Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111 Filed 09/12/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 2370
`
`U N IT ED ST A T ES D IST R IC T C O U R T
`for the
`EasternD istrictofT exas
`T yler D ivision
`
`C .A . N o. 6:13-cv-604
`
`)
`
`))
`
`))
`
`)
`)
`
`))
`
`))
`
`STR A IG H T PA TH IP G R O U P,IN C .,
`
`v.
`
`B L A C K B ER R Y L TD .,etal.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendants.
`
`PA T EN T R U L E4-3JO IN T C L A IM C O N ST R U C T IO N
`
`A N D PR EH EA R IN G ST A T EM EN T
`
`PursuanttoL ocal PatentR ule 4-3and the D ock etC ontrol O rderentered inthese cases,
`
`PlaintiffStraightPathIP G roup,Inc.(“StraightPath”)and D efendantsH uaweiInvestm ent&
`
`H olding C o.,L td.,H uaweiTechnologiesC o.,L td.,H uaweiTechnologiesU SA Inc.,and H uawei
`
`D evice U SA ,Inc.(together,“H uawei”);Sam sung ElectronicsC o.,L td.,Sam sung Electronics
`
`A m erica,Inc.,and Sam sung Telecom m unicationsA m erica,L L C (together,“Sam sung”);and Z TE
`
`C orporationand Z TEU SA ,Inc.(together,“Z TE”)(collectively,“D efendants”),hereafter,“the
`
`Parties,”hereby subm itthisJointC laim C onstructionand Prehearing Statem ent.
`
`ThisStatem entaddressesthe parties’ claim constructionpositionsregarding the asserted
`
`claim softhe Patents-in-Suit,U .S.PatentN os.6,009,469;6,108,704;and 6,131,121. The Parties
`
`have m etand conferred forthe purposesofnarrowing the issuesand finaliz ing preparationofthe
`
`Statem ent. The Partiesagree thatthe C ourtneed notconstrue term sthatdonotappearinthis
`
`Statem ent.
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 1
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111 Filed 09/12/14 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 2371
`
`A . C onstructionofthose claim term s,phrases,or clausesonwhichthe Partiesagree
`
`The Partiesstipulate toconstructionsofthe claim term s,phrases,and/orclausesattached
`
`heretoasExhibitA .
`
`B. Proposed constructionsofdisputed claim term s,phrases,and clauses,with
`extrinsic evidence
`
`StraightPath’sproposed constructionforeachdisputed claim term and identificationof
`
`supporting evidence issetforthinExhibitB . The D efendants’ proposed constructionforeach
`
`disputed claim term and identificationofsupporting evidence issetforthinExhibitC .
`
`C . A nticipated lengthoftim e necessary for the C laim C onstructionH earing
`
`The Partiesbelieve thatthree (3)hourswill suffice forthe C laim C onstructionH earing,with
`
`tim e being splitevenly betweenStraightPathand D efendants.
`
`D . Identity ofwitnessesthe Partiesintend tocall atthe C laim C onstructionH earing
`
`StraightPathm ay rely uponthe expertopinionofD r.StuartStubblebine tosupportits
`
`proposed claim constructionsinthe form ofdeclarationsfiled withthe C ourtand live testim ony at
`
`the claim constructionhearing,should the C ourtsodesire. D r.Stubblebine will testify,if
`
`perm itted,thatone ofordinary sk ill inthe artduring the relevanttim e periodswould have construed
`
`the claim term sidentified by the partiesforconstructioninthe m annerStraightPathhasproposed,
`
`and thatStraightPath'sproposed constructionsare derived from the intrinsic extrinsic evidence.
`
`D r.Stubblebine’stestim ony m ay alsorelate tothe technology ofthe A sserted Patents,including
`
`any topicsD efendants’ expertsm ay opine upon. D r.Stubblebine m ay alsorebutany testim ony or
`
`allegationsconcerning priorartorotherdocum entsidentified by any party regarding the general
`
`field orback ground ofthe inventionsproduced by the partiesand/orany third partiesinthe case,
`
`including butnotlim ited tothe docum entsidentified inthe parties’ P.R .4-2and 4-3disclosures.
`
`A dditionally,StraightPathm ay offerD r.Stubblebine forthe purposesofany tutorial thatthe C ourt
`
`m ay choose toconduct.
