Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13070
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`ORACLE CORPORATION and
`ORACLE U.S.A INC
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`PARALLEL NETWORKS LLP
`
`Defendant
`
`Civ No 06-414-SLR
`
`Parrett Jr Esquire of Morris Nichols Arsht
`Graham Esquire and James
`Mary
`Tunnell LLP Wilmington Delaware Counsel for Plaintiffs Of Counsel James
`Greco Esquire Robert
`Gilliland Esquire Theodore
`Herhold Esquire Joseph
`Artuz Esquire and Eric
`Hutchins Esquire of Townsend and Townsend and Crew
`LLP Palo Alto California Dorian Daley Esquire Peggy
`Bruggman Esquire and
`Oracle US.A Inc Redwood
`Matthew
`Sarboraria Esquire of Oracle Corporation
`Shores California
`
`Moore Esquire of Potter Anderson
`Horwitz Esquire and David
`Richard
`LLP Wilmington Delaware Counsel for Defendant Of Counsel Harry
`Roper
`Bosy Esquire Aaron
`Barlow Esquire Patrick
`Esquire George
`Patras Esquire
`Bradford Esquire Paul
`Bennett Esquire Benjamin
`David
`Margolis Esquire
`and Emily
`Johnson Esquire of Jenner
`Block Chicago Illinois
`
`Corroon
`
`MEMORANDUM OPINION
`
`Dated December
`Wilmington Delaware
`
`2008
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 1
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13071
`
`RTN iIdge
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`On June 30 2006 Oracle Corporation and Oracle U.S.A Inc collectively
`
`Oracle or plaintiffs filed this action for declaratory judgment against EpicRealm
`
`Licensing L.P.1 D.l
`
`Defendant
`
`patent
`
`licensing firm is owner and assignee of
`
`United States Patent Numbers 5894554 the 554 patent and 6415335 the 335
`
`patent which are directed to
`
`system for creating and managing custom web sites
`
`Id D.l 10 at 16 Plaintiffs seek
`
`judgment that they do not
`
`infringe the 554 or 335
`
`patent and that both patents are invalid and/or unenforceable Id Di 339 Currently
`
`pending before the court are plaintiffs motions for summary judgment of
`
`noninfringement D.l 204 invalidity D.l 206 no willful
`
`infringement D.l 208 and to
`
`exclude defendant
`
`from asserting damages based on plaintiffs foreign sales Di 212
`
`Also before the court are defendants motions for partial summary judgment of literal
`
`infringement D.l 223 and that plaintiffs prior art references do not anticipate D.l
`
`216
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`The Parties and Litigation History
`
`Plaintiffs manufacture sell and license software products for customers to use in
`
`1EpicRealm Licensing L.P EpicRealm is
`patent
`licensing firm
`headquartered in Richardson Texas it does not produce or sell any products
`EpicRealm assigned all right title and interest
`in the patents in suit to Parallel Networks
`LLP in August 2007 The court granted EpicRealms motion to substitute parties on
`September 29 2008 D.l 355 For simplicitys sake the court will refer to one
`defendant
`throughout
`its opinion
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 2
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13072
`
`conjunction with the delivery of dynamic web pages.2
`
`Defendant previously brought several actions for infringement of the 554 and
`
`335 patents in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.3 That
`
`litigation was consolidated in November 2005 hereinafter the Texas litigation
`
`Plaintiffs were not named in the Texas litigation
`
`An Oracle customer Safelite Group
`
`Inc Safelite was named as
`
`defendant Safelite asserted counterclaims that the
`
`554 and 335 patents are invalid and filed
`
`third party complaint against plaintiffs for
`
`indemnification Defendant and Safelite settled the Texas litigation and filed
`
`stipulation of dismissal with the court on June 26 2006 D.l 282 ex 22
`
`stipulation
`
`of dismissal was also filed with respect to Safelites third party complaint against
`
`plaintiffs On June 29 2006 the court entered orders dismissing both complaints D.l
`
`at
`
`Plaintiffs brought
`
`their declaratory judgment suit in this court on June 30 2006
`
`Id In the complaint plaintiffs allege that
`
`in
`
`letter to Clark Consulting Inc
`
`party
`
`to the Texas litigation defendant stated that Clark was required to provide discovery
`
`regarding Clarks use of software proprietary to plaintiffs
`
`Id at 24 Plaintiffs also
`
`claim that defendant demanded and received discovery from Safelite regarding its use
`
`of Oracle software Id at 25 Defendant moved to transfer venue and consolidate
`
`incorporated and organized
`software manufacturer
`2Oracle Corporation is
`principal place of business in Redwood Shores
`under the laws of Delaware with
`Oracle USA Inc
`Colorado corporation is wholly owned
`California D.l
`subsidiary of Oracle Corporation Id
`
`Franklin Covey Co et al 205-CV-356 epicRealm
`3epicRealm Licensing LP
`Inc 205-CV-1 50 epicRealm Licensing LP
`Licensing LP
`Speedera Networks
`205-CV-1 63
`Auto flex Leasing Inc et
