`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`In re Inter Partes Review of:
`U.S. Patent No. 8,028,323
`
`For: METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR
`EMPLOYING A FIRST DEVICE TO
`DIRECT A NETWORKED AUDIO
`DEVICE TO OBTAIN A MEDIA ITEM
`
`DECLARATION OF KEVIN C. ALMEROTH, PH.D.
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`US Patent and Trademark Office
`PO Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`
`
`I, Kevin C. Almeroth, hereby declare and state as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained as a technical consultant on behalf of Samsung
`
`Electronics Co., Ltd., the petitioner in the present proceeding, and I am being
`
`compensated at my usual and customary hourly rate. The petition names
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and
`
`Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC as real parties-in-interest. I have
`
`no financial interest in, or affiliation with, the petitioner, real parties-in-
`
`interest, or the patent owner, which I understand to be BLACK HILLS
`
`
`
`LG EXHIBIT 1007
`
`Page 1 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`MEDIA, LLC. My compensation is not dependent upon the outcome of, or
`
`my testimony in, the present inter partes review or any litigation proceedings.
`
`2.
`
`I have reviewed each of the following:
`
`a. U.S. Patent No. 8,028,323 (“the ’323 Patent”), including the claims,
`
`description and prosecution history (which is identified in the Petition
`
`respectively as Exhibits 1001 and 1002);
`
`b. U.S. Patent No. 7,454,511 to Weast (which is identified in the Petition
`
`as Exhibit 1003; hereinafter “Weast”);
`
`c. U.S. Patent No. 7,668,939 to Encarnacion (which is identified in the
`
`Petition as Exhibit 1004; hereinafter “Encarnacion”);
`
`3. Upon reviewing the ’323 Patent, I understand that a non-provisional
`
`application was filed on May 5, 2004 (Appl. No. 10/840,109), which issued as
`
`the ’323 Patent. For the purposes of my analysis, I assume the time of the
`
`purported invention to be May 5, 2003.
`
`4.
`
`It is my opinion that a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`inventions claimed in the ’323 Patent would have at least a B.S. degree in
`
`electrical engineering, computer engineering or computer science and
`
`approximately two years of professional experience with computer
`
`2
`
`Page 2 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`networking and multimedia technologies, or the equivalent. I was a person of
`
`skill in this art in May, 2003.
`
`5. My background, qualifications, and experience relevant to the issues in
`
`proceeding are summarized below. My curriculum vitae is submitted
`
`herewith as Exhibit 1008.
`
`6.
`
`I am currently a Professor in the Department of Computer Science at the
`
`University of California, Santa Barbara. At UCSB, I also hold faculty
`
`appointments and am a founding member of the Computer Engineering (CE)
`
`Program, Media Arts and Technology (MAT) Program, and the Technology
`
`Management Program (TMP). I have been a faculty member at UCSB since
`
`July 1997.
`
`7.
`
`I hold three degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology: (1) a Bachelor
`
`of Science degree in Information and Computer Science (with minors in
`
`Economics, Technical Communication, and American Literature) earned in
`
`June, 1992; (2) a Master of Science degree in Computer Science (with
`
`specialization in Networking and Systems) earned in June, 1994; and (3) a
`
`Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree in Computer Science (Dissertation Title:
`
`Networking and System Support for the Efficient, Scalable Delivery of
`
`Services in Interactive Multimedia System, minor in Telecommunications
`
`Public Policy) earned in June, 1997.
`
`3
`
`Page 3 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`8. One of the major concentrations of my research to date has been the delivery
`
`of multimedia content and data between computing devices. In my research, I
`
`have studied large-scale content delivery systems, and the use of servers
`
`located in a variety of geographic locations to provide scalable delivery to
`
`hundreds, even thousands of users simultaneously. I have also studied
`
`smaller-scale content delivery systems in which content is exchanged between
`
`individual computers and portable devices. My work has emphasized the
`
`exchange of content more efficiently across computer networks, including the
`
`scalable delivery of content to many users, mobile computing, satellite
`
`networking, delivering content to mobile devices, and network support for
`
`data delivery in wireless networks.
