Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 1 of 65 PageID #: 24466
`Case 1:13-cv-00919—LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 1 of 65 PageID #: 24466
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 2 of 65 PageID #: 24467
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 2 of 65 PageID #: 24467
`
`Petition for Inter Panes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`Paper No.
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, GOOGLE INC. AND APPLE INC.
`
`Petitioners
`V.
`
`ARENDI SARI°
`
`alleged Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 8,306,993
`
`Issue Date: Nov, 6, 2012
`
`Title: METHOD, SYSTEM AND COWUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR
`ADDRESSING HANDLING FROM AN OPERATING SYSTEM
`
`Inter Partes Review No. Unassigned
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 3II—319 AND 37 ORR. § 42.IIII) ET. SEQ.
`
`FOX_0012183
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 3 of 65 PageID #: 24468
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 3 of 65 PageID #: 24468
`
`Petition for Inter Pattes Review
`
`US. Pat. No. 8,306,993
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`NOTICE OF LEAD AND BACKUP COUNSEL .............................................. l
`
`NOTICE OF EACH REAL-PARTY—IN—INTEREST ......................................... l
`
`NOTICE OF RELATED MATTERS ................................................................. l
`
`NOTICE OF SERVICE INFORMATION ......................................................... l
`
`GROUNDS FOR STANDING .......................................................................... 2
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED ....................................... 2
`
`THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT IOR INTER PARTES REVIEW .................... 3
`
`I.
`
`Introduction ..................................................................................... 3
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`Declaration of Dr. Dennis Allison ................................................... 3
`
`Technical Background ..................................................................... 3
`
`Overview of the 9% Patent ......................................................................... 3
`
`State of the Art at the Claimed Priority Date ................................... 6
`
`Construction of the Claims .............................................................. 7
`
`Claims I, 9, and I7 — "Contact Database” ..................................... 9
`
`Claims I, 9, and I7 — ”Initiating Electronic Communication" ........ 9
`
`Allowing the User to Make a Decision Whether ............................ 10
`
`Claims 6 l4, and 22 — ”Input Device" .......................................... 10
`
`Claims? l,5, and 23 — " Button" ................................................... ll
`
`IV.
`
`Claim—By—Claini Explana tion of Grounds for Unpatentahility. ....... ll
`
`Ground l. Claims l~4, 6—l2, l4~20, and 22~24 are invalid under 35 U.S.C.
`§ l03 over Bonura in view of Magnanelli ....................................... ll
`
`l.
`
`It would have been obvious to combine Eonura with Magnanelli .......... 17
`
`Ground 2. Claims 5, l3 and 21 would have been obvious as in Ground 1, in
`further view of Giordano ............................................................... 34
`
`Ground 3 Claims I—2, 6—7, 9- l0, l4— l5, l7— l8 and 22-23 are invalid under 35
`U S. C. §l02(h) overLucrw35
`
`Ground 4. Claims l—24 are invalid under 35 U .SC. § l03 over Luciwin view
`of Bates and Giordano. ................................................................... 46
`
`l.
`
`It would have been obvious to combine Luciw, Bates and Giordano ..... 48
`
`ii
`
`FOX_0012184
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 4 of 65 PageID #: 24469
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 4 of 65 PageID #: 24469
`
`Petition for inter Pattes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`EXHlBlT LIST
`
`Exhibit Number
`
`Exhibit Name
`
`100l
`
`US. PatientNo, 8,306,993
`
`1002
`
`Declaration of Dennis Allison
`
`US. Patent No. 5,644,735
`
`US. Patent No. 6,247,043
`
`US, Patent No. 6,870,828
`
`”Drop Zones: An Extension to LiyeDoc,” SigCHI Bulletin, V01.
`30 no. 2, April 1998, by Thomas Bonnra and ,1antes R. Miller
`
`Academia: An Agent—Maintained Database based on information
`Extraction from Web Documents, by Mario Magnanelli, Antonia
`Erni, and Moira Norrie.
