Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 1 of 68 PageID #: 6408
`Case 5:19-cv-00036—RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 1 of 68 PageID #: 6408
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT B
`
`EXHIBIT B
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 2 of 68 PageID #: 6409
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TEXARKANA DIVISION
`
`MAXELL, LTD.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`vs.
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
` Civil Action No. 5:19-cv-00036-RWS
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. BENJAMIN B. BEDERSON IN SUPPORT OF
`APPLE INC.’S PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 3 of 68 PageID #: 6410
`
`
`I, Benjamin B. Bederson, declare and state as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`My name is Dr. Benjamin B. Bederson. I am Professor Emeritus of Computer
`
`Science at the University of Maryland. I am over the age of eighteen, and I am a citizen of the
`
`United States.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained by defendant Apple Inc. (“Apple” or “Defendant”) in
`
`connection with civil action Maxell, Ltd. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 5:19-cv-00036-RWS (E.D.
`
`Texas), to provide my opinions regarding technical background, level of ordinary skill in the art,
`
`and other subject-matter relevant to interpretation of certain disputed claim terms in the asserted
`
`claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,928,306 (the “’306 patent”) and 10,084,991 (the “’991 patent”).
`
`3.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinions on the following topics: (1) the
`
`technology relevant to the ’306 and ’991 patents; (2) the state of the art at the time the relevant
`
`patent applications were filed; (3) the level of ordinary skill in that field as of the filing dates of
`
`the applications that issued as the ’306 and ’991 patents; (4) how those of ordinary skill in the art
`
`at the time of the invention would have understood statements made by the patentee during
`
`prosecutions of the ’306 and ’991 patents; and (5) how those of ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time of the invention would understand certain terms used in the claims of the ’306 and ’991
`
`patents.
`
`4.
`
`My opinions expressed in this declaration rely on my own personal knowledge
`
`and experience. However, where I also considered specific documents or other information in
`
`formulating the opinions expressed in this declaration, such items are referred to in this
`
`declaration. This includes, but is not limited to, the ’306 and ’991 patents, their prosecution
`
`histories (including, if applicable, inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and
`
`Appeal Board), prior art references cited during prosecution, Maxell Ltd. v. Huawei Device USA
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 4 of 68 PageID #: 6411
`
`
`Inc. et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00178-RWS, Dkt. No. 175, Claim Construction Memorandum and
`
`Order (January 31, 2018), and certain dictionaries and other extrinsic evidence cited by Apple
`
`and/or Maxell as part of their claim construction disclosures.
`
`II.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS
`5.
`I received a B.S. degree in Computer Science with a minor in Electrical
`
`Engineering in 1986 from the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. I received M.S. and Ph.D.
`
`degrees in Computer Science in 1989 and 1992, both from New York University.
`
`6.
`
`From 2014 to 2018, I was the Associate Provost of Learning Initiatives and
`
`Executive Director of the Teaching and Learning Transformation Center at the University of
`
`Maryland. I am a member and previous director of the Human-Computer Interaction Lab
`
`(“HCIL”), the oldest and one of the best known Human-Computer Interaction research groups in
`
`the country. I was also co-founder and Chief Scientist of Zumobi, Inc. from 2006 to 2014, a
`
`Seattle-based startup that is a publisher of content applications and advertising platforms for
`
`smartphones. I am also co-founder and co-director of the International Children’s Digital
`
`Library (“ICDL”), a web site launched in 2002 that provides the world’s largest collection of
`
`freely available online children’s books from around the world with an interface aimed to make
`
`it easy for children and adults to search and read children’s books online. I am also cofounder
`
`and Chief Technology Officer of Hazel Analytics, a data analytics company to improve food
`
`safety and better public health whose product sends alerts in warranted circumstances. In
`
`addition, I have for more than 15 years consulted for numerous companies in the area of user
`
`interfaces, including Microsoft, the Palo Alto Research Center, Sony, Lockheed Martin, Hillcrest
`
`Labs, and NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.
`
`7.
`
`For more than 30 years, I have studied, designed, and worked in the field of
`
`computer science and human-computer interaction. My experience includes 30 years of teaching
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 5 of 68 PageID #: 6412
`
`
`and research, with research interests in human-computer interaction and the software and
`
`technology underlying today’s interactive computing systems. This includes the design and
`
`implementation of software applications on mobile devices, including smart phones and PDAs,
`
`such as my work on DateLens, LaunchTile, and StoryKit.
`
`8.
`
`At UMD, I am focused primarily on the area of Human-Computer Interaction
`
`(“HCI”), a field that relates to the development and understanding of computing systems to serve
`
`users’ needs. Researchers in this field are focused on making universally usable, useful,
`
`efficient, and appealing systems to support people in their wide range of activities. My approach
`
`is to balance the development of innovative technology that serves people’s practical needs.
`
`Example systems following this approach that I have built include PhotoMesa (2001 software for
`
`end users to browse personal photos), DateLens (2002 software for end users to use their mobile
`
`devices to efficiently access their calendar information), LaunchTile (2005 “home screen”
`
`software for mobile devices to allow users to navigate apps in a zoomable environment),
`
`SpaceTree (2001 software for end users to efficiently browse very large hierarchies), ICDL (as
`
`described above), and StoryKit (a 2009 iPhone app for children to create stories).
`
`9.
`
`LaunchTile led to my creation of Zumobi in 2006, where I was responsible for
`
`investigating new software platforms and developing new user interface designs that provide
`
`efficient and engaging interfaces to permit end users to access a wide range of content on mobile
`
`platforms (including the iPhone and Android-based devices). For example, I designed and
`
`implemented software called “Ziibii,” a “river” of news for iPhone, software called
`
`“ZoomCanvas,” a zoomable user interface for several iPhone apps, and iPhone apps including
`
`“Inside Xbox” for Microsoft and Snow Report for REI. At the International Children’s Digital
`
`Library (ICDL), I have since 2002 been the technical director responsible for the design and
`
`implementation of the web site, www.childrenslibrary.org (originally at www.icdlbooks.org). In
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 6 of 68 PageID #: 6413
`
`
`particular, I have been closely involved in designing the user interface as well as the software
`
`architecture for the web site since its inception in 2002.
`
`10.
`
`Beginning in the mid-1990s, I have been responsible for the design and
`
`implementation of numerous other web sites in addition to the ICDL. For example, I designed
`
`and built my own professional web site when I was an Assistant Professor of Computer Science
`
`at the University of New Mexico in 1995 and have continued to design, write the code for, and
`
`update both that site (which I moved to the University of Maryland in 1998, currently at
`
`http://www.cs.umd.edu/~bederson/) as well as numerous project web sites, such as Pad++,
`
`http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/pad++/. I received the Janet Fabri Memorial Award for Outstanding
`
`Doctoral Dissertation for my Ph.D. work in robotics and computer vision. I have combined my
`
`hardware and software skills throughout my career in Human-Computer Interaction research,
`
`building various interactive electrical and mechanical systems that couple with software to
`
`provide an innovative user experience.
`
`11. My work has been published extensively in more than 160 technical publications,
`
`and I have given about 100 invited talks, including 9 keynote lectures. I have won a number of
`
`awards including the Brian Shackel Award for “outstanding contribution with international
`
`impact in the field of HCI” in 2007, and the Social Impact Award in 2010 from Association for
`
`Computing Machinery’s (“ACM”) Special Interest Group on Computer Human Interaction
`
`(“SIGCHI”). ACM is the primary international professional community of computer scientists,
`
`and SIGCHI is the primary international professional HCI community. I have been honored by
`
`both professional organizations. I am an “ACM Distinguished Scientist,” which “recognizes
`
`those ACM members with at least 15 years of professional experience and 5 years of continuous
`
`Professional Membership who have achieved significant accomplishments or have made a
`
`significant impact on the computing field.” I am a member of the “CHI Academy,” which is
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 7 of 68 PageID #: 6414
`
`
`described as follows: “The CHI Academy is an honorary group of individuals who have made
`
`substantial contributions to the field of human-computer interaction. These are the principal
`
`leaders of the field, whose efforts have shaped the disciplines and/or industry, and led the
`
`research and/or innovation in human-computer interaction.” The criteria for election to the CHI
`
`Academy are: (1) cumulative contributions to the field; (2) impact on the field through
`
`development of new research directions and/or innovations; and (3) influence on the work of
`
`others.
