Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation

Filing 127

NOTICE by Microsoft Corporation re 126 Defendant's MOTION for Summary Judgment (Redacted) of Filing Exhibits (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Statement of Material Facts, # 2 Appendix Index to Exhibits, # 3 Exhibit 1 (Part 1), # 4 Exhibit 1 (Part 2), # 5 Exhibit 2, # 6 Exhibit 3, # 7 Exhibit 4, # 8 Exhibit 10, # 9 Exhibit 11, # 10 Exhibit 12, # 11 Exhibit 13, # 12 Exhibit 14, # 13 Exhibit 17, # 14 Exhibit 19, # 15 Exhibit 20)(Miner, Curtis)

Download PDF
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 1:10-cv-24063-MORENO MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., Plaintiff, vs. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Counterclaim Plaintiff, vs. MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., Counterclaim Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MICROSOFT CORPORATION’S STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS EXHIBIT A FACT SUPPORT Motorola accuses Microsoft of infringing claims 916 and 18-23 of U.S. Patent No. 5,502,839 (the '839 patent)with Windows Presentation Foundation (“WPF”) component of the .NET Framework for the Windows 7 operating system, the Silverlight Application Programming Interface (“API”) with the Windows 7 operating system, the Silverlight for Windows Phone API with the Windows Phone 7 operating system, the Direct2D API with the Windows 7 operating system, as well as each of those products – except for Silverlight for Windows Phone –with the Windows Vista operating system. First Expert Report of John Sibert, Ph.D. Regarding Whether Certain Claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,502,839 are Practiced by Defendant Microsoft Corporation at ¶31 and Exhibits B-E. Claims 9 and 10-14 require a “source of virtual input.” U.S.P.N. 5,502,839. Claims 15, 16, and 18-23 require “an interface between processes and data in said system and physical input” and “means responsive to one of said physical input devices for generating a picture.” U.S.P.N. 5,502,839. Microsoft's proposed construction of the term "source of virtual input " is " a physical input device corresponding to a virtual input device." Defendant Microsoft Corporation's Disclosure of Proposed Claim Constructions. Motorola's proposed construction for the term " source of virtual input " is " A process which generates one or more picture elements from user input." Defendant Microsoft Corporation's Disclosure of Proposed Claim Constructions. Microsoft's proposed construction of the term " means responsive to one of said physical input devices for generating a picture " is " generating a picture from the input from a physical input device." Defendant Microsoft Corporation's Disclosure of Proposed Claim Constructions. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION, SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER, Page 2 FACT SUPPORT Motorola's proposed construction for the term " means responsive to one of said physical input devices for generating a picture " is " generating a picture comprising one or more picture elements responsive to a user‟s interaction with a physical input device." Defendant Microsoft Corporation's Disclosure of Proposed Claim Constructions. Motorola accuses Microsoft of infringing claims 1, 4, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 5,784,001 (the '001 patent)with Windows Live Messenger 2011. First Expert Report of Dr. Martin E. Kaliski, Ph.D. Regarding Whether Certain Claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,783,001 (sic) are Practiced by Defendant Microsoft Corporation at ¶27 and Exhibit D. Claim 1 requires "presenting…the at least one U.S.P.N. 5, 784,001. image as a graphic message that is accompanied by the alphanumeric message on a display." Claim 4 requires "a display…for presenting…the at least one image as a graphic message accompanied by the alphanumeric message." U.S.P.N. 5, 784,001. Claim 6 requires "a display … for presenting…a corresponding image as a graphic message accomplished by the message." U.S.P.N. 5, 784,001. Microsoft's proposed construction of the term "graphic message that is accompanied by the alphanumeric message"/"graphic message accompanied by the alphanumeric message"/"graphic message accompanied by the message" is "At least one supplemental image is displayed along with the entire alphanumeric message." Defendant Microsoft Corporation's Disclosure of Proposed Claim Constructions. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION, SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER, Page 3 FACT SUPPORT Motorola's proposed construction for the term "graphic message that is accompanied by the alphanumeric message"/"graphic message accompanied by the alphanumeric message"/"graphic message accompanied by the message" is "At least one image is displayed along with a portion of, or the entire, alphanumeric message." Defendant Microsoft Corporation's Disclosure of Proposed Claim Constructions. The original claims were directed to embodiments using codes, including embodiments using codes to insert graphics into a portion of the message. MS-MOTO-SDFLA_00000017201-204 (original claims); 3:17-5:14. The applicants cancelled the claims directed to codes and amended the remaining claims substantially. MS-MOTO-SDFLA_00000017248-251 (amended claims). One amendment was the addition of the "accompanied by" language. MS-MOTO-SDFLA_00000017248-251. The applicants distinguished their invention from MS-MOTO-SDFLA_00000017254-255. the cited art by saying that the references did not disclose "a graphic message … as well as the original alphanumeric message received by the communications receiver" and contained "no suggestion that a graphic message can be displayed to supplement the meaning of a conventionally entered and received alphanumeric message." The applicants explained that "the alphanumeric message itself is presented along with any graphic message so that meaning of the graphic message is clarified when read by a user having the appropriate language skills." MS-MOTO-SDFLA_00000017255. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION, SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER, Page 4 FACT SUPPORT There is no evidence that the products practicing any of the Motorola Patents-in-Suit were marked with a patent designation together with the number of the patent. (Ex. #19) Motorola Mobility, Inc.‟s Responses to Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice dated June 6, 2011, Topic 59 at pages 62-63. There is no evidence that Microsoft was notified of any alleged infringement of any of the Motorola Patents-in-Suit prior to the filing of this action on November 10, 2010. (Ex. #20) Motorola Mobility, Inc.‟s Responses to First Set of Interrogatories filed on February 25, 2011, No. 8 at pages 19-20. No Marketplace server is located in the “fixed portion of the wireless communication system.” „333 patent, FIG. 1; Wedig Report, ¶ 124126; Ex. 2, Geier Report, ¶ 139-145. No Marketplace server performs “controlling a delivery of data.” Wedig Report, ¶ 8, 85-95. Neither Windows Mobile 6.5 nor Windows Phone Wedig Report, ¶ 127-128. 7.0 maintains an “application registry comprising a list of all software applications that are currently accessible to the subscriber unit.” Neither Windows Mobile 6.5 nor Windows Phone Wedig Report, ¶ 8, 60-62, 75-78, 84-85, 7.0 meets the limitation “in response to a change in 143-146. accessibility of an application . . . communicate the change to the fixed portion of the wireless communication system.” CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION, SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER, Page 5

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?