DOCSLIB.ORG

(12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 9,552,131 B2 Chaudhri Et Al

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 9,552,131 B2 Chaudhri Et Al USO095521.31B2 (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 9,552,131 B2 Chaudhri et al. (45) Date of Patent: Jan. 24, 2017 (54) METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR (56) References Cited DISPLAYING AWINDOW FOR AUSER INTERFACE U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS 4,555,775 A 11, 1985 Pike (71) Applicant: APPLE INC., Cupertino, CA (US) 4,890,098 A 12/1989 Dawes et al. (Continued) (72) Inventors: Imran Chaudhri, San Francisco, CA (US); Bas Ording, San Francisco, CA FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS (US) EP 697691 A2 2, 1996 EP 961200 A2 12/1999 (73) Assignee: APPLE INC., Cupertino, CA (US) (Continued) (*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this OTHER PUBLICATIONS patent is extended or adjusted under 35 Apple Inc vs. Samsung Electronic, (Oct. 7, 2011). "Samsung's Patent U.S.C. 154(b) by 481 days. Local Rule 3-3 and 3-4 Disclosures'. Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK, 62 pages. (21) Appl. No.: 14/061,660 (Continued) Primary Examiner — Tadeese Hailu (22) Filed: Oct. 23, 2013 (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP (65) Prior Publication Data (57) ABSTRACT US 2014/O157162 A1 Jun. 5, 2014 Methods and apparatuses to display windows. In more than one embodiments of the invention, a window is closed automatically (e.g., after a timer expires, or when a condi Related U.S. Application Data tion or criterion is met, or a system input is received) without (63) Continuation of application No. 1 1/635,847, filed on user input. In some examples, the window is translucent So Dec. 8, 2006, now Pat. No. 8,601,384, which is a that the portion of another window, when present, is visible under the window. In some examples, the image of the (Continued) window is faded out before the window is closed and destroyed. In some examples, the window does not close in (51) Int. C. response to any input from a user input device. In some G06F 3/048 (2013.01) examples, the window is repositioned (or hidden) automati cally when another translucent window is displayed. The G06F 3/048 (2013.01) degree of translucency, the speed for fading out, the discrete GO6F 3/16 (2006.01) levels of translucency for fading out, the time to expire, (52) U.S. C. and/or other parameters for controlling the display of the CPC ............. G06F 3/0481 (2013.01); G06F 3/165 window may be set by the user or adjusted by the system (or (2013.01); G06F 2203/04804 (2013.01) application software programs) automatically according to (58) Field of Classification Search system conditions or other criteria. CPC ....... G06F 3/165; G06F 3/0481; G06F 1/3215 See application file for complete search history. 34 Claims, 21 Drawing Sheets 3. Fawrits 3isio2 26 M. Wilso clips affiti.25:2A 8 3,202 0:20 422.02 11:20 AM | New essage Arrived 4 US 9,552,131 B2 Page 2 Related U.S. Application Data 6,249,826 6, 2001 Parry et al. 6,252,595 6, 2001 Birmingham et al. continuation of application No. 10/193,573, filed on 6,292.204 9, 2001 Carleton et al. Jul. 10, 2002, now Pat. No. 7,343,566. 6,307,545 10, 2001 Conrad et al. 6,310,610 10, 2001 Beaton et al. 6,323,846 11/2001 Westerman et al. (56) References Cited 6,336,131 1, 2002 Wolfe 6,342,908 1, 2002 Bates et al. U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS 6,348,952 2, 2002 Jeong ..................... GO9G 5,003 348,563 5, 191,620 A 3, 1993 Lee 6,353.450 3, 2002 DeLeeuw 5,233,687 A 8, 1993 Henderson et al. 6,359,631 3, 2002 DeLeeuw 5,265,202 A 11, 1993 Krueger et al. 6,374,277 4, 2002 Vong et al. 5,333,272 A T. 1994 Capek et al. 6,409,603 6, 2002 Nishino et al. 5,363.475 A 11, 1994 Baker et al. 6,414,677 T/2002 Robertson et al. 5.425,141 A 6, 1995 Gedye 6,429,883 8, 2002 Plow et al. 5,461,710 A 10, 1995 Bloomfield et al. 6,433,798 8, 2002 Smith et al. 5,463,728 A 10, 1995 Blahut et al. 6.459,440 10, 2002 Monnes ................ G06F 3/0481 5.483.261 A 1, 1996 Yasutake T15/808 5.487,143 A 1, 1996 Southgate 6,509,911 1, 2003 Shimotono 5.488.204 A 1, 1996 Mead et al. 6,515,688 2, 2003 Berry et al. 5,513.303 A 4, 1996 Robertson et al. 6,549,218 4/2003 Gershony et al. 5,533, 183 A T. 1996 Henderson et al. 6,577.350 6, 2003 Proehl et al. 5,565,657 A 10, 1996 Merz 6,587,128 T/2003 Kanevsky et al. 5,577,188 A 11, 1996 Zhu 6,600,500 T/2003 Yamamoto 5,588,105 A 12, 1996 Foster et al. 6,654,036 11/2003 Jones 5,590,265 A 12, 1996 Nakazawa 6,661.426 12, 2003 Jetha et al. 5,594.467 A 1/1997 Marlton 6,670,970 12, 2003 Bonura ................. G06F 3/0481 5,638,501 A 6, 1997 Gough et al. 34.5/592 5,651,107 A 7, 1997 Frank et al. 6,678,866 1, 2004 Sugimoto et al. 5,657,221 A 8, 1997 Warman et al. 6,690,387 2, 2004 Zimmerman et al. 5,678,015 A 10, 1997 Goh 6,694,486 2, 2004 Frank et al. 5,694,150 A 12, 1997 Sigona et al. 6,711,608 3, 2004 Ogilvie ................ G06Q 10/107 5,737,507 A 4, 1998 Smith TO9,202 5,754,174 A 5, 1998 Carpenter et al. 6,720,982 4, 2004 Sakaguchi 5,764,229 A 6, 1998 Bennett 6,734.884 5, 2004 Berry et al. 5,767,855 A 6, 1998 Bardon et al. 6,765,567 T 2004 Roberson et al. 5,798,752 A 8, 1998 Buxton et al. 6,828,989 12, 2004 Cortright 5,822,123 A 10, 1998 Davis et al. 6,870,529 3, 2005 Davis ....................... G09G 5/10 5,825,352 A 10, 1998 Bisset et al. 345/2O7 5,831,615 A 11, 1998 Drews et al. 6,874,126 3, 2005 Lapidous 5,835,079 A 11, 1998 Shieh 6,876,369 4, 2005 Brown et al. 5,838,318 A 11, 1998 Porter et al. 6,907.447 6, 2005 Cooperman ......... G06Q 10/107 5,841,435 A 11, 1998 Dauerer et al. TO9,203 5,859,639 A 1, 1999 Ebrahim 6,996.783 2, 2006 Brown et al. 5,880,411 A 3, 1999 Gillespie et al. 7,015,894 3, 2006 Morohoshi 5,880,733 A 3, 1999 Horvitz et al. 7,043,701 5/2006 Gordon 5,892,511 A 4, 1999 Gelsinger et al. 7,046,254 5/2006 Brown et al. 5,903,271 A 5, 1999 Bardon et al. 7,068,266 6, 2006 Ruelle 5,920,315 A 7, 1999 Santos-Gomez 7,119,819 10, 2006 Robertson et al. 5,923,324 A 7, 1999 Berry et al. 7,138,983 11/2006 Wakai et al. 5,929,854 A 7, 1999 Ross 7,155,729 12, 2006 Andrew et al. 5,936,610 A 8, 1999 Endo 7,184,064 2, 2007 Zimmerman et al. 5,940,517 A 8, 1999 Shinada et al. 7,249,326 7/2007 Stoakley et al. 5,973,665 A 10, 1999 Davie et al. 7,249,327 7/2007 Nelson et al. 5,986,639 A 11, 1999 Ozawa 7,260,610 8, 2007 Grooters et al. 5.999,191 A 12, 1999 