`
`Dennis Allison Curricuiuin Vitae
`
`
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1014
`
`101 6
`
`US, Patent No. 5,790,532
`
`US, Patent No. 8,306,993 — Claim Language Comparison
`
`"littp://cleve1oper.apple.eom/technotes/tn/tn l 005.1itinl"
`capturedand displayed on Archiveorg’s ”Wayback Machine”
`downloaded by Archiveorg from tlie web on January 17, 1999.
`
`Notice of Service of Summons on Motorola Mobility LLC
`
`”http://ft‘p.int".ethz.ch/publications/papers111ml” captured and
`displayed on Archiveorg’s ”Wayback Machine” downloaded by
`Archiveorg from the web on February 10, 1998
`
`Proceedings 0f14tn European Meeting on Cybernetics and
`Systems Research on April 15, 1998, (taken from
`http://www,osgk.ac.at/emcsr/98/).
`
`iii
`
`FOX_0012185
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 5 of 65 PageID #: 24470
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 5 of 65 PageID #: 24470
`
`Petition for inter Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No. 8,306,993
`
`NOTICE OF LEAD AND BACKUP COUNSEL
`
`Counsel for Petitioners Motorola Mobilit 111C and Goo1e inn:
`
`Lend Counsel: Matthew A. Smith (Reg. No. 49,003); Tel: 650.265.6109
`
`Backup Counsel: Ziinaniia (311 (Reg. No. 51,758); Tel: 650 529.4752
`
`Address: Inner Boyd. LLP, 2570 W. El Camino Real Ste. 380,
`
`Mountain View, CA 94040. FAX: 650.521.5931.
`
`
`Counsel for Petitioner A : )le Tue:
`
`Lend Counsel: David 1... Felirnian (Reg. No. 28,600); Tel: 213.892.5601
`
`Backup Counsel: Meliran Aijoniand (Reg. No. 48,231); Tel: 213.892.5630
`
`Address: MORRiSON & FOERSTER 11.1), 707 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 6000, Los
`
`Angeles, CA 90017—3543. FAX: 213.892.5454
`
`NOTICE OF EACH REAL-PARTY-IN-INTEREST
`
`The real~parties~in~interest for this Petition are Motorola Mobility LLC for
`
`Petitioner Motorola Mobility LLC, Goog1e inc. for Petitioner Google lite, and
`
`Apple inc. for Petitioner Apple inc.
`
`NOTICE OF RELATED MATTERS
`
`US. Patent no. 8,306,993 (“the '993 patent”) at issue has been asserted in the
`
`U .8. District: Court for the District of Delaware 1111118 following eases:
`
`l—i2—ev—
`
`01601, 1-12-eV-01602, 1-12~eV—01600, 1-12~eV-01599, 1-12-eV-01598, 1-12-ev-
`
`01596, 1—12—ev—01595, and. l—l2—eV—0159’7, all fi1ed on Nov. 29, 2012.
`
`NOTICE OF SERVICE INFORMATION
`
`FOX_0012186
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 6 of 65 PageID #: 24471
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 6 of 65 PageID #: 24471
`
`Petition for lnter Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No $306,993
`
`Please address all correspondence to the lead counsel at the addresses shown
`
`above, Petitioners also consents to electronic service by email at the following
`
`addresses:
`
`s1nith@tnriierboyd.corn, doclreting@turnerboyd.coin,
`
`gu@turnerboyd.corn, kent@turnerboyd.corn? d‘felirinan@mofocorn?
`
`inarjoinand@inofo.coin.
`
`GROUNDS FOR STANDING
`
`Petitioner hereby certifies that the patent for which review is sought is available
`
`for inter partes review and that the Petition er is not barred or esto‘pped from
`
`requesting an inter partes review challenging the patent claims on the grounds
`
`identified in the petition, Motorola Mobility was served with a complaint on
`
`November 30, 20l2 (see EX. lOlS), and this petition is being filed on Dec. 2, 20l3
`
`(Monday) by virtue of 35 [1.8.0. § 21th). Apple lnc. was served with a complaint
`
`on December 3,, 20l3,
`
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF RE 0 UESTED
`
`The Petitioner respectfully requests that claims l—24 of U .8. Patent No.
`
`83063993 (”the '993 patent”) (Ex 1001) be canceled based on the following
`
`grounds of unpatentability, explained in detail in the next section:
`
`Ground l. Claims 1—4, 6—12, 14—20, and 22—24 are invalid. under 35 USC}
`
`§ 103 over Bonnra in View of Magnanelli.
`
`[\J
`
`FOX_0012187
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 7 of 65 PageID #: 24472
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 7 of 65 PageID #: 24472
`
`Petition for inter Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No $306,993
`
`Ground 2. Claims 5, l3 and 21 would have been obvious as in Ground l, in
`
`further View oi" Giordano,
`
`Ground 3. Claims l-Z, 6-7, 9—10, 14-15, l7-l8 and 22~23 are invalid under 35
`
`USC. § l02(b) over Luciw,
`
`Ground 4. Claims l-24 are invalid under 35 U .SC. § lil3 over Luciw in View
`
`of Bates and Giordano.
`
`THRESHOLD RE Q UIREMENT FOR INTER PAR TES REVIEW
`
`This petition presents "a reasonable likelihood that the Petitioner would prevail
`
`with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition". 35 USC
`
`§ 3l4(a), as shown in the Grounds explained below.
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`A. Declaration of Dr. Dennis Allison
`
`The declaration of Dennis Allison is attached as Exhibit l002.
`
`B. Technical Background
`
`Overview of the '993 Patent
`
`The disclosure of the ’993 patent relates to the computerized handling of contact
`
`information. Contact information is information that is related to a person—such
`
`as the person’s name, telephone number, postal address, email address, etc. EX
`
`1002 at 1] 38.
`
`The ’993 patent ”handles" such contact information with a system that facilitates
`
`interaction between programs that use text documents (like word processors) and
`
`3
`
`FOX_0012188
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 8 of 65 PageID #: 24473
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 8 of 65 PageID #: 24473
`
`Petition for later Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No $306,993
`
`databases of contact information. EX.
`
`lOOZ at W 38—39. Such databases can be
`
`called ”contact databases” or "address books". Ex. lGOZ at ll 30‘, These databases
`
`can contain information relating to people, such as their names, telephone
`
`numbers, email addresses postal addresses, and notes relating to the person. Id.
`
`The interaction between programs like word processors and contact databases
`
`can be illustrated with reference to Figures 3 and 4 of the '993 patent. These
`
`figures depict screens that a person might see when using a word processing
`
`program“ The relevant portions of the figures are shown side-by—side here:
`
`
`
`
`
`Figure 3 on the left shows a word processor window, in which a user has
`
`entered a name“ The name is processed by the '993 patent system after the user
`
`clicks the "OneButton" 42 in the upper right part of the window. Clicking the
`
`”OneButton” causes the system to ”retrieve the name... from the document” and
`
`"searchfl a database for the name... .”. EX. mm at 6:26—28. Assuming that the
`
`FOX_0012189
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 9 of 65 PageID #: 24474
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 9 of 65 PageID #: 24474
`
`Petition for later Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No. 8,306,993
`
`search finds an address associated with the name, the system then inserts the
`
`address into the word processing document, as depicted in Fig. 4 on the right. EX.
`
`l002 at ll 39.
`
`The bulk of the '993 patent relates to a high -level description of operations like
`
`these. The specification describes the user taking certain actions in a GUI, which
`
`result in operations being performed on contact information. These actions can
`
`include adding a contact to a contact database, or sending an email based on the
`
`contact information. Ex.1002 at ll 40.
`
`The specification of the '993 patent, however, relates mainly to the end-result of
`
`contact information handling, that is, What the user of the computer system
`
`experiences as he or she uses the system. Exactly how these end-results are
`
`achieved is described only at the highest level. For example, the ‘993 patent
`
`provides no source code or pseudo code. High—level flowcharts for some
`
`embodiments are included, EX. l00l at Figs. l, 2, and lo, but each of these is
`
`limited. to a general description of the desired functionality, with no
`
`implementation detail. EX. l002 at filfil 40—4l.
