UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Netflix, Inc.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`V.
`
`OpenTV, Inc.
`Patent Owner
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`OF
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 6,018,768
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I. Mandatory Notices ........................................................................................ .. 1
`
`A. Real Party-in-Interest ............................................................................... .. 1
`
`B. Related Matters ........................................................................................ .. 1
`
`C. Lead and Back-up Counsel and Service Information ................................ .. 1
`
`II. Grounds for Standing ................................................................................. ..1III.ReliefReque
`
`IV. The Reasons for the Requested Relief............................................................ .. 2
`
`A. Summary of Reasons ............................................................................... .. 2
`
`B. The ’”/68 Patent ........................................................................................ .. 3
`
`1. Overview ............................................................................................ ..3
`
`2. Prosecution History ............................................................................. ..4
`
`C.
`
`Identification of Challenges ..................................................................... .. S
`
`1. Challenged Claims .............................................................................. ..5
`
`2. Statutory Grounds for Challenges ....................................................... ..5
`
`3. Claim Construction ............................................................................. ..6
`
`4.
`
`Identification of How the Claims Are Unpatentable ............................ ..9
`
`i. Challenge #1: Claims 1-3 and 19 are obvious over Throckmorton..9
`
`ii. Challenge #2: Claims 4-11 are obvious over Throckmorton in view
`of Hendricks ....................................................... ..28
`
`iii. Challenge #3: Claims 12-18 are obvious over Throckmorton in
`view of Schlender ............................................... ..39
`
`iv. Challenge #4: Claim 20 is obvious over Throckmorton in view of
`Moncreiff............................................................ ..48
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`v. Challenges #5-8 .......................................................................... ..S2
`
`(a) Challenge #5: Claims 1-3 and 19 are obvious over
`Throckmorton in view of Montulli ...................................... ..S5
`
`(b) Challenge #6: Claims 4-11 are obvious over
`Throckmorton in view of Hendricks and Montulli ............... ..S6
`
`(c) Challenge #7: Claims 12-18 are obvious over
`Throckmorton in view of Schlender and Montulli ............... ..S7
`
`(d) Challenge #8: Claim 20 is obvious over Throckmorton in
`view of Moncreiff and Montulli ........................................... ..S8
`
`V. Conclusion .................................................................................................... ..59
`
`iii
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`I.
`
`Mandatory Notices
`
`A.
`
`Real Party-in-Interest
`
`The real party-in-interest is Netflix, Inc.
`
`B.
`
`Related Matters
`
`As of the filing date of this petition, the ’768 patent was asserted against the
`
`party-in-interest in 0penTV Inc- v. Negflix, Ina, 1:12-cv-01733 (D. Del.).
`
`C.
`
`Lead and Back-up Counsel and Service Information
`
`Lead Counsel
`
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`2323 Victory Ave. Suite 700
`Dallas, TX 75219
`
`Back-up Counsel
`Scott Jarratt
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`2323 Victory Ave. Suite 700
`Dallas, TX 75219
`
`ll.
`
`Grounds for Standing
`
`Phone: (214) 651-5116
`Fax: (214)200-0853
`andy.ehmke.ipr@haynesboone.com
`USPTO Reg. No. 50,271
`
`Phone: (972) 739-8663
`Fax: (214)200-0853
`scott.jarratt.ipr@haynesboone.com
`USPTO Reg. No. 70,297
`
`Petitioner certifies that it is not estopped or barred fi'om requesting inter
`
`partes review of the ’768 Patent. Petitioner was served with a complaint asserting
`
`infringement of the ’768 patent on December 19, 2012, which is not more than one
`
`year before the filing of this Petition. Petitioner has not initiated a civil action
`
`challenging validity of any claim of the ’768 patent. Petitioner also certifies that
`
`the ’768 patent is eligible for inter partes review.
`
`lll. Relief Requested
`
`Petitioner asks that the Board review the accompanying prior art and
`
`1
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`analysis, institute a trial for inter partes review of claims 1-20 (all claims) of the
`
`"/68 Patent, and cancel those claims as invalid.
`
`IV.
`
`The Reasons for the Requested Relief
`
`The full statement of the reasons for the relief requested is as follows:
`
`A.
`
`Summary of Reasons
`
`The ’”/68 Patent relates to a system for displaying video programming and
`
`related Internet information.
