PTAB

IPR2024-00341

Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v. Headwater Research LLC

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Automated Device Provisioning and Activation
  • Brief Description: The ’733 patent describes end-user devices that receive control-plane communications from a network system over a secure, encrypted service control link. The system uses a hierarchy of software agents on the device to manage and route these communications, enabling network-based supervision and control of services delivered to the device.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 1-17, 19, 21-27, 29, and 30 are obvious over TS-23.140 in view of Ogawa.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: TS-23.140 (3GPP Technical Specification v6.9.0, Mar. 2005) and Ogawa (8,195,961).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that the combination of TS-23.140 and Ogawa, referred to as "MMS-Ogawa," discloses all limitations of the challenged claims. TS-23.140, a standard for Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), described a client-server architecture where an "MMS User Agent" on a device communicates with a network "MMS Relay/Server" over an MM1 interface. This User Agent was responsible for routing application-specific data to various "destination applications" (claimed as "device agents") on the device using a "destination application identifier" (claimed as a "particular agent identifier"). Ogawa taught a data encryption system that used a "shared encryption key" for symmetric encryption between a client and server, in addition to a transport-layer security protocol like SSL/TLS.
    • Petitioner mapped this combination to independent claim 1 by asserting that TS-23.140's MMS User Agent is the claimed "service control device link agent." A POSITA would have implemented this agent on a device with a modem for wireless communication over 2G/3G networks. The MM1 interface in TS-23.140 served as the claimed "service control link" for "control-plane communications." A POSITA would have secured this link with a conventional encryption protocol like SSL/TLS. To improve security as contemplated by TS-23.140, a POSITA would have added Ogawa's layer of symmetric, end-to-end message encryption, which uses a "shared encryption key" stored in memory on both the device and the server. The combined system's MMS User Agent would receive, decrypt using the shared key, and route messages to the correct destination application based on the identifier in the message, meeting the remaining functional limitations of claim 1.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine the references to achieve improved and layered security for the MMS system described in TS-23.140. It would have been obvious to first secure the transport layer of TS-23.140's system with a conventional protocol like SSL/TLS. A POSITA would have been further motivated to add Ogawa's symmetric message encryption to provide the "end-user to end-user" security contemplated by TS-23.140, representing a simple application of a known encryption technique to a known system to achieve the predictable result of enhanced security.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have had a reasonable expectation of success in combining the references because they describe similar client-server architectures. Implementing modems and SSL/TLS was routine. Ogawa provided a clear, exemplary implementation for the type of end-to-end encryption that TS-23.140 itself suggested, making the combination straightforward and predictable.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

  • Petitioner addressed Patent Owner's apparent litigation position that a single layer of encryption (e.g., SSL/TLS) can satisfy all encryption-related limitations of the claims. Petitioner argued that its primary "MMS-Ogawa" combination, which includes both SSL/TLS for the transport link and Ogawa's separate symmetric message encryption, meets the claims as written. However, Petitioner also argued that the combination would still render the claims obvious even under the Patent Owner's interpretation, as the symmetric keys used within the well-known SSL/TLS protocol would meet the limitations for a shared key stored in memory and used for decryption.

5. Arguments Regarding Discretionary Denial

  • §325(d) / Advanced Bionics: Petitioner argued against denial, asserting that the prior art references and combination were not previously considered by the USPTO. It was contended that the Examiner committed material error during prosecution by issuing the patent with no prior art rejections, thereby failing to consider well-known systems like those described in TS-23.140 and Ogawa that render the claims obvious.
  • §314(a) / Fintiv: Petitioner contended that the Fintiv factors weighed against discretionary denial. The primary arguments were that co-petitioner Google is not a party to the parallel district court litigation, the trial date in that litigation is speculative, and co-petitioner Samsung stipulated it would not pursue the same invalidity grounds in that litigation. These factors, combined with the petition's compelling merits, were argued to favor institution to promote system efficiency and avoid duplicative efforts.

6. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requested institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-17, 19, 21-27, 29, and 30 of the ’733 patent as unpatentable.