IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`___________________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., and
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC,
`and
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC., LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC., and
`LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`BLACK HILLS MEDIA, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`___________________
`
`Case No. IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`___________________
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF GARETH LOY, D.M.A.
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`___________________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., and
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC,
`and
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC., LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC., and
`LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`BLACK HILLS MEDIA, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`___________________
`
`Case No. IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`___________________
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF GARETH LOY, D.M.A.
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`I, Gareth Loy, hereby declare and state as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained by counsel for Patent Owner, Black Hills Media,
`
`LLC (“Patentee”) to provide opinions in connection with Inter Partes Review No.
`
`IPR2014-00709 of U.S. Patent No. 8,028,323 to Martin Weel (Ex. 1001, “the ‘323
`
`patent”). I am the same Gareth Loy who submitted a declaration in connection
`
`with Inter Partes Review No. IPR2013-00598 of U.S. Patent 8,214,873 (“the ‘873
`
`patent,”), which is a parent of the ‘323 patent, made of record in the present Inter
`
`Partes Review, IPR2014-0709 as Exhibit 2006 and incorporated herein by
`
`reference in its entirety. A current copy of my curriculum vitae is attached hereto
`
`as Exhibit A.
`
`2.
`
`For purposes of this declaration, I have been asked to opine on the
`
`disclosure of U.S. Patent 7,454,511 to Weast (“Weast,” Ex. 1004) and U.S. Patent
`
`7,668,939 to Encarnacion (“Encarnacion,” Ex. 1005). I have provided my
`
`opinions on the state of the prior art and construction of the term “playlist,” in my
`
`prior declaration, submitted as Ex. 2006 in the instant proceeding.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`
`3.
`
`I am the President of Gareth, Inc., which provides software
`
`engineering, consulting, and litigation support to high-technology companies
`
`internationally. Gareth Inc. provides research and development services including
`
`product development, coding and documentation. Gareth Inc. also provides a wide
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`variety of software engineering services including embedded systems, real-time
`
`systems, operating systems support and development, file systems, compilers,
`
`parallel processing systems, and digital signal processing (DSP) systems.
`
`4.
`
`Gareth Inc. has prepared and provided compilers, interpreters and
`
`assemblers, enterprise software systems, chip architectures, software architectures,
`
`realtime operating systems, home entertainment systems, embedded systems,
`
`instruction set architectures, datasheets, databooks, user guides, and custom
`
`automated documentation systems. Technology clients have included Infineon,
`
`Philips Semiconductor, Trimedia Technologies, Equator Technologies, Pixim, Inc.,
`
`Palm, Inc., Sonic Solutions, Sony Corporation of America, Chromatic Research,
`
`Raza Microelectronics, Cradle Technologies, Siemens Microelectronics, Zoran
`
`Corporation, Dolby Laboratories, and C-Cube Microsystems.
`
`5.
`
`I have over 38 years of academic and professional experience in
`
`computer science, software development, embedded systems, networking,
`
`enterprise software systems, digital audio signal processing, and music technology.
`
`I received my doctorate from Stanford University in 1980, where I studied under
`
`John Chowning at the Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics,
`
`which was a center within the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory directed
`
`by John McCarthy at the time.
`
`-3-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`6.
`
`I was an early Apple Computer employee, having been hired there in
`
`1979 full time while still in graduate school. I worked for Jef Raskin who reported
`
`directly to Steve Jobs, founder and CEO of Apple Computer. I left Apple in 1980
`
`to teach at UCSD where I taught, for a decade, graduate and undergraduate courses
`
`in computer science and digital audio, and cofounded the Computer Audio
`
`Research Laboratory there.
`
`7.
`
`I have published widely in various peer-reviewed journals, and have
`
`authored three books with the MIT Press, including Musimathics, a two-volume
`
`introduction and reference to the mathematics of music.
`
`8.
`
`I have been a Software Architect for multiple consumer and
`
`professional products for large international electronics companies and have
`
`sustained a long and successful career at the cutting edge of software development
`
`and multimedia computing.
`
`9.
