Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`META PLATFORMS, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`MULLEN INDUSTRIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case IPR2025-00742
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`Issue Date: February 20, 2024
`
`Title: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LOCATION BASED GAMES AND
`EMPLOYMENT OF THE SAME ON LOCATION ENABLED DEVICES
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 11,904,243 B2
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`
`
`Page
`
`
`
`I. 
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER §42.8(A)(1) ......................................... 1 
`A. 
`Real Party-In-Interest under §42.8.(b)(1) ............................................. 1 
`B. 
`Related Matters under §42.8(b)(2) ....................................................... 1 
`C. 
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel under §42.8(b)(3) .................................... 1 
`D. 
`Service Information .............................................................................. 2 
`FEE PAYMENT ............................................................................................. 2 
`II. 
`III.  REQUIREMENTS UNDER §§ 42.104 AND 42.108 AND
`CONSIDERATIONS UNDER §§ 314(A) AND 325(D) ............................... 3 
`A.  Grounds for Standing ........................................................................... 3 
`B. 
`Identification of Challenge and Statement of Precise Relief
`Requested ............................................................................................. 3 
`Considerations Under §§ 314(a) and 325(d) ........................................ 3 
`C. 
`IV.  OVERVIEW OF THE PATENT .................................................................... 4 
`A. 
`Level of Ordinary Skill ........................................................................ 4 
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ........................................................................... 4 
`V. 
`VI.  THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE ........................... 5 
`A. 
`Prior Art Status of Relied-Upon References ........................................ 5 
`A.  Ground 1: Claims 1, 6-8, 17, 24-28, and 30 Are Obvious Over
`Levesque in view of Ronzani ............................................................... 8 
`Independent Claim 1: “A location based game system
` 
`comprising:” (Claim 1[pre]) ...................................................... 8 
`
` 
`
`
`
`-i-
`
` 
`
`

`

`(a) 
`
`(b) 
`
`(c) 
`
`(d) 
`
`(e) 
`
`(f) 
`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`“a head-mounted device operable to provide a
`location based game in a semi-visible environment
`in which a user of said head-mounted device can
`simultaneously view at least a portion of a real-
`world environment around said user as well as
`virtual indicia for said location based game, said
`virtual indicia comprising at least one of a virtual
`game character and a virtual interactive object;”
`(Claim 1[a]) ................................................................... 10 
`“processing circuitry in said head-mounted
`device;” (Claim 1[b]) .................................................... 15 
`“memory in said head-mounted device storing
`computer programming capable of execution by
`said processing circuitry;” (Claim 1[c]) ....................... 25 
`“a first locating device in said head-mounted
`device for providing a first control signal for said
`location based game;” (Claim 1[d]) ............................. 28 
`“a second locating device in said head-mounted
`device for providing a second control signal for
`said location based game; and” (Claim 1[e]) ............... 31 
`“a display provided on said head-mounted device,
`wherein said head-mounted device is a portable
`device and said processing circuitry is operable to
`execute said computer programming to cause said
`display to display said location based game based
`on a location, direction, and pitch associated, at
`least in part, with said first control signal and said
`second control signal, said display of said location
`based game comprising display of said virtual
`indicia in a manner that blocks part of, but not all
`of, said user’s view of said real-world environment
`around said user, and” (Claim 1[f]) .............................. 34 
`
`-ii-
`
` 
`
`
`
`  
`
`
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`(g) 
`
`“wherein said processing circuitry is operable to
`execute said computer programming to allow said
`user of said head-mounted device to manually set
`one or more boundaries for said location based
`game.” (Claim 1[g]) ...................................................... 37 
`Claim 6: “The location based game system of claim 1,
`wherein said location based game is operable to be
`played on a physical playfield that correlates to a virtual
`playfield and said processing circuitry is operable to
`execute said computer programming to set one or more
`physical boundaries for said physical playfield that
`correlate to one or more virtual location boundaries of
`said virtual playfield for said location based game.” ............... 39 
`Claim 7: “The location based game system of claim 6,
`wherein said processing circuitry is operable to execute
`said computer programming to allow said user of said
`head-mounted device to manually set dimensions for said
`physical playfield for said location based game.” ................... 43 
`Claim 8: “The location based game system of claim 7,
`wherein said processing circuitry is operable to execute
`said computer programming to provide a graphical user
`interface for display on said display of said head-
`mounted device to allow said user of said head-mounted
`device to manually set said dimensions for said physical
`playfield for said location based game.” .................................. 44 
`Claim 17: “The location based game system of claim 1,
`wherein said system further comprises a controller