`
`2
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 2
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111 Filed 09/12/14 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 2372
`
`StraightPathreservesthe righttoofferexperttestim ony inrebuttal toany experttestim ony
`
`D efendantsm ay offer. StraightPathalsoreservesitsrighttoidentify additional extrinsic evidence,
`
`notlim ited tothe areasofexperttestim ony,inresponse toortorebutproposed claim constructions
`
`from D efendants. Tothe extentD efendantspropose a constructionforany term notidentified in
`
`ExhibitB ,StraightPathreservesthe righttopropose additional constructionswithina reasonable
`
`tim e afterreceiving D efendants’ proposed construction.
`
`D efendants’ m ay rely uponthe expertopinionofD r.B ruce M aggstorebutexperttestim ony
`
`thatStraightPathm ay offer,including butnotlim ited to:
`
` testim ony tosupportStraightPath’sproposed claim constructionsthatone of
`
`ordinary sk ill inthe artduring the relevanttim e periodswould have construed the
`
`claim term sidentified by the partiesforconstructioninthe m annerStraightPathhas
`
`proposed,
`
` thatStraightPath'sproposed constructionsare derived from the intrinsic and
`
`extrinsic evidence,and
`
` the technology ofthe A sserted Patents.
`
`D efendantsm ay rely uponD r.M aggs’ expertopinioninthe form ofdeclarationsfiled with
`
`the C ourtand live testim ony atthe claim constructionhearing,should the C ourtsodesire.
`
`A dditionally,D efendantsm ay offerD r.M aggsforthe purpose of any tutorial thatthe C ourtm ay
`
`choose toconduct. D efendantsm ay alsoofferD r.M aggs’ expertopinionsforsupporting its
`
`proposed claim constructions,including supportforD efendants’ proposed claim constructionsthat
`
`one ofordinary sk ill inthe artduring the relevanttim e periodswould have construed the claim
`
`term sidentified by the partiesforconstructioninthe m annerD efendantshave proposed,and that
`
`D efendants’ proposed constructionsare derived from the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence.
`
`3
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 3
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111 Filed 09/12/14 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 2373
`
`Tothe extentStraightPathproposesa constructionforany term notidentified inExhibitC ,
`
`D efendantsreserve the righttopropose additional constructionswithina reasonable tim e after
`
`receiving StraightPath’sproposed construction(s).
`
`E. O ther issuesthatm ightappropriately be tak enupata prehearing conference prior
`tothe C laim C onstructionH earing
`
`The following m otionispending before the C ourt. Tothe extentthism otionispending at
`
`the tim e ofthe scheduled claim constructionhearing,StraightPathrequeststhatthe C ourtallow the
`
`partiestoaddressthem atthe scheduled claim constructionhearing:
`
` StraightPath’sM otiontoforL eave toA m end ItsInfringem entC ontentions,Straight
`
`Path IP Group, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al.,C .A .N o.13-cv-606,
`
`D ock etN o.85(July 11,2014).
`
`4
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 4
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111 Filed 09/12/14 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 2374
`
`D A TED :Septem ber12,2014
`
`R espectfully subm itted,
`
`B y:/s/Michael C. Newman
`M ichael T.R enaud (adm itted pro hac vice)
`Jam esM .W odarsk i
`M ichael J.M cN am ara
`M ichael C .N ewm an(adm itted pro hac vice)
`R obertJ.L .M oore (adm itted pro hac vice)
`K ristina R .C ary
`M IN TZ ,L EV IN ,C O H N ,FER R IS,
`G
`L O V SK Y & PO PEO P.C .
`O ne Financial C enter
`B oston,M A 02111
`(617)542-6000
`m trenaud@ m intz .com
`jwodarsk i@ m intz .com
`m m cnam ara@ m intz .com
`m cnewm an@ m intz .com
`rjm oore@ m intz .com
`k rcary@ m intz .com
`
`W A R D & SM ITH L A W FIR M
`T.JohnW ard,Jr.
`TexasState B arN o.00794818
`T.JohnW ard
`TexasState B arN o.2084800
`J.W esley H ill
`TexasState B arN o.24032294
`C laire A bernathy H enry
`TexasState B arN o.24053063
`W A R D & SM IT H
`L A W FIR M
`1127JudsonR oad,Suite 220
`L ongview,TX 75606
`Tel:(903)-757-6400
`jw@ wsfirm .com
`tjw@ wsfirm .com
`wh@ wsfirm .com
`claire@ wsfirm .com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff
`Straight Path IP Group, Inc.