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 3
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13073
`
`with the Texas litigation
`
`This court denied defendants motions on March 26 2007
`
`D.l 21
`
`Defendant
`
`thereafter answered the complaint on May
`
`2007 in which it
`
`admitted an actual controversy exists between the parties for jurisdictional purposes
`
`admitted that it sought discovery from Clark but denied that
`
`it requested discovery
`
`specifically relating to Safelites use of Oracle software D.l 25 at
`
`25 Defendant
`
`also brought
`
`counterclaim of patent
`
`infringement Id Plaintiffs amended their
`
`complaint on October 15 2007 to add
`
`claim that the 554 and 335 patents are
`
`unenforceable due to inequitable conduct D.l 369 Discovery is now closed and trial
`
`is currently scheduled to commence January 12 2009 D.l 29
`
`Technological Background and the Patents-at-Issue
`
`The basic three-tiered architecture of the internet
`
`includes what
`
`is known as
`
`desktop tier an intermediate tier and an enterprise tier The desktop tier is composed
`
`of
`
`client program web browser such as Microsoft
`
`Internet Explorer located on
`
`users desktop computer which sends and receives requests for information over the
`
`internet The intermediate tier comprises one or more web servers which receive and
`
`process user requests and return completed web pages to the client for viewing The
`
`enterprise tier
`
`is synonymous with data services it comprises one or more back-end
`
`database servers which store the information used to make web pages
`
`Formerly most web sites provided only static web pages or pages whose
`
`content was not subject
`
`to change When
`
`web client
`
`computer with web
`
`browser identified
`
`web site the browser program connected to the web and the web
`
`server operating the web site received the request and retrieved the specific file
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 4
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13074
`
`requested by the web client
`
`no file modification occurred Over time web sites began
`
`to provide dynamic web pages i.e web pages that are generated anew in response to
`
`specific request of the web client To generate dynamic web pages the Common
`Gateway Interface CGI was developed CG is
`
`command
`
`protocol
`
`for identifying
`
`running it and returning output
`
`from web server Once created
`
`CGI application
`
`does not have to be modified to retrieve new data and generate
`
`dynamic page it
`
`does so automatically
`
`The processing of dynamic web pages requires more processor
`
`time memory
`
`and/or other system resources than is the case with static web pages As the number
`
`of users dynamic web page requests increased so too did the demand on web server
`
`resources resulting in slowed response time failure to provide the requested content
`
`or the crashing of the web server The tools that generate CGI applications do not
`
`solve these problems
`
`The patents-in-suit disclose systems for efficiently managing dynamic web page
`
`generation requests The architecture of the patented system is depicted in figure
`
`of
`
`the patents.4 First web client
`
`initiates
`
`request for
`
`static or dynamic web page
`
`554 patent col
`
`II 55-57 The request
`
`is routed to web server
`
`Id at
`
`57
`
`Instead of the web server processing the request an interceptor intercepts the request
`
`and routes it to
`
`dispatcher Id at II 58-60 The dispatcher
`
`identifies one or more
`
`page servers or
`
`server connected to the data source Id col
`
`II 37-39
`
`The dispatcher maintains
`
`variety of information on each page server to select
`
`4The 335 patent was issued from continuation application claiming priority to
`the 554 patent therefore both patents share the same specification and filing date
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 5
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13075
`
`the appropriate page server Id col
`
`II 54-59 The patents provide several
`
`scenarios in which the dispatcher selects
`
`page server The first
`
`is connection
`
`caching whereby
`
`dispatcher determines that
`
`particular page server has access to
`
`the requisite data in the data source Id col
`
`II 60-67 Alternatively the dispatcher
`
`may deterrriine that
`
`particular page server already has the necessary data cached in
`
`the page servers page cache even though another page server may also be logged
`
`into the appropriate data source and select
`
`the server containing the cached data Id
`
`col
`
`II 1-1
`
`Lastly the dispatcher may determine that multiple page servers are
`
`logged into the appropriate data source in which case the dispatcher will select
`
`the
`
`least busy page server Id col
`
`II 12-19 This load balancing can significantly
`
`increase performance at
`
`busy web site Id
`
`The patents provide that while
`
