UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`v.
`CARBYNE BIOMETRICS, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`———————
`IPR2024-00507
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`_____________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 312 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`I. CONTENTS
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`I.
`INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES ........................................................................ 1
`A.
`Real Party-in-Interest ............................................................................ 1
`B.
`Related Matters ...................................................................................... 1
`C.
`Lead and Back-up Counsel and Service Information ........................... 2
`III. GROUNDS FOR STANDING .................................................................. 2
`IV. THE ’105 PATENT ................................................................................... 3
`A.
`Summary of the ’105 patent .................................................................. 3
`B.
`Prosecution History ............................................................................... 4
`C.
`Effective Filing Date ............................................................................. 5
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ......................................... 8
`V.
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ...................................................................... 8
`VII. REQUESTED RELIEF ............................................................................. 9
`VIII. OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGES ............................................................. 9
`A.
`Challenged Claims ................................................................................ 9
`B.
`Statutory Grounds for Challenges .......................................................10
`IDENTIFICATION OF HOW THE CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE .. 11
`A. Ground 1: Claims 2, 4, 12, 15, 21, 23, 31, and 34 are obvious
`under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Kesanupalli, Cheng and Kodama. ...........11
`1.
`Kesanupalli ................................................................................11
`2.
`Cheng ........................................................................................13
`3.
`Kodama .....................................................................................16
`4.
`Combination of Kesanupalli, Cheng and Kodama ...................16
`5.
`Independent Claim 1 (base claim to challenged claims) ..........20
`6.
`Claim 2 ......................................................................................35
`7.
`Claim 4 ......................................................................................36
`8.
`Claim 12 ....................................................................................37
`
`IX.
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`9.
`Claim 15 ....................................................................................38
`10. Claims 21, 23, 31 and 34 ..........................................................40
`Ground 2: Claims 5, 6, 24 and 25 are obvious under 35 U.S.C.
`§103 over Kesanupalli, Cheng, Kodama and Hubner. ........................42
`1.
`Hubner .......................................................................................42
`2.
`Combination of Kesanupalli, Cheng, Kodama and Hubner .....44
`3.
`Claim 5 ......................................................................................49
`4.
`Claim 6 ......................................................................................52
`5.
`Claims 24 and 25.......................................................................55
`Ground 3: Claims 2, 4, 12, 15, 21, 23, 31, and 34 are obvious
`under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Jakobsson ’351 and Kodama. .................55
`1.
`Jakobsson ’351 and Kodama ....................................................55
`2.
`Reasons to Combine Jakobsson ’351 and Kodama ..................55
`3.
`Independent Claim 1 (base claim to challenged claims) ..........57
`4.
`Claim 2 ......................................................................................63
`5.
`Claim 4 ......................................................................................64
`6.
`Claim 12 ....................................................................................64
`7.
`Claim 15 ....................................................................................65
`8.
`Claims 21, 23, 31, 34 ................................................................66
`D. Ground 4: Claims 5-6 and 24-25 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103
`over Jakobsson ’351, Kodama and Hubner.........................................67
`1.
`Hubner .......................................................................................67
`2.
`Combination of Jakobsson ’351, Kodama and Hubner ............67
`3.
`Claim 5 ......................................................................................72
`4.
`Claim 6 ......................................................................................72
`5.
`Claims 24-25 .............................................................................73
`X. DISCRETIONARY DENIAL IS NOT WARRANTED ........................... 73
`A.
`The Fintiv factors favor institution. ....................................................74
`B.
`The Board should not deny under General Plastic ..............................76
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`C.
`Advanced Bionics Test Favors Institution. ..........................................76
`XI. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 77
`XII. CERTIFICATE OF WORD COUNT ...................................................... 78
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ...................................................................... 79
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- iii -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`January 31, 2024
`
`APPL-1001 U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105 (“the ’105 patent”)
`APPL-1002
`Prosecution History of the ’105 patent
`APPL-1003 Declaration of Dr. Patrick McDaniel
`APPL-1004
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Patrick McDaniel
`APPL-1005
`Priority Chain Applications
`APPL-1006 U.S. Patent No. 8,799,666 (“Kesanupalli”)
`APPL-1007 U.S. Patent No. 8,099,789 (“Challener”)
`APPL-1008 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0117636 (“Cheng”)
`APPL-1009 U.S. Patent No. 9,652,629 (“Brown”)
`APPL-1010
`European Patent Application EP 2 079 023 A2 (“Kodama”)
`APPL-1011 U.S. Patent 10,360,351 (“Jakobsson ’351”)
`APPL-1012
`Patrick McDaniel, Authentication, Handbook of Computer
`Networks, Volume 3, Part 2, pp. 570-580, John Wiley and
`Sons, 2008. Ed. Hossein Bidgoli
`IBM Introducing Fingerprint Reader Into Laptop. Jack
`Germain. 2004 at https://www.technewsworld.com/story/ibm-
`introducing-fingerprint-reader-into-laptop-37017.html
`APPL-1014 U.S. Patent Publication 2008/0059804 to Shah et al.