`
`5
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 5
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111 Filed 09/12/14 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 2375
`
`/s/ Brian K. Erickson
`B rianK .Erick son
`TexasB arN o.24012594
`Todd S.Patterson
`TexasB arN o.24060396
`D L A PIPER L L P (U S)
`401C ongressA venue,Suite 2500
`A ustin,TX 78701-3799
`Telephone:512-457-7000
`Facsim ile:512-457-7001
`
`C laudia W ilsonFrost
`TexasB arN o.21671300
`D L A PIPER L L P (U S)
`1000L ouisiana Street,Suite 2800
`H ouston,TX 77002-5005
`Telephone:(713)425-8400
`Facsim ile:(713)425-8401
`
`M ark D .Fowler(pro hac vice)
`Erik R .Fuehrer(pro hac vice)
`JonathanH .H ick s(pro hac vice)
`K rista A .C elentano(pro hac vice)
`D L A PIPER L L P (U S)
`2000U niversity A venue
`EastPaloA lto,C A 94303
`Tel:(650)833-2000
`Fax:(650)833-2001
`
`Attorneys for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung
`Electronics America, Inc. and Samsung Telecommunications
`America, LLC
`
`6
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 6
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111 Filed 09/12/14 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 2376
`
`/s/ Thomas H. Reger II
`Thom asH .R egerII
`FISH & R IC H A R D SO N ,P.C .
`TexasB arN o.24032992
`1717M ainStreet,Suite 5000
`D allas,TX 75201
`Telephone:(214)747-5070
`Facsim ile:(214)747-2091
`reger@ fr.com
`
`L inhong Z hang (adm itted pro hac vice)
`1425K StreetN W ,11thFloor
`W ashington,D C 20005
`Telephone:(202)783-5070
`Facsim ile:(202)783-2331
`lwz hang@ fr.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendants Huawei Investment & Holding Co.,
`Ltd., Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Huawei Technologies
`USA, Inc., and Huawei Device USA, Inc.
`
`/s/ Thatcher A. Rahmeier
`K eithA .W alter,Jr.
`ThatcherA .R ahm eier
`D R IN K ER B ID D L E& R EA TH L L P
`222D elaware A venue,Suite 1410
`W ilm ington,D E19801
`k eith.walter@ dbr.com
`thatcher.rahm eier@ dbr.com
`
`EverettU pshaw
`State B arofTexasN o.24025690
`everettupshaw@ everettupshaw.com
`D avid A .B ailey
`State B arofTexasN o.24078177
`davidbailey@ everettupshaw.com
`L A W O FFIC EO FEV ER ETT U PSH A W ,PL L C
`811S.C entral Expressway,Suite 307
`R ichardson,Texas75080
`
`Attorneys for Defendant ZTE (USA), Inc.
`
`7
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 7
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111 Filed 09/12/14 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 2377
`
`C ER T IFIC A T EO FSER V IC E
`
`The undersigned certifiesthatonthis12thday of Septem ber,2014,all counsel ofrecord who
`
`are deem ed tohave consented toelectronic service are being served witha copy of this docum ent
`
`throughthe C ourt’s C M /EC Fsystem under L ocal R ule C V -5(a)(3). A ny othercounsel of record
`
`will be served by a facsim ile transm issionand/orfirstclassm ail.