`
`ln fact, the '993 patent relies on existing word processors and existing databases
`
`to implement its contact management method, assuming that the person of ordinary
`
`skill can fill in the detail. The methods of the '993 patent are implemented on
`
`standard well—known operating systems and ordinary commodity computer
`
`FOX_0012190
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 10 of 65 PageID #: 24475
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 10 of 65 PageID #: 24475
`
`Petition for later Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No. 833063993
`
`hardware, all of which were readily available well before the filing of the
`
`application leading to the '993 patent. Ex. l002 at fill 42—53.
`
`II.
`
`STATE OF THE ART AT THE CLAIMED PRIORITY DATE
`
`in the years leading up to earliest possible priority date (Sep. l998), numerous
`
`systems existed that used personal computers to manage personal contact
`
`information. These systems integrated. sophisticated. contact database technology
`
`available at the time (Ex. lOOZ at Till 45-47) with applications like word processors
`
`as well as applications that performed communications (such as email
`
`applications). Ex. lOllE at f 30—37.
`
`For example, systems had been developed for analyzing text in a document to
`
`detect contact information in a document, and assisting the user in taking
`
`appropriate actions based on the information discovered. For example US. Patent
`
`‘
`
`z.
`l
`
`_____________
`
`a aar.
`
`_
`
`"""ial
`
`3
`
`=70
`”or?
`
`5"
`
`V
`
`an
`
`333
`
`N M (-3 Mill:33
`
`No. 536443735 to Luciw (Ex. 1003)
`
`3
`_
`describes a system for detecting
`
`structures in text and using a template—
`
`based system to offer the user options
`
`for handling the data so identified.
`
`Figures 6a and 6b, which illustrate a
`
`user entering a name and having the
`
`system provide a full name, are shown
`
`
`
`
`ll
`Shame
`
`M’” -
`ISAAC J20ms
`......‘;l‘.‘.‘.‘:IIIm"""""""Wm
`
`Phone
`
`3
`333
`339
`t Optimalllll,C.a3‘l.1;<:r:}
`
`3
`figure or:
`
`:fi‘lgH-TE 65
`
`FOX_0012191
`
`3
`l
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 11 of 65 PageID #: 24476
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 11 of 65 PageID #: 24476
`
`Petition for later Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`at right. EX. 1002 at ll 28.
`
`Another example was the ”Drop Zones” system described in an article by
`
`Bonura and Miller (Ex. l006). Drop Zones integrated a text recognition approach
`
`akin to aniw into common applications like word processors. The text
`
`recognition system of Drop Zones identified things like names, telephone numbers
`
`and email addresses, and allowed the designer of the system to create arbitrary
`
`tasks. The Drop Zones system also used an electronic address book to convert
`
`between different kinds of contact information, and allowed the applications to
`
`update the address book with identified contact information. Fig. 2 of the Bonura
`
`article is shown below, and depicts how a name identified in a document can be
`
`used to cause a looknp on a name to retrieve an email address, thereby allowing an
`
`email to be sent. Ex. lOllZ at W 29, 92-93.
`
`9W4“ £85?“ '42 ($11133:
`
`_
`.
`(s)
`18m; my; own: 11m $41” It)!
`:mfdg aw- ait-m awn mwra do“ on #1?wa
`11693): W Mus! um: (run on: MI!
`
`
`35%“wa
`
`.':
`-""‘1
`
`
`a?!)
`
`N,” ‘.
`.
`re
`
`tdopbmmw
`
`c.-
`‘
`'
`
`1:33: W mam:
`l. n.
`
`I
`
`% {mod was!