`
`I am experienced in a variety of computer science domains, ranging
`
`from embedded systems, digital home entertainment systems, graphical user
`
`interfaces, real-time operating systems, parallel processing systems, signal
`
`processing computers, device drivers, and software for film, music, and audio. I
`
`have extensive experience in use of multiprocessor/multicore architectures to solve
`
`problems in digital audio signal processing. I have also provided expertise in
`
`compiler design, file systems, operating systems, handheld networked Personal
`
`-4-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`Information Management (PIM) devices, network audio streaming systems,
`
`wireless remote control systems, digital loudspeaker systems, digital home
`
`entertainment systems, enterprise email systems, software for factory automation
`
`systems, interactive databases, enterprise software for managing of music libraries,
`
`MPEG audio compression, on-line gaming, composition systems, digital camera
`
`hardware and software, digital audio hardware and software technologies, and
`
`more.
`
`10.
`
`I also have over seventeen years of experience as an expert witness on
`
`numerous cases. Most recently, I testified at an International Trade Commission
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-882 hearing involving the Weel ‘873 and ‘099 patents. I
`
`have also testified before a jury under oath, have provided Markman claim
`
`construction testimony, and have presented exhibits and Markman tutorials in
`
`federal court in trademark infringement, inequitable conduct, and patent
`
`technology litigation. I have been retained as an expert witness in such areas as
`
`software for handheld networked Personal Information Management (PIM)
`
`devices, digital music player software, enterprise email systems, software for
`
`factory automation systems, digital camera hardware and software, internet
`
`customer tracking systems, SAP billing systems, interactive databases, software for
`
`management of music libraries, Digital Audio Recording Devices (DARD), MPEG
`
`audio compression, on-line gaming, human interface design, music composition
`
`-5-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`systems, MIDI systems, network audio streaming systems, rendering of 3D digital
`
`audio, and digital audio hardware and software technologies.
`
`11.
`
`In connection with forming my opinions, I reviewed the ‘323 patent
`
`and the art on which the trial was instituted. I also reviewed the April 21, 2014,
`
`Declaration of Kevin C. Almeroth, Ph.D. and the Institution Decision as they relate
`
`to the grounds instituted by the Board. In addition, I attended Dr. Almeroth’s
`
`January 9, 2015, deposition, and reviewed his deposition transcript. My opinions
`
`are set forth below. I make these statements based upon facts and matters within
`
`my own knowledge or on information provided to me by others. All such facts and
`
`matters are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
`
`III. DEFINITION OF THE PERSON OF SKILL IN THE ART
`
`12.
`
`I understand that the Patent Owner proposed a definition of a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art as having a bachelor’s degree in computer science or
`
`electrical engineering and one year of practical experience with networked media.
`
`I agree with that definition.
`
`IV. THE ‘323 PATENT
`
`13. The ‘323 patent has identical specification to the ‘873 patent, on
`
`which I have previously provided my opinions in my prior declaration, Ex. 2006.
`
`The opinions expressed in my prior declaration (Ex. 2006) are equally applicable
`
`here and are incorporated by reference. I provided additional observations
`
`-6-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`regarding the ‘873 patent herewith. To that end, I provide additional opinions
`
`regarding the ‘323 patent vis a vis the UPnP protocol.
`
`14.
`
`It is my opinion that the ‘323 patent does not disclose a system for use
`
`with the protocol and services supported by UPnP-enabled devices. In the UPnP
`
`protocol, all of the participating devices must be UPnP-enabled and they are
`
`typically located on the same network (for example, in a local, home environment).
`
`(Ex. 1011 at Sec. 5.3 p. 9 (“Using UPnP’s Discovery mechanism, MediaServers
`
`and MediaRenderers in the home network are discovered.”).
`
`15. Figure 8 of the ‘323 patent teaches the use of a cell phone that
`
`physically can be located anywhere that its cellular network reaches, and can
`
`control a media player device that can be located anywhere on a wide area network
`
`(WAN) such as the Internet. This allows, for example, a cell phone user to direct
`
`presentation of media from a remote server to a remote media player (defined in
`
`the ‘323 patent as “a device that is not on the same local area network as the other
`
`device” (13:51-52)) that are not on the same network. To that end, Fig. 8
`
`illustrates a cell phone 84 directing a stereo 83. The stereo 83 is located on a local
`
`area network (LAN) that is connected to the Server/Internet on a wide area
`
`network(WAN). The stereo is controlled from the cell phone 84 via a cellular
`
`network and server 81 that acts as a bridge from the cellular network to the Internet
`
`(WAN) and thence to the stereo via the LAN. (Ex. 1001 at Fig. 8, 14:30-47).
`
`-7-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`16. According to the ‘323 patent, playlists and other media may come
`
`from any server anywhere on the Internet. (Ex. 1001 at Fig. 8, 14:30-15:10). The
`
`‘323 patent teaches a cell phone, acting as a controller, to receive playlists from
`
`any Internet-based server, to receive the user’s input selecting media items, to
`
`select any media player device reachable anywhere on the Internet for which the
`
`user has correct user ID and password credentials, and then to direct the selected
`
`media player device to receive and play the selected media from any Internet-based
`
`server. Not only is the cell phone controller not required to be on the same LAN
`
`with the media player device, it is not even required to be on the Internet with it:
`
`the cell phone can be located anywhere that a cell phone network reaches, so long
`
`as the user has proper credentials.
`
`17. The ‘323 patent permits a user to direct a presentation of media on a
`
`remote media player device regardless of physical proximity, and regardless of the
`
`intervening network topology. Such capability allows users to roam the house —
`
`or indeed to travel to remote locations — and still be able to play media content on
`
`a particular media player device that is accessed via the controller and is available
`
`via an Internet-based service.
`
`18. There is no reference in the ‘323 patent to any UPnP protocol or any
`
`UPnP architecture specification. The ‘323 patent discloses both the remote
`
`control/first device and the media player/second device to independently connect
`
`-8-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`to a data server (e.g., Internet) directly in order to receive/obtain playlists, and to
`
`transfer media content from one device to another. Moreover, the devices of the
`
`‘323 patent do not operate according to the UPnP protocol. In the ‘323 patent,
`
`individual devices interact directly with each other. There is no requirement for an
`
`intermediary such as a Control Point for a device to access media content on a
`
`server and request another device to play the content.
`
`19. The ‘323 patent uses playlists as a form of curated content, distinct
`
`from an arbitrary grouping of songs/media items, as the Petitioner’s order-less
`
`definition implies. (Ex. 1001, 11:3-11 (“list of playlists may contain a playlist
`
`named rock favorites, a playlist named country favorites, and a playlist named
`
`classical favorites,”); Id. at 7:55-67 (“find buddies with the same music
`
`preferences you have in your playlists, the ability to share playlists with buddies”).
`
`For example, the ‘323 Patent distinguishes playlists from a catalog of songs and
`
`notes that playlists are customizable. (Id. at 8:1-16 (“a web-based content and
`
`music management system that offers users a list of features including… content
`
`catalog browsing, search capability (to find artists and specific selections), the use
`
`of standard playlists, the use of custom playlists (created by each user).”).
`
`V. U.S. PATENT No. 7,454,511 TO WEAST (“Weast,” Ex. 1003)
`
`20. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that Weast
`
`proposes to provide “a user friendly technique for a user to employ and control a
`
`-9-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`UPnP media renderer to render media content available from a UPnP media server
`
`in an operating environment.” (Ex. 1003 at 2:43-47). Weast attempted to address
`
`a deficiency in the UPnP A/V Architecture Specification (particularly version 1.0)
`
`which did not “specify the user interface through which the media contents, the
`
`complying servers and renderers are to be made visible to the users at the control
`
`points, and the user interface through which their operations are to be controlled.”
`
`(Ex. 1003 at 1:47-51).
`
`21. Weast’s proposed user interface for a UPnP control point was
`
`intended to work in the framework of the “UPnP A/V Architecture Specification,
`
`that is version 1.0,” (Ex. 1003 at 2:44-56), which I understand to have been
`
`submitted by Petitioner in this proceeding as Ex. 1011.
`
`22. Neither Weast nor the UPnP A/V Architecture Specification, version
`
`1.0, of Ex. 1011 use the term “playlist” or discuss manipulation of “playlists.”
`
`-10-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`
`
`23.
`
`In the context of UPnP A/V Architecture Specification 1.0, Weast
`
`illustrates in Fig. 1 that “UPnP media servers 104 comprise a number of media
`
`contents 132. UPnP media servers 104 provide media contents 132 to selected ones
`
`of UPnP media renderers 106 to render, at the control of control point 102. In
`
`various embodiments, media contents 132 provided by UPnP media servers 104
`
`may include media contents 132 accessible to UPnP media servers 104, but not
`
`disposed on UPnP media servers 104 itself.” (Ex. 1003 at 3:19-26).
`
`24. The control point 102 and the various media renderers 106 and media
`
`servers are all elements on a local wired or wireless network, and are members of
`
`-11-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`the same network domain. (Ex. 1003 at 3:36-40. “Media related services 112 and
`
`enhanced file system services 124 are equipped to cooperate with each other, to
`
`enable media contents 132 available from UPnP media servers 104 and availability
`
`of UPnP media renderers 106 be made visible through the user interface of the file
`
`system implemented by file system services 124.” (Ex. 1003 at 3:48-53).
`
`25.
`
`“[S]election of media content 132 for rendering, and media renderer
`
`106 to perform the rendering, may be made through the same user interface of the
`
`file system….An example of a graphical file system user interface is the file
`
`system user interface of the Windows family of operating systems of Microsoft
`
`Corporation, of Redmond, Wash.” (Ex. 1003 at 3:54-61).
`
`26. The only user interface that Weast describes is one resembling the
`
`“Windows family of operating systems of Microsoft Corporation.” (Ex. 1003 at
`
`3:58-60). When the control point requests media contents from servers, the user
`
`interface “makes visible these [sic] information through the familiar user interface
`
`of the file system” (Ex. 1003 at 5:42-44), which, as depicted in Figure 4a is a
`
`Windows-type interface that merely provides a graphical representation of the
`
`table of contents of the available files on the media server. The files could be
`
`sorted for viewing by the date column, or the size column, as shown in Fig. 4a.
`
`The files or pointers to media items on the media server are displayed the same as
`
`any other non-media files or pointers in the file system.
`
`-12-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`27. Thus, Weast’s folders of files or pointers are not a “playlist”
`
`referencing media items arranged to be played in a sequence because a Windows-
`
`type graphical user interface for displaying a table of contents does not enable, or
`
`intend, playback in sequence. (Ex. 1003 at 6:29- 36 (“file system entries 422 may
`
`be visible through a file system window, such as file system window 402a”)).
`
`28. A person of skill in the art would not understand Weast’s disclosure of
`
`a table of media items or a table of renderers that are arranged to be viewed
`
`according to some order (e.g., by folder, or name, by size, date, etc.) to constitute a
`
`playlist.
`
`
`
`-13-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`
`
`29. Weast provides no disclosure of any organization of the media in the
`
`file system interface. (Ex. 1003 at 6:29-35 (“corresponding file system entries 422
`
`may be visible through a file system window, such as file system window 402a”)).
`
`Weast also provides no disclose to organize the media file system entries into
`
`groups to be played in an order or in sequence.
`
`30. Figures 4a-8 of Weast provide examples of interactions with content
`
`and renderers via the file system interface. Fig. 7 shows that a user can drag songs
`
`in the system folder “Z:\MyMedia\Music” onto a renderer represented by a system
`
`folder “Z:\MyMedia\Renderers\Music Player” in much the same way that a user
`
`might copy or move files in a Windows-based operating system. (Ex. 1003 at
`
`8:34-52 (“rendering of a media content 132 may be initiated by dragging and
`
`-14-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`dropping the corresponding file system entry of a media content 132 of interest
`
`from file system window 402a, into a folder window 402c of the corresponding
`
`UPnP media renderer 106”)).
`
`
`
`31.
`
`In Weast, media renderers are populated in the graphical user
`
`interface of the file system as “dummy” pointers to the renderers. (Ex. 1003 at
`
`6:36-65). “[F]ile system entries 424 are representative dummy or pseudo file
`
`system folders. In various embodiments, file system entries 424 are corresponding
`
`pointers or links of UPnP media renderers 106, i.e. file system entries 424
`
`-15-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`integrally include location information of UPnP media renderers 106.” (Ex. 1003
`
`at 6:60-65).
`
`32. Pointers in the existing file system may be generated based on
`
`responses from media servers as part of a discovery protocol. (Ex. 1004 at 5:16-
`
`50. “The UPnP media server 104 provides the identifications of media contents
`
`132 available, including if applicable, the meta data describing the available media
`
`contents 132, op 308…[O]n receipt of the identifications and meta data, control
`
`point device 102 advantageously makes visible these information through the
`
`familiar user interface of the file system of control point device 102.” (Ex. 1003 at
`
`5:36-44.
`
`VI. U.S. PATENT No. 7,668,939 TO ENCARNACION (“Encarnacion,” Ex.
`1004)
`
`33. Encarnacion is directed to a media server in a Universal Plug and Play
`
`(UPnP) network that is capable of controlling the distribution of resource
`
`information regarding resources to rendering devices. (Ex. 1004 at Abstract). “In
`
`one case, the resource sharing device consults a criterion to determine whether an
`
`identified network device is authorized to receive resource information. In another
`
`case, the resource sharing service consults another criterion to determine whether a
`
`specified individual associated with the media server must consent to the transfer
`
`of the resource information in order for the transfer to occur.” (Ex. 1004 at
`
`-16-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`Abstract). The distribution control system of Encarnacion is motivated by the
`
`desire to avoid displaying media or metadata that might be objectionable to some
`
`users. (Ex. 1005 at 13:31-36 (“Limiting the availability of non-matching resource
`
`metadata is desirable for a number of reasons. This feature is generally
`
`advantageous because it eliminates the display of resource meta data that the
`
`consumer might find objectionable (or the consumer's guardian might find
`
`objectionable).”).
`
`34.
`
`In Fig. 3, Encarnacion illustrates a network architecture 300 that
`
`includes a plurality of UPnP devices (302-312) that are coupled together via a
`
`UPnP network 314. (Ex. 1004 at 7:65-8:2).
`
`-17-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`
`
`35.
`
`“The devices (302-312) include the above-mentioned media server
`
`302 and a plurality of media rendering devices (304-312).” (Ex. 1004 at 8:2-4).
`
`“The UPnP network 314 also optionally includes one or more control points (316,
`
`318).” (Ex. 1004 at 8:14-15). The control points can be integrated with one of the
`
`UPnP devices so that, for example, “a rendering device can also include control
`
`point functionality for interacting with the media server 302.” (Ex. 1004 at 8: 17-
`
`19. “Alternatively, one or more control points can be implemented separate from
`
`the UPnP device (302-312).” (Ex. 1004 at 8:19-21). “The UPnP network 314 can
`
`use any combination of protocols to transfer information between the UPnP
`
`-18-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`devices (302-312, 316 and 318), such as TCP/IP, SOAP, GENA, HTTP, and so
`
`on.” (Ex. 1004 at 8:29-32).
`
`36. A consumer can use a control point (such as control point 316) or
`
`other device to investigate the resource information corresponding to resources
`
`provided in the resource store 320 of the media server 302. (Ex. 1004 at 8:55-58).
`
`“For instance, this operation may entail investigating the resource metadata of the
`
`resources, such as the titles of available resources, and other high level information
`
`regarding the resources.” (Ex. 1004 at 8:58-62). “After such investigation, the
`
`consumer can select resource content associated with a resource for presentation at
`
`a selected rendering device, such as the media rendering device 306.” (Ex. 1004 at
`
`8:62-65). The control point 316 can then “provide a role in setting up the transfer
`
`of the resource content from the media server 302 to the selected rendering device
`
`306.” (Ex. 1004 at 66-67). “In one implementation, the UPnP architecture 300
`
`uses a non-UPnP protocol to actually execute the transfer of resource content from
`
`the media server 302 to the render device 306, such as, but not limited to, the
`
`HTTP protocol.” (Ex. 1004 at 8:67-9:4).
`
`37. Thus, “a consumer can use control point (such as control point 316) to
`
`send a UPnP query to the media server 302. The UPnP query can be structured as
`
`a browse request or a search request. In a browse request, the consumer’s intent is
`
`to scan a collection of resource metadata associated with the resources provided by
`
`-19-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`the media server 302. In a search request, the consumer’s intent is more targeted,
`
`e.g., to find specific resource metadata provided by the media server 302 identified
`
`by various search terms, etc.” (Ex. 1004 at 37:9-17). The media server 302
`
`responds “by presenting resource metadata associated with one or more resources
`
`(e.g., files in the resource store 320) that meet the consumer’s request.” (Ex. 1004
`
`at 37:19-21). The resource metadata can include “various high level information
`
`pertaining to the matching resources, such as title, genre, artist, date created, and so
`
`on.” (Ex. 10045 at 37:21-24). The resource metadata “can also include resource
`
`locators (such as URLs) that identify the respective network locations from which
`
`the resource content items can be retrieved from.” (Ex. 1004 at 37: 24-27).
`
`38. After viewing the resource metadata, “the consumer selects a
`
`corresponding resource content item to be played on a rendering device, such as
`
`rendering device 306.” (Ex. 1004 at 37:36-38). The consumer “enables the
`
`rendering device 306 to transmit a request to the media server 302 that instructs the
`
`media server 302 to retrieve the selected resource content item.” (Ex. 1004 at
`
`37:39-42). For example, the consumer can transfer the URL associated with the
`
`selected resource to the rendering device 306. (Ex. 1004 at 37:42-45). The
`
`rendering device 306 responds by transmitting an HTTP GET request to the media
`
`server 302, where the HTTP GET request includes the URL corresponding to the
`
`selected resource content, which was passed to the rendering device by the control
`
`-20-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`point. (Ex. 1004 at 37:46-49). The media server 302 responds to the HTTP GET
`
`request by retrieving the selected resource content item at the location specified by
`
`the URL, and provides the selected resource content item to the rendering device
`
`306. (Ex. 1004 at 37:50-54).
`
`39. Encarnacion describes “[a] particular kind of resource collection is a
`
`resource playlist. This resource can be implemented as a file that refers to a list of
`
`audio, video and/or photo resources (or other kinds of resources).” (Ex. 1004 at
`
`6:43-46 (emphasis added)). Like the other resources disclosed in Encarnacion,
`
`such as media files, playlists are not automatically sent to the control point – they
`
`must be explicitly retrieved via resource locators. (Ex. 1004 at 14:14-21 (“This
`
`resource locator can be used to retrieve either the playlist (e.g., a list of songs) or
`
`each of the songs in the playlist (e.g., the set of songs ‘concatenated’).”)).
`
`Encarnacion also discloses that resource location information can be formatted as
`
`XML and displayed in HTML format, such as via a web browser. (Ex. 1004 at
`
`13:1-20, 25:36-43).
`
`40.
`
`In Encarnacion, if the control point were to receive a resource locator
`
`for a playlist, such as via an XML message, the control point would not receive the
`
`playlist itself without retrieving it from the resource location, which would be
`
`based on user interaction which Encarnacion does not disclose. (Ex. 1005 at
`
`25:36-43 (“The receiving control point device can translate the XML message into
`
`-21-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`a presentation format (e.g., HTML), and then display this information for the
`
`consumer’s review.”)).
`
`41. Thus, while Encarnacion discloses that any interaction with playlists
`
`at the control point is driven by URLs, XML, and HTML, Weast discloses that
`
`media items are treated as files within the file system of the control point. These
`
`are two very different methods for information presentation. The file system
`
`display of Weast requires changes to the functioning of the Windows OS that
`
`Weast employs. Using the HTML-based system of Encarnacion would require a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art to essentially discard the process of Weast to
`
`realize the system of Encarnacion for displaying information. In sum, the Weast’s
`
`method is not substitutable for Encarnacion’s as it would require a substantial
`
`redesign of Weast to adopt the approach of Encarnacion, and vice versa. Thus,
`
`there is no reason to combine Weast with Encarnacion, as such combination would
`
`obliterate the contribution of Weast to user interface for the control point.
`
`VII. COMBINATION OF WEAST AND ENCARNACION
`
`42.
`
`I take issue with Dr. Almeroth’s statement in his declaration (Ex.
`
`1007 at para. 46) that “… a person of ordinary skill would combine the teachings
`
`of Weast and Encarnacion because both references deal with the same field of the
`
`art—UPnP—and because each teaches different aspects of the UPnP system
`
`that would need to be implemented in order to have a functioning system.” Dr.
`
`-22-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`Almeroth effectively admits that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have to
`
`combine Weast and Encarnacion “in order to make a functioning system.” Dr.
`
`Almeroth implies that neither Weast nor Encarnacion are functioning systems in
`
`and of themselves, and it would be necessary to combine them to make a
`
`functioning system. Thus, Dr. Almeroth implicitly admits using the ‘323 patent as
`
`a roadmap to arrive at the combination of Weast and Encarnacion.
`
`43. Dr. Almeroth, does not indicate whether a person of skill in the art in
`
`2003 would have had a reasonable expectation of success in making the
`
`combination of Weast and Encarnacion. Nor does he acknowledge where his
`
`proposed combinations would render such a system inoperable or unsatisfactory
`
`for its intended purpose. By Dr. Almeroth’s reasoning, it would be reasonable for
`
`a person of ordinary skill in the art in the field of liquid cleaning products to
`
`combine chlorine with ammonia because both are liquids, and both are used as
`
`cleaning products — regardless of the fact that the combination can be violently
`
`explosive.
`
`44. Stating that the references “do not contradict” one another is also not
`
`helpful. Continuing the analogy, use of chlorine does not contradict use of
`
`ammonia to clean with, but this is an insufficient basis to consider combining
`
`them, because it omits the risks and attendant hazards described above.
`
`-23-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00709
`U.S. Patent 8,028,323
`
`
`45.
`
`It is my opinion that neither Weast nor Encarnacion expressed any
`
`limitations in their purported inventions necessitating their combination “to have a
`
`functioning system.” Each is a complete, well-reasoned solution to the problems
`
`each identifies. A person of ordinary skill in the art would not have been
`
`compelled to combine Weast and Encarnacion, for example, because Encarnacion
`
`is a complete solution to the problem that Encarnacion proposes: a system for
`
`restricting the dissemination of resource information in a network environment that
`
`is complete in itself, so a person of skill in the art would not be motivated to look
`
`beyond it. Likewise, Weast is a complete solution to the problem that Weast
`
`proposes: use of a Windows-type file system to represent the contents of a media
`
`server to a user that is complete in itself, so a person of skill in the art would not be
`
`motivated to look beyond it either.
`
`46.
`
`I am being compensated at my standard consulting rate of $450/hour.
`
`My compensation is not contingent upon the substance of my advice, the opinions
`
`I render, or the testimony that I may give.
`
`47. All of the statements made in this declaration of my own knowledge
`
`are true, and all statements made on information and belied are believed to be true.
`
`These statements were made with knowledge that willful false statements and the
`
`like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under section 1001
`
`of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`-24-
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`IPR2014—00709
`
`US. Patent 8,028,323
`
`Datedzz— L/
`
`/
`
`IS
`
`Signature:
`
`A’b/
`
`-25-
`
`|PR2014-00709 BHM EX. 2009
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`EXHIBIT A
`
`|PR2014-00709 BHM EX. 2009
`
`IPR2014-00709 BHM Ex. 2009
`
`
`
`Dr. Gareth Loy – Curriculum Vitae
`
`
`Curriculum
`Vitae
`
`Dr. Gareth Loy, DMA
`Stanford, 1980
`
`President, Gareth, Inc.
`POB 151185, San Rafael, CA 94915
`(415) 927-2916
`dgl@GarethInc.com
`http://www.GarethInc.com
`
`Professional Summary
`
`
`
`Dr. Loy has over 36 years of academic and professional experience in computer science, software
`development, embedded systems, networking, enterprise software systems, digital audio signal
`processing, and music technology. His practice encompasses a wide range of compu
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