`
`12.
`
`I have appeared on radio shows numerous times to discuss issues relating to user
`
`interface design and people’s use and frustration with common technologies, web sites, and
`
`mobile devices. My work has been discussed and I have been quoted by mainstream media
`
`around the world over 120 times, including by the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the
`
`Washington Post, Newsweek, the Seattle Post Intelligencer, the Independent, Le Monde, NPR’s
`
`All Things Considered, New Scientist Magazine, and MIT’s Technology Review.
`
`13.
`
`I have designed, programmed, and publicly deployed dozens of user-facing
`
`software products that have cumulatively had millions of users. My work is cited in several
`
`patents, including U.S. Patent Nos. 6,307,562; 6,608,549; 7,576,756; and 7,834,849. In fact, I
`
`am the co-inventor of 12 U.S. patents and 18 U.S. patent applications. The patents are generally
`
`directed to user interfaces/experience with some directed to mobile devices
`
`14.
`
`Further details of my relevant work history, awards, honors, publications, and
`
`other background are found in my current curriculum vitae (“CV”), attached as Exhibit A. The
`
`list of litigation matters in which I have been engaged can be found in my CV.
`
`15.
`
`I am being compensated at my usual rate of $600 per hour, plus reimbursement
`
`for expenses, for my analysis. My compensation does not depend on the content of my opinions
`
`or the outcome of this proceeding.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 8 of 68 PageID #: 6415
`
`
`III. LEGAL STANDARDS
`16.
`I am not a legal expert and offer no opinions on the law. I understand that claim
`
`construction is a matter of law. However, I have been informed by counsel of the legal standards
`
`that apply to claim construction, and I have applied them in arriving at my conclusions.
`
`17. With respect to construing the patent claims, I understand that one must first
`
`consider the intrinsic evidence, which includes the claim language, the specification, and the
`
`prosecution history of the asserted patent.
`
`18.
`
`In particular, I understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is deemed to
`
`read the claim term not only in the context of the particular claim in which the disputed term
`
`appears, but in the context of the entire patent, including the specification. I also understand that
`
`one must then consider the specification to determine whether the inventor has employed any
`
`terms or words in a manner that is inconsistent with their plain and ordinary meaning. In
`
`addition to the claims and the specification, one must review the patent’s prosecution history,
`
`which is the complete record of all the proceedings before the Patent and Trademark Office,
`
`including any express representations made by the applicant regarding the scope of the claims.
`
`A patent applicant can limit claims during prosecution by, for example, altering claim language
`
`to overcome an Examiner rejection, arguing to overcome or distinguish a reference, or clearly
`
`and unambiguously disavowing claim coverage.
`
`19.
`
`I also understand that courts may consider extrinsic evidence, such as expert and
`
`inventor testimony, dictionaries, and learned treatises.
`
`20.
`
`I have been informed that a term must be interpreted with a full understanding of
`
`what the inventors actually invented and intended to include within the scope of the claim as set
`
`forth in the patent itself. Thus, claim terms should not be broadly construed to encompass
`
`subject matter that is technically within the broadest reading of the term but is not supported
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 9 of 68 PageID #: 6416
`
`
`when the claims are viewed in light of the invention described in the specification. I have also
`
`been informed that when a patent specification repeatedly and consistently characterizes the
`
`claimed invention in a particular way, it is proper to construe the relevant claim terms in
`
`accordance with that characterization.
`
`21.