`s M;
`:igi ”Wonk minnow
`_.V m.-
`
`Figure 2: A user interaction with Dre . Zones
`
`III. CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLAIMS
`
`FOX_0012192
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 12 of 65 PageID #: 24477
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 12 of 65 PageID #: 24477
`
`Petition for inter Pattes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`A claim in inter partes review is given the "broadest reasonable construction in
`
`light of the specification” See 37 CPR, § 42.l00(b). As stated by the Federal
`
`Circuit in the case In re ICON Health and Fitness, Inc:
`
`"[Tlhe PTO must give claims their broadest reasonable construction
`
`consistent with the specification, Therefore, we look to the
`
`specification to see if it provides a definition for claim terms, but
`
`otherwise apply a broad interpretation. "
`
`496 F.3d l3’74, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
`
`in particular, claims in interpartes
`
`review should not be limited by party argument (whether in this or a prior
`
`proceeding). To the extent that the Patent Owner desires a claim term to be
`
`interpreted more narrowly than its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the
`
`specification, the Patent Owner must show that the specification provides an
`
`express definition for the relevant portions of the claims, or amend the claims, See
`
`SAP v. Versata, CBMZOlZ—OOOOl, Pat. App. LEXIS 3788, *8 (PTAB June ll,
`
`20l3). As found by the en banc Federal Circuit:
`
`"if, in reexamination, an examiner determines that particular claims
`
`are invalid and need amendment to be allowable, one would expect an
`
`examiner to require amendment rather than accept argument alone."
`
`Marine Polymer Tech, Inc. v. HemCon, Inc, 672 F.3d l350, l364 (Fed. Cir.
`
`20l2)(en banc).
`
`For the purposes of this proceeding, claim terms are presumed to take on their
`
`FOX_0012193
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 13 of 65 PageID #: 24478
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 13 of 65 PageID #: 24478
`
`Petition for inter Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`broadest reasonable ordinary meaning. This meaning is explained in certain
`
`instances in the following subsections. The Petitioners note that the standard of
`
`claim construction used in district courts differs from the standard applied before
`
`the USPTO, Any claim constructions in this Petition are directed to the USPTO
`
`standard, and are not necessarily the constructions that the Petitioners believe
`
`would be adopted in court, The Petitioners do not acquiesce or admit to the
`
`constructions reflected herein for any purpose outside of this proceeding.
`
`A. Claims 1, 9, and 17 — "Contact Database"
`
`The term "contact database" is used in the independent claims of the '993
`
`patent. The term is not expressly defined in the specification. The word
`
`”database" is used broadly. Ex, lOOl at 4:ll—l4; 9:40—55 and l2:7—l4; Ex, l002 at
`
`W 60-62. The only apparent requirement of the database is that it must allow
`
`access to stored information. Ex. lOOZ at W 60—62. As to the word ”contact”, the
`
`specification includes in the concept of "contact information" names and addresses,
`
`but also ”other information, such as telephone numbers, fax numbers, e—mail
`
`addresses, etc," as well as ”mailing lists," Ex. lOOl at 4:42—48; Ex. lGOZ at W 60—
`
`62. Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term ”contact
`
`database” is ”software that allows access to information related to a person”.
`
`B. Claims 1, 9, and 17 — "Initiating Electronic Communication"
`
`The term "initiating electronic communication" is used in claims l, :9, and l7.
`
`FOX_0012194
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 14 of 65 PageID #: 24479
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 14 of 65 PageID #: 24479
`
`Petition for later Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No. 8,306,993
`
`The specification has little discussion of initiating electronic communications. EX.
`
`lOOZ at ll 63—64, Ex lOOl at 4:42—48. Under the broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation, the term "initiating an electronic communication" should thus mean
`
`”starting a process that leads to an electronic communication”. Ex. l002 at “H 63-
`
`64.
`
`C. Allowing the User to Make a Decision Whether...
`
`The independent claims require in element (iii):
`
`”allowing the user to make a decision whether to store at least art of
`
`the first contact information in the contact database as a new contact
`
`or to update an existing contact in the contact database,” EX. lOOl at
`
`claim l (emphasis added).
`
`This limitation is ambiguous.
`
`it could mean the user is allowed to make a
`
`decision between storing and updating, or that the user is allowed to make a
`
`”decision whether to store. .
`
`. or a decision whether to update. " The latter
`
`interpretation presents the user either with a choice to store or not to store, or; with
`
`a choice to update or not to update. EX.
`
`lOOZ at W 65—67. The specification
`
`supports the second interpretation. Ex. lOOl at 6247454; l0:l7-24;8:62~9:TO, Figs.