`APPL-1015 Kerberos: An Authentication Service for Computer Networks.
`B. Clifford Neuman et al. 1994 at
`https://gost.isi.edu/publications/kerberos-neuman-tso.html
`ISO/IEC 11889-1:2009 Information technology Trusted
`Platform Module Part 1: Overview at
`https://www.iso.org/standard/50970.html
`TPM Main Part 3 Commands Specification Version 1.2 1
`March 2011 at https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/wp-
`content/uploads/TPM-Main-Part-3-
`Commands_v1.2_rev116_01032011.pdf
`RESERVED
`
`APPL-1018
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`APPL-1013
`
`APPL-1016
`
`APPL-1017
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPL-1021
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`Computer Dictionary, Second Edition, entry “record” (1994)
`APPL-1019
`APPL-1020 How to Restore Your Data After a Hard Drive Crash, Glenn
`Derene, Aug 4, 2011 at
`https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/how-
`to/a6819/how-to-restore-your-data-after-a-hard-drive-crash/
`Redline comparison of U.S. Patent No. 10,360,351 patent
`specification and the ’105 patent.
`Reserved
`RFC2818, HTTP Over TLS (May 2000)
`https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/wp-content/uploads/TPM-
`Applications-Whitepaper.pdf (retrieved Jan. 2, 2024)
`Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-
`Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,
`(June 21, 2022) (“Director Memo)
`Preliminary Constructions, Carbyne Biometrics v. Apple Inc.,
`WDTX-1:23-cv-00324 (December 11, 2023)
`
`APPL-1022
`APPL-1023
`APPL-1024
`
`APPL-1025
`
`APPL-1026
`
`APPL-1027 United States District Courts—National Judicial Caseload
`Profile (September 30, 2023),
`https://www.uscourts.gov/statistics/table/na/federal-court-
`management-statistics/2023/09/30 (retrieved Dec. 14, 2023)
`Scheduling Order, Carbyne Biometrics, LLC v. Apple Inc.,
`WDTX-1:23-cv-00324 (July 14, 2023)
`
`APPL-1028
`
`APPL-1029
`
`Plaintiff Carbyne Biometrics, LLC’s Preliminary Infringement
`Contentions, Carbyne Biometrics v. Apple, Inc., 1:23-cv-
`00324 (June 21, 2023)
`APPL-1030 U.S. Patent Application No. 2012/0150808 to Hubner et al.
`filed December 13, 2010 and published June 14, 2012
`(“Hubner”)
`(https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2246.txt),
`The TLS Protocol
`January 1999 (retrieved January 30, 2024)
`
`APPL-1031
`
`APPL-1032
`
`
`
`The Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) Protocol Version 3.0
`(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6101), August 2011
`(retrieved January 30, 2024)
`- v -
`
`

`

`APPL-1034
`
`APPL-1035
`
`APPL-1037
`
`APPL-1033
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`The Kerberos Network Authentication Service
`(VS)
`(https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4120.txt), July 2005
`(retrieved January 30, 2024)
`Tseitlin, Ariel, “Embracing Failure to Improve Resilience and
`Maximize Availability”, acmqueue The Antifragile
`Organization
`Batten et al., “pStore: A Secure Peer-to-Peer Backup System,”
`https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/149321?show=full,
`October, 2002
`
`APPL-1036 Varshavsky et al., “Amigo: Proximity-Based Authentication of
`Mobile Devices,” UbiComp 2007, LNCS 4714, pp. 253-270,
`2007
`Chervenak, Ann & Vellanki, Vivekanand & Kurmas, Zack.
