`Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00057 (U.S. Patent No. 8,954,432)
`IPR2023-00058 (U.S. Patent No. 9,959,291)
`IPR2023-00059 (U.S. Patent No. 10,417,275)
`IPR2023-00060 (U.S. Patent No. 10,628,480)
`
`Petitioner’s Demonstratives
`February 13, 2024
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 1 of 108
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`’432 / ’291 Patents – Sharpe Alone or in View of a POSA
`• Single-Reference Obviousness
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`’432 / ’291 / ’275 Patents – Sharpe + Eintracht
`• Motivation to Combine
`• Undisputed Disclosures
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`’480 Patent – Robertson + Lloyd-Jones
`• Analogous Art
`• Motivation to Combine
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 2 of 108
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 3 of 108
`
`
`
`Challenged Patents
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 4 of 108
`
`
`
`Challenged Patents
`
`’432 Patent
`Filed: Nov. 15, 2001
`Issued: Feb. 10, 2015
`
`’291 Patent
`Filed: Oct. 15, 2013
`Issued: May 1, 2018
`
`’275 Patent
`Filed: Mar. 23, 2018
`Issued: Sep. 17, 2019
`
`’480 Patent
`Filed: Aug. 9, 2019
`Issued: Apr. 21, 2020
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`5
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 5 of 108
`
`
`
`Challenged Patents
`
`’432 Pet. 1, 6-12.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`’432 Patent at (54), 1:11-17.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 6 of 108
`
`
`
`Challenged Patents
`
`’432 Patent, Fig. 4
`
`’432 Patent, Fig. 7
`
`’432 Pet. 1, 6-12.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`7
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 7 of 108
`
`
`
`Photo Tagging Was Well-Known in the Art
`
`PhotoFinder
`
`FotoFile
`
`Ex. 1016 at 4 (Fig. 4).
`
`Ex. 1011 at 4 (Fig. 1).
`
`’432 Pet. 1, 6; ’432 Bederson Decl. (Ex. 1003) at 63-69 (¶¶ 107-09).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`8
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 8 of 108
`
`
`
`Photo Tagging Was Well-Known in the Art
`
`’432 Ex. 1002 (’432 FH) at 935.
`
`’432 Pet. 1, 10-12.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 9 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’432 Allowed Based on “Three Distinct and Separate Databases”
`
`’432 Pet. 1, 10-11.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`10
`
`’432 Ex. 1002 at 885.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 10 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’432 Allowed Based on “Three Distinct and Separate Databases”
`
`’432 Patent at 17:41-18:23 (cl. 6).
`’432 Pet. 1, 10-12.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`’432 Patent, Fig. 1
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 11 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’432 Allowed Based on “Three Distinct and Separate Databases”
`
`’432 Ex. 1002 (’432 FH) at 935.
`
`’432 Pet. 1, 10-12.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 12 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’291 Allowed Based on Selecting Tagged User from Contact List
`
`’291 Ex. 1002 (’291 FH) at 394.
`
`’291 Pet. 1-2, 7-13.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`13
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 13 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’291 Allowed Based on Selecting Tagged User from Contact List
`
`’291 Pet. 1-2, 7-13.
`
`’291 Patent at 26:30-60 (cl. 26).
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`’291 Patent, Fig. 4.
`
`14
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 14 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’275 Also Allowed Based on Selecting Tagged User from Contact List
`
`’275 Ex. 1002 (’275 FH) at 235.
`
`’275 Pet. at 12-13.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`15
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 15 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’275 Also Allowed Based on Selecting Tagged User from Contact List
`
`’275 Patent at 16:59-17:29 (cl. 1).
`
`’275 Pet. 1-2, 7-13.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`16
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 16 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: Selecting Tagged User from Contact List Would Have Been Obvious
`
`’291 Ex. 1008 (’480 FH) at 206-07.
`
`‘432 Pet. 11-12; ’291 Pet. 13; ’275 Pet. 13.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 17 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’480 Allowed Based on Prompt to Add Contact from Tagged Photo
`
`’480 Pet. 1-2, 7-10.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`18
`
`’480 Ex. 1002 (’480 FH) at 273.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 18 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’480 Allowed Based on Prompt to Add Contact from Tagged Photo
`
`’480 Patent at 16:53-17:38 (cl. 1).
