Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318 Fil.ed 07/16/10 Page 1 of 4 PageiD #: 6898
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`SOFTWARE RIGHTS ARCHNE, LLC
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`GOOGLE INC., YAHOO! INC.,
`lAC SEARCH & MEDIA, INC., AOL LLC, §
`§
`and LYCOS, INC.
`§
`§
`§
`
`Civil Action No. 2:07-CV-511 (CE)
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Defendants.
`
`_________________________§
`
`PARTIES' LOCAL PATENT RULE 4-3
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
`
`Pursuant to Patent Rule 4-3 of the Rules of Practice for Patent Cases and the Court's
`
`Docket Control Order as amended by the Court's Order Granting Unopposed Motion to Further
`
`Extend Certain Scheduling Deadline dated June 23rd, 2010, the parties hereby submit this Joint
`
`Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement.
`
`A.
`
`PATENT L.R. 4-3(a): UNDISPUTED CLAIM TERMS, PHRASES, OR CLAUSES
`
`The parties have agreed that certain phrases (identified by the phrase "AGREED
`
`CONSTRUCTION") should be construed as proposed by the parties in the chart attached hereto
`
`as Exhibit A. The parties further agree that any claim terms, phrases, or clauses for which no
`
`construction is provided should be given their ordinary meaning as understood by a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the respective art of each patent and do not require construction by the Court.
`
`1
`
`EXHIBIT 2022
`Facebook, Inc. et al.
`v.
`Software Rights Archive, LLC
`CASE IPR2013-00479
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318 Filed 07/16/10 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: 6899
`
`
`
`B.
`
`PATENT L.R. 4-3(b): PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF DISPUTED CLAIM
`
`TERMS, PHRASES, OR CLAUSES
`
`
`
`Exhibit B details disputed patent claim terms, phrases, or clauses for which Plaintiff and
`
`Defendants propose different constructions. The parties request construction of these claim
`
`terms, phrases, or clauses by the Court. The parties have set forth in Exhibits C and D the
`
`intrinsic and extrinsic evidence they each may rely on in support of their respective proposed
`
`constructions.1
`
` Plaintiff may submit expert declarations in support of its claim construction
`
`positions or in rebuttal to Defendants’ claim construction evidence, and Defendants are
`
`considering submitting rebuttal expert declarations in support of their claim construction
`
`positions. The parties reserve their right to depose any expert who provides a declaration.
`
`
`
`C.
`
`PATENT L.R. 4-3(c): ANTICIPATED LENGTH OF CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`HEARING
`
`
`
`Plaintiff proposes that the parties receive 180 minutes per side for oral argument on claim
`
`construction issues, or no more than 6 hours total for the Claim Construction Hearing on
`
`November 10, 2010. Defendants suggest that approximately 4 hours, or 2 hours per side, will be
`
`needed for the hearing.
`
`
`
`
`1 Each party also reserves the right to rely on the intrinsic and/or extrinsic evidence cited by any other party in
`support of its proposed constructions. In addition, because Plaintiff has requested from Defendants, but have not
`yet received, specific categories of materials that may be relevant to claim construction. Plaintiff reserves the
`right to revise, supplement, and/or amend this Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement after these materials
`have been produced. In addition, because Defendants have requested, and have not yet received, certain
`discovery from Plaintiff, Defendants also reserve the right to revise, supplement, and/or amend this Claim
`Construction and Prehearing Statement after these materials have been produced.
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318 Filed 07/16/10 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 6900
`
`D.
`
`PATENT L.R. 4-3(d): WITNESSES TO BE CALLED AT THE CLAIM
`
`CONSTRUCTION HEARING
`
`The parties anticipate that witnesses, including, but not limited to, expert witnesses, will
`
`not be called at the Claim Construction Hearing.
`
`
`
`E.
`
`PATENT L.R. 4-3(e): ISSUES FOR A PREHEARING CONFERENCE
`
`The parties agree that there are no other issues that need to be taken up at a prehearing
`
`conference prior to the Claim Construction Hearing.
