UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_____________________________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________________________
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,
`APPLE INC.,
`HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE CO.,
` ARUBA NETWORKS, LLC
`
`Petitioners,
`
`- vs. -
`
`BILLJCO, LLC,
`
`Patent Owner.
`_________________________
`
`Case IPR2022-00427
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,292,011
`
`_________________________
`
`
`EXPERT DECLARATION OF WILLIAM R. MICHALSON
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES
`REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,292,011
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 1 of 82
`
`

`

`Declaration of William R. Michalson
`
`I.
`II.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS ............................................... 1
`UNDERSTANDING OF THE GOVERNING LAW ..................................... 4
` Invalidity by Obviousness ......................................................................... 4
` Interpreting Claims Before the Patent Office ........................................... 7
` Materials Relied on in Forming My Opinions .......................................... 8
`III. Overview of the ’011 Patent ............................................................................ 9
` Specification of the ’011 Patent ................................................................ 9
` The Claims of the ’011 Patent .................................................................18
` The Prosecution History of the ’011 Patent ............................................23
` The Priority Date of the ’011 Patent .......................................................24
`IV. STATE OF THE ART PRIOR TO THE ’011 pATENT ..............................25
` The Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ..................................................25
` A POSA Would Have Known of Multiple Ways to Track and Locate
`Mobile Devices . .....................................................................................25
` Ribaudo ...................................................................................................28
` Lorincz ....................................................................................................32
` Evans .......................................................................................................35
` Wrappe ....................................................................................................37
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ..........................................................................38
`V.
`VI. GROUNDS OF INVALIDITY .....................................................................38
` GROUND 1: Claims 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19 and 20 of the ’011 Patent
`are obvious in light of the combination of Ribaudo and Lorincz. ..........38
` Motivation to Combine .....................................................................39
`
`i
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 2 of 82
`
`

`

`Declaration of William R. Michalson
`
`
`
`Invalidity Analysis ............................................................................42
` GROUND 2: Claims 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19 and 20 of the ’011 Patent
`are obvious in light of the combination of Ribaudo and Wrappe. ..........70
` GROUND 3: Claims 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19 and 20 of the ’011 Patent
`are obvious in light of the combination of Ribaudo, Lorincz and Evans.
` .................................................................................................................73
` GROUND 4: Claims 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19 and 20 of the ’011 Patent
`are obvious in light of the combination of Ribaudo, Wrappe and Evans.
` .................................................................................................................76
`VII. Objective Indicia of Non-Obviousness .........................................................78
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 3 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`I, William R. Michalson, hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS
`I have been retained on behalf of Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”), Apple
`1.
`
`Inc. (“Apple”), Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. (“Hewlett Packard”) and Aruba
`
`Networks, LLC (“Aruba”) (collectively, “Petitioners”) to provide my technical
`
`review, analysis, insights, and opinions concerning the validity of the claims of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 10,292,011 (EX1001; “the ’011 Patent”) entitled “System and method
`
`for location based exchange network.” The patent is assigned to BillJCo LLC.
`
`(“BillJCo”).
`
`2.
`
`I am a professor in the Department of Robotics Engineering at the
`
`Worcester Polytechnic Institute, where I currently hold the position of Professor of
`
`Robotics Engineering. I was a founding member of the faculty of the Robotics
`
`Program. I have held an appointment as a Professor of Electrical and Computer
`
`Engineering since 1991 and currently hold appointments as a Professor in the
`
`Departments of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Computer Science and
`
`Mechanical Engineering, in addition to my appointment to Robotics Engineering. I
`
`have been a faculty member at Worcester Polytechnic Institute since 1990.
`
`3. My emphasis at Worcester Polytechnic Institute is on teaching and
`
`conducting research on navigation, communications and computer system design. I
`
`have taught classes related to the fundamentals of navigation systems, robotics,
`
`1
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 4 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`computer architecture, embedded system designs, advanced system architectures,
`
`and real-time system designs.
`
`4.
`
`Prior to joining Worcester Polytechnic Institute, I was employed as an
`
`engineer at Raytheon Company from 1981 until 1991. During that time, I worked on
`
`various projects involving hardware and software design, including those relating to
`
`satellite, airborne and ground-based systems for navigation and communications. I
`
`have worked extensively in software programming, including during my
`
`employment at Raytheon and in a variety of projects relating to navigation,
`
`communications, and computation systems at Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
`
`5.
