`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`Petitioner
`v.
`ROVI GUIDES, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Patent No. 8,156,528
`Filing Date: March 21, 2002
`Issue Date: April 10, 2012
`Title: PERSONAL VIDEO RECORDER SYSTEMS AND METHODS
`________________
`
`Inter Partes Review No.: IPR2020-00809
`
`________________
`
`
`PETITION 1 of 3 FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

` 
`
`IV. 
`
`V. 
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`MANDATORY NOTICES ..................................................................................... vii 
`INTRODUCTION AND RELIEF REQUESTED .......................................... 1 
` 
`OVERVIEW OF THE ’528 PATENT ............................................................ 2 
`A.  Brief Description ........................................................................................ 2 
`B.  Relevant Prosecution History ..................................................................... 5 
`III.  OVERVIEW OF PRIOR ART ........................................................................ 6 
`  Ellis 4709 .................................................................................................... 6 
`B.  Ellis 4707 .................................................................................................... 9 
`C.  Lea ............................................................................................................ 11 
`D.  Wood ........................................................................................................ 11 
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.104(b) AND STATEMENT OF THE RELIEF REQUESTED ............ 12 
`  Claims for Which Review is Requested and Grounds on Which
`Challenge Is Based ................................................................................... 12 
`  How Claims Are to Be Construed and Level of Skill .............................. 12 
`1.  Level of Skill ....................................................................................... 12 
`2.  How Claims Are to Be Construed ....................................................... 13 
`3.  The Claims Should Not Be Interpreted Under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-
`AIA), Sixth Paragraph ......................................................................... 16 
`SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY ................................... 17 
`  Ground 1: Claims 1-5, 8, 11-17, 19, 20, 23, 24, and 26-36 Are
`Anticipated By Ellis 4709 ........................................................................ 17 
`1.  Independent Claim 1 ........................................................................... 17 
`i. 
`Element 1[A] - An interactive television system for providing
`a user with the ability to record television programming, the
`interactive television system having user television
`equipment comprising: ................................................................ 18 
`ii.  Element 1[B] - a personal video recorder compliant device,
`wherein a first interactive television program guide and
`personal video recorder extensions are implemented on the
`personal video recorder compliant device; and ......................... 20 
`iii.  Element 1[C] - a personal video recorder device coupled to
`the personal video recorder compliant device, ........................... 22 
`iv.  Element 1[D] - wherein the personal video recorder device
`comprises a second interactive television program guide and
`the personal video recorder extensions, and .............................. 24 
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.  Element 1[E] - wherein the first interactive television
`program guide and the second interactive television program
`guide have the same functions and are distinctly implemented
`on each of the personal video recorder compliant device and
`the personal video recorder device. ............................................ 25 
`2.  Independent Claims 17, 27 .................................................................. 26 
`i. 
`Elements 17[A]-17[D], 17[F], 17[G], 27[A]-27[D], 27[F],
`27[G] ........................................................................................... 27 
`ii.  Elements 17[E], 27[E] - software and hardware configured
`to implement a plurality of application programming
`interfaces; and ............................................................................. 28 
`iii.  Elements 17[H], 27[H] - wherein the application
`programming interfaces are configured to facilitate
`communications between the personal video recorder device
`and the personal video recorder compliant device, and ............. 29 
`iv.  Element 17[I] - wherein the application programming
`interfaces are used irrespective of where and how the
`personal video recorder device is implemented ......................... 29 
`v.  Element 27[I] - wherein the personal video recorder
`extensions and application programming interfaces are
`configured to provide a seamless integration of personal
`video recorder functionality with the interactive television
`program guide ............................................................................. 30 
`3.  Independent Claim 32 ......................................................................... 31 
`4.  Claim 2 – The system of claim 1 further comprising a communications
`path that couples the personal video recorder compliant device with
`the personal video recorder device. .................................................... 33 
`5.  Claim 3 - The system of claim 2 wherein the communications path
`comprises a serial link. ........................................................................ 34 
`6.  Claim 4 - The system of claim 2 wherein the communications path
`comprises a parallel link. .................................................................... 34 
`7.  Claim 5 - The system of claim 1 further comprising a communications
`path that couples the personal video recorder compliant device with
`the personal video recorder device, wherein the communications path
`comprises a wireless infra-red communications link. ......................... 34 
`8.  Claims 8, 19 ......................................................................................... 35 
`
`ii
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`9.  Claim 11 - The system of claim 1 wherein the personal video recorder
`compliant device is used as a pass-through when the personal video
`recorder device is being used. ............................................................. 36 
`10. Claims 12-13 - The system of claim 1 wherein the second interactive
`television program guide is used without the first interactive television
`program guide. / The system of claim 1 wherein the first interactive
`television program guide is used without the second interactive
`television program guide. .................................................................... 38 
`11. Claims 14-15 - The system of claim 1 wherein the first interactive
`television program guide communicates with the personal video
`recorder device. / The system of claim 1 wherein the second
`interactive television program guide communicates with the personal
`video recorder compliant device. ........................................................ 39 
`12. Claim 16 - The system of claim 1, wherein the same functions
`comprise a function to schedule a television program for recording. 39 
`13. Claim 20 - The system of claim 17 wherein the personal video
`recorder device is implemented in a server arrangement at a location
`remote from the personal video recorder compliant device. .............. 40 
`14. Claims 23, 24 - The system of claim 17 wherein at least one of the
`plurality of application programming interfaces are vendor-specific
`application programming interfaces. / The system of claim 17 wherein
`at least one of the plurality of application programming interfaces are
`vendor-independent application programming interfaces. ................. 40 
`15. Claims 26, 31, 36 ................................................................................. 41 
`16. Claims 28, 33 ....................................................................................... 42 
`17. Claims 29, 34 ....................................................................................... 43 
`18. Claims 30, 35 ....................................................................................... 44 
`  Ground 2: Claims 6, 7, 9-11, 18, 21, 22, 28, and 33 Are Obvious
`Over Ellis 4709 in view of Ellis 4707 ...................................................... 45 
`1.  Claims 6, 18 ......................................................................................... 45 
`2.  Claim 7 - The system of claim 6 wherein functionalities related to
`commerce and authorization are provided by the set-top box. ........... 47 
`3.  Claims 9, 21 ......................................................................................... 47 
`4.  Claims 10, 22 ....................................................................................... 52 
`5.  Claim 11 - The system of claim 1 wherein the personal video recorder
`compliant device is used as a pass-through when the personal video
`recorder device is being used .............................................................. 52 
`6.  Claims 28, 33 ....................................................................................... 53 
`  Ground 3: Claims 17-36 Are Obvious Over Ellis 4709 in view of
`Lea ............................................................................................................ 57 
`
`iii
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`1.  Plurality of APIs (Claims 17- 36) ....................................................... 57 
`2.  Claims 23-24 ....................................................................................... 59 
`3.  Claim 25 .............................................................................................. 61 
`4.  Claims 26, 31, 36 ................................................................................. 63 
`  Ground 4: Claims 1-5, 8, 11-17, 19, 20, 23, 24, and 26-36 Are
`Obvious Over Ellis 4709 in view of Wood .............................................. 64 
`  Ground 5: Claims 6, 7, 9-11, 18, 21, 22, 28, and 33 Are Obvious
`Over Ellis 4709 in view of Ellis 4707 and Wood .................................... 65 
`  Ground 6: Claims 17-36 Are Obvious Over Ellis 4709 in view of
`Lea and Wood ........................................................................................... 65 
`VI.  THE BECTON DICKINSON FACTORS WEIGH IN FAVOR OF
`INSTITUTION .............................................................................................. 66 
`  GROUNDS FOR STANDING & FEE PAYMENT ..................................... 67 
`VII.  CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 68 
`CERTIFICATION UNDER 37 CFR § 42.24(d) ..................................................... 69 
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ................................................................................ 70 
`CLAIM LISTING APPENDIX ............................................................................... 71 
`
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`

`

`EXHIBITS
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,156,528 (the “’528 Patent”)
`
`Certified File Wrapper for the ’528 Patent
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`PCT Application Publication Number WO 00/04709 (“Ellis
`4709”)
`
`PCT Application Publication Number WO 00/04707 (“Ellis
`4707”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,206,497 (“Boyle”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,349,352 (“Lea”)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0042915
`(“Kubischta”)
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0057893
`(“Wood”)
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001:
`
`Ex. 1002:
`
`Ex. 1003:
`
`Ex. 1004:
`
`
`Ex. 1005:
`
`
`Ex. 1006:
`
`Ex. 1007:
`
`Ex. 1008:
`
`
`Ex. 1009:
`
`Ex. 1010:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1016:
`
`Ex. 1017:
`
`
`[Exs. 1011-1014 – omitted]
`
`Ex. 1015:
`
`Comcast Respondents’ Amended Claim Construction Brief in
`Certain Digital Video Receivers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1158
`Complainants’ Opening Claim Construction Brief in Certain
`Digital Video Receivers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1158
`Initial Determination Granting Complainants’ Second
`Unopposed Motion for Partial Termination of the Investigation
`in Certain Digital Video Receivers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1158
`
`
`
`v
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1018:
`
`Ex. 1019:
`
`Ex. 1020:
`
`Ex. 1021:
`
`Ex. 1022:
`
`
`
`Markman Hearing Transcript in Certain Digital Video
`Receivers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1158
`Joint Claim Construction Chart in Certain Digital Video
`Receivers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1158
`Excerpt of Transcript of Telephonic Conference on Jan. 14,
`2020, in Certain Digital Video Receivers, Inv. No. 337-TA-
`1158
`Order regarding Outstanding Markman Constructions and
`Motion In Limine from January 14, 2020, Telephone
`Conference in Certain Digital Video Receivers, Inv. No. 337-
`TA-1158
`Public Version of “United States Patent No. 8,156,528 Claim
`Chart for Infringement of Representative Independent Claims 1,
`17, 27 and 32” from Certain Digital Video Receivers, Inv. No.
`337-TA-1158
`
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES
`Real Parties in Interest. The real parties-in-interest are (i) Comcast
`
`Corporation, (ii) Comcast Business Communications, LLC, (iii) Comcast Cable
`
`Communications Management, LLC, (iv) Comcast Cable Communications, LLC,
`
`(v) Comcast Holdings Corporation, (vi) NBCUniversal Shared Services, LLC
`
`(formerly known as Comcast Shared Services, LLC), (vii) Comcast of Santa Maria,
`
`LLC, (viii) Comcast of Lompoc, LLC, (ix) Comcast Financial Agency Corporation,
`
`and (x) Comcast STB Software I, LLC. These entities are referenced below as
`
`“Comcast entity #” or as “Comcast entities #-#,” where “#” is one of (i) through (x).
`
`No unnamed entity is funding, controlling, or directing this Petition or
`
`otherwise has an opportunity to control or direct this Petition or Petitioner’s
`
`participation in any resulting IPR.
`
`The ’528 Patent has been asserted against Comcast entities (i), (iii), (iv), and
`
`(v) by Rovi Corporation of San Jose, California, and Rovi Guides, Inc. of San Jose,
`
`California. The action, before the International Trade Commission, is In the Matter
`
`of Certain Digital Video Receivers, Broadband Gateways, and Related Hardware
`
`and Software Components, Inv. No. 337-TA-1158 (“ITC Investigation”), which was
`
`instituted in May 22, 2019. The ’528 Patent was also asserted in the Central District
`
`of California in Rovi Guides, Inc. v. Comcast Corporation, No. 2:19-CV-03096
`
`(C.D. Cal). That case is stayed until the determination of the ITC Investigation
`
`
`
`vii
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`becomes final. The earliest date of service on any of the Comcast entities in either
`
`of these proceedings was April 25, 2019.
`
`Related Matters. This is the first of three petitions for inter partes review
`
`filed concurrently by Petitioner against the ’528 Patent.
`
`Lead & Back-Up Counsel, Service Information. Petitioner designates
`
`counsel listed below and consents to electronic service. A power of attorney for
`
`counsel is being filed with this Petition.
`
`Lead Counsel
`Frederic M. Meeker
`Reg. No. 35,282
`fmeeker@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`First Back-Up Counsel
`John R. Hutchins
`Reg. No. 43,686
`jhutchins@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.
