Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 1 of 35 PageID 889
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 1 of 35 Page|D 889
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`Paper No.
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
`Petitioner,
`
`V.
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 6,771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`Issued: August 3, 2004
`Filed: April 11, 2001
`Inventors: Martin David Hoyle
`
`Title: COMPUTER INTERFACE METHOD AND APPARATUS WITH
`
`PORTABLE NETWORK ORGANIZATION SYSTEM AND TARGETED
`
`ADVERTISING
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2014-00044
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`N Y 243337720V1
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 2 of 35 PageID 890
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 2 of 35 Page|D 890
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`1.
`
`Compliance with Requirements of an Inter Partes Review Petition ........ 1
`
`A.
`
`Certification that the Patent May Be Contested via Inter
`Partes Review by the Petitioner (37 CFR §§ 42.101 and
`42.104) .................................................................................................. 1
`
`B.
`
`Fee for Inter Partes Review (37 CFR § 42.15(a)) .......................... .. 1
`
`C. Mandatory Notices (37 CFR § 42.8(b)) .......................................... .. 1
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Real Party in Interest (37 CFR § 42.8(b)(1)) ........................... .. 1
`
`Other Proceedings (37 CFR § 42.8(b)(2)) ............................... .. 2
`
`Lead and Backup Lead Counsel (37 CFR § 42.8(b)(3)) .......... .. 3
`
`Service Information (37 CFR § 42.8(b)(4)) ............................. .. 3
`
`D.
`
`Proof of Service (37 CFR §§ 42.6(e) and 42.105(a)) ...................... .. 4
`
`II.
`
`Identification of Claims Being Challenged (37 CFR § 42.104(b)) ............ 4
`
`III. Relevant Information Concerning the Contested Patent........................ .. 6
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Claims 2 and 3 of the ’29O Patent are not entitled to the
`priority date of the ‘010 patent ....................................................... .. 6
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ................................................ .. 7
`
`Construction of Terms Used in the Claims .................................... .. 8
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`General Observations ............................................................... .. 8
`
`“client computer” ..................................................................... .. 9
`
`“serVer” .................................................................................... .. 9
`
`“network” ................................................................................. .. 9
`
`“file” ....................................................................................... .. 10
`
`“link” ...................................................................................... .. 10
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`i
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 3 of 35 PageID 891
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 3 of 35 Page|D 891
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`“non-volatile data storage device” ......................................... .. 10
`
`“program” ............................................................................... .. 10
`
`“information resource” .......................................................... .. 11
`
`10.
`
`“browser” ............................................................................... .. 11
`
`11.
`
`“profile” .................................................................................. .. 12
`
`IV.
`
`Precise Reasons for Relief Requested ...................................................... .. 12
`
`A.
`
`Claims 2 and 3 Are Anticipated By Kikinis ................................... 12
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Kikinis Anticipates Claim 2 ................................................... .. 12
`
`Kikinis Anticipates Claim 3 ................................................... .. 17
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`CompuServe] Anticipates Claim 2 ................................................. 18
`
`Claim 3 is Obvious Based on C0mpuServe1 in View of
`Admissions of the ’290 patent and/or in View of
`CompuServe2 .................................................................................... 22
`
`D.
`
`Claims 2 and 3 Are Anticipated By Sonnenreich .......................... 23
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Sonnenreich Anticipates Claim 2 ........................................... .. 23
`
`Sonnenreich Anticipates Claim 3 ........................................... .. 27
`
`V.
`
`CONCLUSION ......................................................................................... .. 28
`
`Attachment A. Proof of Service of the Petition
`
`Attachment B. List of Evidence and Exhibits Relied Upon in Petition
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 4 of 35 PageID 892
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 4 of 35 Page|D 892
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`I.
`
`Compliance with Requirements of an Inter Partes Review Petition
`
`A.
`
`Certification that the Patent May Be Contested via Inter Partes
`Review by the Petitioner (37 CFR §§ 42.101 and 42.104)
`
`Petitioner certifies that U.S. Patent No. 6,771,290 (“the ’290 patent”, [Ex.