`(1998). Protecting File Systems: A Survey of Backup
`Techniques
`APPL-1038 Guide to Bluetooth Security: Recommendations of the
`National Institute of Standards and Technology, National
`Institute of Standards and Technology, Sept. 2008
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- vi -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`I.
`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`INTRODUCTION
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105 (the “’105 patent”) relates to “Authentication
`
`Translation” where a request to access a resource and an authentication input is
`
`received, and in response, “a previously stored credential associated with the
`
`resource is accessed” and provided to the resource. APPL-1001, Title, Abstract.
`
`Apple Inc. (“Petitioner” or “Apple”) respectfully requests the Board review and
`
`cancel as unpatentable claims 2, 4-6, 12, 15, 21, 23-25, 31, and 34 (“Challenged
`
`Claims”) of the ’105 patent.
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES
`A. Real Party-in-Interest
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1), Petitioner certifies that the real party-in-
`
`interest is Apple Inc.
`
`B. Related Matters
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(2), the ’105 patent is or was involved in the
`
`following matters, which may affect, or be affected by, this proceeding:
`
`• Carbyne Biometrics, LLC v. Apple Inc., 1:23-cv-00324 (WDTX), filed
`
`March 24, 2023 (Pending) (“Parallel District Court Proceeding”)
`
`Apple is not aware of any disclaimers, reexamination certificates or other IPR
`
`petitions addressing the ’105 patent; however, the following matter involved a
`
`related application and may affect this proceeding:
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`• Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al v. RightQuestion, LLC, IPR2022-
`
`00244 (PTAB), filed December 1, 2021 (terminated July 26, 2022)
`
`(“Samsung ’696 Patent IPR”)
`
`
`
`C. Lead and Back-up Counsel and Service Information
`Lead Counsel
`
`
`David W. O’Brien
`Phone: (512) 867-8457
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`Fax: (214) 200-0853
`2801 N. Harwood St. Suite 2300
`david.obrien.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Dallas, TX 75201
`USPTO Reg. No. 40,107
`
`
`Back-up Counsel
`
`Phone: (512) 867-8528
`Kelly Gehrke Lyle
`Fax: (214) 200-0853
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`kelly.lyle.ipr@haynesboone.com
`2801 N. Harwood St. Suite 2300
`Dallas, TX 75201
`USPTO Reg. No. 62,332
`
`
`Hong Shi
`Phone: (512) 867-8440
`Fax: (214) 200-0853
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`hong.shi.ipr@haynesboone.com
`2801 N. Harwood St. Suite 2300
`USPTO Reg. No. 69,009
`Dallas, TX 75201
`
`Please address all correspondence to lead and back-up counsel. Petitioner
`
`
`
`consents to electronic service and asks Patent Owner to do the same.
`
`III. GROUNDS FOR STANDING
`Petitioner certifies that the ’105 patent is eligible for IPR, and that Petitioner
`
`is not barred or estopped from requesting IPR challenging the patent claims. 37
`
`C.F.R. §42.104(a).
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`
`
`IV. THE ’105 PATENT
`Summary of the ’105 patent
`A.
`The ’105 patent is directed to an environment including a client device, such
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`
`
`as a notebook computer or tablet, which is connected via a network to a service
`
`such as a website. APPL-1001, 2:62-3:14. FIG. 1 is illustrative:
`
`APPL-1001, FIG. 1, annotated
`
`
`
`The ’105 patent describes authentication techniques to provide user
`
`credentials (e.g., a password) from a client device to a service with a goal of
`
`avoiding reliance on a user’s input of the credential, which is tedious and leads to
`
`poor security practices. APPL-1001, 1:43-52. The ’105 patent describes users
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`“need not type such usernames and passwords into their devices whenever required
`
`by a service. Instead, users can authenticate themselves to an ‘authentication
`
`translator’...and
`
`the authentication
`
`translator will provide
`
`the appropriate
`
`credentials to the implicated service on the user’s behalf.” APPL-1001, 3:20-26.
`
`FIG. 5 illustrates this authentication translation. APPL-1001, 1:66-67.
`
`APPL-1001, FIG. 5
`
`
`
`However, these techniques for authentication translation and the systems
`
`performing them were well-known at the time of the claimed invention. APPL-
`
`1003, ¶¶42-61, 31-35.
`
`Prosecution History
`B.
