UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`ZYNGA INC.,
`Petitioner
`v.
`IGT,
`Patent Owner
`____________________________
`U.S. Patent No. 8,795,064 B2
`Original Issue Date: August 5, 2014
`Title: METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OUTPUTTING A MESSAGE AT A
`GAME MACHINE
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00200
`_________________________________________________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DAVID CRANE
`_________________________________________________________________
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 1
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`I.
`II.
`
`Page
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`EDUCATION BACKGROUND, PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE,
`AND OTHER QUALIFICATIONS ............................................................... 1
`III. ASSIGNMENT AND MATERIALS CONSIDERED .................................. 6
`IV. UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW ............................................................. 8
`V.
`LEVEL OF SKILL IN THE ART ................................................................ 12
`VI. THE ’064 PATENT’S EFFECTIVE FILING DATE .................................. 13
`VII. THE ’064 PATENT ...................................................................................... 13
`
`i
`
`

`

`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`[1(a)] identify a player placing at least one wager
`on at least one play of a game........................................ 36
`[1(b)] track information associated with the
`identified player. ............................................................ 38
`[1(c)] if a first set of information associated with
`the identified player is tracked and a message
`trigger condition occurs in association with the
`identified player: (i) determine, based at least in
`part on the first set of tracked information, a first
`message, and (ii) output the determined first
`message to the identified player. ................................... 41
`[1(d)] if a second, different set of information
`associated with the identified player is tracked and
`the message trigger condition occurs in association
`with the identified player: (i) determine, based at
`least in part on the second set of tracked
`information, a second, different message, and (ii)
`output the determined second message to the
`identified player. ............................................................ 48
`Claim 2: The gaming system of claim 1, wherein the
`message trigger condition occurs based on at least one
`selected from the group consisting of: a gaming activity
`of the identified player, a non-gaming activity of the
`identified player, at least one preference of the identified
`player, an activity of another player separate from the
`identified player, and an output of another message. .............. 54
`Claim 3: The gaming system of claim 1, wherein the
`determined message is at least one selected from the
`group consisting of: a status message, an instructive
`message, a communication message, a promotional
`message, an activity-benefit offer, a hypothetical
`information message and a recommendation of a feature. ...... 56
`
`i.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`ii
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 3
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`Claim 4: The gaming system of claim 1, wherein the
`tracked information associated with the identified player
`is at least one selected from the group consisting of: an
`identity of the player, contact information of the player,
`at least one preference of the player, at least one
`wagering performance history of the player, an amount of
`comp points accumulated by the player, a current activity
`of the player, at least one demographic of the player, at
`least one input made by the player, wagering information
`associated with the player and non-wagering information
`associated with the player. ....................................................... 58
`Claim 5: The gaming system of claim 1, wherein when
`executed by the at least one processor, the plurality of
`instructions cause the at least one processor to output, in
`a partition including a pop-up window, one of: (i) the
`determined first message, and (ii) the determined second
`message. ................................................................................... 60
`Claim 6: The gaming system of claim 1, wherein the first
`message is associated with a first representation and the
`second message is associated with a second, different
`representation. .......................................................................... 65
`Claim 7: The gaming system of claim 1, wherein the
`message trigger condition which occurs in association
`with the first set of tracked information is different than
`the message trigger condition which occurs in association
`with the second set of tracked information. ............................. 67
`Claim 8: The gaming system of claim 1, wherein when
`executed by the at least one processor, the plurality of
`instructions cause the at least one processor to suppress
`any output of any of the messages if the message trigger
`condition does not occur. ......................................................... 68
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 71
`a.
`[9p] A method of operating a gaming system, said
`method comprising: ....................................................... 71
`[9(a)] causing at least one processor to execute a
`plurality of instructions to identify a player placing
`at least one wager on at least one play of a game. ......... 71
`
`b.
`
`iii
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 4
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`c.
`
`d.