`operable to communicate with said head-mounted
`device.” .................................................................................... 45 
`Claim 24: “The location based game system of claim 1,
`wherein said head-mounted device further comprises a
`communications device operable to communicate with a
`remote server.” ......................................................................... 48 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
`-iii-
`
` 
`
`
`
`  
`
`
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`Claim 25: “The location based game system of claim 24,
`wherein said location based game is a multiplayer game
`and said communications device of said head-mounted
`device is operable to communicate with said remote
`server in order to enable said multiplayer game.” ................... 51 
`Claim 26: “The location based game system of claim 25,
`wherein said communications device of said head-
`mounted device is operable to communicate location
`information regarding said head-mounted device to said
`remote server.” ......................................................................... 52 
`Claim 27: “The location based game system of claim 26,
`wherein said communications device of said head-
`mounted device is operable to receive location
`information regarding a device of another player in said
`multiplayer game from said remote server.” ........................... 54 
`  Claim 28: “The location based game system of claim 25,
`wherein said head-mounted device is operable to allow
`said user of said head-mounted device to talk to another
`player during said multiplayer game.” ..................................... 56 
`  Claim 30: “The location based game system of claim 1,
`wherein:” (Claim 30[pre]) ....................................................... 56 
`(a) 
`“said location based game is operable to be played
`on a physical playfield that correlates to a virtual
`playfield;” (Claim 30[a]) .............................................. 56 
`“said location based game comprises said virtual
`game character and said virtual game character is
`computer controlled;” (Claim 30[b]) ............................ 56 
`“said location based game comprises a second
`virtual game character and said second virtual
`game character is user controlled; and” (Claim
`30[c]) .............................................................................. 57 
`
`(b) 
`
`(c) 
`
`-iv-
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
`
`
`  
`
`
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`B. 
`
`C. 
`
`  
`
`
`
` 
`
` 
`
`(d) 
`
`(b) 
`
`“said processing circuitry is operable to execute
`said computer programming to cause said user of
`said head-mounted device to lose control of said
`second virtual game character when said user
`travels through a location on a physical playfield
`correlating to a virtual boundary of said virtual
`playfield, and to regain said control of said second
`virtual game character when said user returns to
`said location on said physical playfield.” (Claim
`30[d]) ............................................................................. 59 
`Ground 2: Claims 9, 10, and 22 Are Obvious Over Ground 1
`Prior Art in Further View of Fager..................................................... 61 
`Claim 9: “The location based game system of claim 6,
` 
`wherein said processing circuitry is operable to execute
`said computer programming to:” (Claim 9[pre]) .................... 61 
`(a) 
`“provide default dimensions for said physical
`playfield for said location based game; and”
`(Claim 9[a]) ................................................................... 61 
`“allow said user of said head-mounted device to
`change said default dimensions.” (Claim 9[b]) ............ 68 
`Claim 10: “The location based game system of claim 9,
`wherein said processing circuitry is operable to execute
`said computer programming to provide a graphical user
`interface for display on said display of said head-
`mounted device to allow said user of said head-mounted
`device to change said default dimensions for said
`physical playfield for said location based game.” ................... 69 
`Claim 22: “The location based game system of claim 17,
`wherein said controller comprises at least one directional
`device for providing a control signal associated with a
`direction and/or a pitch of said controller for said location
`based game.” ............................................................................ 70 
`Ground 3: Claim 14 is Obvious Over Ground 1 Prior Art in
`Further View of Ohshima ................................................................... 73 
`-v-
` 
`
`

`

`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`(b) 
`
`(c) 
`
`
`
` 
`
`Claim 14: “The location based game system of claim 1,
`wherein:” (Claim 14[pre]) ....................................................... 73 
`(a) 
`“said location based game comprises said virtual
`game character and said virtual game character is
`computer controlled;” (Claim 14[a]) ............................ 74 
`“said location based game comprises a second
`virtual game character and said second virtual
`game character is user controlled; and” (Claim
`14[b]) ............................................................................. 74 
`“said processing circuitry is operable to execute
`said computer programming to utilize at least one
`of said first control signal from said first locating
`device and said second control signal from said
`second locating device for controlling, at least in
`part, said virtual game character that is computer
`controlled.” (Claim 14[c]) ............................................ 74 
`VII.  CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 79 
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ............................................................................... 81 
`
`
`  
`
`
`
`-vi-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`List of Exhibits
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`Description of Document
`No.