`The Office rejected all claims as obvious but indicated that then-pending
`
`claim 16 reciting “the backup is performed in response to a determination that the
`
`first device is of a same brand as the second device” was allowable. APPL-1002,
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`89-104 (Office Action dated 01-28-2022). The Office also rejected the claims on
`
`obviousness-type double-patenting grounds over various patents including U.S.
`
`Patent 10,360,351 (“Jakobsson ’351”). APPL-1002, 88-89. In a response with
`
`accompanying Terminal Disclaimer, Applicant amended each of its independent
`
`claims to require that initiating backup to a second device is “based at least in part
`
`on the first device being a same brand as a second device.” APPL-1002, 69-70,
`
`76-79. This also was well-known by the earliest claimed invention date. APPL-
`
`1003, ¶¶34-35.
`
`C. Effective Filing Date
`The ’105 Patent issued on a continuation-in-part (CIP) application (US
`
`Application 17/123,018 (“the ’018 App”)) filed December 15, 2020. APPL-1001,
`
`(22), (63); see also APPL-1002, 353-54 (ADS-Domestic Benefit), 397. The ’018
`
`App claims priority as a CIP to U.S. Application 17/027,481, which claims priority
`
`through a chain of five (5) continuation applications originating with US
`
`Application 13/706,254 (“the pre-AIA ’254 App”), filed December 5, 2012. Id.
`
`Applicable Law: Because the ’018 App was filed after March 16, 2013, but
`
`purports to claim benefit of a filing date before March 16, 2013, it is a “transition
`
`application.” The America Invents Act provides that its amendment of 35 U.S.C.
`
`§§102, 103 applies to “any application for patent, and to any patent issuing
`
`thereon, that contains or contained at any time—(A) a claim to a claimed invention
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`that has an effective filing date as defined in Section 100(i) of title 35, United
`
`States Code, that is [after March 15, 2013].” AIA §3(n)(1).
`
`The ’018 App contained (on filing) dependent claim 16, which contained the
`
`language “the backup is performed in response to a determination that the first
`
`device is of the same brand as the second device.” APPL-1002, 417. As
`
`confirmed by Dr. McDaniel, no disclosure exists in any application to which the
`
`’018 App claims priority—including the pre-AIA ’254 App—that provides written
`
`description support for a backup being performed in response to a determination
`
`that the first device is of the same brand as the second device. APPL-1003, ¶¶36-
`
`41. Accordingly, AIA §3(n)(1) dictates the ’105 patent be evaluated under post-
`
`AIA §§102, 103.
`
`Effective Filing Date: The claims are only entitled to the actual filing date of
`
`the ’018 App where description of the initiating a backup based at least in part on a
`
`first device being a same brand as a second device (a limitation of each claim) was
`
`first presented. APPL-1003, ¶¶36-41; APPL-1021 (redline of ’105 patent
`
`specification and U.S. Patent 10,360,351 specification). For a claim in a later-filed
`
`application to be entitled to the filing date of an earlier application, the earlier
`
`application must provide written description support for the claimed subject matter.
`
`Anascape, Ltd. v. Nintendo of Am. Inc., 601 F.3d 1333, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2010). To
`
`satisfy the written description requirement, “the disclosure of the earlier
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`application, the parent, must reasonably convey to one of skill in the art that the
`
`inventor possessed the later-claimed subject matter at the time the parent
`
`application was filed.” Tronzo v. Biomet, Inc., 156 F.3d 1154, 1158 (Fed. Cir.
`
`1998).
`
`As confirmed by Dr. McDaniel, no written description exists in any
`
`application to which the ’018 App claims priority for initiating backup to a second
`
`device based at least in part on the first device being a same brand as a second
`
`device. APPL-1003, ¶¶36-41. To the extent passages of the ’018 App discuss the
`
`term “brand” (i.e., those portions corresponding to 13:28-33 and/or 19:29-35 of the
`
`’105 patent), these passages are not found in any application to which the ’018 App
`
`claims priority. Id. These passages fall under a heading “ADDITIONAL
`
`EMBODIMENTS.” APPL-1001, 11:30; APPL-1002, 18. This heading begins a
`
`portion of the ’018 App’s specification that spans pages numbered 18 to 36; in
`
`contrast, the originally filed specification of the U.S. Application 17/027,481 of
`
`which the ’018 App is a CIP, does not include this heading and begins its claim
`
`recitation at its page 17. APPL-1002, 395-414; APPL-1005, 38.