`
`I received a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Worcester Polytechnic
`
`Institute in 1989. Before that, I received a M.S. degree in electrical engineering from
`
`the Worcester Polytechnic Institute in 1985, and a B.S. degree in electrical
`
`engineering from Syracuse University in 1981.
`
`6.
`
`I have been issued multiple patents in the fields of geolocation devices
`
`and handheld Global Positioning System (“GPS”) devices. I have authored or co-
`
`authored over 100 original articles in the fields of communication networks,
`
`precision location systems, and GPS, including more than 15 journal papers and 90
`
`conference papers. I am a Senior Member of the Institute of Electrical and
`
`Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
`
`2
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 5 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`7.
`
`A large part of my research work has involved GPS and GPS-related
`
`technologies. I have been involved in numerous academic and consulting projects
`
`involving navigation technologies and their association with geographic information
`
`system technologies. For example, in 2003, I worked on an academic project relating
`
`to a container tracking system which explored the application of tracking and
`
`communication technologies to track shipping containers. Further, in 2000, I worked
`
`on an automotive based system which combined GPS and map data in an automotive
`
`environment. In the early 2000s, I was involved with the development of tracking
`
`and communications for soldiers operating in indoor and urban environments, as
`
`well as for tracking firefighters inside buildings. In addition, in 1996, I worked on a
`
`system that combined GPS and radio communications to remotely identify hazards
`
`to an engineer operating a freight train. In 1995, I worked on a differential GPS
`
`system that combined GPS and radio technologies that determined the path traveled
`
`by off-road vehicles during forest operations. As a consultant, I have worked with
`
`the combination of GPS and radio communications in technologies relating to the
`
`transfer of traffic information to GPS devices in a vehicle, space shuttle docking
`
`operations, the combination of GPS and cellular communications for the tracking of
`
`individuals, and map-based handheld tracking devices.
`
`8.
`
`I attach as Exhibit 1003 is my curriculum vitae, which includes a more
`
`detailed list of my qualifications. My curriculum vitae also contains a list of all other
`
`3
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 6 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`cases in which, during the previous 4 years, I testified as an expert at trial or by
`
`deposition. My work on this case is being billed at a rate of $525.00 per hour, with
`
`reimbursement for actual expenses. I have no direct financial interest in the dispute
`
`between the Petitioners and BillJCo, and my compensation is not contingent upon
`
`the outcome of this Inter Partes review.
`
`II. UNDERSTANDING OF THE GOVERNING LAW
`Invalidity by Obviousness
`
`
`9.
`
`I understand that obviousness is analyzed from the perspective of a
`
`POSA at the time of the alleged invention. I also understand that a POSA is
`
`presumed to have been aware of all pertinent prior art at the time of the alleged
`
`invention.
`
`10.
`
`I understand that an obviousness analysis involves comparing a claim
`
`to the prior art to determine whether the claimed invention as a whole would have
`
`been obvious to a POSA in view of the prior art, and in light of the general
`
`knowledge in the art at the time the invention was made. I also understand that the
`
`invention may be deemed obvious when a POSA would have reached the claimed
`
`invention through routine experimentation.
`
`11.
`
`I understand that obviousness can be established by combining or
`
`modifying the disclosures of the prior art to achieve the claimed invention. It is also
`
`my understanding that where there is a reason to modify or combine the prior art to
`
`4
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 7 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`achieve the claimed invention, there must also be a reasonable expectation of success
`
`in so doing to render the claimed invention obvious. I understand that the reason to
`
`combine prior art references can come from a variety of sources, not just the prior
`
`art itself or the specific problem the patentee was trying to solve. I also understand
`
`that the references themselves need not provide a specific hint or suggestion of the
`
`alteration needed to arrive at the claimed invention; the analysis may include
`
`recourse to logic, judgment, and common sense available to a POSA.
`
`12.
`
`I understand that when there is some recognized reason to solve a
`
`problem, and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a POSA
`
`has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If
`
`such an approach leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of
`
`innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. In such a circumstance, when a
`
`patent simply arranges old elements with each performing the same function it had
`
`been known to perform and yields no more than one would expect from such an
`
`arrangement, the combination is obvious.
`
`13.
`
`I understand that when considering the obviousness of an invention,
`
`one should also consider whether there are any objective indicia that support the
`
`non-obviousness of the invention. I further understand that objective indicia of non-
`
`obviousness include failure of others, copying, unexpected results, information that
`
`“teaches away” from the claimed subject matter, perception in the industry,
`
`5
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 8 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`commercial success, and long-felt but unmet need. I also understand that in order for
`
`objective indicia of non-obviousness to be applicable, the indicia must have some
`
`sort of nexus to the subject matter in the claim that was not known in the art. I
`
`understand that this nexus includes a factual connection between the patentable
`
`subject matter of the claim and the objective indicia alleged. I also understand that
`
`an independently made invention that is made within a comparatively short period
`
`of time is evidence that the claimed invention was the product of ordinary skill.