`
`I have been informed that a patent must be precise enough to afford clear notice
`
`of what is claimed and apprise the public of what subject matter is still open to them in a manner
`
`that avoids uncertainty. I understand that a claim term is indefinite if, when the term is viewed in
`
`light of the specification and prosecution history, it fails to inform one skilled in the art about the
`
`scope of the invention with reasonable certainty. The definiteness requirement must take into
`
`account the inherent limitations of language; reasonable certainty in light of the subject matter,
`
`and not absolute precision, is required.
`
`22.
`
`I have been informed that the proper construction of a “means-plus-function”
`
`claim limitation is governed by pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6, which provides that a claim
`
`element may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without recital
`
`of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and that such a claim shall be construed to cover
`
`the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents
`
`thereof.
`
`23.
`
`I have been informed that if a claim element contains the word “means” and
`
`recites a function, that element is presumed to be a “means-plus-function” limitation. Further, I
`
`also understand that when a claim element fails to sufficiently definite structure or recites
`
`function without reciting sufficient structure for performing that function, that claim element
`
`should be construed as a “means-plus-function” limitation.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 10 of 68 PageID #: 6417
`
`
`IV.
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`24.
`Based on my review of the ’306 patent and its prosecution history, and based on
`
`my years of experience in consumer telephony products or human-computer interaction, my
`
`opinion is that a person of ordinary skill in the art at the priority date of the ’306 patent would
`
`have had a Bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, or Computer
`
`Science, or an equivalent degree with at least 2 years of experience in consumer telephony
`
`products, human-computer interaction, or related technologies. Additional education may
`
`substitute for lesser work experience and vice-versa.
`
`25.
`
`At the priority date of the ’306 patent—January 7, 2000—I would have qualified
`
`as a person of ordinary skill in the art under the definitions I provided above. By this date, I had
`
`B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in Computer Science. I had also completed 2 years as a Research
`
`Scientist in Computer Graphics and Interactive Media at Bell Communications Research
`
`(Bellcore), as well as 2 years as a Visiting Research Scientist at New York University’s Media
`
`Research Laboratory and 2 years as a Research Scientist at Vision Applications, Inc. However,
`
`the opinions expressed in this declaration would not change if the level of experience varied by a
`
`few years.
`
`26.
`
`Based on my review of the ’991 patent and its prosecution history, and based on
`
`my years of experience in digital video systems and networking or human-computer interaction,
`
`my opinion is that a person of ordinary skill in the art at the priority date of the ’991 patent
`
`would have had a Bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, or
`
`Computer Science, or an equivalent degree with at least 2 years of experience in digital video
`
`systems and networking, human-computer interaction, or related technologies Additional
`
`education may substitute for lesser work experience and vice-versa.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 11 of 68 PageID #: 6418
`
`
`27.
`
`At the priority date of the ’991 patent—September 25, 2008—I would have
`
`qualified as a person of ordinary skill in the art under the definitions I provided above. By this
`
`date, I had B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in Computer Science. I had also completed 2 years as a
`
`Research Scientist in Computer Graphics and Interactive Media at Bell Communications
`
`Research (Bellcore), as well as 2 years as a Visiting Research Scientist at New York University’s
`
`Media Research Laboratory and 2 years as a Research Scientist at Vision Applications, Inc.
`
`Moreover, I had served as the Director of the Human-Computer Interaction Lab at the University
`
`of Maryland for 6 years, and I had founded a small company to commercialize human-computer
`
`interaction products. However, the opinions expressed in this declaration would not change if
`
`the level of experience varied by a few years.
`
`V.
`
`THE ’306 AND ’991 PATENTS
`28.
`The ’306 patent, which claims priority to a Japanese patent application filed on
`
`January 7, 2000, relates to customizing a ringing sound for a portable telephone unit that
`
`provides users an indication of current conditions (e.g., the time of day or information about the
`
`caller) in addition to alerting the user of an incoming call. See ’306 patent at Cover, Abstract,
`
`1:5-10, 1:62-2:56. As illustrated in Figure 1, shown below, the ’306 patent discloses creating
`
`these customized ringing sounds using multiple sound sources. See id. at Fig. 1.
