`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` ____________
`
`UBISOFT, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC USA, INC. AND UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01828
`U.S. Patent No. 6,489,974
` ____________
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,489,974
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1
`I.
`II. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW UNDER 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.104..................................................................................................................... 1
`A. GROUNDS FOR STANDING UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(A) ................................ 1
`B. IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.104(B) AND RELIEF
`REQUESTED ............................................................................................................ 1
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ‘974 PATENT ........................................................... 8
`A. DESCRIPTION OF THE ‘974 PATENT .................................................................. 8
`B. PROSECUTION HISTORY OF THE ‘974 PATENT ................................................ 11
`IV. THERE IS A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE CHALLENGED
`CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE ........................................................................ 14
`A. INSIDE MACINTOSH, VOLUME VI ANTICIPATES CLAIMS 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 13, 15,
`AND 19 UNDER §102(B) ........................................................................................ 14
`V. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(A)(1) ......................... 50
`A. REAL PARTY-IN-INTEREST AND RELATED MATTERS ..................................... 50
`B. LEAD AND BACK-UP COUNSEL UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(B)(3) ..................... 51
`C. PAYMENT OF FEES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.103 .............................................. 51
`VI. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 52
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Petitioner requests Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) of claims 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 13,
`
`15, and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 6,489,974 (“‘974 Patent”). EX1001.
`
`II. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW UNDER 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.104
`A. Grounds for Standing Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)
`Petitioner certifies that the ‘974 Patent is available for IPR and it is not
`
`barred or estopped. Specifically, Petitioner states: (1) it is not the owner of the ‘974
`
`Patent; (2) it has not filed a civil action challenging the validity of any claim of the
`
`‘974 Patent; (3) this Petition is timely filed less than one year after it was served
`
`with a complaint alleging infringement of the ‘974 Patent; and (4) this Petition is
`
`filed more than nine months after the ‘974 Patent issued.
`
`B.
`
`Identification of Challenge Under 37 C.F.R. §42.104(b) and Relief
`Requested
`
`In view of the prior art, evidence, and discussion of claim limitations, claims
`
`1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 13, 15, and 19 of the ‘974 Patent are unpatentable and should be
`
`cancelled. 37 C.F.R. §42.104(b)(1). This review is governed by pre-AIA §§102
`
`and 103.
`
`Proposed Statutory Rejections for the ‘974 Patent
`
`Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 13, 15, and 19: Anticipated under §102(b) by Inside
`
`Macintosh, Volume VI (“Inside Macintosh”) [EX1002].
`
`
`
`
`
`1. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the field of computer networking at the time of
`
`the alleged invention, January 10, 1994, (“POSITA”) would have had at least a
`
`bachelor’s degree, or equivalent, in electrical engineering, computer engineering,
`
`computer science, or a related field or an equivalent number of years of working
`
`experience, and one to two years of experience in computer programming.
`
`2. Claim Construction
`
`The ‘974 Patent expired on June 19, 2017, and is therefore not subject to
`
`amendment. For purposes of this Petition, the claims are construed pursuant to
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (words of a claim
`
`“are generally given their ordinary and customary meaning” as understood by a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time of the invention). The
`
`claim construction analysis is not, and should not be viewed as a concession by
`
`Petitioner as to the proper scope of any claim term in litigation. These assumptions
`
`are not a waiver of any argument in any litigation that claim terms in the ‘974
`
`Patent are indefinite or otherwise invalid or unpatentable.
`
`a.
`
`“means for providing a representation of said first object on a
`user interface of said computer, with the representation
`supporting user interaction with said first object on said user
`interface of said computer” (Claim 12)
`
`
`
`The stated function is “providing a representation of said first object on a
`
`user interface of said computer, with the representation supporting user interaction
`
`
`
`with said first object on said user interface of said computer.” The disclosed
`
`structure for performing the function is a computer utilizing an operating system
`
`that supports multitasking capabilities, an associated display, and a user input
`
`device such as keyboard, mouse, touch screen, or microphone, and equivalents
`
`thereof. EX1001 at 3:31-51, Fig. 1. The computer processor is programmed to: 1)
`
`display a focused object either as a window 33 displayed in the foreground of the
`
`desktop (as shown in FIG. 2) or as a full screen session 34 displayed in full on the
`
`screen (as shown in FIG. 4); and 2) enable the focused object to receive user inputs
`
`(e.g., the user can type in data using a keyboard, use a mouse cursor or some other
`
`input device to input data or other information). Id. at 3:52-65.