`
`ll and l3; Ex. lOO'Z at “N 67—69. Because the term is ambiguous, the broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation should include either construction. Ex. lOOZ at “J70.
`
`D. Claims 6, 14, and 22 — "Input Device"
`
`in the ’993 patent, the term "input device" includes a GUT element on screen,
`
`l0
`
`FOX_0012195
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 15 of 65 PageID #: 24480
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 15 of 65 PageID #: 24480
`
`Petition for inter Pattes Review
`
`US. Pat. No. 8,306,993
`
`and is thus not limited to hardware devices. EX. 1002 at till.
`
`E. Claims 7, 15, and 23 — "Button"
`
`The specification of the ”993 patent defines the term ”button" as ”a touch screen,
`
`keyboard button, icon, rnenu, voice command. device, etc. (hereinafter called
`
`‘button’)," Ex. lOOl at l:22-24, Ex. 1002 at ll 72,.
`
`IV. CLAIM-BY-CLAIM EXPLANATION OF GROUNDS FOR
`
`UNPATENTABILITY.
`
`Ground 1. Claims 1-4, 6-12, 14-20, and 22-24 are invalid under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103 over Bonura in View of Magnanelli.
`
`Claims l—M are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § l03 over Thomas Bonura and James
`
`R. Miller, "Drop Zones: An Extension to LiveDoc," SigCHI Bulletin, vol. 30 no. 2,
`
`April l998 (”Bonnra”) (EX. 1006) in View of Mario Magnanelli, Antonia Erni, and
`
`Moira Norrie, "ACADEMlA: An Agent-Maintained Database based on
`
`information Extraction from Web Documents,” Proceedings of the 14th European
`
`Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research, Vienna Austria, April
`
`l998 (lMagnanelliUtEX. l007).
`
`Bonura is an article published in the bulletin for the Association for Computing
`
`Machinery’s "Special interest Group on Computer—Human interaction,” also
`
`known as the SigCHI Bulletin, in April 1998, Ex. l002 at till 73—74, Bonura
`
`therefore qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. §§ l02(a) and (b). Magnanelli is an
`
`article paper presented at a conference on April l5, l998, and included in the
`
`ll
`
`FOX_0012196
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 16 of 65 PageID #: 24481
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 16 of 65 PageID #: 24481
`
`Petition for inter Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No. 8,306,993
`
`proceedings of that conference. Ex. 1017. Furthermore, Magnane11i was presented
`
`at a conference on Aprii 14, 1998 and available oniine and indexed by the
`
`archiveorg servers no iater than Feb. 10, 1998. Ex. 1016. Magnaneiii was thus
`
`pubiiciy accessibie as of these dates. Ex. 1002 at 11 104. Therefore, Magnane11i is
`
`prior art under 35 USC. § 102(a) and (b).
`
`The 1eve1 of ordinary shiii in the art is provided. in the Aiiison deciaration (Ex.
`
`1002) at iii] 19—37. The Background and ciairn construction sections are
`
`incorporated in this Ground.
`
`Bonura teaches a computer system for arraiyzing text in a document, and then
`
`aiiowing the user to take specific actions based on identified text. Ex. 1002 at 1] 75.
`
`The process of identifying specific text in a document is based on the Macintosh
`
`LiveDoc system. As Bonura exp1ains:
`
`”Livefloc [61 is an extension to the Macintosh user experience that
`
`aiiovvs documents to reveai structured information in such a way
`
`that it can be readiiy identified and used to achieve specific actions.
`
`Various kinds of recognizers, inc1uding context free grammars, are
`
`used to describe the structures to be found; these structures can be
`
`made up of either a singie 1exica1 term (either a variabie structure him
`
`a phone number, or a coiiection of static strings, irke company names)
`
`or multipie terms (for instance, a meeting can be defined as a
`
`combination of date, time, and venue structures). Smaii pieces of
`
`code can then be associated with each structure to instruct
`
`appiications to carry out specific user actions on the discovered
`
`ha
`1'?