`page server is processing the request for data
`
`retrieval the web server is free to concurrently process other web client requests
`
`promoting web site efficiency
`
`Id col
`
`II 21-27 The page server dynamically
`
`generates
`
`web page in response to the web client request and the web page is either
`
`transrriitted back to the web client or stored on machine that
`
`is accessible to the web
`
`server for later retrieval Id at col
`
`II 27-31
`
`Defendant asserts that plaintiffs infringe claims 1-5 and 7-1
`
`of the 554 patent
`
`and claims
`
`and 16 of the 335 patent The asserted independent claims of the 554
`
`patent read as follows
`
`computer-implemented method for managing
`
`dynamic Web page
`
`block of memory for temporary storage of data likely to be used
`5Generally
`again Web caches store previous responses from web servers such as web pages
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 6
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13076
`
`to Web server said computer-implemented method
`generation request
`comprising the steps of
`routing said request from said Web server to
`page server said page server
`receiving said request and releasing said Web server to process other requests
`wherein said routing step further includes the steps of intercepting said request
`at said Web server routing said request from said Web server to
`dispatcher
`and dispatching said request
`to said page server
`processing said request said processing being performed by said page server
`while said Web server concurrently processes said other requests and
`dynamically generating Web page in response to said request said Web page
`including data dynamically retrieved from one or more data sources
`
`dynamic Web page generation request
`
`networked system for managing
`said system comprising
`one or more data sources
`processing means
`page server having
`first computer system including means for generating said request and
`second computer system including means for receiving said request from said
`first computer said second computer system also including
`router said router
`routing said request from said second computer system to said page server
`wherein said routing further includes intercepting said request at said second
`computer routing said request from said second computer
`dispatcher and
`to
`to said page server said page server receiving said
`dispatching said request
`request and releasing said second computer system to process other requests
`said page server processing means processing said request and dynamically
`generating Web page in response to said request said Web page including
`data dynamically retrieved from said one or more data sources
`
`11
`machine readable medium having stored thereon data representing
`sequences of instructions which when executed by
`computer system cause
`said computer system to perform the steps of
`dynamic Web page generation request from Web server to
`page
`routing
`server said page server receiving said request and releasing said Web server to
`process other requests wherein said routing step further includes the steps of
`intercepting said request at said Web server routing said request from said Web
`dispatcher and dispatching said request
`server to
`to said page server
`processing said request said processing being performed by said page server
`while said Web server concurrently processes said other requests and
`dynamically generating Web page said Web page including data retrieved
`from one or more data sources
`
`Claims
`
`of the 335 patent depends from claim
`
`Those claims read as foHows
`
`dynamic Web page
`computer-implemented method for managing
`to Web server said computer-implemented method
`generation request
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 7
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13077
`
`comprising the steps of
`request from Web server to
`page server said page server receiving
`routing
`said request and releasing said Web server to process other requests wherein
`said routing step further includes the steps of
`intercepting said request at said Web server and routing said request
`page server
`processing said request said processing being performed by said page server
`while said Web server concurrently processes said other requests and
`dynamically generating Web page in response to said request said Web page
`including data dynamically retrieved from one or more data sources
`
`to said
`
`The computer-implemented method in claim wherein said step of routing
`includes the steps of
`said request
`routing said request from said Web server to
`to said page server
`dispatching said request
`
`dispatcher and
`
`Asserted claim 16 of the 335 patent depends from claim 15 as follows
`
`15
`
`computer-implemented method comprising the steps of
`request from an HTTP-compliant device to
`page server said
`transferring
`page server receiving said request and releasing said HTTP-compliant
