Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 1 of 90 PageID #: 6571
`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 1 of 90 PagelD #: 6571
`
`EXHIBIT 9
`EXHIBIT 9
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 2 of 90 PageID #: 6572
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In re Ex Parte Reexamination of:
`
`U. S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`Issue Date: October 8, 2013
`
`Inventor: Timothy R. Pryor
`
`Appl. No. 13/714,748
`
`Filing Date: December 14, 2012
`
`For: MORE USEFUL MAN MACHINE
`INTERFACES AND APPLICATIONS
`
`
`)
`
`)
`) Control No.: To be assigned
`)
`
`) Group Art Unit: To be assigned
`)
`
`) Examiner: To be assigned
`)
`
`) Confirmation No.: To be assigned
`)
`
`)
`
`)
`
`)
`
`)
`
`Mail Stop Ex Parte Reexam
`Attn: Central Reexamination Unit
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Dear Commissioner:
`
`REQUEST FOR EX PARTE REEXAMINATION OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,553,079
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 3 of 90 PageID #: 6573
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`I. 
`II. 
`III. 
`
`IV. 
`
`V. 
`
`
`
`
`
`B. 
`
`C. 
`
`Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 
`Identification of Claims and Citation of Prior Art Presented ............................................ 2 
`Overview of the ’079 Patent .............................................................................................. 2 
`A. 
`Specification and Drawings of the ’079 Patent ...................................................... 2 
`B. 
`Claims of the ’079 Patent ....................................................................................... 6 
`C. 
`The ’079 Patent Prosecution History ..................................................................... 6 
`D. 
`The Effective Priority Date of Claims 1-30 of the ’079 Patent ............................. 7 
`Claim Construction ............................................................................................................ 8 
`“light source adapted to direct illumination through a work volume above
`A. 
`the light source” of claims 1-3, 9-10 .................................................................... 11 
`“light source adapted to illuminate a human body part within a work
`volume generally above the light source” of claims 11, 14-15 ............................ 11 
`“light source in fixed relation relative to the camera and adapted to direct
`illumination through the work volume” of claims 21-23, 30 ............................... 11 
`“gesture” of claims 1, 4-5, 11, 18-21, 24-25 ........................................................ 12 
`“work volume above the light source” of claims 1, 6-7 ...................................... 12 
`“work volume generally above the light source” of claims 11-12 ....................... 13 
`“work volume above the camera” of claim 21 ..................................................... 13 
`“a processor adapted to determine the gesture performed in the work
`volume and illuminated by the light source based on the camera output” of
`claim 11 ................................................................................................................ 13 
`“three-dimensional position” of claims 8, 28 ...................................................... 14 
`I. 
`“adapted to” of claims 1, 11, 21 ........................................................................... 15 
`J. 
`Statement of Substantial New Questions of Patentability ............................................... 15 
`A. 
`SNQ1: Liebermann .............................................................................................. 16 
`B. 
`SNQ2: Liebermann in view of Harakawa ........................................................... 52 
`C. 
`SNQ3: Liebermann in view of Mack ................................................................... 59 
`D. 
`SNQ4: Liebermann in view of Bushnag .............................................................. 67 
`E. 
`SNQ5: Liebermann in view of Meins .................................................................. 71 
`F. 
`SNQ6: Liebermann in view of Auten ................................................................... 75 
`
`D. 
`E. 
`F. 
`G. 
`H. 
`
`i
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 4 of 90 PageID #: 6574
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`VI. 
`
`Detailed Explanation of the Pertinence and Manner of Applying the Prior Art to
`the Claims ........................................................................................................................ 79 
`A. 
`Bases for Proposed Rejections of the Claims ...................................................... 79 
`B. 
`Proposed Rejections ............................................................................................. 81 
`VII.  Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 82 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 5 of 90 PageID #: 6575
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS:
`
`Ex. PA-SB08
`
`USPTO Form SB/08
`
`Ex. PAT-A
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079 (“the ’079 patent”)
`
`Ex. PAT-B
`
`Prosecution History of the ’079 patent
`
`Ex. PA-DEC
`
`Declaration of Dr. Gregory D. Abowd
`
`Ex. PA-DEC CV
`
`Curriculum vitae of Dr. Gregory D. Abowd
`
`Ex. PA-1
`
`Ex. PA-2
`
`Ex. PA-3
`
`Ex. PA-4
`
`Ex. PA-5
`
`Ex. PA-6
`
`Ex. PA-7
`
`Ex. PA-8
`
`U.S. Patent No.
