IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Behar et al.
`
`in re Application of:
`Control No.:
`Patent No.
`Filed:
`Entitled:
`
`Serial No.:
`Group No.:
`Examiner:
`
`N/A
`N/A
`N/A
`
`8,289,688
`July 10, 2008
`Portable Computer with Multiple Display Configurations
`
`REQUEST FOR EX PARTE REEXAMINATION UNDER
`38.U.8.C. §§ 302-307 AND 37 C.PLR. § L310
`
`EFS Web Filed
`Central Reexamination Unit
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 14450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`ASUSTekv. LiTL IPR2024-00532
`
`LiTL Exhibit 2009
`LiTL Exhibit 2009
`ASUSTek v. LiTL
`IPR2024-00532
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page(s}
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS ooo ccc cece eee c tcc ee cece ee cceseceeceetsesesesescsseestsectesessetsteneeensetesereeeeey x
`
`L
`
`iL.
`
`INTRODUCTION ooo ccc cece cence cece nets te eeceseeteseesceeeieetessuasseecreenseeteesecneeseaes 1
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR EX PARTE
`REEXAMINATIONUNDER37 CPR. 8 1 SYQ eect ee ence eteenteaes Ss
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Cc.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`PF.
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`ir
`
`37 CFR. § 1.510(b) 1): Statement Pointing
`Out Each SubstantialNew Question Of Patentability 0000ee 5
`
`37 CFR. § 1.510(b)(2): Identification OF
`Every Claim For Which Reexamination Is Requested 00 eeees 6
`
`37 CPR. § 1.510(b)}2): Detailed Explanation OF
`The Pertinency And Manner Of Applying The Prior Artoeee &
`
`37 CFR. § 1.510(b)3): Copy Of Every Patent
`Or Printed Publication Relied Upon Or Referred To. etectee 7
`
`37 CFR. § 1.510(b)(4): Copy OfThe Entire
`Patent For Which Reexamination Is Requested00 cece ce eneees 7
`
`37C FR. § 1 S1Ob\S): Certification That A Copy Of The
`Request Has Been Served In Its Entirety On The Patent Qwneroo. 7
`
`37 CER. § 1.51006): Certification By The Third Party Requester 00000000000... 7
`
`37 CER. § 1.510(a): Fee For Requesting Reexamination. cee 7
`
`Related Matters occ cece ceeee cence cee cetesetessesesesceteseeeciceteecaetetenevieentettane: 8
`
`TH.
`
`REEXAMINATION SHOULD BE GRANTED DESPITE THE
`FARLTER-DENTED PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEWooo 9
`
`iV.
`
`OVERVIEWOF THE’688 PATENT AND FPS PROSECUTION HISTORY ooo. 10
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`The "688 Patent ooo cece eee ee sete cee cteees sees teneeensevsesssstiseseeesestetetesteeniees 10
`
`The °688 Patent Application Prosecution History ooocece i4
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`APP CatbOtocc treet ce nett tittetie st itctestitotititecttniestes 14
`
`First Office ACH ON cece cece eececee cece esesceteetaeeceveteeceetesensenes i4
`
`Response to First Office AcCttoteccc eeceeeceeettettetetsetetteeen 14
`
`Second Office Action.ccc cece cece ete teteteeeeseeeseetetnteetteniens 16
`
`i
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`Examiner Enterview o.oo ccceeceeeececesetescesesesceuestareciveeeceeteensenes 17
`
`Response to Second Office Acthonccc ccc tee eettettetetees i7
`
`Third Office Achomic ccc ccc ec eeeceteeesecteeesseestetesensetsetnseeseeeeenees 18
`
`Response To Third Office Actton.ccc cect ce tt te teens 18
`
`AM OWNER occ ce cence certs eens sence bretecntetesetievectientneeeterencrenien ai
`
`V.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ooo cece ee cee cece tee sebsetisescietieeteesesctetstetsnetecen 24
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`c.
`
`D,
`
`“display orientation module...” (Claims 11, 13, 14, 16, 19, 25)0. 25
`
`“protection module configured to prevent keyboard operation
`when the portable computer ts configured in the frame made” (Claim 26)... 28
`
`“means for rotating the display component in a
`single direction relative to the base to configure the portable
`computer between a laptop mode and an easel mode” (Claim 1D). 29
`
`“means for detecting an orientation of the
`base relative to the display component” (Claim 11}.ee 30
`
`VL
`
`ALLEGED INVENTION DATE occ cece ee cette esto ttc tite etteteeenieerenes 31
`
`VIL
`
`PERSON OF ORDINARYSKILL IN THE ARTocc eset ectittetceen 31
`
`VEE
`
`SUMMARY OF THE PRIOR ART oo cence settee cette ee ce tetntaseceeeteteeeensany 34
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`dD.
`
`EL
`
`F,
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`I.