`
`Accordingly, the effective filing date of each of the claims of the ’105 patent
`
`is no earlier than December 15, 2020. For avoidance of doubt, only Grounds 3-4
`
`depend on this priority analysis.
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`V. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`The level of ordinary skill in the art may be reflected by the prior art of
`
`record. See Okajima v. Bourdeau, 261 F.3d 1350, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2001). Here,
`
`Persons of Ordinary Skill in the Art (“POSITA”) at the time of the claimed
`
`invention 1 would have had a bachelor’s degree in an electrical engineering,
`
`computer engineering, computer science, or a related field, and at least two years
`
`of experience in the research, design, development, and/or testing of authentication
`
`techniques, and related firmware and software, or the equivalent, with additional
`
`education substituting for experience and vice versa. APPL-1003, ¶¶18-22.
`
`Furthermore, a person with less formal education but more experience, or more
`
`formal education but less experience, could have also met the relevant standard for
`
`POSITA. Id. However, Petitioner does not imply a person having an
`
`extraordinary level of skill should be regarded as POSITA.
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`During IPR, claims are construed according to the standard as set forth in
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc). 37 C.F.R.
`
`§42.100(b) (Nov. 13, 2018). The claims are construed to the extent necessary to
`
`
`
`1 This discussion applies to POSITA both at the earliest claimed priority date
`
`(2011) and at the filing date of the ’105 patent (2020).
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`resolve the underlying controversy. Nidec Motor Corp. v. Zhongshan Broad
`
`Ocean Motor Co., 868 F.3d 1013, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Petitioner submits for
`
`purposes of this proceeding, and as set forth below, terms of the challenged claims
`
`should be given their plain and ordinary meaning. Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1314-17;
`
`APPL-1003, ¶62.
`
`VII. REQUESTED RELIEF
`Petitioner asks the Board to institute trial and cancel the Challenged Claims.
`
`VIII. OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGES
`A. Challenged Claims
`Claims 2, 4-6, 12, 15, 21, 23-25, 31, and 34 (“Challenged Claims”) of the
`
`’105 patent are challenged.
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`
`Statutory Grounds2 for Challenges
`B.
`Grounds Claim(s)
`Basis
`#1
`2, 4, 12, 15, 21, 23, 31, and 34 §103 over Kesanupalli, Cheng and
`Kodama
`§103
`over Kesanupalli, Cheng,
`Kodama and Hubner
`2, 4, 12, 15, 21, 23, 31, and 34 §103 over Jakobsson ’351 and Kodama
`5, 6, 24, 25
`§103 over Jakobsson ’351, Kodama
`and Hubner
`
`5-6, 24-25
`
`#2
`
`#3
`#4
`
`Kesanupalli was filed March 24, 2010, published April 7, 2011, and issued
`
`August 5, 2014. Cheng was filed September 24, 2003 and published June 17,
`
`2004. Kodama published July 15, 2009. Hubner was filed December 13, 2010 and
`
`published June 14, 2012. Kesanupalli is prior art under at least §102(a)(2); Cheng,
`
`Kodama and Hubner are prior art under at least §102(a)(1).
`
`
`
`2 As demonstrated above, the ’105 patent is an AIA patent. See supra, IV.C; AIA
`
`§3(n)(1). Were Patent Owner to contest that, it would be understood that
`
`Kesanupalli also qualifies as prior art under pre-AIA §§102(a), (e), Hubner
`
`qualifies under pre-AIA §102(e), and Cheng and Kodama qualify under pre-AIA
`
`§102(b). See also, APPL-1003, ¶¶63-67.
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`Jakobsson ’351 issued July 23, 2019 and qualifies as prior art under at least
`
`§102(a)(1). Only Grounds 3-4 depend on the priority date of the Challenged
`
`Claims.
`
`IX.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF HOW THE CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE
`A. Ground 1: Claims 2, 4, 12, 15, 21, 23, 31, and 34 are obvious
`under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Kesanupalli, Cheng and Kodama.
`1. Kesanupalli
`Kesanupalli is entitled “Secure User Authentication Using Biometric
`
`Information” and is directed to a secure authentication system using biometric
`
`information to “provide[] a more secure authentication of the user than commonly
`
`used password-based methods and systems.” APPL-1006, (54), 1:59-62. See
`
`APPL-1003, ¶¶68-73. Based on a match between a fingerprint template stored for
`
`a particular user and fingerprint information read from a finger presented at a
`
`fingerprint reader, Kesanupalli’s methods retrieve credentials associated with the
`
`user and communicate those credentials to an external system or process. APPL-
`
`1006, FIGS. 8-9, 3:14-4:11.
