Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 1 of 15 EXHIBIT I. 1 Petitioner Samsung 1013

Transcription

1 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 1 of 15 EXHIBIT I 1 Petitioner Samsung 1013

2 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 2 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PRISUA ENGINEERING CORP., v. Plaintiff, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LATINOAMERICA MIAMI, INC., Defendant. Case No. 1:16-cv KMM EXPERT DECLARATION OF EDWARD J. DELP, PH.D., REGARDING THE CONSTRUCTIONS OF CERTAIN CLAIM LIMITATIONS OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,650,591 2

3 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 3 of 15 I. INTRODUCTION 1. I submit this declaration on behalf of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Electronics Latinoamerica Miami, Inc. (collectively, Samsung ) on claim construction issues relating to U.S. Patent No. 8,650,591 (the 591 patent ). 2. This declaration discloses my opinions regarding the construction and indefiniteness of certain terms in the 591 patent. 3. I reserve the right to supplement or modify the opinions expressed herein, as well as the bases for my opinions, depending on any information subsequently provided by Plaintiff Prisua Engineering Corp. ( Prisua ) or discovered by Samsung. A. Background and Qualifications 4. I am a Distinguished Professor in the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana. I also have a joint appointment in the Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering. My professorship is sponsored by the Charles William Harrison endowment, which donated the $1.5 million dollars to Purdue to establish my position. My official title is the Charles William Harrison Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering. There are 81 Distinguished Professors at Purdue University out of a total of 10,900 faculty members. 5. Purdue University is one of the largest and oldest engineering schools in the United States. It is consistently ranked in the top 10 engineering schools in the Unites States. One out of every 14 engineers in the United States is a Purdue graduate. Purdue graduates have had a tremendous impact on engineering developments and practices in the U.S. For example, the first (Neil Armstrong) and last (Eugene Cernan) persons to walk on the moon were Purdue 2 3

4 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 4 of 15 graduates. Two of the engineers who won Emmy awards for their work in imaging technology, Bill Beyers and Lauren Christopher, are Purdue graduates. 6. I received my Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Cincinnati in 1973; my Master of Science degree from the University of Cincinnati in 1975; and my Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Purdue University in In May 2002, I received an Honorary Doctor of Technology from the Tampere University of Technology in Tampere, Finland; this award cited my work in signal processing. My expertise includes digital signal processing, the processing and coding of image, video, and audio signals, and embedded and mobile applications. The image compression algorithm I developed as part of my Ph.D. thesis, block truncation coding, has been used extensively in many applications and was one of the final candidates of the JPEG compression standard. It was used by NASA to send images back to Earth from the Mars Pathfinder MicroRover, which landed safely on Mars on July 4, I am a Professional Engineer. I am registered in the State of Ohio (registration number E-45364). 8. As a professor at Purdue University and the University of Michigan, I have performed extensive research relating to signal, image, and video processing techniques and embedded systems. Over the last ten years, I have supervised the research and preparation of more than 45 Ph.D. theses relating to topics in signal, image, and video processing. As part of my continuing research in the field of signal, image, and video processing, I have studied new developments in the field of signal, image, and video processing and embedded systems, analyzed the publications of other leaders in this field, and participated in industry organizations chartered to study the processing of images, video, and audio signals. My experience in the field 3 4

5 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 5 of 15 of signal processing includes over 30 years of directed research, as well as the materials taught in my classes at Purdue University and the University of Michigan. 9. I have been studying subject matter relating to image and video processing since approximately 1975, in connection with grants provided by the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Energy and various corporations, including Texas Instruments, Samsung, Motorola, Nokia, Google and Thomson. 10. I also have been elected a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the Society for Imaging Science and Technology (IS&T), the International Society for Optical Engineering (SPIE), and the American Institute of Medical and Biological Engineering. In 2004, I received the Technical Achievement Award from the IEEE Signal Processing Society for my work in image and video compression and multimedia security. In 2008, I received the Society Award from IEEE Signal Processing Society (SPS). This is the highest award given by the SPS. 11. In 2009, I received the Purdue College of Engineering Faculty Excellence Award for Research. 12. In 2015, I was named Electronic Imaging Scientist of the Year by the IS&T and SPIE. The Scientist of the Year award is given annually to a member of the electronic imaging community who has demonstrated excellence and commanded the respect of his/her peers by making significant and substantial contributions to the field of electronic imaging via research, publications and service. I was cited for my contributions to multimedia security and image and video compression. 13. I received the 2017 SPIE Technology Achievement Award. The SPIE Technology Achievement award is awarded annually to recognize outstanding technical accomplishment in 4 5