`
`J
`
`Lane CExhibit 1009) occ cece etc eesceee cee teee te eteseeesseeeesecteeeateestetetensenes 31
`
`Kamikakai (Exhibit LODO)cece eect sete ttrttttetrtttttettteree BS
`
`CN UETO CExhibit LOL2 cece cece te ete t tebe cbe tests tcteestntttneneess 35
`
`Shimura (Exhibit LOL@eect ett tite test tttttstttctinttectee 37
`
`Hisano (Exhibit LOPS)ccc eee ce ett ee tite tteectetertettetiteteenteess 38
`
`Shigeo (Exhibit LOUD)ccc cece cece cee ee ct eeeeteseteetsterevesesetesnssiseneeeeteaes 49
`
`Choi (Exhibit LOL)oc ec cette tet e nett tetttiecietetttenenencin 4]
`
`Misawa (Extabit LOPS)ce tebe net tse tet ttstiettneietectires 42
`
`Clapper CExXHIDIt L020) occ ccc nett cette teebbeecietetetottttiecteersenerey 44
`
`Additional References Disclosing Easel Mode... cece teteeeeeees 46
`
`1.
`
`Podwalmy (Exhibit LO2ZD}ccc ccc ete tenet ett tbeeteteeetteees 47
`
`i
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`2.
`
`Schweizer CExhtbit 10223 cece cece eceetteecetetescetiteersseses 43
`
`K.
`
`Additional References Disciosing Content Reorientation And Inversion... 4g
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Touti (Exhibit P0238) cece cece ete eee cee ee sees tenesensetsetneeseeeeentes 49
`
`SCHWELZET occ eee cee cece c eee ttc tect eectseteecteetaectetisetetestectiettiseeeees 30
`
`Vahikangas (Exhibit LO2Z4)occ cect cere cttettteectitnnnectess 50
`
`1X,
`
`SUBSTANTIAL NEW QUESTIONS OF
`PATENTABILITY UNDER 37 CFR. 9 USPTOcece en teeey 32
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`DB.
`
`E.
`
`F,
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`I
`
`J.
`
`The Lane Reference Raises An SNQ With Respect To
`Claims 12-14, 16, 19-20, 24-26, And 29-32 Of The ’688 Patent 00. 53
`
`The Lane-Kamikakai Combination Raises An
`SNQ With Respect To Claims 26 and 32 Of The °688 Patent... 60
`
`The Lane-Hisano Combination Raises An SNQ With
`Respect To Claims 12-14, 16-22, And 24-32 Of The "688 Patent 0000. 63
`
`The Lane-Hisano-Choi Combination Raises
`An SNQ With Respect to Claim 11 Of The °688 Patent0 73
`
`The Lane-Hisano-Clapper Combination Raises An
`SNQWith Respect To Claim 18 OF The 688 Patent.ee vai
`
`The Kamikakai-Shimura-~Hisano Combination Raises An
`SNQ With Respect To Claims 12-14, 16-22, And 24-32 Of The °688 Patent ..... 79
`
`The Kamikakai-Shimura-Hisano-Choi Combination
`Raises An SNQ With Respect To Claim 11 Of The °688 Patent... Oo
`
`The Ramikakai-Shimuara-Hisano-Clapper Combination
`Raises An SNO With Respect To Claim 15 Of The ’688 Patent. 96
`
`The CN ’°170-Misawa-Shigeo Combination Raises
`An SNQ With Respect To Claim 11 Of The ’688 Patentoe Og
`
`The CN°170-Hisano-Choi Combination Raises An
`SNO With Respect To Claim 11 OF The °688 Patent. 102
`
`DETAILED EXPLANATION OF THE PERTINENCY AND MANNEROF
`APPLYING THE PRIOR ART REFERENCES TO EVERY CLAIMFOR WHICH.......
`REEXAMINATION IS REQUESTED AS REQUIRED BY 37 C.F.R.§ 1.5108)... 195
`
`A.
`
`Lane Renders Obvious Claims 12-14, 16, 19-20, 24-26, 29-32 (Ground 1)... 106
`
`iH
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`I.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`3.
`
`9.
`
`10.
`
`Lt.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`14,
`
`15.