`(“Liebermann”)
`
`5,982,853
`
`to Liebermann
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,385,331 to Harakawa et al.
`(“Harakawa”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,198,485 to Mack et al. (“Mack”)
`
`Canadian Patent No. 2,175,288
`(“Bushnag”)
`
`to Bushnag
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,587,700 to Meins et al. (“Meins”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,912,410 to Auten et al. (“Auten”)
`
`Bushnag Bibliographic Summary, Canadian Patents
`Database
`
`William Stokoe, Semiotics and Human Sign
`Languages (Mouton 1972)
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 6 of 90 PageID #: 6576
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`Ex. PA-9
`
`Ex. PA-10
`
`William Stokoe, Sign Language Structure (Linstok
`Press 1978)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,835,133
`(“Moreton”)
`
`to Moreton et al.
`
`Ex. PA-11
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,192,257 to Ray (“Ray”)
`
`Ex. PA-12
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,901,206 to Soon (“Soon”)
`
`Ex. PA-13
`
`V. Pavlovic et al., Visual Interpretation of Hand
`Gestures for Human-Computer Interaction: A Review,
`19 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PATTERN ANALYSIS AND
`MACHINE INTELLIGENCE 677 (1997).
`
`Ex. PA-14
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,115,482 to Sears et al. (“Sears”)
`
`Ex. PA-15
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,454,043 to Freeman (“Freeman”)
`
`Ex. PA-16
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,256,033 to Nguyen (“Nguyen”)
`
`Ex. PA-17
`
`Ex. PA-18
`
`Ex. PA-19
`
`Ex. PA-20
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,988,981 to Zimmerman et al.
`(“Zimmerman”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,594,469
`(“Freeman-469”)
`
`to Freeman et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. to 6,144,366 to Numazaki et al.
`(“Numazaki”)
`
`Microsoft Announces Release of Windows CE 2.0 –
`Stories
`
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 7 of 90 PageID #: 6577
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`Ex. COMPLAINT-1 Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) in Gesture Partners, LLC v.
`Samsung Elecs. Co., No 2:21-cv-00041 (E.D. Tex.
`Feb. 4, 2021)
`
`Ex. CC-1
`
`Ex. CC-2
`
`Ex. CC-3
`
`P.R. 4-3 Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing
`Statement (Dkt. No. 55) and Appendix 1 (Dkt. No. 55-
`1) in Gesture Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co.,
`Ltd., No. 2:21-cv-00040 (E.D. Tex. July 16, 2021)
`(consolidated with Gesture Partners, LLC v. Samsung
`Elecs. Co., No. 2:21-cv-0041)
`
`Plaintiff’s Opening Claim Construction Brief (Dkt.
`No. 64) and Supporting Declaration (Exhibit E, Dkt.
`No. 64-5) in Gesture Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device
`Co., Ltd., No. 2:21-cv-00040 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 15,
`2021) (consolidated with Gesture Partners, LLC v.
`Samsung Elecs. Co., No. 2:21-cv-0041)
`
`Claim Construction Memorandum and Order (Dkt. No.
`93) in Gesture Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co.,
`Ltd., No. 2:21-cv-00040 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 12, 2021)
`(consolidated with Gesture Partners, LLC v. Samsung
`Elecs. Co., No. 2:21-cv-0041)
`
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 8 of 90 PageID #: 6578
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`An ex parte reexamination is requested on claims 1-30 (“the challenged claims”) of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079 that issued on October 8, 2013, to Pryor (“the ’079 patent,” Ex. PAT-
`A), for which the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“Office”) files identify Gesture Technology
`Partners, LLC (“GTP”) as the assignee. In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.510(b)(6), Requester
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Requester”) hereby certifies that the statutory estoppel provisions
`of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1) and 35 U.S.C. § 325(e)(1) do not prohibit it from filing this ex parte
`reexamination request.
`This request raises substantial new questions of patentability based on prior art that the
`Office did not have before it or did not fully consider during the prosecution of the ’079 patent,
`and which discloses the features recited in the challenged claims.1 The Office should find the
`claims unpatentable over this art.
