UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`Oracle Corporation,
`NetApp Inc. and
`Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`Crossroads Systems, Inc.
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2014- 01177
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,934,041
`
`____________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
` 
`
` 
`EXHIBIT LIST ........................................................................................................ iv
`I.
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES ............................................................................. 3
`A.
`Real Party-In-Interest ................................................................................... 3
`B.
`Related Matters ............................................................................................ 3
`C.
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel ......................................................................... 4
`D.
`Service Information ...................................................................................... 4
`III. PAYMENT OF FEES ..................................................................................... 4
`IV. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW ...................................... 4
`A. Grounds for Standing ................................................................................... 5
`B.
`Identification of Challenge ........................................................................... 5
`1. The Specific Art and Statutory Ground(s) on Which the Challenge Is
`Based ............................................................................................................ 5
`2. How the Construed Claims Are Unpatentable Under the Statutory
`Grounds Identified in 37 C.F.R. § 42.204(b)(2) and Supporting Evidence
`Relied Upon to Support the Challenge ........................................................ 6
`THE ‘041 PATENT ......................................................................................... 6
`V.
`The Preferred Embodiment of the ‘041 Patent ............................................ 6
`A.
`Reexamination of the Grandparent of the ‘041 Patent ................................. 8
`B.
`VI. BROADEST REASONABLE CONSTRUCTION ...................................... 11
`VII. GROUNDS OF UNPATENTABILITY ....................................................... 12
`Claims 1-53 are Rendered Obvious by 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) by CRD-5500
`A.
`User Manual in view of CRD-5500 Data Sheet and Smith ....................... 13
`Introduction of the CRD-5500 References ................................................ 13
`1.
`Introduction of the Smith Reference .......................................................... 16
`2.
`3. The Combined System of CRD-5500 User Manual, CRD-5500 Data Sheet
`and Smith .................................................................................................... 17
`4. Correspondence Between Claims 1-53 and the Combined System of CRD-
`5500 User Manual, CRD-5500 Data Sheet and Smith .............................. 19
`Claims 1-53 Are Rendered Obvious by Kikuchi taken in Combination with
`Bergsten ...................................................................................................... 29
`ii
`
`B.
`
`

`

`C.
`
`Introduction of the Kikuchi Reference ....................................................... 29
`1.
`Introduction of the Bergsten Reference ..................................................... 30
`2.
`3. The Combined System of Kikuchi and Bergsten ....................................... 32
`4. Correspondence Between Claims 1-53 and the Combined System of
`Kikuchi and Bergsten ................................................................................. 35
`Claims 1-53 Are Rendered Obvious by Bergsten taken in Combination
`with Hirai ................................................................................................... 44
`Introduction of the Hirai Reference ........................................................... 44
`1.
`2. The Combined System of Bergsten and Hirai ........................................... 46
`3. Correspondence Between Claims 1-53 and the Combined System of
`Bergsten and Hirai ..................................................................................... 49
`VIII. EXPLANATION OF NON-REDUNDANCY .............................................. 58
`IX. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 60
`
`
` 
`
`iii
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,934,041 (“the ‘041Patent”)
`
`Select Portions of File History of the ‘04 Patent
`
`CRD-4400 SCSI RAID Controller User’s Manual (“CRD-5500 User
`Manual”)
`
`CRD-4400 SCSI RAID Controller Data Sheet (“CRD-5500 Data
`Sheet”)
`
`Smith et al., Tachyon: A Gigabit Fibre Channel Protocol Chip,
`Hewlett-Packard Journal, October 1996 (“Smith”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,219,771 to Kikuchi et al. (“Kikuchi”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,073,209 to Bergsten (“Bergsten”)
`
`JP Patent Application Publication No. Hei 5[1993]-181609 to Hirai
`(“Hirai”)
`
`Infringement Contentions in Crossroads Systems, Inc. v. Oracle
`Corporation, W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-13-cv-00895, Crossroads
`Systems, Inc. v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. et al., W.D.Tex, Case
`No. 1-13-cv-01025, and Crossroads Systems, Inc. v. NetApp, Inc.,
`W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-14-cv-00149
`
`Declaration of Professor Chase, Professor of Computer Science at
`Duke University
`
`Cheating the I/O Bottleneck: Network Storage with Trapeze/Myrinet
`
`Interposed Request Routing for Scalable Network Storage
`
`Cut-Through Delivery in Trapeze: An Exercise in Low-Latency
`Messaging
`
`Structure and Performance of the Direct Access File System
`
`Implementing Cooperative Prefetching and Caching in a Globally-
`Managed Memory System
`
`iv
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`
`
` 
`
`

