`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 149-6 Filed 01/12/23 Page 1of5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 6
`EXHIBIT 6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`GOOGLELLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`V.
`
`TOUCHSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES,INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2022-00794
`Patent 8,904,289 B2
`
`
`ÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 149-6 Filed 01/12/23 Page 2 of 5
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 149-6 Filed 01/12/23 Page 2 of 5
`Trials@uspto.gov
`Paper 10
`571-272-7822
`Date: October 7, 2022
`
` ÿÿ
`
`
` ÿ
` ÿ
` ÿÿÿ
`ÿ
`
` !ÿ" # !"ÿ# ! ÿ#ÿ $#!%#$&ÿ'' (!ÿ
`)!'$!ÿ *!ÿ# ! ÿ $ #+ÿ#ÿ#!#+ÿ)#$ÿ
`,,+!ÿ++(ÿ
`
`- ÿ ÿ
` (*" $!#%ÿ !(*+, !"ÿ (ÿ
` - ÿ.- ÿ
` $/0ÿ
` - ÿ/0/ÿ)ÿ
`)1
` ÿ!)$#ÿ&ÿ" !*!"ÿ# !+ÿ2ÿ,#++ ,#ÿ -3ÿÿ
`#%)!$ÿ+ÿ*#,4ÿ567898:;<=;8>?ÿA=;?9;ÿBC6D?:Eÿ
`,#++ ,#ÿ567898:;<=;8>?ÿA=;?9;ÿBC6D?ÿÿ
`!( " ÿ
`, - -
`-ÿ
`1ÿF9;?<ÿA=<;?:ÿ$ .ÿ
`GHÿIEJEKEÿLÿGMNÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ
`
`Before DEBRA K. STEPHENS, DANIEL J. GALLIGAN,and
`AMBERL. HAGY,Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GALLIGAN,Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Granting Institution of Inter Partes Review
`35 U.S.C. § 314
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 149-6 Filed 01/12/23 Page 3 of 5
`
` ÿ
`
`
` ÿ ÿ
`ÿ !"#$%ÿ$%ÿ'#((!)ÿ
`*++,-
`ÿ7
`/
`7
`--
`1BCÿ?ÿ ÿ
` 6ÿDEÿ+5ÿFÿ
`
`
`
`Bÿ
`
`
`ÿ 2
`2Kÿ
`
`7
`JA+21M
`1+ ÿ
`ÿ
`+ÿ
`
`2Kÿ
`7
` 6ÿ
`
`ÿ
`FJ22
`2Kÿ
`7
`A
` 6
`26ÿ5+2ÿ1 C1J1 ,ÿ
` ÿ8$9:!ÿ;!9:<ÿ2
`OPÿFÿQÿO?/
`4ÿ>A1@Aÿ72+=16
`Cÿ5+--+>CRÿ
`/
`4ÿSGFS.TA
`Kÿ +ÿ
`JA+21M
` ÿ1
`2
`2
`ÿA
`1 5+2B
`1+ ÿ72
` 6ÿ
`
`
` Kÿ2
`ÿA
`ÿ
`2
`C+
`U-
`ÿA
`1-ÿ>1Aÿ
`2
`ÿ-
`Cÿ?ÿ+5ÿA
`1BCÿ@A
`--
`W+2ÿA
`C+ Cÿ
`1
` ÿ8$9:!ÿ;!9:<ÿ2
`
`--ÿ@A
`--
`1BCÿ+ ÿ
`--ÿ,2+J 6Cÿ2
`1C
`2Kÿ
`51 61 ,Cÿ+5ÿ5
`@ÿ
` 6ÿ@+ @-JC1+ Cÿ61C@JCC
`2
`C
`
`2Kÿ2
`2ÿÿA1Cÿ
`-ÿ1Cÿ +ÿ
`ÿ
`51
`-ÿ6
`Cÿ+ÿA
`
`U1-1Kÿ+5ÿ
` Kÿ@A
`--
`1BÿÿX Kÿ51
`-ÿ
`6
`C
`-ÿ
`ÿY:Zÿ[!98:<ÿ8$ÿ\$9:!:<9ÿ
`
`
`
`
`ÿ+J@AC2
`Bÿ
`-ÿ
`7
`2K1 1
`7
`ÿ?ÿ
` ÿ
`
`
`
`the particular media player.” Pet. 50-52 (citing Ex. 1005 4 113-114;
`
`Ex. 1009, 1:11-13, 1:26—30, 5:61-6:2, Fig. 2); see also Pet. 57-58.
`
`Petitioner relies on Hayward to teach executing the programming
`
`code by the particular media player. Pet. 60—61 (citing Ex. 1005 4 129;
`
`Ex. 1009, 1:11—13, 1:26—30, 5:61-66).
`
`Patent Owner doesnotdispute, at this stage, Petitioner’s arguments
`
`and evidenceasto these limitations. Based on our review ofthe record
`
`before us, we determine Petitioner has shown sufficiently that the
`
`combination of Muthukumarasamy and Haywardteachesthe remaining
`
`limitations recited in independent claim 1 and that the combination renders
`
`obviousclaim 1.
