(cid:3) (cid:3)
`
`(cid:53)(cid:82)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:36)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:81)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:54)(cid:37)(cid:49)(cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:27)(cid:28)(cid:28)(cid:27)(cid:12)(cid:3)
`Roger A. Denning (SBN 228998)
`(cid:54)(cid:72)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:3)(cid:48)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:54)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:88)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:54)(cid:37)(cid:49)(cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:26)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:12)(cid:3)
`Seth M. Sproul (SBN 217711)
`(cid:41)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:75)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:53)(cid:76)(cid:70)(cid:75)(cid:68)(cid:85)(cid:71)(cid:86)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:17)(cid:38)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:3)
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:27)(cid:25)(cid:19)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:38)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:53)(cid:72)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:54)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:23)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:3)
`12860 El Camino Real Suite 400
`(cid:54)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:76)(cid:72)(cid:74)(cid:82)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:38)(cid:36)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:21)(cid:20)(cid:22)(cid:19)(cid:3)
`San Diego, CA 92130
`(cid:51)(cid:75)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:27)(cid:24)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:25)(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:24)(cid:19)(cid:26)(cid:19)(cid:3)
`Phone: 858-678-5070
`(cid:41)(cid:68)(cid:91)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:27)(cid:24)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:25)(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:24)(cid:19)(cid:28)(cid:28)(cid:3)(cid:3)
`Fax:
`858-678-5099
`(cid:40)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:79)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:71)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:81)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:35)(cid:73)(cid:85)(cid:17)(cid:70)(cid:82)(cid:80)(cid:3)
`Email: denning@fr.com
`(cid:40)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:79)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:86)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:88)(cid:79)(cid:35)(cid:73)(cid:85)(cid:17)(cid:70)(cid:82)(cid:80)(cid:3)
`Email: sproul@fr.com
`
`(cid:3)(cid:45)
`
`(cid:82)(cid:92)(cid:3)(cid:37)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:46)(cid:72)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:36)(cid:71)(cid:80)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:75)(cid:68)(cid:70)(cid:3)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:70)(cid:72)(cid:12)(cid:3)
`Joy B. Kete (Admitted pro hac vice)
`(cid:52)(cid:76)(cid:88)(cid:92)(cid:76)(cid:3)(cid:58)(cid:88)(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:36)(cid:71)(cid:80)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:75)(cid:68)(cid:70)(cid:3)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:70)(cid:72)(cid:12)(cid:3)
`Qiuyi Wu (Admitted pro hac vice)
`(cid:41)(cid:44)(cid:54)(cid:43)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:53)(cid:44)(cid:38)(cid:43)(cid:36)(cid:53)(cid:39)(cid:54)(cid:50)(cid:49)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:17)(cid:38)(cid:17)(cid:3)
`FISH & RICHARDSONP.C.
`(cid:50)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:48)(cid:68)(cid:85)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:68)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:85)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:85)(cid:76)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:3)
`One Marina Park Drive
`(cid:37)(cid:82)(cid:86)(cid:87)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:48)(cid:36)(cid:3)(cid:19)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:3)
`Boston, MA 02210
`(cid:51)(cid:75)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:25)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:16)(cid:24)(cid:23)(cid:21)(cid:16)(cid:24)(cid:19)(cid:26)(cid:19)(cid:3)
`Phone: 617-542-5070
`(cid:41)(cid:68)(cid:91)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:25)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:16)(cid:24)(cid:23)(cid:21)(cid:16)(cid:27)(cid:28)(cid:19)(cid:25)(cid:3)
`Fax:
`617-542-8906
`(cid:40)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:79)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:78)(cid:72)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:35)(cid:73)(cid:85)(cid:17)(cid:70)(cid:82)(cid:80)(cid:3)
`Email: kete@fr.com
`(cid:40)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:79)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:84)(cid:90)(cid:88)(cid:35)(cid:73)(cid:85)(cid:17)(cid:70)(cid:82)(cid:80)(cid:3)
`Email: qwu@ft.com
`
`(cid:3)(cid:36)
`
`(cid:87)(cid:87)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:92)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:73)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:72)(cid:73)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:71)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:36)(cid:83)(cid:83)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:70)(cid:17)(cid:3)
`Attorneys for Defendant Apple Inc.