`

`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`
`1025
`
`
`1026
`
`
`1027
`
`
`1028
`
`
`
` 
`
`Network I/O with Trapeze
`
`A Cost-Effective, High-Bandwidth Storage Architecture
`
`RAID-II: A High-Bandwidth Network File Server
`
`Payload Caching: High-Speed Data Forwarding for Network
`Intermediaries
`
`Petal: Distributed Virtual Disks
`
`File Server Scaling with Network-Attached Secure Disks
`
`Failure-Atomic File Access in an Interposed Network Storage System
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,308,228 to Yocum et al. (“Yocum”)
`
`
`
`Select Portions of File History of Reexamination Control No.
`90/007,123 (U.S. Patent No. 5,941,972)
`
`Select Portions of the File History of Reexamination Control No.
`90/007,124 (U.S. Patent No. 6,421,753)
`
`Plaintiff Crossroads Systems, Inc.’s Objections and Responses to
`Defendants’ First Set of Common Interrogatories in Crossroads
`Systems, Inc. v. Oracle Corporation, W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-13-cv-
`00895, Crossroads Systems, Inc. v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. et
`al., W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-13-cv-01025, and Crossroads Systems, Inc.
`v. NetApp, Inc., W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-14-cv-00149
`
`Storagepath Fibre Channel Drive System, SWS/Storagepath,
`available at
`web.archive.org/web/19970114010450/http://www.storagepath.com/fi
`bre.htm, archived January 14, 1997
`
`Technology Brief Strategic Direction for Compaq Fibre Channel-
`Attached Storage, Compaq Computer Corporation, October 14, 1997
`
`v
`
`

`

`1029
`
`
`1030
`
`
`1031
`
`
`
`
`1032
`
`
`1033
`
`
`1034
`
`
`1035
`
`
`1036
`
`
`
` 
`
`Tantawy (ed.), Fibre Channel (Ch. 5) of High Performance Networks,
`Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994
`
`Deel et al., Moving Uncompressed Video Faster Than Real Time,
`Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, Inc., December
`1996
`
`Emulex LightPulse Fibre Channel PCI Host Adapter, Emulex
`Corporation, available at
`web.archive.org/web/19980213052222/http://www.emulex.com/fc/lig
`htpulse2.htm, archived February 13, 1998
`
`Select Portions of File History of Reexamination Control Nos.
`90/007,125 and 90/007,317 (U.S. Patent No. 6,425,035)
`
`Local Area Networks Newsletter, Vol. 15, No. 2, Information
`Gatekeepers Inc., February 1997
`
`Litigation Complaint in Crossroads Systems, Inc. v. Oracle
`Corporation, W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-13-cv-00895Asserting
`Infringement of the ‘041 Patent
`
`Litigation Complaint in Crossroads Systems, Inc. v. Huawei
`Technologies Co. Ltd. et al., W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-13-cv-01025
`Asserting Infringement of the ‘041 Patent
`
`Litigation Complaint in Crossroads Systems, Inc. v. NetApp, Inc.,
`W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-14-cv-00149 Asserting Infringement of the ‘041
`Patent
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`

