Skyhook Wireless, Inc. v. GOOGLE, INC.

Filing 55

DECLARATION of Catherine R. Murphy in Support of Google Inc.'s Opposition to Skyhook Wireless, Inc.'s Opening Claim Construction Brief by GOOGLE, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Manning, Susan)

EXHIBIT B

Susan Baker Manning
Direct Phone: [phone]
Direct Fax:
202.373.6472
[e-mail]

July 25, 2011
Samuel K. Lu, Esq.
Irell & Manella LLP
1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90067-4267
Re:

Skyhook Wireless, Inc. v. Google Inc.
Case No. 10-cv-11571-RWZ (D. Mass.)

Dear Sam:
I enclose Google’s Preliminary Identification of Claim Terms Subject to Claim
Construction. Google reserves the right to add or remove terms from this list as warranted,
particularly given that Skyhook has not yet disclosed its contentions as to the scope of the
claims.
As you are aware, Google contends that numerous limitations of the patents-in-suit do not
“particularly point[] out and distinctly claim[] the subject matter which the applicant
regards as his invention” as required by 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 1. See Google Inc.’s
Preliminary Invalidity Contentions at 22-24. We have included those claim terms on the
enclosed list of terms, even though Google believes that these claim limitations are
insolubly ambiguous, and not properly susceptible to construction. If Skyhook contends
that these limitations meet the definiteness requirement, it should propose appropriate
constructions.
Sincerely,

Susan Baker Manning
Enclosure

A/74451145.1

Skyhook Wireless Inc. v. Google Inc.
Case No. 10-cv-11571-RWZ (D. Mass.)

Google’s Preliminary Identification of Claim Terms
Subject to Claim Construction
July 25, 2011
Term
Claim language
No.
“Wi-Fi location server”
1.

Appears in asserted claims
‘988/1 (preamble)

2.

“a database of Wi-Fi access points for at least one target
area”

‘988/1
‘694/1

3.

“Wi-Fi access points”

‘988/1, 3
‘694/1
‘245/1, 2
‘897/1, 3, 4

4.

“target area”

‘988/1
‘694/1, 2
‘245/1

5.

“radius”

‘988/1
‘694/1

6.

“a radius on the order of tens of miles”

‘988/1
‘694/1

7.

“database records”

‘988/1
‘694/1

8.

“substantially all Wi-Fi access points”

‘988/1
‘694/1

9.

“identification information for a corresponding Wi-Fi access ‘988/1
point”
‘694/1

10.

“calculated position information”

‘988/1
‘694/1

11.

“reference symmetry”

‘988/1
‘694/1

12.

“arterial bias”

‘988/1
‘694/1

A/74451072.2

1

Term
Claim language
No.
“recording multiple readings of the Wi-Fi access point at
13.
different locations around the Wi-Fi access point so that the
multiple readings have reference symmetry relative to other
Wi-Fi access points in the target area and so that the
calculation of the position of the Wi-Fi access point avoids
arterial bias in the calculated position information”

Appears in asserted claims
‘988/1

14.

“logic to recalculate position information for Wi-Fi access
points previously stored in the database to utilize position
information for the newly-discovered readings of previously
stored Wi-Fi access points”

‘988/1

15.

“computer-implemented logic to add records to the database
for newly-discovered Wi-Fi access points”

‘988/1

16.

“computer-implemented clustering logic to identify position
information based on error prone GPS information”

‘988/2

17.

“logic to determine a weighted centroid position for all
position information reported for an access point”

‘988/3

18.

“logic to identify position information that exceeds a
statistically-based deviation threshold amount away from
the centroid position”

‘988/3

19.

“calculated positions of the Wi-Fi access points”

‘988/3

20.

“the clustering logic … excludes such deviating position
information from the database and from influencing the
calculated positions of the Wi-Fi access points”

‘988/3

21.

“recording multiple readings of the Wi-Fi access point at
different locations around the Wi-Fi access point so that the
multiple readings avoid arterial bias in the calculated
position information of the Wi-Fi access point”

‘694/1

22.

“wherein the database records for substantially all Wi-Fi
access points in the target area provide reference symmetry
within the target area”

‘694/1

23.

“provide reference symmetry”

‘694/1

24.

“a user-device having a Wi-Fi radio”

‘245/1

25.

“providing a reference database of calculated locations of
Wi-Fi access points in a target area”

‘245/1

26.

“calculated locations”

‘245/1, 2

27.

“in response to a user application request to determine a
location of a user-device having a Wi-Fi radio”

‘245/1

A/74451072.2

2

Term
Claim language
No.
“triggering the Wi-Fi device to transmit a request to all Wi28.
Fi access points within range of the Wi-Fi device”

Appears in asserted claims
‘245/1

29.

“receiving messages from the Wi-Fi access points within
range of the Wi-Fi device, each message identifying the WiFi access point sending the message”

‘245/1

30.

“accessing the reference database to obtain the calculated
locations for the identified Wi-Fi access points”

‘245/1

31.

“location-determination algorithm”

‘245/1, 6, 8

32.

“said chosen algorithm being suited for the number of
identified Wi-Fi access points”

‘245/1

33.

“using the calculated locations for the identified Wi-Fi
access points and the signal strengths of said received
messages and the chosen location-determination algorithm
to determine the location of the user-device”

‘245/1

34.

“simple signal strength weighted average model”

‘245/6

35.

“triangulation technique”

‘245/8

36.

“a WiFi-enabled device”

‘897/1

37.

“a WiFi-enabled device communicating with WiFi access
points within range of the WiFi-enabled device so that
observed WiFi access points identify themselves”

‘897/1

38.

“accessing a reference database to obtain information
specifying a recorded location for each observed WiFi
access point”

‘897/1

39.

“using the recorded location information for each of the
observed WiFi access points in conjunction with predefined
rules to determine whether an observed WiFi access point
should be included or excluded from a set of WiFi access
points”

‘897/1

40.

“recorded location information”

‘897/1, 3

41.

“geographical position”

‘897/1, 2

42.

“using the recorded location information of only the WiFi
access points included in the set and omitting the recorded
location information of the excluded WiFi access points to
calculate the geographical position of the WiFi-enabled
device”

‘897/1

43.

“using the signal strength information when calculating the
geographical position of the WiFi-enabled device”

‘897/2

A/74451072.2

3

Term
Claim language
No.
“rules to determine a reference point and to compare the
44.
recorded location information for each of the observed WiFi
access points to the reference point”

Appears in asserted claims
‘897/3

45.

“WiFi access points having a recorded location within a
predefined threshold distance of the reference point”

‘897/3

46.

“WiFi access points having a recorded location in excess of
the predefined threshold distance of the reference point”

‘897/3

A/74451072.2

4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on July 25, 2011, I served the forgoing Google’s Preliminary
Identification of Claim Terms Subject to Claim Construction via email to the following:
John C. Hueston
Samuel K. Lu
Morgan Chu
Ofer Bleiweiss
Linda C. Klein
Lina F. Somait
Glenn K. Vanzura
S. Albert Wang
Irell & Manella
1800 Avenue of the Stars
Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90067-4276
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Thomas F. Maffei
Douglas R. Tillberg
Griesinger, Tighe & Maffei, LLP
Suite 400
176 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 617-542-0900
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

/s/ Audrey Lo
[e-mail]

A/74451072.2

5