`
`1001]) is available for review and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped from
`
`requesting inter partes review of any of the claims of the ’290 patent. Neither
`
`Petitioner, nor Petitioner’s real party in interest, nor any privy of Petitioner: (a)
`
`has filed a civil action challenging the validity of any of the claims of the ’290
`
`patent; (b) has been served a complaint alleging infringement of the ’290 patent
`
`more than a year prior to the present date; or (c) is estopped from challenging any
`
`of the claims of the ’290 patent.
`
`B.
`
`Fee for Inter Partes Review (37 CFR § 42.15(a))
`
`The Director is authorized to charge the fee specified by 37 CFR § 42.l5(a)
`
`to Deposit Account No. 50-2775, which fee is believed to be $23,000. Any
`
`necessary additional fees may be charged to Deposit Account No. 50-2775.
`
`C. Mandatory Notices (37 CFR § 42.8(b))
`
`1.
`
`Real Party in Interest (37 CFR § 42.8(b)(1))
`
`The real party of interest of this petition is Samsung Electronics America,
`
`Inc. having an address of 85 Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, NJ, 07660, United
`
`States, (“Samsung”). Samsung is in privity with Samsung Telecommunications
`
`America, LLC, having an address of 1301 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, TX
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`1
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 5 of 35 PageID 893
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 5 of 35 Page|D 893
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`75082, United States. No other entity is a real party of interest or a privy for
`
`purposes of this petition.
`
`2.
`
`Other Proceedings (37 CFR § 42.8(b)(2))
`
`The ’290 patent has been asserted in the United States District Court for the
`
`Western District of Tennessee (the “Tennessee litigation”) as shown below:
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC V. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (Civil
`
`Action No. 2: 12-cv-2825- JMP-tmp)
`
`o Complaint served on Samsung Electronics America, Inc. on
`
`October 9, 2012.
`
`[Ex. 1003]
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC V. Samsung Telecommunications America,
`
`LLC (Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-2824- JIVIP-tmp)
`
`o Complaint served on Samsung Telecommunications America,
`
`LLC on October 9, 2012.
`
`[Ex. 1004]
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC V. Amazon Digital Services, Inc. (Civil Action
`
`No. 2: 12-cv-2767—JMP-tmp)
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC V. Barnes & Noble, Inc. (Civil Action No.
`
`2:l2-cv-2823- JMP-tmp)
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC V. Sony Computer Entertainment America
`
`LLC (Civil Action No. 2:12—cv—2826- IMP-tmp)
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 6 of 35 PageID 894
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 6 of 35 Page|D 894
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC V. Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc.
`
`(Civil Action No. 2:l2-cv—2827- JMP-tmp)
`
`Technology, LLC V. Sony Electronics Inc. (Civil Action No.
`
`2:12-cV-2828- JMP-tmp)
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC V. Microsoft Corp. (Civil Action No. 2: l2-cv-
`
`2829- JMP-tmp)
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC v. Google Inc. (Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-
`
`2830- JMP-tmp)
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC v. Apple Inc. (Civil Action No. 2:12-cv—283 1-
`
`JMP-tmp)
`
`B.E. Technology, LLC v. Motorola Mobility Holdings (Civil Action
`
`No. 2:l2—cv-2866- JMP-tmp)
`
`3.
`
`Lead and Backup Lead Counsel (37 CFR § 42.8(b)(3))
`
`Backup Lead Counsel
`
`Heath Briggs
`
`Lead Counsel
`
`Barry Schindler
`Reg. No. 32,938
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`200 Park Avenue
`
`P.O. Box 677
`Florham Park, NJ 07932
`SchindlerB@gtlaw.com
`Phone: (973) 360-7900
`
`Fax: (973)301-8410
`
`
`
`Reg. No. 54,919
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`
`1200 l7th Street, Suite 2400
`
`Denver, CO 80202
`BriggsH@gtlaw.com
`Phone: (303) 572-6500
`Fax: (303) 572-6540
`
`4.
`
`Service Information (37 CFR § 42.8(b)(4))
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 7 of 35 PageID 895
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 7 of 35 Page|D 895
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`Service on Petitioner may be made by mail or hand delivery to: Greenberg
`
`Traurig, LLP, 1200 17”‘ Street, Suite 2400, Denver, CO, 80202. Petitioner also
`
`consents to service by email to: denipmail@gtlaw.com.
`
`D.
`
`Proof of Service (37 CFR §§ 42.6(e) and 42.105(a))
`
`Proof of service of this petition is provided in Attachment A.
`
`II.