`1001 U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2 to Jeffrey David Mullen (filed July 15,
`2007, issued February 20, 2024) (“’243” or “’243 patent”)
`1002 Declaration of Jeremy Cooperstock, Ph.D. (“Cooperstock”)
`1003 U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2004/0110565 A1 to Louis Levesque (filed
`Dec. 4, 2003; published Jun. 10, 2004) (“Levesque”)
`1004 U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2002/0163486 A1 to Peter A. Ronzani et al.
`(filed May 16, 1997; published Nov. 7, 2002) (“Ronzani”)
`1005 U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2004/0104934 A1 to Jan G. Fager et al (filed
`February 7, 2002; published June 3, 2004) (“Fager”)
`1006 U.S. Patent No. 6,951,515 B2 to Toshikazu Ohshima et al., “Game
`Apparatus for Mixed Reality Space, Image Processing Method Thereof,
`and Program Storage Medium” (filed Feb. 17, 2000; issued Oct. 4,
`2005) (“Ohshima”)
`1007 U.S. Patent App. No. 10/932,536 (filed September 1, 2004) (“2004
`Utility Application”)
`1008 U.S. Provisional Application no. 60/499,810 (filed Sep. 2, 2003)
`(“2003 Provisional”)
`1009 U.S. Provisional Application no. 60/603,481 (filed Aug. 20, 2004)
`(“2004 Provisional”)
`1010 U.S. Provisional Application no. 60/430,682 (filed Dec. 4, 2002)
`(“Levesque Provisional”)
`1011 Redline between Levesque and Levesque Provisional
`1012 Petitioner’s Opening Claim Construction Brief in Mullen Industries
`LLC v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-00354-DAE (W.D. Tex.)
`(dated Feb. 26, 2025)
`1013 Proof of Service of Complaint
`
`‐i‐ 
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`I. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER §42.8(A)(1)
`A. Real Party-In-Interest under §42.8.(b)(1)
`Meta Platforms, Inc. is the real party-in-interest to this IPR petition.
`
`B. Related Matters under §42.8(b)(2)
`The ’243 patent (EX1001) is the subject of pending litigation involving
`
`Petitioner: Mullen Industries LLC v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-00354-
`
`DAE (W.D. Tex.). Petitioner was served on April 5, 2024. (EX1013, p.003.)
`
`Petitioner is filing IPR petitions against twelve related patents asserted by
`
`Patent Owner in the pending litigation involving Petitioner:
`
`U.S. Patent No.
`8,585,476 B2
`9,744,448 B2
`10,179,277 B2
`10,828,559 B2
`10,967,270 B2
`11,033,821 B2
`11,376,493 B2
`11,904,243 B2
`11,947,716 B2
`12,019,791 B2
`9,662,582 B2
`10,974,151 B2
`
`IPR Case
`IPR2025-00737
`IPR2025-00738
`IPR2025-00739
`IPR2025-00740
`IPR2025-00702
`IPR2025-00703
`IPR2025-00741
`IPR2025-00742
`IPR2025-00743
`IPR2025-00744
`IPR2025-00745
`IPR2025-00746
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel under §42.8(b)(3)
`Petitioner provides the following designation of counsel.
`-1-
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`
`LEAD COUNSEL
`
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`
`Heidi L. Keefe (Reg. No. 40,673)
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTN: Patent Group
`1299 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 700
`Washington, DC 20004
`Tel: (650) 843-5001
`Fax: (650) 849-7400
`
`Phillip E. Morton (Reg. No. 57,835)
`pmorton@cooley.com
`
`Andrew C. Mace (Reg. No. 63,342)
`amace@cooley.com
`
`Mark R. Weinstein (Admission pro hac
`vice to be requested)
`mweinstein@cooley.com
`
`Lowell D. Mead (Admission pro hac vice
`to be requested)
`lmead@cooley.com
`
`Patrick Lauppe (Admission pro hac vice to
`be requested)
`plauppe@cooley.com
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTN: Patent Group
`1299 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 700
`Washington D.C. 20004
`
`
`
`D.