`
`9.
`
`In 1992, at the time I started graduate school, my research focused initially on
`
`interactive functions (e.g., VCR-style functions like pause, rewind, and fast-
`
`forward) for near video-on-demand systems in cable systems. This included
`
`handling multiple requests using one audio/video stream broadcast to multiple
`
`receivers simultaneously. This research has developed into new techniques to
`
`deliver on-demand content, including audio, video, web documents, and other
`
`types of data, through the Internet and over other types of networks, in a way
`
`that scales to a large number of users.
`
`4
`
`Page 4 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`10. In 1994, I began to research issues associated with the development and
`
`deployment of multicast in the Internet. Multicast allows scalable
`
`transmission from a single source to an arbitrary number of receivers. Some
`
`of my more recent research endeavors have looked at how to use the
`
`scalability offered by multicast to provide streaming media support for
`
`complex applications like distance learning, distributed collaboration,
`
`distributed games, and large-scale wireless communication.
`
`11. Starting in 1997, I worked on a project called the Interactive Multimedia
`
`Jukebox (“IMJ”) to integrate the streaming media capabilities of the Internet
`
`together with the interactivity of the web. Users could select content to view
`
`from a website, which would then be scheduled for delivery using multicast
`
`on one of a number of logical content streams. Delivery would be scheduled
`
`according to available communication capacity: if idle capacity existed when
`
`a request was made, the requesting user would be able to watch its selection
`
`immediately. If the server was fully utilized in streaming previously selected
`
`content, the user’s selection would be queued. In the meantime, the user
`
`would see what content was already playing, and because of the use of
`
`multicast, would be able to join one of the existing streams and watch the
`
`content at the point it was currently being transmitted. This service combined
`
`the interactivity of the web with the streaming capabilities of the Internet to
`
`5
`
`Page 5 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`create a jukebox-like service. As part of the project, we obtained permission
`
`from Turner Broadcasting to transmit cartoons and other short-subject content.
`
`12. Starting in 1997, I began researching issues related to wireless devices. In
`
`particular, I was interested in showing how to provide greater communication
`
`capability to the wireless devices of the time, which tended to be resource-
`
`constrained (e.g., in terms of CPU, memory, networking, and power). Starting
`
`in 1998, I published several papers on my work to develop a flexible,
`
`lightweight, battery-aware network protocol stack, which were similar in
`
`nature to protocols like UPnP and DLNA (discussed below at ¶¶ 21-31. From
`
`this initial work, I have made wireless networking and wireless devices one of
`
`the major themes of my research. These topics include developing
`
`applications for mobile devices, for example, virally exchanging and tracking
`
`“coupons” through “opportunistic contact”; building network communication
`
`among a set of mobile devices unaided by any other kind of network
`
`infrastructure; and dynamically detecting weaknesses in the protocol operation
`
`of wireless network traffic to evaluate alternative solutions.
`
`13. In the course of my research, I have been involved in the development of
`
`academic research into available technology in the marketplace. One aspect
`
`of this work is my involvement in the Internet Engineering Task Force
`
`(IETF), including many content delivery-related working groups like the
`
`6
`
`Page 6 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`Audio Video Transport (AVT) group, the MBone Deployment (MBONED)
`
`group, the Source Specific Multicast (SSM) group, the Inter-Domain
`
`Multicast Routing (IDMR) group, the Reliable Multicast Transport (RMT)
`
`group, the Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) group, etc. I have also
`
`served as a member of the Multicast Directorate (MADDOGS), which
`
`oversaw the standardization of all things related to multicast in the IETF.
`
`Finally, I was the Chair of the Internet2 Multicast Working Group for seven
`
`years.