`
`’480 Pet. 1-2, 7-10.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`19
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 19 of 108
`
`
`
`Prosecution: ’480 Allowed Based on Prompt to Add Contact from Tagged Photo
`
`’480 Pet. 1-2, 7-10.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`20
`
`’480 Patent at 9:31-48.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 20 of 108
`
`
`
`Challenged Patents: Reasons for Allowance
`
`’432 Patent Three Distinct and Separate Databases
`
`’291 Patent Selecting Tagged User From Contact List
`
`’275 Patent Selecting Tagged User From Contact List
`
`’480 Patent Prompt to Add Contact from Tagged Photo
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`21
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 21 of 108
`
`
`
`Asserted Prior Art
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`22
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 22 of 108
`
`
`
`Overview of Instituted Grounds
`’432 Patent (IPR2023-00057)
`Ground 1: Claims 1, 3, 6-8 obvious over Sharpe alone or in view of the knowledge of a POSA
`Ground 2: Claims 1-8 obvious over Sharpe in view of Eintracht teachings
`Ground 3: Claim 3 obvious over Sharpe in view of Carey teachings
`Ground 4: Claim 3 obvious over Sharpe in view of Eintracht and Carey teachings
`
`’291 Patent (IPR2023-00058)
`Ground 1: Claims 1, 5, 10-26 obvious over Sharpe alone or in view of the knowledge of a POSA
`Ground 2: Claims 1-26 obvious over Sharpe in view of Eintracht teachings
`Ground 3: Claim 18, 19, 26 obvious over Sharpe in view of Carey teachings
`Ground 4: Claim 18, 19, 26 obvious over Sharpe in view of Eintracht and Carey teachings
`
`’275 Patent (IPR2023-00059)
`Ground 1: Claims 1-12 obvious over Sharpe in view of Eintracht and FotoFile teachings
`Ground 2: Claims 1-12 obvious over Sharpe in view of Eintracht, FotoFile, and Carey teachings
`
`’480 Patent (IPR2023-00060)
`Ground 1: Claims 1-30 obvious over Robertson in view of Lloyd-Jones teachings
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`23
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 23 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`
`‘432 Pet. 15-17; ’291 Pet. 16-18; ’275 Pet. 16-18.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 4.
`
`24
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 24 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`
`‘432 Pet. 15-17; ’291 Pet. 16-18; ’275 Pet. 16-18.
`
`Ex. 1005 at (54), Fig. 6.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`25
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 25 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Sharpe Discloses Three Distinct and Separate Databases
`
`‘432 Pet. 16-17; ’432 Reply 1; ’432 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 84-85.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005), Fig. 6.
`
`26
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) at 3:64-4:6, 4:21-28.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 26 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Sharpe Discloses Selecting Tagged User from Contact List
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) at 3:57-63, 6:65-7:1, 8:26-29.
`
`‘291 Pet. 31-36; ’291 Reply 1; 275 Pet. 41-46; ’275 Reply 1.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005), Fig. 4.
`
`27
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 27 of 108
`
`
`
`Eintracht (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`
`‘432 Pet. 17-20; ’291 Pet. 18-21; ’275 Pet. 18-21.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`28
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at (54), Figs. 1A-C, 2.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 28 of 108
`
`
`
`Additional Prior Art Not at Issue (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`Undisputed: Carey Teaches Contact Lists; FotoFile Teaches Image Recognition Via AI
`FotoFile
`Carey
`
`’432 Pet. at 78.
`
`‘432 Pet. 20-21, 78-79; ’291 Pet. 21-22; ’275 Pet. 22-23, 53;
`‘275 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 210-211
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`29
`
`Ex. 1011 at 5 (Figs. 3-4).
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 29 of 108
`
`
`
`Robertson (’480 Only)
`
`’480 Pet. 19-21.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`30
`
`Robertson (Ex. 1012)
`at (54), Fig. 11.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 30 of 108
`
`
`
`Robertson (’480 Only)
`
`Robertson (Ex. 1012) at (54), Fig. 8.
`
`’480 Pet. 19-21.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`31
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 31 of 108
`
`
`
`Lloyd-Jones (’480 Only)
`
`’480 Pet. 22-23.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`32
`
`Lloyd-Jones (Ex. 1013) at (54), Fig. 5.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 32 of 108
`
`
`
`Robertson Modified by Lloyd-Jones Teachings (’480 Only)
`
`Robertson (Ex. 1012), Fig. 11 (modified).
`
`Robertson (Ex. 1012), Fig. 8 (modified).