`
`DATED: July 16, 2010
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Andrew G. DiNovo
`Lee L. Kaplan
`LEAD ATTORNEY
`State Bar No. 11094400
`SMYSER KAPLAN & VESELKA, L.L.P.
`700 Louisiana, Suite 2300
`Houston, TX 77002
`(713) 221-2323
`(713) 221-2320 (fax)
`lkaplan@skv.com
`
`Victor G. Hardy
`State Bar No. 00790821
`(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
`Andrew G. DiNovo
`State Bar No. 00790594
`Adam G. Price
`State Bar No. 24027750
`Jay D. Ellwanger
`State Bar No. 24036522
`DINOVO PRICE ELLWANGER & HARDY
`LLP
`7000 N. MoPac Expressway, Suite 350
`Austin, Texas 78731
`(512) 539-2626
`(512) 539-2627 (fax)
`adinovo@dpelaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318 Filed 07/16/10 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: 6901
`
`Of counsel:
`
`S. Calvin Capshaw
`State Bar No. 03783900
`Elizabeth L. DeRieux
`State Bar No. 05770585
`BROWN MCCARROLL, LLP
`1127 Judson Road, Suite 220
`P.O. Box 3999
`Longview, TX 75606-3999
`(903) 236-9800
`(903) 236-8787 (fax)
`ccapshaw@mailbmc.com
`
`Robert M. Parker
`State Bar No. 15498000
`Robert C. Bunt
`State Bar No. 00787165
`Charles Ainsworth
`State Bar No. 0078352
`PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C.
`100 East Ferguson, Suite 1114
`Tyler, Texas 75702
`(903) 531-3535
`(903) 533-9687 (fax)
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served on all
`
`counsel of record via electronic mail on this 16th day of July, 2010.
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Andrew G. DiNovo
` Andrew G. DiNovo
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-1 Filed 07/16/10 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 6902
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A: AGREED CONSTRUCTIONS
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,544,352
`
`Claim Claim Term
`All
`relationships
`All
`direct relationships
`All
`indirect relationships
`
`All
`28
`28
`28
`30
`31
`33
`39
`40
`40
`
`euclidean distances
`chronological data
`matrix searching
`vectors
`occur before
`occurs before
`interim vector
`marked pool
`pool importance
`pool similarity
`
`Agreed Construction
`non-semantic references between objects
`relationship where one object cites to another object
`relationship where at least one intermediate object exists between two objects and where the intermediate
`objects connect the two objects through a chain of citations. (For example, if A cites B and B cites C, A and C
`have an indirect relationship).
`the straight line distance between two points
`data representing temporal characteristics of an object in the database
`searching values arranged in at least one column and at least one row
`A vector is a set of values arranged in a one column matrix or a one row matrix
`precede in time
`precedes in time
`a vector that is created in the process of calculating another value
`the group of objects previously marked
`determining the importance of an object in relation to other objects in a pool
`determining the similarity of an object in relation to other objects in a pool
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-1 Filed 07/16/10 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 6903
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,832,494
`
`Claim Claim Term
`link
`All
`All
`direct links
`All
`paths
`
`Agreed Construction
`non-semantic relationship between two nodes
`A direct link is a link where one node cites another node
`A path is a particular sequence of citations that make up a relationship between two nodes
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-1 Filed 07/16/10 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 6904
`
`16
`
`Claim Claim Term
`activating the
`3
`embedded text
`locating documents
`that have an indirect
`relationship to the
`chosen document
`identifying Universal
`Resource Locators for
`the documents
`cluster analyzing the
`hyperjump data
`
`21
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,233,571
`
`Agreed Construction
`enabling text within the source map to be selectable by a user
`
`locating documents that have an indirect relationship to the chosen document; identifying Universal Resource
`Locators for the documents
`
`non-semantically generating the set of candidate cluster links for nodes indirectly related to the chosen node
`using the hyperjump data, assigning weights to the candidate cluster links and deriving actual cluster links
`from the set of candidate cluster links based on the assigned weights
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 6905
`
`EXHIBIT B: THE PARTIES’ PROPOSED CONSTRUCTIONS OF DISPUTED CLAIM TERMS, PHRASES, AND
`
`CLAUSES
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,544,352
`
`Claim Disputed Claim Term
`26
`A non-semantical
`method
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction
`A method reciting steps that analyze or use non-
`semantical relationships (i.e., citation or hyperlink
`relationships).