`
`In general, the ’768 Patent describes receiving video
`
`and audio signals and a uniform resource locator (URL), decoding and interpreting
`
`the URL, retrieving Internet information using the URL, and then presenting the
`
`video and audio signals concurrently with, or independently from, the Internet
`
`information.
`
`These features were all well known in the prior art in 1996, when the
`
`application from which the"/68 patent claims priority was filed. The references
`
`cited in this petition, alone or in combination, either anticipate or render obvious
`
`the claims of the ’”/68 patent.
`
`For example, U.S. Patent No. 5,818,441 to Throckmorton et al. discloses a
`
`system that receives a video program and a URL, where the URL points to Internet
`
`content particularly relevant to the video program. After the system decodes and
`
`interprets the URL, the system connects to remote computers and retrieves the
`
`referenced information for display with a web browser. Throckmorton teaches that
`
`the online content can be accessed and interactively displayed as an integral part of
`
`2
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`the video program.
`
`Consequently, this petition demonstrates that claims 1-20 simply claim
`
`features that were well known in the prior art and are therefore, are either
`
`anticipated by or rendered obvious over the references presented in this petition.
`
`B.
`
`The "I68 Patent
`
`1.
`
`Overview
`
`The ’”/68 Patent has four independent claims (claims 1, 4, 12 and 19) and a
`
`total of 20 claims. In general, the ’”/68 Patent describes “a computer based system
`
`for receiving a video program along with embedded uniform resource locators
`
`(URLs)—which direct the user’s computer 16 to address locations, or Web sites,
`
`on the Internet 20 to retrieve related Web pages.” (NTFX-1001, 4:45-49).
`
`The URLs can be transmitted “over the same transmission line” as the video
`
`program or the “URLs can be sent down independently of the video program.”
`
`(NTFX-100I1, 5:3-S).
`
`In one embodiment, the “URLs are encoded onto eight fields
`
`of line 21 of the VBI [vertical blanking interval].” (NTFX-1001, 4:63-64).
`
`A receiver station can be a “local PC 16,” a “digital cable box,” or a “digital
`
`TV” connected to “either a cable and/or broadcast television connection.” (NTFX-
`
`1001, 5:33-36; 9:38-31; 10:11-12). “[C]lient software 106 retrieves URLs fi'om
`
`the video program (embodiment of F IG.1) or directly fi'om the Internet connection
`
`(embodiments of FIGS. 2 and 4), interprets these URLs and directs the JAVA
`
`enabled browser 98 to retrieve the particular relevant Web ages 102, and
`
`3
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`synchronizes the retrieved Web pages to the video content for display on the user’s
`
`computer 16.” (NTFX-1001, 7:34-51). “Alternatively, the user can access the
`
`video or web content separately.” (NTFX-1001, 10:30-31).
`
`None of these features were novel and nonobvious when the application to
`
`which the ’768 patent claims priority was filed on that issued as the ’768 patent
`
`was filed on March 8, 1996.
`
`2.
`
`Prosecution History
`
`The ’768 Patent issued on January 25, 2000, from U.S. Patent Application
`
`No. 09/109,945 filed by Craig Ullman, Jack D. Hidary and Nova T. Spivack on
`
`July 6, 1998.
`
`The ’945 application is a continuation-in-part of application No. 08/615,143
`
`(which matured into U.S. Patent No. 5,778,181), which is a continuation-in-part of
`
`application No. 08/613,144 (now abandoned).
`
`During the prosecution of the ’945 application, the Examiner issued a non-
`
`statutory double patenting rejection over U.S. Patent No. 5,774,664 and also
`
`identified commonly-owned U.S. Patent No. 5,778,181 in an interview. (NTFX-
`
`1002, pp. 106-107, 128).
`
`In response, Patent Owner filed terminal disclaimers for
`
`the 5,774,664 and 5,778,181 patents. (NTFX-1002, pp. 123, 129). The Examiner
`
`subsequently allowed the case but did not issue a Statement of Reasons for
`
`Allowance. (NTFX-1002, pp.l24-125, 135-133).
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`Notably, the ’768 Patent contains claims directed toward subject matter that
`
`was added in connection with the continuation-in-part application. For example,
`
`the recitation in claim 20 of “chat dialogue frame interfaces” is directed toward
`
`subject matter not found in the as-filed specifications of the applications to which
`
`the ’”/68 Patent claims priority—U.S. Application No. 08/615,143 (now Patent No.
