PTAB

IPR2015-00698

Under Armour Inc v. adidas AG

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition Intelligence

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Portable Electronic Journal and Method
  • Brief Description: The ’345 patent discloses a “modular personal network” of interoperable portable electronic devices. A primary embodiment is a portable electronic journal that compiles data obtained from a plurality of discrete devices (e.g., microphone, camera, stopwatch, heart rate monitor) to create journal entries for personal, athletic, or medical tracking.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Obviousness over Mault and DeLorme - Claims 1-4, 6-11, 15-18, and 20 are obvious over Mault in view of DeLorme under 35 U.S.C. §103.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Mault (Patent 6,513,532) and DeLorme (Patent 6,321,158).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued Mault disclosed the core elements of the claimed portable electronic journal. Mault teaches a portable monitoring device for logging a user’s diet and activity, which constitutes a journal with journal entries. The device includes memory, a user interface for creating audio or image entries, a clock for time-stamping, and a communication device for uploading data to a computer. Petitioner contended that DeLorme, which teaches a PDA with GPS-based mapping and routing software, supplied the remaining limitations. Specifically, DeLorme taught providing route guidance (claim 17), downloading regional information like maps (claim 15), and displaying points-of-interest that function as localized advertisements (claim 18).
    • Motivation to Combine: A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine Mault and DeLorme because both references disclose portable electronic devices aimed at tracking a user’s personal information and activities (e.g., dieting, exercise, travel). Petitioner asserted the features were complementary; a POSITA would have found it logical and advantageous to incorporate the well-known route guidance and mapping features of DeLorme into Mault’s portable activity logger, which already disclosed using a GPS receiver.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have had a reasonable expectation of success because there were no technical barriers to integrating the software-based features of DeLorme into the hardware system of Mault. The combination would have predictably resulted in a single portable device capable of both activity logging and route navigation.

Ground 2: Obviousness over Telemedicine Kit and DeLorme - Claims 1-11, 15-17, and 20 are obvious over Telemedicine Kit in view of DeLorme under §103.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Telemedicine Kit (Ari T. Adler, M.S. thesis, May 2000) and DeLorme (Patent 6,321,158).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued the Telemedicine Kit, a portable system comprising a laptop and medical peripherals for remote patient diagnosis, constituted the claimed "portable electronic journal." A practitioner uses the kit to create and modify patient files (journal entries) containing text, images, and data from medical instruments. The kit’s laptop provided the memory, software interface, input devices (keyboard, camera), and clock. Petitioner asserted this combination was obvious because Telemedicine Kit itself expressly suggested its use with the DeLorme EarthMate GPS receiver to record the location of a medical consultation. This addition directly taught tagging entries with a location (claim 3) and provided the motivation to add DeLorme's further capabilities, such as downloading regional map information (claim 15) and providing route guidance (claim 17).
    • Motivation to Combine: The motivation was explicit, as Telemedicine Kit directly taught that it was compatible with and could be equipped with the DeLorme GPS receiver. A POSITA would have readily recognized that adding DeLorme’s mapping and navigation capabilities would be extremely useful for a medical practitioner traveling to provide care in remote, rural areas, which was the stated purpose of the Telemedicine Kit.
    • Expectation of Success: Success would have been reasonably expected and predictable. Because Telemedicine Kit expressly mentioned its compatibility with the DeLorme GPS hardware, integrating its associated software features onto the kit’s laptop computer would have been a simple addition of known functionality that would not impair the operation of the medical kit.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

  • "common file format" (claims 1, 20): Petitioner argued this term should be construed as "any well-known or standardized format that permits easy viewing or printing with a computer." This construction was asserted to be consistent with the specification’s examples (HTML, PDF) and supported Petitioner’s argument that formatting data for upload to a PC was a well-known and obvious feature.
  • "advertisement" (claim 18): Petitioner proposed the construction "a calling attention to or making known." This broad interpretation supported the argument that DeLorme's disclosure of displaying map information with points-of-interest for local businesses met this limitation.

5. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requested the institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-11, 15-18, and 20 of the ’345 patent as unpatentable.