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 12 of 68 PageID #: 6419
`
`
`
`
`29.
`
`The ’991 patent, which claims priority to a Japanese patent application filed on
`
`September 25, 2008, relates to a videophone system in which a videophone function-added TV
`
`receiver enables the reception of a television broadcast program signal as well as the
`
`transmission and reception of a videophone signal. See ’991 patent at Cover, Abstract, 1:29-35,
`
`2:7-6:39. The ’991 patent further discloses its system’s methods of alerting the user of an
`
`incoming videophone call and preparing the system for said call. See id. at 16:46-19:64.
`
`VI.
`
`THE DISPUTED CLAIM TERMS
`A.
`“ringing sound generator” (’306, Claims 2, 12, 13)
`
`30.
`
`I am informed that the parties propose the following constructions:
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 13 of 68 PageID #: 6420
`
`
`Claim Term
`“ringing sound
`generator”
`
`Apple’s Proposal
`This claim term should be governed
`by pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6.
`
`Maxell’s Proposal
`Plain and ordinary meaning
`
`Claimed Function: to generate a
`ringing sound
`
`Claimed Structure: Element 1519
`in Figure 15 comprising 1, 3a-3c,
`and 4a-4c in Figure 1; or
`equivalents thereof
`
`
`
`31.
`
`I agree with Apple’s proposed construction because it reflects the understanding a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art would have had, as of the January 7, 2000 priority date of the
`
`’306 patent, regarding the term as used in the patent specification. Indeed, one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art would understand the term “ringing sound generator” to be a means-plus-function term,
`
`with the claimed function to generate a ringing sound and the claimed structure of Element 1519
`
`in Figure 15 comprising 1, 3a-3c, and 4a-4c in Figure 1; or equivalents thereof.
`
`32.
`
`At the outset, I note that one of ordinary skill in the art would not understand the
`
`term “generator” to denote sufficiently definite structure. Instead, the “generator” term would be
`
`understood as anything that performs the function of generating. Indeed, in different contexts,
`
`the word “generator” can be used to refer to entirely different classes of structures. Some
`
`examples include electric generators, engine generators, gas generators, motor generators, signal
`
`generators, and many others.
`
`33.
`
`Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would not understand the term “ringing
`
`sound generator” to convey any definite structure or device. Although the term does not use the
`
`“means for…” formulation, the term “ringing sound generator” is merely a descriptive term that
`
`repeats its intended function, i.e., to generate a ringing sound. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art would understand that a “ringing sound generator” could be anything that generates a ringing
`
`sound. For example, a person ringing a cow bell could be a “ringing sound generator.”
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 14 of 68 PageID #: 6421
`
`
`34.
`
`Similarly, in the electrical engineering, computer engineering, or computer
`
`science fields, there is no commonly understood class of structures for a “ringing sound
`
`generator.” One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that many different classes of
`
`structures could generate a ringing sound. For example, an electric motor against a bell, as used
`
`in telephones beginning in the late 1800s, could generate a ringing sound. Further, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would understand that other structures, such as a spring mechanism, a
`
`piezoelectric device, a speaker outputting recorded sound, and a CPU decoding an MP3, could
`
`generate a ringing sound. Thus, the term “ringing sound generator” describes only the function
`
`performed by some apparatus—i.e., generating a ringing sound—it does not denote a specific
`
`structure or a particular class of structure. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art around
`
`the filing of the ’306 patent would not have known what structure is intended for a “ringing
`
`sound generator” recited in the ’306 patent, claims 2, 12, and 13.
`
`35.
`
`The only disclosure in the ’306 patent’s specification for a “ringing sound
`
`generator” is a box labeled “Ringing Sound Generator 1519” in Figure 15, shown below. See
`
`’306 patent at Fig. 15.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 15 of 68 PageID #: 6422
`
`
`
`
`36.
