Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al

Filing 558

REPLY CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEF to re #461 Claim Construction Statement Pursuant to Patent L.R. 4-5 by Apple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Exhibit R, #3 Exhibit S, #4 Exhibit T, #5 Exhibit U, #6 Exhibit V)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 12/29/2011) Modified text on 12/30/2011 (dhm, COURT STAFF).

EXHIBIT U

CX-201C
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Before the Honorable Theodore R. Essex
Administrative Law Judge
In the Matter of
CERTAIN MOBILE DEVICES AND
RELATED SOFTWARE

Investigation No. 337-TA-750

CORRECTED WITNESS STATEMENT OF DR. RAVIN BALAKRISHNAN

Served on behalf of Complainant:

Counsel for Complainant:

Apple Inc.
1 Infinite Loop
Cupertino, CA 95014
Tel: [phone]

Mark G. Davis
Brian E. Ferguson
Robert T. Vlasis
Edward S. Jou
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
1300 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 900
Washington, D.C. 20005
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Anne M. Cappella
Jill J. Ho
Erin C. Jones
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
201 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Tel: [phone]
Matthew D. Powers
Steven S. Cherensky
Paul T. Ehrlich
Robert L. Gerrity
Tensegrity Law Group LLP
201 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Tel: [phone]

CX-201C.001
Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

APLNDC0001229589

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
are described as “shape, size, and position parameters.” '828 Patent at
25:54-56.
QUESTION 442:

Let's turn to CDX-01.531. What is shown here?

ANSWER:

CDX-01.531 has a table listing each party's proposed construction of
“mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse,” which is a term in Claims 1 and 10.
The issues regarding this claim term are the same as those for the
“mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse to at least one of the pixel groups.”

QUESTION 443:

How have the parties construed “mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse”?

ANSWER:

Apple has construed “mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse” as “comput(ing)
numerical parameters that mathematically define an ellipse.” Motorola
has construed “mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse” as “applying a unitary
transformation of the group covariance matrix of second moments of
proximity data to fit an ellipse.” The Staff has construed “mathematically
fit(ting) an ellipse” as “computing numerical parameters that
mathematically define an ellipse.”

QUESTION 444:

In your opinion, what is the correct construction of “mathematically
fit(ting) an ellipse”?

ANSWER:

Apple's proposed construction is correct because one of ordinary skill in
the art would have understood that “mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse”
meant comput(ing) numerical parameters that mathematically define an
ellipse.

QUESTION 445:

What are the excerpts from the specification shown here on CDX01.531?

ANSWER:

CDX-01.531 shows additional excerpts from the '828 Patent specification.
At column 25 line 54 through column 26 line 67, the '828 Patent
specification describes a set of specific mathematical formulas for an
embodiment of ellipse fit(ting), which are identified as equations 12-23.
On CDX-01.531, I've reproduced equations 19 through 21, where the
computed numerical parameters are major axis lengths and orientation.
One of ordinary skill in the art would understand these formulas to be
examples of ellipse fit(ting) , and would have known that other known
formulas could be used to fit an ellipse. At column 27 lines 1 through 8,
the '828 Patent specification further describes another embodiment for low
resolution electrode arrays where the “total group proximity Gz is a more
reliable indicator of contact size as well as finger pressure.” One of
ordinary skill in the art would understand that this process was an
alternative to equations 15-22 for extracting shape, size, and position
parameters from a pixel group. In this “low resolution” embodiment, the
orientation and eccentricity are set to default values, so this embodiment

99

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

CX-201C.099
APLNDC0001229687

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
still mathematically defines an ellipse. A circle is a special case of an
ellipse with a defined orientation and eccentricity.
QUESTION 446:

In your opinion, are Apple's proposed construction for
“mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse” and “mathematically fit(ting) an
ellipse to at least one of the pixel groups” consistent with the '828
Patent specification?

ANSWER:

Yes, they are.

QUESTION 447:

Do you agree with Motorola's proposed constructions for
“mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse” and “mathematically fit(ting) an
ellipse to at least one of the pixel groups”?

ANSWER:

No, I do not agree with Motorola's proposed construction for
“mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse” and “mathematically fit(ting) an
ellipse to at least one of the pixel groups” because Motorola's proposed
construction is not consistent with the understanding of one of ordinary
skill in the art.

QUESTION 448:

In your opinion, why is Motorola's proposed construction inconsistent
with the understanding of one of ordinary skill in the art?

ANSWER:

The specific mathematical formulas disclosed in the specification, which
require operations on a covariance matrix, are only one example of ellipse
fit(ting). Motorola points to the file history, but as shown on CDX01.532, the file history does not reference any of the specific mathematical
formulas in Motorola’s proposed construction. There is no explicit
definition for “ellipse fitting” in the specification or the file history. This
is further supported by dependent claims 5 and 15, which refer to
eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a covariance matrix. I understand claims
1 and 10 to be broader than these dependent claims, and one of ordinary
skill in the art would thus understand that these specific mathematical
formulas are not necessary for “mathematically fit(ting) an ellipse.”

(ii)

“means for fit(ting) an ellipse to at least one of the pixel groups” (Claim 24)

QUESTION 449:

Please turn to CDX-01.533. What is shown here?

ANSWER:

CDX-01.533 has a table listing each party's proposed construction of the
structure of this term according to § 112 ¶ 6 function and the structure of
“means for fit(ting) an ellipse to at least one of the pixel groups,” which
is a term in Claim 24. CDX-01.533 also shows excerpts from the '828
Patent specification.

100

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

CX-201C.100
APLNDC0001229688

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
these processes practice the claim under all constructions for
“mathematically fit an ellipse.”
QUESTION 608:

Does this Witness Statement contain your answers to the foregoing
questions from counsel?

ANSWER:

Yes.

Dated: August 22, 2011

Ravin Balakrishnan

133

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

CX-201C.133
APLNDC0001229721