`

` 
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
` Petitioners Oracle Corporation, NetApp Inc., and Huawei Technologies
`
`Co., Ltd. (“Petitioners”) respectfully request inter partes review for claims 1-53 of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,934,041 (“the ‘041 Patent,” attached as Ex. 1001) in accordance
`
`with 35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq. The ‘041 Patent is
`
`directed to a storage router that serves as a bridge between a Fibre Channel and
`
`SCSI channel. More specifically, the ‘041 Patent states that “the storage router of
`
`the present invention is a bridge device that connects a Fibre Channel link directly
`
`to a SCSI bus and enables the exchange of SCSI command set information
`
`between application clients on SCSI bus devices and the Fibre Channel links.” (Ex.
`
`1001 at 5:59-63) The ‘041 Patent explains that this method is accomplished with
`
`native low level block protocols (NLLBP) which enhances system performance
`
`because such an approach “does not involve the overhead of high level protocols
`
`and file systems required by network servers.” (Id. at 5:31-33) The “storage router
`
`[also] applies access controls such that virtual local storage can be established in
`
`remote SCSI storage devices for [w]orkstations on the Fibre Channel link.” (Id. at
`
`5:63-66)
`
`An ancestor of the ‘041 Patent, U.S. Patent No. 5,941,972, which claims
`
`similar subject matter, was challenged in an ex parte reexamination (see Ex. 1024)
`
`in which the Patent Owner distinguished over United Kingdom Patent Application
`
` 
`
`

`

` 
`
`Publication No. UK GB 2297636 to Spring. (See Ex. 1024 at p. 2066, Patent
`
`Owner’s Response dated July 22, 2005 at p. 21) More particularly, Patent Owner
`
`argued that “Spring’s Ethernet-to-SCSI system does not allow access using
`
`NLLBP.” (Id.) The Examiner agreed that Spring’s Ethernet-to-SCSI system did
`
`not satisfy the NLLBP limitation because the Ethernet side of the bridge used
`
`TCP/IP. (Id. at p. 7, Notice of Intent to Issue Reexamination Certification “NIRC”
`
`dated September 23, 2005 at p. 3) The Examiner also found that Spring’s
`
`Ethernet-to-SCSI bridge did not operate independently to map between the
`
`“different transport mediums, such that neither entity determines where data is to
`
`be sent, but rather, the router solely dictates where the data will be sent.” (Id.)
`
`Systems corresponding closely to the ‘041 Patent’s preferred embodiment
`
`were taught by prior art which was either not before the Examiner or not applied in
`
`a prior art rejection. The CRD-5500 SCSI RAID Controller by CMD Technology,
`
`Inc. was detailed in product manuals and data sheets released more than a year
`
`before the earliest priority date. Additionally, several other combinations of prior
`
`art predictably yield combined systems in which a storage controller bridges
`
`between a Fibre Channel and a SCSI storage disk array and provides access control
`
`and virtual local SCSI storage space for host devices on the Fibre Channel. For
`
`instance, a skilled artisan would have readily combined the teaching of access
`
`control in U.S. Patent No. 6,219,771 to Kikuchi with the virtualized storage
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

` 
`
`controllers taught in U.S. Patent No. 6,073,209 to Bergsten.  (See Ex. 1010 at ¶¶
`
`123-128) The access control techniques taught in JP Patent Application Publication
`
`No. Hei 5[1993]-181609 to Hirai would likewise have been readily and
`
`predictably combined with the Bergsten system. (See Ex. 1010 at ¶¶ 204-208)
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1), Petitioner provides the following
`
`mandatory disclosures.
`
`A. Real Party-In-Interest
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1), Petitioner certifies that Oracle
`
`Corporation, NetApp Inc., and Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. are the real parties-
`
`in-interest.
`
`B. Related Matters
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2), Petitioner states that the ‘041 Patent is
`
`asserted in co-pending litigation matters captioned Crossroads Systems, Inc. v.
`
`Oracle Corporation, W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-13-cv-00895 (Ex. 1034), Crossroads
`
`Systems, Inc. v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. et al., W.D.Tex, Case No. 1-13-cv-
`
`01025 (Ex. 1035), and Crossroads Systems, Inc. v. NetApp, Inc., W.D.Tex, Case
`
`No. 1-14-cv-00149 (Ex. 1036). All other related and co-pending litigation matters
`
`are set forth in Exhibit 1026.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