`
`/s/Michael C. Newman
`M ichael C .N ewm an
`
`8
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 8
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-1 Filed 09/12/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 2378
`
`EX H IBIT A
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 9
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-1 Filed 09/12/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 2379
`
`T erm or Phrase
`“process”/“processes”
`
`The ’704Patent,C laim s
`1,11,14,16,22,27and 31
`
`The ’469Patent,C laim s
`1,2,3,5,6,9and 14
`
`The ’121Patent,C laim s
`6,8,10,11,13and 14
`
`“dynam ically assigned”
`
`The ’121Patent,C laim s
`6,8,10,11and 13
`
`A greed U ponC onstruction
`“running instance[s]ofa com puterprogram orapplication”
`
`“assigned fora lim ited period oftim e,oruntil explicitly relinquished”
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 10
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 2380
`
`EX H IBIT B
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 11
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 2 of 13 PageID #: 2381
`
`C laim T erm
`“point-to-point”
`
`The ’704Patent,
`C laim s1,11,14,16,
`22,27and 31
`
`The ’469Patent,
`C laim s1,2,3,5,9and
`14
`
`The ’121Patent,
`C laim s6,8,10,11,13
`and 14
`
`StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction Supportfor StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction
`“com m unicationsbetweentwoprocesses
`Intrinsic Evidence
`overa com puternetwork thatare not
`’469PatentatC laim s1,2,3,5,9and 14;
`interm ediated by the [server
`’469PatentFigs.3,4,7,8,9,10,15;
`process]/[server]/[address
`’469PatentatA bstract;
`server]/[directory database]/[directory
`’469Patentat1:5-51;
`database serverprocess]”
`’469Patentat2:30-41;
`’469Patentat3:14-27;
`’469Patentat6:66–7:43;
`’469Patentat9:10-34;
`’469Patentat9:64-10:3;
`’469Patentat26:31-38;
`’469Patentat12:48-53;
`’469Patentat18:26-37;
`’469File H istory atSTR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -0000431-433;
`’469File H istory atSTR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -0000739-744;
`
`’704PatentatC laim s1,11,14,16,22,27and 31;
`’704PatentFigs.3,4,7,8;
`’704PatentA bstract;
`’704Patentat1:38-56;
`’704Patentat1:59–2:9;
`’704Patentat5:24–6:16;
`’704Patentat7:32-41;
`’704Patentat7:60–8:27;
`’704Patentat10:22-37;
`’704File H istory atSTR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -0000864;
`’704Patent,D ec.4,1997,A m endm ent,at8
`(STR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -00006139);
`’704Patent,D ec.4,1997,A m endm ent,at8-9
`(STR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -1723126-1723128);
`
`’121PatentatC laim s6,8,10,11,13and 14;
`
`2
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 12
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 3 of 13 PageID #: 2382
`
`C laim T erm
`
`StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction Supportfor StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction
`‘121PatentFigs.3,4,7,8,9,10;
`‘121Patentat26:23-30;
`‘121Patentat12:41-46.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents.
`
`The following isa briefdescriptionofthe substance ofD r.
`Stubblebine’stestim ony aboutthe term “point-to-point”:
`1. H ow one ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`inventionwould read the specificationsofthe patents-in-suit
`asclearly supporting StraightPath’sconstructionofthe term
`“point-to-point”
`2. Explanationofwhatconstitutesa point-to-point
`com m unication
`3. The potential forinterm ediationofa point-to-point
`com m unicationby certainnetwork hardware and the
`specific serversthatdonotinterm ediate the point-to-point
`com m unicationclaim ed inthe patents-in-suit
`4. The nature ofthe end pointsofthe point-to-point
`com m unicationclaim ed inthe patents-in-suit
`5. D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`Intrinsic Evidence
`’469PatentatC laim 9;
`’469Patentat2:45-54;
`’469Patentat6:66–7:48;
`’469Patentat11:64-12:12;
`
`3
`
`“on-line”
`
`“available forcom m unication”
`
`The ’704Patent,
`C laim s11and 22
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 13
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 4 of 13 PageID #: 2383
`
`C laim T erm
`The ’469Patent,C laim
`9
`
`StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction Supportfor StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction
`’469Patentat20:27-44;
`’469Patentat22:57-23:5;
`’469Patentat23:17-40;
`’469PatentatTable 2;
`’469Patentat22:57-61;
`’469PatentatTA B L E1;
`’469File H istory atSTR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -0000739-744;
`’469File H istory atSTR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -0000748-756;
`
`’704PatentatC laim s11and 22;
`’704Patentat5:24-48;
`’704Patentat1:59-2:9;
`’704Patentat5:24-48;
`’704Patentat5:60-62;
`’704Patentat10:4-20;
`’704File H istory atSTR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -0000864;
`
`’121Patentat6:60-7:7;
`’121Patentat7:29-31;
`’121Patentat11:58-12:6;
`’121Patentat20:19-46;
`’121Patentat22:50-65;
`’121Patentat23:10-33;
`’121Patentat22:50-54.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents.
`
`The following isa briefdescriptionofthe substance ofD r.