`
`’480 Pet. 41-48; ’480 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 175-80.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`33
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 33 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe Alone or in View of
`the Knowledge of a POSA
`(’432 / ’291)
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 34 of 108
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`’432 / ’291 Patents – Sharpe Alone or in View of a POSA
`• Single-Reference Obviousness
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`’432 / ’291 / ’275 Patents – Sharpe + Eintracht
`• Motivation to Combine
`• Undisputed Disclosures
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`’480 Patent – Robertson + Lloyd-Jones
`• Analogous Art
`• Motivation to Combine
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`35
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 35 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe:
`Single-Reference Obviousness
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`36
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 36 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Single-Reference Obviousness (’432 / ’291)
`PO is on notice that Sharpe is a single-reference obviousness ground
`
`E.g., ’432 Pet. at 5.
`
`E.g., ’432 Pet. at 22.
`
`E.g., ’432 ID at 7.
`
`’432 Reply 12-17; ‘291 Reply 13-18.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`37
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 37 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Single-Reference Obviousness (’432 / ’291)
`The Board is not required to address motivation to combine for Sharpe alone
`
`E.g., ’432 ID at 27 n.11.
`
`’432 Reply 12-17; ‘291 Reply 13-18.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`38
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 38 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Single-Reference Obviousness (’432 / ’291)
`The Board is not required to address motivation to combine for Sharpe alone
`
`Here, HP’s primary argument to the Board was that all of the elements of claims 1–4, 8, and 28 were
`disclosed in O’Brien, a single reference. [...] As both the Board and Realtime recognized, HP also argued in
`the alternative that Nelson disclosed some of the elements in the claims at issue.
`
`We conclude that, in this case, the Board was not required to make any finding regarding a motivation
`to combine given its reliance on O’Brien alone. Certainly, had the Board relied on HP’s alternative
`argument, HP would have been required to demonstrate a sufficient motivation to combine the two
`references. [...]
`
`Under these circumstances, the Board was free to come to the very conclusion it reached: that O’Brien
`alone disclosed every element of claims 1-4, 8, and 28. And because the Board did not rely on Nelson for
`the disclosure of a particular element or teaching, the Board had no obligation to find a motivation to
`combine O’Brien and Nelson.
`
`Realtime Data, LLC v. Iancu, 912 F.3d 1368, 1372-73 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
`
`’432 Reply 12-17; ‘291 Reply 13-18.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`39
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 39 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Single-Reference Obviousness
`Stepan footnote addressed a combination of multiple embodiments from a single reference,
`which does not apply to Sharpe
`
`Whether a rejection is based on combining disclosures from multiple references, combining
`multiple embodiments from a single reference, or selecting from large lists of elements in
`a single reference, there must be a motivation to make the combination and a reasonable
`expectation that such a combination would be successful, otherwise a skilled artisan would not
`arrive at the claimed combination.
`
`In re Stepan Co., 868 F.3d 1342, 1346 n.1 (Fed Cir. 2017)
`
`’432 Reply 12-17; ‘291 Reply 13-18.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`40
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 40 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe:
`Disputed Limitations
`1. Unique User Identifier
`2. Request for Said Image Data
`3. List of Pictured Users
`4. Second Tagging User
`5. ’291 Dependent Claims
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`41
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 41 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Unique User Identifier (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`A POSA would have understood that Sharpe’s username is a unique user identifier
`
`’432 Reply 2-4; ’291 Reply 2-5; ’275 Reply 4-8;
`’432 Pet. 29-32; ’291 Pet. 25-26, 36-38, 43-46; ’275 Pet. 33-34, 46-47.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 1005 (Sharpe) at Fig. 6.
`
`42
`
`E.g., ’432 Pet. at 31-32.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 42 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Unique User Identifier (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`A POSA would have understood that Sharpe’s username is a unique user identifier
`
`E.g., ’432 Bederson Decl. ¶ 132.
`
`’432 Reply 2-4; ’291 Reply 2-5; ’275 Reply 4-8;
`’432 Pet. 29-32; ’291 Pet. 25-26, 36-38, 43-46; ’275 Pet. 33-34, 46-47.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`43
`
`E.g., ’432 Bederson Decl. at 88.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 43 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Unique User Identifier (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`A POSA would have understood that Sharpe’s username is a unique user identifier
`
`’432 Reply 2-4; ’291 Reply 2-5; ’275 Reply 4-8;
`’432 Bederson Reply ¶ 10; ’291 Bederson Reply ¶ 10; ’275 Bederson
`Reply ¶ 13.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`44
`
`Falquet (Ex. 1042) at 4.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 44 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Unique User Identifier (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`PO and its expert do not dispute that Sharpe’s username can be a unique user identifier
`
`E.g., ’432 Saber Decl. ¶ 81.