` 
`
`C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3), Petitioner provides the following
`
`designation of counsel: Lead counsel is Greg Gardella (Reg. No. 46,045) and
`
`back-up counsel is Scott A. McKeown (Reg. No. 42,866).
`
`D. Service Information
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4), papers concerning this matter should be
`
`served on the following.
`
`Address: Greg Gardella and Scott McKeown
`Oblon Spivak
`1940 Duke Street
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`cpdocketgardella@oblon.com,
`cpdocketmckeown@oblon.com
`Telephone: (703) 413-3000
`Fax:
`
`(703) 413-2220
`
`Email:
`
`
`III. PAYMENT OF FEES
`
`The undersigned authorizes the Office to charge to Deposit Account No. 15-
`
`0030 the fee required by 37 C.F.R. § 42.15(a) for this Petition for inter partes
`
`review. The undersigned further authorizes payment for any additional fees that
`
`might be due in connection with this Petition to be charged to the above referenced
`
`Deposit Account.
`
`IV. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`As set forth below and pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104, each requirement for
`
`inter partes review of the ‘041 Patent is satisfied.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

` 
`
`A. Grounds for Standing
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a), Petitioner hereby certifies that the ‘041
`
`Patent is available for inter partes review and that the Petitioner is not barred or
`
`estopped from requesting inter partes review challenging the claims of the ‘041
`
`Patent on the grounds identified herein. The ‘041 Patent has not been subject to a
`
`previous proceeding under the AIA and any complaint served on the Real Parties
`
`in Interest referenced above in Section II(B) or privies thereof was served within
`
`the last 12 months.
`
`B. Identification of Challenge
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.104(b) and (b)(1), Petitioner requests inter
`
`partes review of claims 1-53 of the ‘041 Patent, and further requests that the Patent
`
`Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) invalidate the same.
`
`1. The Specific Art and Statutory Ground(s) on Which
`the Challenge Is Based
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.204(b)(2), inter partes review of the ‘041 Patent
`
`
`
`is requested in view of the following grounds:
`
`(a) Claims 1-53 are rendered obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) by the
`
`combination of The CRD-5500 SCSI RAID Controller User’s Manual (“CRD-5500
`
`User Manual”, Ex. 1003), CRD-5500 SCSI RAID Controller Data Sheet (“CRD-
`
`5500 Data Sheet”, Ex. 1004), and Smith et al., Tachyon: A Gigabit Fibre Channel
`
`Protocol Chip, Hewlett-Packard Journal, October 1996 (“Smith”, Ex. 1005);
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

` 
`
`(b) Claims 1-53 are rendered obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) by U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,219,771 to Kikuchi et al. (“Kikuchi”, Ex. 1006) in view of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 6,073,209 to Bergsten (“Bergsten”, Ex. 1007); and
`
`
`
`(c) Claims 1-53 are rendered obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) by
`
`Bergsten in view of JP Patent Application Publication No. Hei 5[1993]-181609 to
`
`Hirai (“Hirai”, Ex. 1008).
`
`2. How the Construed Claims Are Unpatentable Under
`the Statutory Grounds Identified in 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.204(b)(2) and Supporting Evidence Relied Upon to
`Support the Challenge
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.204(b)(4), an explanation of how claims 1-53 of
`
`the ‘041 Patent are unpatentable, including the identification of where each claim
`
`element is found in the prior art, is provided in Section VII below. Pursuant to 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.204(b)(5), the exhibit numbers of the supporting evidence relied upon
`
`to support the challenges and the relevance of the evidence to the challenges
`
`raised, including identifying specific portions that support the challenges, are
`
`provided in Section VII.
`
`V.
`
`THE ‘041 PATENT
`A. The Preferred Embodiment of the ‘041 Patent
`The ‘041 specification states that “the storage router of the present invention
`
`is a bridge device that connects a Fibre Channel link directly to a SCSI bus and
`
`enables the exchange of SCSI command set information between application
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`ibre Channand the Fius devices clients oon SCSI bu
`
`
`
`nel links.” ((Ex. 1001
`
`
`
`at 5:59-63)3)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`This preeferred emmbodiment of storage router 56 iis illustrateed in Figurre 3.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AAccording tto this prefferred embbodiment, ““storage neetwork 50
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`includes a
`
`
`
`Fibre Channel higgh speed seerial intercoonnect 52
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and a SCSSI bus 54 brridged by a
`a
`
`
`storage
`
`router 56.”” (Id. at 4:
`
`
`
`27-30) Stoorage routeer 56 enablles “a largee number oof
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`workstaations 58 too be intercoonnected oon a commmon storagee transport
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`commonn storage ddevices 60,, 62 and 644 through nnative low
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Id. at 44:31-34)
`
`
`
`and to acccess
`
`
`
`level, blocck protoco
`
`ls.”
`
`
`
` SStorage rouuter 56 alsoo includes “enhancedd functionaality to impplement
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`securityy controls aand routingg such thatt each workkstation 588 can have
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`access to aa
`
`
`
`specificc subset of the overalll data storeed in storagge devicess 60, 62 andd 64” whicch
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