`
`b.
`
`“means for executing said first object on said computer”
`(Claim 12)
`
`
`
`The stated function is “executing said first object on said computer.” The
`
`disclosed structure for performing the function is a computer utilizing an operating
`
`system that supports multitasking capabilities, where the computer processor is
`
`programmed to: 1) receive a user input in the user interface for the first object,
`
`causing the object to execute a task (also referred to as a “thread” or “flow of
`
`execution); and 2) execute the task, and equivalents thereof. Id. at Fig. 7 (step 71),
`
`6:46-51, 4:2-8. The ‘974 Patent discloses, for example, “the user could press the
`
`ENTER key to cause the object to execute.” Id. Exemplary tasks disclosed include
`
`sending a fax transmission or formatting a diskette. Id. at 4:2-8, 1:51-56.
`
`
`
`c.
`
`“means for enabling said second object so as to support user
`interaction with said second object on a user interface of said
`computer while said first object is executing” (Claim 12)
`
`
`
`The stated function is “enabling said second object so as to support user
`
`interaction with said second object on a user interface of said computer while said
`
`first object is executing.” The disclosed structure for performing the function is a
`
`computer utilizing an operating system that supports multitasking capabilities, an
`
`associated display, and a user input device such as keyboard, mouse, touch screen,
`
`or microphone, and equivalents thereof. EX1001 at 3:31-51, Fig. 1. The computer
`
`processor is programmed to perform the following steps while the first object is
`
`executing: 1) receive a user input to focus an object of interest; and 2) display the
`
`object of interest focused either as a window 33 displayed in the foreground of the
`
`desktop (as shown in FIG. 2) or as a full screen session 34 displayed in full on the
`
`screen (as shown in FIG. 4); 3) relegate the first object to execute in the
`
`background, such that the first object is no longer enabled to receive user input;
`
`and 4) enable the newly focused object to receive user inputs. Id. at 3:52-65, 5:61-
`
`67, 4:55-57; see also 4:2-12.
`
`d.
`
`“means for determining when said first object ceases
`executing while said second object is enabled so as to support
`user interaction” (Claim 12)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“… further comprises means for determining when said first
`object provides a prompt for a user input” (Claim 13)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The stated function is “determining when said first object ceases executing
`
`while said second object is enabled so as to support user interaction” (Claim 12).
`
`The disclosed structure for performing the claimed function is a computer utilizing
`
`an operating system that supports multitasking capabilities, where the computer
`
`processor is programmed to determine when the status of the executing task of the
`
`first object changes from active to idle (e.g., when an executing task ends or when
`
`the task is no longer able to execute), and equivalents thereof. Id. at 2:1-12, 5:35-
`
`37, 6:47-50, 7:14-22, Fig. 8 (step 91); see also id. at 2:22-33, 4:13-14.
`
`
`
`Where the means for determining when said first object ceases executing
`
`further comprises “means for determining when said first object provides a prompt
`
`for a user input” (Claim 13), the computer processor is further programmed to
`
`determine when the execution of the first object reaches a step where a user input
`
`is required for further execution. Id. at 4:13-16, 2:22-29.
`
`e.