`Service Information
`This Petition is being served by Federal Express to the attorney of record for
`
`the ’243 patent, 32733 - JEFFREY D. MULLEN, 2212 Hassinger Lane, Glenshaw,
`
`PA 15116. Petitioner consents to electronic service at the addresses provided above
`
`for lead and back-up counsel.
`
`FEE PAYMENT
`Petitioner requests review of fifteen claims, with a $51,875 payment.
`
`-2-
`
` 
`
`II.
`
` 
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`III. REQUIREMENTS UNDER
`42.104 AND
`§§
`CONSIDERATIONS UNDER §§ 314(A) AND 325(D)
`A. Grounds for Standing
`Petitioner certifies that the ’243 patent is available for IPR and that Petitioner
`
`42.108 AND
`
`is not barred or otherwise estopped.
`
`B.
`
`Identification of Challenge and Statement of Precise Relief
`Requested
`Petitioner requests IPR institution based on:
`
`Ground
`
`Claims
`
`Basis for Challenge under §103
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`1, 6-8, 17, 24-
`28, 30
`
`Levesque in view of Ronzani
`
`9, 10, 22
`
`Ronzani in view of Ronzani and Fager
`
`14
`
`Ronzani in view of Ronzani and Ohshima
`
`Submitted herewith is the expert declaration of Jeremy Cooperstock, Ph.D.
`
`(EX1002) (“Cooperstock”). (EX1002, ¶¶1-18, Appendix A.)
`
`C. Considerations Under §§ 314(a) and 325(d)
`§314(a): The General Plastic factors are inapplicable as this is the first and
`
`only IPR petition filed regarding the ’243 patent.
`
`The Fintiv factors do not support discretionary denial under §314(a). The
`
`pending litigation against Petitioner is in early stages. Trial is scheduled for
`
`October 5, 2026. Petitioner’s motion to transfer venue is pending, which if granted
`
`would likely move trial even later. Petitioner intends to move to stay the litigation
`
` 
`
`
`
`-3-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`pending resolution of the IPRs. If IPR is instituted, Petitioner will not pursue in
`
`litigation any invalidity defense that was or could have been raised in IPR.
`
`§325(d): No §325(d) issue is raised here. No relied-upon reference was cited
`
`during prosecution.
`
`Petitioner reserves the right to address and respond to any assertions that
`
`Patent Owner may raise regarding discretionary factors.
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE PATENT
`A. Level of Ordinary Skill
`A person of ordinary skill (“POSITA”) would have possessed a bachelor’s
`
`degree in electrical engineering, computer science, or similar field, with two years
`
`combined experience in designing and/or developing computer systems/software
`
`involving interactive graphical virtual and/or augmented reality. A person could
`
`also have qualified as a POSITA with some combination of (1) more formal
`
`education (such as a master’s of science degree) and less technical experience, or (2)
`
`less formal education and more technical or professional experience. (Cooperstock,
`
`¶¶21-25.)
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`Petitioner does not believe express claim construction is necessary at this
`
`time. The prior art renders the challenged claims obvious under any reasonable
`
`construction.
`
` 
`
`
`
`-4-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`VI. THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE
`A.
`Prior Art Status of Relied-Upon References
`Pre-AIA law applies to the challenged claims, and each reference cited in the
`
`grounds qualifies as prior art to the ’243 patent. Levesque (EX1003), Ronzani
`
`(EX1004), Fager (EX1005), and Ohshima (EX1006) qualify as prior art to the ’243
`
`patent based on the filing date of a utility application to which the ’243 patent claims
`
`priority—i.e., September 1, 2004, the filing date of U.S. Patent App. No. 10/932,536
`
`(“2004 Utility Application”; EX1007). Levesque qualifies as prior art under §§
`
`102(a) or (e), because it was published on June 10, 2004 and its provisional
`
`application (60,430,682) was filed on December 4, 2002. Ronzani qualifies as prior
`
`art under §§ 102(a), (b), or (e), including because it was filed May 16, 1997 and
`
`published November 7, 2002. Fager qualifies as prior art under §§ 102(a) or (e),
`
`including because it was filed February 7, 2002 and published June 3, 2004.
`
`Ohshima qualifies as prior art under §§ 102(a), (b), or (e), because it was filed
`
`February 17, 2000 and published February 13, 2003.
