Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 10 of 19
`
`REMARKS
`
`Claims 2—8, 10, 14—20, 22, 25, 27—33, 35, 40—45, and 49—57 are pending in this
`
`application. By this amendment, claim 55 is amended. Thus, claims 2—8, 10, 14—20, 22, 25,
`
`27-33, 35, 40—45, and 49-57 remain pending in this application. Reconsideration and
`
`allowance of this application is respectfully requested.
`
`Claim 55 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply
`
`with the enablement requirement. In particular, the Examiner asserts that the steps of
`
`“generating in a third license one or more rights based on the meta—right in the second
`
`license, wherein the one or more rights in the third license includes at least one right that is
`
`shared among one or more users or devices” is not disclosed in the specification.
`
`However, Applicants respectfully submit that amended claim 55, which recites, in
`
`relevant part, “generating in a further license one or more rights based on the meta—right in
`
`the second license, wherein the one or more rights in the further license includes at least one
`
`right that is shared among one or more users or devices; and associating at least one state
`
`variable with the at least one right that is shared in the further license, wherein the at least one
`
`state variable that is associated with the further license is based on the at least one state
`
`variable that is associated with the second license,” is fully supported by the specification.
`
`For example, according to the invention, the first license is the offer allowing a
`
`distributor to issue licenses for affiliated clubs; the distributor derives from the offer a second
`
`license allowing an affiliated club to issue licenses to its member; and the club derives a
`
`further license (i.e. a third license) allowing a member to play the ebook.
`
`In particular, paragraph [0099] of the published application provides:
`
`FIG. 16 is used to illustrate employing of a state variable in deriving rights
`that are shared among a dynamic set of rights recipients, according to the
`present invention. In FIG. 16, an offer 1601 specifies that a distributor can
`issue site licenses to affiliated clubs, allowing 5 members of each club to
`concurrently View, play, and the like, content, such as an e-book. A
`corresponding state variable 1607 associated with such a right can be
`unspecified in the offer 1601. When corresponding rights 1602 and 1603 are
`issued to affiliated clubs,
`the corresponding club identities are used to
`specify state variables 1608 and 1609 in the issued rights. The offers 1602
`and 1603 are meta—rights derived from the offer 1601, with offer being
`assigned the distinct state variables 1608 and 1609. Further rights 1604-
`1606 can be derived from the offers 1602 and 1603 to be shared among
`members of each respective club. The licenses 1604 and 1605 are examples
`
`107839391
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. l
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 1
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 11 of 19
`
`of rights derived from the offer 1602, and which inherit the state variable
`1608, e.g., "urnzacmezclub," whereas the license 1606 inherits the state
`variable 1609, e.g., "urnzfoozclub."
`
`For reference, Figure 16 is shown below:
`
`?“
`
`:
`
`
`g
`i-S“ we:
`
`
`:
`;
`;
`
`:ta ddhmmor“““““““““““““
`é may
`abs-53k
`
`‘
`
`,
`i
`g
`
`
`
`3
`“~-
`
`7
`_
`6..» 18133
`. . . . . . - 41‘?'-;\u““-xi‘““““““““““
`
`
`
`. W
`.
`~
`amok
`g
`:
`similarseeus: use = 5
`smuflanmus use 2 S
`E
`5
`
`
`
`state variable 3:1 2
`state meme Earl
`--=-
`
`club
`
`'
`amaemub
`‘
`i
`
`
`
`'v."nunnnunuulnnnmm
`
`play
`
`
`amok
`. elmozk
`
`
`
`shrm‘tanems use E 5
`simultmmus use fi 5
`
`
`smite vafiahhs s6
`7
`silage variable id a _fi__. 16:18
`E state variable id = fig, @130";
`
`
`
`
`:
`:5 umLaemvstcmti
`umficmaxzim
`#3
`
`' umfiofldflh ..1\
`
`
`Fgig.
