`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`In re Inter Partes Review of:
`U.S. Patent No. 8,214,873
`
`For: METHOD, SYSTEM, AND
`COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM
`FOR EMPLOYING A FIRST DEVICE
`TO DIRECT A NETWORKED AUDIO
`DEVICE TO RENDER A PLAYLIST
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF KEVIN C. ALMEROTH, PH.D.
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`US Patent and Trademark Office
`PO Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`I, Kevin C. Almeroth, hereby declare and state as follows:
`
`
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained as a technical consultant on behalf of Samsung
`
`Electronics Co., Ltd., the petitioner in the present proceeding, and I am being
`
`compensated at my usual and customary hourly rate. The petition names
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and
`
`Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC as real parties-in-interest. I have
`
`no financial interest in, or affiliation with, the petitioner, real parties-in-
`
`interest, or the patent owner, which I understand to be BLACK HILLS
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`MEDIA, LLC. My compensation is not dependent upon the outcome of, or
`
`my testimony in, the present inter partes review or any litigation proceedings.
`
`2.
`
`I have reviewed each of the following:
`
`a. U.S. Patent No. 8,214,873 (“the ’873 Patent”), including the claims,
`
`description and prosecution history (which is identified in the Petition
`
`respectively as Exhibits 1001 and 1002);
`
`b. The prosecution history of U.S. Patent No. 8,028,323 (“the ’323
`
`Patent”) (which is identified in the Petition as Exhibit 1003);
`
`c. U.S. Patent No. 7,454,511 to Weast (which is identified in the Petition
`
`as Exhibit 1004; hereinafter “Weast”);
`
`d. U.S. Patent No. 7,668,939 to Encarnacion et al. (which is identified in
`
`the Petition as Exhibit 1005; hereinafter “Encarnacion”);
`
`3. Upon reviewing the ’873 Patent, I understand that the application leading to
`
`the ʼ873 Patent was filed on August 10, 2011 (Appl. No. 13/207,113) as a
`
`continuation of the ʼ323 Patent. The application leading to the ʼ323 Patent was
`
`filed on May 5, 2004 (Appl. No. 10/840,109). For the purposes of my
`
`analysis, I assume the time of the purported invention to be May 5, 2003.
`
`4.
`
`It is my opinion that a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`inventions claimed in the ’873 Patent would have at least a B.S. degree in
`
`2
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`electrical engineering, computer engineering or computer science and
`
`approximately two years of professional experience with computer
`
`networking and multimedia technologies, or the equivalent. I was a person of
`
`skill in this art in May, 2003.
`
`5. My background, qualifications, and experience relevant to the issues in
`
`proceeding are summarized below. My curriculum vitae is submitted
`
`herewith as Exhibit 1009.
`
`6.
`
`I am currently a Professor in the Department of Computer Science at the
`
`University of California, Santa Barbara. At UCSB, I also hold faculty
`
`appointments and am a founding member of the Computer Engineering (CE)
`
`Program, Media Arts and Technology (MAT) Program, and the Technology
`
`Management Program (TMP). I have been a faculty member at UCSB since
`
`July 1997.
`
`7.
`
`I hold three degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology: (1) a Bachelor
`
`of Science degree in Information and Computer Science (with minors in
`
`Economics, Technical Communication, and American Literature) earned in
`
`June, 1992; (2) a Master of Science degree in Computer Science (with
`
`specialization in Networking and Systems) earned in June, 1994; and (3) a
`
`Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree in Computer Science (Dissertation Title:
`
`Networking and System Support for the Efficient, Scalable Delivery of
`
`3
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`Services in Interactive Multimedia System, minor in Telecommunications
`
`Public Policy) earned in June, 1997.
`
`8. One of the major concentrations of my research to date has been the delivery
`
`of multimedia content and data between computing devices. In my research, I
`
`have studied large-scale content delivery systems, and the use of servers
`
`located in a variety of geographic locations to provide scalable delivery to
`
`hundreds, even thousands of users simultaneously. I have also studied
`
`smaller-scale content delivery systems in which content is exchanged between
`
`individual computers and portable devices. My work has emphasized the
`
`exchange of content more efficiently across computer networks, including the
`
`scalable delivery of content to many users, mobile computing, satellite
`
`networking, delivering content to mobile devices, and network support for
`
`data delivery in wireless networks.
`
`9.
`
`In 1992, at the time I started graduate school, my research focused initially on
`
`interactive functions (e.g., VCR-style functions like pause, rewind, and fast-
`
`forward) for near video-on-demand systems in cable systems. This included
`
`handling multiple requests using one audio/video stream broadcast to multiple
`
`receivers simultaneously. This research has developed into new techniques to
`
`deliver on-demand content, including audio, video, web documents, and other
`
`4
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`types of data, through the Internet and over other types of networks, in a way
`
`that scales to a large number of users.
`
`10. In 1994, I began to research issues associated with the development and
`
`deployment of multicast in the Internet. Multicast allows scalable
`
`transmission from a single source to an arbitrary number of receivers. Some
`
`of my more recent research endeavors have looked at how to use the
`
`scalability offered by multicast to provide streaming media support for
`
`complex applications like distance learning, distributed collaboration,
`
`distributed games, and large-scale wireless communication.
`
`11. Starting in 1997, I worked on a project called the Interactive Multimedia
`
`Jukebox (“IMJ”) to integrate the streaming media capabilities of the Internet
`
`together with the interactivity of the web. Users could select content to view
`
`from a website, which would then be scheduled for delivery using multicast
`
`on one of a number of logical content streams. Delivery would be scheduled
`
`according to available communication capacity: if idle capacity existed when
`
`a request was made, the requesting user would be able to watch its selection
`
`immediately. If the server was fully utilized in streaming previously selected
`
`content, the user’s selection would be queued. In the meantime, the user
`
`would see what content was already playing, and because of the use of
`
`multicast, would be able to join one of the existing streams and watch the
`
`5
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`content at the point it was currently being transmitted. This service combined
`
`the interactivity of the web with the streaming capabilities of the Internet to
`
`create a jukebox-like service. As part of the project, we obtained permission
`
`from Turner Broadcasting to transmit cartoons and other short-subject content.
`
`12. Starting in 1997, I began researching issues related to wireless devices. In
`
`particular, I was interested in showing how to provide greater communication
`
`capability to the wireless devices of the time, which tended to be resource-
`
`constrained (e.g., in terms of CPU, memory, networking, and power). Starting
`
`in 1998, I published several papers on my work to develop a flexible,
`
`lightweight, battery-aware network protocol stack, which were similar in
`
`nature to protocols like UPnP and DLNA (discussed below at ¶¶ 21-31).
`
`From this initial work, I have made wireless networking and wireless devices
`
`one of the major themes of my research. These topics include developing
`
`applications for mobile devices, for example, virally exchanging and tracking
`
`“coupons” through “opportunistic contact”; building network communication
`
`among a set of mobile devices unaided by any other kind of network
`
`infrastructure; and dynamically detecting weaknesses in the protocol operation
`
`of wireless network traffic to evaluate alternative solutions.
`
`13. In the course of my research, I have been involved in the development of
`
`academic research into available technology in the marketplace. One aspect
`
`6
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`of this work is my involvement in the Internet Engineering Task Force
`
`(IETF), including many content delivery-related working groups like the
`
`Audio Video Transport (AVT) group, the MBone Deployment (MBONED)
`
`group, the Source Specific Multicast (SSM) group, the Inter-Domain
`
`Multicast Routing (IDMR) group, the Reliable Multicast Transport (RMT)
`
`group, the Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) group, etc. I have also
`
`served as a member of the Multicast Directorate (MADDOGS), which
`
`oversaw the standardization of all things related to multicast in the IETF.
`
`Finally, I was the Chair of the Internet2 Multicast Working Group for seven
`
`years.
`
`14. I am an author or co-author of nearly 200 technical papers, published software
`
`systems, IETF Internet Drafts, and IETF Request for Comments (RFCs). The
`
`titles and subject matter of these technical papers are listed in full on my CV,
`
`which is identified in the petition as Exhibit 1009. Furthermore, in the courses
`
`I teach at UCSB, a significant portion of my curriculum covers aspects of the
`
`Internet and network communication including the physical and data link
`
`layers of the Open System Interconnect (OSI) protocol stack, and standardized
`
`protocols for communicating across a variety of physical media such as cable
`
`systems, telephone lines, wireless, and high-speed Local Area Networks
`
`(LANs). The courses I have taught also cover most major topics in Internet
`
`7
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`communication, including data communication, multimedia encoding, and
`
`(mobile) application design. For a complete list of courses I have taught, see
`
`my curriculum vitae, Exhibit 1009.
`
`State of the Art Through 2003
`
`15. One of the most widely deployed computer networks, i.e., physical
`
`connections of computers to exchange data, is the Internet. The Internet has
`
`been around for several decades, with many tracing its origins to the ARPAnet
`
`in the late 1960s. While the origins of the Internet were humble, it has grown
`
`into a massive, highly sophisticated network for highly complex and highly
`
`varied forms of communication. Originally useful mainly for the exchange of
`
`text documents through email or file exchange, the Internet has evolved to
`
`support more complex data transactions including multiple media types (e.g.,
`
`images, audio, video), hence the concept of “multimedia.” Coupled with new
`
`and improved delivery capabilities and increased ways of offering information
`
`to users, the ways in which the Internet could be used increased dramatically
`
`during the 1990s. These factors led to numerous technical innovations in the
`
`way data was made available to users.
`
`16. Much of the communication in networks takes place using a “client/server”
`
`paradigm, where content servers hold information desired by users. Through
`
`their clients, users make requests for this information, and the server responds
`
`8
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`by providing the requested information. Such a paradigm is used in, for
`
`example, the World Wide Web (WWW). In other applications, like email,
`
`servers are responsible for accepting, storing, and forwarding email.
`
`17. One approach to developing advancements in the services provided by servers
`
`to clients—particularly with respect to personal computers—has been to
`
`mimic and improve on existing, non-computer based services. It was a well-
`
`established goal at least as early as the latter half of the 1990s to have
`
`computers provide the kinds of consumer-facing services that were previously
`
`available in only orthogonal, monolithic technology domains, such as
`
`television, radio, telephony, shopping, and gaming. With the power of the
`
`Internet, video programming could be enhanced with web-style interactivity;
`
`desired content could be watched on-demand instead of according to a static
`
`schedule; games could be played with multiple, remote users; “radio stations”
`
`could be custom built based on individual user preferences; and shopping
`
`experiences could be developed that offered advantages beyond what could be
`
`found by visiting a store.
`
`18. One particular environment that received significant attention was the home.
`
`Home-based computing and home-based networking provided rich
`
`opportunities for technology development and product sales. This
`
`environment was further amplified by the increased availability and use of
`
`9
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`network-capable mobile devices (e.g., laptops, PDAs, mobile phones). Within
`
`this area, a particular focus was on the development of various standards that
`
`would permit consumers to share media content freely among devices within a
`
`network.
`
`19. At the same time that laptop computer and PDA devices were reaching
`
`mainstream adoption in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the industry was in
`
`parallel implementing the same and more features of those devices into
`
`cellular phones. Further, the lines between laptop computers, PDAs, and
`
`cellular phones were blurred given the availability of peripherals for
`
`connecting laptop computers and PDAs to cellular voice and data networks,
`
`and the increasing processing and memory capabilities of cellular phones. By
`
`the late 1990s and early 2000s, several companies released cellular phones
`
`with wireless-Internet capability and phones began to appear on the market
`
`that had the ability to play media files in either Windows Media or MP3
`
`format, including files with extensions .asf, .wma, .wmv, and .mp3. By at
`
`least 2003, the industry was well aware of building into cellular phones the
`
`features used in laptop computers and PDA devices.
`
`20. The increasing popularity of digital media and potential of streaming
`
`platforms led many major manufacturers in the early 2000s to develop
`
`wireless set-top boxes and/or music servers that could stream video to a TV or
`
`10
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`audio to a stereo system from various computing devices. These devices
`
`bridged the gap between computers and the home entertainment system, and
`
`generally allowed consumers to play media from a desktop computer,
`
`personal device, or Internet streaming source to their TVs and stereo systems.
`
`Wireless set-top boxes or music servers (and applications for these devices)
`
`were developed in the early 2000s by Intel, Philips, Slim Devices, PRISMIQ,
`
`Oregan Networks, and Mediabolic, among others.
`
`21. To facilitate the integration of network-connected devices, Microsoft
`
`introduced an initiative called Universal Plug and Play (“UPnP”) at the
`
`Consumer Electronics Show in January of 1999. The initiative was originally
`
`supported by companies such as Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Compaq,
`
`Dell, and many others. The members of the UPnP Forum defined and
`
`published device descriptions for the participants in a UPnP network to create
`
`standard building blocks for home networking.
`
`22. By December 2001, the UPnP Forum included more than 350 member
`
`companies from many industries, including consumer electronics, home
`
`automation and security, computers and peripherals, networking, appliances,
`
`semiconductors and others. The first UPnP device standard was published in
`
`November 2001, and the first UPnP-enabled devices shipped in December
`
`11
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`2001. An early UPnP timeline is reproduced below:
`
`
`
`23. The UPnP forum finalized the UPnP Device Architecture, Version 1.0
`
`specification in June of 2000. The UPnP Device Architecture defines the
`
`protocols for communication between UPnP control points and devices
`
`according to six well-defined phases:
`
` Addressing, by which devices obtain an IP address;
`
` Discovery, by which control points become aware of the existence of
`
`devices;
`
` Description, by which control points learn details about devices and their
`
`services;
`
` Control, in which control points invoke service actions;
`
` Eventing, by which devices notify control points of changes in state; and
`
` Presentation, by which devices can present web pages to control points
`
`12
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`allowing for status and control interactions.
`
`The UPnP Device Architecture describes a networking architecture enabling
`
`peer-to-peer network connectivity of intelligent appliances, wireless devices,
`
`personal computers and other devices with communication capabilities.
`
`24. With regard to device discovery, the UPnP Device Architecture teaches that
`
`after a control point has discovered a device, it uses an HTTP URL contained
`
`in the discovery message to request a UPnP description from the device,
`
`which may include vendor-specific information such as the model name and
`
`number, serial number, and manufacturer name. After obtaining knowledge
`
`of a device and its services, a control point can then ask those services to
`
`invoke actions.
`
`25. The June 2000 UPnP Device Architecture could be implemented in a number
`
`of use cases, including by deploying UPnP to enable users to store, play and
`
`view audio and video content across a range of consumer electronics devices.
`
`For example, at least by December 2001, UPnP had defined the following
`
`multimedia use-case: “While checking her e-mail, Paula learns that a new
`
`recording by her favorite artist is available. Paula visits the recording label’s
`
`Web site, purchases a copy of one of the songs and initiates a download of the
`
`song to her new audio player in the family room. Later that night Paula
`
`decides to listen to the song on her home entertainment system. Using her
`
`13
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`remote control, she selects the new recording from her audio player and plays
`
`it on her stereo.” See Ex. 1010, Miller et al., “Home Networking with
`
`Universal Plug and Play” (IEEE, Dec. 2001).
`
`26. Likewise, more specific use-case scenarios were developed for UPnP to
`
`stream multimedia between connected UPnP-compliant devices. For
`
`example:
`
`
`See Ex. 1011, Michael Jeronimo & Jack Weast, UPnP Design By Example,
`
`Intel Press (Apr. 2003).
`
`27. By June 26, 2002, UPnP had released version 1.0 of its standardized device
`
`control protocol specifications (collectively, “UPnP Version 1.0”), and
`
`published them on its public website (http://www.upnp.org). The
`
`standardized device control protocol specifications included a standardization
`
`for devices including a “media renderer” and “media server,” as well as a
`
`14
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`standardization document “UPnP AV Architecture:1” that defines the general
`
`interaction between UPnP control points and UPnP AV devices, and was
`
`designed to support devices such as PCs, TVs, PDAs, CD/DVD players,
`
`jukeboxes, set-top boxes, stereo systems, MP3 players, cameras and
`
`camcorders. See Ex. 1012, UPnP AV Architecture:1 For Universal Plug and
`
`Play Version 1.0, Status: Approved Design Document, Date: June 25, 2002.
`
`28. The UPnP control point lies at the center of the UPnP AV 1.0 architecture.
`
`UPnP control points control the operation of the media servers and media
`
`renderers, and typically perform some variation of the following operations:
`
` Locate the existing media server and media renderer devices in the network,
`
`i.e., discovery.
`
` Enumerate the available content for the user to choose from, i.e., content
`
`enumeration.
`
` Query the server and renderer to find a common transfer protocol and
`
`content format for the selected content, i.e., protocol/format negotiation.
`
` Configure the server and renderer with the desired content and selected
`
`protocol/format, i.e., server/renderer setup.
`
`
`
`Initiate the transfer of the content according to the desires of the users, such
`
`as play, pause, and seek, i.e., control content flow.
`
`15
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
` Adjust the rendering characteristics such as volume, brightness, and so
`
`forth, i.e., control rendering characteristics.
`
`29. UPnP was implemented in consumer devices starting at least as early as 2002.
`
`By September 2002, Intel Corp. announced the “Extended Wireless PC
`
`Initiative,” which was focused on providing UPnP-based technology to
`
`developers, “allowing them to distribute PC digital media to TVs and stereos
`
`throughout the consumer’s home.” See Ex. 1013, “TV Meets the Web”
`
`(Financial Times, Sept. 10, 2002). “Critical to media distribution is a new PC
`
`peripheral called a digital media adaptor, which creates a link between PCs,
`
`TVs and stereos. It can receive digital media from the PC using 802.11
`
`wireless networking (WiFi) and UPnP technologies, and can connect to TVs
`
`and stereos using standard A/V cables — much like a DVD player.” Id.
`
`“Intel’s specification adds UPnP, to let these devices auto-configure to
`
`recognize and seamlessly interoperate with other UPnP devices on the home
`
`network.” See Ex. 1014, “Intel Pushes Plug and Play Into Homes”
`
`(Extremetech.com, Sept. 10, 2002).
`
`30. By January 2003, Mediabolic, Inc. announced that it would incorporate UPnP
`
`support and pursue UPnP compliance testing for its Mediabolic ONE
`
`platform, a middleware solution used in digital entertainment devices: “The
`
`Mediabolic ONE platform enables manufacturers to create new digital
`
`16
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`entertainment devices with optional networking capabilities that extend digital
`
`media entertainment to multiple consumer devices and PCs around the home.
`
`UPnP technology is an industry standard for interoperability of digital devices
`
`on a home network and is an essential ingredient in ensuring that Mediabolic-
`
`enabled products are interoperable with the growing number of digital devices
`
`that use the technology to discover and share content and services. . . . The
`
`Mediabolic ONE platform and UPnP technology enable a world in which
`
`music and other digital entertainment content can be accessed from various
`
`devices in the home without regard for where the media is stored. Digital
`
`devices based on the Mediabolic ONE platform and UPnP technologies will
`
`be able to access digital content located on UPnP-enabled PCs, for example,
`
`allowing consumers to play video clips or view family photos on the TV, or
`
`listen to digital music on the home stereo.” See Ex. 1015, “Mediabolic
`
`Incorporates Support for UPnP Technology into the Mediabolic ONE
`
`Platform” (Business Wire, Jan. 6, 2003).
`
`31. By February 2003, Oregan Networks developed and demonstrated a UPnP-
`
`enabled DVD platform “capable of streaming media content and services from
`
`a PC.” See Ex. 1016, “Oregan Networks Demonstrates UPnP Enabled” (PR
`
`Newswire, Feb. 18, 2003). The UPnP-enabled DVD platform was designed to
`
`“allow consumers to use their televisions to view photos and movie videos
`
`17
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`stored on their PC, or play MP3 files through DVD audio systems. All
`
`content is discovered automatically, and offered through a series of intuitive
`
`menus on the TV.” Id. “Regardless of whether the content is stored on an
`
`UPnP enabled PC, PVR, or MP3 player, the technology permits remote
`
`access, presentation and control of that content from any other UPnP
`
`supporting device within the home.” Id.
`
`Overview of the ’873 Patent
`
`32. The ’873 Patent addresses a method and device for obtaining media on a
`
`network. At a high level, the patent describes that a first device receives a
`
`playlist of songs or other media items, selects media items from the playlist,
`
`selects a second device, and directs the second device to receive the selected
`
`media item from a content server without user input on the second device.
`
`The ’873 Patent describes the devices using the nomenclature of the UPnP
`
`architecture described above, including a “control point” to access music and
`
`control remote devices, and a “rendering device” to play back selected media.
`
`Ex. 1001, ’873 Patent, 7:25-39; 8:9-35. The above description is borne out by
`
`Figure 4, which is representative of the processing of an exemplary
`
`embodiment of the ’873 Patent. A list of playlists is displayed, which allows
`
`the selection of one playlist. ’873 Patent, Fig. 4 at 41-42. An attribute of the
`
`selected playlist is used to request and receive the playlist. Id. at 43-44.
`
`18
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`Media items from the playlist are selected, id. at 46, a second device is
`
`selected, id. at 45, and the first device directs the second device to request the
`
`identified media items from a content server. Id. at 47-50. In the UPnP
`
`nomenclature, the first device is a “control point” device and the second
`
`device is a “media rendering” device. Id. at 7:25-39; 9:27-32.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`33. I have been asked to offer my opinion regarding the understanding of a person
`
`skilled in the art regarding certain claim terms in the ’873 Patent. I
`
`understand that in the present proceeding, claim terms are interpreted as the
`
`broadest reasonable construction consistent with the specification or “BRC.”
`
`34. I have been asked to offer my opinion regarding the understanding of a person
`
`skilled in the art regarding the claim term “playlist,” which appears in each of
`
`independent claims 1, 17, 23, 25-27, 30 and 46. The specification of the ’873
`
`Patent repeatedly discloses that the playlist is a list of songs. See, e.g., ’873
`
`Patent, 11:27-29 (“The listener selects at least one song from the received
`
`playlist, as shown in block 35. Either a single song may be selected, or a
`
`plurality of songs may be selected.”); 11:42-44 (“The selected songs may be
`
`played in the order selected, in random order, or in any other desired order.
`
`The order can preferably be changed at any time.”) The specification also
`
`contemplates that a playlist can include types of content other than audio. For
`
`19
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`example, the types of content that can be in playlists include “pictures, video,
`
`software, or data.” ’873 Patent, 16:18-24. In the terminology of the ’873
`
`Patent, the term used to refer to the different potential types of content is
`
`“media.” For example, the ’873 Patent discusses “providing the selected
`
`content to a media player via a network” and the claims refer to playlists being
`
`used to allow a user to select a media item. See, e.g., ’873 Patent, 5:40-43;
`
`claim 1 (“receiving user second input selecting at least one media item
`
`identifier from the received playlist.”) This is consistent with the use of a
`
`playlist in the specification to refer to a list of media items. Since the media
`
`items on a playlist must be selected for inclusion in the playlist, a person of
`
`ordinary skill would understand the term “playlist” to be “a list of media
`
`items.”
`
`35. In my opinion, one skilled in the art would not understand the BRC of the
`
`term “playlist” to require that media items be played in a sequence. The
`
`specification describes playing songs selected from a playlist, rather than
`
`playing all of the songs on a playlist. This is contrary to the concept that the
`
`playlist be arranged to be played in a sequence. The specification also
`
`explicitly states that selected songs can be played in a selected order, a
`
`random order, or any other desired order, and may be changed at any time.
`
`’873 Patent, 11:42-44. The patent therefore does not indicate that the
`
`20
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`sequence of items in a playlist requires that the media items be played in that
`
`order.
`
`36. Based on this disclosure one of skill in the art would understand the BRC of
`
`“playlist” to be “a list of media items.”
`
`The Weast Patent
`
`37. Weast, like the ’873 Patent, discloses a computing device operating in a UPnP
`
`network. See, e.g., Weast, 1:36-51. In particular, Weast describes the user
`
`interface of the computing device used to control other devices in the network,
`
`which is called the “control point” device in UPnP. Weast also describes the
`
`interaction between the control point, media server, and media rendering
`
`devices. I understand that Weast explicitly draws support from the UPnP A/V
`
`architecture documents, and as such understand it to omit well-known features
`
`in the disclosure in order to focus on the particular aspects of the user
`
`interface that the applicant considered important. See, e.g., id. at 2:65-67;
`
`3:15-18. The control point user interface of Weast is described as being
`
`configured to display resources that are available on the network, including
`
`available media renderers and available media content for playback on those
`
`renderers. See, e.g., id. at 5:1-9; 5:16-44. The control point locates media
`
`renderers on the network by transmitting discovery requests, to which media
`
`renderers respond. See, e.g., id. at 5:59-67. Similarly, the control point
`
`21
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`locates media servers by transmitting discovery requests, and can then query
`
`the media servers for available media content. See, e.g., id. at 5:16-44. After
`
`locating the resources, they can be displayed using a user interface on the
`
`control point. See, e.g., id. at Figs. 4a-4c, 5a-5b, 6a-6b. While several user
`
`interfaces are disclosed, one of the interfaces uses a tree-like interface to
`
`display available media renderers and content. See, e.g., id. at 7:6-15; Fig. 4c.
`
`The list of available media content allows selection of media content to be
`
`played back on a selected media renderer. See, e.g., id. at 7:29-46; 8:18-30;
`
`8:34-39. The interface also allows selection of a media renderer. See, e.g., id.
`
`at 7:65-8:2.
`
`38. Weast also discloses that after selection of media content, the control point
`
`will direct the media renderer to retrieve the requested media content from the
`
`media server where the media content is located. Weast discloses that this
`
`direction and retrieval happens without any user input at the media renderer.
`
`For example, Weast discloses that “in response to a user selection to render a
`
`media content, control point device 102 instructs the applicable UPnP media
`
`renderers 106 accordingly, to receive/pull and render provided media contents
`
`132 from UPnP media servers 104.” See, e.g., id. at 6:19-23; Fig. 3b. This
`
`suggests that after an input on the control point, the media renderer is
`
`instructed to pull and render the requested content. There is no mention of
`
`22
`
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US09
`
`waiting for input at the media renderer, or that the instruction happens after an
`
`input is also received at the media renderer. Additionally, the rendering of
`
`media content is described with input at the control point device, for example
`
`by using an interface on the control point to drag and drop media to playback
`
`onto an icon representing a media renderer or by using a context menu in the
`
`same interface. Id. at 8:34-43; 7:29-40. A further indication that this is
`
`correct is that Weast describes that when a media renderer is already in use,
`
`requests to play additional media items are handled algorithmically, rather
`
`than by soliciting a user input at the media rendering device:
`
`In various embodiments, the corresponding file system entry of
`a media content 132 of interest is queued, if it is dropped into a
`folder window 402c of a corresponding UPnP media renderer
`106 when the UPnP media renderer 106 is in use. In other
`embodiments, the corresponding file system entry of a media
`content 132 of interest may be dropped into a folder window
`402c of the corresponding UPnP media renderer 106 only if the
`UPnP media renderer 106 is not currently in use.
`
`Weast, 8:44-52 (emphasis added). Weast therefore explicitly considers two
`
`scenarios where it is possible that media renderer is already in use, and
`
`therefore, the user of the media renderer may not want to have a newly
`
`requested song be