`device to
`process other requests wherein said transferring step further includes the steps
`of
`
`intercepting said request at said HTTP-compliant
`to said page server
`request
`processing said request said processing being performed by said page server
`while said HTTP-compliant device concurrently processes said other requests
`and
`
`device and transferring said
`
`page in response to said request said page including
`dynamically generating
`data dynamically retrieved from one or more data sources
`
`16 The computer-implemented method in claim 15 wherein said step of
`includes the steps of
`transferring said request
`transferring said request from said HTTP-compliant
`dispatching said request to said page server
`
`device to
`
`dispatcher and
`
`Accused Products
`
`Defendant asserts that the following Oracle products infringe the patents-in-suit
`
`the Oracle Web Cache Products beginning in November 2000 with Release 1.0.2
`
`and all subsequent
`
`releases the Web Cache products
`
`the Oracle Application
`
`Server Products beginning in April 2003 with Release lOgRI 9.0.4 and all subsequent
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 8
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400 Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page
`
`of 55 PagelD
`
`13078
`
`releases the Application Server products
`Real Application Clusters RAC beginning in May 2005 with Release lOgR2
`
`the Oracle Database Products with
`
`10.2.0.1.0 for JDBC and all subsequent
`
`releases and beginning in October 2007 with
`
`Release
`
`lg 11.1 for OCI and all subsequent
`
`releases the Database products.6
`
`These products will be discussed in more detail
`
`infra in the context of the parties
`
`infringement/noninfringement
`
`arguments
`
`Ill STANDARD OF REVIEW
`
`court shall grant summary judgment only if the pleadings depositions
`
`answers to interrogatories and admissions on file together with the affidavits if any
`
`show that there is no genuine issue as to any material
`
`fact and that the moving party is
`
`entitled to judgment as matter of law Fed
`
`Civ
`
`56c The moving party bears
`
`the burden of proving that no genuine issue of material fact exists See Matsushita
`
`Elec Indus Co
`
`Zenith Radio Corp 475 U.S 574 586 n.1O 1986 Facts that
`
`could alter the outcome are material and disputes are genuine if evidence exists from
`
`which
`
`rational person could conclude that the position of the person wèth the burden
`
`of proof on the disputed issue is correct Horowitz
`
`Fed Kemper Life Assurance Ca
`
`57 F.3d 300 302 n.1 3d Cir 1995 internal citations omitted If the moving party has
`
`demonstrated an absence of material fact the nonmoving party then must come
`
`forward with specific facts showing that there is
`
`genuine issue for trial Matsushita
`
`475 U.S at 587 quoting Fed
`
`Civ
`
`56e The court will view the underlying facts
`
`6Defendant contends that the Web Cache products and Application Server
`products infringe every asserted claim while the Database products allegedly infringe
`of the 554 patent
`and
`all asserted claims except claims
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 9
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400
`
`Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page 10 of 55 PagelD
`
`13079
`
`and all reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the party
`
`opposing the motion Pa CoalAssn
`
`Babbitt 63 F.3d 231 236 3d Cir 1995 The
`
`mere existence of some evidence in support of the nonmoving party however will not
`
`be sufficient
`
`for denial of motion for summary judgment
`
`there must be enough
`
`evidence to enable
`
`jury reasonably to find for the nonmoving party on that issue See
`
`Anderson
`
`Liberty Lobby Inc 477 U.S 242 249 1986 If the nonmoving party fails
`
`to make
`
`sufficient showing on an essential element of its case with respect to which it
`
`has the burden of proof the moving party is entitled to judgment as matter of law
`
`See Celotex Corp
`
`Catrett 477 U.S 317 322 1986
`
`IV DISCUSSION
`
`Infringement
`
`Defendant moves for partial summary judgment of infringement of the 554
`
`patent arguing that the accused products infringe because they literally meet every
`
`limitation of claim 11 of the 554 patent.7 D.l 224 at
`
`Plaintiffs move for summary
`
`fact as to whether
`fails to create
`7Defendant
`the
`genuine issue of material
`accused products infringe under the doctrine of equivalents Defendants expert Dr
`David Finkels supplemental
`doctrine of equivalents theory is
`in support of
`report
`untimely as it was submitted after summary judgment briefing was complete Thus
`defendants argument
`for infringement under the doctrine of equivalents rests entirely
`on one paragraph in Finkels second declaration stating that
`Accused Oracle
`Products infringe because the differences between the Accused Oracle Products and
`the asserted claims are insubstantial