`(cid:3)
`
`(cid:56)(cid:49)(cid:44)(cid:55)(cid:40)(cid:39)(cid:3)(cid:54)(cid:55)(cid:36)(cid:55)(cid:40)(cid:54)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:44)(cid:54)(cid:55)(cid:53)(cid:44)(cid:38)(cid:55)(cid:3)(cid:38)(cid:50)(cid:56)(cid:53)(cid:55)(cid:3)
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`(cid:49)(cid:50)(cid:53)(cid:55)(cid:43)(cid:40)(cid:53)(cid:49)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:44)(cid:54)(cid:55)(cid:53)(cid:44)(cid:38)(cid:55)(cid:3)(cid:50)(cid:41)(cid:3)(cid:38)(cid:36)(cid:47)(cid:44)(cid:41)(cid:50)(cid:53)(cid:49)(cid:44)(cid:36)(cid:3)
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`(cid:54)(cid:36)(cid:49)(cid:3)(cid:41)(cid:53)(cid:36)(cid:49)(cid:38)(cid:44)(cid:54)(cid:38)(cid:50)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:44)(cid:57)(cid:44)(cid:54)(cid:44)(cid:50)(cid:49)(cid:3)
`SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`(cid:3)
`
`(cid:38)(cid:68)(cid:86)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:49)(cid:82)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:22)(cid:29)(cid:21)(cid:23)(cid:16)(cid:70)(cid:89)(cid:16)(cid:19)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:28)(cid:25)(cid:16)(cid:45)(cid:54)(cid:38)(cid:3)
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`(cid:3)
`
`(cid:51)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:73)(cid:15)(cid:3)
`Plaintiff,
`
`(cid:3)
`
`(cid:89)(cid:17)(cid:3)
`V.
`
`(cid:39)(cid:40)(cid:41)(cid:40)(cid:49)(cid:39)(cid:36)(cid:49)(cid:55)(cid:3)(cid:36)(cid:51)(cid:51)(cid:47)(cid:40)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:49)(cid:38)(cid:17)(cid:182)(cid:54)(cid:3)
`DEFENDANTAPPLEINC.’S
`(cid:39)(cid:44)(cid:54)(cid:38)(cid:47)(cid:50)(cid:54)(cid:56)(cid:53)(cid:40)(cid:3)(cid:50)(cid:41)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:49)(cid:57)(cid:36)(cid:47)(cid:44)(cid:39)(cid:44)(cid:55)(cid:60)(cid:3)
`DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`(cid:38)(cid:50)(cid:49)(cid:55)(cid:40)(cid:49)(cid:55)(cid:44)(cid:50)(cid:49)(cid:54)(cid:3)(cid:3)
`CONTENTIONS
`
`(cid:43)(cid:36)(cid:51)(cid:55)(cid:44)(cid:38)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:49)(cid:38)(cid:17)(cid:15)(cid:3)
`HAPTIC, INC.,
`
`(cid:3)(cid:3)
`
`(cid:3)
`
`(cid:39)(cid:72)(cid:73)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:71)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:17)(cid:3)
`(cid:3)
`(cid:3)
`Defendant.
`(cid:3)
`
`(cid:3)
`
`(cid:39)(cid:72)(cid:73)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:71)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:3) (cid:36)(cid:83)(cid:83)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:70)(cid:17)(cid:3) (cid:11)(cid:179)(cid:36)(cid:83)(cid:83)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:180)(cid:12)(cid:3) (cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:71)(cid:72)(cid:86)(cid:3) (cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:73)(cid:82)(cid:79)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:90)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:3) (cid:71)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:70)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:86)(cid:88)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:3) (cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:89)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:76)(cid:71)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:92)(cid:3)
`Defendant Apple Inc.