`
`A computer-implemented ... method for numerically
`representing a set of objects in a computer database
`and for computerized searching of the set of
`numerically represented objects in the computer
`database
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`A method of analysis that does not account for
`phrases and words in a textual object and that is
`based on explicit references to other textual objects
`
`No construction necessary
`
`
`A ... method for
`numerically representing
`objects in a computer
`database and for
`computerized searching
`of numerically
`represented objects in the
`computer database.
`objects in a computer
`database
`
`creating a first numerical
`representation for each
`identified object in the
`database based upon the
`object's direct
`relationship with other
`objects in the database
`generating a second
`numerical representation
`
`26
`
`26
`
`26
`
`26
`
`
`
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this definition:
`
`Any electronic collection of objects stored in
`computer media.
`
`creating a first numerical representation for each
`identified object within the set of numerically
`represented objects in the database based upon the
`object’s direct relationship with other objects in the
`database
`
`a defined collection of electronic data available for
`computerized searching
`
`
`
`creating a first numerical representation for each
`marked object in the database based upon citations
`determined to be the object’s direct citations to other
`objects in the database
`
`
`generating a second numerical representation of each
`identified object within the set of numerically
`
`generating a second numerical representation of each
`object in the database that describes the indirect
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 2 of 14 PageID #: 6906
`
`Claim Disputed Claim Term
`of each object based on
`the analysis of the first
`numerical representation
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction
`represented objects based on the analysis of the first
`numerical representations
`
`26
`
`26
`
`26
`
`26
`
`26
`
`26
`
`an object identified by a search using a computer and
`a second numerical representation
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary
`
`identified object
`
`analyzing the first
`numerical
`representations for
`indirect relationships
`searching the objects in
`the database using a
`computer and the stored
`second numerical
`representations
`
`No construction necessary
`
`storing the first
`numerical representation
`for use in computerized
`searching
`storing the second
`numerical representation
`for use in computerized
`searching
`computerized searching No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary
`
`27
`
`boolean word index
`
`
`
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this construction:
`Definition of Boolean Word Index:
`A word index that is capable of supporting Boolean
`2
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`citation relationships found by analyzing the first
`numerical representation
`
`
`each object that has been marked
`
`using the first numerical representations to locate
`and identify the indirect relationships
`
`
`The searching step is performed after the other
`recited claim steps.
`construe “searching the objects in the database
`using a computer “ as retrieving objects from a
`database in response to selection of an object by an
`end user after the prior recited steps have been
`completed
`See construction for “computerized searching”
`below.
`
`See construction for “computerized searching”
`below.
`
`retrieving objects from a database in response to
`selection of an object by an end user after the prior
`recited steps have been completed
`a list of core English words and the respective
`paragraph numbers where those words are located
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 3 of 14 PageID #: 6907
`
`Claim Disputed Claim Term
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction
`searches, which use keywords and operators such as
`“AND, “ “OR “ and “NOT “ to locate documents
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this construction for
`“semantic indexing techniques “:
`
`methods for creating and using indexes that use text
`analysis
`coefficients of similarity No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this construction for
`“coefficients of similarity “:
`
`Coefficients of similarity are values indicating
`similarity.