`
`E.g., ’432 Saber Decl. ¶ 81.
`
`’432 Reply 2-4; ’291 Reply 2-5; ’275 Reply 4-8.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`45
`
`E.g., ’432 Saber Decl. ¶ 82.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 45 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Unique User Identifier (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`PO’s “inherency” argument is a straw man
`
`E.g., ’432 Pet. 31-32.
`
`’432 Reply 2-4; ’291 Reply 2-5; ’275 Reply 4-8.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`E.g., ’432 Bederson Decl. ¶ 307.
`
`46
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 46 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Request for Said Image Data (’432 / ’291)
`
`’432 Reply 6-10; ’291 Reply 5-8;
`’432 Pet. 39-40, 44-54, 55; ’291 Pet. 42-43, 48, 50-51.
`
`’432 Patent at 17:41-18:23 (cl. 6).
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`47
`
`’432 Patent at 18:24-42 (cls. 7-8).
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 47 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Request for Said Image Data (’432 / ’291)
`PO’s misinterpretation would improperly exclude requests that return multiple images
`
`’432 Reply 6-10; ’291 Reply 5-8;
`’432 Pet. 39-40, 44-54, 55; ’291 Pet. 42-43, 48, 50-51.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`48
`
`E.g., ’432 POR at 31-32.
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005), Fig. 4.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 48 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Request for Said Image Data (’432 / ’291)
`PO’s misinterpretation would improperly exclude an embodiment in the specification
`
`E.g., ’432 Patent at 15:46-58.
`
`’432 Reply 6-10; ’291 Reply 5-8.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`E.g., ’432 Patent, Fig. 10.
`
`49
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 49 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Request for Said Image Data (’432 / ’291)
`Even under PO’s misinterpretation, Sharpe discloses the claimed request
`
`’432 Reply 6-10; ’291 Reply 5-8.
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) at 3:29-44.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`50
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 50 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: List of Pictured Users (’432 / ’291)
`Sharpe’s drop-down box discloses a list of pictured users
`
`E.g., ’432 Pet. 42.
`
`’432 Reply 10-12; ’291 Reply 9-11;
`’432 Pet. 40-42, 58; ’291 Pet. 51-53.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) Fig. 4.
`
`51
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 51 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: List of Pictured Users (’432 / ’291)
`PO and its expert offer little more than “not so”
`
`E.g., ’432 POR at 33.
`
`E.g., ’432 POR at 34.
`
`E.g., ’432 Saber Decl. ¶ 94.
`
`’432 Reply 10-12; ’291 Reply 9-11.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`52
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 52 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: List of Pictured Users (’432 / ’291)
`A POSA implementing Sharpe would have understood available UI design options
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) at 9:4-11.
`
`’432 Reply 10-12; ’291 Reply 9-11;
`’432 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 26-30; ’291 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 20-26.
`
`Apple (Ex. 1043) at 79.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) Fig. 4.
`
`53
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 53 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Second Tagging User (’432 Only)
`
`’432 Patent at 17:41-18:23 (cl. 6).
`’432 Reply 4-5; ’432 Pet. 38-39, 55.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`’432 Patent at 18:24-36 (cl. 7).
`
`54
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 54 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Second Tagging User (’432 Only)
`Obvious to apply predictable, nearly identical operations to the same image for a second user
`
`[W]e affirm the Board’s conclusion that the challenged claims would have been
`obvious because modifying the Admitted Prior Art/Betts combination to include
`a second recess was nothing more than the predictable application of
`known technology. The prior art yields a predictable result, the “second
`recess,” because a person of skill in the art would have applied a variation of the
`first recess and would have seen the benefit of doing so.
`
`B/E Aerospace, Inc. v. C&D Zodiac, Inc., 962 F.3d 1373, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2020)
`(citing KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007)).
`
`’432 Reply 4-5; ’432 Pet. 38-39, 55.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`55
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 55 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Adding Image to Tagged User’s Photo Album (’291 cl. 15)
`Sharpe’s UI is used for both retrieving images and archiving images
`
`’291 Patent at 24:14-22.