`
`14. Finally, I understand that patent examiners at the U.S. Patent and
`
`Trademark Office (“USPTO”) rely upon certain exemplary rationales in reviewing
`
`patent applications to understand whether the subject matter of the claims is obvious.
`
`I understand that the following is the list of exemplary rationales relied upon by
`
`patent examiners at the USPTO:
`
`(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to
`
`yield predictable results;
`
`(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain
`
`predictable results;
`
`(C) Use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods,
`
`or products) in the same way;
`
`(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or
`
`product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
`
`6
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 9 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`(E) “Obvious to try” – Choosing from a finite number of identified,
`
`predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success;
`
`(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of
`
`it for use in either the same field or a different one based on
`
`design incentives or other market forces if the variations are
`
`predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art; and
`
`(G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that
`
`would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art
`
`reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at
`
`the claimed invention.
`
`
`
`Interpreting Claims Before the Patent Office
`
`15.
`
`I understand that Inter Partes Review is a proceeding before the United
`
`States Patent & Trademark Office (“USPTO”) for evaluating the validity of issued
`
`patent claims. I understand that, in an Inter Partes Review, a claim term is
`
`interpreted in a manner consistent with the standard used in patent litigation, as set
`
`forth in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc). That
`
`standard generally construes the claims according to their “ordinary and customary”
`
`meaning in view of the claim language, specification, and file history, and where
`
`applicable, relevant other evidence.
`
`7
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 10 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`16.
`
`I understand that a patent’s “specification” includes all the figures,
`
`discussion, and claims within the patent. I understand that the USPTO will look to
`
`the specification and prosecution history to see if there is a definition for a given
`
`claim term, and if not, will apply the ordinary and customary meaning from the
`
`perspective of a POSA at the time in which the alleged invention was made.
`
` Materials Relied on in Forming My Opinions
`
`17.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed in this declaration, I have relied on
`
`my own knowledge, experience, and expertise, as well as the knowledge of a POSA
`
`in the relevant timeframe. In addition, I have reviewed and relied upon all documents
`
`referenced in this declaration and the following list of materials:
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 10,292,011 (“the ’011 Patent”) (EX1001);
`
`• Prosecution History of the ’011 Patent (EX1002);
`
`• U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0030824
`(“Ribaudo”) (EX1005);
`
`• Lorincz, K. and Welsh, M., MoteTrack: A Robust,
`Decentralized Approach to RF-Based Location Tracking
`(“Lorincz”) (EX1006);
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,327,535 (“Evans”) (EX1007); and
`
`• PCT Patent Application Publication No. 2005/106523
`(“Wrappe”) (EX1008).
`
`
`
`8
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 11 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ’011 PATENT
`Specification of the ’011 Patent
`
`
`18. The methods and systems described in the ’011 Patent relate “generally
`
`to location based services for mobile data processing systems, and more particularly
`
`to location based exchanges of data between distributed mobile data processing
`
`systems for locational applications.” EX1001, 1:36-40. As any POSA would have
`
`known, Internet use was growing rapidly and had an ever-increasing number of uses
`
`in the late 1990s and early 2000s. One of those uses was to provide content and
`
`services to mobile devices, such as cell phones and portable or laptop computers.
`
`EX1001, 1:48-55, 3:26-35. The ’011 Patent states, and a POSA would have known,
`
`that many of the companies offering services and content via the Internet acted as
`
`“the intermediary point” between users. EX1001, 1:55-67. According to the ‘011
`
`Patent, this meant that the companies employed “centralized processing” and
`
`“centralized maintaining of data” in order to provide services and content to mobile
`
`devices, which the ’011 Patent refers to as “mobile data processing systems” or
`
`“MSs.” Id.