`Stubblebine’stestim ony aboutthe term “on-line”:
`
`4
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 14
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 5 of 13 PageID #: 2384
`
`C laim T erm
`
`“accessible”
`
`The ’469Patent,C laim
`9
`
`StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction Supportfor StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction
`1. H ow one ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`inventionwould read the specificationsofthe patents-in-suit
`asclearly supporting StraightPath’sconstructionofthe term
`“on-line”
`2. The relationshipbetweenbeing “on-line”and being able to
`engage inthe point-to-pointcom m unicationprotocol
`claim ed inthe patents-in-suit
`3. D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`Intrinsic Evidence
`’469Patent,C laim 9;
`’469Patentat2:45-54;
`’469Patentat6:66-7:13;
`’469Patentat7:30-59;
`’469Patentat19:7-11;
`’469Patentat20:45-54;
`’469Patentat22:54-23:5;
`’469Patentat23:35-40;
`’469Patentat24:7-14;
`’469Patentat24:50-54;
`’469PatentatTA B L E2;
`’469File H istory atSTR A IG H TPA TH -ITC -0000748-756;
`
`“on-line and available forcom m unication
`withthe callerprocess”
`
`‘121Patentat20:37-46;
`‘121Patentat22:50-65;
`‘121Patentat23:28-33.
`
`Extrinsic Support
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents.
`
`5
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 15
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 6 of 13 PageID #: 2385
`
`C laim T erm
`
`StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction Supportfor StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction
`
`The following isa briefdescriptionofthe substance ofD r.
`Stubblebine’stestim ony aboutthe term “accessible”:
`1. H ow one ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`inventionwould read the specificationsofthe patents-in-suit
`asclearly supporting StraightPath’sconstructionofthe term
`“accessible”
`2. H ow one ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`inventionwould interpretthe specificationsofthe patents-
`in-suitasclearly supporting aninterpretationofthe term
`“accessible”torepresentboththe on-line statusofthe callee
`processand the callee process’ availability for
`com m unicationwiththe callerprocess
`3. D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`
`6
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 16
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 7 of 13 PageID #: 2386
`
`StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction Supportfor StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction
`Plainand ordinary m eaning.
`Support:
`Innovative Communication Technologies, Inc. v. Vivox, Inc.,
`C ivil N o.2:12cv7,C ivil N o.2:12cv9,O pinionand O rder(E.D .
`V a.O ct.26,2012)
`
`’704Patent,C laim s1,11and 22
`‘704PatentatA bstract
`‘704Patentat1:1-35
`‘704Patentat5:1-14
`‘704Patentat6:16–7:25
`
`’469Patent,C laim s1,2,3,5,6and 9
`‘469PatentatA bstract
`‘469Patentat1:53–2:4
`‘469Patentat3:15-27
`‘469Patentat4:27-50
`‘469Patentat12:48–13:8
`
`’121Patent,C laim s6,8,10,11,13and 14
`‘121PatentatA bstract
`‘121Patentat1:1-12
`‘121Patentat3:1- 19
`‘121Patentat12:41–13:1
`
`7
`
`C laim T erm
`“network protocol
`address”
`
`The ’704Patent,
`C laim s1,11and 22
`
`The ’469Patent,
`C laim s1,2,3,5,6and
`
`9 T
`
`he ’121Patent,
`C laim s6,8,10,11,13
`and 14
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 17
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 8 of 13 PageID #: 2387
`
`C laim T erm
`“a query astowhether
`[the/a]second process
`isconnected tothe
`com puternetwork ”
`
`StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction Supportfor StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction
`Plainand ordinary m eaning,excepttothe
`Support:
`extentthat“process”requires
`Innovative Communication Technologies, Inc. v. Vivox, Inc.,
`construction.
`C ivil N o.2:12cv7,C ivil N o.2:12cv9,O pinionand O rder(E.D .
`V a.O ct.26,2012)
`
`See StraightPath’ssupportforproposed constructionof“on-
`line”and “process”/”processes”
`
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents. D r.Stubblebine’srebuttal testim ony m ay
`include,butisnotlim ited to:how one ofordinary sk ill inthe
`artatthe tim e ofthe inventionwould read the specificationsof
`the patents-in-suit;why a personofordinary sk ill inthe art
`would understand the term s“query astowhether”and
`“connected tothe com puternetwork ”tobe giventheirplain
`and ordinary m eaning inthe field ofcom puterscience and
`network com m unications.
`
`D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding the
`view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`
`See StraightPath’sproposed construction
`of“process”
`
`The ’704Patent,C laim
`
`1 T
`
`he ’469Patent,
`C laim s3and 6
`
`The ‘121Patent,
`C laim s6,8,13and 14
`
`8
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 18
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 9 of 13 PageID #: 2388
`
`StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction Supportfor StraightPath’sProposed C onstruction
`Plainand ordinary m eaning,excepttothe
`Support:
`extentthat“on-line”and “process”
`Innovative Communication Technologies, Inc. v. Vivox, Inc.,
`require construction.