`
`The ’243 patent cannot claim priority to either of its two provisional
`
`applications—no. 60/499,810 filed September 2, 2003 (“2003 Provisional”;
`
`EX1008), and no. 60/603,481, filed August 20, 2004 (“2004 Provisional”;
`
`EX1009)—because neither provides support for the claim 1 limitation: “wherein
`
`said processing circuitry is operable to execute said computer programming to
`
` 
`
`
`
`-5-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`allow said user of said head-mounted device to manually set one or more
`
`boundaries for said location based game.” (Cooperstock, ¶¶44-46.) With respect
`
`to the 2003 Provisional, the word “boundary” does not appear, nor do the figures
`
`illustrate a boundary—let alone a boundary manually set by the user of the head-
`
`mounted device. (EX1008; Cooperstock, ¶44.) As to the 2004 Provisional, it mainly
`
`describes a wireless device with only a passing mention of games. (EX1009,
`
`p.0007:23-25; Cooperstock, ¶44.) It uses the word “boundary” only once, in
`
`describing a housing portion of a device, not a game boundary. (EX1009, p.0013:9-
`
`12 (“boundary defined by housing portion 701”).)
`
`In contrast, the 2004 Utility Application at least states, for example, that “GUI
`
`412 may be provided in which a user may go to a physical playfield boundary that
`
`the user desires and establish that location as a location boundary for a game.”
`
`(EX1007, pp.0015:33-0016:3; Cooperstock, ¶45.) Similarly, the application
`
`includes a new Figure 1:
`
`(EX1007, Fig. 1 (excerpt); Cooperstock, ¶45.)
` 
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`Even if the ’243 were able to claim priority to either of its provisional
`
`applications (resulting in a September 2, 2003 or August 20, 2004 priority date),
`
`Levesque, Ronzani, Fager, and Ohshima would qualify as prior art. Ronzani would
`
`qualify as prior art at least under §§ 102(a) or (e), including because it was filed
`
`May 16, 1997 and published November 7, 2002. Fager would qualify as prior art
`
`under at least § 102(e), including because it was filed February 7, 2002. Ohshima
`
`would qualify as prior art under §§ 102(a) or (e), because it was filed February 17,
`
`2000 and published February 13, 2003.
`
`Levesque would qualify as prior art under § 102(e), because it is entitled to
`
`the priority date of its provisional application (no. 60/430,682) filed on December 4,
`
`2002. (“Levesque Provisional”; EX1010). A patent is entitled to the benefit of a
`
`provisional application filing date “if the disclosure of the provisional application
`
`provides support for the claims in the reference patent in compliance with §112 ¶ 1.”
`
`Dynamic Drinkware, LLC v. Nat’l Graphics, Inc., 800 F.3d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2015). First, the provisional application must provide “sufficient support for at least
`
`one claim in the child.” Ex Parte Mann, Appeal 2015-003571, 2016 WL 7487271,
`
`at *5 (PTAB Dec. 21, 2016). Second, “the subject matter relied upon in the non-
`
`provisional” must be “sufficiently supported in the provisional application.” Id.
`
`Both requirements are satisfied for Levesque.
`
` 
`
`
`
`-7-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`The first requirement is met because the disclosures in Levesque cited below
`
`were contained, often identically, in the Levesque Provisional. (Cooperstock, ¶67.)
`
`Exhibit 1011 is a redline document between the Levesque Provisional and
`
`Levesque. (Id.) As shown in the redline, any disclosures cited in Levesque that are
`
`not contained substantially identically in the Levesque Provisional are cumulative
`
`of disclosures in the Levesque Provisional. (Id.) For example, paragraph 37 of
`
`Levesque describes multi-player gaming, but multi-player gaming is also described
`
`in paragraphs 24, 39, and 40, which correspond to paragraphs 20, 33 and 34 of the
`
`Levesque Provisional. (Levesque Provisional, ¶¶20, 33, 34.) The figures in both,
`
`although sometimes rendered differently, are also substantively the same for
`
`purposes of the below analysis. (Cooperstock, ¶67.)
`
`With respect to the second requirement, the Levesque Provisional provides
`
`sufficient written description and support for at least claim 1 of Levesque.
`
`(Cooperstock, ¶68.)