`from the perspective of
`person of ordinary skill
`the relevant art D.I 273 at Exh
`36 Defendant cites Optical Disc Corp
`Del
`MarAvionics 208 F.3d 1324 1336 Fed Cir 2000 for the proposition that Finkels
`conclusion is sufficient
`fact regarding plaintiffs
`to create
`genuine issue of material
`infringement by equivalents D.l 275 at 38-39 However
`in Optical Disc
`the expert
`supported his conclusion regarding infringement by equivalents with
`limitation by
`limitation comparison of the patent and the accused product and
`detailed function
`way-result analysis Optical Disc 208 F.3d at 1336 Defendant
`fails to show that
`Finkels conclusion is similarly supported In addition the court notes that even if
`
`in
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 10
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400
`
`Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page 11 of 55 PagelD
`
`13080
`
`judgment of noninfringement of both the 554 and the 335 patents arguing that the
`
`accused products do not
`
`infringe because they do not
`
`literally meet the intercepting
`
`releasing and dispatcher limitations common to the asserted claims of both patents
`
`D.l 204 at 1-2 The parties do not dispute the physical characteristics of the accused
`
`products D.l 204 at
`
`D.l 224 at
`
`Accordingly the question of whether the
`
`accused products literally infringe the patents-in-suit
`
`turns on the courts claim
`
`construction and may be resolved on summary judgment See Gen Mills Inc
`
`Hunt
`
`Wesson Inc 103 F.3d 978 983 Fed Cir 1997
`
`The Accused Products
`
`Web Cache products
`
`Web Cache is
`
`cache server which is
`
`software program designed to maintain
`
`cache or local store of frequently used web pages D.l 270 at 28 Web Cache
`
`sits in front of web server and receives
`
`web clients request for content before the
`
`web server does Id at 28 If Web Cache has the requested content
`
`in its cache
`
`cache hit Web Cache returns the requested content
`
`to the web client Id Cache
`
`hits are handled completely by Web Cache Id at 30 If Web Cache does not have
`
`the requested content
`
`in its cache
`
`cache miss Web Cache sends the web clients
`
`report had been timely filed its doctrine of equivalents analysis
`Finkels supplemental
`restatement of defendants literal
`seems to be nothing more than
`infringement
`pattern and thus is not sufficiently particularized
`arguments in the function-way-result
`fact Accordingly Finkels conclusion is
`to create
`genuine issue of material
`factual dispute See Zelinski
`Brunswick Corp 185
`to create material
`insufficient
`F.3d 1311 1317 Fed Cir 1999 affirming district courts grant of summary judgment
`where only evidence on infringement under doctrine of equivalents was conclusory
`statement of patentees expert Network Commerce Inc
`Microsoft Corp 422 F.3d
`1353 1363 Fed Cir 2005 evidence supporting infringement by equivalents must be
`genuine issue of material fact
`particularized to raise
`
`10
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 11
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400
`
`Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page 12 of 55 PagelD
`
`13081
`
`request
`
`to
`
`web server for processing Id 28 The web servers sitting behind Web
`
`Cache that originate new content
`
`in the event of
`
`cache miss are called origin
`
`servers Id Web Caches purpose is to cache frequently requested content
`
`in order
`
`to reduce the load on the origin servers Id at 32
`
`Web Cache performs its caching function by assigning each received web
`
`request to
`
`fiber within the Web Cache program Id Each fiber is an independent
`
`unit of execution
`
`Id Web Cache fibers that connect
`
`to web clients and search the
`
`cache for requested content are called Front End fibers Id Web Cache fibers that
`
`connect
`
`to an origin server and add new content
`
`to the cache are called Back End
`
`fibers Id
`
`When Web Cache receives
`
`request from web client Web Cache first creates
`
`new Front End fiber to handle that request Id at
`
`338 The Front End fiber then
`
`compares the Universal Resource Locator URL9 of the request
`
`to the URL5 of
`
`previously-requested content stored in the cache
`
`Id at
`
`34 If the comparison yields
`
`cache hit the Front End fiber returns the requested content
`
`to the web client and the
`
`processing is complete Id Web Cache then unless commanded otherwise
`
`8Users may configure Web Cache for maximum number of Front End fibers
`33 The default maximum is 700 which means that with its default
`D.l 270 at
`configuration Web Cache can support up to 700 simultaneous web client requests
`Id If all 700 Front End fibers are occupied
`either processing
`request or waiting for
`then Web Cache cannot process any
`requested web page from an origin server
`request Id
`requests until one of the 700 Front End fibers completes
`additional
`
`9A URL is
`unique identifier or address that defines the location of