Frank et al. 7,286,141 10, 2007 Rieffel et al. 6,008.809 A 12, 1999 Brooks 7,287,063 10, 2007 Baldwin et al. 6,016,145 A 1, 2000 Horvitz et al. 7,305,441 12, 2007 Mathewson, II et al. 6,031,529 A 2, 2000 Migos et al. 7,342,594 3, 2008 Ortet al. 6,057.835 A 5, 2000 Sato et al. 7,343,566 3, 2008 Chaudhri et al. 6,061,064 A 5, 2000 Reichlen 7,350,154 3, 2008 Anderson et al. 6,072,489 A 6, 2000 Gough et al. 7,386,801 6, 2008 Horvitz et al. 6,081,271 A 6, 2000 Bardon et al. 7.406,500 T/2008 Bantz et al. 6,088.018 A T/2000 DeLeeuw et al. 8, 2008 Horvitz A * 7/2OOO Shirriff .................... G09G 5.00 7,417,650 6,094,185 7,451.406 11/2008 Yoon 345,102 3, 2009 Robertson et al. 6,094,196 A T/2000 Berry et al. 7,512,902 6,118,427 A 9, 2000 Buxton et al. 7,594,185 9, 2009 Anderson et al. 6,147,684 A 11, 2000 Nielsen et al. 7,663,607 2, 2010 Hotelling et al. 6,151,030 A 11, 2000 DeLeeuw et al. 7,665,033 2, 2010 Byrne et al. 6,163,318 A 12, 2000 Fukuda et al. 7,743,340 6, 2010 Horvitz ................ G05B 19.404 6,173,315 B 1 * 1/2001 Deleeuw ............... HO4M 3/567 715,710 709/205 RE41,922 11/2010 Gough et al. 6,178,228 B1* 1/2001 Schol .................. G06F 3/04847 7,904,828 3, 2011 Conrad et al. 345,156 8,214,768 T/2012 Boule et al. 6,188,391 B1 2, 2001 Seely et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Case 1:12-Cv-20271-RNS Document 27 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2012 Page 1 of 49
    Case 1:12-cv-20271-RNS Document 27 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2012 Page 1 of 49 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 1:12-cv-20271-RNS-TEB MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., Plaintiff, v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED APPLE INC., Defendant. APPLE INC., Counterclaim Plaintiff, v. MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA, INC., ONE & COMPANY DESIGN, INC., and HTC AMERICA INNOVATION INC. Counterclaim Defendants. DEFENDANT APPLE INC.’S ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIMS TO PLAINTIFF MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Defendant Apple Inc. (“Apple”) by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby responds to Motorola Mobility, Inc.’s (“Motorola Mobility”) Original Complaint for Patent Infringement (“Complaint”) as follows: I. ANSWER INTRODUCTION 1. Apple admits that Motorola Mobility’s Complaint alleges that Apple infringes U.S. Patents Nos. 5,710,987 (“the ’987 patent”), 5,754,119 (“the ’119 patent”), 5,958,006 (“the Case 1:12-cv-20271-RNS Document 27 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2012 Page 2 of 49 ’006 patent”), 6,008,737 (“the ’737 patent”), 6,101,531 (“the ’531 patent”) and 6,377,161 (“the ’161 patent”) (collectively, “the Asserted Patents”), and that Motorola Mobility seeks remedies for Apple’s alleged infringement. Apple denies infringing any of the Asserted Patents. 2. Apple admits that this is the second complaint filed by Motorola Mobility in this district. Apple further admits that Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 1:10-cv- 23580-RNS is still ongoing and that Motorola Mobility has accused a number of Apple products of infringing the Asserted Patents in that suit.