` 
`
`“has the appearance and characteristics of local storage and is referred to…as
`
`virtual local storage.” (Id. at 4:35-41) Storage router 56 performs access control
`
`and routing “such that each workstation 58 has controlled access to only the
`
`specified partition of storage device 62 which forms virtual local storage for the
`
`workstation 58.” (Id. at 4:57-59)
`
`“To accomplish this function, storage router 56 can include routing tables
`
`and security controls that define storage allocation for each workstation 58.” (Id. at
`
`5:23-25) This provides the advantage that “collective backups and other collective
`
`administrative functions” may be performed “more easily.” (Id. at 5:27-29)
`
`Further, “[b]ecause storage access involves native low level, block protocols and
`
`does not involve the overhead of high level protocols and file systems required by
`
`network servers,” this approach does not impede or slow system performance. (Id.
`
`at 5:30-33)
`
`B. Reexamination of the Grandparent of the ‘041 Patent
`U.S. Patent No. 6,421,753, an ancestor of the ‘041 Patent shares the same
`
`specification, claims similar subject matter, and was challenged in an ex parte
`
`reexamination in 2004. The Examiner rejected all claims of the ‘753 Patent under
`
`35 U.S.C. §103(a) over combinations including United Kingdom Patent
`
`Application Publication No. UK GB 2297636 (“Spring”) in view of United States
`
`Patent No. 5,634,111 (“Oeda”) and further in view of Cummings, Systems
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`
`Architecctures Usinng Fibre CChannel, Twwelfth IEEEE Sympossium on MMass Storagge
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Systemss, Copyright 1993 IEEEE. (See e.g., Ex. 10025 at pp.
`
`
`
`
`
`553-564, RReexam Noon-
`
`
`
`
`
`final Offffice Actionn dated Maay 24, 20055 at pp. 133-14) Patennt Owner ddistinguishhed
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`from Sppring on thhat basis thaat Spring’ss Ethernet--to-SCSI syystem doess not alloww
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`access uusing NLLLBP (id. at ppp. 498-5000, Patent
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2005 “PPatent Ownner Responnse” at pp..19-21):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Owner Reesponse da
`
`
`
`ted July 222,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

