`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CPC PATENT TECHNOLOGIES PTY, LTD.,
`Patent Owner
`_________________
`
`
`Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,620,039
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
`I.
`II. SUMMARY OF THE ’039 PATENT .................................................................................... 1
`A. Description of the ’039 Patent ............................................................................................ 1
`B. Summary of Unpatentability of the Challenged Claims ..................................................... 1
`C. Priority Date of the Challenged Claims .............................................................................. 4
`D. Level of Skill of a POSITA ................................................................................................ 4
`III.
`REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ............................................... 4
`A. Grounds for Standing Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ........................................................... 4
`B.
`Identification of Challenge Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) and Relief Requested ............... 5
`C. Claim Construction Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3) ......................................................... 5
`IV.
`SHOWING OF ANALOGOUS PRIOR ART .................................................................... 6
`V. GROUND 1: CLAIMS 1-2 and 19-20 ARE OBVIOUS OVER BRADFORD IN VIEW OF
`Foss in further view of YAMANE ................................................................................................... 9
`A. Claim 1 ................................................................................................................................ 9
`1. Claim 1(Pre): “A method of enrolling in a biometric card pointer system, the method
`comprising the steps of:” ........................................................................................................ 9
`2. Claim 1(a): “receiving card information” ..................................................................... 14
`3. Claim 1(b): “receiving the biometric signature” ........................................................... 16
`4. Claim 1(c): “defining, dependent upon the received card information, a memory
`location in a local memory external to the card” .................................................................. 17
`5. Claim 1(d): “determining if the defined memory location is unoccupied” .................. 33
`6. Claim 1(e): “storing, if the memory location is unoccupied, the biometric signature at
`the defined memory location.” .............................................................................................. 39
`B. Claim 2 .............................................................................................................................. 41
`1. Claim 2(Pre): “A method of obtaining verified access to a process, the method
`comprising the steps of:” ...................................................................................................... 41
`2. Claim 2(a): “storing a biometric signature according to the enrolment method of claim
`1;” 41
`3. Claim 2(b): “verifying the subsequently presented presentation of the card information
`and the biometric signature if the subsequently presented biometric signature matches the
`biometric signature at the memory location, in said local memory, defined by the
`subsequently presented card information.” ........................................................................... 42
`C. Claim 19 ............................................................................................................................ 44
`
`i
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`1. Claim 19(Pre): “A non-transitory computer readable medium having recorded thereon
`a computer program for directing a processor to execute a method of enrolling in a
`biometric card pointer system, the program comprising” ..................................................... 44
`2. Claim 19(a): “code for receiving card information” ..................................................... 46
`3. Claim 19(b): “code for receiving the biometric signature” .......................................... 46
`4. Claim 19(c): “code for defining, dependent upon the received card information, a
`memory location in a local memory external to the card” .................................................... 46
`5. Claim 19(d): “code for determining if the defined memory location is unoccupied” .. 46
`6. Claim 19(e): “code for storing, if the memory location is unoccupied, the biometric
`signature at the defined memory location.” .......................................................................... 47
`D. Claim 20 ............................................................................................................................ 47
`1. Claim 20(Pre): “A non-transitory computer readable medium having recorded thereon
`a computer program for directing a processor to execute a method of obtaining verified
`access to a process, the program comprising:” ..................................................................... 47
`2. Claim 20(a): “code for storing a biometric signature according to the enrolment
`method of claim 19;” ............................................................................................................ 47
`3. Claim 20(b): “code for subsequently presenting card information and a biometric
`signature” .............................................................................................................................. 47
`4. Claim 20(c): “code for verifying the subsequently presented card information if the
`subsequently presented biometric signature matches the biometric signature at the memory
`location, in said local memory, defined by the subsequently presented card information” . 48
`DISCRETIONARY CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................... 48
`VI.
`A. The Fintiv Factors Favor Institution ................................................................................. 48
`1. Stay ............................................................................................................................... 48
`2. Proximity of the Court’s Trial Date .............................................................................. 48
`3.
