PTAB

IPR2015-00846

Lenovo United States Inc v. Personal Audio LLC

Key Events

Petition

petition

Title: Audio Program Distribution and Playback System
Brief Description: The ’178 patent discloses an audio player device that downloads a plurality of audio program files and a separate "sequencing file" from a server. The sequencing file specifies the playback order for the audio files, and the device includes controls for a user to navigate forward or backward within the sequence.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Chase (Application # 2002/0177914) and Loeb (a 1992 article in Communications of the ACM).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Chase, which discloses a system for audio file playback, teaches the core limitations of an "audio program player." Chase’s "affiliate terminal" receives and stores audio files and "play list files" (the claimed sequencing file) that dictate the playback order. Chase also discloses controls for navigating the playlist. Petitioner asserted that Loeb, which describes a "personalized music system," was relevant for its teachings of a "listener's workstation" with a user interface for controlling playback, personalizing song selections based on user preferences, and displaying the current track.
- Motivation to Combine: A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine Chase’s audio distribution and playback system with Loeb’s user-centric, personalized interface to improve the overall user experience. The combination would yield a predictable system that allowed for personalized delivery and control of audio content, a well-known goal in the field.
- Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a high expectation of success in combining the known software and interface techniques of Loeb with the system architecture of Chase to create a more user-friendly and commercially desirable product.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Chase (Application # 2002/0177914), Loeb (a 1992 ACM article), and Inazawa (Patent 4,811,315).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: This ground builds on the Chase/Loeb combination to address limitations in claims 5 and 6 related to specific "skip backward" functionality. Petitioner contended that while Chase/Loeb teach general navigation, Inazawa explicitly discloses the claimed time-dependent backward skip logic. Inazawa, directed to a disc player, teaches using a single control key that either restarts the current track or skips to the previous track based on whether the command is received before or after a predetermined amount of time has elapsed in the current track.
- Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would be motivated to incorporate the specific, intuitive skip-backward functionality from Inazawa into the Chase/Loeb player. This addition would enhance the user interface with a common and desirable navigation feature, fulfilling Inazawa’s stated purpose of providing improved search and selection control for a playback device.
- Expectation of Success: Integrating Inazawa's well-defined hardware control logic into the software-based framework of Chase was presented as a mere design choice between hardware and software implementation, with a predictable and successful outcome.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Chase (Application # 2002/0177914), Loeb (a 1992 ACM article), Inazawa (Patent 4,811,315), and Bolton (Patent 4,609,954).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: This ground adds Bolton to address the "wrap-around" functionality recited in claims 7 and 8, where skipping forward from the last track in a sequence continues at the first track, and skipping backward from the first track continues at the last. Petitioner argued that the base combination was silent on this specific behavior, but Bolton explicitly discloses a disc player with controls that wrap around from the last track to the first and from the first track to the last.
- Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would add Bolton's wrap-around navigation to the player to ensure consistency with the continuous, sequential playback feature taught by Chase. This would create a seamless "endless loop" for the user, a common and expected feature in playlist-based audio systems.
- Expectation of Success: Implementing wrap-around logic is a simple and well-known programming task. A POSITA would be capable of applying this known technique from Bolton to the combined audio player with a high degree of confidence and a predictable result.

Means-Plus-Function Treatment: Petitioner argued that several "processor for..." limitations in the claims (e.g., "a processor for continuously delivering...," "a processor for discontinuing...") should be construed under 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶6 as means-plus-function limitations, even without the word "means." Petitioner contended the term "processor" alone does not impart sufficient structure.
Identification of Structure: For each means-plus-function term, Petitioner identified the claimed function and argued that the corresponding structure was the specific algorithm disclosed in the ’178 patent’s flowcharts (e.g., Figure 3) and related specification text. This detailed structural mapping was central to Petitioner's arguments that the software and hardware disclosed in the prior art performed the identical functions using the same or equivalent structures.
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI): Petitioner provided BRI for other key terms, such as "audio program player" ("a device that reproduces sound from digital audio content") and "sequencing file" ("a file of data that identifies the order in which audio program segments are to be played"), relying on the specification and constructions from a related district court case.

Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review of claims 1-9, 13-17, and 28-29 of Patent 7,509,178 and cancellation of those claims as unpatentable.