`
`4. Claims 2 and 6-8
`
`Petitioner contends the combination of Muthukumarasamy and
`
`Hayward renders obvious claims 2 and 6-8. Pet. 61-71.
`
`Patent Owner,at this stage, does not offer arguments for these claims
`
`other than those addressed above. See Prelim. Resp. Upon our review of
`
`Petitioner’s asserted contentions, we are persuaded based on the record
`
`before us, Petitioner has made a sufficient showing that the combination of
`
`Muthukumarasamy and Haywardrenders obvious claims 2 and 6-8.
`
`5. Conclusion
`
`Based on the record before us, we determinePetitioner’s proffered
`
`arguments, evidence, and supporting testimony establish a reasonable
`
`likelihood that Petitioner would prevail in showing that claims 1, 2, and 6-8
`
`would have been obvious over the combination of Muthukumarasamy and
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 149-6 Filed 01/12/23 Page 4 of 5
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 149-6 Filed 01/12/23 Page 4of5
`IPR2022-00794
`Patent 8,904,289 B2
`
` ÿ
`
`
`
`
`ÿ
`ÿ
`
`"#ÿ$ÿ$'$$$ÿ$' (ÿ'($(' ÿ)!ÿ *&ÿ+,,ÿ./+0ÿ
`
`4
`ÿ1ÿ
`ÿ
` !ÿ
`1
`
`ÿ
`ÿ
`
`"#ÿ$ÿ$'$$$ÿ$' (ÿ'($((*ÿ
`
`
`ÿ2ÿ2
`!
`!
`
` ÿ
`2ÿ1ÿ
`1 2ÿÿ
`2
`5
`2ÿ214 ÿ299
`ÿ
`15
`1 ÿ19ÿ:;
`
`2
`ÿ
` ÿ3
`4
`ÿ
`
` !ÿ
`
`1 2ÿ
`ÿ$ÿ
` ÿ
`ÿ
`1 ÿ
`15812ÿ
`ÿ$ÿ
`<=ÿ?/.@A+ÿBÿ.CDÿEFGÿ
`
`1 ÿ19ÿ:;
`
`2
`ÿ
` ÿ
`3
`4
`ÿ
`2ÿ ÿ
` ÿ(ÿÿ
`
`
`ÿ2ÿ2
`!
`!
`2ÿ
`1
` ÿ12
`
`518
`
`22
`
`
`2
`5
`2ÿ
`
`ÿ299
`ÿ
`1 ÿ19ÿ
`:;
`
`2
`ÿ
` ÿ3
`4
`ÿ
`2ÿ ÿ
` ÿ(ÿ
`J=ÿ?0CK/L+@0Cÿ
`
`2
`
`!
` ÿ21 !ÿ
`52ÿ
`ÿ
`21
`5
`;
`ÿ
`ÿ ÿ214 !ÿ
`ÿ
`2ÿ$ÿ ÿ
` ÿ(ÿ
`41ÿ
`8
`1 ÿ19ÿ:;
`
`2
`ÿ
` ÿ
`3
`4
`ÿ
`ÿ
`
`Hayward.
`
`38
`
`
`
`Ill. CONCLUSION
`
`Forthe foregoing reasons, on the record before us, we are persuaded
`
`that the Petition establishes a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner would
`
`prevail in showingthat at least one claim of the ’289 Patent is unpatentable.
`
`IV. ORDER
`
`For the reasonsgiven,it is:
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 149-6 Filed 01/12/23 Page 5 of 5
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 149-6 Filed 01/12/23 Page 5of5
`IPR2022-00794
`Patent 8,904,289 B2
`
` ÿ
`
`
` ÿ ÿ
`ÿ
`! !ÿ ÿ
`
`#
`
`ÿ
`$( !
`ÿ
`!
`$(
`ÿ
`'
` (ÿ ÿ!& ÿ+,ÿ+,ÿ./+0,ÿ12/ÿ3.+45ÿ16ÿ,7/ÿ89ÿ
`
`
`$(
`ÿ
` :ÿ;<ÿ
`ÿ
`! !ÿ *
`;<<;ÿ
`ÿ'%!%
` ÿÿ>ÿÿ?ÿ@A
`Bÿ
` ÿCDEFGÿIJGEFKÿ !ÿ
`CDKECELEFMÿ ÿ
`((ÿ
`((
` N!ÿ& ÿ
`((ÿ% #!ÿ!
`
`
` #ÿÿ
`PQ<ÿ;<<;ÿ
`ÿ'%!%
` ÿÿ>ÿÿ?ÿ@A
`BÿCDEFGÿ
`IJGEFKÿ
`
`
`ÿ !ÿ#
` #ÿ'%!%
` ÿÿ>ÿÿ?ÿ@A"Bÿ
` #ÿÿÿ?ÿ ÿ
` "
`ÿ
`(ÿ
`ÿ
`
`ORDEREDthat pursuantto 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), an inter partes is
`
`instituted on all the challenged claims with respectto all groundsset forth in
`
`the Petition; and
`
`FURTHER ORDEREDthat pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), inter
`
`partes review of the ’289 Patent is instituted commencingon the entry date
`
`of this Order, and pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(c) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.4,
`
`notice is given ofthe institution ofa trial.
`
`39
`
`