`
`FOX_0012197
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 17 of 65 PageID #: 24482
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 17 of 65 PageID #: 24482
`
`Petition for inter Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`structures— perhaps to tell a telephony application to "Dial this
`
`phone numher." These actions can then he offered to users by
`
`visually highlighting the discovered structures and attaching pop
`
`up menus to the highlights." Ex. l006, p. 59, left column (emphasis
`
`added). Ex. l002 at ‘1] 86.
`
`Bonura discloses that the information identified in a document can he a name,
`
`telephone number (see quote above), an email address (Fig l and caption, Fig“ 3),
`
`etc. Ex.
`
`lOOZ at “J 88-90.
`
`Bonura describes extending the LiveDoc system with "Drop Zones". Ex. 1006,
`
`p, 60, left column” Drop Zones allows a user to make context—based decisions on
`
`the identified information. For example, Bonura discloses that Drop Zones can
`
`interact with an address book (contact database), Ex. l002 at ii 77 The address
`
`book can be searched by Drop Zones to convert an identified phone number into an
`
`email address in the address book. The email address, for example, can then be
`
`used to send an email, This is shown in Fig. l ofBonura, reproduced here with red
`
`annotations:
`
`FOX_0012198
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 18 of 65 PageID #: 24483
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 18 of 65 PageID #: 24483
`
`Petition for inter Pattes Review
`
`US. Pat. No $306,993
`
` Prensa select tit} amen:
`
`;
`
`a I '
`,
`
`
`1*“ij
`"as;
`
`3
`'9.
`" N
`
`
`‘
`
`I.
`‘ W
`
`few; hits: 'm‘£3: mm ”again“
`3mg m m we: draws (m We man
`in
`an} aim “Hm (nun um- “we:
`
`
`
`in Fig. '2, the name ”Toni Bonnra” (red hox at top) has been identified by the
`
`system using text analysis. EX. 1002 at $81—82. A user indicates takes advantage
`
`of this analysis by initiating an entail to Torn Bonura (red hex at bottom: ”Send
`
`email"), Ex. lGOZ at W til—81 93‘, Behind the scenes? the Drop Zones system
`
`queries the address hook, using the identified name, to come up with an email
`
`address stored in the address hook. Ex l002 at W 89,, :93,
`
`Bonura discloses that Virtually any action could he attached to the identified
`
`text. EX. 1002 at ii 78. For example, Bonnra states that:
`
`"i'i‘lhinking about [a name and phone number] from the perspective of
`
`an address hook easily leads tn the interpretation, 'Add this person
`
`to my address heelt'." EX. l006, pt 60 (left coininnXemphasis added)
`
`EX. 1002 atii 77—78.
`
`l4
`
`FOX_0012199
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 19 of 65 PageID #: 24484
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 19 of 65 PageID #: 24484
`
`Petition for later Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`Bonura is thus very similar to the "993 patent claims.
`
`Magnanelli, in turn, teaches a system (”Academia”) for scanning documents (in
`
`this case, Web pages), where the scanned information can be used to interact with
`
`a contact: database. Ex, l002 at fil l05, Figure l of Magnanelli, reproduced below,
`
`shows the basic system:
`
`WW’VW Pages searching
`
`
`
`
`,3;
`n
`- '
`,3
`‘5};
`
`Acheson».
`,.
`Agent
`
` query, Eng
`
`Anaemia
`i
`.
`A
`.,
`
`Database ..J
`The user in the left interacts directly with an "academia Database", which is a
`
`o
`‘w‘
`l.) W. static.
`
`l
`.....
`
`database containing information—inclriding contact information—about people
`
`whose work the user has chosen to follow. Magnanelli, p. 00002, left column at
`
`bottom through right col mnn at middle; Ex. 1002 at ll 31, Magnanelli expressly
`
`states, however, that ”the general concepts of this system may be used in other
`
`applications”. Magmanelli, EX, l007, p. 00002, left column, middle.