`1100 13th Street, NW, Suite 1200
`Washington, DC 20005
`Tel: (202) 824-3000
`Fax: (202) 824-3001
`
`Additional Back-Up Counsel
`J. Pieter van Es
`Reg. No. 37,746
`pvanes@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`John Harris Curry
`Reg. No. 65,067
`jcurry@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`Bennett A. Ingvoldstad
`Reg. No. 73,367
`bingvoldstad@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`Camille D. Sauer
`Reg. No. 71,866
`csauer@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`Eunice N. Chan
`Reg. No. 68,981
`echan@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.
`1100 13th Street, NW, Suite 1200
`Washington, DC 20005
`Tel: (202) 824-3000
`Fax: (202) 824-3001
`
`
`
`viii
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Please address all correspondence to counsel at the addresses shown above.
`
`Petitioner further consents to electronic service by email at the following address
`
`and the above emails: ComcastIPRService@bannerwitcoff.com.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ix
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION AND RELIEF REQUESTED
`Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (“Petitioner”) petitions for inter partes
`
`review and cancellation of claims 1-36 of U.S. Patent No. 8,156,528 (“the ’528
`
`Patent”) (Ex. 1001).
`
`The alleged invention relates to a personal video recorder (“PVR”) system
`
`with two coupled devices, a “PVR device” and a “PVR-compliant device,” each with
`
`its own program guide. The program guides, while implemented on different
`
`devices, provide the same functionality including the ability to schedule programs
`
`for recording onto the PVR device. This was known or would have been obvious to
`
`a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention (“POSA”).
`
`A program guide is a straightforward and known way to control a PVR, and having
`
`guides on multiple devices with the same functionality and communicating to allow
`
`recording was known. The ’528 Patent, at most, claims trivial modifications to
`
`known systems and processes that would have been well within the skill of a POSA.
`
`The ’528 Patent concedes that most of its claim features were already known.
`
`For example, PVRs allowing users to schedule, playback, and manage recordings
`
`were known. Ex. 1001, 1:21-34. Providing interactive program guides (“IPGs”) to
`
`facilitate television viewing was also known (Ex. 1001, 1:35-40), as was providing
`
`IPGs on PVRs to allow users to record programs. Ex. 1001, 1:41-49. Additionally,
`
`providing IPGs that have the same functions and are distinctly implemented on two
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`respective devices was also known in the art, as the Examiner repeatedly noted
`
`during prosecution. Ex. 1002, 4477-4486, 4510-4521, 4538-4549, 4591-4602,
`
`4889-4899, 5045-5054.
`
`The alleged invention thus amounts to using two IPGs on two different
`
`devices, both having the same functions, and both doing what IPGs were known to
`
`do (e.g., control a PVR). The references relied upon herein show the use of two
`
`IPGs having the same functions on two devices to control a PVR as claimed. The
`
`dependent claims recite other trivial features – none of which is described as being
`
`inventive by the ’528 Patent specification or was argued as being inventive during
`
`prosecution, and all of which are taught by the references relied upon herein.
`
`In sum, as demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence, including the
`
`relied-upon prior art, and the Declaration of industry expert Mr. Anthony
`
`Wechselberger (Ex. 1003), the ’528 Patent’s claims are unpatentable.
`
` OVERVIEW OF THE ’528 PATENT
`A. Brief Description
`The ʼ528 Patent “relates to personal video recorder (PVR) systems… that
`
`include user television equipment having an interactive television program guide
`
`(IPG) with PVR extensions implemented thereon.” Ex. 1001, 1:16-20; 5:23-33. The
`
`patent acknowledges that PVR systems with IPGs were known. Id., 1:21-60; Ex.
`
`1003, ¶ 41.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`The system essentially requires a personal video recorder (PVR) that can be
`
`controlled via IPGs that are implemented on two devices: the PVR itself and “a PVR-
`
`compliant device.” Ex. 1001, 7:48-58, 5:54-6:18. The PVR-compliant device 500
`
`“may include, for example, IPG 502, PVR extensions 504, PVR APIs 506, firmware
`
`508, any other component needed to accommodate PVR functionality, or any
`
`combination thereof.” Id., 7:48-58, 8:20-9:35, 9:50-59, Fig. 5 (reproduced below).
