throbber
Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 1 of 44 PageID #: 4373
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TEXARKANA DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`MAXELL, LTD.,
`
`v.
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 5:19-cv-00036-RWS
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`P.R. 4-3 JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`Pursuant to P.R. 4-3 and the Docket Control Order (see, e.g., Dkt. 46), Plaintiff Maxell,
`
`Ltd. (“Plaintiff” or “Maxell”) and Defendant Apple Inc., (“Defendant” or “Apple”) hereby file this
`
`joint claim construction and prehearing statement.
`
`
`
`The claim terms listed below occur in U.S. Patent Nos. 6,748,317 (“the ’317 Patent”);
`
`6,580,999 (“the ’999 Patent”); 6,430,498 (“the ’498 Patent”); 8,339,493 (“the ’493 Patent”);
`
`6,329,794 (“the ’794 Patent”); 6,408,193 (“the ’193 Patent”); 6,928,306 (“the ’306 Patent”);
`
`10,084,991 (“the ’991 Patent”); 7,116,438 (“the ’438 Patent”); and 10,212,586 (“the ’586 Patent)
`
`which are asserted against Apple.
`
`I.
`
`
`
`HIGH PRIORITY TERMS WHOSE CONSTRUCTION WILL BE MOST
`SIGNIFICANT TO THE RESOLUTION OF THE CASE
`
`Maxell’s Position: Maxell believes that there are no claim dispositive terms.
`
`Apple’s Position: Apple believes that Terms 1-12 and 14 in Section IV are potentially
`
`claim dispositive.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 2 of 44 PageID #: 4374
`
`III. CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE CLAIM TERMS, PHRASES, OR CLAUSES ON WHICH THE PARTIES AGREE
`
`
`
`The Parties have agreed to the constructions as set forth in the following chart:
`
`NO. TERM
`
`AGREED CONSTRUCTION
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`“a device connected to a server . . . said device
`connected to said server outputting said location
`information and said direction information and receiving
`retrieved information based on said outputted
`information at said server”
`’317 Patent: claim 6
`“a device for getting direction information denoting an
`orientation of said portable terminal”
`
`’498: claims 1, 5, 10
`’317: claims 1, 6, 10
`’999: claims 1, 5, 6
`
`“an image-instability detector”
`
`’493 Patent: claims 4, 6, 11
`
`
`
`Function: outputting said location information and said direction
`information and receiving retrieved information based on said
`outputted information at said server.
`Structure: CPU 71 and device for data communication 76 of a
`portable telephone and a Personal Handyphone System (PHS)
`terminal (Figure 10, ’317 Patent at 9:40-50); or equivalents thereof1
`Function: getting direction information denoting an orientation of
`said portable terminal
`
`Structure: a compass, gyroscope, and/or sensor such as a clinometer
`in conjunction with a CPU, or equivalents thereof.
`
`
`“a detector, such as a gyroscopic sensor or the like, capable of
`detecting an image instability of the electric camera”
`
`4
`
`“an image-instability of the electric camera”
`
`’493 Patent: claims 4, 6, 11
`
`
`1 The parties agree that the claimed structure includes: (1) a CPU 71 and (2) a device for data communication 76 “of a portable
`telephone and a Personal Handyphone System (PHS) terminal”; or equivalents thereof.