`
`[9(b)] causing the at least one processor to execute
`the plurality of instructions to track information
`associated with the identified player. ............................ 72
`[9(c)] if a first set of information associated with
`the identified player is tracked and a message
`trigger condition occurs in association with the
`identified player: (i) causing the at least one
`processor to execute the plurality of instructions to
`determine, based at least in part on the first set of
`tracked information, a first message, and (ii)
`causing at least one output device to output the
`determined first message to the identified player. ......... 72
`[9(d)] if a second, different set of information
`associated with the identified player is tracked and
`the message trigger condition occurs in association
`with the identified player: (i) causing the at least
`one processor to execute the plurality of
`instructions to determine, based at least in part on
`the second set of tracked information, a second,
`different message, and (ii) causing the at least one
`output device to output the determined second
`message to the identified player. ................................... 73
`10. Claim 10: The method of claim 9, wherein the message
`trigger condition occurs based on at least one selected
`from the group consisting of: a gaming activity of the
`identified player, a non-gaming activity of the identified
`player, at least one preference of the identified player, an
`activity of another player separate from the identified
`player, and an output of another message. ............................... 74
`11. Claim 11: The method of claim 9, wherein the
`determined message is at least one selected from the
`group consisting of: a status message, an instructive
`message, a communication message, a promotional
`message, an activity-benefit offer, a hypothetical
`information message and a recommendation of a feature. ...... 74
`
`e.
`
`iv
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 5
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`12. Claim 12: The method of claim 9, wherein the tracked
`information associated with the identified player is at
`least one selected from the group consisting of: an
`identity of the player, contact information of the player,
`at least one preference of the player, at least one
`wagering performance history of the player, an amount of
`comp points accumulated by the player, a current activity
`of the player, at least one demographic of the player, at
`least one input made by the player, wagering information
`associated with the player and non-wagering information
`associated with the player. ....................................................... 75
`13. Claim 13: The method of claim 9, which includes
`causing the at least one output device to output, in a
`partition including a pop-up window, one of: (i) the
`determined first message, and (ii) the determined second
`message. ................................................................................... 75
`14. Claim 14: The method of claim 9, wherein the first
`message is associated with a first representation and the
`second message is associated with a second, different
`representation. .......................................................................... 76
`15. Claim 15: The method of claim 9, wherein the message
`trigger condition which occurs in association with the
`first set of tracked information is different than the
`message trigger condition which occurs in association
`with the second set of tracked information. ............................. 76
`16. Claim 16: The method of claim 9, which includes
`causing the at least one processor to execute the plurality
`of instructions to suppress any output of any of the
`messages if the message trigger condition does not occur. ..... 77
`17. Claim 17: The method of claim 9, which is executed
`through a data network. ............................................................ 77
`18. Claim 18: The method of claim 17, wherein the data
`network is an internet. .............................................................. 80
`19. Motivation to Combine ............................................................ 83
`a. Motivation to Combine Aristocrat’s Embodiments ...... 83
`b. Motivation to Combine Aristocrat with Boushy ........... 85
`
`v
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 6
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`X. OBJECTIVE INDICIA OF NON-OBVIOUSNESS .................................... 89
`XI. DECLARATION .......................................................................................... 90
`
`vi
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 7
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`I, David Crane, hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`I have been retained by Zynga Inc. (“Zynga” or “Petitioner”) as an
`
`independent expert consultant in this proceeding before the United States Patent
`
`and Trademark Office (“PTO”). I am not, nor have I ever been, an employee of
`
`Zynga or any affiliate or subsidiary of Zynga.
`
`2.
`
`I have been asked to consider whether certain references teach or
`
`suggest the features recited in the claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,795,064 B2, which I
`
`refer to herein as the ’064 patent, and whether certain claims of the ’064 patent are
`
`unpatentable as obvious.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`My opinions and the bases for my opinions are set forth below.
`
`I am being compensated at the rate of $500 per hour for my work,
`
`plus reimbursement for any reasonable expenses. My compensation is based
`
`solely on the amount of time that I devote to activity related to this proceeding and
`
`is in no way contingent on the nature of my findings, the presentation of my
`
`findings in testimony, or the outcome of this or any other proceeding. I have no
`
`other financial interest in this proceeding.
`
`II.
`
`EDUCATION BACKGROUND, PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE,
`AND OTHER QUALIFICATIONS
`5.
`Throughout the remainder of this declaration, I will refer to the field
`
`of wager games as the “relevant field” or the “relevant art.” In formulating my
`
`1
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 8
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`opinions, I have relied upon my training, knowledge, and experience in the
`
`relevant art. A copy of my current curriculum vitae is provided as Appendix A
`
`hereto. It provides a comprehensive description of my academic and employment
`
`history, including a list of video game product publications for at least the last 39
`
`years.
`
`6.