`
`Identification of Claims Being Challenged (37 CFR § 42.104(b))
`
`Claims 2 and 3 of the ’290 patent are unpatentable for the following reasons:
`
`(i)
`
`Claims 2 and 3 are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § l02(b) (pre-AIA) by
`
`International Patent Application Publication No. W0 97/09682 to
`
`Kikinis (“Kikinis”).
`
`[Ex. 1007]. Kikinis published more than one-
`
`year prior to the effective filing date of claims-2-3 of the ’290 patent,
`
`and is thus prior art under 35 U.S.C. l02(b) (pre-AIA).
`
`Claim 2 is anticipated by under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (pre-AIA) by “The
`
`Complete Idiot’s Guide to CompuServe”, by Andy Shafran
`
`(“CompuServel”).
`
`[Ex. 1008]. CompuServel published more than
`
`one-year prior to the effective filing date of claims-2-3 of the ’290
`
`patent, and is thus prior art under 35 U.S.C. l02(b) (pre-AIA).
`
`(iii)
`
`Claim 3 is obvious under 35 U.S.C. l03(a) based on CompuServe1 in
`
`combination with “Special Edition Using CompuServe”, by Nancy
`
`Stevenson et al. (“CompuServe2”).
`
`[Ex. 1009]. CompuServe2
`
`NY 24333 7720v1
`
`4
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 8 of 35 PageID 896
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 8 of 35 Page|D 896
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`published more than one-year prior to the effective filing date of
`
`claims-2-3 of the ’290 patent, and is thus prior art under 35 U.S.C.
`
`102(b) (pre-AIA).
`
`(iv) Claims 2-3 are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. l02(e) by U.S. Patent No.
`
`5,974,446 to Sonnenreich et al. (“Sonnenreich”).
`
`[Ex. 1010].
`
`Sonnenreich was filed with the U.S. Patent Office on October 24,
`
`1996, which is prior to the effective filing date of the ’290 patent, and
`
`is thus prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(e)(2) (pre-AIA).
`
`A list of evidence relied upon in support of this petition is set forth in
`
`Attachment B. The Declaration of Dr. John Strawn Regarding U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,771,290 demonstrating the above lack of patentability is included herewith as
`
`Exhibit 1005. Dr. Strawn’s Curriculum Vitae is included as Exhibit 1006, and the
`
`evidence and other materials relied on and considered by Dr. Strawn are included
`
`herewith as Exhibits 1001-1002 and 1007-1012. Petitioner’s proposed
`
`construction of the claims, the evidence relied upon, and the precise reasons why
`
`the claims are unpatentable are set forth in § IV, below.
`
`NY 24333 7720v1
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 9 of 35 PageID 897
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 9 of 35 Page|D 897
`
`Petition re U.S. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`III. Relevant Information Concerning the Contested Patent
`
`A.
`
`Claims 2 and 3 of the ’290 Patent are not entitled to the priority
`
`date of the ‘010 patent
`
`The ’290 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application No. 09/744,033 which
`
`claims priority to PCT Application No. PCT/US99/ 16135 (“the PCT application”),
`
`which was filed on July 16, 1999. The PCT application claims priority as a
`
`Continuation—in-Part to U.S. Patent Application No. 09/118,351, filed July 17,
`
`1998, now U.S. Patent No. 6,141,010 (“the ‘O10 patent”).
`
`[Ex. 1011]. “For a
`
`claim in a later—filed application to be entitled to the filing date of an earlier
`
`application under 35 U.S.C. § 120, the earlier application must comply with the
`
`written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112, ll 1.” Tronzo v. Biomet, Inc.,
`
`156 F.3d 1154, 1158 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
`
`Claim 2 of the ’290 patent recites, among other things:
`
`0
`
`“the server storing a user profile and user libraryfor each ofa
`
`number ofdiflerent users”
`
`0 “said program being operable upon execution to receive from server
`
`one ofthe user profiles and to display a user—selectable item for user
`
`links contained within the user profile”
`
`0 “said program further being operable in response to selection by a
`
`user ofone of the user links to access the file associated with the
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`6
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 10 of 35 PageID 898
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 10 of 35 Page|D 898
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`selected user linkfrom the user library associated with the received
`
`user profile”.
`
`The written description of the ‘010 patent does not support these limitations.