`(“Apple”) provides the following disclosure of Invalidity
`(cid:38)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:43)(cid:68)(cid:83)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:70)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:70)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:179)(cid:43)(cid:68)(cid:83)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:70)(cid:180)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:179)(cid:51)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:73)(cid:180)(cid:12)(cid:3)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:74)(cid:68)(cid:85)(cid:71)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:3)(cid:56)(cid:17)(cid:54)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:49)(cid:82)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:15)(cid:28)(cid:28)(cid:25)(cid:15)(cid:26)(cid:22)(cid:27)(cid:3)
`Contentions to Plaintiff Haptic, Inc. (“Haptic” or “Plaintiff’) regarding U.S. Patent No. 9,996,738
`(cid:11)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:179)(cid:182)(cid:26)(cid:22)(cid:27)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:15)(cid:180)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:179)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:16)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:16)(cid:54)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:15)(cid:180)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:179)(cid:36)(cid:86)(cid:86)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:180)(cid:12)(cid:17)(cid:3)
`(the “’738 patent,” the “Patent-in-Suit,” or the ““Asserted Patent’’).
`(cid:55)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:86)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:89)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:76)(cid:71)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:92)(cid:3) (cid:70)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:86)(cid:3) (cid:68)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:71)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:79)(cid:92)(cid:3) (cid:68)(cid:86)(cid:3) (cid:87)(cid:82)(cid:3) (cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:70)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:80)(cid:86)(cid:3) (cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:3) (cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:16)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:16)(cid:54)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:3) (cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:3)
`These invalidity contentions are made only as to the claims of the Patent-in-Suit that
`(cid:51)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:75)(cid:68)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:71)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:76)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:85)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:80)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:38)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:86)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:48)(cid:68)(cid:92)(cid:3)(cid:22)(cid:19)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:21)(cid:23)(cid:29)(cid:3) HAPTIC EX2026
`Plaintiff has identified in its Infringement Contentions served on May30, 2024:
`(cid:20)(cid:3)
`1
`
`(cid:36)(cid:51)(cid:51)(cid:47)(cid:40)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:49)(cid:38)(cid:17)(cid:182)(cid:54)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:44)(cid:54)(cid:38)(cid:47)(cid:50)(cid:54)(cid:56)(cid:53)(cid:40)(cid:3)(cid:50)(cid:41)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:53)(cid:40)(cid:47)(cid:44)(cid:48)(cid:44)(cid:49)(cid:36)(cid:53)(cid:60)
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF PRELIMINARY
`(cid:44)(cid:49)(cid:57)(cid:36)(cid:47)(cid:44)(cid:39)(cid:44)(cid:55)(cid:60)(cid:3)(cid:38)(cid:50)(cid:49)(cid:55)(cid:40)(cid:49)(cid:55)(cid:44)(cid:50)(cid:49)(cid:54)
`INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS
`(cid:38)(cid:68)(cid:86)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:49)(cid:82)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:22)(cid:29)(cid:21)(cid:23)(cid:16)(cid:70)(cid:89)(cid:16)(cid:19)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:28)(cid:25)(cid:16)(cid:45)(cid:54)(cid:38)
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`(cid:3)
`
`(cid:3)(cid:36)
`
`(cid:3)(cid:3)
`
`(cid:51)(cid:51)(cid:47)(cid:40)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:49)(cid:38)(cid:17)(cid:3)
`APPLEINC.
`
`BRWwNO
`CoAaNNDNN
`
`(cid:20) (cid:21) (cid:22) (cid:23) (cid:24) (cid:25) (cid:26) (cid:27) (cid:28)
`
`(cid:20)(cid:19)
`(cid:20)(cid:20)
`(cid:20)(cid:21)
`(cid:20)(cid:22)
`(cid:20)(cid:23)
`(cid:20)(cid:24)
`(cid:20)(cid:25)
`(cid:20)(cid:26)
`(cid:20)(cid:27)
`(cid:20)(cid:28)
`(cid:21)(cid:19)
`(cid:21)(cid:20)
`(cid:21)(cid:21)
`(cid:21)(cid:22)
`(cid:21)(cid:23)
`(cid:21)(cid:24)
`(cid:21)(cid:25)
`(cid:21)(cid:26)
`(cid:21)(cid:27)
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent
`’738 patent
`
`Asserted Claims1
`1-2, 4-5, and 9
`
`Haptic’s Alleged Priority Date
`Feb. 13, 2015
`
`Apple reserves the right to supplement these invalidity contentions at least per the parties’
`
`agreement and/or to the extent Plaintiff is allowed to change its Asserted Claims.