`
`I started in the relevant art as a student at DeVry Institute of
`
`Technology, Phoenix, Arizona (“DeVry”) where I earned a Bachelor of Science in
`
`Electronic Engineering Technology in 1975.
`
`7.
`
`My formal studies at DeVry included grounding in all areas of
`
`electronic circuitry, including analog and digital circuits, as well as computer
`
`programming. I built my first computer – an unbeatable Tic-Tac-Toe computer –
`
`at the age of 14 and graduated high school with the ability to program IBM
`
`mainframe computers in 3 languages. While in college, I was the lead hardware
`
`designer and project leader on a fully digital Tic-Tac-Toe playing custom hardware
`
`project. This design featured 72 discrete integrated circuits and an innovative
`
`display using polarized light to separate light output into Xs and Os. In the same
`
`timeframe, I designed the first programmable electronic drum machine, and a
`
`digital clock that never needed setting, designed to receive a time standard over the
`
`AC power line.
`
`2
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 9
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`8.
`
`In 1977, I began my career in the video game industry when I joined
`
`Atari Inc. (“Atari”), where I designed and developed games that generated
`
`approximately $15 million in sales revenues for the company, including, for
`
`example, an electronic Slot Machine game program developed in 1978.
`
`9.
`
`In 1979, I co-founded Activision, Inc. (“Activision”), the first third-
`
`party developer and publisher of video game cartridges. Activision grew to over
`
`$300 million in value in three years and is now one of the largest third-party video
`
`game publishers in the world, with a market capitalization of approximately
`
`$15 billion.
`
`10. During my tenure at Activision, I designed and programmed many hit
`
`games with unit sales over 500,000. One such example is the game Pitfall!™
`
`which sold over 3,500,000 copies and generated over $50 million in wholesale
`
`revenues. At Activision, I performed or oversaw all of Activision’s research on
`
`game consoles and designed and built a custom development computer system for
`
`each console. I personally handled all functional design, circuit design, system
`
`engineering, printed circuit board layout and manufacturing specification, and
`
`soldered and wired the development system prototype before handing the design
`
`off for replication. From Activision’s inception in 1979, until I left the company in
`
`1987, I served as the company’s primary technologist in the operation of the game
`
`consoles for which we published games.
`
`3
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 10
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`11. After leaving Activision in 1987, I founded a series of small game
`
`publishing companies, performing the same two main functions: first, becoming
`
`the company’s primary hardware technologist on a particular game console, then,
`
`designing and programming award-winning games. Throughout this process, I
`
`have developed particular expertise in over 20 video game consoles or systems,
`
`including the Atari 2600, Atari 5200, Atari 7800, Atari 400, Atari 800, Magnavox
`
`Odyssey II, Mattel Intellivision, Colecovision, Apple II, MS-DOS, Commodore
`
`C64, Commodore C128, Nintendo NES, Nintendo SNES, Nintendo Game Boy,
`
`Nintendo DS, Sega Master System, Sega Genesis, Sega CD, Sony PlayStation,
`
`Nokia Series 60 feature phones, LG VX4400, LG VX6000, Apple iPhone, Apple
`
`iPod touch, and Apple iPad.
`
`12. My “publications” in the relevant field have taken the form of
`
`commercial products. In my 39 years of experience in video games, I have
`
`designed and programmed over 80 commercial game products generating over
`
`$400 million in revenues. I have developed games on a large percentage of video
`
`game systems invented, from the early days of Atari and Magnavox through to
`
`present-day systems such as the Microsoft Xbox Platform. I have acquired
`
`extensive experience in designing and developing video games. I am also named
`
`as the inventor on U.S. Patent No. 4,644,495 for an improved Video Memory
`
`4
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 11
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`System configured to increase the capability of a computer system to execute
`
`complex video displays.
`
`13.