` 
`
`In response to this argument the Examiner issued a NIRC which provided
`
`the following reasons for confirmation:
`
`The prior art disclosed by the Patent Owner and cited by the
`Examiner fail to teach or suggest, alone or in combination, all the
`limitations of the independent claims (claims 1 and 4), particularly
`the map/mapping feature which is a one-to-one correspondence, as
`given in a simple table, the map physically resident on a router,
`whereby the router forms the connection between two separate
`entities over different transport mediums, such that neither entity
`determines where data is to be sent, but rather, the router solely
`dictates where the data will be sent; also the "NLLBP” feature
`referring to a fundamental low level protocol defined by a
`specification/standard that is well known to one of ordinary skill in
`the art, where the NLLBP is used at the router for communications
`with both the first and second transport medium. The SCSI
`protocol/standard is considered a NLLBP. TCP/IP, e.g., used in
`Ethemet communications, however, is not considered to be a
`NLLBP. (Id. at p. 14, Notice of Intent to Issue a Reexam
`Certificate “NIRC” at p. 3)
`
`As such, the Examiner agreed that Spring’s Ethernet-to-SCSI system did not
`
`satisfy the NLLBP limitation because the Ethernet side of the bridge used TCP/IP.
`
`(Id.) The Examiner also found that Spring’s Ethernet-to-SCSI bridge did not teach
`
`a map/mapping feature that is a one-to-one correspondence given in a simple table.
`
`(Id.)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

` 
`
`VI. BROADEST REASONABLE CONSTRUCTION
`
`Petitioner bases this petition upon the broadest reasonable interpretation of
`
`the claim language. All claimed terms not specifically addressed in this section
`
`have been accorded their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the patent
`
`specification including their plain and ordinary meaning. Petitioner’s position
`
`regarding the scope of the claims under their broadest reasonable interpretation is
`
`not to be taken as stating any position regarding the appropriate scope to be given
`
`the claims in a court or other adjudicative body under the different claim
`
`interpretation standards that may apply to such proceedings. In particular,
`
`Petitioner notes that the standard for claim construction used in district courts
`
`differs from the standard applied before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`(“USPTO”). Any claim construction offered by Petitioner in this petition is
`
`directed to the USPTO standard, and Petitioner does not acquiesce or admit to the
`
`constructions reflected herein for any purpose outside of this proceeding.
`
` “Native low-level block protocol” is described in the specification as being
`
`distinct from higher-level protocols that require translation to NLLBP. (Ex. 1001 at
`
`1:43-56; 2:9-12; 2:21-24; 3:14-25; and 4:17-25) Examples of NLLBPs in the
`
`‘041 Patent include SCSI-2 commands and SCSI-3 Fibre Channel Protocol (FCP)
`
`commands. (See e.g., id. at 6:56-7:13) The specification distinguishes prior art
`
`systems that provided access “through network protocols that the [network] server
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

` 
`
`must translate into low level requests to the storage device.” (Id. at 2:12-14)
`
`During the reexamination of the grandparent patent the Patent Owner argued
`
`that a NLLBP is “a protocol that enables the exchange of information without the
`
`overhead of high-level protocols and file systems typically required by network
`
`servers,” citing the Markman Order of the U.S. District Court for the Western
`
`District of Texas in Crossroads v. Chaparral Network Storage, Inc., Civil Action
`
`No. A- 00-CA-217-SS and Crossroads Systems (Texas), Inc., v. Pathlight
`
`Technology, Inc., Civil Action No. A-00CA-248-JN. (Ex. 1025 at p. 500, Patent
`
`Owner Response at p. 21) Consistent with this, the Examiner found that “[t]he
`
`SCSI protocol/standard is considered a NLLBP. TCP/IP, e.g., used in Ethernet
`
`communications, however, is not considered to be a NLLBP.” (Id. at p. 14,
`
`“NIRC” at p. 3)
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the broadest reasonable interpretation of NLLBP
`
`includes a protocol, such as SCSI command protocol, that enables the exchange of
`
`information without the overhead of high-level protocols and file systems typically
`
`required by network servers.
`
`VII. GROUNDS OF UNPATENTABILITY
`
`
`The explanations set forth below summarize the grounds of unpatentability.
`
`Each reference is introduced in turn and those introductions are followed by an
`
`explanation of the combined system or method and the supporting rationale.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