`
`“instability caused by vertical and/or horizontal movement of the
`electric camera”
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 3 of 44 PageID #: 4375
`
`NO. TERM
`“function devices(s)”
`
`’794 Patent: claim 1
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`“component device” / “component devices for
`performing different functions in the device”
`
`’794 Patent: claim 9
`“a cellular telephone adapted to be used in a CDMA
`system, comprising”
`
`’193 Patent: claims 1 and 7
` “variable amplitude amplifier”
`
`’193 Patent: claims 1, 7
`“a function defining a relation between bias data and
`gain data stored in said memory”
`’193 Patent: claim 7
`“voice signal code”
`
`“voice code signal”
`
`’193 Patent: Claims 1, 7
`“a time zone which is set up in advance”
`
`’306 Patent: Claims 5, 14
`“an authentication process for allowance to use said
`display apparatus”
`
`’438 Patent: Claim 1
`
`AGREED CONSTRUCTION
`
`Function: equipped with independent functions
`Structure: modem devices, audio communication devices and
`videophone devices; or equivalents thereof
`Function: performing different functions
`Structure: modem devices, audio communication devices and
`videophone devices; or equivalents thereof
`The preamble is limiting
`
`an amplifier whose output amplitude may be varied and that provides
`a variable gain in response to a control signal
`
`a relationship between bias data and gain data stored in memory such
`that each gain data value has a corresponding bias data value
`
`The two terms have the same meaning
`
`a duration of time or a range of hours set up in advance
`
`a process that authorizes the user to use the display apparatus
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 4 of 44 PageID #: 4376
`
`13
`
`NO. TERM
`“an authentication process for allowance to use said
`information-processing terminal”
`
`’438 Patent: Claim 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AGREED CONSTRUCTION
`a process that authorizes the user to use the information-processing
`terminal
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 5 of 44 PageID #: 4377
`
`IV. CONSTRUCTIONS OF THOSE CLAIM TERMS, PHRASES, OR CLAUSES ON WHICH THE PARTIES DO NOT
`AGREE
`
`
`
`Set forth below is each party’s proposed construction of each disputed claim term, phrase, or clause, together with an
`
`identification of all references from the specification or prosecution history that support that construction, and an identification of any
`
`extrinsic evidence known to the party on which it intends to rely either to support its proposed construction of the claim or to oppose
`
`any other party’s proposed construction of the claim, including, but not limited to, as permitted by law, dictionary definitions, citations
`
`to learned treatises and prior art, and testimony of percipient and expert witnesses.
`
`NO. TERM
`“a device for
`1
`getting location
`information
`denoting a present
`place of said
`portable terminal”
`
`’498: claims 1, 5,
`10
`’317: claims 1, 6,
`10
`’999: claims 1, 5,
`6
`
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`Plaintiff’s Construction
`
`Function: getting location
`information denoting a
`present place of said
`portable terminal
`
`Structure: a wireless or
`cellular antenna, a GPS, a
`PHS, or the like; such a data
`receiver as an infrared ray
`sensor, or the like; and a
`CPU for analyzing received
`data; or equivalents
`thereof.
`
`Defendants’ Construction
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Evidence
`
`’498 Patent, Abstract, 2:44-3:20, 4:6-11, 5:48-65, 6:15-38, 6:66-7:10,
`8:13-22, 9:28-51, 10:11-22, Figures 1 and 4-10, and corresponding
`disclosures in the ’317 and ’999 specifications.
`
`In addition, Maxell will present expert testimony from Dr. Craig
`Rosenberg in support of Maxell’s proposed construction and addressing
`arguments presented by Apple’s expert, if any. This testimony may
`include, at least, an explanation of the meaning of this term in the context
`of the subject matter disclosed in the asserted patents, a description of the
`state of the technology, and how a person of ordinary skill in the art
`would interpret the term at the time the application for the asserted patent
`was filed.
`
`Defendants’ Evidence
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 6 of 44 PageID #: 4378
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`Function: getting location
`information denoting a
`present place of said
`portable terminal
`
`Structure: a wireless or
`cellular antenna, or a GPS,
`or a Personal Handyphone
`System (PHS); and an
`infrared ray sensor; and a
`control unit for analyzing
`received data, with the
`control unit calculating
`location information as
`disclosed in ’498 at 5:48-56
`and Fig. 2; or equivalents
`thereof
`
`’498 Patent at Abstract; 1:10-13; 2:45-65; 4:9-11; 5:48-56; 9:39-44; 9:44-
`47; Fig. 10; and corresponding disclosures in the ’317 and ’999
`specifications.