`
`These invalidity contentions are being made before claim construction. The parties have
`
`only recently started general discovery and document production, and no party depositions have
`
`been noticed or taken. Accordingly, Apple reserves the right to supplement and amend these
`
`contentions to the extent additional information becomes available during discovery. Apple has
`
`served third-party discovery on companies and/or individuals that it is informed and believes have
`
`relevant prior art. Apple will also be taking third-party discovery from the individuals named as
`
`inventors on Plaintiff’s patent filings and associated companies. Apple may also serve additional
`
`third-party discovery in the future including, but not limited to, based on discovery received from
`
`Plaintiff, the named inventors of the Asserted Patent, and/or the above-referenced third parties.
`
`Apple reserves the right to supplement and/or amend its invalidity contentions to include new prior
`
`art discovered from Plaintiff, from the named inventors, from these third-party sources, or other
`
`sources.
`
`I.
`
`RESERVATIONS
`
`A.
`
`General Reservation of Right
`
`The information provided shall not be deemed an admission regarding the scope of any
`
`claims or the proper construction of those claims or any claim terms. In certain instances, Apple
`
`has applied the claims to the prior art in view of Plaintiff’s allegations, admissions, or positions
`
`for purposes of these invalidity contentions only, to the extent Apple can discern Plaintiff’s
`
`allegations. As of the date of service, Plaintiff’s infringement contentions remain deficient, as
`
`explained in correspondence from Apple’s counsel on July 11, 2024. The deficiencies include,
`
`
`1 The independent claim is bolded and underlined.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`but are not limited to: lack of any infringement theory provided by Plaintiff with respect to all
`
`accused products; failure to identify the accused instrumentalities with specificity; failure to
`
`identify Plaintiff’s infringement allegations under the doctrine of equivalents2; failure to identify
`
`any alleged direct infringer for Plaintiff’s contributory infringement allegations; lack of citation to
`
`show that the pictured products and components are unmodified; lack of support regarding
`
`Plaintiff’s alleged priority dates, etc. These deficiencies have prejudiced, and continue to
`
`prejudice, Apple’s ability to prepare its defenses, including Apple’s ability to prepare its invalidity
`
`contentions. This disclosure of invalidity contentions is not intended to be, and is not, an admission
`
`that any Asserted Claim is infringed by any of Apple’s products, that any particular feature or
`
`aspect of any of the accused products practices any limitations of the Asserted Claims, or that any
`
`of the constructions implicit in Plaintiff’s Infringement Contentions is reasonable, supportable, or
`
`proper. Rather, in some instances, Apple’s application of the claims to the prior art is intended to
`
`apply Plaintiff’s apparent interpretation of the claims.
`
`B.
`
`Plaintiff’s Infringement Contentions Served on May 30, 2024
`
`Plaintiff’s Infringement Contentions are deficient in numerous respects, as explained in
`
`Apple’s deficiency letter served on July 11, 2024. Apple reserves the right to supplement or amend
`
`these Invalidity Contentions in view of Plaintiff’s response, if any. Because Plaintiff’s response
`
`to such deficiencies may lead to further grounds for invalidity, Apple specifically reserves the right
`
`to modify, amend, or supplement its contentions as Plaintiff modifies, amends, or supplements its
`
`disclosures and/or produces documents in discovery.
`
`
`2 Plaintiff has presented no substantive contentions of any alleged infringement under the doctrine
`of equivalents in its Infringement Contentions served on May 30, 2024. At most, Plaintiff has
`provided boilerplate reservations of rights, and made general references to the doctrine of
`equivalents, which is insufficient to preserve an infringement theory under the doctrine of
`equivalents. As a result, Plaintiff has waived any doctrine of equivalents theory. If Plaintiff is
`permitted to provide any information relating to infringement under the doctrine of equivalents,
`Apple may amend and supplement these invalidity contentions as appropriate.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`C.