`
`
`
`“Components of PVR-compliant device 500 may be located in, for example,
`
`a PVR sidecar, a PVR server, a set-top-box, any suitable location or locations, or a
`
`combination thereof.” Id., 7:55-58, 13:56-14:3, 17:13-30. Figures 9-14 of the ’528
`
`Patent depict various arrangements of a system having a PVR and a PVR-compliant
`
`device. Id., 13:39-55. For example, Figure 12 (reproduced below) depicts an
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`example where a set-top box 1200 functions as the PVR-compliant device and a
`
`PVR sidecar 1201 functions as the PVR. Id., 15:3-12, Fig. 12.
`
`
`
`The PVR-compliant device 500 (i.e., set-top box 1200) can include PVR extensions
`
`902, an IPG 904, and PVR APIs. Id., 14:4-53. The PVR extensions can include
`
`“any suitable hardware, software, or both that may be used in conjunction” with the
`
`IPG to “enable a seamless integration of” the IPG with PVR functionality, which
`
`provides a single interface with which to operate both the IPG and the PVR
`
`equipment. Id., 7:59-8:19. The ’528 Patent also explains that a “full port” of the
`
`IPG 904 can be implemented in the PVR sidecar in addition to being implemented
`
`on the PVR-compliant device (i.e., set-top box). Id., 15:13-29; 16:10-31. In this
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`manner, the PVR device is operated via either the IPG on the PVR or the IPG
`
`implemented on the PVR-compliant device, which may be remote from, but in
`
`communication with, the PVR device. Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 41-57.
`
`B. Relevant Prosecution History
`U.S. Application No. 10/105,082 (“the ’082 Application”), which issued as
`
`the ʼ528 Patent, was filed on March 21, 2002 and claimed priority to three
`
`provisional applications, the earliest of which was filed on March 22, 2001. Ex.
`
`1002 at 1, 6. Thus, the earliest possible priority date to which the ’528 Patent could
`
`be entitled is March 22, 20011.
`
`
`
`During an arduous prosecution, the Examiner repeatedly indicated that it was
`
`not inventive to provide two IPGs that are distinctly implemented on two respective
`
`devices, citing to, e.g., U.S. 2003/0044165 to Wood and U.S. 6,256,390 to Okuyama.
`
`Id., at 4477-4486, 4510-4521, 4538-4549, 4591-4602, 4889-4899, 5045-5054.
`
`Indeed, it is axiomatic that replicating a known feature is presumed to be obvious.
`
`In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Nevertheless, after various
`
`amendments and appeals, in which the Applicant focused on the claimed limitations
`
`of two implementations of an IPG – one on the PVR device and one on the PVR-
`
`
`
`1 Petitioner does not concede that the ’528 Patent is entitled to the priority of the
`
`provisional applications.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`compliant device – both doing what IPGs were known to do (e.g., control a PVR
`
`device), the Examiner eventually relented and allowed the ’082 Application. Ex.
`
`1002, 4942-4948, 5002-5008, 5067-5073.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF PRIOR ART
` Ellis 4709
`Ellis 4709 (Ex. 1004) is international patent publication number WO
`
`00/04709, which was published on January 27, 2000 and therefore qualifies as prior
`
`art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`Like the ’528 Patent, Ellis 4709 discloses a system for recording programs on
`
`a PVR (a digital storage device 31 contained within a set-top box) via an IPG
`
`implemented on either the PVR itself or on a “remote program guide access device”
`
`that is remote from, but in communication with, the PVR. Ex. 1004, 4:18-23, Fig.
`
`1; Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 89-111. Ellis 4709 describes an illustrative system 10 as shown in
`
`Figure 1 (reproduced, below):
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Ellis 4709 explains that system 10 includes interactive television equipment
`
`17 that is connected to a main facility 12 via a communications link 18. Ex. 1004 at
`
`9:1-10:14. Additionally, system 10 includes a “remote program guide access device
`
`24” to which “[i]nteractive television program guide equipment 17 may be
`
`connected … via remote access link 19.” Id., 9:15-30. Equipment 17, includes,
`
`among other things, user television equipment 22, which in turn includes a set-top
`
`box 28 with digital storage 31. Id., Figs. 2a and 3 (annotated and reproduced, below).
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Set-top box 28 can control a home storage device to record programs. Ex.