`Investment in Parallel Proceeding ................................................................................ 52
`4. Overlap .......................................................................................................................... 52
`5. Same Party .................................................................................................................... 53
`6. Other Circumstances ..................................................................................................... 53
`B. The Fintiv Framework Should Be Overturned ................................................................. 54
`1. The Fintiv Framework Exceeds the Director’s Authority ............................................ 54
`2. The Fintiv Framework Is Arbitrary and Capricious ..................................................... 54
`3. The Fintiv Framework Was Impermissibly Adopted Without Notice-and-Comment
`Rulemaking ........................................................................................................................... 55
`VII. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 55
`VIII. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1) ........................................... 57
`A. Real Party-In-Interest ........................................................................................................ 57
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`B. Related Matters ................................................................................................................. 57
`C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel .............................................................................................. 57
`A method of enrolling in a biometric card pointer system, the method comprising the steps
`of: .......................................................................................................................................... 59
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases
`Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc., IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020) . passim
`Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Ramot at Tel Aviv Univ. Ltd., IPR2020-00122, Paper 15 (PTAB
`May 15, 2020) ......................................................................................................53
`DISH Network L.L.C. v. Broadband iTV, Inc., IPR2020-01280, Paper 17 (PTAB
`Feb. 4, 2021) ........................................................................................................49
`Horsehead Resource Dev. Co. v. Browner, 16 F.3d 1246 (D.C. Cir. 1994) ...........54
`In re Apple Inc., No 20-135, slip op. (Fed. Cir. Nov. 9, 2020) ...............................49
`Kisor v. Wilkie, 139 S. Ct. 2400 (2019) ...................................................................55
`NHK Spring Co., Ltd., v. Intri-Plex Technologies, Inc., IPR2018-00752, Paper 8
`(PTAB Sept. 12, 2018) ...................................................................................48, 50
`Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 572 U.S. 663 (2014) ...............................54
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc) ...........................5
`Port of Seattle v. FERC, 499 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2007) ..........................................55
`Sand Revolution II, LLC v. Continental Intermodal Group-Trucking LLC,
`IPR2019-01393, Paper 24 (PTAB Jun. 16, 2020) ................................................48
`Shenzhen Carku Tech. Co., Ltd. v. The Noco Co., IPR2020-00944, Paper 20
`(PTAB Nov. 12, 2020) .........................................................................................49
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 102 .................................................................................................6, 7, 8
`35 U.S.C. § 314 .......................................................................................................48
`35 U.S.C. § 316 .................................................................................................50, 55
`Regulations
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100 .....................................................................................................5
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104 .................................................................................................4, 5
`37 C.F.R. § 42.105 ...................................................................................................64
`37 C.F.R. § 42.24 .....................................................................................................63
`37 C.F.R. § 42.6 .......................................................................................................64
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8 .................................................................................................57, 63
`
`
`iv
`
`

`

`I.
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Petitioner Apple Inc. (“Petitioner”) requests Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) of
`
`Claims 1-2 and 19-20 (collectively, the “Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,620,039 (“the ’039 Patent”). The purportedly distinguishing features of the
`
`Challenged Claims were (1) a reference pointer on a card to a memory location for
`
`storing biometric information; and (2) automatically storing biometric information.
`
`Both features were well-known before the priority date of the ’039 Patent, rendering
`
`the Challenged Claims obvious over the prior art. IPR of the Challenged Claims
`
`should thus be instituted.
`
`II.
`
`SUMMARY OF THE ’039 PATENT
`A. Description of the ’039 Patent
`The ’039 Patent describes systems and methods for storing a user’s biometric
`
`information at a memory location defined by card data read from a card. ’039 Patent,
`
`Abstract, 2:51-67. Embodiments further provide an enrollment process for storing
`
`the user’s biometric information. ’039 Patent, 2:62-67, 7:43-49.
`
`B.
`Summary of Unpatentability of the Challenged Claims
`The Challenged Claims of the ’039 Patent recite an enrollment process in
`
`which card data on a card defines a memory location for storing biometric
`
`information of a user. See, e.g., ’039 Patent, Claim 1.
`
`A single ground of unpatentability is presented for all Challenged Claims,
`
`relying on the combination of Bradford, Foss, and Yamane. Bradford alone teaches
`
`1
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`most of the recited claim limitations, including a biometric card pointer enrollment
`
`system and method employing a user ID (obtained from a player ID card storing the
`
`user ID on a magnetic strip), storage of biometric information in local memory, and
`
`subsequent verification of a user’s fingerprint via comparison to the enrolled
`
`biometric, which is located using the player ID card.
`
`
`
`Bradford, FIG. 3.