`
`“means for providing a notification on said user interface
`when said first object ceases executing by suddenly displaying
`a notification icon on said user interface of said computer
`while maintaining the representation of the first object, said
`notification icon being in a location that is separate from the
`representation of said first object on said user interface”
`(Claim 12)
`
`“… further comprises means for displaying a name of said
`first object in proximity to said notification icon.” (Claim 15)
`
`The stated function is “providing a notification on said user interface when
`
`
`
`
`
`
`said first object ceases executing by suddenly displaying a notification icon on said
`
`
`
`user interface of said computer while maintaining the representation of the first
`
`object” (Claim 12). The disclosed structure for performing the function is a
`
`computer utilizing an operating system that supports multitasking capabilities, and
`
`an associated display, and equivalents thereof. EX1001 at 3:31-51, Fig. 1. The
`
`computer processor is programmed to perform step 103 depicted in Fig. 8 and
`
`described at 7:59-67. Namely, the computer processor is programmed to: 1) while
`
`maintaining the representation of the first object, suddenly draw or display a
`
`notification icon on the user interface so as not to interfere with the currently
`
`focused object; and 2) the notification icon being in a location that is separate from
`
`the representation of its associated (first) object on the user interface. Id. at 7:59-
`
`67, 2:15-24, 2:34-41, 4:13-44, 4:65-5:9, Fig. 2; EX1004, ‘974 File History, p. 155
`
`(“When the first object ceases executing, a [not]ification is provided on the user
`
`interface by suddenly displaying a notification icon 35 (Fig. 2; page 7, lines 30-
`
`33). The representation 31 of the first object is maintained, with the notification
`
`icon 35 being in a location that is separate from the representation of the first
`
`object on the user interface (see Fig. 2; page 8, lines 19-25).”), p. 159 (“Applicants'
`
`invention causes an icon to suddenly appear in a location that is separate from the
`
`object's icon. This sudden appearance in a new location on the user interface is
`
`more likely to catch the user's attention.”), p. 188 (“Our interpretation of Green
`
`coincides with that of Appellants, i.e., contrary to the claimed invention, there is no
`
`
`
`disclosure of the display of a notification icon at a location on a user interface that
`
`is separate from a representation of its associated object.”); see also id. at pp. 137,
`
`158-159.
`
`Where the means for providing a notification on said user interface further
`
`comprises “displaying a name of said first object in proximity to said notification
`
`icon” (Claim 15), the computer processor is further programmed to draw or display
`
`the name of the object “in proximity to the buoy icon.” Id. at 2:37-39, 7:61-63,
`
`4:32-35, Figs. 2, 4-5 (names displayed below buoy icons).
`
`f.
`
` “means for removing said notification icon from said user
`interface” (Claim 19)
`
`
`
`The stated function is “removing said notification icon from said user
`
`interface.” The disclosed structure for performing the function is a computer
`
`utilizing an operating system that supports multitasking capabilities, an associated
`
`display, and a user input device such as keyboard, mouse, touch screen, or
`
`microphone, and equivalents thereof. EX1001 at 3:31-51, Fig. 1. The computer
`
`processor is programmed to perform steps 121, 123, and 125 depicted in Fig. 9 and
`
`described at 8:32-47. Namely, the computer processor is programmed to: 1)
`
`receive input from the user indicating that the user has targeted the notification
`
`icon (step 121); 2) receive an entered “remove sequence” from the user input
`
`device (step 123); and 3) remove or delete the notification icon from the desktop
`
`on the screen (step 125). Id. at Fig. 9, 8:32-47. Exemplary disclosed “remove
`
`
`
`sequences” include pressing the right mouse button, an escape key, or a function
`
`key. Id.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ‘974 PATENT
`A. Description of the ‘974 Patent
`On its face, the ‘974 Patent is directed to providing a buoy icon notification
`
`in a known multitasking computer environment. EX1001, ‘974 Patent at 2:4-41.
`
`The ‘974 Patent describes a user interface including a plurality of icons
`
`representing a plurality of objects, which may be computer applications. Id. at
`
`3:52-57. The user interface is presented on a general purpose computer with
`
`memory, a processor and an operating system. Id. at 3:32-51, Fig. 1. A user may
`
`focus on one of the objects, causing a window to open, and allowing the user to
`
`input data or other information into the object. Id. at 3:55-65. When executing the
`
`focused object, the user may reach a step that causes the user to wait. Id. at 4:2-8.