`
`Indeed, nowhere does the ‘O1 0 patent disclose storing a user library or a user
`
`profile on a server remote of the client computer (i.e., “the server storing a user
`
`profile and user library for each of a number of different users”). Consequently,
`
`the ‘O10 patent also does not disclose “said program being operable upon
`
`execution to receive from server one of the user profiles” or “said program further
`
`being operable in response to selection by a user of one of the user links to access
`
`iigflassociated with the selected user link from the user library associated with
`
`the received user profile.” Furthermore, Patent Owner has previously
`
`acknowledged that claims relying on the disclosure of the PCT application “may
`
`not be entitled to the July 17, 1998 priority date.” [Ex. 1013, p. 8]. For at least
`
`these reasons, claim 2 of the ’29O patent is not entitled to claim priority to the ‘010
`
`patent. Claim 3 depends from claim 2. Thus, the effective filing date of claims 2
`
`and 3 of the ’290 patent is July 16, 1999.
`
`B.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art in the field of the ’29O patent (“the
`
`skilled person”) would have been familiar with software engineering techniques
`
`published in the literature and known in the field as of July of 1999.
`
`[Ex. 1005, 1]
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 11 of 35 PageID 899
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 11 of 35 Page|D 899
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`19]. The skilled person would have gained this familiarity through graduate level
`
`studies in computer engineering or computer science, and/or through work
`
`experience in academia (either as a professor or a graduate student), and/or by
`
`working for a technology company or the government.
`
`[Ex. 1005, 11 19].
`
`C.
`
`Construction of Terms Used in the Claims
`
`In this proceeding, the claims must be given their broadest reasonable
`
`construction in light of the specification. 37 CFR 42.l0O(b). Additionally, the
`
`words of a claim “are generally given their ordinary and customary meaning,” and
`
`“the ordinary and customary meaning of a claim term is the meaning that the term
`
`would have to a person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time of the
`
`invention, i.e., as of the effective filing date of the patent application.” Phillips v.
`
`A WH Corp., 415 F. 3d 1303, 1313-1314 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “Importantly, the person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art is deemed to read the claim term not only in the context
`
`of the particularnclaim in which the disputed term appears, but in the context of the
`
`entire patent, including the specification.” Id. at 1314.
`
`1.
`
`General Observations
`
`Claim 2 is independent, and claim 3 depends from claim 2. The preamble of
`
`claim 2 is limiting. “If the claim preamble, when read in the context of the entire
`
`claim, recites limitations of the claim, or, if the claim preamble is necessary to give
`
`life, meaning, and vitality to the claim, then the claim preamble should be
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 12 of 35 PageID 900
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 12 of 35 Page|D 900
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`construed as if in the balance of the claim.” Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard
`
`Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Claim 2 recites several elements that
`
`are included in both the preamble and the body of the claim (e.g., server, network,
`
`user profile, user library, files, user link), which in and of itself makes the
`
`preamble limiting. Furthermore, the preamble provides specific functionality of
`
`the computer—readable memory of claim 2, z'.e., gives life, meaning and vitality to
`
`the claim. Thus, the preamble is limiting and “should be construed as if in the
`
`balance of the claim.” Id.
`
`2.
`
`“client computer”
`
`“Client computer” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a] computer that is
`
`connected to a network (including computers that are connected only occasionally
`
`to the network such as, for example, by a modem and telephone line) and that can
`
`be used to send requests for information to other computers over the networ .”
`
`[’290 patent, 411-6].
`
`3.
`
`“server”
`
`“Server” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a] computer on a network that
`
`stores information and that answers requests for information.” [’290 patent, 4:66-
`
`67].
`
`4.
`
`“network”
`
`NY 24333 7720v1
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 13 of 35 PageID 901
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 13 of 35 Page|D 901
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`“Network” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a] system having at least two
`
`computers in communicable connection, including intranets, personal networks,
`
`virtual private networks, and global public networks such as the Internet.” [’290
`
`patent, 4:42-45].
`
`5.
`
`“file”
`
`A “file” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a]ny digital item, including
`
`information, documents, applications, audio/video components, and the like, that is
`
`stored in memory and is accessible via a file allocation table or other pointing or
`
`indexing structure.” [’290 patent, 4:25-28].
`
`6.
`
`“link”
`
`A “link” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a] data item that identifies the
`
`location or address of a program or information resource. A URL is a link, as is a
`
`path and filename of an information resource.” [’290 patent, 4:39-41].
`
`7.
`
`“non-volatile data storage device”
`
`A “non-volatile data storage device” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a]
`
`memory device that retains computer-readable data or programming code in the
`
`absence of extemally-supplied power, including such things as a hard disk or a
`
`floppy disk, a compact disk read-only memory (CDROM), digital versatile disk
`
`DVD), magneto-optical disk, and so forth.” [’290 patent, 4:46-51].
`
`8.
`
`“program”
`
`NY 24333 7720v1
`
`10
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 14 of 35 PageID 902
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 14 of 35 Page|D 902
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`A “program” is defined in the ’290 patent as “one or more related program
`
`modules.” [’290 patent, 4:61]. A program module is defined in the ’290 patent as
`
`“one or more related program components.” [’290 patent, 4:59-60]. A program
`
`component is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a] set of instructions stored in a file in
`
`computer-readable format, whether as object code or source code, and whether
`
`written in a compiled language, in byte code (such as JaVaTM), or in a scripting or
`
`other interpreted language.” [’290 patent, 4:54-58]. A browser is a type of
`
`program (“browser - a program that can .
`
`.
`
`. .” [’290 patent, 3:65, emphasis
`
`added]).
`
`9.
`
`“information resource”
`
`An “information resource” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a] source of
`
`information stored on a server or other computer that is accessible to other
`
`computers over a network.” [’290 patent, 4:33-36]. For example, a web page is a
`
`type of information resource.
`
`[’290 patent, 5:23]. A file can be an information
`
`resource (A “file” is defined as “any digital item, including information .
`
`. .” [’290
`
`patent, 4:25-28]).
`
`[Ex. 1005, 1] 40].
`
`10.
`
`“browser”
`
`“Browser” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[a] program that can
`
`communicate over a network using http or another protocol and that can display
`
`html information and other digital information.” [’290 patent, 3:65-67].
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`11
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 15 of 35 PageID 903
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 15 of 35 Page|D 903
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`11'.
`
`“profile”
`
`“Profile” is defined in the ’290 patent as “[u]ser-specific information
`
`relating to an individual using a computer.” [’290 patent, 4:52-53].
`
`IV.
`
`Precise Reasons for Relief Requested
`
`A.
`
`Claims 2 and 3 Are Anticipated By Kikinis
`
`1.
`
`Kikinis Anticipates Claim 2
`
`Each of the elements of claim 2 is disclosed in Kikinis.
`
`[EX. 1005, 1] 55].
`
`Kikinis discloses a user station or kiosk having a computer system (63, 107) (client
`
`computer), having well-known elements of such a computer system, that
`
`communicates with a Web server (67) and a set of electronic document servers
`
`(69) by means of a modem (61, 105) and telephone line (83 cited in text, number
`
`not in figures) using communication protocols such as PPP or SLIP (i.e., via a
`
`network).
`
`[Id. at ] 46]. A computer-readable memory is one of the well-known
`
`elements of a computer system (63, 107).
`
`[Id. at 1] 46]. Thus, Kikinis discloses “A
`
`computer-readable memoryfor use by a client computer in conjunction with a
`
`server that is accessible by the client computer via a network.” [Id. at 1] 46].
`
`The Web server (67) supports a set of data bases (71).
`
`[Ex. 1005, 1] 47].
`
`Each of the data bases (71) belongs to a different client, and has a user profile, as
`
`shown by, e. g., the user-specific home page (73).
`
`[Id. at 1] 47]. The electronic
`
`document servers (69) are linked to each user-specific data base (71), and contain
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`12
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 16 of 35 PageID 904
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 16 of 35 Page|D 904
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`user—specific files such as lower-order data bases (89, 91, 93, 95).
`
`[Id. at 1] 47].
`
`The set of lower-order data bases comprises the user library, and the files of these
`
`lower-order data bases are the user’s files, such as voice mail files.
`
`[Id. at 1] 47].
`
`Thus, Kikinis discloses “the server storing a user profile and user library for each
`
`ofa number ofdifferent users, with the user library containing one or more files
`
`and the user profile containing at least one user link that provides a, link to one of
`
`the files in the user library.” [Id. at ][ 47].