`
`
`ASUSTek Computer Inc. v. Maxell, Ltd., IPR2019-00071, Paper No. 2
`(Oct. 16, 2018) (“ASUSTek IPR Petition”), and exhibits 1001-1023
`thereto
`
`ASUSTek Computer Inc. v. Maxell, Ltd., IPR2019-00071, Paper No. 6
`(Jan. 22, 2019) (“Maxell Preliminary Response”)
`
`ASUSTek Computer Inc. v. Maxell, Ltd., IPR2019-00071, Paper No.7
`(Mar. 14, 2019) (“Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review”)
`
`Michael Beigl et al., “A location model for communicating and
`processing of context,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, Vol. 6,
`Issue 5-6, pp. 341-357 (2002) (APL-MAXELL_00802686-APL-
`MAXELL_802710)
`
`Robert L. French et al., “A comparison of IVHS Progress in the United
`States, Europe, and Japan” (Dec. 31, 1993) (APL-MAXELL_00802783-
`APL-MAXELL_00802998)
`
`Natalia Marmasse, “commotion: a context-aware communication
`system,” Dissertation Mass. Inst. of Tech. (June 1999) (APL-
`MAXELL_00802999-APL-MAXELL_00803082)
`
`Thad Eugene Starner, “Wearable Computing and Contextual Awareness,”
`Dissertation, Mass. Inst. of Tech. (June 1999) (APL-
`MAXELL_00803223-APL-MAXELL_00803470)
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 7 of 44 PageID #: 4379
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`Thad Starner et al., “The Locust Swarm: An environmentally-powered,
`networkless location and messaging system,” IEEE (1997) (APL-
`MAXELL_00803221-APL-MAXELL_00803222)
`
`Roy Want et al., “The Active Badge Location System,” Olivetti Research
`Ltd. (1992) (APL-MAXELL_00803750-APL-MAXELL_00803759)
`
`Gregory D. Abowd et al., “Cyberguide: A Mobile Context-Aware Tour
`Guide,” Baltzer Journals (September 23, 1996) (APL-
`MAXELL_00713087-APL_MAXELL_00713107)
`
`Karl Rehrl et al., “Combined indoor/outdoor Smartphone navigation for
`public transport travelers,” Geowissenschaftliche Mitteilungen, Heft Nr.
`74, 2005 (Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on LBS &
`TeleCartography) (2005) (APL-MAXELL_00803201-APL-
`MAXELL_00803208)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,589,835 to Gildea et al. (APL-MAXELL_00718169-
`APL-MAXELL_0071877)
`
`Testimony of Dr. Joseph Paradiso (including declaration and deposition
`testimony). Dr. Paradiso will explain the technology, the state of the art
`at the time the patent application was filed, the meaning of claim terms or
`phrases as they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art
`at the time of the invention in the context of the patent specification and
`other intrinsic/extrinsic evidence, how those of ordinary skill in the art at
`the time of the invention would have understood statements made by the
`patentee during prosecution of the applications, and the level of ordinary
`skill in the relevant art. Dr. Paradiso may also offer a declaration, if
`necessary, to respond to Plaintiff’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of Plaintiff, or for the Court’s benefit.
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 8 of 44 PageID #: 4380
`
`NO. TERM
`“a device for
`2
`getting a location
`information of
`another portable
`terminal from said
`another portable
`terminal via
`connected
`network”
`
`’317: claim 10
`’999: claim 6
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`Plaintiff’s Construction
`
`Function: getting a location
`information of another
`portable terminal from said
`another portable terminal
`via connected network
`
`Structure: CPU and device
`for data communication 76
`of a portable terminal; or
`equivalents thereof
`
`Defendants’ Construction
`
`Function: getting a location
`information of another
`portable terminal from said
`another portable terminal
`via connected network
`
`Structure: CPU 71 and
`device for data
`communication 76 of a
`portable telephone and a
`Personal Handyphone
`System (PHS) terminal
`(Figure 10, ’317 Patent at
`9:40–50); or equivalents
`thereof
`
`Plaintiff’s Evidence
`
`’317 Patent, Abstract, 1:10-15, 2:23-26, 2:51-3:1, 3:43-66, 4:14-39, 5:17-
`21, 5:64-6:4, 8:17-9:39, 10:29-34, Figures 5-7, 9, 10, and corresponding
`disclosures in the ’999 specification.