`
`At this stage, the user may focus on a different object, enabling the user to
`
`accomplish some work in the second object, while the first object is executing. Id.
`
`at 4:8-12.
`
`
`
`Id. at Fig. 3. When the first object finishes, or reaches a point requiring user input,
`
`a buoy icon displays on the user interface notifying the user that the first object is
`
`available for input. Id. at 4:13-31.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Id. at Fig. 5. Upon the display of the buoy, the user can choose to ignore it, and
`
`continue to work with the focused object, the user can select the buoy icon, causing
`
`the display to immediately focus back on the first object, or the user can dismiss
`
`the buoy. Id. at 4:44-64.
`
`However, as admitted by Applicants, multitasking computers, such as those
`
`described and claimed in the ‘974 Patent, were known at the time.
`
`“Multitasking computer environments allow users to run or execute plural
`objects (such as application programs) in an apparent simultaneous manner.
`For example, a user can execute a spread sheet application, a graphics
`application and a phone application at the same time.”
`
`
`
`Id. at 1:16-30.
`
`The problem addressed by the ‘974 Patent was that while two applications
`
`are executing concurrently, it is difficult to determine if the application running in
`
`the background is complete or requires user input other than by focusing the
`
`application, i.e., bringing it to the foreground. Id. at 1:41-61. The ‘974 Patent
`
`solved this problem by providing a notification to a user that a background
`
`application requires attention (e.g., it has completed execution and/or requires user
`
`input). See, e.g., id. at 1:42-66. However, as described further throughout this
`
`Petition, providing such a notification icon was well-known in the art, and actually
`
`implemented in popular products, years prior to the filing of the application leading
`
`to the ‘974 Patent. See, e.g., EX1003, U.S. Patent No. 5,448,695 at 3:49-67, 8:39-
`
`50, Figs. 2d, 2e; see generally EX1002, Inside Macintosh (described further below).
`
`Prosecution History of the ‘974 Patent
`
`B.
`The ‘974 Patent was filed on January 11, 1996 and claims priority to U.S.
`
`App. No. 08/179,479 (“the ‘479 Application”) filed on January 10, 1994 with 24
`
`claims. See EX1004, ‘974 Patent File History, pp. 9-61. The Examiner rejected
`
`Claims 1-24 under §112 as indefinite and as obvious under §103 over Green, et al.
`
`(US5333256) in view of Jaaskelainen (US5301348). Id. at pp. 64-72 (Feb. 8, 1995
`
`Office Action). In a response, Applicants amended claims 1-9, 11-21, and 23-24
`
`and added claims 25-28. Id. at pp. 73-82 (May 30, 1995 Response). The
`
`
`
`amendments, in part, were directed to adding a limitation that required a
`
`notification icon be displayed separate from a first object when the object ceased
`
`executing. Id. at pp. 74 (Claim 1 Amendment). In addition to the amendments,
`
`Applicants argued that, in contrast to the prior art of record, the notification icon of
`
`Applicants’ invention “suddenly appears on the user interface” but no notification
`
`of the status of the first object is provided while the first object is executing. Id. at
`
`pp. 80-81. The Applicant further noted that the prior art did not teach displaying a
`
`notification icon on a user interface when a first object ceases executing, where the
`
`icon is separate from the object. Id.
`
`On August 8, 1995, the Examiner again rejected Claims 1-9, 11-21 and 23-
`
`28 under §112 as indefinite and rejected the same under §103 as being
`
`unpatentable over Green in view of Jaaskelainen. Id. at pp. 83-90. In response,
`
`Applicants amended Claims 1 and 13 to add a limitation requiring that the
`
`notification icon be “suddenly” displayed upon execution of the first object ceasing.
`
`Id. at pp. 92-98 (Dec. 7, 1995 Response). Applicant distinguished the prior art on
`
`the grounds that the claimed invention “suddenly” displays a notification icon that
`
`is separate from any representation of the object itself. Id. at pp. 96-97.
