`CPC Patent Technologies
`Pty Ltd
`
`I P R 2 0 2 2 - 0 1 0 0 6
`
`I P R 2 0 2 2 - 0 1 0 4 5
`
`I P R 2 0 2 2 - 0 1 0 8 9
`
`H E A R I N G : S E P T E M B E R 2 8 , 2 0 2 3
`
`Patent Owner’s Slides – Not Evidence
`
`1
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 1
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Grounds
`
`Source: Petition at p. 4
`
`2
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 2
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Representative Claim 1 of the ‘705 Patents
`– The “D” limitations
`
`• 1[D(P)] wherein the transmitter sub-system controller is further configured
`to:
`
`• 1[D(1)] receive a series of entries of the biometric signal, said series
`being characterised according to at least one of the number of said entries
`and a duration of each said entry;
`
`• 1[D(2)] map said series into an instruction; and
`
`• 1[D(3)] populate the data base according to the instruction
`
`Source: Petition, Claim Listing, p. 100 (emphasis added)
`
`3
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 3
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen Prior Art
`
`4
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 4
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Argument - Mathiassen
`
`Petitioner relies on Mathiassen for:
`◦ A series of entries of a biometric signal characterized by a number and duration
`
`◦ Petition, p. 41
`
`◦ Mapping said series into an instruction
`
`◦ Petition, pp. 43 and 46-49
`
`Petitioner admits that: “Bianco is silent on how administrators send control
`signals…”
`◦ Petition, p. 47; Ex. 1005, Lipoff Decl., ¶ 173.
`
`5
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 5
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen
`
`Source: POR at 31, POSR at 17-18, Ex. 1004 at Figs. 2-3 and Table 3a
`
`6
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 6
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen – 3 Modes Disclosed
`
`Mathiassen teaches 3 separate modes of operation:
`
`Source: POR at 31, POSR at 17-18, Ex. 1004 at Table 3a, p. 12
`
`7
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 7
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen – Finger Commands
`
`The navigation function “measures the duration, direction and
`speed of the finger moves on the switch and categorizes the signal
`from the switch into categories…[which are] compared by
`translation means 4 with predefined tables relating categories of
`finger moves and sequences thereof to readable characters/signs.”
`◦ Ex. 1004 (Mathiassen) at 7:2-8
`
`When authentication by finger print biometrics is completed, the
`cellular phone sets the sign-generator to sleep mode…The sign-
`generator is then waked up, e.g., when a request for the sign
`generator is called for…Two dimensional finger moves combined
`with combined finger command sequences (such as taps, etc.)
`thereby gives an accurate cursor control….”
`◦ Ex. 1004 (Mathiassen) at 14:22-36
`
`Source: POR at 25-29, POSR at 17-19, Ex. 1004 at 7:2-8; 14:22-36
`
`8
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 8
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen – Finger Commands
`
`Mr. Lipoff’s testimony:
`
`Q. Yeah. Does the touch-sensitive switch measure the
`user's fingerprint with each of these finger commands?
`
`… T
`
`HE WITNESS:· There's no disclosure one way or the other
`as to measuring the fingerprint. It's -- it's -- they're characterized as
`finger commands which are entered upon the same biometric sensor
`that can be used for validating the fingerprint, but there's no
`disclosure one way or the other as to whether it's also reading the
`fingerprint other than just the -- a series of a number -- a number of
`entries and the duration of entries. So that's the only thing that
`seems to be disclosed here for certain.
`
`Source: POR at 30, 40; POSR at 19-20, Ex. 2034 (Lipoff Depo) at 65:2-24
`
`9
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 9
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen – Finger Commands
`
`Dr. Russ’s Declaration:
`
`A POSITA would have understood that,
`biometrically scanning a fingerprint (including capturing
`the ridges and valleys of fingerprint) with each
`navigational finger movement would have made it more
`difficult, and certainly impractical (if not essentially
`impossible) to achieve the fast and versatile input of finger
`movements needed for navigational functions such as text
`input and curser control.
`
`Source: POR at 78, Ex. 2031 at ¶78, pp. 41-42
`
`10
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 10
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen – Finger Commands
`
`Dr. Russ’s testimony:
`
`“…the sensor is operating in one of two different
`modes: a fingerprint capture mode, which is designed to
`uniquely define the person, to use the language from 1:27
`of Mathiassen, or it’s using gestures to navigate and move
`a mouse and when that's happening, it's not trying to
`uniquely define a person. It's just trying to move a mouse
`on a screen, and so, it's not making a biometric
`measurement at all.”