`
`In addition, Maxell will present expert testimony from Dr. Craig
`Rosenberg in support of Maxell’s proposed construction and addressing
`arguments presented by Apple’s expert, if any. This testimony may
`include, at least, an explanation of the meaning of this term in the context
`of the subject matter disclosed in the asserted patents, a description of the
`state of the technology, and how a person of ordinary skill in the art
`would interpret the term at the time the application for the asserted patent
`was filed.
`
`Defendants’ Evidence
`
`’317 Patent at Fig. 10; 5:66-67; 9:42-43; 9:40-51
`
`Japanese Patent Application Publication No. H10-197277 (“Maruyama”)
`(APL-MAXELL_00715620-APL-MAXELL_00715677)
`
`Japanese Patent Application Publication No. H10-285059 (“Nakayama”)
`(APL-MAXELL_00715652-APL-MAXELL_00715689)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,882,326 to Hirayama et al.
`
`Maxell LTD. v. Huawei Device USA Inc. et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00178-
`RWS, Dkt. No. 175, Claim Construction Memorandum and Order
`(January 31, 2018)
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 9 of 44 PageID #: 4381
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`3
`
`“a device for
`getting the
`location
`information of
`another portable
`terminal”
`
`’999: claims 1, 5
`
`Maxell LTD. v. Huawei Device USA Inc. et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00178-
`RWS, Dkt. No. 138, Transcript of Markman Proceedings held 11/29/17
`(Dec. 18, 2017) at 126:13-16
`
`Plaintiff’s Evidence
`
`’317 Patent, Abstract, 1:10-15, 2:23-26, 2:51-3:1, 3:43-66, 4:14-39, 5:17-
`21, 5:64-6:4, 8:17-9:39, 10:29-34, Figures 5-7, 9, 10, and corresponding
`disclosures in the ’999 specification.
`
`In addition, Maxell will present expert testimony from Dr. Craig
`Rosenberg in support of Maxell’s proposed construction and addressing
`arguments presented by Apple’s expert, if any. This testimony may
`include, at least, an explanation of the meaning of this term in the context
`of the subject matter disclosed in the asserted patents, a description of the
`state of the technology, and how a person of ordinary skill in the art
`would interpret the term at the time the application for the asserted patent
`was filed.
`
`Defendants’ Evidence
`
`’317 Patent at Fig. 10; 5:66-67; 9:42-43; 9:40-51
`
`Japanese Patent Application Publication No. H10-197277 (“Maruyama”)
`(APL-MAXELL_00715620-APL-MAXELL_00715677)
`
`Japanese Patent Application Publication No. H10-285059 (“Nakayama”)
`(APL-MAXELL_00715652-APL-MAXELL_00715689)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,882,326 to Hirayama et al.
`
`Plaintiff’s Construction
`
`Function: getting a location
`information of another
`portable terminal
`
`Structure: CPU and device
`for data communication 76
`of a portable terminal; or
`equivalents thereof
`
`Defendants’ Construction
`
`Function: getting a location
`information of another
`portable terminal
`
`Structure: CPU 71 and
`device for data
`communication 76 of a
`portable telephone and a
`Personal Handyphone
`System (PHS) terminal
`(Figure 10, ’317 Patent at
`9:40–50); or equivalents
`thereof
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 10 of 44 PageID #: 4382
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`“a device for
`retreiving a route
`from said present
`place to said
`destination”
`’317: claims 15,
`18
`
`Maxell LTD. v. Huawei Device USA Inc. et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00178-
`RWS, Dkt. No. 175, Claim Construction Memorandum and Order
`(January 31, 2018)
`
`Maxell LTD. v. Huawei Device USA Inc. et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00178-
`RWS, Dkt. No. 138, Transcript of Markman Proceedings held 11/29/17
`(Dec. 18, 2017) at 126:13-16
`
`Plaintiff’s Evidence
`
`’317 Patent, Abstract, 1:10-15, 2:23-26, 2:51-3:1, 3:43-66, 4:14-39, 5:17-
`21, 5:64-6:4, 6:9-18, 8:17-9:39, 9:40-63, 10:29-34, Figures 5-7, 9, 10,
`and corresponding disclosures in the ’999 specification.
