`Exhibit 1002
`
`
`Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In re U.S. Patent No. 7,188,145
`
`Currently in Litigation Styled: Parallel
`Networks, LLC v. Reloaded Games, Inc., Case
`No. 1:13—cv-00827 (D.Del.)
`
`PETITION
`
`FOR
`
`INTER
`
`PARTES REVIEW PURSUANT
`
`TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ET
`
`SEQ.
`
`
`
`Issued: March 6, 2007
`
`Filed: January 12, 2001
`
`Applicants: Keith A. Lowery, et al.
`
`Title: Method and System for Dynamic
`Distributed Data Caching
`
`Mail Stop Inter Pmrtes Review
`Commissioner for Patents
`
`P . O. B ox 145 0
`
`Alexandria, VA 223 13-145 0
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. PETER B. DANZIG
`
`I, Peter B. Danzig, hereby declare the following:
`
`BACKGROUND AND EDUCATION
`
`1.
`
`I am an adjunct professor of Computer Engineering at the University
`
`of California Santa Cruz (“UCSC”).
`
`I am an expert in the fields of distributed
`
`caching, resource discovery, and computer networks generally.
`
`I have a BS. in
`
`Applied Physics from the University of California Davis (1982) and a Ph.D. in
`
`Computer Science fi'om the University of California Berkeley (1989). Although I
`
`discuss my expeit qualifications in more detail below, I also attach as [Exhibit
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 1
`
`
`
`1003] a recent and complete curriculum vitae, which details my educational and
`
`professional background and includes a Google Scholar search that lists many of
`
`my publications.
`
`2.
`
`I have been an adjunct professor at UCSC since 2010.
`
`In the years
`
`from 2001 to 2005 and 2009 to 2010 I taught a11d lectured at Stanford University in
`
`courses relating to computer networks and distributed systems. From 1996 to 1999
`
`I was an associate professor of the Computer Science Department at the University
`
`of Southern California (“USC”). The years preceding that, beginning 1990, I was
`
`an assistant professor of Computer Science at USC.
`
`I have taught courses to
`
`undergraduates, master’s students, and Ph.D. students on a variety of topics related
`
`to computer networks and distributed systems.
`
`3.
`
`While at USC, I performed extensive research on Internet “object
`
`caches,” including the commonly known “Harvest Web Cache” (later known as
`
`“Squid”), which was developed under my guidance. Internet object caches such as
`
`the Harvest Web Cache generally permit methods for storing Internet information
`
`in a manner that makes the information more accessible to client browsers,
`
`facilitating more speedy access by the public to files located across networks.
`
`4.
`
`I have over two—dozen conference and journal publications issued
`
`from the late 1980s to the late 1990s, many of which have substance pertinent to
`
`the caching and retrieving content throughout a distributed network of computers.
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 2
`
`
`
`Specifically, the publications include information concerning NetCache, Harvest,
`
`object
`
`caching, distributed information retrieval
`
`and
`
`resource discovery.
`
`Publication of my research and my research software became the reference
`
`implementation for the leading Internet web caches, as well as the basis for the
`
`most successful comrnercial cache implementations for the Internet. For example,
`
`my work served as the basis for most Content Delivery Networks, Squid, the Cisco
`
`cache engine, and Network Appliance’s NetCache. I also have received several
`
`awards for my work, including: being named a National Young Investigator (NYI)
`
`by the National Science Foundation from 1994 through 1999; the University of
`
`Southern California Innovative Teaching Award (awarded to me twice); and the
`
`Demetri Angelakos Service Award, presented by the Department of Computer
`
`Science at the University of California—Berkeley.
`
`5.
`
`In addition to my academic work,
`
`I have extensive industry
`
`experience related to Internet caching technology.
`
`In 1996, I founded Internet
`
`Middleware Corporation to build the first industry grade web cache.
`
`Internet
`
`Middleware Corporation was acquired by Network Appliance in 1997.
`
`I served as
`
`chief architect and CTO of Network App1iance’s NetCache division.
`
`In 1999, I
`
`left Network Appliance and built the west coast engineering office of Akamai
`
`Technologies, Inc. (“Akamai”).
`
`I was the Vice President of Technology for
`
`Akamai Technology’s west coast team, where I directed engineering and business
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 3
`
`
`
`development. Network Appliance and Akamai were, and remain,
`
`two of the
`
`leading Internet web caching companies.