`
`Specifically, the ’306 patent discloses:
`
`The structures of the cellular phone, according to a first embodiment of
`the present invention, will be shown in FIG. 15, wherein … reference
`numeral 1519 indicates a ringing sound generator for generating the
`ringing sound when it receives the radio-wave signal, and 1520 a speaker
`for outputting the alerting signal that is reproduced in the ringing sound
`generator 1519, audibly. Further, in the explanation given below,
`“reproduce” means to output a sound data that is stored or a sound data
`that is received with the incoming call, or to output an audible frequency
`signal that is converted from an inputted sound data.
`
`Id. at 4:13-33.
`
`Accordingly, based on the disclosure of the patent specification, one of ordinary
`
`
`
`
`37.
`
`skill in the art would understand that the function of “generating the ringing sound” is linked to
`
`and performed by “Ringing Sound Generator 1519” shown in Figure 15.
`
`38.
`
`Similarly, the ’306 patent discloses that Figure 1, shown below, “is a block
`
`diagram of showing details of the communication controller 1516 and the ringing sound
`
`generator 1519 shown in the FIG. 15.” See id. at 4:34-65; see also id. at Fig. 1. The ’306 patent
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 16 of 68 PageID #: 6423
`
`
`further discloses that Figure 1 shows “mixer 5,” and “speaker 6 (corresponding to the speaker
`
`1520 shown in the FIG. 15), which is connected to the mixer 5.” See id. at 4:34-65; see also id.
`
`at Fig. 1.
`
`39.
`
`Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand Figure 1 to depict:
`
`• “controller 2,” which corresponds with “communication controller 1516”
`
`
`
`in Figure 15;
`
`• “reproduction timing memory 1,” “sound data of FM sound source 3a,”
`
`“sound data of PCM sound source 3b,” “sound data of MIDI sound source
`
`3c,” “sound data reproduction portion of FM sound source 4a,” “sound
`
`data reproduction portion of PCM sound source 4b,” and “sound data
`
`reproduction potion of MIDI sound source 4c,” which, collectively,
`
`correspond with “ringing sound generator 1519” in Figure 15;
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 17 of 68 PageID #: 6424
`
`
`• “mixer 5;” and
`
`• “speaker 6,” which corresponds with “speaker 1520” in Figure 15.
`
`40.
`
`Similarly, the ’306 patent discloses:
`
`FIG. 1 is a block diagram of showing details of the communication
`controller 1516 and the ringing sound generator 1519 shown in the FIG.
`15. The cellular phone in the present embodiment can reproduce a
`plurality of sound data simultaneously. According to the present
`embodiment, a plurality of memories are provided for storing the sound
`data corresponding to a plurality of the sound data methods thereof. In
`more details, there are provided a sound data memory 3 a of the FM sound
`source, a sound data memory 3 b of the PCM sound source and a sound
`data memory 3 c of the MIDI method, and are also provided a sound data
`reproduction portion 4 a of the FM sound source, a sound data
`reproduction portion 4 b of the PCM sound source, and a sound data
`reproduction portion 4 c of the MIDI method, respectively, as the sound
`data reproduction portions for reproducing the sound data corresponding
`to those methods. Also, the sound data reproduction portion 4 a of the FM
`sound source, the sound data reproduction portion 4 b of the PCM sound
`source, and the sound data reproduction portion 4 c of the MIDI method
`are connected to the controller 2. The controller 2 selects the sound data
`to be reproduced from the plurality of the sound data stored in a
`reproduction timing memory 1, and also determines a reproduction timing
`for the sound data selected, thereby making the sound data reproduction
`portion reproduce the selected sound data at the reproduction timing
`determined, respectively. Outputs of the respective sound reproduction
`portions are connected to a mixer 5, to be mixed with one another therein,
`and at the end, they are outputted outside, as the ringing sound for alerting
`of the incoming call through a speaker 6 (corresponding to the speaker
`1520 shown in the FIG. 15), which is connected to the mixer 5.
`
`Id. at 4:34-65.
`
`Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand “ringing sound generator
`
`
`41.