`
`In addition, Maxell will present expert testimony from Dr. Craig
`Rosenberg in support of Maxell’s proposed construction and addressing
`arguments presented by Apple’s expert, if any. This testimony may
`include, at least, an explanation of the meaning of this term in the context
`of the subject matter disclosed in the asserted patents, a description of the
`state of the technology, and how a person of ordinary skill in the art
`would interpret the term at the time the application for the asserted patent
`was filed.
`
`Defendants’ Evidence
`
`’317 Patent at Fig. 10; 5:66-67; 9:42-43; 9:40-51
`
`Japanese Patent Application Publication No. H10-197277 (“Maruyama”)
`(APL-MAXELL_00715620-APL-MAXELL_00715677)
`
`10
`
`Plaintiff’s Construction
`
`Function: retreiving a route
`from said present place to
`said destination
`
`Structure: CPU and device
`for data communication 76
`of a portable terminal; or
`equivalents thereof
`
`Defendants’ Construction
`
`Function: retreiving a route
`from said present place to
`said destination
`
`Structure: CPU 71 and
`device for data
`communication 76 of a
`portable telephone and a
`Personal Handyphone
`System (PHS) terminal
`(Figure 10, ’317 Patent at
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 11 of 44 PageID #: 4383
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`9:40–50); or equivalents
`thereof
`
`Japanese Patent Application Publication No. H10-285059 (“Nakayama”)
`(APL-MAXELL_00715652-APL-MAXELL_00715689)
`
`5
`
`“effective
`scanning lines …
`of a display
`screen”
`
`’493: claim 1
`
`Plaintiff’s Construction
`
`the number of lines on a
`display screen
`corresponding to an actually
`displayed image
`
`Defendants’ Construction
`
`the lines displayed in a
`single field of an interlaced
`scanning display
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,882,326 to Hirayama et al.
`
`Maxell LTD. v. Huawei Device USA Inc. et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00178-
`RWS, Dkt. No. 175, Claim Construction Memorandum and Order
`(January 31, 2018)
`
`Maxell LTD. v. Huawei Device USA Inc. et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00178-
`RWS, Dkt. No. 138, Transcript of Markman Proceedings held 11/29/17
`(Dec. 18, 2017) at 126:13-16
`
`Plaintiff’s Evidence
`’493 Patent at 1:18-43, 1:30-2:17, 2:26-35, 2:62-3:37, 4:30-6:7, 6:39-59,
`7:9-26, 7:31-65, 8:8-15, 9:25-49, 10:3-12, 10:13-32, 11:59-12:14, 12:37-
`48, 13:16-22, 15:4-21, Figures 3, 5
`JP H11-187306
`JP 2008-206146
`US 6,018,363 (“Horii”)
`Defendant Apple Inc.’s Invalidity Contentions Pursuant to Patent Local
`Rules 3-3 and 3-4 (and exhibits thereto)
`Maxell, Ltd. v. BLU Products, 18-cv21231
`(Dkt. No. 69) (Claim Construction Order)
`
`In addition, Maxell will present expert testimony from Dr. Vijay
`Madisetti in support of Maxell’s proposed construction and addressing
`arguments presented by Apple’s expert, if any. This testimony may
`include, at least, an explanation of the meaning of this term in the context
`of the subject matter disclosed in the asserted patents, a description of the
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 12 of 44 PageID #: 4384
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`state of the technology, and how a person of ordinary skill in the art
`would interpret the term at the time the application for the asserted patent
`was filed.
`
`Defendants’ Evidence
`
`’493 Patent at Abstract; 1:30-43; 1:51-58; 4:34–48; 4:64–5:6; 5:19-62;
`7:31–39; 7:40–8:7, 8:8-33; 8:51–9:36; 10:3–12; 10:18–50; 10:51-11:8;
`13:23-14:9; Figs. 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, Claims 1, 5, 8, 13.