`On February 4, 2021, Patent Owner (“PO”) initiated a litigation campaign asserting, inter
`alia, infringement of the ’079 patent against five defendants across two different venues in Gesture
`Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd., Case No. 2:21-cv-00040 (EDTX), Gesture
`Technology Partners, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Case No. 2:21-cv-00041 (EDTX)
`(consolidated with Case No. 2:21-cv-0040 for all pretrial issues), Gesture Technology Partners,
`LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 6:21-cv-00121 (WDTX), Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v.
`Lenovo Group Ltd., Case No. 6:21-cv-00122 (WDTX), and Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v.
`LG Electronics, Inc., Case No. 6:21-cv-00123 (WDTX). The LG case was transferred to Gesture
`Technology Partners, LLC v. LG Electronics Inc., Case No. 2-21-cv-19234 (DNJ). Requester
`respectfully urges that this Request be granted and that reexamination be conducted with “special
`dispatch” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 305.
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.20(c)(1), the fee for ex parte reexamination (non-
`streamlined) is submitted herewith. If this fee is missing or defective, please charge the fee as well
`as any additional fees that may be required to Deposit Account No. 50-2613.
`
`
`1 At the time of filing of this Request, there are two pending inter partes reviews (IPR2021-00922
`and IPR2022-00090) challenging the claims of the ’079 patent based on prior art not presented in
`this Request.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 9 of 90 PageID #: 6579
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`II.
`
`Identification of Claims and Citation of Prior Art Presented
`Requester respectfully requests reexamination of claims 1-30 of the ’079 patent in view of
`the following prior art references, which are also listed on the attached PTO Form SB/08 (Ex. PA-
`SB08).
`
`Exhibit PA-1 U.S. Patent No. 5,982,853 to Liebermann
`(“Liebermann”)
`
`Exhibit PA-2 U.S. Patent No. 6,385,331 to Harakawa et al.
`(“Harakawa”)
`
`Exhibit PA-3 U.S. Patent No. 6,198,485 to Mack et al. (“Mack”)
`
`Exhibit PA-4
`
`Canadian Patent No. 2,175,288 to Bushnag
`(“Bushnag”)
`
`Exhibit PA-5 U.S. Patent No. 6,587,700 to Meins et al. (“Meins”)
`
`Exhibit PA-6 U.S. Patent No. 6,912,410 to Auten et al. (“Auten”)
`
`A copy of each of the above-listed references is attached to this request pursuant
`to 37 C.F.R. § 1.510(b)(3). A copy of the ’079 patent is also attached to this request as Exhibit
`PAT-A pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.510(b)(4).
`
`III. Overview of the ’079 Patent
`A.
`Specification and Drawings of the ’079 Patent
`The ’079 patent generally relates to “simple input devices” that use cameras to “determine
`gestures” performed in a “work volume” and illuminated by a light source. (Ex. PAT-A, 1:54,
`2:54-3:8.) The devices are particularly “intended for use with 3-D graphically intensive activities”
`and operate “by optically sensing object or human positions and/or orientations.” (Id., 1:55-57.)
`This optical sensing is accomplished with “real time stereo photogrammetry using single or
`multiple TV cameras whose output is analyzed and used as input to a personal computer, typically
`to gather data concerning the 3D location of parts of, or objects held by, a person or persons.” (Id.,
`1:57-62.) In stereo photogrammetry, the devices use a processor to process “data obtained from
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 10 of 90 PageID #: 6580
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`the cameras in order to look for the finger,” which “can be done on both color basis and on the
`basis of shape as well as motion.” (Id., 4:65-5:3.) Alternatively, the optical sensing of gestures
`can be accomplished with an “electro-optical system capable of determining” the location of the
`relevant body parts in 3D space. (Id., 12:38-42.)
`The ’079 patent “seeks to provide further detail on useful embodiments for computing,”
`including a number of embodiments featuring “a keyboard for a laptop computer” and
`incorporating “digital TV cameras to look at points on, typically, the hand or the finger, or objects
`held in the hand of the user, which are used to input data to the computer.” (Id., 1:64-2:2, FIG. 1-
`3.) For example, FIG. 1 (reproduced below) “illustrates a laptop or other computer keyboard with
`cameras according to the invention located on the keyboard surface to observe objects such as
`fingers and hands overhead of the keyboard.” (Id., 2:15-18.) FIGS. 2 and 3 (reproduced below)
`further build on FIG. 1 by illustrating all features disclosed in FIG. 1 and introducing the use of
`additional finger detection features.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 11 of 90 PageID #: 6581
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`
`
`
`
`(Id., FIGS. 1-3.)