`
`’291 Reply 11-12;
`’291 Pet. 53-54; ’291 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 224-27.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`56
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005), Fig. 4.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 56 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: User ID Previously Provided by User (’291 cl. 17)
`Obvious design choice to have users provide their username in Sharpe’s registration process
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) at 5:4-6, 7:35-41.
`
`’291 Reply 12-13; ’291 Pet. 33-34, 39-41, 54-55;
`’291 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 228-29.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005), Fig. 1.
`
`57
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 57 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Screen Name Previously Provided by User (’291 cl. 19)
`Also an obvious design choice to have users provide screen names in Sharpe’s registration process
`
`’291 Bederson Decl. ¶ 233.
`
`’291 Reply 13; ’291 Pet. 33-34, 39-41, 54-55;
`’291 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 232-33.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`58
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 58 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe: Naming Information Includes Screen Name (’275 cl. 11)
`Petition addresses obviousness of same functionality for username earlier in the claim
`
`’275 Pet. at 67.
`
`’275 Reply 14; ’275 Pet. 33-34, 67;
`’275 Bederson Decl. ¶ 245.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`59
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 59 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe + Eintracht
`(’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 60 of 108
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`’432 / ’291 Patents – Sharpe Alone or in View of a POSA
`• Single-Reference Obviousness
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`’432 / ’291 / ’275 Patents – Sharpe + Eintracht
`• Motivation to Combine
`• Undisputed Disclosures
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`’480 Patent – Robertson + Lloyd-Jones
`• Analogous Art
`• Motivation to Combine
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`61
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 61 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe + Eintracht:
`Motivation to Combine
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`62
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 62 of 108
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Have Combined the Teachings of Sharpe & Eintracht
`Eintracht’s asynchronous annotations would have improved Sharpe’s collaborative archival system
`Sharpe
`Eintracht
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) at 5:4-18.
`
`’432 Pet. 59-62; ’291 Pet. 59-62; ’275 Pet. 25-27;
`’432 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 143-45; ’291 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 252-54;
`‘275 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 129-31.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`63
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 2:56-3:4.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 63 of 108
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Have Combined the Teachings of Sharpe & Eintracht
`Sharpe and Eintracht disclose structurally similar web-based, collaborative systems
`Sharpe
`Eintracht
`
`’432 Pet. 59-62; ’291 Pet. 59-62; ’275 Pet. 25-27;
`’432 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 143-45; ’291 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 252-54;
`‘275 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 129-31.
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) Fig. 2.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) Fig. 3.
`
`64
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 64 of 108
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Have Combined the Teachings of Sharpe & Eintracht
`Patent Owner and its expert offer little more than “not so”
`Patent Owner
`
`Dr. Saber
`
`E.g., ’432 POR at 53-54.
`
`E.g., Saber Decl. ¶ 110.
`
`’432 Reply 18-19; ’291 Reply 18-20; ’275 Reply 2-4.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`65
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 65 of 108
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Have Combined the Teachings of Sharpe & Eintracht
`Sharpe and Eintracht each operate on both documents and images
`
`Sharpe
`
`Eintracht
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) at 3:45-56.
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 6:55-65.
`
`’432 Reply 18-19; ’291 Reply 18-20; ’275 Reply 2-4;
`’432 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 32-34; ’291 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 28-30;
`’275 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 7-9.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`66
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 66 of 108
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Have Combined the Teachings of Sharpe & Eintracht
`Sharpe and Eintracht each operate on both documents and images
`Sharpe
`
`Eintracht
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) Fig. 1C.
`
`’432 Reply 18-19; ’291 Reply 18-20; ’275 Reply 2-4;
`’432 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 32-34; ’291 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 28-30;
`’275 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 7-9.
`
`Sharpe (Ex. 1005) Fig. 4.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`67
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 67 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe + Eintracht:
`Undisputed Disclosures
`1.Unique User Identifier
`2.Second Tagging User
`3.List of Pictured Users
`4.Request for Said Image Data
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`68
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 68 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Eintracht Discloses Unique User ID (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`PO does not challenge Petition’s showing that Eintracht also discloses a unique user ID
`
`’432 Reply 20-21; ’291 Reply 20-21; ’275 Reply 7-8;
`’432 Pet. 63-64, 68; ’291 Pet. 62-64; ’275 Pet. 34-36.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`69
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 8:6-16.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 69 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Eintracht Discloses Unique User ID (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`During prosecution, PO admitted that Eintracht discloses a unique user ID
`
`’432 Ex. 1002 (’432 FH) at 487.
