e.Digital

Case Nos. IPR2015-01470, -01471, -01472, -01473, -01474 and -01475 15 although a component of context awareness is not the same thing as context awareness. VII. Overview of the Disputed Patents 31. The parent ’522 patent issued on November 13, 2012 pursuant to an application filed September 28, 2010. The other disputed patents are direct continuations of the ’522 patent, share a common specification, and, though they may differ in ways not relevant here, they share the same basic architecture as the ’522 patent. 32. The state of the art in September 2010 was limited to presence sensing and supervised learning as described by Lane, Nicholas D., et al., in “A survey of mobile phone sensing.” (Ex. 2017 at 5, 7.) Essentially, the use of mobile communication devices and other sensors to consider and interpret conditions within their surroundings was nascent and developing. 33. In very general terms, the subject patents concern systems and methods (1) using a set of sensors to gather data and information about the surrounding environment, (2) classifying an activity, event, or other characteristic(s) about the environment surrounding the sensing device(s) based on that sensor data or other information based on sensor data, and (3) automatically providing specifically tailored information and/or operations based on that classification. e.Digital Corporation Exhibit 2015 - Page 17 Case Nos. IPR2015-01470, -01471, -01472, -01473, -01474 and -01475 16 34. The systems of the patents claims begin when a processor assembles the retrieved sensor data and/or other information based on the sensors (e.g., map or location data derived from a comparison of GPS sensor data and non-sensor data such as Google Maps) into what the patent refers to as a “detected social signature.” (’522 patent at 9:24-10:67, 13:36-45, and passim; see also id. at Claim 1 (“creates a detected social signature from the received sensor data”.) 35. A processor then compares the data within the detected social signature to a “static and/or dynamic rule set,” which the patent refers to as a “social template.” (Id. at 11:1-2; see also 18:63-19:3 and Fig. 3; claims 1 (“processor … determines which of the social signatures of the stored social templates has a greatest correspondence with the created social signature through comparison of the first and second detected sensor values and the first and second sensor value ranges of each stored social template) and 17.) 36. The “social template” provides a set of parameters and/or information against which the data of the detected social signatures can be compared. For example, the specification of the patents describes an embodiment in which a location sensor provides data on the location of a device (“39.78° N, 104.88° W”), inertial sensor data shows no movement, an optical sensor provides data consistent with low light levels (“223 lm”), and an acoustic sensor provides data consistent with low sound levels (“-63 db”). (Id. at 16:14-18.) Compiled together, this data e.Digital Corporation Exhibit 2015 - Page 18 Case Nos. IPR2015-01470, -01471, -01472, -01473, -01474 and -01475 17 set is the “detected social signature.” (Id. at 16:14-18; see also Claim 1.) 37. A processor then compares the detected social signature with the parameters of one or more social templates stored in memory to determine the closest match – in this example, the social template for “mother and baby sleeping” is selected. (Id. at 16:18-23.) An example of what information the selected social template might comprise is depicted at Table 1 of the specification. (Id. at 15:48- 58, shown below.) 38. The specification refers to the sensor value ranges of Table 1 as “the social signature of the social template.” (Id. at 16:18-20.) These “social signatures of the social template” are “unique” to the “social template” to which they are associated at the time of processing. 39. The social template can be associated with a “social hierarchy.” (See, e.g., id. at 1:59-2:4, 3:63-4:6, Claim 3 and passim.) The associated “social e.Digital Corporation Exhibit 2015 - Page 19 Case Nos. IPR2015-01470, -01471, -01472, -01473, -01474 and -01475 18 hierarchy” can be comprised of people, social networks, emergency services, and/or operations (e.g. email, text message, pre-recorded voice messages), etc. (See, e.g., id. at 2:39-45 (hierarchy composed of social networks); 15:59-16:13 (hierarchy composed of people); 21:4-14 (emphasis added); and 21:19-24, 21:28- 33, 21:38-44 (hierarchy composed of operations).) The “social hierarchy” is organized such that the processor can provide different levels of information to each level of the hierarchy based upon which social template is selected. (See, e.g., id. at 1:59-2:4, 3:63-4:6, Claim 3 and passim.) An example of a potential social hierarchy is shown in Table 2 in the specification, shown below. (See id. at 15:60- 16:13.) e.Digital Corporation Exhibit 2015 - Page 20