`
`The Examiner issued an Advisory Action on December 18, 1995, indicating
`
`the Amendment would not be entered. Id. at p. 101. On March 15, 1996, the
`
`
`
`Application was abandoned for failure to Respond to an Office Action. Id. at p.
`
`104.
`
`The ‘974 Patent was filed on January 11, 1996, with 24 claims as a file
`
`wrapper continuation of the soon-to-be abandoned ‘479 Application. See id. at pp.
`
`109-115. That application included a Preliminary Amendment amending claims 1
`
`and 13 and adding claim 29. Id. at pp. 111-125. Applicant’s amendments and
`
`arguments were the same amendments and arguments raised in the December 7,
`
`1995 response, but not entered by the Patent Office.
`
`The Examiner rejected claims 1-9, 4, 9, 11-14, 16, 23-28 and 29 under § 102
`
`as anticipated by Green and, rejected claims 3, 5-8, 15, and 17-20 under § 103 as
`
`being obvious over Green. Id. at pp. 126-132 (Oct. 6, 1997 Office Action). In
`
`response, Applicants amended claims 1 and 13 adding a limitation requiring that a
`
`representation of a first object support user interaction. Id. at pp. 135-141 (Mar. 20,
`
`1998 Response). Applicant again argued that the prior art did not teach “providing
`
`a notification icon that is … separate from the representation of the first object”
`
`and “… suddenly displaying the notification icon while maintain the representation
`
`of the first object.” Id. at pp. 137-39.
`
`The Examiner issued a final Office Action rejecting claims 1-2, 4, 9, 11-14,
`
`16, 21, 23-26 and 29 under § 102 as anticipated by Green and claims 3, 5-8, 15,
`
`and 17-20 under § 103 as being obvious over Green. Id. at pp. 142-148.
`
`
`
`Applicants filed a Notice of Appeal on October 8, 1998. Id. at pp. 151-152.
`
`In its brief, Applicants maintained the position that the prior art differed from the
`
`claimed invention because it did not teach “providing a notification icon that is in a
`
`location that is separate from the representation of the first object on the user
`
`interface” or “notifying a user of an object status by suddenly displaying a
`
`notification icon that is separate from the object’s representation. Id. at pp. 153-
`
`168. The Examiner filed an Answer on March 3, 1999. Id. at pp. 169-183.
`
`The Board of Appeals reversed the Examiner on both rejections. Id. at pp.
`
`184-191. Namely, the Board concluded that Green did not teach at least “the
`
`display of a notification icon at a location on a user interface that is separate from a
`
`representation of its associated object.” Id. at pp. 188-89. Further, the Board
`
`concluded that a POSITA would not have found Claims 3, 5-8, 15, and 17-20
`
`obvious. Id. at p. 190. A Notice of Allowance was issued July 19, 2002 (id. at p.
`
`195) and the ‘974 Patent subsequently issued on December 3, 2002.
`
`IV. THERE
`IS A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE
`CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE
`
`The following prior art references disclose each limitation of claims 1, 2, 4,
`
`8, 12, 13, 15, and 19. As such, these claims are unpatentable. Included below are
`
`exemplary citations to the prior art references.
`
`A.
`
`Inside Macintosh, Volume VI Anticipates Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 13, 15,
`and 19 under §102(b)
`
`
`
`Inside Macintosh, Volume VI (“Inside Macintosh”) was published in 1991
`
`and publicly available at least as early as December 1991 (See EX1005,
`
`Declaration of Scott Bennett, Ph.D. at ¶43) and is therefore prior art under at least
`
`§ 102(b). Inside Macintosh supplements information described in Inside
`
`Macintosh, Volumes I – V with information specific to system software version
`
`7.0 (“System 7”). EX1002, Inside Macintosh at Cover Page. System 7 integrated
`
`the cooperative multitasking capabilities that were in optional components of prior
`
`system software versions into the Macintosh Operating System. Id. at 1-4. This
`
`allowed users to have several applications open at a time and switch between them.