`C ivil N o.2:12cv7,C ivil N o.2:12cv9,O pinionand O rder(E.D .
`V a.O ct.26,2012)
`
`See StraightPath’sproposed construction
`of“on-line”and “process”
`
`See StraightPath’ssupportforproposed constructionof“on-
`line”and “process”/”processes”
`
`’704Patent,C laim s11and 22
`
`’469Patent,C laim 9
`‘469patentat6:43-65
`
`’121Patent,C laim s6and 8
`
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents. D r.Stubblebine’srebuttal testim ony m ay
`include,butisnotlim ited to:how one ofordinary sk ill inthe
`artatthe tim e ofthe inventionwould read the specificationsof
`the patents-in-suit;why a personofordinary sk ill inthe art
`would understand the term s“querying”,“status”,“callee
`process”and “callerprocess”tobe giventheirplainand
`ordinary m eaning inthe field ofcom puterscience and network
`com m unications.
`
`D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding the
`view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`
`C laim T erm
`“querying the
`[server/serverprocess]
`astothe on-line status
`ofthe first
`[callee]/[called]
`process”
`
`“query the [server
`process/addressserver]
`astowhether[a/the]
`second processis
`connected tothe
`com puternetwork ”
`
`The ’704Patent,
`C laim s11and 22
`
`The ’469Patent,C laim
`
`9 T
`
`he ’121Patent,
`C laim s6and 8
`
`9
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 19
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 10 of 13 PageID #: 2389
`
`“having on-line status
`withrespecttothe
`com puternetwork ”
`
`The ’121Patent,
`C laim s10and 11
`
`Plainand ordinary m eaning,excepttothe
`extentthat“on-line requiresconstruction.
`
`See StraightPath’sproposed construction
`of“on-line.”
`
`Support:
`Innovative Communication Technologies, Inc. v. Vivox, Inc.,
`C ivil N o.2:12cv7,C ivil N o.2:12cv9,O pinionand O rder(E.D .
`V a.O ct.26,2012)
`
`See StraightPath’ssupportforproposed constructionof“on-
`line”
`
`’121Patent,C laim s10and 11
`
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents. D r.Stubblebine’srebuttal testim ony m ay
`include,butisnotlim ited to:how one ofordinary sk ill inthe
`artatthe tim e ofthe inventionwould read the specificationsof
`the patents-in-suit;why a personofordinary sk ill inthe art
`would understand the term s“having… statuswithrespecttothe
`com puternetwork ”tobe giventheirplainand ordinary
`m eaning inthe field ofcom puterscience and network
`com m unications.
`
`D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding the
`view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`
`10
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 20
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 11 of 13 PageID #: 2390
`
`Plainand ordinary m eaning.
`
`“[a/the]userassociating
`[twoorm ore
`elem ents]”/”association
`of[twoorm ore
`elem ents]”
`
`The ’704Patent,
`C laim s11,14,16,22
`and 27
`
`The ‘469Patent,
`C laim s9and 14
`
`Support:
`Innovative Communication Technologies, Inc. v. Vivox, Inc.,
`C ivil N o.2:12cv7,C ivil N o.2:12cv9,O pinionand O rder(E.D .
`V a.O ct.26,2012)
`
`’704Patent,C laim s11,14,16,22and 27
`
`‘469Patent,C laim s9and 14
`‘469patentat11:43-26
`
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents. D r.Stubblebine’srebuttal testim ony m ay
`include,butisnotlim ited to:how one ofordinary sk ill inthe
`artatthe tim e ofthe inventionwould read the specificationsof
`the patents-in-suit;why a personofordinary sk ill inthe art
`would understand these term stobe giventheirplainand
`ordinary m eaning inthe field ofcom puterscience and network
`com m unications.
`
`D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding the
`view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`
`11
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 21
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 12 of 13 PageID #: 2391
`
`“callerprocess”/
`“callee process”
`
`The ’704Patent,
`C laim s11,14,16,22,
`27and 31
`
`The ’469Patent,
`C laim s9and 14
`
`Plainand ordinary m eaning,excepttothe
`extentthat“process”requires
`construction.
`
`See StraightPath’sproposed construction
`of“process”
`
`Support:
`Innovative Communication Technologies, Inc. v. Vivox, Inc.,
`C ivil N o.2:12cv7,C ivil N o.2:12cv9,O pinionand O rder(E.D .