`
`A POSITA Would Have Implemented Lane Such That
`Content Was Displayed Right-Side-Up In Each Of Its Modes... 106
`
`Lane’s Position-Indicating Mechanisms Provide Detailed
`Data About The Orientation Of The Lane Base And Display .00000000.. 108
`
`Independent Charm 12 ooo cece ccc e cee teen ettttetteeteenes Lid
`
`Dependent Chau ES ccc ccc cece cee cb tetetstetttctienttectiteenseces 117
`
`Bependent Claim 14 occ ec eect ett tetteetitetetitenieen 119
`
`Dependent Claim 160c ccc cet cette ete te tne trtetenteeetenes 120
`
`Dependent Claim 20 occ cece cee tenet tebe citer teteesteess 121
`
`Dependent Claim 24 occ et terete cbt ettvtittetsestienteen 121
`
`Dependent Chau 25ccc ccc ec te ct teetttctrstctienttetvtitnsnseces 122
`
`Bependent Claim 26 occ cece e tect eb te tetteettetetitenteens 123
`
`Independent Claim DQocc cette ete ete e tee tte tetteeeteces 125
`
`Independent Claim 29 ooo ccc cece c eet e teen ct enteevttennieenes 133
`
`Dependent Chaim 30 ccc ccc eee ect ecs rete treeteiettetsicenes 139
`
`Dependent Chat Sy occ eects ce teteteecesetentecsteseiessteecss 140
`
`Dependent Claim 32 cece cece ete ete tenet ee ettetetnteteeen 140
`
`Lane In View Of Kamikakai Renders
`Obvious Claim 26 Of The ’6&8 Patent (Ground 2). cere 142
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Dependent Claim 26 oooeet e nett tets tee tetntetntetienes 142
`
`Dependent Claim 320 oooeee cbt ete te tte cteetienites 145
`
`Lane In View Of Hisano Renders Obvious
`Claims 12-14, 16-22 And 24-32 Of The ’688 Patent (Ground 3)... 147
`
`L.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Combining Lane And Hisano 00eect teteeteenes 147
`
`Independent Clap 12occ c cc tects ct tetct ect rstcsienttectitnenseces 153
`
`Dependent Claim 13 occ ete ett ct tet tvtitetestienteen 160
`
`Dependent Chat 14ccc ccte ce teeeteeceetenteteteeettessneecss 163
`
`Dependent Claim 16 occ cece tens ttte tenet eet eetntetnteeieees 164
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`Bependent Claim 20 occ ec eet ett ett tettettitetetiteniecs 166
`
`Dependent Claim 24 occ ccc c cee e eee terete tnt eenetetenes 166
`
`Dependent Claim 25 oot cece tet etter tees teeeetnetntetieees 167
`
`Dependent Claim 26 o.oo ccc cee eect ct et ets te te teeneetieettes 171
`
`Independent Clann U7 ooo cc ect cess tetct tet ttvsietttectiesnectes E73
`
`Bependent Claim 18 occ ec etree te ti teetitetetittnieen 184
`
`Dependent Claim 27 ooo ccc c cee ce bette ete te tne tnteeenetenteces 185
`
`Dependent Claim 28 occ cece ce ec teeter e beter etnttnteeseess 187
`
`Independent Clam LQ oooccc cece e eee eetttttt tenets 188
`
`Dependent Chau 21ccc ccc ec te cb teebt eee ttctienttectiteineces 200
`
`Bependent Claim 22 occ ete e tebe ett tettettitetetittnieens 202
`
`Independent Claim 29 ooo cece cet e eect e te tne tnt eenteeeteces 203
`
`Dependent Claim 30ccc ce ec eect ect etter etre tettecieees 21
`
`Dependent Claim 3)et eet cb tte ttctitietsestieniee 212
`
`20,
`
`Dependent Chau 32 ccc eset ect tttitttetttisene BES
`
`D.
`
`Lane In View Of Hisano And Choi Renders
`Obvious Claim 11 Of The ’688 Patent (Ground 4).cette 248
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Combining Lane, Hisano, And Chobe ccc ceteetttettteeress 215
`
`Independent Claim Db ooo cece cette cee cn tent tetetenitenes 221
`
`Lane In View Of Hisano And Clapper Renders
`Obvious Claim 15 Of The ’6&8 Patent (Ground 5). cette 229
`
`1.
`
`Dependent Claim 15 occ eee c ccc ete etter tens tee teen tetetieees 229
`
`Kamuikakai In View Of Shimura And Hisano Renders Obvious
`Claims 12-14, 16-22, and 24-32 Of The °6&8 Patent (Ground 6). 233
`
`i.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Combining Kamikakai, Shimura, And Hisanooe 233
`
`Independent Charm 12 ooo cece ccc e cee teen ettttetteeteenes 243
`
`Dependent Chau ES ccc ccc cece cee cb tetetstetttctienttectiteenseces 257
`
`Dependent Claim 14 occ ec ere tect tte ttctiteetestienieen 260
`
`Vv
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`10,
`
`Lt.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`14.
`
`1S.
`
`16.
`
`7
`
`18.
`
`19.