    [Show full text]
  • Multiple Documents
    Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al, Docket No. 5:11-cv-01846 (N.D. Cal. Apr 15, 2011), Court Docket Multiple Documents Part Description 1 18 pages 2 Exhibit 4 to the Cashman Declaration 3 Exhibit 14 to the Cashman Declaration 4 Exhibit 15 to the Cashman Declaration 5 Exhibit 17 to the Cashman Declaration 6 Exhibit 18 to the Cashman Declaration 7 Exhibit 20 to the Cashman Declaration 8 Exhibit 63 to the Cashman Declaration 9 Exhibit 64 to the Cashman Declaration 10 Exhibit 65 to the Cashman Declaration 11 Exhibit 66 to the Cashman Declaration © 2013 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6LJBLEO82?documentName=1372.xml Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1356 Filed07/26/12 Page1 of 18 1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Charles K. Verhoeven (Cal. Bar No. 170151) [email protected] 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 875-6600 Facsimile: (415) 875-6700 Kevin P.B. Johnson (Cal. Bar No. 177129) [email protected] Victoria F. Maroulis (Cal. Bar No. 202603) [email protected] 555 Twin Dolphin Drive 5th Floor Redwood Shores, California 94065 Telephone: (650) 801-5000 Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 Michael T. Zeller (Cal. Bar No. 196417) [email protected] 865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 443-3000 Facsimile: (213) 443-3100 Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION APPLE INC., a California corporation, CASE NO.
    [Show full text]
  • Days That Shook the World Projects
    ‘Days That Shook the World’ Christchurch Mosque Attacks in New Zealand By Adam M. What Happened ● A gunman attacked two mosques in Christchurch New Zealand on 15 March 2019. ● The Al Noor Mosque was attacked first at around 13:40 followed by Linwood Islamic Centre at around 13:52. ● In total 51 people lost their lives and 40 were injured in the attack. Al Noor Mosque. Linwood Islamic Centre. Who was involved ● Brenton Tarrant is a 29 year old man from Australia. ● He was arrested on the 15 of March and charged with murder of 51 people. He was also charged with 40 attempted murder charges and one charge of committing a terrorist act. ● He was sentenced in August 2020 after he pleaded guilty to 51 counts of murder, 40 attempted murders and one charge of terrorism. ● He was sentenced to life in prison. Motives and Background ● Brenton Tarrant described his anti-immigrant motives including the growth of minority populations in a manifesto. ● He was planning the attack for two years. ● He described himself as a “racist” and saw Donald Trump as a “symbol of renewed white identity”. ● Tarrant also praised the Interest for teaching him and developing his “beliefs”. ● He live-streamed the attack on Facebook. ● He published a “manifesto” in which he declared immigrants as “invaders” ● He travelled the world before the attack and met Norwegian mass murder Anders Breivik who gave Tarrant his blessing for the attack. Consequences of the attack ● After the attack happened, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced that the government would tighten its gun laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Multiple Documents Part Description 1 44 Pages 2 Declaration of Tulin Erdem STRICKEN PURSUANT to ORDER #2212 3 Declaration of Stephen Gray 4 Declaration of R
    Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al, Docket No. 5:11-cv-01846 (N.D. Cal. Apr 15, 2011), Court Docket Multiple Documents Part Description 1 44 pages 2 Declaration of Tulin Erdem STRICKEN PURSUANT TO ORDER #2212 3 Declaration of Stephen Gray 4 Declaration of R. Sukumar STRICKEN PURSUANT TO ORDER #2212 5 Declaration of Jerry Wind STRICKEN PURSUANT TO ORDER #2212 6 Declaration of Andries Van Dam © 2013 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see www.bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6LJBLEO82?documentName=2080.xml Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2054 Filed10/19/12 Page1 of 44 1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Charles K. Verhoeven (Cal. Bar No. 170151) ! [email protected] 50 California Street, 22nd Floor " San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 875-6600 # Facsimile: (415) 875-6700 $ Kathleen M. Sullivan (Cal. Bar No. 242261) [email protected] % Kevin P.B. Johnson (Cal. Bar No. 177129) [email protected] & Victoria F. Maroulis (Cal. Bar No. 202603) [email protected] ' 555 Twin Dolphin Drive 5th Floor Redwood Shores, California 94065 ( Telephone: (650) 801-5000 Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 Susan R. Estrich (Cal. Bar No. 124009) [email protected] Michael T. Zeller (Cal. Bar No. 196417) ! [email protected] 865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor " Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 443-3000 # Facsimile: (213) 443-3100 $ Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS % AMERICA, INC. and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC & UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ' NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION ( APPLE INC., a California corporation, CASE NO.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
    Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2851 Filed12/05/13 Page1 of 3 1 HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781) WILLIAM F. LEE [email protected] [email protected] 2 MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664) WILMER CUTLER PICKERING [email protected] HALE AND DORR LLP 3 RACHEL KREVANS (CA SBN 116421) 60 State Street [email protected] Boston, MA 02109 4 ERIK J. OLSON (CA SBN 175815) Telephone: (617) 526-6000 [email protected] Facsimile: (617) 526-5000 5 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street 6 San Francisco, California 94105-2482 MARK D. SELWYN (SBN 244180) Telephone: (415) 268-7000 [email protected] 7 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 8 950 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Telephone: (650) 858-6000 Counterclaim-Defendant APPLE INC. Facsimile: (650) 858-6100 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN JOSE DIVISION 14 APPLE INC., a California corporation, Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG) 15 Plaintiff, APPLE’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO 16 FILE UNDER SEAL APPLE’S MOTION v. FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES 17 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a 18 Korean corporation; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New 19 York corporation; and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, 20 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, 21 Defendants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 APPLE’S ADMIN. MOT. TO FILE UNDER SEAL MOT. FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG) sf-3361324 Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2851 Filed12/05/13 Page2 of 3 1 In accordance with Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5, Apple Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Southern District of Florida
    Case 1:12-cv-01004-GMS Document 115 Filed 07/17/12 Page 1 of 40 PageID #: 2939 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Plaintiff, v. Consolidated Cases APPLE INC., Case No. 1:12-cv-20271-RNS Defendant. Case No. 1:10-cv-23580-RNS APPLE INC., Counterclaim Plaintiff, v. MOTOROLA, INC., MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA, INC., ONE & COMPANY DESIGN, INC., and HTC AMERICA INNOVATION INC., Counterclaim Defendants. HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA, INC., ONE & COMPANY DESIGN, INC., and HTC AMERICA INNOVATION INC., Counterclaim Plaintiffs, v. APPLE INC., Counterclaim Defendant. HTC’S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS TO DEFENDANT AND COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF APPLE INC.’S COUNTERCLAIMS TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 678426.03 Case 1:12-cv-01004-GMS Document 115 Filed 07/17/12 Page 2 of 40 PageID #: 2940 Counterclaim Defendants HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., One & Company Design, Inc., and HTC America Innovation Inc. (collectively “HTC Defendants”), for their Answer to the Counterclaims of Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff Apple Inc. (“Counterclaims”) (Docket No. 95), hereby respond as follows: ANSWER TO APPLE’S COUNTERCLAIMS GENERAL DENIAL Unless expressly admitted below, HTC Defendants deny each and every allegation Apple has set forth in its Counterclaims. PARTIES 161. Admitted. 162. HTC Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 162 regarding Counterclaim Defendant Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“Motorola”) and therefor they are denied. 163. HTC Defendants admit that HTC Corporation is a corporation organized under the laws of Taiwan and having a principal place of business at 23 Xinghua Road, Taoyuan 330, Taiwan, Republic of China.
    [Show full text]
  • Declaration in Support of 1000 Opposition/Response to Motion
    Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al Doc. 1014 Att. 18 EXHIBIT EE Dockets.Justia.com Highly Confidential – Attorneys' Eyes Only – Subject to Protective Order United States District Court Northern District of California Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. Expert Report of Michael J. Wagner April 16, 2012 Volume 1 LitiNomics Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. Table of Contents Expert Report of Michael J. Wagner Volume 1 Tab # Description 1 Expert Report of Michael J. Wagner 2 Damages Analysis 3 License Agreement Matrix 4 List of Documents Considered 5 Curriculum Vitae of Michael J. Wagner 6 Damages Analysis Based on U.S. Manufacturing Costs LitiNomics Tab 1 Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only – Subject to Protective Order United States District Court Northern District of California San Jose Division Case No. 11-cv-01846 LHK APPLE INC. v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC Expert Report of Michael J. Wagner April 16, 2012 Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only – Subject to Protective Order I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1 II. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS ............................................................................................................... 2 III. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTIONS ........................................................ 7 A. PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]