`
`3' 3
`
`In addition, paragraph [0101] of the published application provides:
`
`The state of rights can depend on more than one state variable. FIG. 18 is
`used to illustrate employing of multiple state variables to represent one state
`of rights, according to the present invention. The example described with
`respect to FIG. 18 builds upon the example described with respect to FIG.
`16. In FIG. 18, a usage right can be tracked by employing multiple state
`variables 1807 and 1808 in an offer 1801. The state variable 1808, for
`example,
`representing a priority level,
`can stay unspecified in the
`corresponding offers 1802 and 1803 (e.g., site licenses). The corresponding
`state variables 1809-1811, for example, used for setting a priority, can be
`assigned to each member in the corresponding licenses 1804, 1805 and
`1806. The corresponding right to view, play, and the like, can now be
`dependent on two state variables, effectively restricting 5 simultaneous
`views, plays, and the like, per priority level.
`
`107839391
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 2
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 2
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 12 of 19
`
`For reference, Figure 18 is shown below:
`
`aileigeimia QM Q $
`sale y‘afifibfir} kfi
`twammfiwfi
`5‘th wrfiamg is“ ‘4' “w $535
`tmafisfitfiwx
`“~-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.Y
`,.
`.‘ “3
`QM Fm sub W:
`EEQQ
`".1.
`.
`msmfitas.»
`
`,.
`
`H ,.
`,
`"£55 mes 33' 5
`
`s “ '
`
`'(I(I(ltl/l/l/(rt/(I/I/I/lll(1/1115!!!
`
`;4;4;;;;;;»;;l/;)3111)I;Jlliltl//'f/
`
`
`
`
`: my Rem aim MW
`,
`.
`‘ m3?
`\ 5mm"
`‘ Sérsmfimsss useQfi
`
`1
`
`.
`
`
`
`
`
`iii-$23:65%thQ3Q
`asmm‘mesciué:
`
`
`
`i‘irx-d
`
`
`
`E
`\
`E
`
`E
`
`r'E‘EJIt-Si‘r‘§5\.\‘fi§ Um = 5
`-
`- V10 '35 . \t'fli:
`
`lily, nambk. its
`
`“fl 1839
`
`Fig. 13
`
`63:31:33;
`Q5
`£5113ka
`Qinmélemwim um; Q 5
`mm QEI‘ELKQ? m *—“
`$31 3
`:anifimitjltfij
`.1
`:QEQQ \erQtsQ Q: E Qer._,,-1
`
`5
`
`Thus, the features recited in claim 55, as presented herein, are fully and clearly
`
`supported by at least Figs. 16 and 18, and related discussion in at least paragraphs [0099] and
`
`[0101] of the published application. Accordingly, Applicants respectfully submit that the
`
`rejection of claim 55 under 35 U.S.C. § 1 12 should be reconsidered and withdrawn.
`
`Claims 2—10, 14—22, 25, 27—35, and 40—54 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
`
`being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 6,226,618 to Downs et al. However, Applicants
`
`107839391
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - EX. 1058, p. 3
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 3
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 13 of 19
`
`respectfully submit that Downs fails to disclose, suggest, or render obvious, each and every
`
`feature recited in claims 2—10, 14—22, 25, 27—35, and 40—54.
`
`For example, independent claim 40 recites a method for sharing rights adapted to be
`
`associated with an item, the method comprising specifying in a first license at least one usage
`
`right and at least one meta-right for the item, wherein the usage right and the meta—right
`
`include at least one right that is shared among one or more users or devices, defining, via the
`
`at least one usage right, a manner of use selected from a plurality of permitted manners of use
`
`for the item, defining, via the at least one meta—right, a manner of rights derivation selected
`
`from a plurality of permitted manners of rights derivation for the item, wherein the at least
`
`one meta-right allows the one or more users or devices to transfer rights or to derive new
`
`rights, associating at least one state variable with the at least one right in the first license,
`
`wherein the at least one state variable identifies a location where a state of rights is tracked,
`
`generating in a second license one or more rights based on the meta—right in the first license,
`
`wherein the one or more rights in the second license includes at least one right that is shared
`
`among one or more users or devices, and associating at least one state variable with the at
`
`least one right that is shared in the second license, wherein the at least one state variable that
`
`is associated with the second license is based on the at least one state variable that is
`
`associated with the first license.