`
`Bependent Claim 16 occ cece e cette tettentitetetiteniecn 261
`
`Dependent Claim 20 occ ccc cect tee tee ete te tne tneeeenteeetenes 262
`
`Dependent Claim 24 ooo eects tebe tete tect tntetetenieees 263
`
`Dependent Claim 25 oot ec tect c tet ete tebe eteetienttes 264
`
`Dependent Chau 26 occ cece ee ee cette bt eet titcsienttetctitennseces 269
`
`independent Clam U7occ ect eee cette tite tteetitntetitentecs 272
`
`Dependent Claim 13 occ ccc tenet tee te te tnetnteeeneeenteces 287
`
`Dependent Claim 27ccc cece teen e cnet tt ee citer tttteceess 287
`
`Dependent Claim 28 occ tect e ttt ccc ette tent teeteenes 291
`
`Independent Clann 19occ ccc ect ect tetbt eet ritctientteectitnsnecnes 292
`
`Dependent Chaim 2y cece cette ete eees cece tetrtetiteetteteseees 308
`
`Dependent Claim 2200ers BOF
`
`Independent Claim 29 ooo ccc cece c eet e teen ct enteevttennieenes 308
`
`Dependent Chaim 30 ccc ec ectc crete tetietretteietetssenes 318
`
`Dependent ChauSoc ec te cb tetttectrtctientteectitnenectes 320
`
`20,
`
`Dependent Chaim 32 occ ccc ccc cece ec teees cece tetestecteeteteerseees 322
`
`Kamikakai In View Of Shimura, Hisano, And Choi
`Renders Obvious Claim 11 Of The "688 Patent (Ground 7) 00. 323
`
`i.
`
`2.
`
`Combining Kamikakai, Shimura, Hisano, And Chot 00. 323
`
`Independent ClaimDic cee et eter ttt GEG
`
`Kamikakai In View Of Shimura, Hisano And Clapper
`Renders Obvious Claim 15 Of The 688 Patent (Ground 8)oe 340
`
`L.
`
`Dependent Claim 15 octet tee FAQ
`
`CN ’170 In View Of Misawa AndShigeo
`Renders Obvious Claim 11 Of The ’688 Patent (Ground 9} 00. 344
`
`L.
`
`2.
`
`Combining CN ’170, Misawa, And Shigeo0. ceeee G44
`
`Independent Clam Ub occ ccc cece cbt ttttctrtctienttectinenectes 357
`
`vi
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`£
`
`CN °170 In View Of Hisano And Choi
`Renders Obvious Claim 11 Of The ’688 Patent (Ground 10)0. 364
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Combining CN 7170, Hisano, And CHOb ccc ecteetteecees 364
`
`independent Claim Pbccc ec eee cette tite tteetitntetitentecs 374
`
`XE
`
`NO SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS OF NON-OBVIOUSNESSooo... 382
`
`XU CONCLUSIONocc ccc ect eee ete tebe tbtcettiesetetititesitstrettesenss 384
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCEoot ttetter 386
`
`vil
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Page(s}
`
`Board Decisions
`
`ix Parte Finjan, Inc.,
`Appeal No. 2018-007444, 2018 WL 4740168 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 28, 20183. passim
`
`Cases
`
`in ve Fox,
`ATL P.2d 1405 (COPA 1973) occ ccc eee cere ce te cee tee eteetteteeeeetseneens 108, L18, 129, 149
`
`inve Morris,
`127 F.3d 1048, 44 USPQ 2d 1023 Ped. Cir, 1997} cece eee ce ete cetetesseteeeasenes 24
`
`fn re Swanson,
`No. 07-1534 (Wed. Cir, 2008) ccc eee eee eee este ee se ence cenesenseteretectesectenrenceneey 24
`
`Inve Trans Texas Holding Corp.,
`498 F.3d 1290 Hed. Cir, 2007)occ cece ccc ne teen r ene ie tenes cteverctienretcesteneestetees 24, 25
`
`dure Vivir, Inc.,
`14 F 4th 1342 (Ped. Cir, 2020)ccc cence eects cee ete te cette scttecieetteertrenets passim
`
`In re Yamanoia,
`740 F.2d 1569 (Fed. Cir, 1984) cece cece eee eect cent tbc eeesceectsetsecteettcteettieeseniey 24
`
`fnve Zletz,
`893 F.2d 319, 13 USPQ2d 1320 ed. Cir, 1989) cece eect cece ete ttetteeeeneey 25
`
`KSR Int'l Co, v. Teleflex fic,
`S50 US. SOB (2007) cece cect cece eee cece ceteceecevesesseveeeteetestessnieseeensey 219, 327, 352, 369
`
`Leapfrog Enterprises Inc. vy. Fisher-Price inc.,
`488 F.3d 1157, 82 USPQ 2d 1687 (Ped. Cir, 2007) occ et cet ete eteectetteensey 383
`
`Muniauction, inc. y. Thomson Corp.,
`S32 F.3d 1318 (Ped. Cir, 2008) cece cee ete eee ence ce tenes stereteiteiectenecnen 382
`
`Statutes
`
`B53 US CL BODeee ete enc eet ce cae eens seaseensseceteeiaeceteecseeeseestssesseesesteesestiseessseeteeserteeeas &
`
`BS USC. SOB eee cece eens cece cece cenee cee ceneeeceeeesaeceteeesseseseeenreseeesseeeeesneeesireeteeeeteeenes 7
`
`BRSCSDt rtd r bec bt tebe tettecnutstiievitesiectirtstcrenies passim
`
`vit
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`B35 UG.C. § BOQ occ ccsss sess essse essestities 5