`
`I also was the joint editor in 2002 of the
`
`IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications (J SAC), which was dedicated
`
`to discussion of proxy caches.
`
`6.
`
`As a result of my experience, I have been on a number of technical
`
`advisory boards for companies that deal with technologies regarding: content
`
`distribution; data flow and delivery of network resources; and cloud storage
`
`systems, to name a few. I have also offered significant applicable consulting Work.
`
`Currently, I am the Chief Strategy Officer at Virtuata, Inc. and have been such,
`
`since I founded the company in 2010. Virtuata, Inc. provides capabilities for
`
`securing information in data centers and cloud environments. Cisco acquired
`
`Virtuata in July of 2012 for enhanced security in virtual machines and cloud
`
`inf1'ast1'uctures.
`
`7.
`
`In sum, I have over 25 years of experience in the computer science
`
`industiy as a professor, entrepreneur and consultant. During this time, I have
`
`worked extensively with Internet object caches,
`
`resource discovery, content
`
`distribution, and computer networks.
`
`I have had a hand in the foundations of
`
`multiple content delivery networks as well as providing means for the applications
`
`of noteworthy Internet caches.
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 4
`
`
`
`8.
`
`I am submitting this declaration to offer my independent expert
`
`opinion concerning certain issues raised in the petition for inter partes review
`
`(“Petition”). My compensation is not based on the substance of the opinions
`
`rendered here. As part of my work in connection with this matter, I have studied
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,188,145 (the ‘“145 patent”), including the respective written
`
`descriptions, figures, and claims. In addition, I have reviewed the Petition for Inter
`
`Parfes Review of the ‘145 patent.
`
`I have also carefully considered the following
`
`references:
`
`(“Tiwana”), entitled,
`' U.S. Patent No. 7,069,324 to Tiwana, et al.
`“Methods and Apparatus Slow-Starting a Web Cache System,” filed on
`June 30, 2000 and issued on June 27, 2006 [Exhibit 1004]
`
`° U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/168,862, entitled, “Method and
`Apparatus for Redirecting Network Traffic,” and filed on December 2,
`1999 [Exhibit 1005]
`
`° U.S. Patent No. 6,341,311 to Smith, et al., entitled “Directing Data Object
`Access Requests in a Distributed Cache,” filed on May 29, 1998 and issued
`on January 22, 2002 [Exhibit 1006]
`
`° U.S. Patent No. 6,256,747 to Inohara, et al., entitled, “Method of
`Managing Distributed Servers and Distributed Information Processing
`System Using the Method,” filed on September 24, 1998 and issued on
`July 3, 2001. [Exhibit 1007]
`
`OPINION
`
`A.
`
`9.
`
`Level of a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`In determining the characteristics of a hypothetical person of ordinary
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 5
`
`
`
`several factors, including the type of problems encountered in the art, the solutions
`
`to those problems, the rapidity with which innovations are made in the field, the
`
`sophistication of the technology, and the education levei of active workers in the
`
`field.
`
`I also placed myself back in the time frame of the claimed invention, and
`
`considered the students who I had taught and with whom I had worked at that time.
`
`In my view, a person of ordinary skill in the field of data caching in 2001 would
`
`have a B.S. in computer science or related engineering discipline or equivalent
`
`experience and at
`
`least
`
`two years in networking or equivalent experience or
`
`education. The person would also have some knowledge of networking of
`
`computers, distributed systems, data caching, and implementation of distributed
`
`networks in computer systems. Based on my education, training, and professional
`
`experience in the field of the claimed invention, I am familiar with the level and
`
`abilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention.
`
`B.
`
`Background of Distributed Data Caching
`
`10.
`
`The filing date of the ‘145 Patent is January 12, 2001. Distributed
`
`caching systems that incorporated the concepts described and claimed in the ‘ 145
`
`Patent ‘were well-known in the art before the priority date of the ‘145 Patent.
`
`Starting in the late 1980s, and especially early 1990s, utilizing caching proxies was
`
`an area of increased interest due to the boom in growth of Internet users. See e.g.,
`
`Ex. 1010, Mohammad Salimullah Raunak, “A survey of Cooperative Caching,”
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 6
`
`
`
`Technfcal
`
`Report
`
`(Dec.