`
`5,778,181) and U.S. Patent Application No. 08/613,144. (NTFX-1003, pp. 10-11).
`
`Accordingly, at least claim 20 is not entitled to the benefit of the filing dates of the
`
`prior-filed applications.
`
`C.
`
`Identification of Challenges
`
`1.
`
`Challenged Claims
`
`Claims 1-20 of the ’768 Patent are challenged in this petition.
`
`2.
`
`Statutory Grounds for Challenges
`
`Challenge #1: Claims 1-3 and 19 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,818,441 to Throckmorton et al. (“Throckmorton”).
`
`Throckmorton is an issued patent filed June 15, 1995, and is prior art under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`Challenge #2: Claims 4-11 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`
`Throckmorton in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,559,549 to Hendricks et al.
`
`(“Hendricks”). Hendricks is an issued patent filed December 2, 1993, and is prior
`
`art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`Challenge #3: Claims 12-18 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`
`5
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`Throckmorton in view of the article by Brenton R. Schlender, entitled “COUCH
`
`POTATOES! NOW IT'S SMART TV” in Fortune Magazine (“Schlender”).
`
`Schlender was published November 20, 1989, and is prior art under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`102(b).
`
`Challenge #4: Claim 20 is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § l03(a) over
`
`Throckmorton in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,828,839 to Moncreiff (“Moncreifi”).
`
`Moncreiff is an issued patent filed November 14, 1996, and is prior art under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(e), with respect to the filing date of the ’768 Patent (not the earliest
`
`claimed priority date).
`
`Challenge #5: Claims 1-3 and 19 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § l03(a) over
`
`Throckmorton in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,774,670 to Montulli. Montulli is an
`
`issued patent filed Oct. 6, 1995, and is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`Challenge #6: Claims 4-11 are obvious over Throckmorton in view of
`
`Hendricks and Montulli.
`
`Challenge #7: Claims 12-18 are obvious over Throckmorton in view of
`
`Schlender and Montulli.
`
`Challenge #8: Claim 20 is obvious over Throckmorton in view of Moncreiff
`
`and Montulli.
`
`3.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`This petition presents claim analysis in a manner that is consistent with the
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. See 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.100(b). Claim terms are given their ordinary and accustomed meaning as would
`
`6
`
`

`
`Petition for inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, unless the inventor, as a
`
`lexicographer, has set forth a special meaning for a term. Multiform Desiccants,
`
`Inc. v. Medzam, Ltd., 133 F.3d 1473, 1477 (Fed. Cir. 1998); York Prods., Inc- v.
`
`Central Tractor Farm & Family Ctr., 99 F.3d 1568, 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
`
`In the ’”/68 Patent, the inventor did not act as a lexicographer and did not
`
`provide a special meaning for any of the claim terms. Accordingly, using the
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation standard, the terms should be given their
`
`ordinary and custom meaning as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art:
`
`0
`
`“means for receiving programming wherein the programming contains a video
`
`and audio signals and one or more uniform resource locators” (claim 1): This
`
`claim limitation is written in means-plus-function form under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
`
`paragraph 6.
`
`function: receiving programming wherein the programming contains a
`
`video and audio signals and one or more uniform resource locators.
`
`structure: one or more receiver stations such as a computer, cable set top
`
`box, television, or equivalent. (NTFX-1003, pp. 11-13).
`
`I “a means for decoding. -
`
`. the uniform resource locators” (claims 1, 4, 12, and
`
`19): This claim limitation is written in means-plus-function form under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 112, paragraph 6.
`
`function: decoding the uniform resource locators.
`
`

`
`Petition for inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`structure: hardware and/or software. (NTFX-1003, pp. 13-15).
`
`I “a controller means -
`
`.
`
`- for interpreting the uniform resource locators” (claims
`
`1, 4, 12, and 19): This claim limitation is written in means-plus-function form
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 112, paragraph 6.
`
`function: interpreting the uniform resource locators.
`
`structure: hardware and/or software. (NTFX-1003, pp.15-17). 1
`
`I “a display means .
`
`-
`
`. for presenting the video [and audio signals] concurrently
`
`with or independentbifrom the Internet information segments” (claims 1, 5, 12,
`
`and 19): This claim limitation is written in means-plus-function form under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 112, paragraph 6.
`
`function: presenting the video [and audio signals] concurrently with or
`
`independently fi'om the Internet information segments.