`
`B5 USC. § B08occ cccccccsssesecssevesevesssevsservesevetssssinsssvassevsissssissssivsssssveusssiissesseseseevssesseseassees 5
`
`BS USC. § B04 occ cecsecccsssessssvvevsssvessssvsesevvesssenssstussssssesivtsssesssistassasessvsssssistasiussevsussveessseeeesves §
`
`BSUS. 8 B08 occ cccccccsssesecssesessevesssvevsstivsesvusssivessevavsssvstsssusasivisarvessstassesecsssivecesiusaseussseesaseees 5
`
`BS USC. § B06 co ccccccccccsssesssereussseissserevevevevevetearissarveststiteeseusssiissivisssusseussntseiseesese 5
`
`
`
`fasB53 US. BBS eee cece eect recesses cess eneectecetesrecnesnscneseeserevessvietnrentetesnteveetnieeneees 7
`
`BS OSC. S SOT ccc ccc eee cence eee cbt cate este nee ececeeeasseescseecrseseceeseecneessaseseetieesieessnceesees 24
`
`Other Authorities
`
`MPEP 8 22D cece ccc ec ee ener en eee cee b cece te teac str eiceietenescnevencteverdietteessetesceeees 24
`
`MPEP § DES cece ccee ce cereees sete ceeeceeeseeceteeesesevseececsaeseessiesisceuettatevseeteetesetescsteseensey 382
`
`MPEP § 248 Goo cccccec cece cece ceee eens cess tee tueececceseeecesesaectesesseceeeteseesuiesereeesesiegnsesteteneeessenees 16
`
`MPEP 8 2242 ccc cece cee ented t obit c tebe t bie etcicectntbistrttecietcieetitiiecnes passim
`
`MPEP § 2286.04 occ cece cee eb ebb ents et ec tenet eteseiesceteectetssetettses:itiescrnieteiesne 25
`
`Rules
`
`SPB RR LO cece ccc etee ce teee cence teec esses sescntesesceuesaeecesnseecseetetetsevsentestenttestiesees 385
`
`BT CPR. LSS ccc eect ee ees eens cee tee cece eecseeneeeeseneeeseceeseeenseveetieceeesiecnesiesenesntenees 24
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`LIST OF EXBIBITS
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,289,688 (the °688 Patent’)
`10G1
`
`1002
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 8,289,688
`
`information Disclosure Statement by Third Party Requester
`
`Declaration of Christopher Schmandt (Schmandt’)
`
`Petition for /nier Parties Reviewof the ’688 Patent, filed March 18, 2021,
`Lenovo (United States} Inc. v. LiL ELC, IPR2021-00681 (PTAB}
`
`Patent Owner's Preliminary Response, filed June 25, 2021, Lenove (United
`States} ine. v. LifL LEC, iPR2021-00681 (PTAB)
`
`Decision Denying Institution of /nter Parties Review of the 688 Patent,
`Paper8, issued September 3, 2021, Lenovo (United States} ince. vy. Lith
`LEC, YPR2021-00681 (PTAB)
`
`No. H08-179851 (Shigeo”) U.S. Patent No. 6,918,159 to Choi C Chor’), issued July 19, 2005
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`First Amended ComplaintComplaint’), Li70 LEC vy. Lenovo (United
`States}, inc. et al, No. 1:20-cv-00089-RGA CUS. Dist. Ct, Dist. Delaware}
`
`PCTInternational Patent Application Publication No. WO 95/24007 to
`Lane (“Lane”), published September 8, 1995
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,154,359 to Kamikakai et al. C Ramikakai’), issued
`November 28, 2000
`
`ON 2627170Yto Ruipiang, issued July 21, 2004
`
`Certified English Translation of CN 2627170Y CCR 7?ETO"}
`
`JP HO06-242853 to Shimura et al. published September 2, 1994
`
`Certified English Translation of JP HO6-242853 (Shimura’)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0034042 to Hisanoetal.
`(“Hisane’}, published February 16, 2006
`
`Japanese Patent Application PublicationNo. HO8-179851 to Shigeo
`published July 12, 1996
`
`Certified English Translation of Japanese Patent Application Publication
`
`

`

`
`
`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`
`
`S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0134717 to Misawa
`eMisawa’*), published fume 23, 2005
`
`S. Patent No. 6,704,007 to Clapper (“Clapper”), issued March 9, 2004
`
`. Patent No. 5,644,516 to Podwalnyet al. (“Pedwainy”}, issued July |
`
`SS. Patent No. 7,061,472 to Schweizeret al. (“Schweizer”), issued Fune
`3, 2006
`
`).S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0062715 to Tsuji et al.
`“Vsugi’}, published March 24, 2005
`
`( Valikangas’), published August 12, 1998
`
`[No Author Listed], Lit] Webbook Beats ChromeODS, Becomes First Cloud
`Computer. CoolThings. November 16, 2009,
`
`McDonald LiTL Webbook Review. Little Tech Girl. August 31, 2018.