`
`Although Bradford alone describes utilizing read card data during subsequent
`
`verification of the user, Foss is included for clarification of a specific step reciting
`
`reading card data from the card during an enrollment process.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
` The Challenged Claims also recite a system and method for determining if
`
`the defined memory location is unoccupied, and, if it is not occupied, storing the
`
`presented biometric. See, e.g., ’039 Patent, Claim 1(d)-(e). The ’039 Patent describes
`
`using a flag to perform this determination. ’039 Patent, 9:23-33. Yamane teaches a
`
`fingerprint presence/absence flag facilitating this functionality, illustrated below in
`
`Fig. 2.
`
`Yamane, Fig. 2.
`
`Therefore, the modifications to Bradford’s system are minor, namely reading
`
`the card data from the card during an enrollment phase and setting a flag to determine
`
`if a memory location is unoccupied.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`
`C.
`Priority Date of the Challenged Claims
`U.S. Patent Application No. 12/063,650 (the ’650 Application), from which
`
`the ’039 Patent issued, was filed on August 12, 2010. The ’650 Application is a § 371
`
`National Phase Application of PCT/AU2006/001136, filed on August 10, 2006,
`
`which claims priority to AU2005904375, filed August 12, 2005.
`
`For this IPR only, Apple applies August 12, 2005, as the priority date for the
`
`Challenged Claims.
`
`D. Level of Skill of a POSITA
`A POSITA at the time of the ’039 Patent—which, for purposes of this Petition
`
`is August 12, 2005—would have had at least a bachelor’s degree in computer
`
`engineering, computer science, electrical engineering, or a related field, with at least
`
`one year of experience in the field of human-machine interfaces and device access
`
`security. Additional education or experience might substitute for the above
`
`requirements. Dec., 31-34.1
`
`III. REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`A. Grounds for Standing Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)
`Apple certifies the ’039 Patent is available for IPR and Apple is not barred or
`
`estopped from requesting IPR challenging the claims of the ’039 Patent. Apple is
`
`not the owner of the ’039 Patent, has not filed a civil action challenging the validity
`
`
`1 All citations to “Dec.” are to Ex. 1003, Declaration of Dr. Andrew Sears.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`of any claim of the ’039 Patent, and this Petition is filed less than one year after
`
`Apple was served with a complaint alleging infringement of the ’039 Patent.
`
`B.
`
`Identification of Challenge Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) and Relief
`Requested
`In view of the prior art and evidence presented, the Challenged Claims of the
`
`’039 Patent are unpatentable and should be cancelled. 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1).
`
`Based on the prior art identified below, IPR of the Challenged Claims should be
`
`granted. 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(2).
`
`Proposed Grounds of Unpatentability
`Ground 1: Claims 1-2 and 19-20 are obvious under § 103(a) over Bradford (Ex.
`
`1004) in view of Foss (Ex. 1005) in further view of Yamane (Ex. 1006)
`
`
`Section V identifies where each element of the Challenged Claims is found in
`
`the prior art. 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4). The exhibit numbers of the evidence relied
`
`upon to support the challenges are provided above and the relevance of the evidence
`
`to the challenges raised is provided in Section V. 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5). Exhibits
`
`1001-1038 are also attached.
`
`C. Claim Construction Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3)
`In this proceeding, claims are interpreted under the same standard applied by
`
`Article III courts (i.e., the Phillips standard). 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b); 83 Fed. Reg.
`
`197 (Oct. 11, 2018); Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2005)
`
`(en banc). Petitioner applies the plain and ordinary meaning of all claim terms.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`Petitioner does not waive any argument in any litigation that claim terms in the ’039
`
`Patent are indefinite or additional terms need construction.
`
`In the related District Court litigation between the Parties, the Parties agreed
`
`to the following claim construction, which has been applied in the mappings below.
`
`Claim Term
`Claims
`1,
`19:
`“dependent upon”
`
`Agreed Plain & Ordinary Construction
`Plain and ordinary meaning, defined as “contingent on or
`determined by” (Ex. 1032, 2)
`
`The District Court also construed “biometric card pointer system,” recited in
`
`
`
`Claims 1 and 19, as a “[n]onlimiting preamble term with no patentable weight. (Ex.
`
`1033, 1).