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1, 6-8, 17, 24-28, and 30 Are Obvious Over
`Levesque in view of Ronzani
`
`Independent Claim 1: “A location based game system
`comprising:” (Claim 1[pre])
`Assuming the preamble is limiting, Levesque discloses “[a] location based
`
`game system” as explained further below. (Cooperstock, ¶¶89-90; Levesque, ¶¶8-9,
`
`25, 33; see also Cooperstock, ¶¶54-64.)
`
` 
`
`
`
`-8-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`For example, Levesque describes a “video gaming device includ[ing] a central
`
`gaming unit in communication with a heads-up display and a location sensing
`
`sensor.” (Levesque, ¶8.) Figures 1 and 2 of Levesque show a gaming unit 12, which
`
`contains processor 30 and memory 32 and connects to heads-up display 20, sensors
`
`including GPS sensor 14 and external sensors 18, and a wireless network through
`
`network interface 36.
`
`
`
` 
`
`
`
`-9-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Figs. 1-2 (highlighting and annotation added), ¶¶18-28; Cooperstock,
`
`¶¶54-64.)
`
`(a)
`
`“a head-mounted device operable to provide a location
`based game in a semi-visible environment in which a
`user of said head-mounted device can simultaneously
`view at least a portion of a real-world environment
`around said user as well as virtual indicia for said
`location based game, said virtual indicia comprising at
`least one of a virtual game character and a virtual
`interactive object;” (Claim 1[a])
` Levesque discloses claim 1[a]. Levesque discloses “a head-mounted
`
`device,” such as “integrated eye glasses” or a “helmet visor” that includes a “heads-
`
`up display 20.” (Levesque, ¶24; Cooperstock, ¶91.)
`
` 
`
`
`
`-10-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Fig. 3 (annotation added), ¶¶30-31; Cooperstock, ¶91.)
`
`Levesque discloses that its head-mounted device is “operable to provide a
`
`location based game.” (Cooperstock, ¶92.) For example, Levesque discloses that
`
`its head-mounted provides games (like the one shown in Figure 4) that use inputs
`
`from “a location sensing sensor” to control gameplay (e.g., interact with opponents,
`
`avoid enemy fire, etc.)
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Fig. 4, ¶¶9, 34, 39-40.)
`
` 
`
`
`
`-11-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`Levesque discloses that its head-mounted device provides a location-based
`
`game “in a semi-visible environment in which a user of said head-mounted
`
`device can simultaneously view at least a portion of a real-world environment
`
`around said user as well as virtual indicia for said location based game.”
`
`(Cooperstock, ¶¶93-96.) For example, Figure 4 of Levesque shows the user
`
`simultaneously viewing both “a portion of a real-world environment” (e.g., the
`
`ocean and sky) as well as “virtual indicia” for the location-based game, including
`
`virtual boundary 60, simulated opponent 50, score 62, speed, crosshairs, and radar
`
`display:
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Fig. 4, ¶34; Cooperstock, ¶93; see also Levesque, Figs. 6, 8.) Levesque
`
`also discloses that heads-up display 20 “allows an operator to view an image without
`
`diverting his or her eyes from their normal point of focus” and to “view an
`
`electronically presented image without unduly obstructing the user’s view.”
`
`(Levesque, ¶24; see also id., ¶¶20, 31, 40.)
`
` 
`
`
`
`-12-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`In the district court litigation, Petitioner is asserting that “semi-visible
`
`environment” is indefinite as to its full scope. Petitioner is also asserting that there
`
`are example scenarios that would be included in the claim scope—e.g., “a display
`
`half-filled with virtual objects persistently blocking a user of average vision from
`
`seeing the corresponding real-world objects ‘behind’ them[.]” (EX1012, p.0018.)
`
`Levesque discloses a “semi-visible environment” at least within Petitioner’s
`
`provided example claim scope. (Cooperstock, ¶96.) For example, Figure 6 shows
`
`virtual indicia indicating user speed that blocks the user’s view of a real-world cloud:
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Fig. 6 (annotation added); Cooperstock, ¶96.) Levesque also discloses
`
`“allowing the user to view an electronically presented image without unduly
`
`obstructing the user’s view.” (Levesque, ¶24.)
`
`Regarding the last portion of of claim 1[a], Levesque discloses that its head-
`
`mounted device provides “virtual indicia comprising at least one of a virtual
`
`game character and a virtual interactive object.” (Cooperstock, ¶¶97-100.)