`
`The Intrinsic Record
`
`Apple reserves the right to rely on applicable industry standards and prior art cited in the
`
`file histories of the Patent-in-Suit and any related U.S. and foreign patent applications as
`
`invalidating references or to show the state of the art. Apple further reserves the right to rely on
`
`the patent applicant’s admissions concerning the scope of the prior art relevant to the Patent-in-
`
`Suit found in, inter alia: the patent prosecution history for the Patent-in-Suit and any related patents
`
`and/or parent applications or reexaminations (or inter partes review or post-grant review
`
`proceedings); any deposition testimony of the named inventor or inventors whose names were
`
`removed during prosecution of the Patent-in-Suit; any deposition testimony or other admissions
`
`by Plaintiff; and the papers filed and any evidence submitted by Plaintiff in connection with this
`
`or any related litigation or proceeding.
`
`D.
`
`Rebuttal Evidence
`
`Prior art not included in these invalidity contentions, whether known or not known to
`
`Apple, may become relevant. In particular, Apple is currently unaware of the extent, if any, to
`
`which Plaintiff will contend that limitations of the Asserted Claims of the Patent-in-Suit are not
`
`disclosed in the prior art identified herein or otherwise contend the Patent-in-Suit are not invalid.
`
`To the extent that such an issue arises, Apple reserves the right to identify other references that
`
`would render obvious the allegedly missing limitation(s) or the disclosed device or method, or
`
`otherwise rebut Plaintiff’s argument(s).
`
`E.
`
`Contextual Evidence
`
`Apple’s claim charts cite particular teachings and disclosures of the prior art as applied to
`
`the limitations of each of the Asserted Claims. However, persons having ordinary skill in the art
`
`generally may view an item of prior art in the context of his or her experience and training, other
`
`publications, literature, products, and understandings. Moreover, common sense may be employed
`
`as part of the obviousness analysis. As such, Apple may rely on the uncited portions of the prior
`
`art references and on other publications, expert testimony, and common sense as aids in
`
`understanding and interpreting the cited portions, as providing context thereto, and as additional
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`evidence that the prior art discloses a claim limitation or the claimed subject matter as a whole.
`
`Apple further reserves the right to rely on uncited portions of the prior art references, other
`
`publications, and testimony, including expert testimony, to establish bases for combinations of
`
`certain cited references that render the Asserted Claims obvious. The references discussed in the
`
`claim charts may disclose the elements of the Asserted Claims explicitly and/or inherently, and/or
`
`they may be relied upon to show the state of the art in the relevant time frame. The suggested
`
`obviousness combinations are provided in the alternative to anticipation contentions and are not to
`
`be construed as suggesting that any reference included in the combinations is not by itself
`
`anticipatory.
`
`II.
`
`OVERVIEW OF THE TECHNOLOGY
`
`The basic concepts, teachings, and techniques utilized by the control systems described in
`
`the Asserted Patent were well-known at the time of the claimed invention. For example, the
`
`Asserted Patent describes:
`
`A control system [that] includes a housing engaged to a mounting surface, a
`sensor contained within the housing, a server in communication with the sensor,
`and a terminal device in communication with the server. A gesture by a user
`associated with the mounting surface controls activity of the terminal device,
`such as a knock on a wall lowering a thermostat. The control system enables a
`mounting surface independent from the terminal device to become a controller
`for the terminal device. The sensor forms an interactive zone, and a contact
`interaction with the mounting surface within the interactive zone is detected by
`the sensor as data signals. The server receives the data signals, determines a data
`pattern corresponding to the data signals, and matches the data pattern with a
`gesture profile. The gesture profile is associated with a command transmitted to
`the terminal device to control activity of the terminal device.
`
`’738 patent at Abstract. However, each of these components and functions was well known in the
`
`prior art.
`
`A.
`
`Sensors
`
`The Asserted Patent describes the use of a sensor 30 (including a sensor unit
`
`(accelerometer) 35) that forms an interactive zone 32 and detects a contact interaction 60 (e.g., a
`
`knock on a tabletop). See, e.g., ’738 patent at Fig. 3, 5.
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`6
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`The use of sensors, including accelerometers, for this purpose was well-known in the prior
`
`art. For example, the toktoktok system discloses a device that includes a sensor to detect vibrations
`
`on a surface (e.g., a wall or a table).
