Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 162-22 Filed 02/13/19 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 14528
`Case 2:17-cv-00514—JRG Document 162-22 Filed 02/13/19 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 14528
`
`
` EXHIBIT 22
`EXHIBIT 22
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 162-22 Filed 02/13/19 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 14529
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`HTC CORPORATION,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`
`Case No. 2:17-cv-00514-JRG
`(Lead Case)
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:17-cv-00515-JRG
`(Member Case)
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANT LG ELECTRONICS, INC.’S AMENDED INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS
`PURSUANT TO PATENT LOCAL RULE 3-6
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 162-22 Filed 02/13/19 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 14530
`
`claim in each patent-in-suit and, accordingly, none of the asserted claims is entitled to the benefit
`
`of the September 21, 2004, filing date for that additional reason.
`
`Fourth, as reflected in and expressed by the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) in
`Fourth, as reflected in and expressed by the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) in
`
`inter partes review (IPR) petitions filed by Google LLC and Apple, Inc., the Patents-In-Suit are
`inter partes review (IPR) petitions filed by Google LLC and Apple, Inc., the Patents-In-Suit are
`
`not entitled to the priority date claimed by AGIS. LGEKR incorporates by reference and intends
`not entitled to the priority date claimed by AGIS. LGEKR incorporates by reference and intends
`
`to rely, in relevant part, on any analyses set forth by the PTAB in those petitions related to this
`to rely, in relevant part, on any analyses set forth by the PTAB in those petitions related to this
`
`issue, including as provided in any respective decisions related to those petitions.
`issue, including as provided in any respective decisions related to those petitions.
`
`1.
`
`’970 patent
`
`None of the asserted claims of the ’970 patent are entitled to a priority date of (or earlier
`
`than) September 21, 2004, as AGIS alleges, because at least the exemplary claim limitations
`
`listed below are not sufficiently disclosed in U.S. Application No. 10/711,490 (now U.S. Patent
`
`No. 7,031,728). Nor do any of the intervening parent applications (e.g., U.S. Application No.
`
`11/612,830 and U.S. Application No. 11/308,648, now U.S. Patent No. 7,630,724) through
`
`which the ’970 claims priority as a continuation-in-part sufficiently disclose at least one such
`
`limitation in each of the claims listed below. LGEKR also incorporates by reference any
`
`identifications and analyses that any expert witness(es) may take concerning priority issues. To
`
`the extent that AGIS is permitted to modify, and in fact modifies in any manner, the alleged date
`
`to which the ’970 patent is entitled to priority, Defendant reserves the right to respond and
`
`challenge that date to the extent required by law to satisfy their burden.
`
`Claim 1:
`
`(cid:129)
`
`(cid:129)
`
`“a forced message alert software application program including a list of required possible
`responses to be selected by a participant recipient of a forced message response loaded on
`each participating PDA/cell phone”
`
`“means for attaching a forced message alert software packet to a voice or text message
`creating a forced message alert that is transmitted by said sender PDA/cell phone to the
`
`8
`
`