`
`14. I am an author or co-author of nearly 200 technical papers, published software
`
`systems, IETF Internet Drafts, and IETF Request for Comments (RFCs). The
`
`titles and subject matter of these technical papers are listed in full on my CV,
`
`which is identified in the petition as Exhibit 1008. Furthermore, in the courses
`
`I teach at UCSB, a significant portion of my curriculum covers aspects of the
`
`Internet and network communication including the physical and data link
`
`layers of the Open System Interconnect (OSI) protocol stack, and standardized
`
`protocols for communicating across a variety of physical media such as cable
`
`systems, telephone lines, wireless, and high-speed Local Area Networks
`
`(LANs). The courses I have taught also cover most major topics in Internet
`
`communication, including data communication, multimedia encoding, and
`
`7
`
`Page 7 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`(mobile) application design. For a complete list of courses I have taught, see
`
`my curriculum vitae, Exhibit 1008.
`
`State of the Art Through 2003
`
`15. One of the most widely deployed computer networks, i.e., physical
`
`connections of computers to exchange data, is the Internet. The Internet has
`
`been around for several decades, with many tracing its origins to the ARPAnet
`
`in the late 1960s. While the origins of the Internet were humble, it has grown
`
`into a massive, highly sophisticated network for highly complex and highly
`
`varied forms of communication. Originally useful mainly for the exchange of
`
`text documents through email or file exchange, the Internet has evolved to
`
`support more complex data transactions including multiple media types (e.g.,
`
`images, audio, video), hence the concept of “multimedia.” Coupled with new
`
`and improved delivery capabilities and increased ways of offering information
`
`to users, the ways in which the Internet could be used increased dramatically
`
`during the 1990s. These factors led to numerous technical innovations in the
`
`way data was made available to users.
`
`16. Much of the communication in networks takes place using a “client/server”
`
`paradigm, where content servers hold information desired by users. Through
`
`their clients, users make requests for this information, and the server responds
`
`by providing the requested information. Such a paradigm is used in, for
`
`8
`
`Page 8 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`example, the World Wide Web (WWW). In other applications, like email,
`
`servers are responsible for accepting, storing, and forwarding email.
`
`17. One approach to developing advancements in the services provided by servers
`
`to clients—particularly with respect to personal computers—has been to
`
`mimic and improve on existing, non-computer based services. It was a well-
`
`established goal at least as early as the latter half of the 1990s to have
`
`computers provide the kinds of consumer-facing services that were previously
`
`available in only orthogonal, monolithic technology domains, such as
`
`television, radio, telephony, shopping, and gaming. With the power of the
`
`Internet, video programming could be enhanced with web-style interactivity;
`
`desired content could be watched on-demand instead of according to a static
`
`schedule; games could be played with multiple, remote users; “radio stations”
`
`could be custom built based on individual user preferences; and shopping
`
`experiences could be developed that offered advantages beyond what could be
`
`found by visiting a store.
`
`18. One particular environment that received significant attention was the home.
`
`Home-based computing and home-based networking provided rich
`
`opportunities for technology development and product sales. This
`
`environment was further amplified by the increased availability and use of
`
`network-capable mobile devices (e.g., laptops, PDAs, mobile phones). Within
`
`9
`
`Page 9 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`this area, a particular focus was on the development of various standards that
`
`would permit consumers to share media content freely among devices within a
`
`network.
`
`19. At the same time that laptop computer and PDA devices were reaching
`
`mainstream adoption in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the industry was in
`
`parallel implementing the same and more features of those devices into
`
`cellular phones. Further, the lines between laptop computers, PDAs, and
`
`cellular phones were blurred given the availability of peripherals for
`
`connecting laptop computers and PDAs to cellular voice and data networks,
`
`and the increasing processing and memory capabilities of cellular phones. By
`
`the late 1990s and early 2000s, several companies released cellular phones
`
`with wireless-Internet capability and phones began to appear on the market
`
`that had the ability to play media files in either Windows Media or MP3
`
`format, including files with extensions .asf, .wma, .wmv, and .mp3. By at
`
`least 2003, the industry was well aware of building into cellular phones the
`
`features used in laptop computers and PDA devices.
`
`20. The increasing popularity of digital media and potential of streaming
`
`platforms led many major manufacturers in the early 2000s to develop
`
`wireless set-top boxes and/or music servers that could stream video to a TV or
`
`audio to a stereo system from various computing devices. These devices
`
`10
`
`Page 10 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`bridged the gap between computers and the home entertainment system, and
`
`generally allowed consumers to play media from a desktop computer,
`
`personal device, or Internet streaming source to their TVs and stereo systems.