`
`’432 Reply 20-21; ’291 Reply 20-21; ’275 Reply 7-8;
`’432 Pet. 63-64, 68; ’291 Pet. 62-64; ’275 Pet. 34-36.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`70
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 70 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Eintracht Discloses Second Tagging User (’432 Only)
`PO does not challenge Petition’s showing that Eintracht also discloses a second tagging user
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 3:59-65.
`
`’432 Reply 20-21; ’432 Pet. 65, 70.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`71
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 71 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Eintracht Discloses List of Pictured Users (’432 / ’291)
`PO does not challenge Petition’s showing that Eintracht also discloses a list of pictured users
`
`’432 Reply 20-21; ’291 Reply 20-21;
`’432 Pet. 66-68, 71; ’291 Pet. 70-72.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`72
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 7:5-17, Fig. 1C.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 72 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Eintracht Discloses List of Pictured Users (’432 / ’291)
`PO does not challenge Petition’s showing that Eintracht also discloses a list of pictured users
`
`’432 Reply 20-21; ’291 Reply 20-21;
`’432 Pet. 66-68, 71; ’291 Pet. 70-72.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`73
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 7:18-23, Fig. 2.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 73 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Eintracht Discloses Request for Image (’432 / ’291)
`PO does not challenge Petition’s showing that Eintracht also discloses a request for image data
`
`’432 Reply 20-21; ’291 Reply 20-21;
`’432 Pet. 68-69; ’291 Pet. 62-64.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`74
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 4:13-21, 8:17-23.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 74 of 108
`
`
`
`Undisputed: Eintracht Discloses Request for Image (’432 / ’291)
`Even under PO’s improper interpretation, Eintracht discloses a request for a “particular” image
`
`’432 Reply 20-21; ’291 Reply 20-21;
`’432 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 35-36; ’291 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 31-32.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`75
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 13:41-43, 13:56-58, Fig. 6 (excerpt).
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 75 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe + Eintracht:
`Disputed Limitations
`1. Coordinates
`2. Email Alerts
`3. ’275 Dependent Claim
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`76
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 76 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe + Eintracht: Coordinates (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`Eintracht adds coordinates to the named user annotations of Sharpe
`
`’432 Reply 21-23; ’291 Reply 22-24; ’275 Reply 8-10;
`’432 Pet. 72-74, 68; ’291 Pet. 66-67; ’275 Pet. 47-51, 62-66.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`77
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 7:59-66, Fig. 1B.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 77 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe + Eintracht: Coordinates (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`A POSA would have known of many UI design options to prevent obscuring an image
`
`Microsoft (Ex. 1044) at 343 (Fig. 12.6).
`
`’432 Reply 21-23; ’291 Reply 22-24; ’275 Reply 8-10;
`’432 Pet. 72-74, 68; ’291 Pet. 66-67; ’275 Pet. 47-51, 62-66.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`78
`
`Harrison & Vicente (Ex. 1045) at Fig. 1.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 78 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe + Eintracht: Email Alerts (’432 / ’291 / ’275)
`Eintracht adds email alerts to named user annotation events of Sharpe
`
`’432 Reply 23-24; ’291 Reply 21-22; ’275 Reply 12-13;
`’432 Pet. 74-75; ’291 Pet. 64-65; ’275 Pet. 59-60;
`’432 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 45-46; ’291 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 33-34;
`’275 Bederson Reply ¶¶ 22-23.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`79
`
`Eintracht (Ex. 1006) at 10:5-16, 11:7-14.
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 79 of 108
`
`
`
`Sharpe + Eintracht: ’275 Dependent Claims 8-9
`Petition addresses “in response to” location of the image recited earlier in the claim
`
`’275 Reply 13-14; ’275 Pet. 63-67;
`’275 Bederson Decl. ¶¶ 233-43.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`’275 Pet. 64.
`
`80
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 80 of 108
`
`
`
`Robertson + Lloyd-Jones
`(’480 Only)
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Angel Technologies Group LLC
`IPR2023-00058
`Exhibit 1049 - Page 81 of 108
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`’432 / ’291 Patents – Sharpe Alone or in View of a POSA
`• Single-Reference Obviousness
`• Disputed Limitations
`
`’432 / ’291 / ’275 Patents – Sharpe + Eintracht
`• Motivation to Combine
`• Undisputed Disclosures
`• Disputed Limitation