`
`JP H11-187306
`
`JP H09-270959
`
`U.S. 4,434,435 to Fujimoto
`
`EP 0,840,503 to Kijima
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,661,451 to Kijima
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,054,915 to Sugihara
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,620,134 to Peels
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,002,203
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,541,010
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,700,607 to Misawa
`
`U.S. Patent 5,657,082 to Harada
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 13 of 44 PageID #: 4385
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,668,597 to Parulski
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,828,406 to Parulski
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,374,955 to Furuhata
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,720,996 to Suyama
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,910,599 to Hashimoto
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,264,939 to Chang
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,450,129 to Matoba
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,986,698 to Nobuoka.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,122,007 to Ishibashi
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,181,375 to Mitsui
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,529.236 to Watanabe
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,580,457 to Armstrong
`
`U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2001/0043276 to Ueno
`
`U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2002/0118291 to Ishigami
`
`U.S. 6,765,616 Prosecution History, Office Action dated November 26,
`2013, and references cited therein
`
`U.S. 6,765,616 Prosecution History, Amendment and Remarks dated
`February 26, 2004
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 14 of 44 PageID #: 4386
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Preliminary Amendment dated
`September 12, 2003
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Requirement for Restriction/Election
`dated March 13, 2008
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Response to Election/Restriction
`dated April 11, 2008
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Office Action dated August 11,
`2008, and references cited therein
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Amendment and Remarks dated
`November 10, 2008
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Office Action dated November 10,
`2009, and references cited therein
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Amendment and Remarks dated
`May 10, 2010
`
`U.S. 8,339,493 Prosecution History, Office Action dated March 14, 2012,
`and references cited therein
`
`U.S. 8,339,493 Prosecution History, Amendments and Remarks dated
`July 16, 2012
`
`Maxell Ltd. v. Huawei Device USA Inc. et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00178-
`RWS, Dkt. No. 175, Claim Construction Memorandum and Order
`(January 31, 2018)
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 15 of 44 PageID #: 4387
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`Yiyan Wu et al., “Overview of Digital Television Development
`Worldwide, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 94, NO. 1 (Jan. 2006)
`
`ITU-T Recommendation J.182, Series J: Cable Networks and
`Transmission of Television, Sound Programme and Other Multimedia
`Signals (03/2001)
`
`IPR No. 2018-00908 (U.S. Patent No. 9,100,604), Patent Owner’s
`Preliminary Response to Petition For Inter partes Review Of U.S. Patent
`No. 9,100,604 (October 17, 2018) (MAXELL_APPLE0123853-
`MAXELL_APPLE0123888)
`
`IPR No. 2018-00909 (U.S. Patent No. 9,100,604), Patent Owner’s
`Preliminary Response to Petition For Inter partes Review Of U.S. Patent
`No. 9,100,604 (October 17, 2018)
`
`IPR No. 2018-00910 (U.S. Patent No. 8,059,177), Patent Owner’s
`Preliminary Response to Petition For Inter partes Review Of U.S. Patent
`No. 8,059,177 (November 9, 2018)
`
`Testimony of Dr. Alan Bovik (including declaration and deposition
`testimony). Dr. Bovik will explain the technology, the state of the art at
`the time the patent application was filed, the meaning of claim terms or
`phrases as they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art
`at the time of the invention, how those of ordinary skill in the art at the
`time of the invention would have understood statements made by the
`patentee during prosecution of the applications, and the level of ordinary
`skill in the relevant art. Dr. Bovik may also offer a declaration, if
`necessary, to respond to Plaintiff’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of Plaintiff, or for the Court’s benefit.
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 16 of 44 PageID #: 4388
`
`NO. TERM
`“mixing . .. signal
`6
`charges
`accumulated in the
`N number of
`vertically arranged
`pixel lines” /
`“mixed . . . from
`the N number of
`vertically arranged
`pixel lines”
`
`’493 Patent:
`claims 1, 5, 10
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`Plaintiff’s Construction
`mixing . . . signal charges
`means combining signal
`charges from multiple
`pixels / mixed means
`combined
`
`Defendants’ Construction
`
`“mixing” / “mixed” means
`collecting charges from
`multiple pixels for
`combined transfer /
`collected
`
`Plaintiff’s Evidence
`
`’493 Patent at Abstract, 1:18-31, 2:44-53, 2:62-3:2, 4:30-65, 4:66-5:18,
`5:34-6:7, 6:39-57, 7:31-65, 8:8-41, 8:51-9:2, 9:30-36, 9:58-10:12, 10:6-
`32, 11:59-12:14, 12:37-48, 13:16-22, 14:10-32, 14:52-55, 15:4-21,
`Figures 3, 5, 6
`
`Defendant Apple Inc.’s Invalidity Contentions Pursuant to Patent Local
`Rules 3-3 and 3-4 (and exhibits thereto)
`
`US 7,158,158
`
`US 2013/0084003
`
`JP H09-270959
`
`EP 0 822 724
`
`IPR2018-00236, Paper Nos. 1, 9, Ex. 1002.
