Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 348-15 Filed 06/18/20 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 12788
`
`EXHIBIT 32
`
`EXHIBIT 32
`REDACTED VERSION
`
`REDACTED VERSION
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 32
`
`EXHIBIT 32
`REDACTED VERSION
`
`REDACTED VERSION
`
`
`
`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 348-15 Filed 06/18/20 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 12789
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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.
`
`OPENING EXPERT REPORT OF DR. JOSEPH A. PARADISO REGARDING
`INVALIDITY OF U.S. PATENT NOS. 6,748,317, 6,580,999, 6,430,498
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 348-15 Filed 06/18/20 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 12790
`
`
`I.
`
`II.
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`V.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`Page
`
`INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
`A.
`Qualifications ......................................................................................................... 2
`B.
`Previous Testimony ............................................................................................... 8
`C.
`Materials Considered ............................................................................................. 8
`D.
`Compensation ...................................................................................................... 10
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS ........................................................................................... 10
`RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS ............................................................................. 11
`A.
`Invalidity .............................................................................................................. 11
`B.
`Invention Date / Priority Date .............................................................................. 11
`C.
`Anticipation.......................................................................................................... 13
`D.
`Obviousness ......................................................................................................... 14
`E.
`Claim Construction .............................................................................................. 17
`F.
`Patent-Eligibility .................................................................................................. 18
`TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND ................................................................................. 20
`A.
`Navigation In Ancient Times ............................................................................... 20
`B.
`Annotating Maps With Direction Information .................................................... 22
`C.
`Compasses, Gyroscopes and Accelerometers ...................................................... 26
`D.
`Early Electronic Navigation And Coordination Among Devices ........................ 30
`E.
`Navigation Using GPS ......................................................................................... 33
`F.
`Portable GPS Navigation Systems And Displays In The 1990s .......................... 37
`G.
`Personal Handyphone System.............................................................................. 41
`BACKGROUND ON THE ASSERTED PATENTS ...................................................... 43
`A.
`Overview Of The Asserted Patents ...................................................................... 43
`B.
`Prosecution Histories Of The Asserted Patents ................................................... 48
`1.
`’498 Patent Prosecution History .............................................................. 48
`2.
`’999 Patent Prosecution History .............................................................. 49
`3.
`’317 Patent Prosecution History .............................................................. 49
`The Asserted Claims ............................................................................................ 50
`1.
`’317 Patent - Claims 1, 17 (15) ................................................................ 50
`2.
`’999 Patent - Claim 3 (1) ......................................................................... 51
`
`C.
`
`-i-
`
`
`
`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 348-15 Filed 06/18/20 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 12791
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`D.
`
`VI.
`
`’498 Patent - Claims 3 (1), 13 (10) .......................................................... 51
`3.
`Claim Construction .............................................................................................. 52
`1.
`Agreed Constructions............................................................................... 52
`2.
`Parties’ Proposed Claim Constructions And Court’s Claim
`Constructions ........................................................................................... 53
`Priority Date ......................................................................................................... 54
`E.
`Level Of Ordinary Skill In The Art ..................................................................... 55
`F.
`INVALIDITY OF THE ASSERTED CLAIMS IN VIEW OF PRIOR ART ................. 56
`A.
`Summary Of Prior Art References ....................................................................... 56
`1.
`Cyberguide System (“Cyberguide”) And Related Publication,
`Cyberguide: A Mobile Context-Aware Tour Guide by Abowd et al.
`(“Abowd”)................................................................................................ 56
`Garmin NavTalk (“NavTalk”) ................................................................. 62
`Japanese Patent Publication No. JPH10-197277 to Maruyama et al.
`(“Maruyama”) .......................................................................................... 73
`U.S. Patent No. 6,067,502 to Hayashida et al. (“Hayashida”) ................. 76
`4.
`Obviousness: Combinations And Motivations To Combine ............................... 81
`1.
`Summary Of Combinations And Motivations To Combine .................... 81
`2.
`NavTalk, In View Of Maruyama ............................................................. 84
`3.
`NavTalk, In View Of Hayashida ........................................................... 103
`4.
`Hayashida, In View Of Maruyama ........................................................ 114
`5.
`Cyberguide Or Abowd, In View Of Hayashida ..................................... 121
`Secondary Considerations Of Non-Obviousness ............................................... 138
`C.
`VII. PATENT-ELIGIBILITY OF THE ASSERTED CLAIMS ........................................... 145
`VIII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 155
`
`2.
`3.
`
`B.
`
`-ii-
`
`
`
`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 348-15 Filed 06/18/20 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 12792
`
`
`
`these familiar elements, disclosed and/or embodied in the prior art listed above, to practice the
`
`asserted claims.
`
`167. Below is a listing of combinations of references that would render obvious the
`
`Asserted Claims. I reserve the right to modify my identification of combinations to the extent
`
`that Maxell’s opening expert report on infringement adopts claim interpretations that differ from
`
`those in Maxell’s infringement contentions and in the Court’s claim construction order.
`
`(cid:120) NavTalk, in view of Maruyama (all Asserted Claims)
`
`(cid:120) NavTalk, in view of Hayashida (all Asserted Claims)40
`
`(cid:120) Hayashida, in view of Maruyama (all Asserted Claims)
`
`(cid:120) Cyberguide, in view of Hayashida (all Asserted Claims)41
`
`168. Details of how these combinations would be formed and reasons for their
`
`combination are described below.
`
`2.
`
`NavTalk, In View Of Maruyama
`
`169. A PHOSITA would have found it obvious and been motivated to modify NavTalk
`
`with the teachings of Maruyama. As detailed below, both references are directed to portable
`
`navigation devices with GPS capability and date from the same time period. To the extent
`
`NavTalk does not disclose either (1) a compass, gyroscope, or other component that qualifies as
`
`a “device for getting a direction information denoting an orientation of said portable terminal”
`
`under the Court’s construction of that term or (2) a PHS as required by the Court’s constructions
`
`of “a device for getting a location information of another portable terminal” and “a device for
`
`
`40 This combination applies under Maxell’s apparent and broad interpretation that any mobile
`device is an equivalent to a PHS.
`41 This combination applies under Maxell’s apparent and broad interpretation that any mobile
`device is an equivalent to a PHS.
`
`- 84 -
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