6 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 6 of 15 optics, electro-optics, photonic engineering, or imaging. The SPIE Awards Committee has made this recommendation in recognition of my pioneering work in multimedia security including watermarking and device forensics and for his contributions to image and video compression. 14. In 2016, I received the Purdue College of Engineering Mentoring Award for my work in mentoring junior faculty and women graduate students. 15. In 1990, I received the Honeywell Award and in 1992 the D. D. Ewing Award, both for excellence in teaching. In 2001, I received the Raymond C. Bowman Award for fostering education in imaging science from the Society for Imaging Science and Technology (IS&T). In 2004, I received the Wilfred Hesselberth Award for Teaching Excellence. In 2000, I was selected a Distinguished Lecturer of the IEEE Signal Processing Society, and I gave lectures in France, Spain, and Australia on signal, image, and video processing. 16. A copy of my CV is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. B. Testimony 17. A description of the previous testimony I have given at trial and in deposition is presented in Exhibit 2. C. Compensation 18. My compensation for this case is $650 per hour, plus expenses. My compensation does not depend in any way on the outcome of this case. II. MATERIALS CONSIDERED 19. In forming my opinions, I have relied upon my knowledge of the state of the art at the time of the alleged inventions of the 591 patent (i.e., on or before March 2010). Additionally, I have reviewed and considered the documents and materials in forming my opinions listed in Exhibit

7 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 7 of 15 III. STANDARDS IN PATENT LAW 20. In this expert report, I do not offer opinions related to the law, as I am not an attorney. I have, however, been informed by counsel of several principles concerning patent validity and claim construction, which I used to arrive at my conclusions. A. Claim Construction 21. I am informed that the words of a claim are generally given their ordinary and customary meaning that they would have to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention in view of the specification of the patent and the file history. To determine the meaning of a claim term, I am informed that the Court will look first to the claims and specification, then to the file history, and only if necessary, to other extrinsic evidence. I am informed that extrinsic evidence is not relevant if it contradicts the specification and file history. B. Legal Standard for Indefiniteness 22. I understand that a patent claim is invalid as indefinite if the claim does not particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter that the applicant regards as his invention. In order to meet this definiteness requirement, a patent must provide one of ordinary skill in the art with reasonable certainty about the scope of the claimed invention. 23. I understand that invalidity for indefiniteness (failure to meet the definiteness requirement) must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. C. Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art 24. The 591 patent discloses an apparatus that generates an edited video data stream by substituting a portion of an original video data stream with an image extracted from another (user input) video data stream. Prior to the substitution, a user identifies first and second images from two separate video data streams and the system purportedly spatially matches the two images selected by the user, to generate a third edited video data stream. 6 7

8 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 8 of I do not disagree with the level of ordinary skill in the art set forth in Dr. Negahdaripour s declaration to Prisua s claim construction brief. More precisely, a person of ordinary skill in the art around the purported priority date of the 591 patent (March 9, 2010) would likely have been a person familiar with signal, image, and video processing. That person would likely have earned a Bachelor s Degree in Electrical Engineering and would have had at least three years of professional experience in signal, image, and video processing or would have had earned a Master s Degree in Electrical Engineering and at least two years of professional experience in signal, image, and video processing. I consider myself to be a person of at least ordinary skill in the art. IV. DISCUSSION OF DISPUTED TERMS 26. I understand that the parties dispute the proper construction of six claim terms as summarized below. In this report, I provide my opinions as to the construction of user input video data stream, original video data stream, and spatially matching terms. Claim Term Prisua s Proposal Samsung s Proposal user input video data stream (Claim 1) a sequence of images digitally recorded by a user separate from the original video data stream a digitally recorded sequence of frames contained in a format for displaying the frames as a motion picture (e.g., ASF, MPEG-2, AVI) that is provided by the user original video data stream (Claim 1) spatially matching (Claim 1) a digitally recorded sequence of images that is to be modified aligning a set of pixels in the spatial domain a digitally recorded sequence of frames contained in a format for displaying the frames as a motion picture (e.g., ASF, MPEG-2, AVI) that is to be modified Indefinite; or, in the alternative, partitioning images into a set of coarse to fine scale sub-blocks and concatenating the histograms extracted from all blocks into a long vector representation extracting (Claim 1) select and separate out Plain meaning (i.e., removing ) 7 8