`
`Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms (7th ed.; 2000), p. 827
`(“picture element”)
`
`
`Defendants’ Evidence
`
`’493 Patent at Abstract, 1:18–31; 2:1–25; 2:26–53; 2:62–3:2; 3:8–15;
`4:30–65; 4:66–5:18; 5:34–6:7; 6:39–57; 7:40–8:7; 10:3–12; 10:18–58;
`Figures 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10
`
`JP H11-187306
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 17 of 44 PageID #: 4389
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`JP H09-270959
`
`U.S. 4,434,435 to Fujimoto
`
`EP 0,840,503 to Kijima
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,661,451 to Kijima
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,054,915 to Sugihara
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,620,134 to Peels
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,002,203.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,541,010.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,700,607 to Misawa
`
`U.S. Patent 5,657,082 to Harada
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,668,597 to Parulski
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,828,406 to Parulski
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,374,955 to Furuhata
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,720,996 to Suyama
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,910,599 to Hashimoto
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,264,939 to Chang
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,450,129 to Matoba
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 18 of 44 PageID #: 4390
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,986,698 to Nobuoka.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,122,007 to Ishibashi
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,181,375 to Mitsui
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,529.236 to Watanabe .
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,580,457 to Armstrong
`
`U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2001/0043276 to Ueno
`
`U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2002/0118291 to Ishigami
`
`U.S. 6,765,616 Prosecution History, Office Action dated November 26,
`2013, and references cited therein
`
`U.S. 6,765,616 Prosecution History, Amendment and Remarks dated
`February 26, 2004
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Preliminary Amendment dated
`September 12, 2003
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Requirement for Restriction/Election
`dated March 13, 2008
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Response to Election/Restriction
`dated April 11, 2008
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Office Action dated August 11,
`2008, and references cited therein
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 19 of 44 PageID #: 4391
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Amendment and Remarks dated
`November 10, 2008
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Office Action dated November 10,
`2009, and references cited therein
`
`U.S. 8,059,177 Prosecution History, Amendment and Remarks dated
`May 10, 2010
`
`U.S. 8,339,493 Prosecution History, Office Action dated March 14, 2012,
`and references cited therein
`
`U.S. 8,339,493 Prosecution History, Amendments and Remarks dated
`July 16, 2012
`
`Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (1998) (defining “mix” as “1.
`to combine or blend into one mass” or “2. to combine with another”)
`
`Oxford American College Dictionary (2002) (defining “mix” as
`“combine or put together to form one substance or mass”)
`
`Oxford English Reference Dictionary (1996) (defining “mix” as
`“combine or put together (two or more substances or things) so that the
`constituents of each are diffused among those of the others … combine
`(an activity etc.) with another simultaneously … join, be mixed, or
`combine”)
`
`R.H. Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary (1997) (defining “mix” as “1. to
`combine (substances, elements, things, etc.) into one mass, collection, or
`assemblage, generally with a thorough blending of the constituents” or
`“3. to combine, unite or join”)
`
`19
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 20 of 44 PageID #: 4392
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`Random house unabridged dictionary (1993) (defining “mix” as “1. to
`combine (substances, elements, things, etc.) into one mass, collection, or
`assemblage, generally with a thorough blending of the constituents
`blending of the constituents” or “3. to combine, unite or join”)