`
`Id.; see id. at 1-6.
`
`Claim 1. A method that is implemented on a multitasking computer that
`comprises first and second objects, said method providing notification of a status
`of said first object on said computer, comprising the steps of:
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Claim 12.
`
`a) providing a representation of said first object on a user interface of said
`computer, with the representation supporting user interaction with said first
`object on said user interface of said computer;
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Element 12(a).
`
`b) executing said first object on said computer;
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Element 12(b).
`
`c) while said first object is executing, enabling said second object so as to support
`user interaction with said second object on said user interface of said computer;
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Element 12(c).
`
`
`
`d) while said second object is enabled so as to support user interaction,
`determining when said first object ceases executing;
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Element 12(d).
`
`e) providing a notification on said user interface when said first object ceases
`executing by suddenly displaying a notification icon on said user interface of
`said computer while maintaining the representation of the first object, said
`notification icon being in a location that is separate from the representation of
`said first object on said user interface.
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Element 12(e).
`
`Claim 2. The method of claim 1 wherein said step of determining when said first
`object ceases executing further comprises the step of determining when said first
`object provides a prompt for a user input.
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Claim 13.
`
`Claim 4. The method of claim 1 wherein said step of providing a notification on
`said user interface when said first object ceases executing further comprises the
`step of displaying a name of said first object in proximity to said notification
`icon.
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Claim 15.
`
`Claim 8. The method of claim 1 further comprising the step of removing said
`notification icon from said user interface.
`
`See Inside Macintosh as applied to Claim 19.
`
`Claim 12. An apparatus for use with a multitasking computer, said computer
`comprising first and second objects, said apparatus providing notification of a
`status of said first object on said computer, comprising:
`
`Inside Macintosh describes the System 7 Macintosh multitasking operating
`
`system for Macintosh computers, which allowed multiple applications (i.e., first
`
`and second objects) to execute concurrently. Namely, a user can cause the Finder
`
`
`
`application (i.e., first object) to copy files. The user can then initiate execution of
`
`or switch foreground context to a different application task (i.e., second object),
`
`which causes the Finder application to continue execution in the background while
`
`the other application operates in the foreground.
`
`“The Macintosh Operating System lets the user have several applications
`open at the same time and lets the user switch between them. The Operating
`System also gives the user constant access to the Finder. This lets a user
`move among open documents and applications without having to save or
`quit the previous document or application. This environment also allows
`applications to run in the background. For example, the Finder can copy
`files while the user is working on another task in the foreground.”
`
`EX1002, Inside Macintosh at p. 1-4.
`
`“The foreground process is the one currently interacting with the user; it
`appears to the user as the active application. The foreground process
`displays its menu bar, and its windows are in front of the windows of all
`other applications.
`
`A background process is a process that isn't currently interacting with the
`user. At any given time a process is either in the foreground or the
`background; a process can switch between the two states at well-defined
`times.
`
`The foreground process has first priority for accessing the CPU. Other
`processes can access the CPU only when the foreground process yields time
`to them. There is only one foreground process at any one time. However,
`multiple processes can exist in the background.
`
`
`
`An application that is in the background can get CPU time but can't interact
`with the user while it is in the background. (However, the user can choose to
`bring the application to the foreground-for example, by clicking in one of the
`application's windows.) Any application that has the canBackground flag set
`in its 'SIZE' resource is eligible to obtain access to the CPU when it is in the
`background.”
`
`Id. at p. 29-4.
`
`“Applications running in the background receive processing time when the
`front application makes an event call (that is, calls WaitNextEvent,
`GetNextEvent, or EventAvail) and there are no events pending for that front
`application. An application running in the background should relinquish the
`CPU regularly to ensure a timely return to the foreground application when
`necessary.
`
`In system software version 7.0 [], the available processing time is
`distributed among multiple applications through a procedure known as
`context switching (or just switching). When a context switch occurs, the
`Process Manager allocates processing time to a process that is different
`from the one that had been receiving processing time. Two types of context
`switching may occur: major and minor. All switching occurs at a well-
`defined time, namely, when an application calls WaitNextEvent.