`‘
`if flast
`nocessed June 25, 2021
`Strauss, Litl Webbook Re-Detines Computing. ABC News. December 11,
`2009, URL-https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GadgetGuide/lithwebbook-
`2
`defines-computing/story7id=93 11095 Hlast accessed June 25, 2021]
`King, Lith Webbookprice drops from $699 to§ 99. zDNet. May 16, 2010.
`
` UK Patent Application Publication No. GB 2 321 982 A to Valikangas
`
`File History (Excerpts) of European Patent No.EP 2 283 407 BI
`
`accessed February 7, 2022)
`European PatentNo. EP 2 283 407 B1 (EP °407°) to Beharet al., assigned
`o LITL LLC, published October 10, 2018
`
`x!
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`i
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`eet
`This Request shows substantial new questions of patentability (SNQs”}, raised by prior
`
`art and arguments not previously considered by the Office, regarding claims 11-22 and 24-32 of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,239,688 (“the ’688 Patent,” Ex. 1001). For example, primarypriorart references
`
`Lane (Ex. 1009}, Kamikakai (ix. 1010), and CIN 7170 (Ex. 1012) were neither cited during
`
`prosecution nor presented in a previously-denied IPR petition. Each of these primary references
`
`discloses a portable computer device configurable to various orientations including an “easel
`
`mode.” Lane alone raises SNQs as to claims 12-14, 16, 19-20, 24-26, and 29-32, Additional SNOs
`
`are raised by Lane in combination with one or more secondary reference. Kamikakai
`
`in
`
`combination with secondary references, raises additional, distinct SNQs as to claims 11-22 and
`
`24-32. And CN °170 in combination with secondaryreferences raises an additional, distinct SNOQ
`
`as to claim 11. This Request explains why these SNQs warrant reexamination and howthe prior
`
`art renders these claims unpatentable, thus warranting their cancellation.
`
`The '688 patent relates generally to a portable computer (e.2.,
`
`laptop} that can be
`
`configured into additional “display modes” besides just a traditional laptop mode, such as the easel
`
`and frame modes shown below. #.g¢., "688 Patent, 5:43-49.
`
`Laptop Mode
`
`
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`Frame Mode
`
` a Easel Mode| oy
`
`SNR] GSE:
`
`FIG, 28
`
`688 Patent, FIGS. 1, 4, 26 Qwith annotations). All independent claims ofthe °688 Patent subject
`
`to this Request recite a portable computer including a laptop mode and an easel mode, while
`
`other claims require the computer to also be configurable into a frame mode.
`
`This Request presents previously unconsidered prior art references—namely Lane,
`
`Kamikakai, and CN °170—each of which discloses a “frame mode,” as shown in the following
`
`exemplary figures from each of these references:
`
`bh
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`Lane’s Frame Vide
`
`» \
`
`e
`%2
`NG
`\ %
`
`eSwrt
`\, x
`8\
`; FIG 25
`
`\
`
`Kamikakai’s Frame Mode
`Fig, &
`
`CN 7170's Frame Mode
`
`
`
`Kamikakai, FIG. 8 (with annotations), Lane, FIG. 25 (with annotations), CN 7170, FIG. 13 Qvith
`
`annotations).
`
`Similarly, both Lane and CN 7170 disclose the claimed easel mode, and while Kamikakai
`
`does not explicitly disclose an easel mode it would have been obvious to implement it with such a
`
`mode in light of a secondary prior art reference, Shimura (Ex. 1014). The easel modes of Lane,
`
`S
`2
`2
`ON "170 and Shimura are shown in the following exemplary figures:
`
`2
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`Lane’s Wasel Mode
`
`Shimura’s Hasel Mode
`
`
`s
`
`
`
`oer reMobo SAOA4
`
`
`
`$
`
`Lane, FIG. 28 Gwith annotations); Shimura, FG. 5, CN 7170, FIG. 19 (with annotations).
`
`Various claims of the 688 Patent also recite the portable computer’s re-orienting of
`
`displayed content by 180 degrees when transitioning between a conventional laptop mode to an
`
`easel mode or between an easel mode and frame mode. However, there is nothing inventive in this
`
`concept as it would be plain to a person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art (POSITA) that when a
`
`computer's display becomes inverted (such as when going from a laptop to an easel mode
`
`orientation or from an easel mode to a frame mode}, then the content on the display will Hkewise
`
`become inverted, causing the content to be upside-down relative to a user viewing the display. It
`
`would therefore be obvious to a POSITAio rotate the displayed content by 180 degrees in response
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`to such a transition in order to maintain the content as right-side-up for a user. Various prior art
`
`references-——including Lane as well as secondary references Hisano (Ex. 1015) and Shigeo (Ex.
`
`1017}recognize this need to invert displayed content in response to re-orientation of a portable
`
`computer to maintain the content as nght-side-up for the user. These references all teach use of
`
`known sensors and computer logic for performing this fundamental content reorientation.