`
`In addition to gaining expertise through educational training,
`
`professional experiences, and research experiences described above, I have kept
`
`abreast of developments in the relevant field. I am a regular speaker and/or
`
`panelist at video game industry trade events such as the D.I.C.E. Summit (Design,
`
`Innovate, Communicate & Entertain) and GDC (Game Developers Conference),
`
`indicating that my peers feel that I am an expert in these areas as well. I have
`
`spoken at gatherings of game business executives (such as at the Pepperdine
`
`University Graziadio School of Business and Management), and I am featured
`
`annually at the Classic Gaming Expo. I have been profiled in national press
`
`publications including Forbes Magazine and Newsweek, and I have been
`
`interviewed by such diverse publications as television’s 20/20 News Magazine and
`
`the G4 Television Network. Furthermore, I have collaborated with, or have
`
`communicated with, many of the programmers, developers, and researchers in the
`
`field of video game display technology. Accordingly, I believe I am qualified to
`
`provide an opinion as to what a person of ordinary skill in the art would have
`
`understood, known, or concluded as of 2002 when the application through which
`
`the ’064 patent claims priority was filed.
`
`5
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 12
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`14.
`
`I have received many other awards for my work and career. For
`
`example, I received one of the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences lifetime
`
`honors: The Pioneer Award, celebrating my foundational and continuing work in
`
`the creation and development of the video game business. This singular honor,
`
`presented to me in 2010, was the inaugural award in a new category. I was the first
`
`to receive this award out of everyone who had ever worked in the video game
`
`industry throughout its entire history. Additional awards include Game Designer
`
`of the Year (twice), the prestigious 2003 Game Developer Choice Award for
`
`contribution to the field, and the Lifetime Achievement Award in Video Games
`
`from Classic Gaming Expo. In addition to these personal honors, many of the
`
`individual games that I have developed have also received numerous awards.
`
`III. ASSIGNMENT AND MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`15.
`I have been asked to provide analysis and explain the subject matter of
`
`the ’064 patent, including the state of the art when the purported priority patent
`
`application to the ’064 patent was filed. I have also been asked to consider,
`
`analyze, and explain certain prior art to the ’064 patent including how that art
`
`relates to claims 1-18 (the “Challenged Claims”) of the ’064 patent and to provide
`
`my opinions regarding whether that art invalidates the claimed subject matter.
`
`16.
`
`The opinions expressed in this declaration are not exhaustive of my
`
`opinions regarding the unpatentability of the claims of the ’064 patent. Therefore,
`
`6
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 13
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`the fact that I do not address a particular point should not be understood to indicate
`
`an agreement on my part that any claim complies with the requirements of any
`
`applicable patent or other rule.
`
`17.
`
`I reserve the right to amend and supplement this declaration in light of
`
`additional evidence, arguments, or testimony presented during this IPR or related
`
`proceedings on the ’064 patent.
`
`18.
`
`In forming the opinions set forth in this declaration, I have considered
`
`and relied upon my education, knowledge of the relevant field, knowledge of
`
`scientific and engineering principles, and my experience. I have also reviewed and
`
`considered the ’064 patent (Exhibit 1001), its prosecution history (Exhibit 1002),
`
`and the additional materials in the table below:
`
`Exhibit
`1001
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 8,795,064 B2 to Walker et al.
`
`1002
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 8,795,064 B2 to Walker et al.
`
`International Pub. No. WO 00/32286 (“Aristocrat”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,761,647 (“Boushy”)
`
`Sept. 29, 2021 Patent Owner’s Preliminary Proposed
`Constructions in IGT et al. v. Zynga Inc., Case No. 6:21-cv-
`00331-ADA (W.D. Tex.)
`
`Sept. 30, 2021 Petitioner’s Preliminary Proposed Constructions
`in IGT et al. v. Zynga Inc., Case No. 6:21-cv-00331-ADA (W.D.
`Tex.)
`
`7
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 14
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`IV. UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW
`19.
`I am not an attorney but have been instructed in and applied the law as
`
`described in this section.
`
`20.
`
`I understand that the first step in comparing an asserted claim to the
`
`prior art is for the claim to be properly construed. I address how a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would have understood the claims of the alleged invention
`
`in Section IX below.
`
`21.
`
`I have been further instructed and understand that a patent claim is
`
`unpatentable and invalid as obvious if the subject matter of the claim as a whole
`
`would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art of the claimed
`
`subject matter as of the time of the invention at issue. I understand that when
`
`assessing the obviousness of claimed subject matter, the following factors are
`
`evaluated: (1) the scope and content of the prior art; (2) the difference or
`
`differences between each claim of the patent and the prior art; and (3) the level of
`
`ordinary skill in the art on the effective filing date of the patent.
`
`22.