`
`Kikinis discloses that the computer system (63, 107) has well-known
`
`elements of such a computer system, which would necessarily include a non-
`
`Volatile data storage device.
`
`[Ex. 1005, 1] 48]. Thus, Kikinis discloses “the
`
`computer readable memory comprising.‘ a non-volatile data storage device. ” [Id.
`
`at 1] 48].
`
`Kikinis discloses that the computer system (e.g., 63, 107) includes a Web-
`
`browser (e.g., 65, 109).
`
`[Ex. 1005, 1] 49]. The browser (e.g., 65, 109) is the
`
`program.
`
`[Id. at 1] 49]. Because the computer system (63, 107) necessarily has a
`
`non-Volatile memory and operates the web browser that is stored on the computer,
`
`Kikinis discloses “the computer readable memory comprising: .
`
`.
`
`. a program
`
`stored on said non-volatile data storage device in a computer—readableformat.”
`
`[Id. at 11 49].
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`13
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 17 of 35 PageID 905
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 17 of 35 Page|D 905
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`Kikinis discloses that it is well known that a browser may have screen
`
`buttons, data—entry fields, and display fields (user-selectable items).
`
`[Ex. 1005, 1]
`
`50]. For example, Kikinis discloses a browser (109) that displays a graphical user
`
`interface with an application window having buttons and a field (a user-selectable
`
`item, 113) for entering a URL.
`
`[Id. at 1] 50]. Thus, Kikinis discloses “said
`
`program being operable upon execution to display a graphical user interface
`
`comprising an application window having a number ofuser—selectable items
`
`displayed therein.” [Id. at 11 50]. Kikinis also discloses a user home page (73) that
`
`is displayed “by using the facilities of a Web browser”, which user home page (73)
`
`includes buttons 117, 118, 120, and 122, i. e., user—selectable items.
`
`[Id. at 1i 50].
`
`Thus, Kikinis discloses “saidprogram being operable upon execution to display a
`
`graphical user interface comprising an application window having a number of
`
`user-selectable items displayed therein.” [Id. at 1] 50].
`
`Kikinis discloses that a user may enter a URL (link) to a Web destination
`
`(information resource) in the field (113) of the browser (109).
`
`[Ex. 1005, 1] 51]. In
`
`particular, Kikinis discloses the link “http:P/www.home.com.” [Id. at 1] 51]. Thus,
`
`Kikinis discloses “wherein each ofsaid items has associated with it a link to an
`
`information resource accessible via the network. ” [Id. at 1] 51]. Kikinis also
`
`discloses that each of the user-selectable items (117, 118, 120, 122) on the user-
`
`specific home page (73) has a link to one or more files of the lower-order data
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`14
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 18 of 35 PageID 906
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 18 of 35 Page|D 906
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`bases (89, 91, 93, 95) accessible Via the Internet.
`
`[Id. at 1] 51]. Thus, Kikinis
`
`discloses “wherein each ofsaid items has associated with it a link to an
`
`information resource accessible via the network. ” [Id. at 1] 51].
`
`Kikinis discloses that, after the user selects the Web destination and enters
`
`the URL, the browser accesses the selected Web destination (information resource,
`
`home page) using the Internet (i. e., over the network).
`
`[Ex. 1005, fil 52]. In
`
`particular, Kikinis discloses that a user home page (in this case, the information
`
`resource, 73) is retrieved (accessed).
`
`[Id. at 1] 52]. Thus, Kikinis discloses
`
`“wherein saidprogram is operable upon execution and in response to selection by
`
`a user ofone ofsaid items to access the associated information resource over the
`
`network. ” [Id. at 1] 52]. Kikinis also discloses that the user may select one of the
`
`user—selectable items (117, 118, 120, 122) on the user-specific home page (73).
`
`[Id. at 1] 52]. In response the system will access, using the Internet (i.e., over the
`
`network), one or more files of the lower-order data bases (89, 91, 93, 95)
`
`associated with the selected user—selectable item.
`
`[Id. at {I 52]. Then, as shown in
`
`FIG. 3, when an item is selected, a browser window (e.g., Voice-mail browser
`
`window 125) is opened and the user selected item is accessed.