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 12 of 90 PageID #: 6582
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`In the above embodiments, “a stereo pair of cameras 100 and 101 located on each side of
`the keyboard are used,” with cameras “pointed obliquely inward at angles Φ toward the center of
`the desired work volume 170 above the keyboard.” (Id., 2:40-45.) Cameras 100 and 101 are
`“mounted at the rear of the keyboard (toward the display screen),” but may be placed in “[a]lternate
`camera locations . . . such as the positions of cameras 105 and 106, on upper corners of screen
`housing 107 looking down at the top of the fingers (or hands, or objects in hand or in front of the
`cameras), or of cameras 108 and 109 shown.” (Id., 2:40-53.) “Light from below, such as provided
`by single central light 122 can be used to illuminate the finger” that is “typically located . . . in
`work volume 170.” (Id., 3:1-6.) Using the cameras and the light source, as well as a “front end
`processor” that can be used “[t]o determine finger location,” “[f]inger gestures comprising a
`sequence of finger movements” can be detected. (Id., 3:43-51.) Additionally, “the pointing
`direction vector 160 of the user’s finger” can also be detected using these features. (Id., 2:55-56.)
`“It is also desirable for fast reliable operation to use retroreflective materials and other
`materials to augment the contrast of objects used in the application.” (Id., 3:63-65.) FIG. 2 shows
`the use of “a line target such as 200 [which] can be worn on a finger 201,” as well as a
`“retroreflective cylinder 208” which is also worn on the finger. (Id., 3:65-66, 4:5-6.) “[A]ssuming
`each [stereo] camera is equipped with a sufficiently coaxial light source, typically one or more
`LEDs such as 210 and 211,” such targets “effectively become[] a line image in the field of view
`of each camera,” and “can be used to solve . . . for the pointing direction of the finger.” (Id., 4:4-
`14.) As shown in FIG. 3, “[i]t is also possible to have light sources on the finger” such as “the
`ring mounted LED light sources 301 and 302.” (Id., 4:16-22.) These light sources, which “can be
`used with either TV camera type sensors or with PSD type analog image position sensors as
`disclosed in references incorporated,” can also aid in determination of “the pointing direction” by
`either being “modulated at different frequencies that can be individually discerned by sensors
`imaging the sources on to a respective PSD detector,” or by being “turned on and off at different
`times such that the position of each point can be independently found allowing the pointing
`direction to be calculated from the LED point data gathered by the stereo pair of PSD based
`sensors.” (Id., 4:16-28.)
`While the challenged claims broadly recite limitations relating to some of these high-level
`features, as demonstrated below, such features were already known and disclosed in the prior art
`before the alleged invention.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 13 of 90 PageID #: 6583
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`B.
`Claims of the ’079 Patent
`The ’079 patent includes 30 claims, with claims 1, 11, and 21 as the only independent
`claims. (Ex. PAT-A, claims 1-30.) Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method
`providing a light source and a camera, where the light source is “adapted to direct illumination
`through a work volume above the light source” and the camera is “oriented to observe a gesture
`performed in the work volume, the camera being fixed relative to the light source.” (Id., claim 1.)
`Additionally, independent claim 1 recites “determining, using the camera, the gesture performed
`in the work volume and illuminated by the light source.” (Id.)
`Independent claims 11 and 21 are very similar to claim 1, although slightly narrower in
`scope. (Id., claims 1, 11, 21.) Claim 11 recites a computer apparatus, and like claim 1, it recites
`a light source and “a camera in fixed relation relative to the light source,” with the camera “oriented
`to observe a gesture performed . . . in the work volume.” (Id., claims 1, 11.) However, the light
`source is “adapted to illuminate a human body part within a work volume generally above the light
`source” and the camera is “oriented to observe a gesture performed by the human body part in the
`work volume.” (Id., claim 11.) Claim 11 also recites “a processor adapted to determine the gesture
`performed in the work volume and illuminated by the light source based on the camera output.”