`web or any other internet
`facility D.l 270 at 28
`
`file on the
`
`11
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 12
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400
`
`Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page 13 of 55 PagelD
`
`13082
`
`destroys the Front End fiber.1 Id
`
`If the URL comparison yields
`
`cache miss then Web Cache creates
`
`Back
`
`End fiber which communicates the URL of the request
`
`to an origin server and then
`
`waits for the origin server to process the request and return the content
`
`Id at 35
`
`The Front End and Back End fibers wait until either the origin server returns the
`
`requested content or
`
`time-out error occurs Id Once the origin server locates the
`
`requested content
`
`it returns the content to the web client via the Front End and Back
`
`End fibers and the content
`
`is inserted into the cache so that Web Cache can satisfy
`
`future requests for the same content without
`
`involving an origin server
`
`Id at 36
`
`Web Cache then destroys the Front End and Back End fibers Id
`
`Web Cache can be configured in several different ways Id at 30 Users can
`
`configure
`
`system to use
`
`single Web Cache in front of multiple origin servers with
`
`Web Cache maintaining
`
`cache of content
`
`requested from each origin server and
`
`distributing cache misses among the muItpIe origin servers Id at 31
`
`During normal operation Web Cache receives TCP acknowledgments11
`
`from
`
`10Web Cache does not normally keep the Front End fiber alive to handle
`37 The only exception is if the web client sends further
`second request D.l 270 at
`feature of version 1.1 of the HTTP
`requests over the same connection by means of
`protocol known as the Keep-Alive command Id Where the Keep-Alive command
`is invoked the Front End fiber will process each of the additional
`requests from that
`time before being destroyed Id
`web client one at
`
`1The internet protocol suite commonly known as TCP/IP is the set of
`communications protocols that implement the protocol stack on which the Internet and
`is named for its two most important
`59 It
`most commercial networks run D.l 270 at
`protocols the Transmission Control Protocol TCP and the Internet Protocol IP
`Id The Internet protocol suite can be viewed as
`set of layers each one solving
`set of problems involving data transmission and serving upper layer protocols based on
`using services from lower layers Id at 60 Upper layers rely on lower layer
`
`12
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 13
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400
`
`Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page 14 of 55 PagelD
`
`13083
`
`Oracle HTTP Server OHS Id at 58 which is the web server component of the
`Application Server products to be discussed hereafter Id at 75
`
`protocols to translate data into forms that can eventually be physically transmitted Id
`The four TCI/IP layers listed lowest to highest are the network access layer the
`layer and the application layer Id
`network layer the transport
`
`The application layer consists of all
`involve user interaction
`the processes that
`Id at 61 The applications within the layer determine the presentation and control
`the session For example applications such as web browsers e.g Microsoft
`Internet
`Explorer Mozilla Firefox primarily use Hypertext Transfer Protocol HTTP to
`communicate with servers running websites Other applications in the layer use other
`protocols including Simple Mail Transfer Protocol SMTP and Post Office Protocol
`POP for e-mail and File Transfer Protocol FTP for the transfer of files to and from
`various computers Id
`
`There are two transport
`
`layer protocols TCP and the User Datagram Protocol
`UDP Id TCP guarantees that information is received as it was sent whereas
`UDP does not Id
`
`The network layer isolates the upper layer protocols from the details of the
`Id IP is
`underlying network and manages the connections across the network
`normally described as the network layer Id All upper and lower layer
`communications trave through IP as they are passed through the TCP/IP protocol
`stack Id
`
`The network access layer consists of the data-link layer protocos that define the
`use of the electrical signals for data transmission and the physical
`layer protocols that
`define the physical connection itself Id
`
`TCP/IPs four-layer structure is built as information is passed down from
`applications to the network access layer Id at 62 When data is sent each layer
`treats the information received from the layer above as data and adds control
`header to the front of the data Id This process is called
`information or
`Id When data is received the process reverses as each layer
`encapsulation
`Id
`removes its header before passing the data to the layer above
`
`This structure allows software developers to write software providing for an
`application layer protocol such as HTTP without providing for implementation of TCP
`or other lower layer protocols Id at 65 This is possible because implementation of
`lower layer protocols can be done by other software such as
`computers operating
`system Id
`
`13
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 14
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400
`
`Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page 15 of 55 PagelD
`
`13084
`
`During TCP communication between two computers the operating system of the
`
`TCP segment
`receiving computer will upon receiving
`acknowledgment ACK message Id at
`receive the ACK message within
`
`transmit
`
`transport
`
`layer
`
`66 If the sending computer does not
`
`certain time it will
`
`resend the TCP segment Id
`
`Once the sending corriputer
`
`receives the ACK message it discards the received
`
`packets from the TCP memory buffer which frees some of the memory allocated to the
`
`TCP buffer by the operating system Id at
`
`66 68
`
`Application Server products
`
`The Application Server products contain multiple software programs such as
`
`OHS and Oracle Containers For Java OC4J Id at 75 OHS is the web server
`
`component of the Application Server products Id The OHS software program
`
`contains several built-in functions including the HTTP Listener and
`
`collection of
`
`modules Id The HTTP Listener receives incoming web client requests and passes
`
`them to the appropriate processing module Id at 76 The modules perform various
`
`functions related to the processing of web client requests Id at 77
`
`In the default configuration there are 256 instances or copies of the OHS
`
`program Id at 81 Where Web Cache is not present or where
`
`web clients
`
`request
`
`is
`
`cache miss one of the instances of OHS accepts the web clients request
`
`for processing
`
`Id The OHS instance processes the request by calling each module
`
`in the order in which the modules were loaded into memory when the OHS program
`
`was first started Id at
`
`82 When it calls module the OHS instance compares the
`
`URL of the request against
`
`list of types of web page content
`
`to determine whether the
`
`14
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 15
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400
`
`Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page 16 of 55 PagelD
`
`13085
`
`request
`
`is the type of request
`
`that the module is designed to process Id Once the
`
`OHS instance identifies the correct module to use the OHS instance processes the
`
`request using that module Id
`
`If the OHS instance calls all of the modules and no module is capable of
`
`processing the request
`
`the OHS instance will attempt
`
`to satisfy the request by
`
`accessing the content
`
`from the computers local storage e.g files on the computers
`
`hard drive Id at IT 83 If
`
`the OHS instance cannot satisfy the request from accessing
`
`the local storage then the OHS instance will send an error message to the web client
`
`indicating that the requested content was not found Id Once the OHS instance
`
`either sends the requested web page content or an error message the OHS instance is
`
`done processing the request Id
`
`One of OHSs modules mod_oc4j enables OHS to communicate with OC4J
`
`Id at 11 78 OC4J is designed to contain
`
`users Java-based software applications
`
`Id at 11 80
`
`user using OC4J would design
`
`Java-based software application and
`
`then use OC4J to run that application when it
`
`is requested by web client Id When
`
`web client requests content
`
`that requires processing by
`
`Java-based software
`
`application and that request
`
`is not handled by Web Cache an OHS instance uses
`
`mod_oc4j
`
`to route those requests to an OC4J program Id at 11 79 The OHS
`
`instance then waits until OC4J returns the completed request
`
`Id at
`
`84 Once OC4J
`
`has returned the requested content
`
`to the OHS instance the OHS instance sends the
`
`requested content to the web client Id Because OHS instances can process only
`
`one request at
`
`time requests made while an OHS instance is engaged in responding
`
`15
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1029, p. 16
`
`

`
`Case 106-cv-00414-SLR
`
`Document 400
`
`Filed 12/04/08
`
`Page 17 of 55 PagelD
`
`13086
`
`to
`
`request
`
`either processing the request
`
`itself or waiting for some other component
`
`to process the request must be handled by some other OHS instance Id at
`
`84-
`
`85
`
`Users of the Application Server products can change some of the configuration
`
`details concerning how mod_oc4j communicates with OC4J instances.12
`
`Id at IT 86
`
`As an initial matter users must configure OHS with mod_oc4j Id Having done that
`
`where users have atso configured the Application Server product
`
`to have more than
`
`one OC4J instance mod_oc4j will
`
`load balance requests among the multiple OC4J
`
`instances
`
`Id Users can configure mod_oc4j
`
`to perform one of e