`
`Marking portions of an object (words, phrases,
`paragraphs or other portions of an object)
`
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`
`creating a word index for text analysis
`
`
`a value between 0 and 100% representing the
`comparative Euclidean distance between two objects
`in the database
`
`marking portions (words, phrases, paragraphs, or
`portions of other full textual objects that are referred
`to in another full textual object) of an object
`
`A portion (words, phrases, paragraphs) of an object
`or a portion of another object that is referred to in the
`object
`
`A portion of an object (word, phrase, paragraph, or
`other portion of an object).
`
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this construction:
`grouping the subsets into sections based upon an
`analysis of the subset numerical representations
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this construction for
`3
`
`grouping paragraphs based on weighing their
`Euclidean distances and contiguity
`
`group of contiguous or related paragraphs
`
`
`27
`
`33
`
`34
`
`34
`
`35
`
`semantic indexing
`techniques
`
`wherein the marking step
`includes the step of
`marking subsets of
`objects in the database
`subset
`
`clustering the subsets
`into sections based upon
`the subset analysis
`
`35
`
`section
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 4 of 14 PageID #: 6908
`
`Claim Disputed Claim Term
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`
`section:
`
` a
`
` group of subsets
`
`
`No construction necessary
`
`
`graphically displaying
`one or more of the
`identified objects
`
`pool-importance
`searching to identify an
`important pool of textual
`objects, important in
`relation to the objects in
`the selected pool
`pool-similarity searching
`to identify a similar pool
`of textual objects, similar
`in relation to the objects
`in marked pool
`identifying a paradigm
`pool of objects
`
`A method for the non-
`semantical indexing of
`objects stored in a
`computer database, the
`method for use in
`searching the database
`for the objects
`objects stored in a
`computer database
`
`37
`
`39
`
`39
`
`40
`
`41
`
`41
`
`
`
`searching objects to identify a pool of important
`textual objects from the selected pool by ranking the
`relative importance of the objects in the selected
`pool
`
`displaying a graphic showing the relations, patterns,
`and similarity found among one or more of the
`identified objects
`
`
`searching objects to identify a group of important
`textual objects from the selected pool by ranking the
`relative importance of the objects in the selected
`pool
`
`searching objects to identify a pool of similar textual
`objects to the selected pool by ranking the relative
`similarity of objects in the marked pool
`
`searching objects to identify a group of similar
`textual objects to the selected pool by determining
`the relative similarity of objects in the marked pool
`
`identifying a pool of exemplary, model, or
`archetypical objects that serve as a reference point
`for analyzing direct and indirect relationships
`between objects
`A method for the non-semantical indexing of a set of
`objects stored in a computer database, the method
`for use in searching the database for the objects in
`the set of indexed objects
`
`identifying a group of textual objects with a
`determined geographic center calculated by the
`mean of the Euclidean distances of all the textual
`objects in the pool
`A method of analysis and searching that does not
`account for phrases and words in a textual object and
`that is based on explicit references to other textual
`objects
`
`No construction necessary
`
`
`a defined collection of electronic data available for
`computerized searching
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 5 of 14 PageID #: 6909
`
`Claim Disputed Claim Term
`
`generating a second
`numerical representation
`for each object based on
`each object’s references
`to other objects
`creating a third
`numerical representation
`for each object
`
`calculating a fourth
`numerical representation
`for each object based on
`the euclidean distances
`between the third
`numerical
`representations
`determining a fifth
`numerical representation
`for each object by
`processing the fourth
`numerical
`representations through
`similarity processing
`
`storing the fifth
`numerical
`representations in the
`computer database as the
`
`41
`
`41
`
`41
`
`41
`
`41
`
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this construction for
`database:
`
`any electronic collection of objects stored in
`computer media
`generating a second numerical representation for
`each object within the set of indexed objects based
`on each object’s references to other objects
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`
`
`
`
`generating a second numerical representation for
`each labeled object
`
`
`creating a third numerical representation for each
`object within the set of indexed objects
`
`calculating a fourth numerical representation for
`each object within the set of indexed objects based
`on the Euclidean distances between the third
`numerical representations.