9 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 9 of 15 Claim Term Prisua s Proposal Samsung s Proposal selecting and separating out Indefinite because (1) there is no the at least one pixel chosen antecedent basis for the clam term by a user on a display, when the user entering data in Claim said display is acting as a data 3 and (2) there is no antecedent entry device and receives a basis for the claim term the data selection of at least one pixel entry display device in Claim 3. by said user extracting the at least one pixel from the user entering data in the data entry display device (Claim 3) the digital processing unit is further capable of extracting the at least one pixel from the user pointing to a spatial location in a displayed video frame (Claim 4) performing spatial analysis on a video frame based on a user input, then selecting and separating out the at least one pixel chosen by said user Indefinite at least because it depends from Claim user input video data stream / original video data stream 27. I agree with Dr. Negahdaripour that the user input video data stream is a separate and distinct video data stream from the original video data stream and the displayable edited video data stream. I also agree that the original video data stream of Claim 1 is a video data stream that is to be modified. I do, however, disagree with Dr. Negahdaripour s proposed construction of video data stream. 28. The term video data stream has a well-understood meaning in the field of digital signal processing. One of ordinary skill in the art in 2010 would have understood the term video data stream to refer to a sequence of frames that captures motion at a high frame rate and that can be played back as moving pictures. The motion here can be static or dynamic depending on the amount of movement of the objects that were captured in the video. Therefore, one of skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention (and today) would understand that a video data stream is a digitally recorded sequence of frames contained in a format for displaying the frames as a motion picture. 29. I understand that Dr. Negahdaripour has opined that a video data stream is a digitally recorded sequence of images. I disagree that video data stream can be properly 8 9

10 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 10 of 15 construed that way because not all digitally recorded sequences of images are video. A person having ordinary skill in the art would not expect a still image or a sequence of still images that cannot be played back to the viewer as a motion picture to be a video data stream. 30. I also understand that Dr. Negahdaripour has opined in 32 of his declaration that a motion picture has a special meaning to a person having ordinary skill in the art and that it means a movie production specifically intended for theatrical exhibition. I disagree. 31. A motion picture or moving picture can certainly mean a movie intended for theatrical exhibition but the word is not as limited as Dr. Negahdaripour suggests. For instance, the acronym MPEG refers to the Moving Pictures Expert Group and which refers to data compression standard used for video. Certainly, videos encoded pursuant to the MPEG standards are not limited to productions intended for theatrical exhibition, yet that would still be considered motion pictures. 32. Moreover, in my opinion, motion picture comports with the 591 patent in light of the claims and specification. For instance, Claim 2 of the 591 patent describes compacting motion vectors associated with the first image and applying the motion vectors to the second image in order to maintain the overall motion of the original video data stream. This language supports my understanding that video refers to a format for displaying frames as motion pictures. Thus, it is my opinion that Samsung s use of motion picture in construing the term video data stream is appropriate. 33. I understand that, in describing a video data stream, Dr. Negahdaripour opined that a sequence of images proposed by Prisua is more appropriate than a sequence of frames proposed by Samsung. I disagree. In fact, a review of the 591 patent specification clearly indicates that the use of a sequence of images does not comport with the claim language. 9 10

11 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 11 of Claim 1 of the 591 patent uses the following phrases: a frame of said original video data stream and at least one pixel in a frame of said original video data stream is extracted to form a first image. Ex. 4 at Claim 1. Here, the named-inventor correctly uses the word frame to refer to one portion of a video that would be sequentially played to display motion. In the same claim, the named-inventor uses the word image to refer to a picture (or frame) that is extracted from a video data stream. Indeed, a person having ordinary skill in the art ordinarily uses the word frame instead of image to refer to portions of video. Thus, it is my opinion that a construction that a video data stream is composed of frames is more appropriate. 35. It is my understanding that Samsung s proposed construction includes ASF, AVI, and MPEG-2 as examples of types of a video data streams. MPED-2, ASF and AVI are all well-known formats for storing video and would have been known to those of skill in the art in While this is not an exhaustive list, they are illustrative of video file formats and are useful for distinguishing video from non-video formats (e.g. JPEG or PNG formats). 36. Just as JPEG and PNG signify still image processing, ASF, AVI, and MPEG-2 are very popular file and encoding formats that signify video signals. In light of the specification and claim language that call for frames and motions in a video data stream, it is my opinion that a video data stream in the 591 patent does not include a still image. 37. Moreover, I disagree with Dr. Negahdaripour s statement that the file and encoding formats (i.e., ASF, MPEG-2, and AVI) provided in Samsung s proposed construction require compression. For instance, AVI (Audio Video Interleave) is a file wrapper format that can contain either compressed or uncompressed video data. I do understand that the indicator e.g. means that these are just examples and not an exhaustive list. 38. Furthermore, Dr. Negahdaripour in 30 of his declaration opines that the 591 patent requires the image manipulation to occur in the uncompressed spatial domain. This is 10 11