`
`During an enrollment process with a resource such as a website, “a user
`
`swipes [or places] their finger [on] a fingerprint sensor several times to create [the]
`
`fingerprint template. The fingerprint template allows the user’s fingerprint to be
`
`distinguished from fingerprints associated with other users.” APPL-1006, 3:33-41.
`
`The user (or system) also “provides user credentials, such as a password,
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`cryptographic key…or the like,” and the systems and methods described in
`
`Kesanupalli “bind the user’s fingerprint template with the user credentials.”
`
`APPL-1006, 3:15-18, 3:41-46. To protect user credentials, “[t]he fingerprint
`
`template and user credentials are then stored in a secure storage of the user’s
`
`device.” APPL-1006, 3:46-47, 8:29-53.
`
`During a subsequent user identification or verification for the website, a user
`
`presents her biometric information (e.g., places a finger on a fingerprint sensor)
`
`and if the presented fingerprint “matches a fingerprint template, the user’s
`
`credentials are released to the user and/or [the] service or process requesting the
`
`user verification.” APPL-1006, 3:52-61. “[T]he user credentials released after
`
`finding a matching fingerprint template may include an OTP (One Time Password)
`
`token, RSA signature and the like,” such as a “cryptographic key.” APPL-1006,
`
`3:41-44, 3:65-4:1, FIG. 12.
`
`FIG. 9 of Kesanupalli illustrates these steps of authenticating a user in the
`
`context of an embodiment in which user credentials are cryptographically secured
`
`in storage. FIG. 2 illustrates an example system 200 in which user enrollment and
`
`authentication processes are performed using a biometric sensor 204, secure
`
`storage 206 and a Host PC 202. APPL-1006, 6:26-49, 9:10-24.
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`APPL-1006, FIGS. 9 and 2
`
`
`
`In an authentication process, sensor 204 receives a biometric input from a user and
`
`releases the user’s credentials from secure storage 206 upon a successful match of
`
`the input with the user’s stored biometric template. APPL-1006, 6:31-45. The
`
`released credentials are then communicated to the external resource by an
`
`application 214 of the Host PC 202. APPL-1006, 5:9-58, 6:11-31.
`
`2. Cheng
`Cheng is entitled “System, Method and Apparatus for Secure Two-Tier
`
`Backup and Retrieval of Authentication Information” and provides ways to
`
`“securely backup and restore” a user’s authentication-based device without
`
`compromising the security thereof. APPL-1008, (54), Abstract.
`
`Cheng
`
`recognizes “[b]iometrics-based authentication”
`
`is commonly
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`implemented, which leads to portable devices that include “user’s authentication
`
`information, electronic identity and any data associated therewith.” APPL-1008,
`
`[0004], [0006]. Cheng securely backs-up this data to avoid costs of creating the
`
`data on new device from scratch should a first device containing the data be lost or
`
`stolen. See APPL-1008, Abstract, [0006]. Cheng’s FIGS. 3A-3B illustrate a
`
`backup of data of a user’s device is performed through secure communication
`
`between a user service bureau (a storage service) and the device. APPL-1008,
`
`[0029]-[0030]. Cheng’s backup process includes a two-tier encryption procedure
`
`for backing up data. APPL-1008, [0031]-[0039].
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`APPL-1008, FIG. 3A–3B (portion), annotated
`
`
`
`See APPL-1003, ¶¶74-77. Cheng describes a use case of a user’s device, having
`- 15 -
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`been backed up, becoming unavailable. A second device connects to the user
`
`service to download the data. APPL-1008, [0044]–[0050], FIGS. 4A-4C.
`
`3. Kodama
`Kodama is directed to backing up data in an electronic device. APPL-1010,
`
`(57), [0040], [0041], APPL-1003, ¶¶78-80. Kodama explains its backup
`
`procedures “can be applied to any electronic appliance such as a mobile phone, a
`
`PDA or a PC[,]” and “there is no particular limitation in the backup target data
`
`upon applying the present invention.” APPL-1010, [0040]-[0041].