`
`
`
`Hack A Day: Reinventing The Clapper with a knock-based home automation controller
`
`(web.archive.org/web/20120312150152/https:/hackaday.com/tag/knock/)
`
`(“Clap On!... Clap
`
`Off!... was super awesome when The Clapper came out in the mid-eighties. Now [Mathieu
`
`Stephan] is trying to make the concept much more functional. He put together a controller that
`
`lets you knoch on walls to control things around the house. It’s called the Toktoktok project and
`
`uses small boxes to receive user input and control items like lamps and computers.”).
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Indiegogo: The toktoktok box (www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-toktoktok-box#/) (“Indiegogo”)
`
`(showing a toktoktok box, which includes a housing and a sensor).
`
`Additional examples are disclosed in Bess, Murakoshi, Yeo, and Newton:
`
`
`
`
`
`Bess at Fig. 1; see also id. at Abstract (“A system includes at least three accelerometers disposed
`
`in different locations of an area with a surface to capture respective vibration data corresponding
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`to a command tapped onto the surface by a user and a processing system to receive the vibration
`
`data from each accelerometer, identify the command and a location of the user from the vibration
`
`data, and generate a control signal based on the command and the location.”).
`
`Murakoshi at Fig. 1 (disclosing an apparatus 104 that includes one or more sensors, such as sensor
`
`206 (a 3-axis gyroscope (i.e., accelerometer)) operable to determine acceleration that corresponds
`
`to vibrations produced in the vibratory surface 106), [0037].
`
`
`
`
`
`Yeo at Fig. 18; see also id. at 3:16-17 (“FIG. 18 is a schematic drawing of application as an input
`
`device for interacting with digital devices.”), 9:60-67 (“The in-built sensing capabilities of each
`
`sensor node enables it to be used an alternate input device that remaps its input measurements to
`
`inputs for other devices. For example, FIG. 18 shows cancelling a call without having to take the
`
`phone out by tapping on the pocket/hand carrier; augmenting a desktop space such that
`
`tapping/scratching on a physical table becomes an interaction mode to desktop computer.”).
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Newton at Fig. 1, Abstract (“A lighting control apparatus (106) may include an accelerometer
`
`(118), a wireless communication interface (112), and a secure connection (125) for securing the
`
`lighting control apparatus to a surface. The secure connection may be configured to transfer
`
`motion imparted on the surface to the accelerometer. A controller (108) may be coupled with the
`
`accelerometer and the wireless communication interface. The controller may be configured to:
`
`receive, from the accelerometer, a signal representative of motion sensed by the accelerometer;
`
`determine, based on the signal from the accelerometer, that the sensed motion satisfies a motion
`
`criterion; and transmit, over the wireless communication interface to a lighting unit (104) or a
`
`lighting system bridge (102), data configured to cause one or more lighting units to emit light
`
`having one or more selected properties.”); see also Johnson; Khaira; Pryor; Krum; Yun.
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Furthermore, under Plaintiff’s apparent theory of infringement, the accelerometer in a
`
`mobile phone can be the claimed sensor. Infringement Contentions, Ex. A.
`
`However, numerous prior art mobile phones included accelerometers that performed the same
`
`function. For example, the iPhone 6 (as well as every prior model of iPhone) includes an
`
`accelerometer for detecting, among other things, impacts on the outside surface of the phone.
`
`
`
`iFixit at Step 15; see also iPhone 4; Samsung Galaxy III; LG G2; Nokia Phones.
`
`B.
`
`Housing engaged to a mounting surface
`
`
`
`
`
`In the Asserted Patent, the sensor (accelerometer) is contained within a housing 20 and the
`
`housing is engaged to a mounting surface 22 that receives the contact interaction. See, e.g., ’738
`
`patent at Figs. 3-4.
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`This arrangement was well-known in the prior art. For example, the toktoktok system
`
`includes a housing engaged to mounting surface.