`
`I understand that claimed subject matter may be obvious in view of
`
`more than one item of prior art. I understand, however, that it is not enough to
`
`show simply that all the limitations of the claimed subject matter are spread
`
`throughout the prior art. Instead, for claimed subject matter to be obvious over
`
`multiple references, there must be some reason or motivation for one of ordinary
`
`8
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 15
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`skill in the art to combine the prior-art references to arrive at the claimed subject
`
`matter.
`
`23.
`
`I have been informed that, in seeking to determine whether an
`
`invention that is a combination of known elements would have been obvious to a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, one must consider
`
`the references in their entirety to ascertain whether the disclosures in those
`
`references render the combination obvious to such a person.
`
`24.
`
`I have been informed and understand that, while not required, the
`
`prior-art references themselves may provide a teaching, suggestion, motivation, or
`
`reason to combine, but other times the motivation linking two or more prior-art
`
`references is common sense to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention.
`
`25.
`
`I understand that a particular combination may be proven obvious by
`
`showing that it was obvious to try the combination. I have been informed that, if a
`
`technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way,
`
`using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her
`
`skill.
`
`26.
`
`I further understand that an obviousness analysis recognizes that
`
`market demand, rather than scientific literature, often drives innovation, and that a
`
`9
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 16
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`motivation to combine references also may be supplied by the direction of the
`
`marketplace. For example, when there is a design need or market pressure to solve
`
`a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a
`
`person of ordinary skill has a good reason to pursue the known options within his
`
`or her technical grasp because the result is likely the product not of innovation but
`
`of ordinary skill and common sense.
`
`27.
`
`I have been informed that the combination of familiar elements
`
`according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than
`
`yield predictable results. Thus, where all of the elements of a claim are used in
`
`substantially the same manner, in devices in the same field of endeavor, the claim
`
`is likely obvious.
`
`28. Additionally, I understand that a patent is likely to be invalid for
`
`obviousness if a person of ordinary skill can implement a predictable variation or if
`
`there existed at the time of the invention a known problem for which there was an
`
`obvious solution encompassed by the patent’s claims. Therefore, when a work is
`
`available in one field of endeavor, design incentives and other market forces can
`
`prompt variations of it, either in the same field or a different one.
`
`29.
`
`I further understand that combining embodiments related to each other
`
`in a single prior-art reference would not ordinarily require a leap of inventiveness.
`
`10
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 17
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`30.
`
`I also understand that one of ordinary skill in the art must have had a
`
`reasonable expectation of success when combining references for claimed subject
`
`matter to be obvious.
`
`31.
`
`I have been informed and I understand that factors referred to as
`
`“objective indicia of non-obviousness” or “secondary considerations” are also to
`
`be considered when assessing obviousness when such evidence is available. I
`
`understand that these factors can include: (1) commercial success; (2) long-felt but
`
`unresolved needs; (3) copying of the invention by others in the field; (4) initial
`
`expressions of disbelief by experts in the field; (5) failure of others to solve the
`
`problem the claimed subject matter solved; and (6) unexpected results.
`
`32.
`
`I also understand that evidence of objective indicia of non-
`
`obviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claimed subject matter. I
`
`further understand that there must be a relationship, sometimes referred to as a
`
`“nexus,” between any such secondary indicia and the claimed invention.
`
`33.
`
`Finally, I have been informed that one cannot use hindsight to
`
`determine that an invention was obvious.
`
`34.
`
`I provide my opinions in this declaration based on the guidelines set
`
`forth above.
`
`11
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 18
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`V.
`
`LEVEL OF SKILL IN THE ART
`35.
`I have been informed and understand that the level of ordinary skill in
`
`the relevant art at the time of the invention is relevant to inquiries such as the
`
`meaning of claim terms, the meaning of disclosures found in the prior art, and the
`
`reasons one of ordinary skill in the art may have for combining references.
`
`36.
`
`I have been informed and understand that the factors that may be
`
`considered in determining the level of ordinary skill include: (1) the education of
`
`the inventor; (2) the type of problems encountered in the art; (3) prior art solutions
`
`to those problems; (4) rapidity with which innovations are made; (5) sophistication
`
`of the technology; and (6) education level of active workers in the relevant field. I
`
`have been further informed and understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`is also a person of ordinary creativity.
