld device
`and
`
`[1.2] identical to [33.2]
`
`[19.2] at least one
`display;
`
`[1.3.1] identical to
`[33.3.1]
`
`[19.3.1]/[Claim 37]
`wherein the handheld
`device is adapted for
`switching between
`performing at least one
`action in a physical 3D
`environment,
`
`
`2 Petitioner demonstrates the unpatentability of claims [1], 20-28, 30-31, and
`
`40-42 by showing that claims 33-34 are unpatentable.
`
`3 Petitioner demonstrates the unpatentability of claims [19], 29, 32, and 43
`
`by showing that claims 33, 37, and 44 are unpatentable.
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`Claim 193
`[19.3.2] wherein the at
`least one display is
`adapted for visually
`representing the physical
`3D environment; and
`[19.3.3] remotely
`controlling the display to
`adjust the view with
`which the 3D
`environment is
`represented on the
`display;
`
`Claim 12
`[1.3.2] identical to
`[33.3.2]
`
`[1.4] the handheld device
`includes a 3D user
`interface for remotely
`controlling the display to
`adjust the view with
`which the 3D
`environment is
`represented on the
`display,
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 33
`[33.3.2] the at least one
`display is adapted for
`visually representing the
`physical 3D
`environment; and
`[33.4]: wherein the
`handheld device includes
`at least one motion
`sensor for remotely
`controlling the display to
`adjust the view with
`which the 3D
`environment is
`represented on the
`display; and
`[Claim 34] “wherein the
`handheld device further
`comprises at least two
`user interface elements”
`
`
`
`
`(See element 33.4 for
`similar language)
`
`
`
`
`
`[1.5] wherein the
`handheld device
`comprises at least one
`motion sensor, and
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`[19.4]/[Claim 44]
`wherein the handheld
`device is an intra-oral 3D
`scanner and the at least
`one action performed in
`the physical 3D
`environment is scanning
`and
`[19.5] that the view is
`remotely controlled by at
`least one motion sensor
`arranged in the handheld
`device,
`[19.6]/[Claim 37] and
`wherein an actuator
`
`

`

`Claim 33
`
`Claim 12
`
`
`
`
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`Claim 193
`provided on the handheld
`device switches between
`performing the at least
`one action and remotely
`controlling the view, and
`[19.7] wherein the at
`[1.6] wherein the at least
`[33.5] wherein the at
`one motion sensor is a
`least one motion sensor is
`least one motion sensor is
`sensor that directly
`a sensor that directly
`an accelerometer, gyro,
`detects motion.
`detects motion.
`or magnetometer.
`EX1001, 15:66-16:18, 17:1-18, 17:66-18:18 (numbering and spacing added).
`
`IPR and Reissue History
`C.
`RE’221 is a reissue of the ’675 patent. In IPR2018-00197, the Board found
`
`that U.S. 2007/0171220A1 (“Kriveshko”) invalidates almost all the ’675 patent
`
`claim elements. EX1031, 25-38. The Board also found that U.S. 2006/0020204A1
`
`(“Serra”) invalidated ’675 patent claim 19’s “3D sensor” that can sense the motion
`
`of a handheld probe by tracking its position and orientation because Serra teaches
`
`that “a button can be used to use the probe to scan an image or to use it to rotate
`
`the entire virtual scene,” recognizing that this was “a common 3D data set
`
`interactive visualization operation.” Id., 39; see also id., 51-59.
`
`Serra’s “3D sensor” senses motion through tracking position and orientation
`
`and rotates “the 3D data presented on the display using tracking information
`
`corresponding to the movement of the scanning device.” Id., 54. The Board held
`
`that it would have been obvious to incorporate Serra’s 3D user interface into
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. RE48,221
`
`
`Kriveshko’s scanning device in light of the “ergonomic benefits of modifying a
`
`scanning device to include the ability to adjust display parameters.” Id., 42.
`
`PO did not appeal and instead filed Reissue Application 16/526,281, seeking
`
`substantively the same claims as invalidated claims 1 and 19, adding only “wherein
`
`the at least one motion sensor is an acceleromete