`(Id.) Claim 21, like claim 1, recites a computer-implemented method where the light source is
`“adapted to direct illumination through the work volume” and a “light source in fixed relation
`relative to the camera.” (Id., claims 1, 21.) However, the camera is “oriented to observe a gesture
`performed in a work volume above the camera” and the camera is used to “detect[] . . . a gesture
`performed by at least one of a user’s fingers and a user’s hand in the work volume. (Id., claim 21.)
`The dependent claims, which are similar for the three independent claims, further specify:
`a light source of light emitting diodes; detecting a gesture by analyzing sequential camera images;
`various types of detected gestures; determining a pointing direction; positioning a target on a user;
`determining various three-dimensional point positions; a keypad; a three-dimensional display;
`various fixed relationships between components; and a laptop computer comprised of the elements.
`(Id., claims 1-30.)
`
`C.
`The ’079 Patent Prosecution History
`The application leading to the ’079 patent—U.S. Application No. 13/714,748—was filed
`on December 14, 2012 as a continuation of application No. 12/700,055, filed on February 4, 2010,
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 14 of 90 PageID #: 6584
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`which is a continuation of application No. 10/866,191, filed on June 14, 2004, which is a
`continuation of application No. 09/433,297, filed on November 3, 1999 (now U.S. Patent No.
`6,750,848), which claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/107,652, filed November
`9, 1998. (Ex. PAT-A, Cover.)
`Before examination, original claims 1-20 were cancelled and claims 21-50 were added.
`(Ex. PAT-B, 133-138.) The Examiner allowed all of the claims 21-50, now claims 1-30, because
`“[t]he closest prior arts of record issued to Naoi et al. (US 5459793 A), Platzker et al. (US 5528263
`A), Sellers (US 5864334 A) and Fukushima et al. (US 6346929 B1) fail to teach or suggest” the
`limitations of the independent claims. (Id., 153.) The dependent claims were “considered
`allowable on the same basis as the independent claims.” (Id.)
`The references forming the substantial new questions of patentability—Liebermann,
`Harakawa, Mack, Bushnag, Meins, and Auten—were not cited or considered during prosecution
`of the ’748 application. (Ex. PAT-A, Cover; Ex. PAT-B.) Likewise, these references are not cited
`and will not be considered in the pending IPRs. Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners LLC,
`IPR2021-00922 (filed May 18, 2021); LG Electronics, Inc. et al. v. Gesture Technology Partners
`LLC, IPR2022-00090 (filed November 5, 2021).
`
`D.
`The Effective Priority Date of Claims 1-30 of the ’079 Patent
`For purposes of this reexamination only, Requester assumes that claims 1-30 are entitled
`to the filing date of Provisional application No. 60/107,652, identified on the cover of the ’079
`patent, which is November 9, 1998, listed on the cover of the ’079 patent. (Ex. PAT-A, Cover.)
`Liebermann issued on November 9, 1999, from Application No. 08/653,732 filed May 23,
`1996; Harakawa issued on May 7, 2002, from Application No. 09/040,436 filed March 18, 1998;
`Mack issued on March 6, 2001, from Application No. 09/123,965 filed July 29, 1998; Meins issued
`on July 1, 2003, from Application No. 08/979,110 filed November 26, 1997; and Auten issued on
`June 28, 2005, from Application No. 09/138,920 filed August 24, 1998. Thus, Liebermann,
`Harakawa, Mack, Meins, and Auten qualify as prior art at least under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`Bushnag is a publication of a patent application laid “Open to Public Insp[ection]” (i.e.,
`publically accessible as a printed publication) by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office on
`October 30, 1997. See eBay v. MoneyCat, CBM2014-00092, Paper 12 at 12 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 24,
`2014) (crediting “Open to Public Insp.” date as establishing Canadian laid-open patent application
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 15 of 90 PageID #: 6585
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`as publicly accessible printed publication) (citing In re Wyer, 655 F.2d 221 (C.C.P.A. 1981)); In
`re Wyer, 655 F.2d 221 (C.C.P.A. 1981); Bruckelmyer v. Ground Heaters, Inc., 445 F.3d 1374 (Fed.