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Indiegogo (showing the housing of the toktoktok system and a mounting surface); see also Bess
`
`at Fig. 1, Abstract (“A system includes at least three accelerometers disposed in different locations
`
`of an area with a surface to capture respective vibration data corresponding to a command tapped
`
`onto the surface by a user and a processing system to receive the vibration data from each
`
`accelerometer, identify the command and a location of the user from the vibration data, and
`
`generate a control signal based on the command and the location.”).; Murakoshi at Fig. 1
`
`(disclosing an apparatus 104 with housing engaged to a vibratory surface 106); Stewart at Fig. 1,
`
`5:9-37; Newton at Abstract (“A lighting control apparatus (106) may include an accelerometer
`
`(118), a wireless communication interface (112), and a secure connection (125) for securing the
`
`lighting control apparatus to a surface. The secure connection may be configured to transfer motion
`
`imparted on the surface to the accelerometer.”), 9:50-56 (“Secure connection and motion transfer
`
`component 125 may include but are not limited to various adhesives (e.g., activated by removing
`
`tape), hook and loop fasteners (e.g., Velcro), double sided foam tape (e.g., with removable tape to
`
`activate), suction cup(s), one or more magnets, one or more screws or a clips, and so forth.”);
`
`Marks at Figs. 1, 6, [0040] (“As shown in FIG. 6, the remote transmitter 22 is attachable by means
`
`of an adhesive surface 27.”).
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Furthermore, under Plaintiff’s apparent theory of infringement, the printed circuit board
`
`(“PCB”) assembly of a smartphone inside the smartphone’s exterior shell is a housing engaged to
`
`a mounting surface. Infringement Contentions, Ex. A.
`
`However, this was a standard feature of smartphones sold before 2015. For example, the
`
`iPhone 6 (as well as every prior model of iPhone) includes a logic board assembly that contains
`
`
`
`the sensor.
`
`iFixit at Step 14; see also iPhone 4; Samsung Galaxy III; LG G2; Nokia Phones.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`C.
`
`Server
`
`The Asserted Patent describes “a server in communication with the sensor.” ’738 patent
`
`at Abstract. The server 40 comprises a routing module 44, a processing module 46, and an output
`
`module 48. See, e.g., id. at Fig. 1.
`
`Such servers were well-known in the prior art. For example, Orr discloses “a server
`
`
`
`system 110.” Orr at [0027].
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Id. at Fig. 1 (annotated). As shown above, the server includes an I/O interface 122, a processing
`
`module 118, and a I/O interface 116. Id.; see also Sharp KK at Abstract (similar). Similarly, the
`
`Bump app used a server for gesture recognition. See, e.g., https://www.zdnet.com/home-and-
`
`office/networking/eight-burning-questions-for-bump-co-founder-jake-mintz/ (“When two phones
`
`bump, software on the phone sends up a variety of sensor data to an algorithm running on the
`
`Bump servers -- data like the location of the phone, the accelerometer readings, the IP address,
`
`etc.”); see also Johnson at 29:9-16 (“Therefore, every component forms part of the cloud which
`
`comprises servers, applications and clients as defined above. The cloud can be in communication
`
`with the intelligent door lock system 10, the vibration tapping sensing device of the mobile device
`
`210, and the like.”); Avrahami at [0050] (“Example data includes web pages, text messages,
`
`images, sound files, video data, classifier training data or other data sets to be sent to and/or
`
`received from one or more network servers or other devices by the device 600 via one or more
`
`wired or wireless networks, or for use by the device 600.”); Bess at [0041] (confirming the
`
`“processing device may be … a server”).
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Furthermore, under Plaintiff’s apparent theory of infringement, a server is merely the
`
`combination of a smartphone’s processor, circuitry connecting the processor to the accelerometer,
`
`and circuitry connecting the processor to a terminal device. Infringement Contentions, Ex. A.
`
`
`
`
`
`However, this was a standard feature of smartphones sold before 2015. For example, the iPhone
`
`6 (as well as every prior model of iPhone) includes these components.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`iFixit at Step 11.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iFixit at Step 15; see also iPhone 4; Samsung Galaxy III; LG G2; Nokia Phones.
`
`D.
`
`Terminal device
`
`The Asserted Patent further describes a terminal device that includes a receiving module
`
`and a switch. In the specification, “the terminal device 50 can be an appliance, such as a television,
`
`stereo or coffee machine with a switch 50’’’. Alternatively, the terminal device 50 may be a device
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`APPLE INC.’S DISCLOSURE OF INVALIDITY
`CONTENTIONS
`Case No. 3:24-cv-02296-JSC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7