`
`[Id. at ll 52]. Voice
`
`mail browser window 125 of FIG. 3 is a “browser window” because Kikinis states:
`
`“Fig. 3 shows an example set 111 ofwindows accessible in a home page for
`
`accessing electronic documents by using the facilities ofa Web browser.” [Id. at 1]
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`15
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 19 of 35 PageID 907
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 19 of 35 Page|D 907
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`52]. Thus, Kikinis discloses “wherein saidprogram is operable upon execution
`
`and in response to selection by a user ofone ofsaid items to access the associated
`
`information resource over the network. ” [Id. at 1] 52].
`
`Kikinis discloses that the browser (109) retrieves a user-specific home page
`
`(73), which necessarily would require receiving a user profile from the server (69).
`
`[Ex. 1005, 1] 53]. The user specific home page (73) displays user-selectable items
`
`(117, 118, 120, 122) for user links contained within the user profile.
`
`[Id. at 1] 53].
`
`Thus, Kikinis discloses “said program being operable upon execution to receive
`
`from server one ofthe user profiles and to display a user-selectable item for user
`
`links contained within the user profile. ” [Id. at 1] 53].
`
`Kikinis discloses that a user may select one of the user-selectable items (117,
`
`118, 120, 122) to access one or more files of the lower-order data bases (89, 91, 93,
`
`95) associated with the user’s home page (73).
`
`[EX. 1005, 1] 54]. Such items (117,
`
`1 18, 120, 122) have links in order to access the files of the lower-order data bases
`
`(89, 91, 93, 95).
`
`[Id. at 1] 54]. In particular, Kikinis discloses that the voice mail
`
`database 93 has been accessed because the voice mail browser window (125) is
`
`opened. [Id at 1] 54]. Thus, Kikinis discloses “said program further being
`
`operable in response to selection by a user ofone ofthe user links to access the file
`
`associated with the selected user linkfrom the user library associated with the
`
`received user profile.” [Id. at 1] 54].
`
`NY 24333 7720v1
`
`16
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 20 of 35 PageID 908
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 20 of 35 Page|D 908
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`Thus, as shown above, Kikinis discloses every limitation of claim 2 of the
`
`’290 patent.
`
`[Ex. 1005, 11 55]. Therefore, Kikinis anticipates and invalidates claim
`
`2 of the ’290 patent.
`
`2.
`
`Kikinis Anticipates Claim 3
`
`Each of the elements of claim 3 is disclosed in Kikinis.
`
`[Ex. 1005, 11 57].
`
`Kikinis discloses that, after the user selects the Web destination and enters the
`
`URL, the browser accesses the selected Web destination (information resource)
`
`using the Internet (i. e., over the network).
`
`[Id. at 11 56]. Kikinis uses a browser to
`
`access the Web destination to retrieve the user home page (information resource
`
`73).
`
`[Id. at 11 56]. Thus, Kikinis discloses “wherein saidprogram is operable upon
`
`execution and in response to selection by a user ofone ofsaid items to access the
`
`associated information resource over the network using a browser.” [Id. at 11 56].
`
`Kikinis also discloses that the user-specific home page (73) includes user-
`
`selectable items (117, 118, 120, 122) to access, using the Internet (i.e., over the
`
`network), one or more files of the lower-order data bases (89, 91, 93, 95)
`
`associated with a particular user-selectable item.
`
`[Id. at 11 56]. User home page
`
`(73) of FIG. 3 is a “browser window” because Kikinis states: “Fig. 3 shows an
`
`example set I I I ofwindows accessible in a home page for accessing electronic
`
`documents by using the facilities ofa Web browser.” [Id. at 11 56]. When an item
`
`is selected, the another browser window (e.g., voice mail browser window 125) is
`
`NY 243337720v1
`
`17
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 21 of 35 PageID 909
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 66-3 Filed 11/22/13 Page 21 of 35 Page|D 909
`
`Petition re US. Pat. 6, 771,290 (Claims 2-3)
`
`opened and the user-selected item is accessed.
`
`[Ia’. at 1] 56]. Both (a) the selecting
`
`of the item on user home page browser window 73 (e. g., “pushing” of one of the
`
`buttons (117, 118, 120 and 122) of user home page browser window (73)), and (b)
`
`the opening of the another browser window (e.g., voice mail browser window 125)
`
`constitute “using a browser.” [Id. at ll 56]. Thus, Kikinis discloses “wherein said
`
`program is operable upon execution and in response to selection by a user of