Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 8,982,863
`
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Tech. LLC, Case IPR2022-01222
`
`Andrew Ehmke and Adam Fowles,
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`1
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 1 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,982,863
`
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Tech. LLC, Case IPR2022-01222
`
`Andrew Ehmke and Adam Fowles,
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`1
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 1 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`The ’863 Patent
`
`Ex.1001, Figs. 4 and 5a; Petition, 8.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`2
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 2 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`’863 Patent, Claims 1 and 14
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 1.
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 14.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`3
`
`3
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 3 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s Different System Functions Render Obvious
`the “Server” and “Network Switch Box” Limitations
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`4
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 4 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s System Includes a “Server” and “Network Switch Box”
`
`Petition, 18.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`5
`
`5
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 5 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`POSITAs Understood That Ahopelto’s GGSNs Included
`Multiple Logical Functions
`Ahopelto teaches integrating multiple logical node functions into one computer:
`
`Ex.1005, 6:7-15; Petition, 35,36.
`GGSNs were known to include multiple logical functions in one node:
`
`Ex.1010, p. 84; Ex.1003, ¶123; Petition, 39.
`
`Ex.1010, pp. 85, 87; Ex.1003, ¶¶111, 122;
`Petition, 34-36, 39; Pet. Reply, 8.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`6
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 6 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Server Functionality Teaches a “Server”
`
`Ahopelto teaches a server function that determines the protocol type of the data
`packet:
`Petition, 24.
`
`Ex.1005, 7:37-40; Petition, 33.
`
`Ex.1005, 8:40-41; Petition, 33.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`7
`
`7
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 7 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Server Functionality Teaches a “Server”
`
`Petition, 24.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`8
`
`8
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 8 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Access Server Also Teaches a “Server”
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN includes an access server which also renders obvious the “server”:
`
`Ex.1006, 11:51-55; Ex.1003, ¶106; Petition, 33-34.
`
`Ex.1003, ¶106; Petition, 33-34.
`
`Ex.1010, p. 87; Ex.1003, ¶79; Petition, 25.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`9
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 9 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Routing Functionality Teaches a “Network Switch Box”
`
`Ahopelto teaches the GGSN transmitting a packet with its routing function:
`
`Ex.1005, 8:40-45; Petition, 42.
`
`Ex.1013, 14:1-3; Ex.1003, ¶125; Petition, 40.
`
`Ex.1010, p. 85; Ex.1003, ¶122; Petition, 39.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`10
`
`10
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 10 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Routing Functionality Teaches a “Network Switch Box”
`
`Petition, 40.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`11
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 11 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`PO Acknowledges That Different Hardware is Not Required for
`the “Server” and “Network Switch Box” Limitations
`
`POR, 2.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`12
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 12 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`The GGSN Server/Routing Functions are Logically Distinct
`
`Server Function of GGSN:
`
`Routing Function of GGSN:
`
`Ex.1005, 7:37-40; Petition, 24, 33.
`
`Ex.1005, 8:40-41; Petition, 24, 33.
`
`Ex.1005, 8:40-45; Petition, 42.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:22-23; Petition, 24.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:22-27; Petition, 42.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:48-50; Petition, 24.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:50-55; Petition, 42.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:56-59; Petition, 24.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex.1005, 10:59-62; Petition, 42.
`13
`
`13
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 13 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`What are the Claim Requirements for the “Server”?
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 1.
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 14.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`14
`
`14
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 14 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Server” Requirements – Part 1 (Server Functionality)
`
`Claim 1: “controlling [IP] based wireless devices, IP based cellular phones, networks or
`network switches …”
`
`Petition, 28.
`
`Ex.1005, 8:40-41; Petition, 33.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`15
`
`15
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 15 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Server” Requirements – Part 1 (Access Server)
`
`Claim 1: “controlling [IP] based wireless devices, IP based cellular phones, networks or
`network switches …”
`
`Ex.1003, ¶106; Petition, 33-34.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`16
`
`16
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 16 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Server” Requirements – Part 2
`
`Claim 1: “a first server connected to at least one internet protocol enabled network …”
`Server Functionality
`
`Access Server
`
`Petition, 35.
`
`Ex.1003, ¶106; Petition, 33-34.
`
`Ex.1005, 6:16-19; Petition, 34.
`
`Ex.1010, p. 87; Ex.1003, ¶106; Petition, 33-34.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`17
`
`17
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 17 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Server” Requirements – Part 3
`
`Claim 1: “said server configured with a controller in communication with a plurality of
`network devices …”
`Server Functionality
`
`Access Server
`
`Ex.1010, p. 84; Petition, 35-36.
`
`Ex.1006, 14:1-5; Petition, 36.
`
`Petition, 38.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex.1003, ¶112; Petition, 36.
`
`18
`
`18
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 18 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Server” Requirements – Part 4
`
`Claim 14: “a server … configured for communication with the first network switch box
`and the second network switch box, and a communication protocol …”
`
`Ex.1005, 7:21-26; Petition, 69.
`
`Ex.1022, p.12; Ex.1003, ¶187; Petition, 59, 69.