`
`
`creating a third numerical representation for each
`labeled object
`
`calculating a fourth numerical representation for
`each labeled object based on the euclidean distances
`between the third numerical representations
`
`
`determining a fifth numerical representation for each
`object within the set of indexed objects by
`processing the fourth numerical representations
`through similarity processing ....
`Similarity processing is any processing to determine
`the similarity of objects. For example, determining if
`two objects relate to the same topic is similarity
`processing. Another example would be examining
`link relationships to determine if two objects are
`similar.
`No construction necessary
`
`determining a fifth numerical representation for each
`labeled object by processing the fourth numerical
`representations to determine the degree of similarity
`between each labeled object and the other labeled
`objects
`
`
`The searching is performed after the other recited
`claim steps.
`construe “searching for objects in the database “ as
`retrieving objects from a database in response to
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 6 of 14 PageID #: 6910
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`selection of an object by an end user after the prior
`recited steps have been completed
`
`grouping objects based on weighing their Euclidean
`distances
`grouping paragraphs based on weighing their
`Euclidean distances and contiguity
`
`patterns of citation relationships previously
`identified as useful in search
`
`
`Claim Disputed Claim Term
`index for use in
`searching for objects in
`the database
`
`42
`
`43
`
`44
`
`clustering objects having
`similar characteristics
`clustering adjacent
`paragraphs that have
`similar characteristics
`
`analyzing the second
`numerical representation
`against a plurality of
`empirically defined
`patterns, wherein certain
`patterns are more
`important than others
`
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction
`
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary.
`
`Alternatively, plaintiff proposes this construction
`
`grouping adjacent paragraphs that have similar
`characteristics
`
`
`No construction necessary.
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this construction:
`
`Empirically defined patterns are patterns of citation
`relationships that have been determined to be useful
`in search. Examples of such patterns include
`(assuming that a, b, and c occur before A; A occurs
`before d, e, and f, which occur before B; and B
`occurs before g, h, and i) the following:
`
`1. B cites A;
`2. B cites c, and A cites c;
`3. g cites A, and g cites B;
`4. B cites f, and f cites A;
`5. B cites f, f cites e, and e cites A;
`6. B cites f, f cites e, e cites d, and d cites A;
`7. g cites A, g cites a, h cites B, and h cites a;
`8. i cites B, i cites f (or g), and f (or g) cites A;
`9. i cites g, i cites A, and g cites B;
`10. i cites g (or d), i cites h, g (or d) cites A, h cites
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 7 of 14 PageID #: 6911
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`
`assigning a weight to the second numerical
`representations according to the results of their
`analysis against the empirical patterns ranked by
`importance
`
`initiating a search by the end user inputting
`commands to the computer processor via an input
`means
`presenting a diagram showing an identified object
`and its connections and interrelations to other
`identified objects
`
`calculating the Euclidean distances from the selected
`object to each object in the group of identified
`objects
`
`Claim Disputed Claim Term
`
`44
`
`45
`
`45
`
`45
`
`weighing the analyzed
`second numerical
`representations
`according to the
`importance of the
`patterns
`entering search
`commands
`
`presenting one or more
`objects
`
`quantifying the
`relationship of the
`selected object to each
`object in the group of
`objects
`
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction
`g, and h cites B;
`11. i cites A, i cites e, and B cites e;
`12. i cites A, i cites e, and B cites e;
`13. g cites A, g cites a, h cites a, and h cites B;
`14. i cites a, i cites d, and B cites d; and A cites a;
`15. i cites d, i cites B, and d cites a;
`16. B cites d, d cites b, and A cites b;
`17. B cites d, d cites a, b cites a, and A cites b;
`18. B cites a, d cites b, and A cites a
`
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary
`
`
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 8 of 14 PageID #: 6912
`
`Claim
`1
`
`Disputed Term
`database
`
`All
`
`Cluster link
`
`All
`
`Candidate cluster links
`
`All
`
`Actual cluster links
`
`1
`
`1
`
`All
`
`wherein the step of
`generating comprises an
`analysis of one or more
`indirect relationships in
`the database
`deriving actual cluster
`links from the candidate
`cluster links
`
`
`node
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,832,494
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed
`Construction
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this definition:
`
`Any electronic collection of objects stored in
`computer media..