`
`Source: POSR at 20-21, Ex. 1028 at 51:4-13
`
`11
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 11
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen – Finger Commands
`
`Dr. Russ’ testimony:
`
`·
`
`Q.· · In Mathiassen, when a command is
`recognized by a series of long taps and short taps, do
`you believe that the system would be capturing
`fingerprint data in order to receive and recognize such
`instructions.
`
`· · · ·A.· · No. Because the fingerprint, the capture
`fingerprint gesture is expressly disclosed as moving the
`finger vertically over the stripe sensor, and so, it's clear
`that these long and short taps would not yield a complete
`fingerprint for analysis.
`
`Source: POSR at 20-21, Ex. 1028 at 85:12-22
`
`12
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 12
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Mathiassen – Institution Decision
`
`“By reading the fingerprint and its motion, ‘single-button
`sensor’ 1 (along with the above components 2-5) combine
`biometric reading for user authentication and cursor-type
`control for text input.”
`
`Source: IPR2022-01006, Paper 27 [Corrected] Institution Decision, p. 51
`
`13
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 13
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`“Biometric Signal” – Petitioner’s Construction
`is a Moving target
`
`Source
`Petition
`
`Petition
`
`Position
`No construction (see p. 9-12)
`
`“the ‘705 Patent provides that the biometric signal is a measurement of the user’s biometric
`attribute.”
`
`Date
`May 31, 2022
`
`May 31, 2022
`
`Petition, p. 41
`Ex. 1005, Lipoff Decl., ¶¶ 107, 161
`
`Lipoff Deposition
`
`A. [I]t’s not a construction that I considered before…and I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with
`this; its just that I haven’t had any opportunity to study it to form an opinion.
`
`Feb. 14, 2023
`
`Q.· ·So did you have a different construction of "biometric signal" in mind when you formed your
`opinions?
`
`A.· ·I didn't have any construction in mind.· I had an understanding of what "biometric signal" was as
`it’s used in the patent, and that's what I applied in forming my opinions.
`
`Ex. 2034, 32:14-33:3 (emphasis added)
`
`Reply Brief
`
`“the input and output of the biometric sensor”
`
`May 30, 2023
`
`Reply at 7-8
`
`Source: POSR at 3-4
`
`14
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 14
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Prior Construction of “Biometric Signal”
`
`January 12, 2022
`
`• Joint Claim Construction Statement filed in
`the Apple Litigation (WDTX)
`•Agreed Construction for “biometric signal”:
`“physical attribute of the user (i.e., fingerprint,
`facial pattern, iris, retina, voice, etc.)”
`•Ex. 2022, p. 3
`
`May 31, 2022
`
`• ASSA ABLOY files its Petition against the
`‘705 Patent
`•The Petition identifies the Apple Litigation and
`Apple’s IPR as related matters in the mandatory
`notices. Pet. at 1-2
`•The Petition proposes constructions for certain
`claim terms but is silent with respect to
`“biometric signal.” Pet. at 9-11
`
`February 23, 2022
`
`• Apple’s IPR Petition against the ‘705
`Patent filed
`•Apple proposes “physical attribute of the user
`(i.e., fingerprint, facial pattern, iris, retina, voice,
`etc.)” to the Board
`•IPR2022-00602, Paper No. 1 at 6
`
`Source: POSR at 6.
`
`15
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 15
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Partial Fingerprints Are Not Biometric
`Signals
`
`• Dr. Russ’ testimony:
`
`◦ A.· · Yeah, yeah.· A person of ordinary skill would
`understand that a fingerprint sensor images a fingerprint,
`an entire fingerprint.· There's no basis for saying that it's
`going to acquire a portion of a fingerprint.· And a
`person of ordinary skill would therefore regard
`something that acquires a portion of a fingerprint as
`not acquiring a fingerprint.
`
`Source: POSR at 13, Ex. 1028 (Russ Tr.) at 193:9-17
`
`16
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 16
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`“Biometric Signal”
`
`A “biometric signal” must uniquely identify the
`user – Mr. Lipoff agrees:
`
`“So long as the biometric sensor can output a
`biometric signal capable of uniquely
`identifying a user, the claims and purported
`invention would be viable.”
`
`Ex. 1029 (Second Lipoff Decl.) at ¶ 14
`
`Q.· ·And I -- I am not trying to cause confusion
`by mixing terms such as biometric data or
`biometric signal. I just want to establish that
`you agree that just biometric systems in general
`are intended to uniquely identify a given user; is
`that fair?
`
`A.· ·Yeah, I would say that when the --
`when a biometric system is used for the
`purpose of providing access, then it would
`need to be capable of uniquely identifying the
`user.
`
`Ex. 2040 (Lipoff Tr., Vol. 2) at 54:7-15
`
`Source: POSR at 8-9, Ex. 1029 at ¶14, Ex. 2040 at 54:7-15
`
`17
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 17
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`“Biometric Signal”
`
`A “biometric signal” must uniquely identify the
`user – Petitioner’s prior art agrees
`
`Mathiassen, Ex. 1004 at 1:14-24:
`◦ “Accordingly there is a strong trend to base access control on
`biometrics which is [a] mathematical description of characteristic
`elements of the owner's body or behaviour that can not be
`separated from this person, and which describes him uniquely.”
`
`Bianco, Ex. 1003 at 12:51-61:
`◦ “Bianco describes “[b]iometric devices” that “identify a user
`based on compared measurements of unique personal
`characteristics” called “biometric measurements.”
`
`Source: POSR at 8-9; Petition (Paper 2) at 20.
`
`18
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 18
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Bianco Prior Art
`
`19
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 19
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Argument - Bianco
`
`Petitioner relies on Bianco for
`◦ A series of entries of a biometric signal characterized by a number and duration
`
`◦ Relies on hand-written signature
`
`◦ Petition at 42
`
`◦ Populating the database according to the instruction
`
`◦ Relies on Bianco’s enrollment of biometric signatures in a database
`
`◦ Petition at 49-50
`
`◦ Admits that Bianco does not disclose the “mapping” element
`
`◦ Petition at 47
`
`20
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 20
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Bianco – Physical vs Behavioral Attributes
`
`“Biometric identification mechanisms include two basic
`categories of biometric measurements. The first category
`involves measuring a unique characteristic found on a
`user's body. This may include, but is not limited to, finger
`and hand geometry, retina and facial images, weight, DNA
`data and breath. The second category involves measuring
`a user's behavioral characteristics. This may include, but
`is not limited to, voice, typing stroke and signature. In
`general, anything that can be measured on a user that is
`unique can be used as a biometric measurement.”
`
`In all cases, the measurement must uniquely identify the
`user.
`
`Source: POR at 24; POSR at 23, Ex. 1003 (Bianco) at 7:57-67
`
`21
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 21
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Bianco – Physical vs Behavioral Attributes
`
`◦ “Bianco makes clear that biometrics
`are both physical (e.g., fingerprint,
`eyeprint, DNA scan) and behavioral
`(e.g., voice, typing style, signature).”
`
`Source: POR at 21-22, Ex. 1005 (Lipoff Decl.) at ¶ 169 (citing Ex. 1003 at 7:57-67)
`
`22
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 22
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Bianco – Physical vs Behavioral Attributes
`“A fingerprint device measures the geometry of a
`fingerprint.”
`◦ Ex. 1003 (Bianco) at 8:26-27
`
`“A specific example of how biometric identification
`works when behavioral measurements are involved can
`be illustrated by a typical signature device. Here, the
`user is prompted for multiple samples of a signature.
`For each sample, characteristics or measurements
`include the pressure, sequence of events, direction,
`relative vectors and speed.”
`◦ Ex. 1003 (Bianco) at 8:41-47
`
`Source: POR at 23-24, 43-45; POSR at 23
`
`23
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 23
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Construction of “Biometric Signal”
`
`‘705 & ‘208 Patents:
`◦ “One example of a biometric signal is a fingerprint. Other physical attributes that can be used
`to provide biometric signals include voice, retinal or iris pattern, face pattern, palm
`configuration and so on.”
`
`◦ Ex. 1001 (‘705 Patent) at 1:29-33
`
`Dr. Russ:
`◦ “In sum, the ‘biometric signals’ claimed in the ’705 Patent are physical biometric attributes only;
`the claims do not include behavioral biometric attributes. A POSITA would have understood that
`attributes that are clearly behavioral attributes, such as hand-written signatures, typing stroke,
`and gait, did not fall within the scope of the claimed ‘biometric signal’ as properly construed.”