`
`19. The ’011 Patent discusses some drawbacks to the use of centralized
`
`processing. EX1001, 2:16-44. These drawbacks include poor performance by the
`
`centralized processor, the costs associated storage of data by the centralized
`
`processor, and the possibility that the private information of a user that is stored in a
`
`9
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 12 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`centralized database could be compromised. Id. For instance, these drawbacks of a
`
`centralized processing system can be a concern when a service provider is providing
`
`location-based services (referred to as “LBS” in the ’011 Patent) to users. Location-
`
`based services frequently track and store users’ locations in order to provide their
`
`location-based features and functionality. EX1001, 3:5-10; 4:50-61. This leads to
`
`increased security and privacy concerns. Id. (“LBS contain centralized data that is
`
`personal in nature to its users. This is a security concern.”). These concerns would
`
`have been well-known to a POSA in the late 1990s and early 2000s.
`
`20.
`
`In the systems and methods disclosed in the ’011 Patent, “[a] common
`
`connected service is not required for location based functionality and features.” Id.,
`
`1:40-41. Instead, “[l]ocation based exchanges of data between distributed mobile
`
`data processing systems enable location based features and functionality in a peer to
`
`peer manner.” Id., 1:41-44. The ’011 Patent discloses a network of location-based
`
`exchanges, which it proposes as a superior alternative to the “centralized” approach
`
`to location-based services (LBS). In the network described in the ’011 Patent, certain
`
`processing is distributed throughout the network of devices (or “decentralized”) by
`
`“push[ing] intelligence out to the mobile data processing systems themselves.”
`
`EX1001, 3:11-25. The ’011 Patent describes techniques to allow users of mobile
`
`data processing systems (e.g., mobile devices) to take advantage of “location
`
`10
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 13 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`dependent features and functionality” without having their location tracked and
`
`stored by a centralized service provider. EX1001, 3:65-4:3.
`
`21. Figures 1B and 1C of the ’011 Patent illustrate the difference between
`
`the centralized and decentralized approaches. In the decentralized LBX approach,
`
`shown in Figure 1B below (left), each of the five mobile devices (MSs, 2)
`
`communicates directly with the other mobile devices in its vicinity, without
`
`requiring a centralized service provider to facilitate the interaction. EX1001, 32:39-
`
`49 (“In a preferred embodiment, communications are limited reliability wireless
`
`broadcast datagrams having recognizable data packet identifiers. In another
`
`embodiment, wireless communications are reliable transport protocols carried out
`
`by the MSs, such as TCP/IP.”).
`
`22.
`
`In contrast, in Figure 1C below (right), a prior-art single location-based
`
`service provider controls the communications between the MSs (MS 1, MS 2, MS
`
`N). In the depiction, the MSs do not communicate directly with one another.
`
`EX1001, 33:19-42.
`
`11
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 14 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Figures 1B and 1C of the ’011 Patent
`
`EX1001, Figures 1B-1C.
`
`23. By allowing communication between mobile devices, the LBX network
`
`in the ’011 Patent purports to provide MSs with an enhanced ability to take
`
`advantage of location-based functionality. The ’011 Patent teaches that there are
`
`modules in each MS in an LBX network that control how that MS interacts with the
`
`other devices within its vicinity. EX1001, 32:4-24. These modules, referred to in the
`
`patent as “permissions” and “charters,” help form the “LBX character” of each
`
`device, as shown in green in annotated Figure 1A below. EX1001, 29:17-34.
`
`12
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 15 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`Annotated Figure 1A of the ’011 Patent
`
`
`
`EX1001, Figure 1A.
`
`24. According to the ’011 Patent, each user within the LBX network is able
`
`to configure “an infinite set of LBX characters,” each of which characterizes how
`
`the device interacts with other devices in certain specified circumstances. EX1001,
`
`38:18-22. Figure 1F of the ’011 Patent (reproduced below) illustrates this concept
`
`by providing an example wherein each mobile device within an LBX network (each
`
`represented by a different animal) contains its own configuration of permissions and
`
`charters. EX1001, 37:43-54.
`
`13
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 16 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`Figure 1F of the ’011 Patent
`
`
`
`EX1001, Figure 1F. In discussing Figure 1F, the ’011 Patent states that “Tiger MS
`
`2 contains configurations for allowing business associates to interact, for example
`
`for letting a boss and team member know whereabouts, or alerting business
`
`associates of being nearby, or for automatically performing charter actions for the
`
`purpose of improving business activities.” EX1001, 38:13-18. Each of the MSs
`
`represented by the other animals in Figure 1F similarly contains its own unique
`
`configuration of permissions and charters, which together prescribe a different set
`
`of rules for how the device can interact with others. According to the ’011 Patent,
`
`“[u]sers exploit their own creativity for how their MSs should behave and what
`
`personalities their MS should have.” EX1001, 38:22-25.