`
`structure: one or more of a computer monitor and PC speakers, a television,
`
`or other display monitor, or equivalent. (NTFX-1003, pp. 17-20).
`
`0
`
`“means for creating a playlist” (claim 19): This claim limitation is written in
`
`' To the extent that the structure for the “controller means” is limited to certain
`
`software methods in the ’”/68 Patent, where “each of which standing alone is
`
`properly a ‘means for interpreting,’” as argued by Patent Owner in a previous
`
`litigation (NTFX-1012, pp. 31-33), Challenges #5-8 apply prior art disclosing at
`
`least one of the software methods pointed to by the Patent Owner.
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`means-plus-function form under 35 U.S.C. § 112, paragraph 6.
`
` : creating a playlist.
`
`structure: hardware and/or software. (NTFX-1003, pp. 20-21).
`
`The foregoing proposed claim construction is presented by Petitioner using
`
`the broadest reasonable interpretation standard applied for purposes of inter partes
`
`review. Petitioner reserves the right to advocate a different claim interpretation in
`
`district court or any other forum in accordance with the claim construction
`
`standards applied in such forum.
`
`4.
`
`Identification of How the Claims Are Unpatentable
`
`i. Challenge #1: Claims 1-3 and 19 are obvious over
`
`Throekmorton
`
`Claims 1-3 and 19 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over U.S. Patent
`
`No. 5,818,441 to Throckmorton et al. (“Throckmorton”).
`
`(a) BriefSummary of Throckmorton
`
`Throckmorton teaches a system that enables broadcasting and entertainment
`
`companies to broadcast streams of data to consumers. (NTFX-1003, pg. 22). For
`
`example, television programs are transmitted to a consumer’s personal computer,
`
`as well as “information associated with a broadcast television program.” (NTFX-
`
`1007, Abstract). And, “interactivity may be achieved by adding an actual two way
`
`communication channel to the personal computer so that online services or the
`
`Internet may be accessed.” (NTFX-1007, Abstract).
`
`9
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`The streams of data received by the consumer include a “primary data
`
`stream,” such as a television program, and an “associated data stream” that
`
`contains information “relevant” to the primary data stream. (NTFX-1007, 3:36-62;
`
`NTFX-1003, pg. 22). The “primary data stream” contains programming content.
`
`(NTFX-1007, 3:45-50; NTFX-1003, pg. 22). With respect to the associated data
`
`stream, Throckmorton teaches two embodiments. (NTFX-1003, pg. 22).
`
`In the
`
`first embodiment, Throckmorton teaches a one-way communication system, in
`
`which the “associated data stream” contains “World Wide Web pages.” (NTFX-
`
`1007, 3:36-37; 3:55-62; 6:61-63).
`
`In the second embodiment, Throckmorton
`
`teaches a two-way communication system, in which the “associated data stream”
`
`contains “URLs” (which are references to web pages). (NTFX-1007, 9:1-5; NTFX-
`
`1003, pg. 22).
`
`At a consumer’s location, Throckmorton’s system includes “equipment to
`
`receive the primary and associated data streams.” (NTFX-1007, 6:4-8).
`
`In one
`
`embodiment, the equipment includes a personal computer with a “receiver for
`
`receiving the primary data stream and a receiver for receiving the associated data,”
`
`where the receivers “may be the same unit.” (NTFX-1007, 2:64-67; NTFX-1003,
`
`pp. 22-23). The receiver “could be a personal computer add-in adapter board, a
`
`television or radio broadcast receiver, a cable television converter box or it could
`
`be a satellite receiver for digital broadcast.” (NTFX-1007, 6:8-11). Additionally,
`
`10
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`the receiver “could be part of a standard television.” (NTFX-1007, 6:19-20).
`
`Throckmorton further describes that “the primary data stream could be
`
`delivered by broadcast television and the associated data could be delivered over a
`
`high speed digital network.” (NTFX-1007, 4:1-20; NTFX-1003, pg. 23). When the
`
`delivered data reaches the receiver, the receiver “decodes the signal, separates the
`
`primary data fi'om the associated data and passes the associated data on to the
`
`processor.” (NTFX-1007, 4:21-25; NTFX-1003, pg. 23).
`
`The viewer may interact with the received associated data (which could be a
`
`WWW page or a URL to a WWW page) with a keyboard and mouse. (NTFX-
`
`1007, 4:27-30; NTFX-1003, pg. 23). For instance, when a user clicks on a URL,
`
`the system “connects to and retrieves the referenced information fi'om the
`
`appropriate source,” which may be viewed in a “web browser.” (NTFX-1007, 9:1-
`
`14; 7:42-45; NTFX-1003, pg. 23). Additionally, Throckmorton teaches that the
`
`delivered data “could be interactively displayed and manipulated by consumers.”
`
`(NTFX-1007, 1:59-67). Further, the “consumer receives and has access to the
`
`relevant data during the process of program reception. Therefore the data becomes
`
`an integral part of the experience desired by the program producers.” (NTFX-
`
`1007, 1:59-67).
`
`(b)
`
`Reasons to Combine
`
`As previously discussed, Throckmorton discusses two embodiments: a one-
`
`11
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`way communication system and a two-way communication system. The
`
`application of Throckmorton to the claims relies upon the teachings contained in
`
`each of these embodiments.
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art, when reading Throckmorton would be
`
`motivated to combine the features of the two systems in Throckmorton for a
`
`number of reasons. (NTFX-1003, pp. 24-25). For example, the combination
`
`amounts to simply combining elements contained in the same reference in
`
`precisely the manner described in the reference. Combining the retrieving-
`
`internet-information-using-a-URL as described in the two-way embodiment, with
`
`the known method of displaying a web page simultaneously with a video program
`
`as described in the one-way embodiment, yields the predictable result of displaying
`
`a web page retrieved with a URL simultaneously with a video program. (NTFX-
`
`1003, pg. 24). This result is predictable because Throckmorton specifically
`
`teaches such a result. (NTFX-1003, pg. 24).
`
`This implementation of the teachings of Throckmorton would be desirable
`
`because it would allow the user to have direct access to relevant online information
`
`during the program reception without the need for changing screens. (NTFX-1003,
`
`pp. 23-24). Throckmorton specifically provides a motivation to make this
`
`combination, because it was desirable to make an experience for viewers that
`
`integrated data with television program reception. (NTFX-1003, pg. 25).
`
`12
`
`

`
`Petition for inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`E [
`
`1.0] “A systemfor presenting integrated video programming and corresponding
`
`related Internet information segments obtainedfrom Web sites on the Interne ”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches “presenting the
`
`primary data stream to the consumer,” where the primary data stream may be a
`
`television broadcast, to a consumer with “a cathode ray tube screen, or possibly a
`
`liquid crystal display screen and audio provided by an audio amplifier and
`
`speakers.” (NTFX-1007, 6:36-43). Further, it teaches “retriev[ing] data fi'om
`
`remote computers .
`
`.
`
`. for presentation to the consumer,” where the data from
`
`“online services or the Internet [] are particularly relevant to the television
`
`program.” (NTFX-1007, 8:30-34; Abstract).
`
`Fig. 4 of Throckmorton, as annotated below, illustrates Throckmorton’s
`
`system:
`
`Receive video
`
`programming with URLs
`
`Present video
`programming
`
`nnn
`:
`
`Internet info
`
` and related
`
`Obtain Internet
`Info using URLs
`
`/4..
`
`NTFX-1007, Fig. 4 (annotated); NTFX-1003, pg. 27
`
`13
`
`

`
`Petition for inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`Thus, the system for presenting television video programming and
`
`corresponding WWW pages relevant to the television programming, as taught by
`
`Throckmorton, discloses “a system for presenting integrated video programming
`
`and corresponding related Internet information segments obtained fi'om Web sites
`
`on the Internet,” as recited in the claim. (NTFX-1003, pp. 25-27).
`
`[1.1] “a meansfor receiving programming, wherein the programming contains a
`
`video and audio signals and one or more uniform resource locators, wherein the
`
`uniform resource locators specify one or more Internet addresses ofthe
`
`information segments which relate speciyically to the content ofthe video and
`
`audio signals ofthe programming”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches a receiver device,
`
`such as a personal computer, for “receiv[ing] the primary and associated data
`
`streams.” (NTFX-1007, 6:4-I 1). The primary data stream could be “broadcast
`
`television” (NTFX-1007, 4:13-20) and the “associated data” can be a URL
`
`pointing to “locations in the online services or the Internet which are particularly
`
`relevant to the television program.” (NTFX-1007, 9:1-I 2; Abstract).
`
`Thus, the computer that includes receivers for receiving video signals and
`
`associated data such as a URL, wherein the URL specifies Internet locations that
`
`are relevant to the video programming, as taught by Throckmorton, discloses “a
`
`means for receiving programming, wherein the programming contains a video and
`
`audio signals and one or more uniform resource locators, wherein the uniform
`
`14
`
`

`
`Petition for inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`resource locators specify one or more Internet addresses of the information
`
`segments which relate specifically to the content of the video and audio signals of
`
`the programming,” as recited in the claim. (NTFX-1003, pp. 27-31).
`
`[1.2] “a meansfor decoding, connected to the receiving means, the uniform
`
`resource locators to determine the specified Internet addresses”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches a “decoder”
`
`connected to a receiver that “performs the function of decoding the associated
`
`data,” where the associated data could be a URL. (NTFX-1007, 6:50-53; 9:1-12).
`
`Thus, the decoder connected to the receiver in the consumer equipment for
`
`decoding the associated data (e.g., URL), as taught by Throckmorton, discloses “a
`
`means for decoding, connected to the receiving means, the uniform resource
`
`locators to determine the specified Internet addresses,” as recited in the claim.
`
`(NTFX-1003, pp. 31-32).
`
`[1 .3] “a controller means, connected to the decoding means, for interpreting the
`
`uniform resource locators”
`
`Throckmorton discloses “a controller means, connected to the decoding
`
`means, for interpreting the uniform resource locators” because it teaches a
`
`“microprocessor” in the computer (NTFX-1007, 6:13-14) that controls an
`
`“associated data protocol manager 60” to perform “the function of extracting the
`
`different forms of associated data fi'om the incoming digital data steam and
`
`converting them to a form that can be used by communications manager.” (NTFX-
`
`15
`
`

`
`Petition for inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`1007, 6:54-60). The “microprocessor” and “decoder” are connected as part of the
`
`same system. (See NTFX-1007, Figs. 4-5).
`
`Thus, the microprocessor in the consumer equipment that controls the data
`
`protocol manager (that is connected to the decoder) for converting the incoming
`
`associated data (e.g., URL) so that it can be used by the communications manager,
`
`as taught by Throckmorton, discloses “a controller means, connected to the
`
`decoding means, for interpreting the uniform resource locators,” as recited in the
`
`claim. (NTFX-1003, pp. 32-33).
`
`[1 .4] “a web browser, connected to the decoding means and the controller
`
`means, for sending message requests to specific Internet sites located at the
`
`Internet addresses corresponding to the uniform resource locators and
`
`consequently receiving the one or more requested Internet information segments
`
`residing at the determined Internet addresses, the browser retrieves the requested
`
`Internet information segments under the direction and control ofthe controller
`
`means”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches a “Web Browser”
`
`that is “used to display data pages fi'om the World Wide Web.” (NTFX-1007, 7:42-
`
`45). In that regard, when a user “click[s] on a reference, the system actually
`
`connects to and retrieves the referenced information fi'om the appropriate source.”
`
`(NTFX-1007, 9:1-14). Further, the web browser software executes on the
`
`computer, which is controlled by the microprocessor. (NTFX-1007, 6:13-14). The
`
`microprocessor “causes the associated data to be accessed and processed.” (NTFX-
`
`16
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`1007, 4:27-33). The “resulting data” is then displayed. (NTFX-1007, 4:27-33).
`
`Thus, Throckmorton teaches (i) a web browser executing on a system
`
`(comprising the web browser, a decoder and a microprocessor); (ii) that the web
`
`browser is under the control of the microprocessor, and (iii) that the web browsing
`
`system “connects to and retrieves” WWW pages corresponding to the URL and
`
`displays the pages, thereby disclosing “a web browser, connected to the decoding
`
`means and the controller means, for sending message requests to specific Internet
`
`sites located at the Internet addresses corresponding to the uniform resource
`
`locators and consequently receiving the one or more requested Internet information
`
`segments residing at the determined Internet addresses, the browser retrieves the
`
`requested Internet information segments under the direction and control of the
`
`controller means,” as recited in the claim. (NTFX-1003, pp. 33-35).
`
`[1.5] “a display means, connected to the controller and receiving means, for
`
`presenting the video and audio signals concurrently with or independentlyfrom
`
`the Internet information segments”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches a display such as a
`
`99 (.6
`“standard television, monitor,” or “liquid crystal display screen” with “audio
`
`provided by an audio amplifier and speaker” connected to the processor and
`
`receiver in the consumer equipment that presents both the primary data stream
`
`(e.g., television broadcast) and the Internet information retrieved via the URL
`
`provided in the associated data. (NTFX-1007, 6:17-20; 6:36-43; 9:1-14; DEC).
`
`17
`
`

`
`Petition for inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`Further, the “consumer receives and has access to the relevant data during the
`
`process of program reception. Therefore the data becomes an integral part of the
`
`experience desired by the program producers.” (NTFX-1007, 1:59-67).
`
`Accordingly, Throckmorton’s system displays both the primary data stream
`
`(e.g., television program) and the online information retrieved with the
`
`URLs/pointers on the display of the consumer equipment (e.g., personal
`
`computer).
`
`In some instances, the online information is displayed as an “integral
`
`part” of the primary data stream (e.g., television program). (NTFX-1003, pg. 37).
`
`Thus, the display connected to the processor and receiver in the consumer
`
`equipment that may be a CRT screen or LCD that presents a television broadcast
`
`and information fi'om WWW pages, as taught by Throckmorton, discloses “a
`
`display means, connected to the controller and receiving means, for presenting the
`
`video and audio signals concurrently with or independently fi'om the Internet
`
`information segments,” as recited in the claim. (NTFX-1003, pp. 35-37).
`
`J [
`
`2. 1] “The system of claim I, wherein the uniform resource locdtors are
`
`embedded in the received video signal”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches that “[i]n the case
`
`of television, the associated data is encoded in the VB] of the television signal.”
`
`(NTFX-1007, 7:61-65). In that regard, “associated data may consist of references
`
`such as uniform resource locations (‘URL’) which are WWW page references.”
`
`18
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`(NTFX-1007, 9:3-S).
`
`Thus, the URLs that are embedded in the VBI of the television signal, as
`
`taught by Throckmorton, disclose “wherein the uniform resource locators are
`
`embedded in the received video signal,” as recited in the claim. (NTFX-1003, pp.
`
`37-38).
`
`J [
`
`3. 1] “The system ofclaim I, wherein the uniform resource locators are received
`
`independentlyfrom the video signal”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches that “[t]he primary
`
`data stream and secondary data stream are typically transmitted to a consumer over
`
`the same delivery medium; however, the invention contemplates situations where
`
`this is not the case. For example, the primary data stream could be delivered by
`
`broadcast television and the associated data could be delivered over a high speed
`
`digital network, a FM sideband, a direct satellite broadcast, a cable network, a
`
`telephone, etc. (NTFX-1007, 4:4-20). The “associated data may consist of
`
`references such as uniform resource locations (‘URL’) which are WWW page
`
`references.” (NTFX-1007, 9:3-5).
`
`Thus, the associated data (i.e., URL) that is received independently from the
`
`primary data stream (e.g., broadcast television signal), as taught by Throckmorton,
`
`disclose “wherein the uniform resource locators are embedded in the received
`
`video signal,” as recited in the claim. (NTFX-1003, pp. 38-39).
`
`19
`
`

`
`Petition for inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,018,768
`
`Claim 19
`
`[1 9.0] “A systemfor presenting integrated video programming and
`
`corresponding related Internet information segments obtainedfrom Web sites on
`
`the Interne ”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches “presenting the
`
`primary data stream to the consumer,” where the primary data stream may be a
`
`television broadcast, to a consumer with “a cathode ray tube screen, or possibly a
`
`liquid crystal display screen and audio provided by an audio amplifier and
`
`speakers.” (NTFX-1007, 6:36-43). Further, it teaches “retriev[ing] data fi'om
`
`remote computers .
`
`.
`
`. for presentation to the consumer,” where the data from
`
`online services or the Internet [] are particularly relevant to the television
`
`program.” (NTFX-1007, 8:30-34; Abstract).
`
`Thus, the system for presenting television video programming and
`
`corresponding WWW pages relevant to the television programming, as taught by
`
`Throckmorton, discloses “a system for presenting integrated video programming
`
`and corresponding related Internet information segments obtained fi'om Web sites
`
`on the Internet,” as recited in the claim. (NTFX-1003, pp. 39-41).
`
`[l9.l] “a production computer”
`
`Throckmorton discloses this limitation because it teaches a “data stream
`
`creati