Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Ruling That Samesurf's Shared Browsing Patent Claims Are Unpatentable

The Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB final written decision in an inter partes review challenging a patent on synchronized, shareable web browsing experiences. The patent covered a guest device joining a synchronized browsing session administered by a centralized synchronization server. The guest device received “web browsing interaction data” from the server and used that data to operate an application to access a website server. The PTAB found all claims unpatentable for obviousness based on prior art including a WIPO publication and a U.S. application publication. The outcome depended on construing “web browsing interaction data” as data related to web browsing interactions, a construction broad enough to encompass the prior art. The Federal Circuit held the Board correctly construed the disputed claim term and rejected a restrictive reading tied to a single embodiment absent clear intent to limit claim scope.

"The Federal Circuit explained that 'even when the specification describes only a single embodiment, the claims of the patent will not be read restrictively unless the patentee has demonstrated a clear intention to limit the claim scope,' which the record did not show here."

"Samesurf owns U.S. Patent No. 9,185,145, entitled "Method and Apparatus for the Implementation of a Real-Time, Shareable Browsing Experience on a Guest Device." The '145 patent broadly includes a method by which a guest device joins a synchronized browsing session administered by a centralized synchronization server, using data received from that server to independently access a website. Claim 1 requires, among other elements, that the guest device receive "web browsing interaction data" from the synchronization server and then operate an application based on that data to access a website server."

"On a petition filed by Intuit Inc., the Board instituted inter partes review (IPR) of all claims of the '145 patent and ultimately issued a final written decision holding the claims obvious over a World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) international publication known as "Lebrun," when combined with a U.S. patent application publication referred to as "Wang." The Board's determination turned on its interpretation of the term "web browsing interaction data," which it construed to mean "data related to web browsing interactions." This interpretation is broad enough"

Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law