`
`IV. SHOWING OF ANALOGOUS PRIOR ART
`Bradford, Foss, and Yamane were neither cited nor considered during
`
`prosecution of the ’039 Patent.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,612,928 to Bradford et al. (“Bradford”) published
`
`September 2, 2003, qualifying as prior art to the ’039 Patent under at least 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 102(b). Bradford teaches a gaming authentication system and method including
`
`enrolling a user in a player ID database (FIG. 6, 14:21–16:47), authenticating the
`
`user for subsequent play (16:1-25), assisting the user in complying with
`
`requirements for filling out tax forms (16:48-50), and authenticating electronic funds
`
`transfers (24:52-54). Enrollment in the system can be at least partially performed
`
`directly on a gaming device that stores enrolled biometric information locally in a
`
`6
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`player ID database. Bradford, 8:51-9:17, 15:48-67, FIG. 3. A newly enrolling user
`
`may be provided with a first authenticator such as a magnetic strip card containing
`
`a unique player ID that is used to find a matching entry in the player ID database.
`
`Bradford, 5:63-6:13, 15:16-29, FIG. 6. Because Bradford, like the ’039 Patent,
`
`discloses an enrollment and verification system that uses card information to
`
`determine the location of biometric information in local memory, Bradford is in the
`
`same field of endeavor and is pertinent to a problem to be solved by the claimed
`
`invention in the ’039 Patent. Dec., 61. Therefore, Bradford is analogous art.
`
`U.S. PGPub No. 2005/0127169 to Foss, Jr. (“Foss”) filed Feb 3, 2005, and
`
`published June 16, 2005, qualifies as prior art to the ’039 Patent under at least 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(e). Foss teaches an enrollment process for enabling an existing account
`
`holder to enroll additional new customer(s) in a group stored value card program.
`
`Foss, [0086], FIGS. 7-8. Foss’s system prompts the customer to “swipe the existing
`
`stored value card” to “continue the enrollment process.” Foss, [0088]. The system
`
`identifies the stored value card account associated with the existing customer,
`
`identifying the account based on the data read from its magnetic stripe via card
`
`reader. Id. Because Foss, like the ’039 Patent, discloses a method for enrollment of
`
`user information that looks up an existing record using card information, Foss is in
`
`the same field of endeavor and is pertinent to a problem to be solved by the claimed
`
`invention in the ’039 Patent. Dec., 62. Therefore, Foss is analogous art.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`U.S. PGPub No. 2001/0014883 to Yamane et al. (“Yamane”) published
`
`August 16, 2001, qualifies as prior art to the ’039 Patent under at least 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 102(b). Yamane teaches a process of registering the fingerprint information of a
`
`user by determining whether a fingerprint has been registered by reference to a
`
`fingerprint presence/absence flag 60-2. Yamane, [0049], [0052-0054], [0058-0059],
`
`FIG. 2. Yamane then teaches performing a process of determining a proper user
`
`based on the stored fingerprint information compared to live fingerprint information.
`
`Yamane, [0033]. Because Yamane, like the ’039 Patent, discloses a method of
`
`enrolling a user’s biometric using a flag to determine if a defined memory location
`
`for biometric information is occupied, Yamane is in the same field of endeavor and
`
`is pertinent to a problem to be solved by the claimed invention in the ’039 Patent.
`
`Dec., 63. Therefore, Yamane is analogous art.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`V. GROUND 1: CLAIMS 1-2 AND 19-20 ARE OBVIOUS OVER
`BRADFORD IN VIEW OF FOSS IN FURTHER VIEW OF YAMANE
`A. Claim 1
`1.
`Claim 1(Pre): “A method of enrolling in a biometric card
`pointer system, the method comprising the steps of:”
`a)
`Bradford Teaches a “biometric card pointer system”
`To the extent the preamble is limiting2, Bradford teaches a biometric card
`
`pointer system and method, as claimed. Bradford teaches a player ID database and
`
`“a method for the creation of an entry having biometric data in a player ID database,”
`
`specifically for a “player currently without an entry in the player ID database.”
`
`Bradford, 14:21-28, FIG. 6. Bradford is directed to a “system and method for using
`
`two authenticators to identify a player in a gaming environment,” where exemplary
`
`first authenticators include a player ID card, credit card, or debit card storing a
`
`“unique data sequence” on a magnetic strip, and “the second authenticator is based
`
`on biometric data,” such as fingerprint data. Bradford, Abstract, 3:6-27, 5:36–6:13,
`
`6:49-64. The user uses the first authenticator to “identify themselves” at a gaming
`
`device and “to get the associated second authenticator.” Bradford, 5:36-38, 3:56-58,
`
`5:16-34, 1:20-26.