` 
`
`Thereafter, the correspondence between the combined system or method and each
`
`claim element is explained. Pinpoint citations are provided to the declaration of
`
`Professor Chase (Ex. 1010) which describes in further detail the combined system,
`
`supporting rationale, and the correspondence to the claimed subject matter.
`
`A. Claims 1-53 are Rendered Obvious by 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) by
`CRD-5500 User Manual in view of CRD-5500 Data Sheet and
`Smith
`1. Introduction of the CRD-5500 References
`The CRD-5500 SCSI RAID Controller User’s Manual (“CRD-5500 User
`
`Manual”, Ex. 1003) and CRD-5500 SCSI RAID Controller Data Sheet (“CRD-
`
`5500 Data Sheet”, Ex. 1004) were published on November 21, 1996 and December
`
`26, 1996, respectively, over a year before the earliest priority date of the ‘041
`
`Patent (December 31, 1997). Therefore, the CRD-5500 User Manual and CRD-
`
`5500 Data Sheet are prior art to the ‘041 Patent under 35 U.S.C. §102(b). The
`
`CRD-5500 User Manual was before the Examiner but was not discussed by the
`
`Examiner in any office action or referenced in any rejection. The Patent Owner
`
`initially presented the CRD-5500 User Manual in the list of references submitted
`
`in relation to the ex parte reexamination of ancestor U.S. Patent No. 6,421,753
`
`(See Ex. 1025 at p. 649, List of References Cited by Application dated May 24,
`
`2005) The CRD-5500 Data Sheet has never been before the Examiner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

` 
`
`The CRD-5500 User Manual describes a RAID controller which couples
`
`one or more host devices to virtual local storage on a RAID storage disk array.
`
`(Ex. 1003 at 1-1) Devices are connected to the CRD-5500 controller through a
`
`number of I/O module slots configured to receive both host interface modules and
`
`storage device interface modules. (Id. at 2-1)
`
`Figure 1-1 of the CRD-5500 User Manual illustrates how the controller's
`
`RAID set configuration utility can be used to configure virtual or logical storage
`
`regions, referred to as RAID sets, by assigning individual disk drives to logical
`
`groups. (Ex. 1003 at 1-2) Each group may have a particular purpose and, as such,
`
`a particular configuration including, in some examples, striped partitions, data
`
`mirroring, or a combination thereof. (Id.; see also id. at 1-5 and 1-7)
`
`“The controller's Host LUN [Logical Unit Number] Mapping feature
`
`makes it possible to map RAID sets” or redundancy groups (a RAID set or
`
`portion/partition thereof) “differently to each host.” (Id. at 1-1; see also id. at 1-
`
`10; see also id. at 4-5) As illustrated in the “Host LUN Mapping” utility
`
`disclosed in the CRD-5500 User Manual, a particular host device (identified as
`
`“Channel 0”) is allotted access to one or more RAID redundancy groups (e.g.,
`
`redundancy groups 0, 1, 5, and 6 through 31). The host device is provided an
`
`address for accessing each RAID redundancy group through a “Host LUN”
`
`(logical unit number, an addressing mechanism). (See e.g., id. at 4-5; 4-10; and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