`A relationship defined by mathematically analyzing
`direct links in a set of paths between two nodes
`
`A set of cluster links from a selected node to other
`nodes from which actual cluster links may be
`derived
`
`Cluster links that are derived from candidate cluster
`links for use in the display of nodes and are derived
`prior to searching.
`
`No construction necessary
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`a defined collection of electronic data stored in a
`computer device that is connected to a computer
`processor
`
`a relationship between two nodes based upon a
`statistical analysis of multiple relationships between
`nodes in a database
`the set of all possible cluster links between a search
`node and a target node
`
`subset of candidate cluster links for use in display
`based on weights in relation to the selected node
`under analysis
`
`wherein the step of generating comprises identifying
`and classifying one or more non-semantical
`relationships that are characterized by at least one
`intermediate node between two nodes in the database
`
`choosing actual cluster links based on the weight of
`direct links in a set of paths between nodes
`
`See separate definition of “actual cluster links “ in
`supplemental terms.
`
`A node is any entity that can be represented on a
`display. A node can be an object in a database, a
`portion of an object in a database, a document, a
`section of a document, a World Wide Web page,
`website, or an idea or concept, such as a topic name.
`
`any entity that can be represented by a box on a
`display, for example, an object in a database, a
`portion of an object in a database, a document, a
`section of a document, a World Wide Web page, or
`an idea or concept, such as a topic name.
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 9 of 14 PageID #: 6913
`
`Claim
`1
`
`Disputed Term
`selecting a node for
`analysis
`
`3
`
`selecting the top rated
`candidate cluster links,
`wherein the top rated
`candidate cluster links
`are those which are most
`closely linked to the
`node under analysis*
`
`
`7
`
`external object
`
`activating the desired
`node
`
`
`independent application
`which can be executed in
`background
`independent application
`which can be executed as
`an extension
`wherein the generating
`step includes an analysis
`of one or more indirect
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`12
`
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed
`Construction
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary
`
`Plaintiff offers the following alternative
`construction:
`
`Selecting candidate cluster links to be used as actual
`cluster links according to the weight that
`corresponds to being most closely linked to the node
`under analysis
`
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers this construction:
`
`An object stored outside the database.
`
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff offers the following
`construction:
`
`Initiating a function associated with a desired node.
`an application separate from the database that can
`run simultaneously with other programming
`
`An application that is separate from the database
`that connects to another computer or application
`
`No construction necessary
`
`9
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`identifying, by an end user, a node to be non-
`semantically analyzed
`
`choosing a subset of candidate cluster links whose
`weights indicate that they are the strongest cluster
`links for the node under analysis
`
`
`an object that is not within the database
`
`Indefinite.