`
`15,
`
`1999),
`
`available
`
`at:
`
`http ://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=l 0. 1.1 .27.7l 78&rep=rep l &typ
`
`e=pd£ At this time, data caching was in extensive use in proxy servers across the
`world as a potential solution to combat perceived problems such as increased
`
`bandwidth usage and excessive latency in retrieving web pages. Id. Consequently,
`
`the research into and implementation of distributed data caching schemes
`
`experienced rapid growth and a number of solutions arose out of that research.
`
`11.
`
`One thing that became clear was that cooperative caching across a
`
`number of proxy servers was the best way to increase the effectiveness of caching
`
`and take advantage of its beneficial aspects. Two cooperative caching schemes
`
`emerged from this research — distributed and hierarchical.
`
`I was at the forefront of
`
`the hierarchical caching scheme that utilized caches placed at multiple levels of a
`
`network,
`
`including in a system known at the time as the HARVEST project.
`
`Distributed caching systems placed caches only at the lowest level of a network.
`
`There were also schemes that blended parts of the hierarchical and distributed
`
`caching systems. Thus, by the late I990’s, there were literally hundreds of articles
`
`written about various caching schemes, some of which were being implemented
`
`around the world and some of which remained just ideas.
`
`12.
`
`The prior art identified in the Petition illustrates that the concepts
`
`described and claimed in the ‘145 Patent were nothing new. For instance, Tiwana,
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 7
`
`
`
`1
`
`i
`
`E
`
`} 53
`
`Smith and Inohara all disclose distributed data-caching schemes utilizing one or
`
`more servers. EX. 1004, Tiwana at Abstract, 5:21-30, 5:63—65Fig. 1; Ex. 1006,
`
`Srnifh at 4:7-10; Fig. 2; Ex. I007, Inohara at 3:48-50. Smith, Tiwana and Inohara
`
`also all describe allowing a server to join a group of servers. Ex. 1006, Sm1'fh at
`
`18:49-19:19, Fig. 11; Ex. 1004, Tiwana at 6:16-27, Fig. 2; Ex. 1007, Inolwara at
`9:16-10:36, Fig. 4. Furthermore, Inohara discloses a user requesting and receiving
`
`a table (list) of server groups so as to select a server group to join, generating a
`
`request to join the server group and receiving a message allowing entry to the
`
`group. Ex. 1007, Inohara at 9:16-10:36, Fig. 4. Upon reading the teachings of
`
`lnohara, a person of ordinary skill would have realized that the ability Search for
`
`and join a cache group would have made the systems of Tiwana and Smith more
`
`effective by allowing a server liberty in selecting which group to join.
`
`13. At the time of the ‘ 145 Patent, persons having ordinary skill in the art
`
`were motivated to find ways to efficiently use bandwidth in view of the increase in
`
`network traffic, and combining various features from prior data caching systems,
`
`like those discussed above, would have been obvious to such skilled persons.
`
`Thus, combining functionalities or ideas from various known systems or proposed
`
`systems would not only be obvious, but desirable. Such combinations would have
`
`yielded predictable results using known methods in the art. Thus, a computer
`
`softwareand/ornetworkingengineerwouidhavebeenledtomodifytheteachings
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 8
`
`
`
`of Tiwana and Smith in order to provide the functionality of allowing a server to
`
`request a listing of groups and join a specific array through submitting a request to
`
`join as taught by Inohara. A computer software and/or networking engineer would
`
`have also been led to modify the teachings of Tiwana and Smith in order to provide
`
`similar advances as taught by Inohara.
`
`14.
`
`Below, I discuss straight—forward combinations of (1) Tiwana and
`
`Inohara, and (2) Smith and Inohara, the results being very predictable, and the
`
`combinations not requiring undue experiinentation. As described above and
`
`below, a person of ordinary skill would have been highly motivated to combine the
`
`prior art.
`
`C. Tiwana and Inohara
`
`i i
`
`15.
`
`Claims 1 ~ 36 generally relate to a method (claims 1-14 and 29-31); a
`
`system for dynamic distributed data caching (claims 15-28 and 32-34); a system
`
`having “means for” (claim 35) providing a cache community, allowing a client to
`
`join the community, updating a peer list, associating content with the client, and re-
`
`allocating the cache storage of the content among the peers of the cache
`
`community; and a system having “means for” (claim 36) requesting and receiving
`
`a community list, requesting to join the community, receiving an allow message,
`
`receiving a peer list, receiving content allocated for storage and cache storage re-
`
`allocation.
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 9
`
`
`
`16.
`
`It is my opinion that it would have been obvious to a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art to combine the system described in Tiwana to provide the
`
`functionality of a cache system receiving a list of cache clusters and selecting fi'om
`
`the list a cache cluster to join, as taught by Inohara. For instance, as discussed
`
`above, both embodiments of Tiwana and Inohara are implemented in a system
`
`having multiple caches (peers) grouped in a community. Ex. 1004, Tiwana at
`
`5:21~30, 5:63-65, Fig. 1; Inohara at 3:48—50. Specifically, both references describe
`
`a client requesting to and joining a community. Ex. 1004, Tiwana at 6:16-27, Fig.
`
`1; EX. 1005 at 6; Inohara at 9:l6—10:36, Fig. 4. Both references also teach
`
`transmitting a list of servers to other servers in the group. Ex. 1004 at 7:48-8:16;
`
`Ex. 1005 at 6, 7, 9; Inohara at 10:66—11:5. Further, both Tiwana and Inohara
`
`acknowledge the same problem as the ‘l45 Patent and propose similar distributed
`
`cache-related solutions. As I discussed above, skilled artisans in the area of
`
`distributed caching were concerned with the ability of the network to sustain future
`
`traffic and, therefore, motivated by the exponential increase in Internet usage to
`
`find ways to more efficiently use bandwidth and decrease latency. A common
`
`solution to this was caching data at various servers in an environment. And
`
`addition of the desirable functionality of a server selecting from a received list of
`
`groups as taught by Inohara to the system of Tiwana would have yielded
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 10
`
`
`
`predictable results, and the combination of these familiar elements could have been
`
`accomplished using known methods in the art.
`
`D. Smith and Inohara
`
`17.
`
`It is my opinion that it would also have been obvious to a person
`
`having ordinary skill
`
`in the art to combine the system described in Smith to
`
`provide the functionality of allowing the caches to discover groups (communities)
`
`and to select one of which groups to join, as taught by Inohara. For instance, as
`
`discussed above, both references describe multiple cache servers or peers and
`
`involve caching content received from peers. Ex. 1006, Smith at 427-10, 715-18,
`
`7:67-8:4, Fig. 2; Ex. 1007, Inohara at 3:48-50, 14:41-63, Fig. l. Specifically, both
`
`references describe a server requesting to join a group of servers. Ex. 1006, SmI'th
`
`at 12:42-62,
`
`l8:49-19:19, Fig. 11; Ex. 1007, Inohara at 3:48-58, 9:16-11:5.
`
`Further, both Smith and Inohara acknowledge the same problem as the ‘ 145 Patent
`
`and propose similar distributed cache-related solutions. For example, Smith seeks
`
`to reduce levels of traffic on the Internet through a distributed caching scheme. Ex.
`
`1006, Smith at Abstract. Smith discloses allowing a client to join a community,
`
`receiving a peer list associated with the community, and re—allocating content
`
`based on joinder of the client. See e. g. Ex. 1006, Smith at 12:42-62. Smith
`
`specifically states: “many different implementations may be envisioned by those
`
`skilled in at the art that will allow a proxy server to be added to the proxy server
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 11
`
`
`
`array.” Id. at 18:51-53. lnohara discloses one such implementation and teaches that
`
`it would be useful to allow cache servers the ability to Search for and join cache
`
`groups so as to increase the effectiveness of the caching scheme. Ex. 1007,
`
`Inohara at 3:48-58. A person having ordinary skill
`
`in the art would have
`
`recognized that the distributed caching scheme described in Smith could have been
`
`combined with Inohara to include the function of allowing proxy servers the ability
`
`to search for and join arrays. As I discussed above, skilled ‘artisans in the area of
`
`distributed caching were concerned with the ability of the network to sustain future
`
`levels of trallic and, therefore, motivated by the exponential increase in Internet
`
`usage to find ways to more efficiently use bandwidth and decrease latency. And
`
`addition of the desirable functionality of allowing the proxy servers the ability to
`
`search for and join server groups as taught by lnohara to the system of Smith
`
`would have yielded predictable results, and the combination of these familiar
`
`elements could have been accomplished using known methods in the art.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`26.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the above statements are true
`
`and correct.
`
`Date:
`
`Nggj
`
`e Dc
`
`Peter B. Danzig
`
`Petitioner Ex. 1002 Page 12
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