`
`A major switch is a complete context switch: an application's windows are
`moved from the background to the foreground, or vice versa. In a major
`switch, two applications are involved, the one being switched to the
`foreground and the one being switched to the background. …
`
`
`
`A minor switch occurs when an application is switched out to give time to
`background processes. A minor switch always involves two applications, a
`background application and the application yielding time to it (which may
`be some other background application). In a minor switch, … the layers of
`windows are not switched[.]”
`
`Id. at 5-12 to 5-13; see also id. at 29-3 to 29-7, 1-6.
`
`
`
`When an application operating in the background (i.e., first object), such as
`
`the Finder example mentioned above, completes execution of the background task,
`
`the Notification Manager notifies the user of the completion event (i.e., providing
`
`notification of a status of said first object).
`
`“The Notification Manager provides an asynchronous notification service. It
`allows software running in the background (or otherwise unseen by the user)
`to communicate information to the user. For example, applications that
`manage lengthy background tasks (such as printing many documents or
`transferring large amounts of data to other machines) might need to inform
`the user that the operation is complete. These applications cannot use the
`standard methods of communicating with the user, such as alert or dialog
`boxes, because such windows might easily be obscured by the windows of
`other applications. Moreover, even if those windows are visible, the
`background application cannot be certain that the user is aware of the
`change. So some more reliable method must be used to manage the
`communication between a background application and the user, who might
`be awaiting the completion of the background task while running other
`applications in the foreground. …
`
`
`
`In all these cases, the communication generally needs to occur in one
`direction only, from the background application (or task, or driver) to the
`user. The Notification Manager [] allows you to post to the user a
`notification, which is an audible or visible indication that your application
`(or other piece of software) requires the user’s attention.”
`
`Id. at p. 24-3.
`
`“The Notification Manager provides applications with a standard user
`interface for notifying the user of significant events. It is suggested that your
`application adopt
`the
`following
`three-level notification strategy
`for
`communicating with the user:
`
`1. Display a diamond next to the name of the application in the Application
`menu.
`
`2. Insert a small icon into the list of icons that alternate with the Apple menu
`icon or the Application menu icon in the menu bar, and display a diamond
`next to the name of your application in the Application menu.
`
`3. Display a diamond, insert a small icon, and put up an alert box to notify
`the user that something needs to be done.
`
`Ideally, the user should be allowed to set the desired level of notification.
`The suggested default level of notification is level 2.”
`
`Id. at 24-5; see generally id. at 24-1 to 24-12.
`
`a) means for providing a representation of said first object on a user interface of
`said computer, with the representation supporting user interaction with said first
`object on said user interface of said computer;
`
`The ‘974 Patent discloses that the representation of a first object in its
`
`multitasking computer environment supports user interaction upon being “focused,”
`
`
`
`such as by being displayed in a foreground window and enabled to receive user
`
`input. EX1001, ‘974 Patent at 3:55-65.
`
`Inside Macintosh discloses the claimed function. Namely, Inside Macintosh
`
`discloses displaying a focused object as, for example, a window displayed in the
`
`foreground of the desktop (i.e., providing a representation of said first object on a
`
`user interface of said computer) that is enabled to receive user input (i.e., the
`
`representation supporting user interaction with said first object).
`
`“The foreground process is the one currently interacting with the user; it
`appears to the user as the active application. The foreground process
`displays its menu bar, and its windows are in front of the windows of all
`other applications.
`
`…
`
`The foreground process has first priority for accessing the CPU. Other
`processes can access the CPU only when the foreground process yields time
`to them. There is only one foreground process at any one time. However,
`multiple processes can exist in the background.”
`
`EX1002, Inside Macintosh at 29-4.
`
`“Although the user can have a number of open documents and applications,
`only one application is the active application. The active application is the
`application currently interacting with the user; its icon appears in the right
`side of the menu bar. The active application displays its menu bar and is
`responsible fo
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