`
`The American Heritage College Dictionary Third Edition (1993)
`(defining “mix” as “To combine or blend into one mass or mixture” or
`“To create or form by combining ingredients”)
`
`The American Heritage Desk Dictionary (2013) (defining “mix” as “To
`combine or blend into one mass or mixture” or “To combine or join”)
`
`The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (1997) (defining “mix” as “[T]o
`combine into one mass”)
`
`The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993) (defining “mix” as
`“Put together or combine (two or more substances or things) so that the
`constituents of each are diffused among those of the other or others”)
`
`Webster’s II New College Dictionary (2001) (defining “mix” as “To
`combine or blend into one mass or mixture, rendering the constituent
`parts indistinguishable”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,529,236 to Watanabe (APL-MAXELL_00718597-
`APL-MAXELL_00718620)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,018,363 to Horii (APL-MAXELL_00718245- APL-
`MAXELL_00718277)
`
`EP 0 802 688 A2 to Inoue (APL-MAXELL_00713722- APL-
`MAXELL_00713746)
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 21 of 44 PageID #: 4393
`
`NO. TERM
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,502,483 to Takase (APL-MAXELL_00718141-APL-
`MAXELL_00718151)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,444,482 to Misawa (APL-MAXELL_00718115-APL-
`MAXELL_00718126)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,335,760 to Sato (APL-MAXELL_00718465-APL-
`MAXELL_00718485)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,828,406 to Parulski
`
`Testimony of Dr. Alan Bovik (including declaration and deposition
`testimony). Dr. Bovik will explain the technology, the state of the art at
`the time the patent application was filed, the meaning of claim terms or
`phrases as they would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art
`at the time of the invention, how those of ordinary skill in the art at the
`time of the invention would have understood statements made by the
`patentee during prosecution of the applications, and the level of ordinary
`skill in the relevant art. Dr. Bovik may also offer a declaration, if
`necessary, to respond to Plaintiff’s contentions, any expert testimony on
`behalf of Plaintiff, or for the Court’s benefit.
`
`Plaintiff’s Evidence
`
`’493 Patent at Abstract, 1:18-31, 2:44-53, 2:62-3:2, 4:30-65, 4:66-5:18,
`5:34-6:7, 6:39-57, 7:31-65, 8:8-41, 8:51-9:2, 9:30-36, 9:58-10:12, 10:6-
`32, 11:59-12:14, 12:37-48, 13:16-22, 14:10-32, 14:52-55, 15:4-21,
`Figures 3, 5, 6
`
`7
`
`“culling signal
`Plaintiff’s Construction
`
`charges
`Plain and ordinary
`accumulated in the
`meaning
`N number of
`
`vertically arranged
`Defendants’ Construction2
`pixel lines” /
`
`2 Apple objects to Maxell’s refusal to identify what it contends to be the “plain and ordinary meaning” of this and other claim terms
`during the claim construction process, thereby frustrating the purpose and intent of Patent Rule disclosures and materially prejudicing
`Apple’s participation in the claim construction process.
`
`21
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 99 Filed 10/16/19 Page 22 of 44 PageID #: 4394
`
`NO. TERM
`“culled from the N
`number of
`vertically arranged
`pixel lines”
`
`’493 Patent:
`claims 1, 5, 10
`
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE
`
`
`“culling” / “culled” means
`selecting pixels for output
`by skipping pixels at
`predetermined intervals /
`selected
`
`
`Defendant Apple Inc.’s Invalidity Contentions Pursuant to Patent Local
`Rules 3-3 and 3-4 (and exhibits thereto)
`
`US 7,158,158
`
`US 2013/0084003
`
`JP H09-270959
`
`EP 0 822 724
`
`IPR2018-00236, Paper Nos. 1, 9, Ex. 1002.
`
`Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms (7th ed.; 2000), p. 827
`(“picture element”)
`
`In addition, Maxell will present expert testimony from Dr. Vijay
`Madisetti in support of Maxell’s proposed construction and addressing
`arguments presented by Apple’s expert, if any. This testimony may
`include, at least, an explanation of the meaning of this term in the context
`of the subject matter disclosed in the asserted patents, a description of the
`state of the technology, and how a person of ordinary skill in the art
`would interpret the term at the time the application for the asserted patent
`was filed.
`
`Defendants’ Evidence
`
`’493 Patent at Abstract, 1:18–31; 2:1–25; 2:26–53; 2:62–3:2; 3:

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket