IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In the Inter Partes Review of:
`
`Trial Number: To Be Assigned
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`Filed:
`
`December 29, 2000
`
`Issued: December 20, 2005
`
`Inventor(s): Sung-Hoon Baek, Joong-
`Bae Kim, Yong-Youn Kim
`
`Assignee: Electronics and
`Telecommunications Research Institute
`
`Title: Apparatus For Redundant
`Interconnection Between Multiple Hosts
`And RAID
`
`Mail Stop Inter Partes Review
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Panel: To Be Assigned
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. RANDY KATZ UNDER 37 C.F.R..~ 1.68 IN
`SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 6~978~346
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 1 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`Table of Contents
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
`
`Background and Qualifications ....................................................................... 3
`
`III. Understanding of Patent Law .......................................................................... 5
`
`IV. Background ...................................................................................................... 5
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Background of the Field Relevant to the ’346 Patent ........................... 5
`
`Summary of the ’346 Patent .................................................................. 6
`
`Summary of the Prosecution History .................................................... 9
`
`V.
`
`Level of Ordinary Skill in the Pertinent Art .................................................. 10
`
`VI. Broadest Reasonable Interpretation ............................................................... 10
`
`VII. Detailed Invalidity Analysis .......................................................................... 12
`
`A. Background on Prior Art References .................................................. 12
`
`1. Background on Chong US and Chong JP ................................. 12
`
`B.
`
`The Challenged Claims are Anticipated by the Chong
`Reference ............................................................................................. 14
`
`o
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 15
`
`Claim 2 ...................................................................................... 22
`
`Claim 3 ...................................................................................... 23
`
`Claim 4 ...................................................................................... 24
`
`Claim 5 ...................................................................................... 26
`
`Claim 6 ...................................................................................... 29
`
`Claim 7 ...................................................................................... 30
`
`Claim 8 ...................................................................................... 33
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 2 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`9. Claim 9 ...................................................................................... 34
`
`VIII. Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 40
`
`ii
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 3 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`I, Randy Katz, do hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`1.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`I have been retained as an expert witness on behalf of International Business
`
`Machines Corporation ("IBM") and Oracle America, Inc. ("Oracle") for the
`
`above-captioned Petition for Inter Partes Review ("IPR") of U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,978,346 ("the ’346 Patent"). I am being compensated $750/hour for my
`
`time in connection with this IPR. My compensation is not affected by the
`
`outcome of this matter.
`
`2.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether Claims 1-9
`
`("the Challenged Claims") of the ’346 Patent are invalid as anticipated by
`
`the prior art.
`
`3.
`
`The ’346 Patent issued on December 20, 2005, from U.S. Patent Appl. No.
`
`09/753,245 ("the ’245 Application"), filed on December 29, 2000. (Ex.
`
`1008.) The ’245 Application claims priority to Korean Appl. No. 2000-
`
`54807, filed on September 9, 2000.
`
`4.
`
`The face of the ’346 Patent names Sung-Hoon Baek, Joong-Bae Kim, and
`
`Yong-Youn Kim as the purported inventors and identifies Electronics and
`
`Telecommunications Research Institute ("ETRI") as the purported assignee
`
`of the ’346 Patent. (Ex. 1004 at Cover, the ’346 Patent.) I have reviewed
`
`the Patent Office "Assignments on the Web" record for the ’346 Patent.
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 4 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`This record indicates that the named inventors
`
`originally assigned their
`
`interests in the
`
`’245 Application, the application that issued as the ’346
`
`Patent, to ETRI in or around October 2000.
`
`In preparing this Declaration, I have reviewed the ’346 Patent, the file
`
`history of the ’346 Patent, the prior art references identified in the
`
`Declaration, and statements made by ETRI and the PTAB regarding the
`
`alleged meaning and scope of terms and phrases recited in the Challenged
`
`Claims.
`
`I understand that claims in an IPR are given their broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation in view of the patent specification and the understandings of
`
`one having ordinary skill in the relevant art.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed in this Declaration, I relied upon my
`
`education and experience in the relevant field of the art, and have considered
`
`the viewpoint of a person having ordinary skill in the relevant art as of 2000,
`
`the effective priority date of the ’346 Patent. My opinions are based, at least
`
`in part, on the following:
`
`Reference
`U.S. Patent No. 6,070,251 to Chong
`("Chong US")
`
`Date of Public Availability
`Chong US was filed on June 26,
`1997, and issued on May 30, 2000,
`and is attached as Ex. 1005 to the
`IPR petition.
`
`Japanese Patent No. JPH11120092A Chong JP was published on April
`
`2
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 5 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`to Chong ("Chong JP")
`
`30, 1999, and is attached as Ex.
`1006 to the IPR petition. A certified
`translation of Chong JP is attached
`as Ex. 1007 to the IPR petition.
`
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`
`My name is Randy H. Katz. My work address is Room 465 Soda Hall
`
`#1776, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California 94720-1776.
`
`I have studied, taught, and practiced computer science and engineering for
`
`over thirty years. I earned an Artium Baccalaureus degree in Computer
`
`Science from Cornell University in May, 1976, and a Master of Science and
`
`a Philosophice Doctor degree in Computer Science from University of
`
`California at Berkeley in June, 1978 and June, 1980, respectively.
`
`10.
`
`After positions in industry and the University of Wisconsin-Madison, I
`
`joined the Berkeley faculty in 1983, where I have been to this day. Since
`
`1996 I have been the United Microelectronics Corporation Distinguished
`
`Professor in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. I am a Fellow of
`
`the ACM and the IEEE. I am a member of the National Academy of
`
`Engineering and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. I have
`
`published over 250 technical papers, book chapters, and books. I authored
`
`the textbook entitled Contemporary Logic Design used at over 200 colleges
`
`and universities. I have earned several honors, awards, and have been
`
`3
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 6 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`recognized for my work in the field of Computer Science and Engineering.
`
`In particular, the IEEE Reynolds Johnson Storage System Award, which I
`
`shared with colleagues at Berkeley in 1999, is the highest professional
`
`recognition in the storage systems field.
`
`11.
`
`In the late 1980s, with colleagues at Berkeley, I developed the essential
`
`framework for describing the tradeoff between reliability and performance in
`
`storage systems. This led to the wide-spread concept of Redundant Arrays
`
`of Inexpensive Disks (RAID), now a $15 billion per year industry sector.
`
`My current research interests are Smart Energy Systems including Smart
`
`Grid and Software-Defined Smart Buildings. Prior research interests have
`
`included: database management, VLSI CAD,
`
`high performance
`
`multiprocessor (Snoop cache coherency protocols)
`
`and storage (RAID)
`
`architectures, transport (Snoop TCP) and mobility
`
`protocols spanning
`
`heterogeneous wireless networks, converged data and telephony network
`
`and service architectures, and Reliable, Adaptive Distributed Systems
`
`supported by new services deployed inside the network.
`
`12.
`
`My qualifications in the area of Computer Science and Engineering in
`
`general, and more specifically in the area of attached storage systems, is set
`
`forth more fully in my Curriculum Vitae, Ex. 1002 to the Petition.
`
`4
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 7 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`III. UNDERSTANDING OF PATENT LAW
`
`13.
`
`I understand that prior art to the ’346 Patent includes patents and printed
`
`publications in the relevant art that predate September 19, 2000, the effective
`
`priority date of the ’346 Patent.
`
`14.
`
`I understand that a claim is invalid if it is anticipated. Anticipation of a
`
`claim requires that every element of a claim be disclosed expressly or
`
`inherently in a single prior art reference, arranged in the prior art reference
`
`as arranged in the claim.
`
`IV. BACKGROUND
`
`A. Background of the Field Relevant to the ’346 Patent
`
`15.
`
`The ’346 patent relates to interconnections between host computers and
`
`storage systems. The storage systems referenced in the patent and claims are
`
`those known by the acronym RAID, which stands for Redundant Array of
`
`Inexpensive (or sometimes, Independent) Disks. I was one of the
`
`researchers who coined the term "RAID" in a 1987 paper to describe storage
`
`systems comprised of an array of inexpensive drives, enhancing their
`
`performance. A number of different RAID configurations have since been
`
`developed, including RAID 0 (disk striping), RAID 1 (disk mirroring), and
`
`RAID 2 through RAID 6 (various parity protection forms). On review of the
`
`’346 patent, I note that it is not specific to any particular type of RAID
`
`system. Nor does the ’346 patent require specific hardware.
`
`5
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 8 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`16. Rather, the ’346 patent is directed at specific configurations of storage
`
`systems, through redundant connections between hosts and storage
`
`controllers to ensure fault tolerance (i. e., that functionality is retained even if
`
`one storage controller is faulty).
`
`17.
`
`The concepts described in the ’346 patent were well-known by the time of
`
`the ’346 patent’s effective filing date. Indeed, as described herein, the same
`
`system had been previously described in patents assigned to Sun
`
`Microsystems, Inc.
`
`B. Summary of the ’346 Patent
`
`18.
`
`Figure 4 of the ’346 patent is reproduced below:
`
`I I
`
`FIG. 4
`
`II
`
`I1
`
`II
`
`I
`
`I
`
`L
`
`I
`
`I
`
`19.
`
`Figure 4 of the ’346 Patent is described as one embodiment of the invention
`
`showing "a host interface system as an internal installment system between a
`
`6
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 9 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`RAID and host computers." (’346 patent at 2:46-49.) As shown in Figure 4,
`
`the system includes "host computer[s]" (labeled 400-402) connected to a
`
`first "hub or switch" (labeled 440), and further connected to a RAID (labeled
`
`490) through network interface controlling unit ports (labeled 470 and 480)
`
`in the RAID controllers (labeled 460 and 461). Other "host computers"
`
`(labeled 403-405) are connected to a second "hub or switch" (labeled 441),
`
`and further connected to the RAID through network interface controlling
`
`unit ports (labeled 471 and 481) in the RAID controllers.
`
`20.
`
`The ’346 patent discloses that "information" can be transmitted between the
`
`network controlling units in Figure 4 above, but does not disclose any
`
`modifications to the network components that need to be made in order to
`
`transmit information between network interface controlling units.
`
`21. The Challenged Claims include two independent claims, claims 1 and 9.
`
`22. Claim 1 of the ’346 patent recites the following:
`
`[1] An apparatus for a redundant interconnection between multiple hosts
`and a RAID, comprising:
`
`[1 a] a first RAID controlling units and a second RAID controlling unit for
`processing a requirement of numerous host computers,
`
`[1 b] the first RAID controlling unit including a first network controlling
`unit and a second network controlling unit, and
`
`[1 c] the second RAID controlling unit including a third network
`controlling unit and a fourth network controlling unit;
`
`7
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 10 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`[ld] a plurality of connection units for connecting the first RAID
`controlling units and the second RAID controlling unit to the numerous
`host computers,
`
`[le] wherein the first RAID controlling unit and the second RAID
`controlling unit directly exchange information with the numerous host
`computers through the plurality of connecting units,
`
`[if] and the first network controlling unit exchanges information with the
`fourth network controlling unit, and
`
`[lg] the second network controlling unit exchanges information with the
`third network controlling unit.
`
`23. Claim 9 of the ’346 patent recites the following:
`
`[9] An apparatus for a redundant interconnection between multiple host
`computers and a RAID, the apparatus comprising:
`
`[9a] a plurality of connection units for connecting the host computers and
`the RAID;
`
`[9b] a first and a second RAID controllers, included in the RAID, each of
`which having a first network interface controller and a second network
`interface controller for processing requests from the plurality of the host
`computers connected through the plurality of the connection units,
`
`[9c] wherein the first network interface controller in the first RAID
`controller supplies data to the host computers connected through the
`plurality of connection units and processes information transmitted from
`the second network interface controller in the second RAID controller,
`
`[9d] wherein the first network interface controller in the second RAID
`controller supplies data to the host computers connected through the
`plurality of connection units and processes information transmitted from
`the second network interface controller in the first RAID controller,
`
`[9e] wherein the second network interface controller in the first RAID
`controller is used for fault tolerance by performing functions of the first
`network interface controller in the second RAID controller when the
`second RAID controller is faulty, and
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 11 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`[9f] wherein the second network interface controller in the second RAID
`controller is used for fault tolerance by performing functions of the first
`network interface controller in the first RAID controller when the first
`RAID controller is faulty, and
`
`[9g] wherein the first network controlling unit in the first RAID controlling
`unit exchanges information with the second network controlling unit in the
`second RAID controlling unit, and
`
`[9h] the second network controlling unit in the first RAID controlling unit
`exchanges information with the first network controlling unit in the second
`RAID controlling unit.
`
`C. Summary of the Prosecution History
`
`24.
`
`The ’245 Application was initially rejected over US 5,812,754 (hereinafter
`
`"Lui"). (Ex. 1008, pgs. 4-9).
`
`To overcome this rejection, the applicant
`
`made amendments that were
`
`substantially undone in the Applicant’s
`
`response to the next office action. The next office action was a Final Office
`
`Action rejecting all claims over Lui (Ex. 1008, pgs. 30-39). In response to
`
`the Final Office Action, the Applicant amended claims 1 and 9 and argued
`
`that Lui does not teach "two network interface controlling units included in
`
`each RAID controller." (Ex. 1008, pgs. 41-49). The Applicant also argued
`
`that Lui does not teach "the first network controlling unit exchanges
`
`information with the fourth network controlling unit and the second network
`
`controlling unit exchanges information with the third network controlling
`
`unit." (Ex. 1008, pgs. 48-49). The claims were allowed without reasoning
`
`from the Examiner. (Ex. 1008, pgs. 53-56).
`
`9
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 12 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`V.
`
`25.
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE PERTINENT ART
`
`I have been informed that multiple factors are considered in identifying the
`
`level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, including education of those
`
`working in the relevant field on the date of the invention, the sophistication
`
`of the technology, the type of problems encountered in the art, and the prior
`
`art solutions to those problems.
`
`26. Based on my education and extensive experience relating to RAID storage
`
`systems and fault-tolerant systems, I believe I am qualified to provide
`
`opinions about the understanding and qualifications of a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art of the technology at issue in this proceeding.
`
`27.
`
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art of the ’346 patent, as of
`
`2000, would have had a Bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering or
`
`Computer Science and at least two years of experience in designing storage
`
`systems.
`
`28. My opinions below explain how a person of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`have understood the ’346 patent and cited references around 2000.
`
`VI. BROADEST REASONABLE INTERPRETATION
`
`29.
`
`I understand that in an IPR proceeding, the Challenged Claims are given
`
`their broadest reasonable meaning as they would be understood by one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art, consistent with the specification of the patent.
`
`10
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 13 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`30.
`
`I have reviewed the Board’s decision instituting IPR proceedings in another,
`
`related, IPR of the ’346 patent. The Board’s decision instituting IPR
`
`proceedings construed certain terms in the ’346 patent. For the purposes of
`
`my opinions set forth herein, I have used the Board’s constructions.
`
`Claim Term
`
`Construction
`
`"RAID controlling unit" and "RAID
`
`"A component that controls
`
`operation of the RAID"
`
`"Redundant array of inexpensive
`
`disks"
`
`"exchange information" /
`
`"To transmit and receive information
`
`"exchanges information"
`
`reciprocally"
`
`"connection unit"
`
`"a hub or switch"
`
`31.
`
`In the related IPR proceeding, the Patent Owner stated that a "’network
`
`interface controller’ is the part of a RAID controller that allows the RAID
`
`controller to communicate with the ’connection units.’" (IPR2013-00635,
`
`Paper 14 at 19.) For purposes of this proceeding, I incorporate the the Patent
`
`Owner’s construction of the claim terms "network interface controller,"
`
`"network controlling unit," and "network interface controlling unit," as "the
`
`part of a RAID controller that allows the RAID controller to communicate
`
`with the ’connection units.’"
`
`11
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 14 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`32.
`
`In Case No. IPR2013-00635, the PTAB rejected the notion that "exchanges
`
`information" means exchanging information via one or more of the
`
`connection units, because the claim language and the specification of the
`
`’346 Patent provide no such limitation on the exchange of information. The
`
`construction proposed here is consistent with the PTAB’s construction in
`
`Case No. IPR2013-00635 and is supported by the ’346 Patent’s
`
`specification.
`
`VII. DETAILED INVALIDITY ANALYSIS
`
`33.
`
`I have been asked to provide an opinion as to whether the Challenged
`
`Claims are invalid in view of the prior art. The discussion below provides a
`
`detailed analysis of how the prior art references identified in Section I
`
`invalidate the Challenged Claims.
`
`A. Background on Prior Art References
`
`34. Before providing a detailed analysis of how the prior art invalidates the
`
`Challenged Claims, I provide a brief summary of the asserted prior art
`
`references.
`
`1. Background on Chong US and Chong JP
`
`35. Chong US is titled "Method And Apparatus For High Availability And
`
`Caching Data Storage Devices," and is assigned on its face to Sun
`
`Microsystems, Inc. Chong JP, similarly titled "Method And Apparatus For
`
`High Availability And Caching Of Data Storage Devices," is also assigned
`
`12
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 15 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`on its face to Sun Microsystems, Inc. Chong JP claims priority to Chong
`
`US, and the relevant disclosure in Chong US and Chong JP is substantially
`
`identical. I understand that both references are included because Chong JP
`
`is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). Though Chong US and Chong JP
`
`provide separate grounds for invalidating the Challenged Claims, for
`
`purposes of efficiency I discuss them together (collectively "the Chong
`
`Reference").
`
`36.
`
`The Chong Reference is directed to efficient caching operations and fail-
`
`over support in data storage controllers and/or data storage devices. (Ex.
`
`1005, 1:7-10; Ex. 1007 at 3, ¶ 1; Ex. 1006). The Chong Reference discloses
`
`a system with a RAID configuration. Data is written identically to both
`
`storage devices 124 and 125 in the system. (Ex. 1005, 3:30-49, 4:15-28,
`
`4:50-51; Ex. 1007, ¶¶ 9, 12-13). In addition, the configuration in the Chong
`
`Reference provides fault tolerance such that as long as one data storage
`
`device is functioning, the array continues to operate. (Ex. 1005, 4:52-5:3;
`
`Ex. 1007, ¶ 14) This combination of data mirroring and fault tolerance
`
`makes the two data storage devices appear as a single, reliable drive to the
`
`hosts, or in other words, a RAID.
`
`37.
`
`The Chong Reference also discloses that data storage controllers exchange
`
`information through a direct communication link between PSOCs (Serial
`
`13
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 16 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`Optical Converter for PCI bus). (Ex. 1005, 3:50-67; Ex. 1007, ¶ 10). The
`
`PSOC is part of the hardware that implements a port on each data controller.
`
`Each controller includes a primary port and a secondary port. (Ex. 1005,
`
`Fig. 3, 4:15-39; Ex. 1007, Fig. 3, ¶ 12).
`
`The primary and secondary ports
`
`allow communication between the data
`
`storage controllers and facilitate
`
`communication between hosts and the data storage devices.
`
`(Ex. 1005,
`
`3:34-38; Ex. 1007, ¶ 9).
`
`B. The Challenged Claims are Anticipated by the Chong Reference
`
`38.
`
`It is my opinion that Claims 1 through 9 are anticipated by the Chong
`
`Reference. The Chong Reference discloses each and every element of
`
`Claims 1 through 9, which are arranged in the Chong Reference as arranged
`
`in the claims, and thus anticipates the claims.
`
`39.
`
`Reproduced below is Fig. 3 of the
`
`Chong Reference with annotations
`
`pointing out the claimed structures
`
`of the ’346 patent. The specific
`
`limitations of each claim are discussed in detail below.
`
`14
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 17 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`Connection Units
`
`l~a_I D Controllers
`
`t25 FIG. J
`
`1.
`
`Claim 1
`
`(1) The Chong Reference discloses "an apparatus for a
`redundant interconnection between multiple hosts and a
`RAID"
`
`40.
`
`The Chong Reference discloses a system having multiple hosts connected
`
`redundantly to a set of data storage devices. (Ex. 1005, Fig. 3, 4:15-42; Ex.
`
`1007, Fig. 3, I[ 12). As explained above in I[ 36, the Chong Reference
`
`discloses a RAID configuration. The multiple hosts have multiple
`
`connections to the data storage devices through the switching circuits. (Ex.
`
`15
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 18 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`1005, Fig. 3, 4:15-42; Ex. 1007, Fig. 3, 1 12). These multiple connections
`
`provide redundancy in the event of a controller or data storage device
`
`failure. (Ex. 1005, 4:52-67; Ex, 1007, 1 14).
`
`41. Additional evidence supporting my opinion that the Chong Reference
`
`discloses the preamble is found in the claim charts for Grounds 1 & 2
`
`included in the body of the Petition for IPR.
`
`(2) The Chong Reference discloses "a first RAID
`controlling units and a second RAID controlling unit for
`processing a requirement of numerous host computers"
`
`42.
`
`The Chong Reference discloses a first controller 116 (first RAID controlling
`
`unit) and a second controller 122 (second RAID controlling unit). (Ex.
`
`1005, Fig. 3, 4:15-22; Ex. 1007, 1 12). Each controller is coupled to a data
`
`storage device in a RAID configuration. (Ex. 1005, Fig. 3, 4:15-22, 4:50-51;
`
`Ex. 1007, 11 12-13). Each controller, therefore, is a RAID controlling unit.
`
`Further, the Chong Reference discloses that controllers 116 and 122 allow
`
`numerous hosts to communicate with data storage devices 124 and 125.
`
`(Ex. 1005, Fig. 3, 4:15-22, 4:50-51; Ex. 1007, Fig. 3, 11 12-13).
`
`43. Additional evidence supporting my opinion that the Chong Reference
`
`discloses this limitation is found in the claim charts for Grounds 1 & 2
`
`included in the body of the Petition for IPR.
`
`16
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 19 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`(3) The Chong Reference discloses "the first RAID
`controlling unit including a first network controlling unit
`and a second network controlling unit"
`
`44.
`
`The Chong Reference discloses that controller 116 includes two ports,
`
`Primary 1 (first network controlling unit1) and Secondary 2 (second network
`
`controlling unit). Each port includes includes "a GBIC 56 [and] a PSOC...
`
`62." (Ex. 1005, Fig. 3, 2:67-3:3, 4:26-28; Ex. 1007, ¶ 8, 12). A GBIC is a
`
`Gigabit Interface Converter, and a PSOC is a Serial Optical Converter for
`
`PCI Bus. (Ex. 1005, 2:64-3:1; Ex.
`
`1007, ¶ 8). The GBIC and PSOC are
`
`used to process commands from
`
`the hosts and communicate over the
`
`network via the switching circuits 111 and 112. (Ex. 1005, 3:16-22, 3:31-
`
`38; Ex. 1007, ¶ 8-9). The ports in each controller allow it to communicate
`
`with the switching circuits, and thus meet the "network interface controller"
`
`and "network controlling unit" limitations. Thus, the Chong Reference
`
`discloses this limitation.
`
`Claim 1 recites a "network controlling unit." Claims dependent on claim 1
`recite a "network interface controlling unit," and claim 9 recites a "network
`interface controller." It appears the patent uses these terms interchangeably.
`When I refer to a "network controlling unit," I am referring to a "network
`controlling unit," a "network interface controlling unit," and a "network
`interface controller" as recited by the claims of the ’346 Patent.
`
`17
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 20 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`45. Additional evidence supporting my opinion that
`
`the Chong Reference
`
`discloses this limitation is found in the claim charts for Grounds 1 & 2
`
`included in the body of the Petition for IPR.
`
`(4) The Chong Reference discloses "and the second RAID
`controlling unit including a third network controlling unit
`and a fourth network controlling unit"
`
`46.
`
`The Chong Reference discloses that controller 122 includes two ports,
`
`Primary 2 (third network controlling unit) and Secondary 1 (fourth network
`
`controlling unit). Each port includes "a GBIC 56 [and] a PSOC . . . 62."
`
`(Ex. 1005, Fig. 3, 2:67-3:3, 4:26-28; Ex. 1007, Fig. 3, ¶ 8, 12). A GBIC is a
`
`Gigabit Interface Converter, and a PSOC is a Serial Optical Converter for
`
`PCI Bus. (Ex. 1005, 2:64-3:1; Ex.
`
`1007, ¶ 8). The GBIC and PSOC are
`
`used to process commands from
`
`the hosts and communicate over the
`
`network. (Ex. 1005, 3:16-22, 3:31-38; Ex. 1007, ¶ 8-9). The ports in each
`
`controller allow it to communicate with the switching circuits, and thus meet
`
`the "network interface controller" and "network controlling unit" limitations.
`
`Thus, the Chong Reference discloses this limitation.
`
`47.
`
`Additional evidence supporting my opinion that the Chong Reference
`
`discloses this limitation is found in the claim charts for Grounds 1 & 2
`
`included in the body of the Petition for IPR.
`
`18
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 21 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`(5) The Chong Reference discloses "a plurality of
`connection units for connecting the first RAID controlling
`units and the second RAID controlling unit to the numerous
`host computers"
`
`48.
`
`The Chong Reference discloses that switching circuits 111 and 112
`
`(connection units) connect controllers 116 and 122 to multiple hosts. Fig. 3
`
`shows a configuration in which "two hosts, host 1 and host 2, are
`
`communicating with data storage devices 124 and 125 via switching circuit
`
`set 110 and controllers 116 and 122 on two fiber channel loops." (Ex. 1005,
`
`4:15-21; Ex. 1007, ¶ 12). Switching circuit set 110 includes "two switching
`
`circuits 111 and 112." (Ex. 1005, 4:23-24; Ex. 1007, ¶ 12). Each of these
`
`switching circuits 111 and 112 comprises a connection unit.
`
`49. Additional evidence supporting my opinion that the Chong Reference
`
`discloses this limitation is found in the claim charts for Grounds 1 & 2
`
`included in the body of the Petition for IPR.
`
`(6) The Chong Reference discloses "wherein the first
`RAID controlling unit and the second RAID controlling
`unit directly exchange information with the numerous host
`computers through the plurality of connecting units"
`
`50.
`
`The Chong Reference discloses that controllers 116 and 122 directly
`
`exchange data with the hosts through switching circuits 111 and 112. The
`
`Chong Reference Fig. 3 shows direct connections between controllers 116
`
`and 122 and switching circuits 111 and 112. The Chong Reference also
`
`19
`
`IBM-Oracle 1001
`Page 22 of 45
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Randy Katz Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,978,346
`
`discloses that hosts 1 and 2 communicate with data storage devices 124 and
`
`124 through switching circuits 111 and 112 and controllers 116 and 122.
`
`(Ex. 1005, 4:15-21; Ex. 1007, 1 12).
`
`51. Additional evidence supporting my opinion that the Chong Reference
`
`discloses this limitation is found in the claim charts for Grounds 1 & 2
`
`included in the body of the Petition for IPR.
`
`(7) The Chong Reference discloses "and the first network
`controlling unit exchanges information with the fourth
`network controlling unit"
`
`52.
`
`The Chong Reference discloses that