Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67 Filed 04/17/15 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 2070
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`v.
`
`
`SERVICENOW, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`In accordance with Patent Rule 4-3 and the Court’s Docket Control Order of February 10,
`
`2015 (Dkt. 46), the parties hereby submit this Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing
`
`Statement. In accordance with Patent Rule 4-2(c), the parties met and conferred on several
`
`occasions for the purposes of narrowing the issues and finalizing preparation of this Joint Claim
`
`Construction and Prehearing Statement.
`
`A. Agreed-Upon Constructions
`
`The parties conducted meet-and-confers and have been able to reach agreement regarding
`
`the construction of the following claim terms/phrases in the asserted patents. The chart below
`
`provides the construction of those claim terms, phrases, or clauses on which the parties agree:
`
`U.S. Patent 7,062,683
`
`Agreed-Upon Construction
`
`“mat”
`
`“east”
`
`“impact graph”
`
`“impact policy”
`
`McKool 1084507v1
`
`“root”
`
`“least”
`
`“topology or architecture of a specific fault
`model”
`“rule, or set of rules, for assessing the impact
`on a fault model node based on the status or
`
`1
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-CV-903-JRG
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BMC SOFTWARE, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`001
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67 Filed 04/17/15 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 2071
`
`
`“inference policy”
`
`
`
`condition of the node’s immediately up-stream
`neighboring nodes”
`“rule, or set of rules, for inferring the status or
`condition of a fault model node based on the
`status or condition of the node’s immediately
`down-stream neighboring nodes”
`
`B. Disputed Claim Constructions
`
`Exhibits A and B, attached hereto, identify the disputed claim terms.
`
`Exhibit A provides BMC’s identification of intrinsic and extrinsic evidence supporting its
`
`proposed constructions, as required by Patent Rule 4-3(b).
`
`Exhibit B provides ServiceNow’s identification of intrinsic and extrinsic evidence
`
`supporting its proposed constructions, as required by Patent Rule 4-3(b).
`
`C. Anticipated Length of Time for the Claim Construction Hearing
`
`BMC anticipates that the Claim Construction Hearing will take no longer than two (2)
`
`hours. ServiceNow anticipates that the Claim Construction Hearing will take no longer than four
`
`(4) hours.
`
`D. Identification of Witnesses
`
`BMC may rely upon testimony (by declaration) from Dr. Hugh Smith and/or Dr. Ben
`
`Bederson and/or Dr. Mark Jones. Each may testify about their backgrounds, the background of
`
`the subject matter discussed in the patents-in-suit, and the skill level of one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art. Each may also testify in support of BMC’s proposed claim constructions, including
`
`addressing the intrinsic evidence in the patents and the prosecution histories and extrinsic
`
`evidence. See Exhibit A. In addition to the above, each may offer testimony in response or in
`
`rebuttal to any arguments or expert testimony offered by ServiceNow, including any argument
`
`that any term is indefinite or that one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to discern the
`
`McKool 1084507v1
`
`2
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`002
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67 Filed 04/17/15 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 2072
`
`
`boundaries of any term. BMC may submit its declaration with its opening Markman brief, as the
`
`parties’ have agreed.
`
`ServiceNow may rely upon testimony (by declaration) from Dr. Arthur Brody, Dr. Tal
`
`Lavian, Dr. Saul Greenberg, and/or Dr. Brad A. Myers. Each may testify about their
`
`backgrounds, the background of the subject matter discussed in the patents-in-suit, and the skill
`
`level of one of ordinary skill in the art. Each may also testify in support of ServiceNow’s
`
`proposed claim constructions and indefiniteness contentions, including addressing the intrinsic
`
`evidence in the patents and the prosecution histories and extrinsic evidence. See Exhibit B. In
`
`addition to the above, each may offer testimony in response or in rebuttal to any arguments or
`
`expert testimony offered by BMC, including any argument or opinion regarding claim
`
`construction and any argument or opinion that any term is not indefinite.
`
`E. Other Issues
`
`At present, the parties are unaware of any additional issues that would require the
`
`scheduling of a pre-hearing conference.