`
`14
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 17 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`25. Once the permissions and charters are set for the MSs in the LBX
`
`network, they are able to take advantage of location-based functionality. For
`
`instance, in certain embodiments, the ’011 Patent teaches that the LBX
`
`configurations can be set to provide “a nearby, or nearness, status using a peer to
`
`peer system and method.” EX1001, 12:3-6. In particular, the LBX system uses
`
`“nearby detection means of one MS when in the vicinity of another MS.” EX1001,
`
`12:7-10. In one such embodiment, “locally maintained configurations govern
`
`functionality when MSs are newly nearby, or are newly departing being nearby.
`
`Nearby status, alerts, and queries are achieved in a LBX manner.” EX1001, 12:15-
`
`17.
`
`26. The ’011 Patent further discloses that, in addition to providing a nearby
`
`or nearness status, LBX can be used for “peer to peer content delivery and local MS
`
`configuration of that content.” EX1001, 12:24-25. More specifically, “[u]sers make
`
`local configurations to enjoy location based content delivery to other MSs.”
`
`EX1001, 12:26-28. “Content is delivered under a variety of circumstances for a
`
`variety of configurable reasons.” EX1001, 12:26-28. “Content maintained local to
`
`an MS is delivered asynchronously to other MSs for nearby alerts, arrival or
`
`departure to and from geofenced areas, and other predicated conditions of nearby
`
`MSs.” EX1001, 12:29-32.
`
`15
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 18 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`27. Further, the ’011 Patent discloses that the communications between
`
`MSs can be in the form of wireless data records, which are referred to as “WDRs.”
`
`EX1001, 44:38-42 (“Many embodiments are better described by redefining the “W”
`
`in acronyms used throughout this disclosure for the more generic “Wireless” use,
`
`rather than “Whereabouts” use. Thus, WDR takes on the definition of Wireless Data
`
`Record.”). According to the ’011 Patent, a WDR may consist of a variety of data
`
`fields, including (a) MS ID, which is a unique MS identifier; (b) DATE/TIME
`
`STAMP identifying the date and time at which the WDR was generated; (c)
`
`LOCATION representing the location of the device originating the WDR, and other
`
`location-related information like SPEED, HEADING, and ELEVATION. EX1001,
`
`Fig. 11; 41:22-42:47. In addition to these data fields, the WDR optionally may
`
`contain other fields, as illustrated in Figure 11A of the ’011 Patent:
`
`
`
`16
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 19 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`Figure 11A of the ’011 Patent
`
`
`
`EX1001, Figure 11A, 78:50-84:55.
`
`28.
`
`In the LBX network, a mobile device may receive a WDR and use the
`
`WDR to enable location-based functionality. EX1001, 79:39-46 (“WDRs are
`
`designed for maintaining whereabouts information independent of any location
`
`technology applied.”) In one embodiment, a mobile device receives a WDR (or
`
`multiple WDRs) and uses the WDR to determine (or estimate) the device’s location.
`
`The ’011 Patent describes a process for a mobile device to “determine its own
`
`whereabouts with useful WDRs from other MSs.” EX1001, 124:14-125:22; Figure
`
`26A. As discussed in the claim analysis below in Paragraphs 63-138, a POSA would
`
`have been aware of prior art systems and methods that communicated with wireless
`
`data records having equivalent fields.
`
`17
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 20 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`The Claims of the ’011 Patent
`
`29. The ’011 Patent includes 20 claims, and claims 1, 10, and 20 are
`
`independent claims. See EX1001, 448:11-451:22. Claim 1 recites:
`
`1. A system including one or more sending data processing
`systems wherein each sending data processing system of
`the one or more sending data processing systems
`comprise:
`
`one or more processors; and
`
`memory coupled to the one or more processors and storing
`instructions, wherein the one or more processors, based on
`the instructions, perform operations comprising:
`
`broadcast
`a
`outbound
`beaconing
`periodically
`unidirectional wireless data record for physically locating
`in a region of the sending data processing system one or
`more receiving user carried mobile data processing
`systems, the broadcast unidirectional wireless data record
`received directly from the sending data processing system
`in each receiving user carried mobile data processing
`system of the one or more receiving user carried mobile
`data processing systems, and including:
`
`no physical location coordinates of the sending data
`processing system,
`
` data field containing a signal strength of the sending data
`processing system, and
`
`application context identifier data identifying location
`based content for presenting by a location based
`application of the receiving user carried mobile data
`processing system to a user interface of the receiving user
`carried mobile data processing system upon the receiving
`user carried mobile data processing system determining
`with a
`local memory maintained
`location based
`
` a
`
`18
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 21 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`configuration monitored with background processing of
`the receiving user carried mobile data processing system
`during mobility of the receiving user carried mobile data
`processing system anticipating receipt of the broadcast
`unidirectional wireless data record having the application
`context identifier data in response to a user activating the
`location based application with the user interface of the
`receiving user carried mobile data processing system
`wherein the location based application:
`
`invokes a location based API of the receiving user carried
`mobile data processing system for the location based
`configuration anticipating the receipt of the broadcast
`unidirectional wireless data record having the application
`context identifier data,
`
`is notified upon the receipt of the broadcast unidirectional
`wireless data record having the application context
`identifier data configured
`in
`the
`location based
`configuration, and
`
`presents the location based content to the user interface of
`the receiving user carried mobile data processing system,
`the location based content originating from another data
`processing system that is remote to both the sending data
`processing system and the receiving user carried mobile
`data processing system.