`
`
`2 The District Court found “biometric card pointer system” to be a “nonlimiting
`
`preamble term with no patentable weight.” (Ex. 1033, 1).
`
`9
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`Bradford describes various aspects of a gaming authentication system,
`
`including enrolling a user in a player ID database (FIG. 6, 14:21–16:47),
`
`authenticating the user for subsequent play (16:1-25), assisting the user in complying
`
`with requirements for filling out tax forms (16:48-50), and authenticating electronic
`
`funds transfers (24:52-54). Bradford teaches different embodiments of the game
`
`device, where the FIG. 3 embodiment is “similar” to the other embodiments of the
`
`game device shown in FIGs. 1-2. Bradford, 8:51-56. The present mapping primarily
`
`relies on the game device disclosed for FIG. 3, enrolling a user in the player ID
`
`database, and subsequent game play. However, because the FIG. 3 game device is
`
`“similar” to other game devices also disclosed in Bradford, a POSITA would have
`
`found it obvious to use like components of FIGs. 1-2 in the embodiment of FIG. 3.
`
`Dec., 64-65.
`
`b)
`Bradford Teaches a “method of enrolling”
`Claim 1(Pre) recites a “method of enrolling.” To the extent the preamble is
`
`limiting and specific to enrollment of a new user, Bradford teaches enrolling a new
`
`user (i.e., a player), referring to “creation of an entry having biometric data in a
`
`player ID database.” Bradford, 14:21-25, FIG. 6, 16:5-7 (referring to “the newly
`
`enrolled player[]”), 3:50-54 (disclosing the first step of the invention “is to create an
`
`entry in the player identification database, which associates a first authenticator and
`
`10
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`a second authenticator”). Bradford further teaches a method of enrolling in a
`
`biometric card pointer system, as shown in FIG. 6:
`
`
`
`Bradford, FIG. 6. An “authorized person” (also referred to as a “casino attendant”
`
`in Bradford, 15:16) associated with the casino or gaming device and authorized to
`
`enroll the user “enters the player’s data and information into the player ID database.”
`
`Bradford, 14:25-43, FIG. 6, 15:37-38 (referring to the player “creating a new entry”
`
`as part of creating a record in the player ID database). The player is provided a first
`
`authenticator, such as a player ID card, or the player provides their own first
`
`authenticator. Bradford, 15:16-24. The casino attendant then accesses a privileged
`
`11
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`screen of a game device in the casino to “enter a player’s biometric measurements
`
`for entry into the player ID database.” Bradford, 15:48-58 and 16:26-32 (also
`
`describing a “preferred embodiment allows the attendant to use any game device in
`
`the casino having the present invention…”). The player’s biometric data, such as
`
`“fingerprint data,” is “made part of the player’s ID entry in the player ID database.”
`
`Bradford, 15:59-63. The attendant then “makes use of the newly created entry to
`
`demonstrate to the player the use of the two-authenticator authentication process,”
`
`including to “identify[] themselves to the system.” Bradford, 16:1-5.
`
`Once the enrollment process is complete, “the player is now ready to use the
`
`system and the system has an entry in the player ID database corresponding to the
`
`player, having a first authenticator and a second authenticator useable by the player.”
`
`Bradford, 16:21-25, 16:40-47 (disclosing creating entry in the player ID database
`
`and “associating the data corresponding to a first and second authentic authenticator
`
`with this entry”); see also id. at 22:25-56 (discussing “initialization of an electronic
`
`funds account” and describing similar steps of enabling a player account and the
`
`player providing the first and second authenticators).
`
`c)
`Bradford Teaches a Biometric “card pointer” System
`Claim 1(Pre) also recites a “biometric card pointer system.”3 Specific to a
`
`“card pointer” system, Bradford describes creating a player ID that is accessed using
`
`
`3 All emphases added unless otherwise noted.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`a player ID card. Bradford describes an implementation where the first authenticator
`
`is a tangible card, such as “an already existing player ID card,” with a magnetic strip
`
`having a “unique data sequence” that is used “to find a matching data sequence in
`
`the player ID database.” Bradford, 15:16-20, 3:6-23, 5:36-54, 6:3-13. The player ID
`
`entry in the player ID database associates the first and second authenticator.
