PTAB

IPR2018-01245

Apple Inc v. Qualcomm Inc

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Method and Apparatus Continuing Action of User Gestures Performed Upon a Touch Sensitive Interactive Display in Simulation of Inertia
  • Brief Description: The ’239 patent describes a system that identifies a user gesture performed on a touch-sensitive display and executes an associated action. The system stores a collection of predefined user gestures and their corresponding operations, where the manner of modifying the displayed subject matter can be responsive to a determined magnitude of the user's touch.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 1-4 are obvious over Hullender in view of Renaud.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Hullender (Application # 2003/0156145) and Renaud (a 1996 printed publication).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Hullender taught a tablet PC system that recognized gestures performed on a touch-sensitive display to execute corresponding actions, such as deleting or selecting content. Hullender disclosed storing a record of gestures and their associated operations in a data structure and identifying received gestures based on properties like stroke shape or number of taps. Critically, Hullender taught that the manner of the action could be responsive to the magnitude of the touch; for example, the size of a bracket gesture could determine the extent of selected text, and writing speed or stylus pressure could scale an action's area. Renaud was cited for its teaching on the known benefits of localizing data storage and processing in client/server systems to improve performance by reducing network latency, conserving bandwidth, and avoiding data transfer errors.
    • Motivation to Combine: A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine Hullender’s gesture system with Renaud’s principles for optimizing networked systems. Since Hullender's tablet PC could operate in a network, a POSITA would have been motivated to apply Renaud's teachings by storing Hullender's gesture data structure and performing gesture identification processing locally on the tablet. This combination would yield the predictable benefits of improved system performance, reliability, and the ability to function offline.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have had a reasonable expectation of success in this combination. Hullender already described a tablet PC with the necessary local processor and storage, making the implementation of Renaud's well-understood client-server optimization strategy a straightforward design choice to enhance an existing system.

Ground 2: Claims 1-4 are obvious over Kiraly in view of Agulnick.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Kiraly (Patent 6,249,606) and Agulnick (Patent 5,347,295).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner asserted that Kiraly taught a gesture recognition system that used a separate touchpad to receive gesture input. Kiraly's system identified gestures by processing stroke properties (e.g., stroke direction, number of strokes) into a feature vector and matching it against a stored collection of predefined gesture categories to execute commands. Agulnick, in contrast, taught a system where gestures were performed directly on the touch-sensitive display of a notebook computer to initiate operations such as page-turning, scrolling, or zooming. Agulnick further taught that the magnitude of a stroke—such as its size—could affect the scope of the resulting action, for instance, a larger "scratch-out" gesture deleting more content.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine Kiraly and Agulnick to improve Kiraly's system by replacing its separate touchpad with direct on-screen gesture input, as taught by Agulnick. This would create a more intuitive and efficient user experience, a well-known goal in the art. A POSITA would also have been motivated to incorporate Agulnick's teaching of using stroke magnitude to affect gesture execution, thereby providing Kiraly's system with more granular and nuanced control over computer operations.
    • Expectation of Success: Petitioner argued a POSITA would have a reasonable expectation of success. Both references addressed gesture control for computers and used common components like LCDs. Implementing direct on-screen input in Kiraly’s system was a predictable integration of known technologies to achieve the recognized benefits described in Agulnick, such as providing a richer vocabulary of stylus movements and better user feedback.

4. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requested institution of an inter partes review (IPR) and cancellation of claims 1-4 of Patent 8,665,239 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103.