`
`37. A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) in the relevant field
`
`of the ’064 patent would have had a bachelor’s degree in computer science or a
`
`similar discipline and 2 years of professional programming experience in the
`
`gaming software industry. This person would be aware of and generally
`
`knowledgeable about casino gaming systems at the time the purported priority
`
`patent application that eventually led to the ’064 patent was filed (which I
`
`understand to be October 2002 for purpose of this proceeding), including the
`
`12
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 19
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`manner in which casino gaming machines tracked player information and delivered
`
`messages to players and the networks connecting various casino gaming machines.
`
`38.
`
`In view of my educational background and decades of experience in
`
`the relevant field, as discussed in Section II, I was a person of more than the
`
`ordinary level of skill in the art as of October 2002. My opinions herein, however,
`
`were formed considering the perspective of an ordinarily skilled artisan.
`
`VI. THE ’064 PATENT’S EFFECTIVE FILING DATE
`39.
`I understand that the application leading to the ’064 patent was filed
`
`on November 19, 2012.
`
`40. Based on my review of the ’064 patent, I note that it also refers to two
`
`earlier applications and an October 11, 2002 provisional application.
`
`41.
`
`For purposes of this declaration, I have been instructed to use October
`
`11, 2002 as the effective filing date of the ’064 patent. My opinions in this
`
`declaration were formed from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art as of October 11, 2002, including both the knowledge of a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art at that time as well as how a person of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`have understood the prior art.
`
`VII. THE ’064 PATENT
`
`13
`
`

`

`machine, to provide relevant information at appropriate times, and/or in response
`
`to appropriate events, to players using the game machine.” (Ex. 1001, Abstract).
`
`It also purports to enhance the gaming experience by “selectively outputting
`
`helpful and desirable messages to players while minimizing interference with the
`
`players’ gaming and to avoid overwhelming players with unsolicited, unwanted,
`
`and/or irrelevant messages.” (Id.). A purported benefit of the invention is that
`
`game machines can “cater to all players with the same level of service and
`
`attention previously provided exclusively to ‘high rollers’ by hosts and hostesses.”
`
`(Id., 4:3-7).
`
`43.
`
`Figure 3 of the ’064 patent, replicated below, provides a block
`
`diagram of an exemplary system with a controller 102 that is operable to execute
`
`the methods of the purported invention.
`
`14
`
`Zynga Ex. 1003, p. 21
`Zynga v. IGT
`IPR2022-00200
`
`

`

`(Id., Fig 3, annotated).
`
`44.
`
`The controller 102 may comprise standard components including a
`
`processor 302, an input device 338, an output device 340, and a communications
`
`port 336 through which the processor 302 communicates with other devices such
`
`as game machines. (Id., 13:34-41). The processor may also communicate with a
`
`data storage device 304, which may include memory and may store a server
`
`program 306 that controls the processor 302. (Id., 13:42-47, 13:59-60). The
`
`15
`
`

`

`specification provides that the processor may be an Intel Pentium processor. (Id.,
`
`13:35-36). The server program is operative to execute several aspects of the
`
`invention, including receiving, storing, and accessing player information and
`
`determining if trigger conditions for outputting messages are met:
`
`one or more routines to identify a player at a game
`machine 104; one or more routines to retrieve messages
`from databases; one or more routines to receive
`information about a user; one or more routines to retrieve
`historical data regarding a player; one or more routines to
`send messages to a game machine 104; one or more
`routines to send signals to a game machine 104 to adjust
`a parameter; one or more routines for receiving
`information from a game machine 104; one or more
`routines to store player performance information; one or
`more routines to store player preference information; one
`or more routines to facilitate and control communications
`between game machines 104 and/or third-party servers;
`one or more routines to restore a game machine 104 to
`using its default parameter values; and/or one or more
`routines to control databases or software objects that
`track information regarding users, casinos, merchants
`supplying prizes, other third-parties, gambling results,
`game machines 104 and awarding prizes.
`(Id., 14:17-35).
`
`16
`
`

`

`1. A gaming system comprising:
`at least one output device;
`at least one input device;
`at least one processor; and
`at least one memory device which stores a plurality of
`instructions, which when executed by the at least one
`processor, cause the at least one processor to operate with
`the at least one output device and the at least one input
`device to:
`(a) identify a player placing at least one wager on at least
`one play of a game,
`(b) track information associated with the identified player,
`(c) if a first set of information associated with the identified
`player is tracked and a message trigger condition occurs
`in association with the identified player:
`(i) determine, based at leas