Case 1:19-cv-11586-IT Document 45 Filed 03/19/20 Page 1 of 5
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
`
`PHILIPS NORTH AMERICA LLC,
`
`v.
`
`FITBIT, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-11586-IT
`
`FITBIT, INC.’S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF
`FITBIT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 112 (U.S. PATENT 6,013,007)
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
`
`PHILIPS NORTH AMERICA LLC,
`
`v.
`
`FITBIT, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-11586-IT
`
`FITBIT, INC.’S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF
`FITBIT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 112 (U.S. PATENT 6,013,007)
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-11586-IT Document 45 Filed 03/19/20 Page 2 of 5
`
`STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED
`
`MATERIAL FACTS
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Local Rule 56-2, Defendant Fitbit,
`
`Inc. (“Fitbit” or “Defendant”) submits the following Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in
`
`support of Fitbit’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Invalidity Under 35 U.S.C. § 112 of
`
`the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,013,007 (the ‘007 patent).
`
`NO.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT OF FACT
`
`SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
`
`Independent Claims 1 and 21 of U.S. Patent
`No. 6,013,007 (the ’007 patent) contain a
`claim element expressed in means-plus-
`function claiming format:
`
`“means for computing athletic performance
`feedback data from the series of time-
`stamped waypoints obtained by said GPS
`receiver”.
`The function performed by the means for
`computing claim element in claims 1 and 21
`is “computing athletic performance
`feedback data from the series of time-
`stamped waypoints obtained by said GPS
`receiver”
`
`The specification of the ’007 patent does
`not disclose a corresponding structure
`clearly linked or associated with performing
`the claimed function of “computing athletic
`performance feedback data from the series
`of time-stamped waypoints obtained by said
`GPS receiver”.
`
`The specification of the ’007 patent states
`that GPS units available at the time of filing
`of the ’007 application “do not include real-
`time athletic performance algorithms.”
`
`The specification of the ’007 patent claims
`that a “smart algorithm can be used to filter
`out the erroneous position points resulting
`
`’007 patent at Col. 11:12-14; 12:28-
`30
`
`’007 patent at Col. 11:12-14; 12:28-
`30
`
`See ’007 specification
`
`’007 patent at Col. 1:47-48.
`
`‘007 patent at Col. 7:52-56.
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-11586-IT Document 45 Filed 03/19/20 Page 3 of 5
`
`SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
`
`See ’007 specification, Col. 7:52-56.
`
`Chaikovsky Declaration at 3-6.
`
`Chaikovsky Declaration at 3-6.
`
`DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT OF FACT
`from signal interference or from induced
`errors through the U.S. government's
`Selective Availability (SA) program, which
`intentionally limits the absolute accuracy of
`civilian GPS receivers.”
`
`The specification of the ’007 patent does
`not disclose any of the step-by-step details
`of any algorithm performed by a processor
`that is clearly linked or associated with
`performing the claimed function of
`“computing athletic performance feedback
`data from the series of time-stamped
`waypoints obtained by said GPS receiver.”.
`
`Philips’ disclosures provided pursuant to
`patent local rule 16.6(d)(1)(A)(iv), requiring
`identification of the corresponding
`structures for means-plus-function
`limitations, contains no identification of a
`particular algorithm performed by a
`processor that corresponds to the function of
`“computing athletic performance feedback
`data from the series of time-stamped
`waypoints obtained by said GPS receiver.”
`
`Philips’ infringement claim charts directed
`to the “means for computing athletic
`performance feedback data from the series
`of time-stamped waypoints obtained by said
`GPS receiver” recited by claim 1 and 7 of
`the ’007 patent point to the functional
`results of using a GPS device in the accused
`products, and fail to identify a particular
`algorithm performed by a processor in the
`accused products as allegedly performing
`the claimed functions of “computing
`athletic performance feedback data from the
`series of time-stamped waypoints obtained
`by said GPS receiver.”
`
`NO.
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-11586-IT Document 45 Filed 03/19/20 Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`Dated: March 19, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FITBIT, INC.
`
`By Its Attorneys,
`
`/s/ Yar R. Chaikovsky
`Yar R. Chaikovsky
`yarchaikovsky@paulhastings.com
`Dave Beckwith
`davidbeckwith@paulhastings.com
`David Okano
`davidokano@paulhastings.com
`Radhesh Devendran
`radheshdevendran@paulhastings.com
`Berkeley Fife
`berkeleyfife@paulhastings.com
`
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`1117 S. California Avenue
`Palo Alto, California 94304-1106
`Telephone: 1(650) 320-1800
`Facsimile:
`1(650) 320-1900
`
`Jennifer B. Furey (BBO # 634174)
`Andrew T. O’Connor (BBO # 664811)
`GOULSTON & STORRS PC
`400 Atlantic Avenue
`Boston, MA 02110
`Telephone: (617) 482-1776
`Facsimile: (617) 574-4112
`E-mail: jfurey@goulstonstorrs.com
`aoconnor@goulstonstorrs.com
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-11586-IT Document 45 Filed 03/19/20 Page 5 of 5
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I certify that a true copy of the above document was served on the attorney of record for
`
`each party via the Court’s CM/ECF system, which will send notification of this filing (NEF) to
`
`all registered participants, and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as nonregistered
`
`participants.
`
`
`Dated: March 19, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Yar R. Chaikovsky
`
`
`Yar R. Chaikovsky (Pro Hac Vice)
`
`
`
`
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