`
`software application that is not within the database
`and that runs without interaction by the user while
`the user is working on another task
`software application that is not within the database
`and that modularly adds functionality to another
`program
`wherein the generating step includes identifying and
`classifying one or more non-semantical relationships
`that are characterized by at least one intermediate
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 10 of 14 PageID #: 6914
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed
`Construction
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`node between two nodes in the database
`
`choosing a set of actual cluster links for the selected
`object based on the weight of direct links in a set of
`paths between two nodes
`
`determining the subset of candidate cluster links for
`use in display based on weights in relation to the
`selected object under analysis
`
`inputting, by an end user, an object to non-
`semantically determine the relations, patterns, and
`similarity of other objects to the selected object
`
`computing the combined weight of direct links in
`each path of a candidate cluster link and summing
`those combined weights
`
`for each chain of direct links between two nodes
`
`defining the weight of each member of the stored set
`of candidate cluster links as equal to one path length
`of zero from the start node
`determining the subset of candidate cluster links for
`display based on weights in relation to the selected
`node under analysis
`
`A non-semantical method of analyzing a database
`
`non-semantically locating at least one object in the
`database based on end user input
`
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary except that Plaintiff
`offers this construction of “path”:
`
` A
`
` path is a particular sequence of citations that
`make up a relationship between two nodes
`No construction necessary except that Plaintiff
`offers this construction of “path”:
`
` A
`
` path is a particular sequence of citations that
`make up a relationship between two nodes
`setting the computer to the starting conditions for
`the generation of candidate cluster links
`
`choosing a set of actual cluster links based on the
`weight of direct links in a set of paths between
`nodes wherein the actual cluster links are a subset of
`the candidate cluster links
`
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary
`
`10
`
`Claim
`
`12
`
`12
`
`14
`
`Disputed Term
`relationships in the
`database
`deriving an actual cluster
`link set for the selected
`object using the
`generated candidate
`cluster link set
`selecting an object to
`determine the proximity
`of other objects to the
`selected object
`determining the weight
`of the path
`
`14
`
`for each path
`
`initializing a set of
`candidate cluster links
`
`deriving the actual
`cluster links wherein the
`actual cluster links are a
`subset of the candidate
`cluster links
`A method of analyzing a
`database
`identifying at least one
`object in the database,
`wherein the stored
`
`14
`
`15
`
`18
`
`18
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 11 of 14 PageID #: 6915
`
`Claim
`
`23
`
`33
`
`33
`
`33
`
`Disputed Term
`numerical representation
`is used to identify
`objects
`generating a graphical
`display for representing
`an object
`
`A method of
`representing data in a
`computer database
`generating node
`identifications based
`upon the assigned links,
`wherein node
`identifications are
`generated so that each
`link represents a
`relationship between two
`identified nodes
`searching for node
`identifications using the
`stored links
`
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed
`Construction
`
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction
`
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary
`
`No construction necessary
`
`displaying a graphic showing the relations, patterns,
`and similarity found between the object and other
`objects
`
`A non-semantical method of representing data in a
`computer database
`
`identifiers that are unique to each node and that take
`into account each link associated with each
`respective node
`
`No construction necessary
`
`using stored links to non-semantically locate node
`identifications based on end user input
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:07-cv-00511-CE Document 318-2 Filed 07/16/10 Page 12 of 14 PageID #: 6916
`
`Claim
`1, 11,
`22
`
`1
`
`1
`
`2
`
`Disputed Term
`activating a link
`represented on the
`source map, wherein a
`user may hyperjump to a
`node represented as a
`node of the link
`active links
`
`generating a source map,
`wherein the source map
`represents hyperjump
`links that identify a
`chosen node as a
`destination of a link
`activating an embedded
`icon
`
`5
`
`choosing a node
`
`All
`
`hyperjump data
`/hyperjump links
`
`5
`
`wherein the step of
`determining comprises
`proximity analyzing the
`identified hyperjump
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,233,571
`
`Plaintiff’s Proposed Construction
`activating a link represented on the map of source
`links (i.e., outbound links), wherein a user may
`hyperjump to a node represented as a node of the
`link
`
`Defendants’ Construction
` “activating a link “: enabling a reference on a source
`map to a node to be selectable by a user to allow the
`user to access the node
` “source map “: see separate definition below
`
`No construction necessary
`
`generating a map of source links (i.e., outbound
`links), wherein the map represents hyperjump links
`that identify a chosen node as a destination of a link
`a node
`
`direct links to nodes in a network outside the
`database and computer that may be accessed
`non-sematically evaluating an object in the database
`to display a map of all of the nodes external to the
`database and computer that the object directly links
`to, including the chosen node
`
`No construction necessary
`
`Alternatively, plaintiff offers this construction