`
`Magnanelli‘s system also has an Academia Agent (shown at right in the
`
`l5
`
`FOX_0012200
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 20 of 65 PageID #: 24485
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 20 of 65 PageID #: 24485
`
`Petition for later Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`diagram). The Academia Agent performs scanning of documents to recognize
`
`structures of interest in the documents (Ex. l002 at fillOS), just like Bcnura.
`
`The document scanning in Magnanelli can identify particular structures that
`
`represent contact and other information about a person. Ex. lGOZ at ll l l l—l l2,
`
`ll4. Magnanelli teaches that, when potential additional contact information is
`
`identified for a contact, the system can give the user a choice as to whether the
`
`contact database should be updated with the new information. EX. mm at W l 15-
`
`ll7. %or example, Magnanelli states:
`
`"The key contact information in the database consists ofperson names
`
`and WWW addresses. The name is necessary to identify the person,
`
`while the address is a general starting point for the agent to search for
`
`updates, The database also stores general facts about persons such as
`
`title, address, photo and information about research activities
`
`including the titles of publications, URLs leading to abstracts or a
`
`publication file, project titles and URLs ofpages containing turther
`
`information on the project. The user accesses the database directly to
`
`retrieve and process information on academic contacts. The Academia
`
`agent provides a value-added service by using information extracted
`
`from Web documents to maintain the database and ensure its
`
`currency. The agent may either update the database directly, or
`
`consult with the user as to whether or not it should perform the
`
`updates," Magnanelli, Ex. T1007, p. 00002 (right column).
`
`l6
`
`FOX_0012201
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 21 of 65 PageID #: 24486
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 21 of 65 PageID #: 24486
`
`Petition for inter Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`1. It would have been obvious to combine Bonura with Magnanelli
`
`it would have been obvious to combine Bonura with Magnanelli Ex. lGOZ at
`
`W l26—137. Bonura discloses a base system that provides semantically appropriate
`
`choices to a user upon the identification in a document of certain kinds of
`
`structures. EX. “3%, p. 60, left column; Ex. 1002 at ll l25. The structures can
`
`include the kinds of information normally found in a contact information database
`
`(typically called an "address book"). Ex. 1006, p, 60, left column. For example,
`
`an address book will typically contain names and phone numbers. Bonura teaches
`
`automatically recognizing such address—book type information in text documents.
`
`EX.
`
`lOOG, p, 5.9 introduction; p. 60, left column; EX.
`
`lOOfZ at l 125.
`
`Bonura further teaches that, as an extension of LiveDoc, the disclosed ”Drop
`
`Zones" system can cause processing functions (executable code) to be associated
`
`with the identification of such contact information. ior example, Bonura states:
`
`"Various kinds of recognizers, including context free grammars, are
`
`used to describe the structures to be found; these structures can be
`
`made up of either a single lexical term (either a variable structure like
`
`a phone number, or a collection of static strings, like company names)
`
`or multiple terms (for instance, a meeting can be defined as a
`
`combination of date, time, and venue structures), Small pieces of
`
`code can then be associated with each structure to instruct
`
`applications to carry out specific user actions on the discovered
`
`structures— perhaps to tell a telephony application to ”Dial this phone
`
`l7
`
`FOX_0012202
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 22 of 65 PageID #: 24487
`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 306-2 Filed 03/10/21 Page 22 of 65 PageID #: 24487
`
`Petition for inter Partes Review
`
`US. Pat. No, 8,306,993
`
`number." These actions can then be offered to users by visually
`
`highlighting the discovered structures and attaching pop~up menus to
`
`the highlights." Bonura, Ex. l006, p. 59, (left colurnn)(emphasis
`
`added), Ex. l002 at $2.6.
`
`Bonura explains that the code that can be associated with particular structures is
`
`more—or-less arbitrary. Ex. 1002 at 1i l2’7.
`
`in fact, developers could develop so
`
`many different functions to be executed based on the identification of a particular
`
`structure in a document that the choice between them would threaten to overwhelm
`
`the user. Ex. l006, p. 59, right column. To assist in selecting the appropriate
`
`functions for any given situation, Bonura described a contextual, semantic process
`
`for choosing functions to associate with certain structures. That is, Bonura teaches
`
`extending the function