`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`SYMANTEC CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`v.
`THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
`IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK
`Patent Owner
`_________________
`Case IPR2015-00375
`Patent No. 8,074,115
`__________________
`
`PATENT OWNER THE TRUSTEES OF
`COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK'S
`NOTICE OF APPEAL
`
`via mail
`Director of the United States Patent & Trademark Office
`c/o Office of the General Counsel
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`via PTAB E2E
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`
`via CM/ECF
`United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00375
`U.S. Patent No. 8,074,115
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 141(c), 142, 319; 5 U.S.C. §§ 702, 703; and 37
`
`C.F.R. §§ 90.2(a), 90.3(a), Patent Owner, the Trustees of Columbia University in
`
`the City of New York ("Columbia") hereby appeals to the United States Court of
`
`Appeals for the Federal Circuit from the final written decision entered on June 30,
`
`2016 (Paper 47) ("the Final Written Decision") and all underlying orders,
`
`decisions, rulings and opinions which adversely affect Columbia, including but not
`
`limited to the Decision Instituting IPR.
`
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 90.2(a)(3)(ii), Columbia further indicates
`
`that the issues on appeal include but are not limited to:
`
` whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the "Board") erred in
`
`ruling that Claims 22, 25-29, 32, 35-39, and 42 of U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,074,115 ("the '115 Patent") are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 102(e) by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0108562 ("Khazan");
`
` whether the Board erred in ruling Claims 1, 4-8, 11, 14-18, and 21 of
`
`the '115 Patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`
`Khazan and U.S. Patent No. 5,440,723 ("Arnold");
`
` whether the Board erred in ruling Claims 3, 13, 24, and 34 of the '115
`
`Patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Khazan,
`
`Arnold and U.S. Patent No. 8,108,929 ("Agrawal");
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00375
`U.S. Patent No. 8,074,115
` whether the Board erred in its construction and application of the
`
`
`
`construction for the term "model of function calls" as appearing in all
`
`claims;
`
` whether the Board erred in its construction and application of the
`
`construction of the term "the model reflects attacks against the at
`
`least a part of the program" as appearing in claims 8, 18, 29, and 39;
`
` whether the Board erred in its construction and application of the
`
`construction for the term "creating a combined model from at least
`
`two models created at different times" in claims 3, 13, 24 and 34;
`
` whether the Board erred in its finding that the cited art discloses the
`
`term "the model reflects normal activity of the at least a part of the
`
`program," as it appears in claims 7, 17, 28 and 38;
`
` whether the Board erred in its finding that the cited art discloses the
`
`term "the model reflects attacks of the at least a part of the program,"
`
`as it appears in claims 8, 18, 29 and 39;
`
` whether the Board erred in its application of the construction for the
`
`term "application community" as applicable to claims 1-21;
`
` whether the Board erred in its application of the construction for the
`
`term "anomalous" as applicable to all claims;
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00375
`U.S. Patent No. 8,074,115
` whether the Board erred in finding that cited art discloses the
`
`
`
`limitation "modifying a program . . . ." or "modifies a program . . . ."
`
`as applicable to claims 22-42;
`
` whether the Board erred in its finding that the cited art discloses an
`
`"emulator" as construed by the Board;
`
` whether the Board erred in its finding that the cited art discloses
`
`"notifying/notifies . . . of the anomalous function call" as applicable to
`
`claims 1-21;
`
` the Board's consideration of the record evidence, including but not
`
`limited to expert testimony;
`
` the Board's analysis regarding motivation for and reasons to combine
`
`in support of its obviousness conclusion; and
`
` all findings or determinations supporting or relating to those issue, as
`
`well as any other issues decided adversely to Columbia in any orders,
`
`decisions, rulings and opinions.
`
`Simultaneous with this submission, a copy of this Notice of Appeal is being
`
`filed electronically through the Board's End to End (PTAB E2E) electronic filing
`
`system as well as mailed by Express Mail to Director of the United States Patent &
`
`Trademark Office, c/o Office of the General Counsel, at P.O. Box 1450,
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. In addition, Appellant Columbia files a copy of the
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00375
`U.S. Patent No. 8,074,115
`Notice of Appeal transmitted to the Board on August 23, 2016, the $500 filing fee
`
`
`
`prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1913, and courtesy copies of the Final Written Decision
`
`with the Clerk's Office for the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /
`
` Hong A. Zhong /
`
`
`Hong A. Zhong (Reg. No. 66,530)
`Michael R. Fleming (Reg. No. 67,933)
`Jason Sheasby (pro hac vice)
`Irell & Manella LLP
`1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900
`Los Angeles, CA 90067-4276
`
`- 4 -
`
`Circuit.
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: August 23, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00375
`U.S. Patent No. 8,074,115
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 42.6, the undersigned certifies that on August 23,
`
`2016, a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the following, by
`
`ELECTRONIC MAIL:
`
`Brian M. Hoffman
`bhoffman@fenwick.com
`
`
`
`Michael Sacksteder
`msacksteder@fenwick.com
`
`
`
`Further, a copy of the foregoing document, a $500 filing fee and courtesy
`
`copies of the Final Written Decision and Institution Decision (as needed) are being
`
`paid and e-filed through CM/ECF on August 23, 2016 with the Clerk's Office of
`
`the United States Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit located at 717 Madison
`
`Place, N.W., Suite 401, Washington DC 20005.
`
`Additionally, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 90.2(a) and 104.2(b), a copy of the
`
`foregoing document and a copy of the Final Written Decision and Institution
`
`Decision and a Federal Circuit Form 5 are being mailed to Director of the United
`
`States Patent and Trademark Office, c/o Office of the General Counsel, P.O. Box
`
`1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 as well as being caused to be hand delivered
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00375
`U.S. Patent No. 8,074,115
`during business hours to the Office of the General Counsel, 10B20, Madison
`
`
`
`Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314-5793.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Susan M. Langworthy /
`
`
`
`
`
`- 6 -