` 
`-13-
` 
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`Levesque describes displaying “virtual game character[s]” such as virtual (or
`
`simulated) opponents, including “virtual opponents 50” shown in Figure 4:
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Fig. 4 (annotation added), ¶34; Cooperstock, ¶98; see also Levesque,
`
`¶40, Figs. 5-6.) Levesque also describes displaying “virtual interactive object[s],”
`
`including “weapon fire from opponents 50” and virtual obstacles 70 with which the
`
`user can interact. (Cooperstock, ¶99; Levesque, ¶¶34, 39, Figs. 4-6, 8.) For
`
`example, a user can interact with weapon fire from opponents 50, using “[a]ctual
`
`motion of the vehicle to avoid launched weapons,” and a user can “steer the vehicle
`
`to avoid collision with” virtual obstacles 70:
`
` 
`
`
`
`-14-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Fig. 6, ¶39; Cooperstock, ¶99.)
`
`Petitioner asserts in litigation that the term “virtual” should be construed as
`
`“not real world.” (EX1012 at pp.0007-0011.) Levesque satisfies the claim language
`
`regardless of whether Petitioner’s proposed construction is adopted. (Cooperstock,
`
`¶¶91-100.) For example, the “virtual indicia,” “virtual game character,” and “virtual
`
`interactive object” elements Levesque discloses are part of the game provided by
`
`video gaming device—thus, they are “not real world.”
`
`(b)
`
`“processing circuitry in said head-mounted device;”
`(Claim 1[b])
`Levesque with Ronzani discloses and renders obvious claim 1[b].
`
`(Cooperstock, ¶¶101-116.) Levesque discloses “processing circuitry,” such as
`
`processor 30 contained in gaming unit 12 connected to heads-up display 20:
`
` 
`
`
`
`-15-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Fig. 2 (highlighting and annotation added), ¶¶19-20; Cooperstock, ¶102.)
`
`Levesque discloses that the processor is “in communication with processor readable
`
`memory” (which contains gaming software), and a location sensor—so that it can
`
`“present a video game whose play is controlled by location of the gaming device, as
`
`sensed by the location sensor.” (Levesque, ¶10; see also id., ¶19.) Processor 30 is
`
`“any suitable processor capable of processing processor executable instruction of
`
`sufficient complexity and at sufficient speed to present a near real-time gaming
`
`environment to an end-user.” (Id., ¶20.)
`
`Levesque discloses that gaming unit 12 including processor 30 and other
`
`components is located on a vehicle—for example, near the seat of a watercraft:
`
` 
`
`
`
`-16-
`
` 
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`
`
`
`(Levesque, Fig. 3 (annotation added); Cooperstock, ¶103.) A POSITA would have
`
`been motivated to place a processor and other hardware components inside a head-
`
`mounted device in light of Ronzani. (Cooperstock, ¶¶103-116.)
`
`For example, Ronzani discloses various head-mounted displays containing
`
`hardware such as a processor, memory, and first and second locating device. (See,
`
`e.g., Ronzani, Figs. 35-45, ¶¶162-205; Cooperstock, ¶¶104, 71-76.) Ronzani
`
`generally discloses that “[t]he computer and associated electronic components used
`
`to load programs, load and store data and communicate or network with other
`
`systems by wire or wireless operation can be mounted on the head-piece[.]”
`
`(Ronzani, ¶7 (emphasis added).) Ronzani further discloses that a head-mounted
`
`display can be fully “self-contained.” (See Ronzani, ¶94; Cooperstock, ¶104.)
`
`Ronzani discloses many such embodiments. (See Ronzani, Figs. 32A, 32B, 33, 34A-
`
`D, 35-45, ¶¶150-151, 154-156, 159-166, 169, 172-176, 179-183, 186-197, 200-202,
`
`205; Cooperstock, ¶104.) For example, Figure 35 shows components in a “head-
` 
`-17-
` 
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 11,904,243 B2
`
`mounted computer 710”:
`
`
`
`(Ronzani, Fig. 35 (highlighting added), ¶¶162-171; Cooperstock, ¶104.) Ronzani
`
`discloses that the “general purpose” head-mounted computer 710 can be adapted
`
`“for use in many real world situations,” including the embodiments in Figures 37-
`
`45. (Ronzani, ¶¶173-205; Cooperstock, ¶104.)
`
`Ronzani’s head-mounted computer 710 includes CPU 712. (Ronzani, ¶162