`
`Each of the new primary references, alone and/or in combination with other prior art
`
`references, present substantial new questions of patentability (SNQs”) not previously considered
`
`by the Office. None of these prior art combinations or arguments have been presented to the Office
`
`in any post-grant proceeding involving the °688 Patent, including any petition for infer partes
`
`review of the 688 Patent. The Request also raises SNQs based on the declaration of Chris
`
`Schmandt (Schmandt’), whose testimony informs how a POSITA would have combined the
`
`raised prior art references and howthe priorart as a whole renders all claims unpatentable.
`
`Based on these SNQs, Requester Lenovo (United States} Inc. (Requester” or “Lenove”}
`
`respectfully requests that the Office institute ex parfe reexamination of Claims 11-22 and 24-32 of
`
`the “688 Patent under 35 U.S.C. §$ 302-307 and 37 C.F.R. § 1.510. The Office should reexamine,
`
`find unpatentable, and issue a Certificate of Reexamination canceling each ofthese claims.
`
`Hf.
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR EX PARTE
`REEXAMINATION UNDER 37 C.ER. § L516
`
`A.
`
`37 CLBLR. § L.S10(b}(): Statement Pointing
`Out Each Substantial New Question Of Patentability
`
`A statement pointing out each substantial new question of patentability (SNQ”) based on
`
`the cited references in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.510(b}¢1), is presented belowin Section EX.
`
`A chart of proposed SNQs is provided here for reference:
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`
`SRO
`| Claims Affected
`| 12-14, 16, 19-20,
`eeeenn|24-26,29-32
`
`Lane in Combination with Kamikakai
`
`
`Lane in Combination with Hisano and Clapper
`
`
`Lane in Combination with Hisano
`
`Kamikakai in Combination with Shimura and Hisance
`
`
`
`
`
`70 in Combination with Hicano and Choi
`
`
`B.
`
`37 CLER. § LStoCb(2): identification OF
`Every Claim For Which Reexamination Is Requested
`
`Tn accordance with 37 CLF.R. § 1.510¢bX2), reexamination is requested for Claims 11-22
`
`and 24-32 of the ’688 Patent,
`
`Cc,
`
`37 CLE. § 1.5106(b}(@): Detailed Explanation OF
`The Pertineney And Manner Of Annivinge The Prior Art
`
`
`
`
`
`A detailed explanation of the pertinency and manner of applying the cited priorart to each
`
`claim for which reexamination is requested, is provided belowin Section X.
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`D.
`
`37 CLR. § LSibMa): Copy Of Every Patent
`Or Printed Publication Relied Upon Or Referred Te
`
`A copy of every patent or printed publication relied upon herein is submitted as Exhibits
`
`1001 through 1031, each of whichis listed on the accompanying Form PTO-SB/08 CExhibit 1003).
`
`Each of these cited prior art references constitutes effective prior art as to the claims of the "688
`
`Patent under pre-ATA 35 U.S.C. § 162.!
`
`E.
`
`37 C.RR. § LS104): Copy OF The Entire
`Patent For Which Reexamination Is Requested
`
`A full copy of the °688 Patent is submitted herein as Exhibit 1001 and its corresponding
`
`fle history is submitted as Exhibit 1002.
`
`F.
`
`37 CLELR. § L.SiG(D\S): Certification That A Copy OF The
`Request Has Been Served In lis Entirety On The Patent Owner
`
`
`
`A copyofthis request has been served in its entirety on the Patent Ownerat the following
`
`PAIR correspondence address of record:
`
`Wolf Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
`600 Atlantic Avenue
`Boston, MA02210-2206
`
`G.
`
`37 CLE. § 1.510(bW6): Certification By The Third Party Requester
`
`Requester certifies that the statutory estoppel provisions of 35 U.S.C. $8 315(e3(4),
`
`325{e\( 1} do not prohibit Requester from filing this ex parte reexamination request. Requester
`
`previously petitioned for IPR of the 688 Patent, but the Board did not institute IPR and thus did
`
`not reach a final written decision in that case. See fufra Section ILL
`
`
`
`H. 37 CER.&1.510(a}: Fee For Requesting Reexamimation
`
`' As the "688 Patent alleges priority to Provisional Application No. 61/041,365, unless otherwise
`
`noted all citations herein are to the pre-AIA versions of Sections 102 and 103. Requester does not
`
`concede that any claimis entitled to claim priority to these earlier applications.
`
`~~]
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`The Office is authorized to charge all fees associated with this Request, including the fee
`
`specified by 37 CFR. § 1.510fa), to Deposit Account No. 0-24850.
`
`L
`
`Related Matters
`
`The °688 Patent was the subject of a request for ater partes review, in TPR2021-00681. As
`
`the Board denied institution of that IPR, it never reached a final written decision. hg, kx Parte
`
`Finjan, Ine., Appeal No. 2018-007444, 2018 WL 4740168, at “5 @.TAB. Sept. 28, 2018)
`
`(“Because no trial was instituted in the inter partes review, there was no ‘final holding of invalidity’
`
`or ‘concluded examination or review’ ...."}; see also fn re Vivini, fnc., 14 P.4th 1342, 1349 (Fed.