`
`
`
`McKool 1084507v1
`
`3
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`003
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67 Filed 04/17/15 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 2073
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Sam Baxter
`
`Samuel F. Baxter
`Texas State Bar No. 01938000
`sbaxter@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`104 East Houston, Suite 300
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Telephone: (903) 923-9000
`Facsimile: (903) 923-9099
`
`
`
`Holly E. Engelmann
`hengelmann@mckoolsmith.com
`McKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
`Dallas, Texas 75201
`Telephone: (214) 978-4000
`Fax: (214) 978-4044
`
`Pierre Hubert
`phubert@mckoolsmith.com
`McKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`300 W. 6th St., Suite 1700
`Austin, Texas 78701
`Telephone: (512) 692-8700
`Facsimile: (512) 692-8744
`
`
`
`Philip J. Lee
`plee@mckoolsmithhennigan.com
`McKool Smith Hennigan, P.C.
`865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2900
`Los Angeles, CA 90017
`Telephone: (213) 694-1153
`Facsimile: (213) 694-1234
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`BMC SOFTWARE, INC.
`
`
`
`Dated: April 17, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Robert A. Cote
`rcote@mckoolsmith.com
`Radu A. Lelutiu
`rlelutiu@mckoolsmith.com
`David R. Dehoney
`ddehoney@mckoolsmith.com
`Kevin Schubert
`kschubert@mckoolsmith.com
`Dana E. Vallera
`dvallera@mckoolsmith.com
`McKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`One Bryant Park, 47th Floor
`New York, New York 10036
`Telephone: (212) 402-9400
`Fax: (212) 402-9444
`
`Brandon M. Jordan
`bjordan@mckoolsmith.com
`McKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`1999 K Street, NW, Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20006
`Telephone: (202) 370-8302
`Facsimile: (202) 370-8344
`
`
`
`McKool 1084507v1
`
`4
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`004
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67 Filed 04/17/15 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 2074
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Deron R. Dacus
`Deron R. Dacus
`Texas State Bar No. 00790553
`THE DACUS FIRM, P.C.
`821 ESE Loop 323, Suite 430
`Tyler, TX 75701
`Telephone: (903)705-1117
`Fax: (903) 705-1117
`ddacus@dacusfirm.com
`
`Heidi L. Keefe (CA Bar 178960)
`Mark R. Weinstein (CA Bar 193043)
`COOLEY LLP
`3175 Hanover Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`Telephone: (650) 843-5000
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`mweinstein@cooley.com
`
`Michael G. Rhodes (CA Bar 116127)
`COOLEY LLP
`101 California Street
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Telephone: (415) 693-2000
`mrhodes@cooley.com
`
`Phillip E. Morton (VA Bar No. 71299)
`COOLEY LLP
`One Freedom Square
`Reston Town Center
`11951 Freedom Drive
`Reston, VA 20190-5656
`Telephone: (703) 456-8000
`pmorton@cooley.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
`SERVICENOW, INC.
`
`McKool 1084507v1
`
`5
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`005
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67 Filed 04/17/15 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 2075
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
`
`I hereby certify that counsel for Plaintiff and counsel for Defendant have conferred
`
`regarding the forgoing Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement.
`
`
`
`/s/ Kevin Schubert
`Kevin Schubert
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that true and correct copies of the foregoing document were
`
`served via electronic mail and were thereby made available to all counsel of record.
`
`
`
`/s/ Kevin Schubert
`Kevin Schubert
`
`
`
`
`
`McKool 1084507v1
`
`6
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`006
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-1 Filed 04/17/15 Page 1 of 32 PageID #: 2076
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`McKool 1084519v2
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`007
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-1 Filed 04/17/15 Page 2 of 32 PageID #: 2077
`Plaintiff BMC Software’s P.R. 4-3 Disclosures
`
`ASSERTED
`CLAIM
`1
`
`CLAIM TERM
`
`“resource”
`
`’594: 3:4-9; 1:14-18; 1:22-61; 2:8-
`20; 3:5-3:10; 3:30-33; 5:11-23;
`7:45-8:13; Figs. 7-9.
`
`P.R. 4-3 DISCLOSURES FOR U.S. PATENT NO. 5,978,594
`BMC’S PROPOSED1
`INTRINSIC SUPPORT2
`CONSTRUCTION
`plain meaning. Or if the Court
`believes that this term requires
`construction, then: the word
`resource is “intended in its
`broad sense to include, without
`limitation, hardware such as
`computers, printers, memory
`or other network devices,
`applications such as database
`management systems, and
`logical devices such as logical
`disk drives or filing systems.”
`
`EXTRINSIC SUPPORT
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Mark Jones, Dr. Hugh
`Smith, and/or Dr. Ben Bederson
`regarding how a person of ordinary
`skill in the art would understand
`this claim term
`
`1
`
`“computer
`system”
`
`plain meaning
`
`’594: Fig. 1; 3:14-29; 1:31-35;
`1:64-2-24; 3:14-56; 4:4-22; 4:43-
`46; 6:17-19; 6:34-38; 6:51-56;
`7:11-13; 7:45-48; Figs. 4-5, and 7
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary,
`Fifth Ed., 2002 at p. 121
`(“computer system”)
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Mark Jones, Dr. Hugh
`Smith, and/or Dr. Ben Bederson
`regarding how a person of ordinary
`
`
`1 BMC Statement Regarding Terms for Construction: On the day of the parties’ 4-2 exchange ServiceNow reduced its claim terms from approximately 170
`terms to approximately 90 terms. Between the 4-2 exchange and the 4-3 submission, BMC requested that ServiceNow further reduce its list of claim terms for
`the Court, or, at the very least, prioritize its terms, and conducted several meet and confers, including on April 8, 2015, April 10, 2015, and April 17, 2015. As of
`the date of the JCCS, ServiceNow still seeks construction of more than 55 terms, and to BMC’s knowledge, ServiceNow has not prioritized the terms that
`ServiceNow proposes for construction. Between now and the Markman briefing, BMC will continue to invite cooperative efforts between the parties to reduce
`the number of claim terms for construction and to narrow the disputes between the parties.
`
`2 BMC reserves the right to rely on any intrinsic and/or extrinsic evidence identified by ServiceNow. Further, to the extent it is not otherwise identified, BMC
`reserves the right to rely on the surrounding claim language where the claim term appears.
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`McKool 1084519v2
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`008
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-1 Filed 04/17/15 Page 3 of 32 PageID #: 2078
`Plaintiff BMC Software’s P.R. 4-3 Disclosures
`
`ASSERTED
`CLAIM
`
`CLAIM TERM
`
`P.R. 4-3 DISCLOSURES FOR U.S. PATENT NO. 5,978,594
`BMC’S PROPOSED1
`INTRINSIC SUPPORT2
`CONSTRUCTION
`
`1
`
`1
`
`1
`
`“discovery
`information”
`
`plain meaning
`
`“interpretable
`high-level
`computer
`programming
`language”
`
`plain meaning. Or if the Court
`believes that this term requires
`construction, then: a computer
`language that provides a level
`of abstraction from the
`underlying machine language,
`and that can be translated and
`executed or compiled into an
`intermediate form and
`translated and executed
`
`’594: 5:58-61; 7:59-62; Figs. 2, 3,
`4, 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b, and 8.
`
`’594 FH: 9/20/96 Amendment at 6.
`
`
`’594: Fig. 6a, 6b, and 8; 6:32-65;
`7:45-54
`
`’594 FH: 9/20/96 Amendment at 8
`
`
`“uninterpreted
`form”3
`
`plain meaning. Or if the Court
`believes that this term requires
`construction, then: a form not
`interpreted
`
`’594: 4:47-51; 6:34-65; 10:11-14;
`Figs. 4, 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b, and 8.
`
`’594 FH: 9/20/96 Amendment at 8
`
`EXTRINSIC SUPPORT
`
`skill in the art would understand
`this claim term
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Mark Jones, Dr. Hugh
`Smith, and/or Dr. Ben Bederson
`regarding how a person of ordinary
`skill in the art would understand
`this claim term
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary,
`Fifth Ed., 2002 at p. 253 (“high-
`level language”).
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Mark Jones, Dr. Hugh
`Smith, and/or Dr. Ben Bederson
`regarding how a person of ordinary
`skill in the art would understand
`this claim term
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Mark Jones, Dr. Hugh
`Smith, and/or Dr. Ben Bederson
`regarding how a person of ordinary
`skill in the art would understand
`
`
`3 ServiceNow has indicated that it may parse this term differently for construction. As of 6:00 pm (central) the day this submission is due, BMC has not seen a
`different parsing of this term. BMC reserves the right to address any parsing or modification of this term, including adding new intrinsic and extrinsic support,
`and to object altogether, should ServiceNow attempt to offer a new term for construction.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`McKool 1084519v2
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`009
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-1 Filed 04/17/15 Page 4 of 32 PageID #: 2079
`Plaintiff BMC Software’s P.R. 4-3 Disclosures
`
`ASSERTED
`CLAIM
`
`CLAIM TERM
`
`P.R. 4-3 DISCLOSURES FOR U.S. PATENT NO. 5,978,594
`BMC’S PROPOSED1
`INTRINSIC SUPPORT2
`CONSTRUCTION
`
`1
`
`“interpreting the
`instructions”
`
`plain meaning. Or if the Court
`believes that this term requires
`construction, then: using the
`instructions to execute
`commands
`
`’594: 9:12-14; 10:11-14; 2:26-29;
`4:47-51; 6:34-65; 7:63-8:2; Figs. 3,
`6a, 6b, and 8.
`
`EXTRINSIC SUPPORT
`
`this claim term
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Mark Jones, Dr. Hugh
`Smith, and/or Dr. Ben Bederson
`regarding how a person of ordinary
`skill in the art would understand
`this claim term
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`McKool 1084519v2
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`010
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-2 Filed 04/17/15 Page 1 of 40 PageID #: 2108
`
`
`EXHIBIT B
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`011
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-2 Filed 04/17/15 Page 2 of 40 PageID #: 2109
`Defendant ServiceNow’s P.R. 4-3 Disclosures
`
`ServiceNow reserves the right to rely upon or rebut any evidence identified by BMC. To the extent it is not otherwise identified,
`ServiceNow reserves the right to rely on the surrounding claim language where the claim term appears. The identification of
`“Asserted Claim” is intended only as a convenient reference to a claim in which the term first appears. ServiceNow reserves the right
`to supplement or amend this disclosure based on further information, discovery, and analysis. BMC presently asserts 55 claims from
`seven unrelated patents.
`
`
`ASSERTED
`CLAIM
`1
`
`CLAIM TERM
`
`“resource”
`
`1
`
`“computer
`system”
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Office Action Response (9/20/96)
`
`’594 patent 1:14-18, 1:22-61, 2:8-
`20, 3:5-3:10, 3:30-33, 3:64-4:2,
`5:11-23, 7:45-8:13, Figures 7-9.
`
`’594 patent Abstract, 1:64-2:4, 2:5-
`8, 3:33-44, 3:45-56, 4:37-47,
`Figure 1, Figures 4-5, Figure 7.
`
`P.R. 4-3 DISCLOSURES FOR U.S. PATENT NO. 5,978,594
`SERVICENOW’S CURRENT
`INTRINSIC SUPPORT
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
`“any hardware, software, or
`device including, but not
`limited to, hardware such as
`computers, printers, memory,
`or other network devices,
`applications such as database
`management systems, and
`logical devices such as
`logical disk drives or filing
`systems.”
`“a computer equipped with a
`CPU, conventional input
`equipment such as a
`keyboard, conventional
`output equipment such as a
`display monitor, a
`conventional data storage
`device such as a disk or tape
`drive or CD ROM drive,
`some sort of random access
`memory (“RAM”), and some
`sort of conventional network
`communication hardware
`such as an ETHERNET
`
`EXTRINSIC SUPPORT
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Arthur Brody, Dr. Tal
`Lavian, Dr. Saul Greenberg, and/or
`Dr. Brad A. Myers regarding how a
`person of ordinary skill in the art
`would understand this claim term.
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary,
`Microsoft Press (1991), p. 78.
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Arthur Brody, Dr. Tal
`Lavian, Dr. Saul Greenberg, and/or
`Dr. Brad A. Myers regarding how a
`person of ordinary skill in the art
`would understand this claim term.
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`012
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-2 Filed 04/17/15 Page 3 of 40 PageID #: 2110
`Defendant ServiceNow’s P.R. 4-3 Disclosures
`
`EXTRINSIC SUPPORT
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Arthur Brody, Dr. Tal
`Lavian, Dr. Saul Greenberg, and/or
`Dr. Brad A. Myers regarding how a
`person of ordinary skill in the art
`would understand this claim term.
`Microsoft Press (1991), p. 174.
`
`Computer
`Press
`Microsoft
`Dictionary, 3ed (1997), p. 233.
`
`IEEE Standard Dictionary of
`Electrical and Electronics Terms
`(1993), p. 598.
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Arthur Brody, Dr. Tal
`Lavian, Dr. Saul Greenberg, and/or
`Dr. Brad A. Myers regarding how a
`person of ordinary skill in the art
`would understand this claim term.
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Arthur Brody, Dr. Tal
`Lavian, Dr. Saul Greenberg, and/or
`Dr. Brad A. Myers regarding how a
`person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`ASSERTED
`CLAIM
`
`CLAIM TERM
`
`“discovery
`information”
`
`P.R. 4-3 DISCLOSURES FOR U.S. PATENT NO. 5,978,594
`SERVICENOW’S CURRENT
`INTRINSIC SUPPORT
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
`interface unit for physically
`coupling the computer
`system to the network, with
`an installed agent software”
`“information about how to
`determine whether a resource
`is present on a computer
`system”
`
`Office Action Response (9/20/96)
`
`‘594 patent, 3:57-4:2, 5:24-36,
`5:58-61, 6:7-20, 7:59-62, Figure 2,
`Figure 4.
`
`Office Action Response (9/20/96)
`
`‘594 patent, Abstract, 2:30-35,
`2:27-29, 6:30-50, 6:51-65, 7:45-54,
`Figures 6a-6b, Figure 8.
`
`“high-level
`computer
`programming
`language”
`
`“a programming language
`with a defined syntax,
`capable of being translated
`into machine language”
`
`“stored … in …
`uninterpreted
`form”
`
`“stored as a text file
`containing high level
`programming language
`instructions”
`
`Office Action Response (9/20/96)
`
`Office Action Response (1/7/99)
`‘594 patent, Abstract, 5:24-28,
`5:50-61, 6:26-31, 6:32-50, 4:29-33,
`2
`
`1
`
`1
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`013
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-2 Filed 04/17/15 Page 4 of 40 PageID #: 2111
`Defendant ServiceNow’s P.R. 4-3 Disclosures
`
`EXTRINSIC SUPPORT
`
`would understand this claim term.
`
`Computer
`Press
`Microsoft
`Dictionary (1991), p. 194.
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary,
`Microsoft Press (1997), p. 261,
`422.
`
`IEEE Standard Dictionary of
`Electrical and Electronics Terms
`(1993) 676.
`
`Webster’s New World Dictionary
`of Computer Terms, 6ed (1997) p.
`268.
`
`Webster’s NewWorld Dictionary
`of Computer Terms (1988) p. 194.
`
`IBM Dictionary of Computing
`(1994) p. 355.
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Arthur Brody, Dr. Tal
`Lavian, Dr. Saul Greenberg, and/or
`Dr. Brad A. Myers regarding how a
`person of ordinary skill in the art
`would understand this claim term.
`Microsoft
`Press
`Computer
`
`ASSERTED
`CLAIM
`
`CLAIM TERM
`
`P.R. 4-3 DISCLOSURES FOR U.S. PATENT NO. 5,978,594
`SERVICENOW’S CURRENT
`INTRINSIC SUPPORT
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
`
`4:47-51, Figure 4, Figure 5a,
`Figures 6a-6b.
`Office Action Response (9/20/96)
`
`Office Action Response (1/7/99)
`
`‘594 patent, Abstract, 2:26-2:35,
`4:47-64, 6:32-50, 6:51-6:65, 7:48-
`8:2, 8:33-8:59, Figure 3, Figures
`6a-6b, Figure 8.
`
`
`1
`
`“interpretable”
`high-level
`computer
`programming
`language
`
` A high-level computer
`programming language “in a
`form that can be translated
`and executed one instruction
`at a time such as a script”
`
` ‘594 patent, 2:26-2:35, 4:47-64,
`3
`
`1
`
`“interpreting the
`
`“translating and executing
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`014
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00903-JRG Document 67-2 Filed 04/17/15 Page 5 of 40 PageID #: 2112
`Defendant ServiceNow’s P.R. 4-3 Disclosures
`
`EXTRINSIC SUPPORT
`
`Dictionary (1991), p. 194.
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary,
`Microsoft Press (1997), p. 261.
`
`IEEE Standard Dictionary of
`Electrical and Electronics Terms
`(1993) 676.
`
`Webster’s NewWorld Dictionary
`of Computer Terms (1988) p. 194.
`
`IBM Dictionary of Computing
`(1994) p. 355.
`
`Expert declaration and testimony
`of Dr. Arthur Brody, Dr. Tal
`Lavian, Dr. Saul Greenberg, and/or
`Dr. Brad A. Myers regarding how a
`person of ordinary skill in the art
`would understand this claim term.
`
`ASSERTED
`CLAIM
`
`CLAIM TERM
`
`instructions”
`
`P.R. 4-3 DISCLOSURES FOR U.S. PATENT NO. 5,978,594
`SERVICENOW’S CURRENT
`INTRINSIC SUPPORT
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
`the instructions one
`instruction at a time”
`
`6:32-6:50, 7:48-8:2, 8:33-59,
`Figure 3, Figures 6a-6b, Figure 8
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ServiceNow's Exhibit No. 1011
`
`015