`Cir. 2006) (determining a Canadian patent application was publically accessible and thus a printed
`publication); see also Ex. PA-4, 1 (listing an October 30, 1997 date); Ex. PA-7 (listing the open to
`public inspection date of the Bushnag reference as October 30, 1997). Thus, Bushnag qualifies as
`prior art at least under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`IV. Claim Construction
`In a reexamination proceeding involving claims of an expired patent, claim construction
`pursuant to the principle set forth by the court in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1316, 75
`USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (words of a claim “are generally given their ordinary and
`customary meaning” as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time
`of the invention) should be applied since the expired claim[s] are not subject to amendment. MPEP
`§ 2258 I.(G) (citing Ex parte Papst-Motoren, 1 USPQ2d 1655 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1986)). The
`’079 patent, which lists November, 3, 1999, as the date of the earliest related continuation and does
`not list any term extensions or adjustments, has expired. (See Ex. PAT-A, Cover.) Therefore, the
`claim interpretations submitted or implied herein for the purpose of this reexamination adhere to
`the Phillips standard. See In re CSB-System Int’l, Inc., 832 F.3d 1335, 1340-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016).2
`The district court
`in
`the
`related Eastern District of Texas cases
`recently
`construed/considered ten terms recited in the claims of the ’079 patent under the Phillips standard.
`(Ex. CC-3.) A summary of the district court constructions/interpretations and the constructions
`advanced by the parties in the litigation is listed in the below table.
`
`
`2 Requester reserves all rights to raise claim constructions and other arguments in other venues.
`For example, Requester has not necessarily raised all challenges to the ’079 patent in this
`proceeding, including those under 35 U.S.C. § 112, given the limitations placed by the Rules
`governing this proceeding. For example, Requester has alleged some terms are indefinite in
`district court proceedings. But given how closely the prior art maps to the claims (as explained
`below), those issues do not need to be resolved to assess patentability in this proceeding. In
`addition, a comparison of the claims to any accused products in litigation may raise controversies
`that need to be resolved through claim construction that are not presented here given the
`similarities between the references and the ’079 patent. Thus, the SNQs presented herein should
`not be interpreted to (and do not) conflict with Requester’s indefiniteness positions in other
`proceedings regarding the ’079 patent (and how the Court ruled on such positions) (Ex. CC-3.).
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 16 of 90 PageID #: 6586
`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 16 of 90 PagelD #: 6586
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`US. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`E.D. Texas
`Construction
`
`Construction
`Advanced by PO
`
`Construction
`Advanced by
`Defendant(s
`no construction
`“a light source
`
`to direct illumination|(Ex. CC-3, 61-63) designed to transmit|necessary
`through a work light directly through|(Ex. CC-3, 61-63)
`
`volume abovethe
`a work volume above
`light source” of
`the component”
`claims 1-3, 9-10
`(Ex. CC-3, 61-63)
`
`
`performed” no construction
`
` “light source adapted|plain meaning
`
`°079 Patent Terms
`
`“light source adapted
`to illuminate a human
`body part within a
`work volume
`generally above the
`light source” of
`claims 11, 14-15
`
`“light source in fixed
`relation relative to the
`camera and adapted
`to direct illumination
`through the work
`volume”of claims
`21-23, 30
`“gesture” of claims 1,
`4-5, 11, 18-21, 24-25
`
`“work volume above
`the light source” of
`claims 1, 6-7
`
`plain meaning
`(Ex. CC-3, 61-63)
`
`plain meaning
`(Ex. CC-3, 61-63)
`
`“a light source
`designed to transmit
`light directly onto a
`human bodypart
`within a work volume
`generally above the
`component”
`Ex. CC-3, 61-63
`“a light source in
`fixed relation relative
`to the camera and
`designed to transmit
`light directly through
`the work volume”
`
`necessary
`(Ex. CC-3, 61-63)
`
`no construction
`
`necessary
`(Ex. CC-3, 61-63)
`
`“movement of hands
`or other body parts
`that conveys
`meaning”
`
`“a sequence of
`positions that
`conveys a meaning”
`(Ex. CC-3, 54-57)
`
`no construction
`
`necessary
`(Ex. CC-3, 54-57)
`
`“space that is above
`the light source and
`wherein gestures can
`be performed and
`detected”
`
`“volume of space