`
`Kodama teaches registering a first device with a backup service (storage)
`
`including “device information including the manufacturer name” and after
`
`registration, sending data to its storage. APPL-1010, [0101], [0106]–[0107].
`
`Kodama restores data onto another device (e.g., a “new” device) and to start
`
`restoration “device information including the manufacturer name” of the second
`
`device is sent to the backup service system. APPL-1010, [0135]–[0136]. The
`
`backup service system verifies the information–including the manufacturer name–
`
`of the second device coincides with the first device before permitting the backup of
`
`data to the second device. See APPL-1010, [0137]-[0144].
`
`4. Combination of Kesanupalli, Cheng and Kodama
`POSITA would have been motivated to apply Cheng’s data backup
`
`teachings to Kesanupalli’s device including biometric information and credentials
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`for user authentication. APPL-1003, ¶¶81-90. Kesanupalli’s device and its stored
`
`biometric information and credentials, which are a user’s personal data, combined
`
`with Cheng’s data backup teachings would produce obvious, beneficial, and
`
`predictable results of reducing the need to recreate the user’s personal data when
`
`using a new device (e.g., a device replacing one having been lost or stolen). Id.
`
`POSITA would have been further motivated to apply Kodama’s teachings of
`
`ensuring devices implementing the backup are the same brand, which provides the
`
`obvious, beneficial, and predictable result of mitigating compatibility arising
`
`between manufacturers. Id.
`
`Kesanupalli, Cheng, Kodama and the ’105 patent are all in the same field of
`
`endeavor−security arrangements and procedures for protecting data in computer
`
`systems. APPL-1003, ¶83; see, e.g., APPL-1006, 2:30-38, 2:48-50; APPL-1008,
`
`[0003]-[0004]; APPL-1001, 1:43-50 , FIG. 1; APPL-1010, (57), [0040]-[0041].
`
`Moreover, as evidenced on the front pages of Kesanupalli, the ’105 patent,
`
`and Kodama, each includes the same search subclass. See APPL-1001, (51), (52);
`
`APPL-1006, (51) (58); APPL-1010, (51).3 POSITA would recognize it is directed
`
`
`
`3 see also www.uspto.gov/web/patents/classification/cpc/html/cpc-
`
`G06F.html#G06F (subclass definitions);
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`to the same technology. APPL-1003, ¶84; APPL-1008, [0007].
`
`Second, POSITA would have been motivated to employ Cheng’s backup
`
`technique in connection with Kesanupalli’s secure user authentication methods
`
`because Kesanupalli’s stored biometric information and credentials are personal
`
`data. APPL-1003, ¶¶85-89. POSITA would have understood stored personal data
`
`(biometric information and credentials) would need to be created and registered
`
`from scratch should the device be lost or stolen. Id.; APPL-1008, [0006]. Such a
`
`problem of inconvenience would have also been reasonably pertinent to the
`
`inventor of the challenged patent. See APPL-1001, 8:55-58. Thus, not only were
`
`Kesanupalli, Cheng/Kodama and the ’105 patent in the same field of endeavor, but
`
`Cheng would have been reasonably pertinent to a problem faced by the inventor of
`
`the ’105 patent as well as pertinent to known risks of theft and loss of devices and
`
`recovery of data that would have motivated POSITA to address by combining
`
`Cheng with Kesanupalli.
`
`POSITA would readily recognize a personal electronic device can be lost,
`
`damaged, or otherwise require replacement. APPL-1003, ¶¶85-89; see APPL-
`
`1006, 10:13-18; APPL-1008, [0006]. And when introducing replacement devices,
`
`www.uspto.gov/web/patents/classification/cpc/html/cpc-G06F.html#G06F (CPC to
`
`
`
`IPC concordance).
`
`
`
`- 18 -
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00507 Petition
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105
`
`
`it is desirable to have access to the personal data without having to create the data
`
`from scratch. APPL-1008, [0006]-[0007]. Moreover, POSITA would have
`
`recognized a desire in the market of electronic devices to be capable of being
`
`backed up long before the ’105 patent. APPL-1003, ¶87. Cheng provides a benefit
`
`of implementing its techniques to perform the desired backup of personal data
`
`giving access to data in other user devices in a “reliable and secure way.” Id. In
`
`particular, Cheng teaches backing up personal data related to biometric information
`
`and secret keys. APPL-1008, [0007]–[0009]. This is data the same data as store