`
`1004, 5:20-24, 16:20-26. The storage device may be a digital storage device 31,
`
`with which “the user may record programs and program data in digital form.” Id.,
`
`17:16-18. Additionally, Ellis 4709 explains that digital storage device 31 “can be
`
`contained in set-top box 28.” Id., 17:28-31. Ellis 4709 further describes that both
`
`the local guide on the set-top box and the remote guide on the remote device are “the
`
`same guide but compiled to run on two different platforms.” Id., 17:1-9, 27:20-24;
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 99, 101-102. Furthermore, Ellis 4709 explains that “[p]rogram guide
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`information… may be exchanged, and settings set, between the two interactive
`
`television program guides.” Id., 28:7-16.
`
`B.
`Ellis 4707
`Ellis 4707 (Ex. 1005) is international patent publication number WO
`
`00/04707, which was published on January 27, 2000, and qualifies as prior art under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`
`
`Ellis 4707 discloses “an interactive television program guide system … in
`
`which multiple interactive television program guides within the household are
`
`coordinated.” Ex. 1005, 3:24-27. Ellis 4707’s illustrative program guide system 30
`
`includes a main facility 32, television distribution facility 38, and multiple instances
`
`of user television equipment 44. Id., 11:17-13:4, Fig. 1 (reproduced, below); Ex.
`
`1003, ¶¶ 112-123.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Each device 44 of the system implements its own guide. Ex. 1005, 4:19-27, 5:18-
`
`28, 26:3-17. Furthermore, the guide on one device may be used to adjust settings,
`
`including setting program recordings, on the guide of another device. Id. In one
`
`example, a device lacking the ability to record may, when a user requests a recording
`
`via a guide on the device, instruct another device to carry out the recording. Ex.
`
`1005 at 35:9-32. Each device with a guide may be a set-top box with a digital storage
`
`device. Id., 1:18-20, 2:28-3:2, 3:30-33, 14:4-7, claims 89-91. Thus, Ellis 4707
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`teaches providing recording functionality from one set-top box to another set-top
`
`box. Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 112-123.
`
`C. Lea
`U.S. Patent No. 6,349,352 to Lea (Ex. 1007) issued from an application filed
`
`on January 6, 1998, which is prior to the earliest claimed priority date of the ’528
`
`Patent. Lea, therefore, qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`Lea describes a home entertainment system in which multiple devices interact.
`
`Ex. 1007 at Abstract, 2:36-46; Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 124-139. When one device connects to
`
`another and discovers its capabilities, it determines the type of device. Ex. 1007 at
`
`9:50-55, 18:20-62. This approach facilitates cooperation among devices of different
`
`type and vendor. Id. at 9:64-10:3, 18:9-15. A specific API based on the type of
`
`device is then generated, which allows the devices to communicate. Id., 18:64-19:5.
`
`D. Wood
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2002/0057893 to Wood et al. (Ex. 1010) issued
`
`from an application filed on March 3, 1999, which is prior to the earliest claimed
`
`priority date of the ’528 Patent. Wood, therefore, qualifies as prior art under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`Wood confirms that it was known for digital recording devices to
`
`automatically record programs users are viewing in real-time, a fact also admitted
`
`by the ’528 Patent. Ex. 1003, ¶ 140; Ex. 1001, 1:21-34. For example, Wood
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`describes the digital recorder storing live television shows so the user can rewind or
`
`pause. Ex. 1010, ¶¶ [0007], [0059], [0117]-[0122].
`
`IV.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.104(B) AND STATEMENT OF THE RELIEF REQUESTED
` Claims for Which Review is Requested and Grounds on Which
`Challenge Is Based
`Petitioner requests review on the following grounds:
`
`Ground
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`Claims
`Challenged
`1-5, 8, 11-17, 19,
`20, 23, 24, 26-36
`6, 7, 9-11, 18, 21,
`22, 28, 33
`17-36
`1-5, 8, 11-17, 19,
`20, 23, 24, 26-36
`6, 7, 9-11, 18, 21,
`22, 28, 33
`17-36
`
`Basis
`
`Prior Art
`
`§ 102(b)2
`
`Ellis 4709
`
`§ 103(a)
`
`§ 103(a)
`
`§ 103(a)
`
`§ 103(a)
`
`§ 103(a)
`
`Ellis 4709 and Ellis 4707
`
`Ellis 4709 and Lea
`
`Ellis 4709 and Wood
`
`Ellis 4709, Ellis 4707, and
`Wood
`Ellis 4709, Lea, and Wood
`
` How Claims Are to Be Construed and Level of Skill
`1.