`V a.O ct.26,2012)
`
`See StraightPath’ssupportforproposed constructionof
`“process”/”processes”
`
`469patentat6:43-65
`
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents. D r.Stubblebine’srebuttal testim ony m ay
`include,butisnotlim ited to:how one ofordinary sk ill inthe
`artatthe tim e ofthe inventionwould read the specificationsof
`the patents-in-suit;why a personofordinary sk ill inthe art
`would understand the term s“callerprocess”and “callee
`process”tobe giventheirplainand ordinary m eaning inthe
`field ofcom puterscience and network com m unications.
`
`D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding the
`view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`
`12
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 22
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-2 Filed 09/12/14 Page 13 of 13 PageID #: 2392
`
`“tem porarily disabling
`point-to-point
`com m unications”
`
`Plainand ordinary m eaning,excepttothe
`extentthat“point-to-point”requires
`construction.
`
`The ’704Patent,
`C laim s16and 27
`
`See StraightPath’sproposed construction
`of“point-to-point”
`
`The ’469Patent,C laim
`14
`
`Support:
`Innovative Communication Technologies, Inc. v. Vivox, Inc.,
`C ivil N o.2:12cv7,C ivil N o.2:12cv9,O pinionand O rder(E.D .
`V a.O ct.26,2012)
`
`See StraightPath’ssupportforproposed constructionof
`“point-to-point”
`
`469patent,10:46-51and 28:41-48
`
`121patent,10:40-45and 28:33-40
`
`D r.StuartStubblebine m ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents. D r.Stubblebine’srebuttal testim ony m ay
`include,butisnotlim ited to:how one ofordinary sk ill inthe
`artatthe tim e ofthe inventionwould read the specificationsof
`the patents-in-suit;why a personofordinary sk ill inthe art
`would understand the term s“tem porarily disabling”and
`“com m unications”tobe giventheirplainand ordinary
`m eaning inthe field ofcom puterscience and network
`com m unications.
`
`D r.Stubblebine m ay alsoofferexperttestim ony regarding the
`view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe
`A sserted Patents
`
`33220661v.1
`
`13
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 23
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-3 Filed 09/12/14 Page 1 of 21 PageID #: 2393
`
`EX H IBIT C
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 24
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-3 Filed 09/12/14 Page 2 of 21 PageID #: 2394
`
`N o. C laim T erm
`1
`“network protocol ad-
`dress”
`
`D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`“addressassigned according toa network -
`layerprotocol,suchasanIP address.”
`
`Supportfor D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`See also evidence cited for“point-to-point.”
`
`“network protocol ad-
`dresses”
`
`’704PatentC laim s:
`
`1,11,22
`
`’469PatentC laim s:
`
`1-3,5-6,9
`
`’121PatentC laim s:
`
`6,8,10-11,13-14
`
`“addressesassigned according toa network -
`layerprotocol,suchasanIP address.”
`
`Intrinsic Evidence:
`
`’704Patent
`
`Figs.7-9,1:21-26,1:27-55,5:24-38,6:61-7:59,8:3-
`10,8:3-10,
`
`’469Patent
`
`Figs.7-9,2:5-50,6:43-7:3,8:39-9:52,9:66-10:3,
`18:33-37,24:7-11.
`
`’121Patent
`
`Figs.7-9,2:6-54,6:37-65,8:32-9:46,9:60-64,
`18:25-29,23:67-24:2.
`
`File H istory
`
`’704,6/2/97O ffice A ctionat3-4;
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 25
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-3 Filed 09/12/14 Page 3 of 21 PageID #: 2395
`
`N o. C laim T erm
`
`D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`
`Supportfor D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`’704,10/28/98O ffice A ctionat4;
`
`’704,3/1/99R esp.at14-15;
`
`’704R eexam ,11/27/09R esp.at21;
`
`’469,4/20/98O ffice A ctionat8.(“containing a
`network protocol address(IP address)”;
`
`’469,10/26/98R esp.at7-8;
`
`’469,3/3/99R esponse at8;
`
`’121R eexam ,11/25/09R esp.at14;
`
`’121,9/7/99R esp.at19-20.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence:
`
`D r.B ruce M aggsm ay offerexperttestim ony regarding
`the view ofone ofordinary sk ill inthe artatthe tim e
`ofthe A sserted Patents. D r.M aggs’ rebuttal testim ony
`m ay include,butisnotlim ited to:how one ofordinary
`sk ill inthe artatthe tim e ofthe inventionwould read
`the specificationsofthe patents-in-suit;explanationof
`whatconstitutesa network protocol address.