`
`Wireless set-top boxes or music servers (and applications for these devices)
`
`were developed in the early 2000s by Intel, Philips, Slim Devices, PRISMIQ,
`
`Oregan Networks, and Mediabolic, among others.
`
`21. To facilitate the integration of network-connected devices, Microsoft
`
`introduced an initiative called Universal Plug and Play (“UPnP”) at the
`
`Consumer Electronics Show in January of 1999. The initiative was originally
`
`supported by companies such as Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Compaq,
`
`Dell, and many others. The members of the UPnP Forum defined and
`
`published device descriptions for the participants in a UPnP network to create
`
`standard building blocks for home networking.
`
`22. By December 2001, the UPnP Forum included more than 350 member
`
`companies from many industries, including consumer electronics, home
`
`automation and security, computers and peripherals, networking, appliances,
`
`semiconductors and others. The first UPnP device standard was published in
`
`November 2001, and the first UPnP-enabled devices shipped in December
`
`11
`
`Page 11 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`2001. An early UPnP timeline is reproduced below:
`
`
`
`23. The UPnP forum finalized the UPnP Device Architecture, Version 1.0
`
`specification in June of 2000. The UPnP Device Architecture defines the
`
`protocols for communication between UPnP control points and devices
`
`according to six well-defined phases:
`
` Addressing, by which devices obtain an IP address;
`
` Discovery, by which control points become aware of the existence of
`
`devices;
`
` Description, by which control points learn details about devices and their
`
`services;
`
` Control, in which control points invoke service actions;
`
` Eventing, by which devices notify control points of changes in state; and
`
` Presentation, by which devices can present web pages to control
`
`points
`
`12
`
`Page 12 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`allowing for status and control interactions.
`
`The UPnP Device Architecture describes a networking architecture enabling
`
`peer-to-peer network connectivity of intelligent appliances, wireless devices,
`
`personal computers and other devices with communication capabilities.
`
`24. With regard to device discovery, the UPnP Device Architecture teaches that
`
`after a control point has discovered a device, it uses an HTTP URL contained
`
`in the discovery message to request a UPnP description from the device,
`
`which may include vendor-specific information such as the model name and
`
`number, serial number, and manufacturer name. After obtaining knowledge
`
`of a device and its services, a control point can then ask those services to
`
`invoke actions.
`
`25. The June 2000 UPnP Device Architecture could be implemented in a number
`
`of use cases, including by deploying UPnP to enable users to store, play and
`
`view audio and video content across a range of consumer electronics devices.
`
`For example, at least by December 2001, UPnP had defined the following
`
`multimedia use-case: “While checking her e-mail, Paula learns that a new
`
`recording by her favorite artist is available. Paula visits the recording label’s
`
`Web site, purchases a copy of one of the songs and initiates a download of the
`
`song to her new audio player in the family room. Later that night Paula
`
`decides to listen to the song on her home entertainment system. Using her
`
`13
`
`Page 13 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`remote control, she selects the new recording from her audio player and plays
`
`it on her stereo.” See Ex. 1009, Miller et al., “Home Networking with
`
`Universal Plug and Play” (IEEE, Dec. 2001).
`
`26. Likewise, more specific use-case scenarios were developed for UPnP to
`
`stream multimedia between connected UPnP-compliant devices. For
`
`example:
`
`
`See Ex. 1010, Michael Jeronimo & Jack Weast, UPnP Design By Example,
`
`Intel Press (Apr. 2003).
`
`27. By June 26, 2002, UPnP had released version 1.0 of its standardized device
`
`control protocol specifications (collectively, “UPnP Version 1.0”), and
`
`published them on its public website (http://www.upnp.org). The
`
`standardized device control protocol specifications included a standardization
`
`for devices including a “media renderer” and “media server,” as well as a
`
`14
`
`Page 14 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`standardization document “UPnP AV Architecture:1” that defines the general
`
`interaction between UPnP control points and UPnP AV devices, and was
`
`designed to support devices such as PCs, TVs, PDAs, CD/DVD players,
`
`jukeboxes, set-top boxes, stereo systems, MP3 players, cameras and
`
`camcorders. See Ex. 1011, UPnP AV Architecture:1 For Universal Plug and
`
`Play Version 1.0, Status: Approved Design Document, Date: June 25, 2002.
`
`28. The UPnP control point lies at the center of the UPnP AV 1.0 architecture.
`
`UPnP control points control the operation of the media servers and media
`
`renderers, and typically perform some variation of the following operations:
`
` Locate the existing media server and media renderer devices in the network,
`
`i.e., discovery.
`
` Enumerate the available content for the user to choose from, i.e., content
`
`enumeration.
`
` Query the server and renderer to find a common transfer protocol and
`
`content format for the selected content, i.e., protocol/format negotiation.
`
` Configure the server and renderer with the desired content and selected
`
`protocol/format, i.e., server/renderer setup.
`
`
`
`Initiate the transfer of the content according to the desires of the users, such
`
`as play, pause, and seek, i.e., control content flow.
`
`15
`
`Page 15 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
` Adjust the rendering characteristics such as volume, brightness, and so
`
`forth, i.e., control rendering characteristics.
`
`29. UPnP was implemented in consumer devices starting at least as early as 2002.
`
`By September 2002, Intel Corp. announced the “Extended Wireless PC
`
`Initiative,” which was focused on providing UPnP-based technology to
`
`developers, “allowing them to distribute PC digital media to TVs and stereos
`
`throughout the consumer’s home.” See Ex. 1012, “TV Meets the Web”
`
`(Financial Times, Sept. 10, 2002). “Critical to media distribution is a new PC
`
`peripheral called a digital media adaptor, which creates a link between PCs,
`
`TVs and stereos. It can receive digital media from the PC using 802.11
`
`wireless networking (WiFi) and UPnP technologies, and can connect to TVs
`
`and stereos using standard A/V cables — much like a DVD player.” Id.
`
`“Intel’s specification adds UPnP, to let these devices auto-configure to
`
`recognize and seamlessly interoperate with other UPnP devices on the home
`
`network.” See Ex. 1013, “Intel Pushes Plug and Play Into Homes”
`
`(Extremetech.com, Sept. 10, 2002).
`
`30. By January 2003, Mediabolic, Inc. announced that it would incorporate UPnP
`
`support and pursue UPnP compliance testing for its Mediabolic ONE
`
`platform, a middleware solution used in digital entertainment devices: “The
`
`Mediabolic ONE platform enables manufacturers to create new digital
`
`16
`
`Page 16 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`entertainment devices with optional networking capabilities that extend digital
`
`media entertainment to multiple consumer devices and PCs around the home.
`
`UPnP technology is an industry standard for interoperability of digital devices
`
`on a home network and is an essential ingredient in ensuring that Mediabolic-
`
`enabled products are interoperable with the growing number of digital devices
`
`that use the technology to discover and share content and services. . . . The
`
`Mediabolic ONE platform and UPnP technology enable a world in which
`
`music and other digital entertainment content can be accessed from various
`
`devices in the home without regard for where the media is stored. Digital
`
`devices based on the Mediabolic ONE platform and UPnP technologies will
`
`be able to access digital content located on UPnP-enabled PCs, for example,
`
`allowing consumers to play video clips or view family photos on the TV, or
`
`listen to digital music on the home stereo.” See Ex. 1014, “Mediabolic
`
`Incorporates Support for UPnP Technology into the Mediabolic ONE
`
`Platform” (Business Wire, Jan. 6, 2003).
`
`31. By February 2003, Oregan Networks developed and demonstrated a UPnP-
`
`enabled DVD platform “capable of streaming media content and services from
`
`a PC.” See Ex. 1015, “Oregan Networks Demonstrates UPnP Enabled” (PR
`
`Newswire, Feb. 18, 2003). The UPnP-enabled DVD platform was designed to
`
`“allow consumers to use their televisions to view photos and movie videos
`
`17
`
`Page 17 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`stored on their PC, or play MP3 files through DVD audio systems. All
`
`content is discovered automatically, and offered through a series of intuitive
`
`menus on the TV.” Id. “Regardless of whether the content is stored on an
`
`UPnP enabled PC, PVR, or MP3 player, the technology permits remote
`
`access, presentation and control of that content from any other UPnP
`
`supporting device within the home.” Id.
`
`Overview of the ’323 Patent
`
`32. The ‘323 Patent addresses a method and device for obtaining media on a
`
`network. At a high level, the patent describes that a first device receives a
`
`playlist of songs or other media items, selects media items from the playlist,
`
`selects a second device, and directs the second device to receive the selected
`
`media item from a content server without user input on the second device.
`
`The ’323 Patent describes the devices using the nomenclature of the UPnP
`
`architecture described above, including a “control point” to access music and
`
`control remote devices, and a “rendering device” to play back selected media.
`
`’323 Patent, 7:33-47; 8:17-41. The above description is borne out by Figure
`
`4, which is representative of the processing of an exemplary embodiment of
`
`the ’323 Patent. A list of playlists is displayed, which allows the selection of
`
`one playlist. ’323 Patent, Fig. 4 at 41-42. An attribute of the selected playlist
`
`is used to request and receive the playlist. Id. at 43-44. Media items from the
`
`18
`
`Page 18 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`playlist are selected, id. at 46, a second device is selected, id. at 45, and the
`
`first device directs the second device to request the identified media items
`
`from a content server. Id. at 47-50. In the UPnP nomenclature, the first
`
`device is a “control point” device and the second device is a “media
`
`rendering” device. Id. at 9:33-38.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`33. I have been asked to offer my opinion regarding the understanding of a person
`
`skilled in the art regarding certain claim terms in the ’323 Patent. I
`
`understand that in the present proceeding, claim terms are interpreted as the
`
`broadest reasonable construction consistent with the specification or “BRC.”
`
`34. I have been asked to offer my opinion regarding the understanding of a person
`
`skilled in the art regarding the claim term “playlist,” which appears in each of
`
`independent claims 1, 10, 14, 16, 17 and 18. The specification of the ’323
`
`Patent repeatedly discloses that the playlist is a list of songs. See, e.g., ’323
`
`Patent, 11:33-35 (“The listener selects at least one song from the received
`
`playlist, as shown in block 35. Either a single song may be selected, or a
`
`plurality of songs may be selected.”); 11:48-50 (“The selected songs may be
`
`played in the order selected, in random order, or in any other desired order.
`
`The order can preferably be changed at any time.”) The specification also
`
`contemplates that a playlist can include types of content other than audio. For
`
`19
`
`Page 19 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`example, the types of content that can be in playlists include “pictures, video,
`
`software, or data.” ’323 Patent, 16:25-30. In the terminology of the ’323
`
`Patent, the term used to refer to the different potential types of content is
`
`“media.” For example, the title of the ’323 Patent is “Method and system for
`
`employing a first device to direct a networked audio device to obtain a media
`
`item,” and the claims refer to playlists being used to allow a user to select a
`
`media item. See, e.g., ’323 Patent, claim 1 (“selecting at least one media item
`
`identifier from the received playlist.”) This is consistent with the use of a
`
`playlist in the specification to refer to a list of media items. Since the media
`
`items on a playlist must be selected for inclusion in the playlist, a person of
`
`ordinary skill would understand the term “playlist” to be “a list of media
`
`items.”
`
`35. In my opinion, one skilled in the art would not understand the BRC of the
`
`term “playlist” to require that media items be played in a sequence. The
`
`specification describes playing songs selected from a playlist, rather than
`
`playing all of the songs on a playlist. This is contrary to the concept that the
`
`playlist be arranged to be played in a sequence. The specification also
`
`explicitly states that selected songs can be played in a selected order, a
`
`random order, or any other desired order, and may be changed at any time.
`
`’323 Patent, 11:47-50. The patent therefore does not indicate that the
`
`20
`
`Page 20 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`sequence of items in a playlist requires that the media items be played in that
`
`order.
`
`36. Based on this disclosure one of skill in the art would understand the BRC of
`
`“playlist” to be “a list of media items.”
`
`The Weast Patent
`
`37. Weast, like the ’323 Patent, discloses a computing device operating in a UPnP
`
`network. See, e.g., Weast, 1:36-51. In particular, Weast describes the user
`
`interface of the computing device used to control other devices in the network,
`
`which is called the “control point” device in UPnP. Weast also describes the
`
`interaction between the control point, media server, and media rendering
`
`devices. I understand that Weast explicitly draws support from the UPnP A/V
`
`architecture documents, and as such understand it to omit well-known features
`
`in the disclosure in order to focus on the particular aspects of the user
`
`interface that the applicant considered important. See, e.g., id. at 2:65-67;
`
`3:15-18. The control point user interface of Weast is described as being
`
`configured to display resources that are available on the network, including
`
`available media renderers and available media content for playback on those
`
`renderers. See, e.g., id. at 5:1-9; 5:16-44. The control point locates media
`
`renderers on the network by transmitting discovery requests, to which media
`
`renderers respond. See, e.g., id. at 5:59-67. Similarly, the control point
`
`21
`
`Page 21 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`locates media servers by transmitting discovery requests, and can then query
`
`the media servers for available media content. See, e.g., id. at 5:16-44. After
`
`locating the resources, they can be displayed using a user interface on the
`
`control point. See, e.g., id. at Figs. 4a-4c, 5a-5b, 6a-6b. While several user
`
`interfaces are disclosed, one of the interfaces uses a tree-like interface to
`
`display available media renderers and content. See, e.g., id. at 7:6-15; Fig. 4c.
`
`The list of available media content allows selection of media content to be
`
`played back on a selected media renderer. See, e.g., id. at 7:29-46; 8:18-30;
`
`8:34-39. The interface also allows selection of a media renderer. See, e.g., id.
`
`at 7:65-8:2.
`
`38. Weast also discloses that after selection of media content, the control point
`
`will direct the media renderer to retrieve the requested media content from the
`
`media server where the media content is located. Weast discloses that this
`
`direction and retrieval happens without any user input at the media renderer.
`
`For example, Weast discloses that “in response to a user selection to render a
`
`media content, control point device 102 instructs the applicable UPnP media
`
`renderers 106 accordingly, to receive/pull and render provided media contents
`
`132 from UPnP media servers 104.” See, e.g., id. at 6:19-23; Fig. 3b. This
`
`suggests that after an input on the control point, the media renderer is
`
`instructed to pull and render the requested content. There is no mention of
`
`22
`
`Page 22 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`waiting for input at the media renderer, or that the instruction happens after an
`
`input is also received at the media renderer. Additionally, the rendering of
`
`media content is described with input at the control point device, for example
`
`by using an interface on the control point to drag and drop media to playback
`
`onto an icon representing a media renderer or by using a context menu in the
`
`same interface. Id. at 8:34-43; 7:29-40. A further indication that this is
`
`correct is that Weast describes that when a media renderer is already in use,
`
`requests to play additional media items are handled algorithmically, rather
`
`than by soliciting a user input at the media rendering device:
`
`In various embodiments, the corresponding file system entry of
`a media content 132 of interest is queued, if it is dropped into a
`folder window 402c of a corresponding UPnP media renderer
`106 when the UPnP media renderer 106 is in use. In other
`embodiments, the corresponding file system entry of a media
`content 132 of interest may be dropped into a folder window
`402c of the corresponding UPnP media renderer 106 only if the
`UPnP media renderer 106 is not currently in use.
`
`Weast, 8:44-52 (emphasis added). Weast therefore explicitly considers two
`
`scenarios where it is possible that media renderer is already in use, and
`
`therefore, the user of the media renderer may not want to have a newly
`
`requested song be played. Rather than directing that a user input is required at
`
`the media renderer to broker competing requests, Weast discloses that the
`
`23
`
`Page 23 of 32
`
`
`
`Docket No. 032449.0032-US04
`
`system will either queue or decline to stream the request. A person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would understand that,
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