`Level of Skill
`The alleged invention relates to the field of “personal video recorder (PVR)
`
`
`
`2 All citations to 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103 refer to the pre-AIA version of the
`
`statutes.
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`systems, and more particularly, to PVR systems that include user television
`
`equipment having an interactive program guide (IPG) with PVR extensions
`
`implemented thereon.” Ex. 1001, 1:16-20, claims 1, 17, 27 and 32; Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 5-
`
`20, 30, 41. A POSA would have had at least a bachelor’s degree in computer
`
`science, electrical engineering, computer engineering, or a similar discipline, and
`
`two or more years of relevant industry or research experience, or the equivalent
`
`thereof, including in electronic content delivery, electronic program guides,
`
`television video signal processing, graphical user interfaces, cable or satellite
`
`television systems, set-top boxes, personal video recorders (PVR), or similar digital
`
`storage devices Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 29-31.
`
`2. How Claims Are to Be Construed
`A claim subject to inter partes review shall be given its ordinary and
`
`customary meaning to a POSA, consistent with the prosecution history, as it would
`
`be given in a civil action under 35 U.S.C. § 282(b). 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). All
`
`claim terms not addressed below should, for the purpose of this proceeding, be
`
`construed according to their ordinary and customary meaning to a POSA at the time
`
`of the alleged invention.
`
`In the co-pending ITC Investigation, Petitioner and Patent Owner proposed
`
`constructions as set forth in the following table. See Ex. 1019, 3-4; Ex. 1015, 2652,
`
`Ex. 1016, 3-31; Ex. 1022.
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Term
`
`application
`programming
`interfaces
`personal
`video
`recorder
`device
`
`personal
`video
`recorder
`compliant
`device
`interactive
`television
`program
`guide
`
`distinctly
`implemented
`
`same
`functions
`PVR
`extensions
`
`
`
`Comcast’s Proposed
`Construction
`
`Rovi’s Proposed Construction
`
`a set of protocols or routines that provide an interface between
`two program modules, such as two software modules
`
`a device that records
`personal videos on internal
`storage
`
`a device that provides
`recording functionality
`only when coupled to a
`personal video recorder
`
`the components of a system
`that can manipulate guide
`data and user inputs to
`provide an interactive,
`visual display of media
`listings and other guidance
`functions
`each device separately
`contains all the
`components of a system
`that can manipulate guide
`data and user inputs to
`provide an interactive,
`visual display of media
`listings and other guidance
`functions
`all of the same functions
`
`hardware or software that
`enables seamless
`integration of interactive
`program guide and
`
`a device used to interact with an
`interactive television system and that
`is capable of recording programs to
`local digital storage including the
`automatic recording of programs
`that users are watching in real-time
`a device without a personal video
`recorder, designed to operate with a
`personal video recorder device, and
`used to interact with an interactive
`television system
`an application that generates a
`display of television program
`listings on user television equipment
`and that allows users to navigate
`through and interact with television
`program listings based on user
`commands
`separately implemented
`
`a plurality of common interactive
`television program guide functions
`any suitable hardware, software, or
`both used in conjunction with the
`interactive television program guide
`which adds personal video recorder
`functionality to a device
`
`14
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`personal video recorder
`functionality
`
`The ITC adopted certain claim constructions for the disputed terms. With two
`
`exceptions (as indicated below), the ITC adopted a construction proffered by one of
`
`the parties. The ITC’s adopted constructions are summarized in the table, below:
`
`Term
`
`personal video recorder
`device
`
`personal video recorder
`compliant device
`
`interactive television
`program guide
`
`ITC Adopted Constructions
`Adopted Rovi’s Construction. Ex. 1020, 58:16-22.
`
`ITC Construction (neither party): “a device that
`provides personal video recorder (‘PVR’) functionality
`only when coupled to a PVR.” Ex. 1020, 64:5-11.
`Adopted Rovi’s Construction. Ex.1020, 63:18-64:4.
`
`distinctly implemented Adopted Rovi’s Constructio