`
`EX1001, 448:11-67.
`
`
`
`30. Claim 2 recites:
`2. The system of claim 1 wherein the location based
`configuration includes determining an arrival or departure
`condition.
`
`EX1001, 449:1-3.
`
`31. Claim 3 recites:
`
`
`
`19
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 22 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EX1001, 449:4-5.
`
`32. Claim 9 recites:
`the sending data
`The system of claim 1 wherein
`processing system is a mobile data processing system.
`
`
`EX1001, 449:22-23.
`
`33. Claim 11 recites:
`11. A method in a location network expanse, the method
`comprising:
`
`broadcast
`a
`outbound
`beaconing
`periodically
`unidirectional wireless data record from at least one
`sending data processing system for physically locating in
`a region of the sending data processing system one or more
`receiving user carried mobile data processing systems, the
`broadcast unidirectional wireless data record received
`directly from the sending data processing system in each
`receiving user carried mobile data processing system of
`the one or more receiving user carried mobile data
`processing systems, and including:
`
`no physical location coordinates of the sending data
`processing system,
`
`3. The system of claim 1 wherein the location based
`configuration includes determining a distance condition.
`
` a
`
` data field containing a signal strength of the sending data
`processing system, and
`
`application context identifier data identifying location
`based content for presenting by a location based
`application of the receiving user carried mobile data
`processing system to a user interface of the receiving user
`carried mobile data processing system upon the receiving
`user carried mobile data processing system determining
`with a
`local memory maintained
`location based
`
`20
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 23 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`configuration monitored with background processing of
`the receiving user carried mobile data processing system
`during mobility of the receiving user carried mobile data
`processing system anticipating receipt of the broadcast
`unidirectional wireless data record having the application
`context identifier data in response to a user activating the
`location based application with the user interface of the
`receiving user carried mobile data processing system
`wherein the location based application:
`
`invokes a location based API of the receiving user carried
`mobile data processing system for the location based
`configuration anticipating the receipt of the broadcast
`unidirectional wireless data record having the application
`context identifier data,
`
`is notified upon the receipt of the broadcast unidirectional
`wireless data record having the application context
`identifier data configured
`in
`the
`location based
`configuration, and
`
`presents the location based content to the user interface of
`the receiving user carried mobile data processing system,
`the location based content originating from another data
`processing system that is remote to both the sending data
`processing system and the receiving user carried mobile
`data processing system.
`
`
`EX1001, 449:33-450:15.
`
`34. Claim 12 recites:
`
`The method of claim 11 wherein the location based
`configuration includes determining an arrival or departure
`condition.
`
`
`EX1001, 450:16-18.
`
`
`
`
`
`21
`
`Exhibit 1004
`IPR2022-0427
`Page 24 of 82
`
`

`

`
`
`35. Claim 13 recites:
`
`The method of claim 11 wherein the location based
`configuration includes determining a distance condition.
`
`EX1001, 450:19-20.
`
`36. Claim 19 recites:
`
`The method of claim 11 wherein the sending data
`processing system is a mobile data processing system.
`
`
`EX1001, 450:37-38.
`
`
`37. Claim 20 recites:
`
`readable medium
`20. A non-transitory computer
`containing executable instructions, that when executed,
`causes one or more processors, based on the instructions,
`to perform a method comprising:
`
` a
`
` sending data processing system periodically beaconing
`outbound a broadcast unidirectional wireless data record
`for physically locating in a region of the sending data
`processing system one or more receiving user carried
`mobile data processing
`systems,
`the broadcast
`unidirectional wireless data record rec