`
`Bradford, 3:50-54, 16:40-45. Bradford teaches:
`
`A player identification database is also used, where an entry
`corresponding to a player comprises at least one record (typically,
`exactly one record), and the record has fields containing data,
`information, or pointers. The records have fields corresponding to a
`first authenticator and a second authenticator, providing authenticator
`data therein or pointers to authenticator data. The second authenticator
`will always have data that correspond to a biometric measurement.
`
`Bradford, 3:28-36. “The data that is read off of the card is used to find matching first
`
`authenticator data in the player ID database.” Bradford, 6:4-6.
`
`Per Dr. Sears, Bradford thus teaches using a card, such as a player ID card,
`
`storing a unique data sequence, i.e., first authenticator data, for finding a matching
`
`data sequence in a player ID database. Dec., 67-68. Bradford also teaches the player
`
`ID entry in player ID database storing second authenticator data, such as fingerprint
`
`data, and associating the first authenticator data with the second authenticator data.
`
`Because the created player ID entry in the player ID database associates the first and
`
`second authenticators, the first authenticator data may be “used to find matching first
`
`13
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`authenticator data in the player ID database” to allow the first authenticator data to
`
`be subsequently “used to get the associated second authenticator.” Bradford, 3:56-
`
`58, 6:4-6. Bradford thus teaches a “biometric card pointer system,” as claimed. Dec.,
`
`64-69.
`
`2.
`Claim 1(a): “receiving card information”
`Bradford teaches an authentication reader 104,304, which includes a player
`
`tracking ID slot. Bradford, 8:22-31, 8:51-56, FIG. 3. Bradford discusses the player
`
`“presenting” the first authenticator:
`
`‘Presents’ is defined in this disclosure to mean any action needed by
`the user of an authenticator to have the authenticator read by a reader
`designed to read that authenticator. The exact actions will, of course,
`vary depending on what type of authenticator a player is using. In the
`case of a magnetic strip card, the presenting action would be to insert
`the card into a magnetic strip card reader (like an ATM and a bank
`card). […] Each type of authenticator and its associated input device
`would have a corresponding meaning of ‘presents’, where in each case
`the net result is that the needed data on or in the authenticator to be
`read, is read by the reader corresponding to that type of
`authenticator.
`
`Bradford, 6:13-27. Bradford further teaches:
`
`Each first authenticator that is not data itself (i.e., a PIN) has the ability
`to have data read from it (i.e., the data on the magnetic strip of a typical
`player ID card). ‘First authenticator data’ refers to the data that can
`be read from a physical first authenticator card, if such is used.
`
`14
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`Bradford, 3:9-15. Bradford thus teaches a “magnetic strip card reader” that receives
`
`data from the first authenticator, including data on a magnetic strip card. Dec., 70.
`
`Per Dr. Sears, a POSITA would have understood the data read from the card,
`
`including data stored on a magnetic strip of the card, is “card information,” as
`
`claimed. Dec., 70-72. For example, Bradford teaches the first authenticator data,
`
`which is received from the card, is a “unique data sequence,” where the data “read
`
`off of the card is used to find matching first authenticator data in the player ID
`
`database.” Bradford, 6:4-6; Dec., 70-72.
`
`The first authentication reader 304 housed in game device 300 is shown in
`
`FIG. 3:
`
`Bradford, FIG. 3, 8:51-56 (annotating first authentication reader 304).
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00600
`U.S. Patent No. 8,620,039
`3.
`Claim 1(b): “receiving the biometric signature”
`The claimed “the biometric signature” lacks antecedent basis and is treated
`
`for purposes of this IPR as reciting “a biometric signature.” Dec., 73.
`
`Bradford teaches a fingerprint reader 110,310 receiving a fingerprint
`
`“biometric signature.” Bradford, 7:45-47 (“The card user is then required to input a
`
`biometric signature, such as fingerprint…”), 8:22-28, 8:56-65; Dec., 74-78, 64-65
`
`(noting Bradford’s teaching the game device of FIG. 3 is similar to the game device
`
`of FIGs. 1-2). Bradford teaches reader 310 is housed within the game device of FIG.
`
`3, where reader 310 “includes the hardware and software needed to do initial
`
`processing of the image, scan, or read of the biometric data that will be the second
`
`authenticator….” Bradford, 8:56-65, 10:30-40. The biometric reader 310 is
`
`annotated below in FIG. 3:
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Inter Pa