12 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 12 of 15 an incomplete statement regarding the 591 patent. What the 591 patent requires is either uncompressed or decompressed video such that all pixel information in a frame can be retrieved by the system for spatial image manipulation. Both uncompressed frames and decompressed frames can provide complete pixel information on an image. Therefore, both compressed and uncompressed videos comport with the 591 patent. 39. Accordingly, Dr. Negahdaripour s characterization of the three types of formats included in Samsung s proposed construction as conflicting with the 591 patent is incorrect. In my opinion, adding these non-exhaustive types of file and encoding formats only helps to clearly delineate the bounds of the term video data stream as used in the 591 patent. 2. spatially matching 40. It is my understanding that Prisua proposed spatially matching to mean aligning a set of pixels in the spatial domain and Samsung objected to the term as being indefinite. 41. It is my opinion that the term spatially matching is indefinite because, as there is no single understood meaning to one of skill in the art and the 591 patent is silent on what is meant by spatially matching. 42. I have reviewed several articles in the IEEE database that mention spatial matching, none of which define spatial matching but most of which explain different methods to match two images. 43. For instance, S. Lazebnik, C. Schmid, and J. Ponce, Beyond Bags of Features: Spatial Pyramid Matching for Recognizing Natural Scene Categories, Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp , June 2006, New York, NY, (Ex. 5) describes scene semantic recognition (not object recognition) using a process that subdivides and image and concatenates the histograms extracted from those 11 12

13 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 13 of 15 subdivisions; J. Philbin, O. Chum, M. Isard, J. Sivic, and A. Zisserman, Object retrieval with large vocabularies and fast spatial matching, Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 1-8, June 2007, Minneapolis, MN (Ex. 6), describes image retrieval, by quering with an image; Z. Zhang, R. Deriche, O. Faugeras, and Q. Luong, A robust technique for matching two uncalibrated images through the recovery of the unknown epipolar geometry, Artificial Intelligence, pp , vol. 78, no. 1 2, October 1995 (Ex. 7) refers to stereo image matching; C. Baillard, C. Schmid, A. Zisserman, and A. Fitzgibbon, Automatic line matching and 3D reconstruction of buildings from multiple views, Proceedings of the ISPRS Conference on Automatic Extraction of GIS Objects from Digital Imagery, pp , Part 3-2W5, September 1999, Munich, Germany, (Ex. 8) refers to automatic line matching; A. Roche, X. P. Grégoire Malandain, and N. Ayache, The correlation ratio as a new similarity measure for multimodal image registration, Proceedings of the International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, pp , October 1998, Cambridge, MA (Ex. 9), refers to correlation matching; F. Maes, A. Collignon, D. Vandermeulen, G. Marchal and P. Suetens, Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 16, no. 2, pp , April 1997 (Ex. 10) describes image registration; and M. H. Chan, Y. B. Yu and A. G. Constantinides, Variable size block matching motion compensation with applications to video coding, IEE Proceedings I - Communications, Speech and Vision, vol. 137, no. 4, pp , August 1990 (Ex. 11) describes block matching for motion compensation in video coding. These are just some examples of different methods of matching images, none of which is disclosed in the 591 specification and all of which could be considered a possible ways of performing what one might consider spatially matching

14 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 14 of It is my opinion that because there is no guidance in the 591 patent specification whatsoever, there is no one correct definition of the term spatial matching and the patent does not provide one of ordinary skill in the art reasonable certainty as to the scope of the claimed invention. 45. On the other hand, in my opinion, Prisua s proposed construction of aligning a set of pixels in the spatial domain is also incorrect because there are processes in image processing that involve the aligning of pixels in the spatial domain that one of skill in the art would not consider spatial matching. For instance, spatial filtering involves aligning pixels in the spatial domain but would not be considered spatial matching. Sobel edge detection is a convolution operation that may align pixels in the spatial domain. Resizing may involve aligning pixels in the spatial domain, but I understand that resizing was distinguished by the patentee during prosecution of the 591 patent. These are just some examples of processes where one aligns pixels but would not be considered to be spatial matching. V. CONCLUSION 46. Based upon my knowledge, education, and skill in the art of signal, image and, video processing, as well as all the materials reviewed and/or examined that are listed in Exhibit C, it is my opinion that Samsung s proposed construction of original video data stream and user input video data stream are correct and more appropriate than Prisua s incomplete proposed constructions. 47. The opinions set forth in this expert report are based upon the information available to me at this time. Accordingly, I reserve the right to supplement, expand, or modify my opinions as new information becomes available to me. I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct

15 Case 1:16-cv KMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2017 Page 15 of 15 Executed on January 25, 2017 in Washington D.C. Dr. Edward J. Delp, Ph.D