`
`◦ Ex. 2031 (Russ Decl.) at ¶¶ 43
`
`Source: POR at 10, 16-17; POSR at 7-8, 10, 12
`
`24
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 24
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Construction of “Biometric Signal”
`
`Source: POR at 13-14
`
`25
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 25
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Bianco – Mapping Limitation
`
`◦ “Bianco discloses reading multiple
`types of biometric signatures,
`including fingerprints, and signatures
`where each has a duration. However,
`Bianco is silent on how
`administrators send control
`signals….”
`
`Source: POR at 41 (citing Petition at 47); (Ex. 1005 (Lipoff Decl.) at ¶ 173
`
`26
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 26
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`No Motivation to
`Combine
`
`27
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 27
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine
`
`“[A] POSITA would have understood that capturing the ridges
`and valleys of the entire fingerprint with each finger move—
`while in a navigation mode—would have been highly
`undesirable because it would interfere with, and slow down, the
`navigational functions. Using a stripe sensor, as explained in both
`Mathiassen and EX-2037, requires the computer to “stitch
`together” different images to form a complete fingerprint image.
`EX-2037 at 002. This requires significant computing power and
`time.”
`
`Source: POR at 35-36, Ex. 2031 (Russ Decl.) at ¶ 77
`
`28
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 28
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine
`
`Source: POR at 36-37 citing Ex. 2031 (Russ Decl.) at ¶79; Ex. 2037 at p. 1, Figure 1
`
`29
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 29
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine
`
`“[A] POSITA would have understood that the need for
`measuring a duration of behavioral biometric entries such as a
`hand-written signature and typing stroke makes sense and
`serves a beneficial security purpose because the duration of
`such behavioral traits is part of what makes that trait unique
`to a given user. But a POSITA would further understand that
`this benefit has no apparent applicability to the measurement
`of the duration of a physical attribute, such as a fingerprint. A
`fingerprint is a unique identifier of a user by itself, regardless
`of for how long it is measured….”
`
`Source: POR at 43, Ex. 2031 (Russ Decl.) at ¶ 94
`
`30
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 30
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Time Bar Under 35
`U.S.C. § 315(b)
`
`31
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 31
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`DJ Complaint: Petitioner Heavily Relied
`On Its Affinity With Apple
`
`“Charter Pacific is also engaged in an aggressive litigation campaign that includes Apple Inc. (“Apple”),
`a business partner of the ASSA ABLOY Entities,” EX2007 at ¶30.
`
`Patent Owner’s “litigation campaign that includes Apple … is likely to expand to include the ASSA
`ABLOY Entities.” Id.
`
`“it is highly likely that Charter Pacific will sue the Assa Abloy Entities on the same patents that have
`been asserted against Apple.” Id.
`
`“Charter Pacific has a history of alleging infringement of all three Patents-in-Suit, including against
`Apple, the ASSA ABLOY Entities’ business partner.” Id. at ¶¶ 43-44.
`
`“After initiating the two lawsuits in the Western District of Texas, CPC also initiated an ex parte
`discovery action against Apple under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to pursue infringement allegations against
`Apple in the Federal Republic of Germany.” Id. at ¶ 46.
`
`“the Apple Touch ID and Face ID features were a prominent focus of the claim charts presented to
`Yale.” ¶63.
`
`“Charter Pacific has asserted infringement of the ’039 patent against Apple.” Id. at ¶ 100.
`
`Source: POR at 18-20 citing Ex. 2007, ¶¶18-20.
`
`32
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 32
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Current Argument
`
`“Petitioners and Apple have a standard business relationship like that of over 34
`
`million application developers on Apple’s platform (EX-1023 at 6-7) and hundreds
`
`of MFi Program participants (collectively its business partners).”
`
`Source: Reply to POPR (Paper 18) at 1.
`
`33
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 33
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s IPR Against the ’039 Patent was
`Prompted Solely by the Apple Litigation
`
`◦ Neither of the notice letters to Yale Locks mentioned the ’039 Patent.
`
`◦ EX2005, EX2006.
`
`◦ The DJ Complaint raises the ‘039 Patent in connection with HID and Hospitality, not Yale. Patent Owner
`never contacted HID or Hospitality.
`
`◦ EX2007 at ¶¶100-106.
`
`◦ Worlds, Inc. v. Bungie, Inc., 903 F.3d 1237, 1244 (Fed. Cir. 2018)
`
`◦ “the fact that the five patents asserted in the Activision litigation were the same five patents Bungie challenged in its IPR petitions”
`cited as one of three significant factors indicating that Activision was an RPI.
`
`Source: PO Preliminary Response (Paper 9) at 10.
`
`34
`
`CPC Ex. 2041 Page 34
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045
`
`