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 26
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-3 Filed 09/12/14 Page 4 of 21 PageID #: 2396
`
`N o. C laim T erm
`
`D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`
`Supportfor D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`M arch7,2014R ebuttal ExpertR eportofD r.Stuart
`Stubblebine,atpp.1-73;R esponsive ExpertR eportof
`K evinJeffay,Ph.D ,inNet2Phone v. Skype.pp.9-35
`and the M ay 20,2008,D epositionofK evinJeffay,
`Ph.D .
`
`R FC 793(TC P protocol spec.),R FC 791(IP protocol
`spec.),and R FC 768(U D P protocol specification).
`
`D ouglasC om er,Internetwork ing withTC P/IP –Prin-
`ciples,Protocols,and A rchitecture,V ol.I (N ew Jer-
`sey:Prentice-H all,1991),e.g.,C hapter7(“Internet
`Protocol:C onnectionlessD atagram D elivery”),C hap-
`ter8(“InternetProtocol:R outing IP D atagram s”),
`C hapter10(“Protocol L ayering”),C hapter11(“U ser
`D atagram Protocol”),C hapter12(“R eliable Stream
`TransportService (TC P)”),and C hapter21(“The
`Sock etInterface”).
`
`W .R ichard Stevens,U N IX N etwork Program m ing
`(N ew Jersey:Prentice-H all,Inc.,1990),e.g.,C hapter4
`(“A N etwork Prim er”),C hapter5(“C om m unication
`Protocols”)and C hapter6(“B erk eley Sock ets”).
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 27
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-3 Filed 09/12/14 Page 5 of 21 PageID #: 2397
`
`N o. C laim T erm
`
`D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`
`Supportfor D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`
`W .R ichard Stevens,TC P/IP Illustrated,V olum e 1–
`The Protocols(B oston:A ddison-W esley,1994),e.g.,
`C hapter1(“Introduction”),C hapter3(“IP:Internet
`Protocol”),C hapter9(“IP R outing”),C hapter11
`(“U D P:U serD atagram Protocol”),C hapter17(“TC P:
`Transm issionC ontrol Protocol”),C hapter18(“TC P
`C onnectionEstablishm entand Term ination”),and
`C hapter19(“TC P Interactive D ata Flow”).
`
`2
`
`“having on-line status
`withrespecttothe
`com puternetwork ”
`
`’121PatentC laim s:
`
`10-11
`
`“thatare currently registered withthe serv-
`er”
`
`See also evidence cited for“query”term s
`
`Intrinsic Evidence:
`
`’704Patent
`
`A bstract,1:59-2:9,3:19-32,5:33-37,5:39-42,5:24--
`6:16,10:10-37.
`
`’469Patent
`
`4:59-5:6,6:66-7:59,11:64-12:28,18:26-19:63,
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 28
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-3 Filed 09/12/14 Page 6 of 21 PageID #: 2398
`
`N o. C laim T erm
`
`D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`
`Supportfor D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`20:49-54,22:54-23:34,23:41-24:49,25:61-26:24.
`
`’121Patent
`
`4:51-65,6:60-753,11:28-12:21,18:18-19:55,
`20:21-54,22:47-23:27,23:34-24:42,25:54-26:16.
`
`File H istory
`
`’704,12/2/97H uttonD ec.atEx.A ;
`
`’704R eexam 11/27/09R esp.at11-18,21,27-28;
`
`’704R eexam M ayer-Patel D ec.at10-11,13-15;
`
`’121R eexam ,5/7/10O ffice A ctionat6;
`
`’121R eexam 11/25/09R esp.at8;
`
`’121R eexam 11/25/05R esp.at10-11;
`
`’121R eexam M eyer-Patel D ec.at7-8;
`
`’46910/26/98R esp.at7-8;
`
`’4693/3/99R esp.at8-9;
`
`’469R eexam 11/25/09R esp.at11-12;
`
`Samsung v. Straight Path, IPR2014-01366
`Straight Path - Ex. 2003 - Page 29
`
`

`

`Case 6:13-cv-00604-KNM Document 111-3 Filed 09/12/14 Page 7 of 21 PageID #: 2399
`
`N o. C laim T erm
`
`D efendants’ Proposed C onstruction
`
`Supportfor