`
`Petition, 46, 69.
`
`Ex.1006, 14:6-10; Ex.1003, ¶189; Petition, 59-60, 69.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`19
`
`19
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 19 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s System Renders Obvious a “First Network Switch Box”
`
`Ex.1005, 6:16-19; Petition, 38-39.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`20
`
`20
`
`Petition, 41.
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 20 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s System Renders Obvious a “Second Network Switch Box”
`
`Petition, 62.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`21
`
`21
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 21 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`What are the Claim Requirements for the “Network Switch Box”?
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 1.
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 14.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`22
`
`22
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 22 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Network Switch Box” Requirements – Part 1
`
`Claim 1: “the network switch box is configured with a plurality of ports”
`
`Petition, 40.
`
`Ex.1013, 14:1-3; Ex.1003, ¶125; Petition, 40.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`23
`
`23
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 23 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Network Switch Box” Requirements – Part 2
`
`Claim 1: “the network switch box is connected to at least two networks”
`
`Petition, 41.
`
`Petition, 42.
`
`Ex.1010, p. 85; Ex.1003, ¶122; Petition, 39.
`
`Ex.1010, p. 84; Ex.1003, ¶123; Petition, 39.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`24
`
`24
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 24 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Network Switch Box” Requirements – Part 3
`
`Claim 1: “the network switch box is configured to transmit and receive one or more data
`packets between the two networks”
`Mobile Originated
`
`Mobile Terminated
`
`Petition, 44.
`
`Petition, 43.
`
`Ex.1005, 8:40-41; Petition, 44.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex.1005, 7:21-26; Petition, 43.
`25
`
`25
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 25 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Teaches the “Network Switch Box” Requirements – Part 4
`
`Claim 14: “configured with a wired and/or wireless interface” and “configured to transmit
`and receive a plurality of data streams”
`
`A GGSN routing functionality (first network switch box)
`interfaces between two networks:
`
`A host router (second network switch box) interfaces
`between two networks:
`
`Ex.1005, 6:50-52; Petition, 64.
`
`Ex.1005, Abstract; Petition, 63-64.
`
`POSITAs understood that packet networks had wired/wireless
`interfaces:
`
`Ex.1027, 11:1-8; Ex.1003, ¶204; Petition, 63-64.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`26
`
`26
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 26 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Renders Obvious the “in Communication With”/
`“Configured for Communication With” Limitations
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`27
`
`27
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 27 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Server Functionality is “in Communication With
`a Plurality of Network Devices” (Claim 1)
`
`In Communication With SGSN:
`
`In Communication With Network/Router/Host:
`
`Petition, 38.
`
`Ex.1005, 6:7-15; Petition, 36-37.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex.1005, 7:20-26; Petition, 37.
`
`28
`
`28
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 28 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Server Functionality is “in Communication With
`a Plurality of Network Devices” (Claim 1)
`Server Functionality of GGSN accesses every packet to analyze:
`
`Ex.1005, 8:40-45; Petition, 24; Pet. Reply, 16-17.
`
`Ex.1029, 81:18-21; Pet. Reply, 16.
`
`Ex.1029, 81:22-82:3; Pet. Reply, 16.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`29
`
`29
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 29 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Server Functionality is “Configured for Communication With”
`the First and Second Network Switch Boxes (Claim 14)
`
`Petition, 66.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`30
`
`30
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 30 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Renders Obvious
`Dependent Claim 4
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 4.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`31
`
`31
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 31 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Server Functionality Dynamically Changes Paths
`Based on the Protocol of the Packet
`
`Petition, 50, 52.
`
`Petition, 51, 52.
`
`Ex.1003, ¶158; Petition, 52.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`32
`
`32
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 32 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s First “Network Switch Box”
`
`GGSN (first network switch box) receiving packets (first path):
`
`Ex.1005, 10:22-23; Petition, 49; Pet. Reply, 23.
`GGSN (first network switch box) receiving packets (second path):
`
`Ex.1005, 10:48-50; Petition, 51; Pet. Reply, 23.
`GGSN (first network switch box) transmitting packets (first path):
`
`Ex.1005, 10:23-27; Petition, 49; Pet. Reply, 23.
`GGSN (first network switch box) transmitting packets (second path):
`
`Ex.1005, 10:50-53; Petition, 51; Pet. Reply, 23.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`33
`
`33
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 33 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s Second “Network Switch Box”
`
`Mobile originated (second network switch box transmitting/receiving)
`
`Petition, 66.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`34
`
`34
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 34 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Renders Obvious
`Dependent Claim 6
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 6.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`35
`
`35
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 35 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s GGSN Server Functionality Switches Between Paths
`in Response to an Application
`Ahopelto’s server functionality switches in response to protocol used by an application
`(whether the network supports the protocol):
`
`Ex.1005, 9:56-57; Petition, 54; Pet. Reply, 24-25.
`
`Ex.1005, 9:50-54; Petition, 54.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:13-21; Petition, 54.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:39-45; Petition, 54.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`36
`
`36
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 36 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`PO Ignores the Ahopelto Teachings Showing Switching
`“in Response to an Application”
`
`PO assertion
`
`Actual claim
`language
`
`Actual
`teaching
`
`PO Response, 28.