`abovethe light source
`visible to the camera
`within which gestures
`are performed”
`
`no construction
`
`necessary
`(Ex. CC-3, 68-71)
`
`“work volume
`generally abovethe
`light source” of
`claims 11-12
`
`“space that is
`generally above the
`light source and
`wherein gestures can
`be performed and
`detected”
`
`“volumeof space
`generally above the
`light source visible to
`the camera within
`whichgestures are
`
`no construction
`
`necessary
`(Ex. CC-3, 68-71)
`
`“space that is above|“volumeof space
`“work volume above
`no construction
`the camera” of claim
`the camera and
`above the camera
`necessary
`wherein gestures can|visible to the camera
`x. CC-3, 68-71
`21
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 17 of 90 PageID #: 6587
`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 17 of 90 PagelD #: 6587
`
`°079 Patent Terms
`
`E.D. Texas
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`US. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`Construction
`Advanced by PO
`
`Construction
`Advanced by
`Defendant(s
`within which gestures
`be performed and
`are performed”
`detected”
`x. CC-3, 68-71
`x. CC-3, 68-71
`
`
`“a processor adapted|plain meaning terms invoke 35 no construction
`to determine the
`(Ex. CC-3, 64-66)
`USS.C. § 112, 9 6:
`necessary and the
`
`gesture performed in function = “determine|terms do not invoke
`
`the work volume and the gesture performed|35 U.S.C. § 112,96
`illuminated by the
`in the work volume
`(Ex. CC-3, 64-66)
`light source based on
`and illuminated by
`the camera output” of
`the light source based
`claim 11
`on the camera
`output”; structure =
`
`
`
`
`
`no construction
`“a position defined
`plain meaning
`“three-dimensional
`
`position” of claims 8,|(Ex. CC-3, 66-67) with respect to three|necessary
`28
`perpendicular axes
`(Ex. CC-3, 66-67)
`
`“adapted to” of
`claims 1, 11, 21
`
`plain meaning
`(Ex. CC-3, 57-60)
`
`light source:
`“designed to”;
`processor:
`“programmed to”
`Ex. CC-3, 57-60
`
`no construction
`necessary
`(Ex. CC-3, 57-60)
`
`The prior art mappings found in Section V of this Request explain how the claims of the
`
`°079 patent are invalid under the constructions of the district court as well as the constructions
`
`advanced by both PO and Defendants.
`
`Indeed, the claims would be unpatentable under any
`
`reasonable construction of the terms given how closely the prior art maps to the claims. More
`
`generally, Section V demonstrates how theprior art meets the limitations of the challenged claims
`
`under their plain meaning (as adopted by the district court) unless otherwise noted. Specific
`
`3 While the district court declinedto find this term indefinite, Requester does not concede the claim
`is definite by demonstrating howthepriorart discloses/suggests this limitation below. Instead, as
`noted, Requester presents how a substantial new question of patentability is raised by the prior art
`where the term is interpreted under the district court’s (and PO’s) plain meaning interpretation of
`the claimed term, and also as construed below.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00040-JRG Document 157-9 Filed 12/16/21 Page 18 of 90 PageID #: 6588
`
`Request for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`
`information regarding disputed terms in the Eastern District of Texas litigation concerning the
`’079 patent follows.
`
`A.
`
`“light source adapted to direct illumination through a work volume above
`the light source” of claims 1-3, 9-10
`The Defendants have contended that the above limitation should be construed to mean “a
`light source designed to transmit light directly through a work volume above the component.” (Ex.
`PAT-A, FIGS. 1-3, 2:49-58, 3:1-3. 4:4-24, 4:61-64; see also id., claims 1-3, 9-10.) Requester
`demonstrates below in Section V how the prior art addresses this limitation under this
`interpretation.
`
`PO has contended that the above limitation does not require construction. (Ex. CC-1, 13-
`14; Ex. CC-2, 20.) Requester likewise demonstrates below in Section V how the prior art addresses
`this limitation under PO’s interpretation, which also reflects the plain meaning mapping warranted
`by the district court’s construction order. (Ex. CC-3, 61-63.)
`
`B.
`
`“light source adapted to illuminate a human body part within a work volume
`generally above the light source” of claims 11, 14-15
`The Defendants have contended that the above limitation should be construed to mean “a
`light source designed to transmit light directly onto a human body part within a work volume
`generally above the component.” (Ex. PAT-A, FIGS. 1-3, 2:49-58, 3:1-3. 4:4-24, 4:61-64; see
`also id., claims 11, 14-15.) Requester demonstrates below in Section V how the prior art address