2013年11月22日 星期五

專利局駁回蘋果觸控基礎專利

不同於Apple其他幾件好不容易挽回專利權的命運(如:http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2013/10/apple.html),這件同樣也是對Samsung提告的主要專利之一:US7,844,915(915案),本部落格曾對此案追蹤報導被再審(re-examination)的過程,日前的報導顯示該案已被再審核駁(http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2012/12/blog-post_20.htmlhttp://enpan.blogspot.tw/2013/08/blog-post.html),而11/20/2013的決定(control no.: 90/012,332)為全數範圍都確認駁回。

簡史:
智慧局繼07-26-2013發出最終核駁(final rejection)之後,Apple於10-28-2013答辯,之後獲得USPTO發出的諮詢意見(Advisory Action),認為Claims 1-21全數被核駁。

Apple對終駁提出回應:


Apple對於捍衛自己多點觸控的基礎專利十分在意,雖然前案已經揭露觸控技術,但是「多點觸控」就是所有爭議點中最重要的,也就是Apple技術可以分辨出one, two or more的手指觸碰事件,如果是單點觸控,就是捲動(scroll)操作;如果兩點或以上觸控,就是一種手勢(gesture)操作。
8. A machine readable storage medium storing executable program instructions which when executed cause a data processing system to perform a method comprising:
receiving a user input, the user input is one or more input points applied to a touch-sensitive display that is integrated with the data processing system;
creating an event object in response to the user input;
determining whether the event object invokes a scroll or gesture operation by distinguishing between a single input point applied to the touch-sensitive display that is interpreted as the scroll operation and two or more input points applied to the touch-sensitive display that are interpreted as the gesture operation;
issuing at least one scroll or gesture call based on invoking the scroll or gesture operation;
responding to at least one scroll call, if issued, by scrolling a window having a view associated with the event object; and
responding to at least one gesture call, if issued, by scaling the view associated with the event object based on receiving the two or more input points in the form of the user input.

除了Apple質疑審查委員不當過廣解釋專利範圍的答辯之外,Apple對於再審案的答辯技巧也不會很花俏,主要還是討論技術本身,而且不輕易修改正在訴訟的權利範圍。
對於主要引證案Hillis案,Apple論點與之前答辯內容差不多,只是"重申"一些立場,對於專利局現階段而言,難以扭轉審委態度:
  • 認為Hillis並不會分辨觸控幾點,但Hillis有揭露單點與兩點的動作
  • Hillis沒有提到事件物件(event object),也就是呼叫捲動與手勢兩個指令呼叫,Hillis針對影像指示
  • Hillis並非應用在觸控顯示器(touch-sensitive display),Hillis是一種投射式觸控技術
  • Hillis並沒有揭露一個整合的裝置(integrated device),Hillis不是一個裝置內的技術,而是結合幾種裝置達成
  • Hillis並不能根據取得一段時間內拉動的輸入(drag user input for a certain time period) 判斷捲動或手勢,這點確實沒有

Hillis(US7724242)專利介紹可參閱:http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2012/12/blog-post_20.html




最後竟參考了近300件前案(IDS):
Advisory Action最後決定全數範圍被駁回:

915案被駁回,Samsung應該會興奮地要求法院撤回這件侵權的判決。

Apple應會對此案提出訴願。

Ron

沒有留言: