ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.

ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board's construction of "biometric signal" as "a physical or behavioral biometric attribute" and upheld the Board's finding that the asserted prior-art combination did not teach the enrollment-process limitations. The court also held that the Board did not err by declining to address a Bianco-only obviousness theory that was not presented with particularity in the petitions. The decision reinforces that IPR petitioners must clearly present each obviousness theory in the petition and cannot recast a combination ground as a standalone-reference theory later in the proceeding. Affirmed. The patents claim secure-access systems using biometric signals for both authentication and enrollment of users. ASSA challenged the Board's construction of "biometric signal," arguing it should cover any input or output of a biometric sensor, including finger taps that do not involve biometric measurement. The court agreed with the Board that the claim language ties "the biometric signal" to a signal received by a biometric sensor and matchable against biometric signatures; the disclosed enrollment embodiment was not excluded because the system still reads fingerprint information from the finger presses. Under that construction, Mathiassen's finger taps in navigation mode did not satisfy the claimed series of entries of a biometric signal because no biometric measurement was taken. ASSA's Bianco-only obviousness theory was untimely because the petitions presented an obviousness ground based on the Bianco-Mathiassen combination, with Mathiassen supplying the mapping limitation. § 103 claim construction waiver / forfeiture non-precedential § 103 claim construction waiver / forfeiture non-precedential § 103 claim construction waiver / forfeiture non-precedential