`
`PO Sur-Reply, 19-20.
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 6.
`
`Pet. Reply, 25
`(Petition, 54-55).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`37
`
`37
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 37 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto also Renders Obvious “in Response to an Application”
`With the “Billing or Security Reasons”
`Ahopelto’s server functionality switches in response to a billing or security reason
`requiring routing packets a specific way:
`
`Ex.1005, 10:34-36; Petition, 55; Pet. Reply, 26.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:13-21; Petition, 54.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`38
`
`38
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 38 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto Render Obvious
`Dependent Claim 19
`
`Ex.1001, Claim 19.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`39
`
`39
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 39 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s Optimal Data Path is Defined From the Server Functionality
`
`“As further shown at claim 3” (Petition, 72):
`
`First path via operator 1:
`
`Second path via operator 3:
`
`Ex.1005, 10:22-27; Petition, 49.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:30-33; Petition, 49.
`
`Ex.1005, 10:48-55; Petition, 51.
`
`Ex.1003, ¶236; Petition, 73; Pet. Reply, 27.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`40
`
`40
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 40 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s Optimal Data Path is Between two “Network Switch Boxes”
`
`Petition, 50, 54, 72.
`
`Petition, 51, 54, 72.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`41
`
`41
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 41 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s Optimal Data Path is for a “Specific Data Stream Flow”
`
`Ex.1005, 10:63-11:6; Petition, 56 (claim 8, “data stream”); Pet. Reply, 27.
`
`Ex.1029, 91:5-14; Pet. Reply, 28.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`42
`
`42
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 42 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Ahopelto’s Optimal Data Path is for a “Specific Data Stream Flow”
`
`Packets between endpoints – new argument? (PO Sur-Reply, 22)
`
`Cited and quoted in the original Petition:
`
`Ex.1005, 10:63-66; Petition, 56; Pet. Reply, 27.
`
`What is the “method described above” that allows visiting of
`networks that don’t support the protocol?:
`
`Ex.1005, 10:48-55; Petition, 51, 72.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`43
`
`43
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 43 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Hardwick is Analogous Art
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`44
`
`44
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 44 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Hardwick is in the Same Field of Endeavor to the ’863 Patent
`
`’863 Field of Endeavor: Wireless Networking
`
`Ex.1001, Title; Ex.1003, ¶45; Petition, 7; Pet. Reply, 30.
`
`Ex.1001, 4:14-15; Ex.1003, ¶46; Petition, 8; Pet. Reply, 30.
`
`Ex.1001, 5:6-11; Ex.1003, ¶47; Petition, 8; Pet. Reply, 30.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`45
`
`45
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 45 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Hardwick is in the Wireless Networking Field
`
`Ex.1008, Abstract; Ex.1003, ¶66; Petition, 75; Pet. Reply, 30.
`
`Ex.1008, 6:38-41; Ex.1003, ¶245; Petition, 76; Pet. Reply, 30.
`
`Ex.1008, 51:19-21; Pet. Reply, 30.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`46
`
`46
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 46 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`The ’863 Patent’s Problem
`
`’863 Pertinent Problem: how to further integrate components
`for connections between networks
`
`Ex.1001, claim 1; Pet. Reply, 31.
`
`Ex.1001, 1:51-54; Pet. Reply, 31.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`47
`
`47
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 47 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Hardwick is Reasonably Pertinent to the ’863 Patent’s Problem
`
`Hardwick reduces the cost of providing packet switching
`services and integrates virtual switches into the same physical
`switching system:
`
`Ex.1008, 6:38-41; Petition, 76; Pet. Reply, 32.
`
`Ex.1008, 6:47-52; Petition, 76; Pet. Reply, 32.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`48
`
`48
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 48 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Sood is Analogous Art
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`49
`
`49
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 49 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Sood is in the Wireless Networking Field
`
`Ex.1009, 3:46-52; Petition, 79-80; Pet. Reply, 323.
`
`Ex.1009, 3:54-56; Petition, 80; Pet. Reply, 32.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`50
`
`50
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 50 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`The ’863 Patent’s Problem
`
`’863 Pertinent Problem: having different channels for voice and
`other data
`
`Ex.1001, 9:17-20; Pet. Reply, 33.
`
`Ex.1001, 9:44-47; Pet. Reply, 33.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`51
`
`51
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 51 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Sood is Reasonably Pertinent to the ’863 Patent’s Problem
`
`Sood teaches how to receive one stream of information
`synchronized with another stream of information in real time,
`including audio, video, images, data:
`
`Ex.1009, 9:26-32; Petition, 81; Pet. Reply, 33.
`
`Ex.1009, 2:35-38; Petition, 81-82; Pet. Reply, 33.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`52
`
`52
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 52 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 8,982,863
`
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Tech. LLC, Case IPR2022-01222
`
`Andrew Ehmke and Adam Fowles,
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`53
`
`Ex.1100 / IPR2022-01222 / Page 53 of 53
`Apple Inc. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