`
`Cir. 2021) CTA] question of patentability is newuntil it has been considered and decided on the
`
`merits.”). The Board denied institution of the IPR based on procedural defects in the petition and
`
`the Board therefore did not address the merits of the presented prior art. Ex. 1007, 8-18. In
`
`particular,
`
`the Board determined that
`
`the petition lacked sufficient clarity and sufficient
`
`explanation of its arguments to meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 312¢a\3), 37 CER. §
`
`42.22(a\(2), and 37 CER. § 42.104b\(4}-(8). Hd, 8-16.
`
`Moreover, this Request presents substantially different obviousness combinations than the
`
`IPR Petition. Specifically,
`
`this Request presents entirely new primary references (Lane and
`
`Kamikakai}, neither of which were cited or relied on in the IPR Petition.
`
`The '688 Patent is also asserted in district court litigation captioned LIT LLC vy. Lenovo
`
`(United States}, Inc., Case No. 20-cv-00689 (D. Del.), which has not reached a final holding of
`
`invalidity as to any claim of the ’688 Patent. The district court pudge recently denied a motionthat
`
`the "688 Patent is invalid for lack of eligible subject matter under Section 101 for reasons that do
`
`riot bear on this Request. /a., Mem. Op., ECF No. 46, at 11. None of the prior art references or
`
`issues presentedin this Request have been litigated to a verdict in any district court case.
`
`

`

`Th=REEXAMINATIONSHOULD BE GRANTED DESPITE THE
`EARLTER-DENTED PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`Patent Owner may suggest that the Office deny or terminate reexamination under Section
`
`325(d)}, citing the Federal Circuit decision fa re: Vivint, Inc. 14 F 4th 1342 (Ped. Cir. Sept. 29,
`
`2021). The Office should not do so because this reexamination request is filed under circumstances
`
`far different from the narrowfact pattern of Vivint, and the narrow holding of Vivinr does not apply
`
`here. The narrow holding in Vivini only bars Reexamination when the request is “nearly identical”
`
`to an IPR petition that thePTO previously denied for “abusive filing practices” under 325(d). id
`
`at 1354 (Our ruling todayis limited.”).
`
`In Vivint, the party requesting reexamination—Alarm.com—hadalreadyfiled three failed
`
`petitions for infer partes review against a single patent. /d. at 1346. In denying the last ofthose
`
`TPR petitions, the Board “relied on § 325(d} considerations” in finding that the multiple petitions
`
`was an abuse of process. /d. at 1353. Alarm.comthen filed a reexamination request nearly identical
`
`to its abusive IPR petition. fol at 1347. The Federal Circuit effectively held that since the Office
`
`found the IPR petition to be abusive, it could not reverse course and find otherwise for the “nearly
`
`identical” reexamination request. /. at 1354.
`
`The present Request is far different, with only a single prior IPR petition, which was not
`
`denied under Section 325(d), let alone for “abusive filing practices.” That sole petition was denied
`
`for a lack of clarity as to the grounds presented and for conclusory arguments that lacked sufficient
`
`explanation of the positions presented. Ex. 1007; see also supra, Section ILL. Moreover, the present
`
`Reguest presents new primary prior art references and combinations that were not previously
`
`presented to or considered by the Office. Indeed, the Vivini decision specifically noted that even
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`swapping out just a single secondaryreference from apreviously presented ground is sufficient to
`
`raise an SNQ. /d@ at 1350. This Request does far more than that.
`
`iV.
`
`OVERVIEWOF THE 7688 PATENT AND ITS PROSECUTION HISTORY
`
`A.
`
`The °688 Patent
`
`The ’688 Patent purports to provide a portable computer having a hinge assembly that
`
`permits the computer to be transitioned to multiple display modes. #.g., Ex. 1001, 2:2-9; see also
`
`Schmandt Declaration (Exhibit 1004}, #] 22-307
`
`For example, from a closed position (FIG. 2}, the display component 102 ofthe portable
`
`computer 100 is rotatable up to 320° relative to the base component 104 to configure the portable
`
`computer 100 into a plurality of display modes, inchiding: a conventional laptop mode (FIG. 1),
`
`an easel made (FIG. 4), and a frame mode (FIG. 26). E.g., id, 2:19-38, 2:60-3:2, FIGS. 1-2, 4,
`
`26,
`
`“ While the priorart alone presents SNOs and renders the claims unpatentable, as discussed dara
`
`Sections [X-X, this Request is further supported by the declaration of Christopher Schmandt, an
`
`expert in the field of the °688 Patent during the relevant time period.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Patent No.: 8,289,688
`Request for kx Parte Reexamination
`
`Closed Position
`
`Laptop