` 
`
`6-10) An administrator can allocate a particular disk as a redundancy group,
`
`such that a host LUN maps to a single physical disk or partition thereof.
`
`Accordingly, the “Host LUN Mapping” utility of the CRD-5500 controller
`
`provides virtual local storage to a host device by presenting access to one or more
`
`RAID redundancy groups using LUN-based addressing. (Id.) Further, the “Host
`
`LUN Mapping” utility allows the CRD-5500 controller to restrict a particular
`
`host’s access to a given memory region on the RAID array by withholding
`
`addresses (i.e., “Host LUNs”) for particular RAID redundancy groups to that host
`
`(e.g., redundancy groups 2 through 4 have been excluded from the list of
`
`redundancy groups for which Host LUNs have been assigned to the host
`
`illustrated). (See e.g., id. at 1-1, “The controller's Host LUN Mapping feature
`
`makes it possible to map RAID sets differently to each host. You make the same
`
`redundancy group show up on different LUNs to different hosts, or make a
`
`redundancy group visible to one host but not to another.” See also id. at 1-11,
`
`“the CRD-5500 defines each RAID set or partition of a RAID set as a
`
`‘redundancy group.’ These redundancy groups may be mapped to host LUNs,
`
`either in a direct one-to-one relationship or in a manner defined by the user.”)
`
`The CRD-5500 Data Sheet notes that the modular design of the storage
`
`controller supports interfacing with host and/or storage devices via a high speed
`
`serial connection such as a Fibre Channel transport medium:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`
`“Unlike other RAID controllers, CMD's advanced ‘Viper’ RAID
`architecture and ASICs were designed to support tomorrow's
`high speed serial interfaces, such as Fibrechannel (FCAL)[].”
`(Ex. 1004 at p. 1 (emphasis added))
`
`
`2. Introduction of the Smith Reference
`Smith et al., Tachyon: A Gigabit Fibre Channel Protocol Chip, Hewlett-
`
`Packard Journal, October 1996 (“Smith”) was published in October of 1996,
`
`over a year before the earliest priority date of the ‘041 Patent (December 31,
`
`1997). Smith is therefore prior art under 35 U.S.C. §102(b).
`
`
`
`Smith describes the off-the-shelf Tachyon controller which is used in the
`
`preferred embodiment of the ‘041 Patent. (Ex. 1001 at 6:30) The Tachyon chip is
`
`designed to serve as, among other things, a bridge between a Fibre Channel and a
`
`SCSI channel by encapsulating SCSI packets and sending them over the Fibre
`
`Channel. (Ex. 1005 at 4) Indeed,
`
`[t]he second major design goal was that Tachyon should support
`SCSI encapsulation over Fibre Channel (known as FCP). From the
`beginning of the project, Tachyon designers created SCSI assists to
`support SCSI initiator transactions. …Early in the design, Tachyon
`only supported SCSI initiator functionality with its SCSI hardware
`assists. It became evident from customer feedback, however, that
`Tachyon must support SCSI target functionality as well, so SCSI
`target functionality was added to Tachyon hardware assists. (Id.)
`
`The SCSI target functionality allows for mass storage support by adapting the
`
`Fibre Channel controller chip for use in a Fibre Channel target adapter card, such
`
`as the host interface modules of the CRD-5500. (Id. at 3)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

` 
`
`3. The Combined System of CRD-5500 User Manual,
`CRD-5500 Data Sheet and Smith
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the
`
`CRD-5500 User Manual, the CRD-5500 Data Sheet, and Smith to enhance the
`
`communication and storage options of a host computing device on a Fibre Channel
`
`transport medium, benefit from the “Host LUN Mapping” feature of the storage
`
`controller, and avail the host computing device of ubiquitous mass storage
`
`applications (e.g., RAID). (Ex. 1010 ¶¶ 41-45) This combination is specifically
`
`suggested in the CRD-5500 Data Sheet, which explains that “CMD's advanced
`
`‘Viper’ RAID architecture and ASICs were designed to support tomorrow's high
`
`speed serial interfaces, such as Fibrechannel[].” (Ex. 1004 at p. 1) The high
`
`bandwidth of Fibre Channels and capability of extended distances between hosts
`
`and the storage controller each provided a strong motivation to adopt the CRD-
`
`5500 Data Sheets’s suggestion to enhance the CRD-5500 controller with the Fibre
`
`Channel-to-SCSI bridging capabilities of host and/or storage device modules
`
`designed with Tachyon chips. (See generally Ex. 1004 at pp. 1-2)
`
`In the combined system, the Tachyon chip is incorporated into Fibre
`
`Channel enabled host device interface modules installed in I/O slots of the CRD-
`
`5500 controller. (See e.g., Ex. 1010 at ¶ 47) Professor Chase explains that the
`
`Tachyon chip encapsulates and de-encapsulates SCSI commands on FC transport
`
`media that enables bridging to SCSI transport media. (See e.g., id. at ¶¶ 36, 38,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

` 
`
`43