`
`1519” to comprise 1, 3a-3c, and 4a-4c in Figure 1. Or, more specifically, one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art would understand “ringing sound generator 1519” to comprise “reproduction timing
`
`memory 1,” “sound data of FM sound source 3a,” “sound data of PCM sound source 3b,” “sound
`
`data of MIDI sound source 3c,” “sound data reproduction portion of FM sound source 4a,”
`
`“sound data reproduction portion of PCM sound source 4b,” and “sound data reproduction potion
`
`of MIDI sound source 4c” in Figure 1.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 18 of 68 PageID #: 6425
`
`
`42.
`
`This understanding is further supported by the specification, which discloses that,
`
`“[a]ccording to the present invention,” “there is provided a portable mobile unit for alerting the
`
`user on incoming of a signal by a ringing sound, comprising: a ringing sound generator having a
`
`plurality of sound sources therewith; and a controller for controlling operations of the portable
`
`mobile unit, wherein the controller controls the ringing sound generator, when the signal comes
`
`in, so that it generates the ringing sound with using at least one of the a plurality of sound
`
`sources.” Id. at 2:1-10. Indeed, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that “sound
`
`data of FM sound source 3a,” “sound data of PCM sound source 3b,” “sound data of MIDI sound
`
`source 3c” would comprise the ringing sound generator’s disclosed “plurality of sound sources
`
`therewith.” Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that “reproduction timing
`
`memory 1,” “sound data of FM sound source 3a,” “sound data of PCM sound source 3b,” “sound
`
`data of MIDI sound source 3c,” “sound data reproduction portion of FM sound source 4a,”
`
`“sound data reproduction portion of PCM sound source 4b,” and “sound data reproduction potion
`
`of MIDI sound source 4c” in Figure 1 would enable the disclosed “ringing sound generator” to
`
`“generate[] the ringing sound with using at least one of the a plurality of sound sources.”
`
`43.
`
`This understanding is also supported by the specification’s disclosure that
`
`“[a]ccording to a preferable embodiment,” “the ringing sound generator comprises: a memory
`
`for storing a plurality of sound data which are generated with different generation methods,
`
`respectively; a plurality of reproducer for reproducing the plurality of sound data stored in
`
`accordance with the respective generation methods; and a reproduction timing memory for
`
`performing selection of the sound data to be reproduced among the plurality of sound data and
`
`for storing reproduction timings to form the patterns for the respective sound data selected.” Id.
`
`at 2:11-23. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand “reproduction timing memory 1” to
`
`correspond with “a reproduction timing memory for performing selection of the sound data to be
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 161-3 Filed 12/09/19 Page 19 of 68 PageID #: 6426
`
`
`reproduced among the plurality of sound data and for storing reproduction timings to form the
`
`patterns for the respective sound data selected.” Similarly, one of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`understand “sound data of FM sound source 3a,” “sound data of PCM sound source 3b,” and
`
`“sound data of MIDI sound source 3c” to correspond with “a memory for storing a plurality of
`
`sound data which are generated with different generation methods, respectively.” And, finally,
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art would understand “sound data reproduction portion of FM sound
`
`source 4a,” “sound data reproduction portion of PCM sound source 4b,” and “sound data
`
`reproduction potion of MIDI sound source 4c” to correspond with “a plurality of reproducer for
`
`reproducing the plurality of sound data stored in accordance with the respective generation
`
`methods.”
`
`44. Moreover, the understanding that “ringing sound generator,” with the structure of
`
`Element 1519, functions to generate a ringing sound is further supported by the Abstract, which
`
`describes the “ringing sound generator” as “for generating the ringing sound in a plurality of
`
`patterns” and “to generate the ringing sound for alerting a user of the incoming call.” Id. at
`
`Abstract.
`
`45.
`
`Finally, this understanding is further supported by the prosecution history of the
`
`’306 patent. In the prosecution of U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2009/755,878, which issued as the
`
`’306 patent, the applicant distinguished the alleged inventio