`
`In addition, independent claim 41 recites a system for sharing rights adapted to be
`
`associated with an item, the system comprising means for specifying in a first license at least
`
`one usage right and at least one meta-rightfor the item, wherein the usage right and the
`
`meta—right include at least one right that is shared among one or more users or devices,
`
`means for defining, via the at least one usage right, a manner of use selected from a plurality
`
`of permitted manners of use for the item, means for defining, via the at least one meta—right, a
`
`manner of rights derivation selected from a plurality of permitted manners of rights
`
`derivation for the item, wherein the at least one meta-right allows the one or more users or
`
`devices to transfer rights or to derive new rights, means for associating at least one state
`
`variable with the at least one right in the first license, wherein the at least one state variable
`
`identifies a location where a state of rights is tracked, means for generating in a second
`
`license one or more rights based on the meta—right in the first license, wherein the one or
`
`more rights in the second license includes at least one right that is shared among one or more
`
`10783939.l
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - EX. 1058, p. 4
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 4
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 14 of 19
`
`users or devices, and means for associating at least one state variable with the at least one
`
`right that is shared in the second license, wherein the at least one state variable that is
`
`associated with the second license is based on the at least one state variable that is
`
`associated with thefirst license.
`
`Furthermore, independent claim 42 recites a device for sharing rights adapted to be
`
`associated with an item, the device comprising means for receiving a first license specifying
`
`at least one usage right and at least one meta—right for the item, wherein the usage right and
`
`the meta-right include at least one right that is shared among one or more users or devices,
`
`the least one usage right defines a manner of use selected from a plurality of permitted
`
`manners of use for the item, the at least one meta—right defines a manner of rights derivation
`
`selected from a plurality of permitted manners of rights derivation for the item, the at least
`
`one meta-right allows the one or more users or devices to transfer rights or to derive new
`
`rights, at least one state variable is associated with the at least one right in the first license
`
`and identifies a location where a state of rights is tracked, and means for generating in a
`
`second license one or more rights based on the meta—right in the first license, wherein the one
`
`or more rights in the second license includes at least one right that is shared among one or
`
`more users or devices, at least one state variable is associated with the at least one right that
`
`is shared in the second license, and the at least one state variable that is associated with the
`
`second license is based on the at least one state variable that is associated with the first
`
`license.
`
`Thus, the invention recited in independent claims 40, 41 and 42 includes at least the
`
`novel features of specifying in a first license at least one usage right and at least one meta-
`
`right for an item, the at least one meta—right allows one or more users or devices to transfer
`
`rights or to derive new rights, associating at least one state variable with the at least one right
`
`in the first license, wherein the at least one state variable identifies a location where a state of
`
`rights is tracked, generating in a second license one or more rights based on the meta—right in
`
`the first license, and associating at least one state variable with at least one right that is shared
`
`in the second license, wherein the at least one state variable that is associated with the second
`
`license is based on the at least one state variable that is associated with the first license.
`
`By contrast, Downs is directed to a method and apparatus of securely providing data
`
`to a user’s system, wherein the data is encrypted so as to only be decryptable by a data
`
`10783939.l
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - EX. 1058, p. 5
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 5
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 15 of 19
`
`decrypting key, the data decrypting key being encrypted using a first public key, and the
`
`encrypted data being accessible to the user’ s system. The method includes transferring the
`
`encrypted data decrypting key to a clearing house that possesses a first private key, which
`
`corresponds to the first public key; decrypting the data decrypting key using the first private
`
`key; re—encrypting the data decrypting key using a second public key; transferring the re—
`
`encrypted data decrypting key to the user's system, the user's system possessing a second
`
`private key, which corresponds to the second public key; and decrypting the re—encrypted
`
`data decrypting key using the second private key. However, Downs fails to disclose, teach or
`
`suggest at least the noted features recited in independent claims 40, 41 and 42.
`
`Specifically, and contrary to the Examiner’ s assertions, Downs fails to disclose meta—
`
`rights, as recited in the claims. In particular, meta—rights are defined in the present patent
`
`application, as rights to “permit granting of rights to others or the derivation of rights” (see,
`
`e.g., Applicants’ published Specification, paragraph [0041]):
`
`[0041] Rights can specify transfer rights, such as distribution rights,
`and can permit granting of rights to others or the derivation of rights.
`Such rights are referred to as “meta-rights”. Meta-rights are the rights that
`one has to [generate], manipulate, modify,
`[dispose of] or otherwise
`derive other meta-rights or usage rights. Meta-rights can be thought of
`as usage rights to usage rights [or other meta-rights]. Meta-rights can
`include rights to offer, grant, obtain, transfer, delegate,
`track, surrender,
`exchange, and revoke usage rights lo/from others. Meta-rights can include
`the rights to modify any of the conditions associated with other rights. For
`example, a meta-right may be the right to extend or reduce the scope of a
`particular right. A meta—right may also be the right to extend or reduce the
`validation period of a right.
`
`As succinctly stated and defined in the present patent application, usage rights permit
`
`actions on an item, such as music, video, digital content, and the like. Such actions can
`
`include play, read, View, other uses, and the like, of the item. On the other hand, meta—rights
`
`permit actions on rights, such as usage rights and meta—rights. Such actions can include
`
`generate, modify, transfer, and the like, of rights.
`
`By contrast, the system of Downs does not disclose meta—rights, but instead merely
`
`discloses that content stores can alter usage conditions. For example, and as identified by the
`
`Examiner, Downs discloses, at Col. 21, lines 30-42:
`
`The Content Usage Control Layer 505 permits the specification and
`enforcement of the conditions or restrictions imposed on the use of Content
`113 use at the End-User Device(s) 109. The conditions may specify the
`
`107839391
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 6
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 6
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 16 of 19
`
`number of plays allowed for the Content 113, whether or not a secondary
`copy of the Content 113 is allowed, the number of secondary copies, and
`whether or not the Content 113 may be copied to an external portable
`device. The Content Provider(s) 101 sets the allowable Usage Conditions
`517 and transmits them to the Electronic Digital Content Store(s) 103 in a
`SC (see the License Control Layer 501 section). The Electronic Digital
`Content Store(s) 103 can add to or narrow the Usage Conditions 517 as
`long as it doesn’t
`invalidate the original conditions set by the Content
`Provider(s) 101. The Electronic Digital Content Store(s) 103 then transmits
`all Store Usage Conditions 519 (in a SC) to the End-User DeVice(s) 109 and
`[he Clearinghouse(s)
`105. The Clearinghouse(s)
`105 perform Usage
`Conditions Validation 521 before authorizing the Content 113 release to an
`End-User DeVice(s) 109.
`
`Thus, contrary to the Examiner’s statements on page 2 of the office action, Col. 2,
`
`lines 30-36, of Downs does not disclose the concept of meta-rights as it is recited in the
`
`claims and used in this invention. Instead, this portion of Downs merely provides that a
`
`content store has the ability to add to or narrow usage conditions, but requires that the usage
`
`conditions do not invalidate the original conditions set by the Content Provider. This is
`
`distinguishable from meta—rights, as is recited in the claims. Specifically, Downs fails to
`
`disclose or suggest a license that includes “at least one usage right and at least one meta—right
`
`for the item, wherein the usage right and the meta—right include at least one right that is
`
`shared among one or more users or devices,” “defining, via the at least one usage right, a
`
`manner of use selected from a plurality of permitted manners of use for the item,” and
`
`“defining, via the at least one meta-right, a manner of rights derivation selected from a
`
`plurality of permitted manners of rights derivation for the item, wherein said at least one
`
`meta—right allows said one or more users or devices to transfer rights or to derive new rights,”
`
`as is recited in claim 40, for example.
`
`Accordingly, Applicants again respectfully submit that, while Downs suggests that a
`
`store can add to or narrow usage conditions with restrictions, Downs completely fails to
`
`disclose or suggest the concept of meta—rights as set forth in the specification and recited in
`
`the claims. Accordingly, Downs is silent with respect to the novel meta—rights feature of the
`
`invention recited in independent claims 40, 41 and 42.
`
`Moreover, contrary to the Examiner’s assertion on page 8 of the Office Action that
`
`Downs discloses meta—rights by simply defining “onto what kinds of media the content can
`
`be transferred to” (citing Downs, col. 59, lines 52—54), Downs completely fails to disclose,
`
`107839391
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - EX. 1058, p. 7
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 7
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 17 of 19
`
`teach or suggest meta—rights, which allow one or more users or devices to transfer rights or to
`
`derive new rights, as recited in independent claims 40, 41 and 42.
`
`In addition, the combination of state variables together with meta—rights further
`
`patentably distinguishes the invention recited in independent claims 40, 41 and 42 over
`
`Downs. For example, the combination of state variables and meta-rights, advantageously,
`
`enables the sharing of rights, wherein one shared right can be derived from another shared
`
`right in accordance with a meta—right. In addition, a state variable referring to a location on
`
`the device can be used to infer that the right is exclusive to the device, whereas a state
`
`variable referring to a location on a server can be used to infer that the right is shared among
`
`multiple devices; wherein each device that exercises the right will cause the state variable on
`
`the server to be updated.
`
`The following two examples illustrate the use of state variables together with meta—
`
`rights in more detail (see, e.g., Applicants’ published Specification, paragraphs [0095] and
`
`[0099]):
`
`[0095] FIG. 14 is used to illustrate employing of a state variable in deriving
`inherited usage rights, according to the present invention. In FIG. 14, a
`derived right can inherit a state variable from meta-rights. For example, a
`personal computer (PC) of a user, Alice, can be configured to play an e-
`book according to a license 1403. A personal data assistant (PDA) of Alice
`also can obtain a right to play the e-book according to offer 1401, if the PC
`and PDA share
`the
`same
`state variables
`1404
`and
`1405,
`e.g.,
`“AlicePlayFbook.” A derived right 1402 allows Alice also to play the e-
`book on her PDA as long as the PDA and the PC share a same count limit
`1406 of 5 times.
`
`[0099] FIG. 16 is used to illustrate employing of a state variable in deriving
`rights that are shared among a dynamic set of rights recipients, according to
`the present invention. In FIG. 16, an offer 1601 specifies that a distributor
`can issue site licenses to affiliated clubs, allowing 5 members of each club
`to concurrently view, play, and the like, content, such as an c-book. A
`corresponding state variable 1607 associated with such a right can be
`unspecified in the offer 1601. When corresponding rights 1602 and 1603 are
`issued to affiliated clubs,
`the corresponding club identities are used to
`specify state variables 1608 and 1609 in the issued rights. The offers 1602
`and 1603 are meta-rights derived from the offer 1601, with offer being
`assigned the distinct state variables 1608 and 1609. Further rights 1604-
`1606 can be derived from the offers 1602 and 1603 to be shared among
`members of each respective club. The licenses 1604 and 1605 are examples
`of rights derived from the offer 1602, and which inherit the state variable
`1608, e.g., “urn:acme:club,” whereas the license 1606 inherits the state
`variable 1609, e.g., “urnzfoozclub.”
`
`107839391
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 8
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 8
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 18 of 19
`
`Thus, contrary to the Examiner’s statements on pages 2—3 of the office action, a state
`
`variable is not simply “the number of copies” or “rental terms.” Instead, a state variable
`
`references, for example, a counter or variable where “the number of copies” or “rental terms”
`
`is maintained, and wherein such a counter or variable can be located on a local device or a
`
`remote server. The ability to choose the location of a state keeper instead of a specific
`
`number, advantageously, provides a mechanism for the rights owner to control rights sharing.
`
`The invention recited in independent claims 40, 41 and 42 and claims dependent
`
`therefrom recognizes and solves the following problems:
`
`[0009] However, there are limitations associated with the above—mentioned
`paradigms wherein only usage rights and conditions associated with content
`are specified by content owners or other grantors of rights. Once purchased
`by an end user, a consumer, or a distributor, of content along with its
`associated usage rights and conditions has no means to be legally passed on
`to a next recipient in a distribution chain. Further the associated usage rights
`have no provision for specifying rights to derive other rights, i.e. Rights to
`modify, transfer, offer, grant, obtain, delegate, track, surrender, exchange,
`transport, exercise, revoke, or the like. Common content distribution models
`often include a multi-tier distribution and usage chain. Known DRM
`systems do not facilitate the ability to prescribe rights and conditions for all
`participants along a content distribution and usage chain. Therefore,
`it is
`difficult for a content owner to commercially exploit content unless the
`owner has a relationship with each party in the distribution chain.
`
`The invention recited in independent claims 40, 41 and 42 and claims dependent
`
`therefrom provides the following advantages:
`
`[0090] There are multiple ways to specify the scope of state variables, each
`of which can affect whether the derivative state variables can be shared, how
`the derivative state variables can be shared, and the like. For example, a
`state variable can be local, and solely confined to a recipient or can be
`global, and shared by a predetermined group of recipients. A global state
`variable can be shared by a group of recipients not determined when derived
`rights are issued, but to be specified later, perhaps based on certain rules
`defined in the license or based on other means. A global state variable can
`be shared between one or more rights suppliers, predetermined recipients,
`un—specified recipients, and the like. Advantageously, depending on the
`sharing employed with a given a business model and the rights granted in
`the meta-rights, state variables can be created at different stages of the value
`chain.
`
`Thus, for at least the above reasons, Downs fails to disclose, suggest, or render
`
`obvious, each and every feature recited in independent claims 40—42. Accordingly,
`
`Applicants respectfully request that the rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) in
`
`107839391
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 9
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 9
`
`

`

`Docket No. 111325—235000
`
`Serial No. 10/956,070
`
`Page 19 of 19
`
`view of Downs. In addition, dependent claims 2—10, 14—22, 25, 27—35, and 43—54 are also
`
`allowable over Downs for at least the reasons set forth above, and also on their own merits.
`
`Moreover, Applicants would like to point out that there is no substantive rejection of
`
`pending claims 56-57 in this office action. However, in the hopes of expediting prosecution
`
`of this application, Applicants submit that these claims are also allowable over Downs for at
`
`least the reasons set forth above, and also on their own merits. If a further office is deemed
`
`necessary by the Examiner, Applicants request an indication of allowability for these claims
`
`as well.
`
`In view of the foregoing, it is submitted that the present application is in condition for
`
`allowance and a notice to that effect is respectfully requested. If, however, the Examiner
`
`deems that any issue remains after considering this response, the Examiner is invited to
`
`contact the undersigned attorney to expedite the prosecution and engage in a joint effort to
`
`work out a mutually satisfactory solution.
`
`Except for issue fees payable under 37 C.F.R. § 1.18, the Commissioner is hereby
`
`authorized by this paper to charge any additional fees during the entire pendency of this
`
`application including fees due under 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.16 and 1.17 which may be required,
`
`including any required extension of time fees, or credit any overpayment to Deposit Account
`
`No. 19—2380. This paragraph is intended to be a CONSTRUCTIVE PETITION FOR
`
`EXTENSION OF TIME in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(3).
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Date: October 31, 2007
`
`/Stephen M. Hertzler, Reg. No. 58,247/
`Stephen M. Hertzler
`
`NIXON PEABODY LLP
`Suite 900, 401 9th Street, NW.
`Washington, DC. 20004—2128
`(202) 585—8000
`
`107839391
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 10
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. - Ex. 1058, p. 10
`
`