PTAB

IPR2019-00717

SZ DJI Technology Co Ltd v. Dareltech LLC

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition Intelligence

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Handheld Device for Mobile Phone Photography and Videography
  • Brief Description: The ’128 patent relates to a handheld device for holding and remotely operating a mobile phone's camera functions. The device comprises a handle, a coupler to attach the phone, and a wireless interface module (e.g., Bluetooth or Wi-Fi) with user-operated keys to control features like zoom and recording.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 1-16 and 19-22 are obvious over Rosenhan in view of Kim.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Rosenhan (Application # 2013/0005401) and Kim (WO 2012/096433).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Rosenhan taught an ergonomic handle for a smartphone with remote control buttons (zoom, record), a wireless interface (e.g., Bluetooth), and an auxiliary battery. However, Rosenhan's mounting structure was designed for a specific phone size. Kim taught a similar handle but featured a spring-loaded, adjustable coupler to accommodate phones of various sizes and explicitly disclosed a battery powering its wireless transmitter. Petitioner asserted that combining Rosenhan's ergonomic handle and controls with Kim's adjustable, spring-loaded coupler and explicit power-for-wireless teaching met all limitations of the independent claims.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine the references to solve two known problems. First, Rosenhan's fixed-size mount was impractical given the rapidly changing form factors of smartphones; incorporating Kim's adjustable mount was a predictable solution to enhance commercial applicability. Second, Kim's explicit teaching of a battery powering a wireless transmitter provided a clear blueprint for implementing the power supply for Rosenhan's wireless interface, a necessary element for its intended function.
    • Expectation of Success: Success was expected because the combination involved the simple substitution of a known adjustable mount for a fixed one and the application of a known technique (powering a wireless transmitter with a battery) to improve a similar device, yielding predictable results.

Ground 2: Claims 23-29 are obvious over Rosenhan.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Rosenhan (Application # 2013/0005401).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner asserted that Rosenhan alone disclosed all elements of method claims 23-29. Rosenhan's device, with its ergonomic grip, integrated controls, and wireless interface, was designed to allow a user to hold and operate a phone with one hand. The method steps—including receiving an input command from a key, providing a wireless connection, and sending an indication of the command to the phone—were alleged to be taught or rendered obvious by Rosenhan's disclosure of an ergonomic handle with Bluetooth-enabled camera controls.

Ground 3: Claims 17 and 18 are obvious over Rosenhan, Kim, and Ghanouni.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Rosenhan (Application # 2013/0005401), Kim (WO 2012/096433), and Ghanouni (Patent 7,204,650).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground built upon the Rosenhan and Kim combination by adding Ghanouni to teach the limitation of "a button to control the coupler," as required by claim 17. Ghanouni disclosed a holding accessory for photographic equipment where a push button was used to control the movement and adjustment of its attachment assembly (the coupler).
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would be motivated to integrate Ghanouni's push-button control into the combined Rosenhan/Kim device. This addition would improve the usability of adjusting the phone mount, particularly when the handle is extended in a "selfie stick" configuration, making it easier for a user to change the phone's angle remotely.

Ground 4: Claim 26 is obvious over Rosenhan and Bolton.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Rosenhan (Application # 2013/0005401) and Bolton (Application # 2011/0058052).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground alleged that adding Bolton to Rosenhan rendered claim 26 obvious. Claim 26 required "providing, by the handheld device, feedback that the mobile phone received input command." Bolton disclosed a remote control accessory for a smartphone camera that used an indicator (e.g., an LED light) to provide visual feedback to the user, confirming that a command (e.g., "start recording") was received and executed by the phone.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would incorporate Bolton's feedback indicator into Rosenhan's handle to provide the user with valuable real-time confirmation of camera operations. This feedback is highly beneficial in situations where the phone's screen is angled away from the user, improving the user's ability to control and manage photography and video capture effectively.

4. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-29 of Patent 9,037,128 as unpatentable.