`
`
`Steven Krampf, et al.
`In re Patent of:
`8,090,309 Attorney Docket No.: 39521-0016IP2
`U.S. Patent No.:
`January 3, 2012
`
`Issue Date:
`Appl. Serial No.: 11/967,692
`
`Filing Date:
`December 31, 2007
`
`Title:
`ENTERTAINMENT SYSTEM WITH UNIFIED CONTENT
`SELECTION
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF M. RAY MERCER
`
`Personal Work Experience and Awards
`1. My name is Melvin Ray Mercer, Professor Emeritus of Electrical and
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Computer Engineering at Texas A&M University. I am currently President of M.
`
`Ray Mercer and Associates, Inc., an independent consulting firm. In addition to the
`
`below summary, a copy of my current curriculum vitae more fully setting forth my
`
`experiences and qualifications is submitted herewith as Appendix A.
`
`2.
`
`I have more than 46 years of dual industrial and academic experience
`
`in Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering. I received a B.S. in Electrical
`
`Engineering from Texas Tech University in 1968, a Master of Science in Electrical
`
`Engineering from Stanford University in 1971, and a Doctor of Philosophy in
`
`Electrical Engineering from The University of Texas at Austin in 1980. Further, I
`
`have authored dozens of published technical papers and delivered many lectures
`
`addressing various aspects of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
`
`1
`
`APPLE 1003
`
`
`
`3.
`
`From 1968 to 1973, I was a Research/Development Engineer at
`
`General Telephone and Electronics Sylvania in Mountain View, California, during
`
`which time I also completed my M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Stanford
`
`University in 1971. During this period, I programmed minicomputer systems
`
`(predecessors to personal computers, smartphones, and modem servers) in machine
`
`language, assembly language, and various higher-level languages. I wrote simple
`
`Operating Systems, and most of the applications involved real-time processing as a
`
`significant aspect of the systems design. Much of this work was related to
`
`computer control of data collection and analysis systems used by organizations in
`
`the United States government.
`
`4.
`
`From 1973 to 1977, I was a Member of Technical Staff at Hewlett-
`
`Packard's Santa Clara Division and subsequently at Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
`
`in Palo Alto, California. During this time, I continued to develop application
`
`programs. I also designed interface hardware to interact with the software of the
`
`computers and accomplish various tasks. One major project for which I had overall
`
`responsibility was the real-time control of environmental test systems for satellites
`
`and satellite components. At HP Laboratories, among other projects, I developed
`
`hardware and software to provide real-time control of manufacturing systems for
`
`exotic solid state devices.
`
`2
`
`
`
`5.
`
`From 1977 to 1980, I was a Lecturer in the Division of Mathematics,
`
`Statistics, and Computer Science at the University of Texas at San Antonio. As the
`
`director of a laboratory for teaching students to program and build hardware
`
`interfaces and control systems using small computers, I purchased, built, and
`
`operated some of the earliest personal computers. Additionally, I taught courses in
`
`the design of digital systems, while also completing my Ph.D. in Electrical
`
`Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin in 1980.
`
`6.
`
`From 1980 to 1983, I was a Member of Technical Staff at Bell
`
`Laboratories in Murray Hill, New Jersey. My work involved the programming of
`
`computers and the hardware design of components for communication systems. I
`
`was part of a three-person team that designed, tested, and directed the manufacture
`
`of an integrated circuit that was a key component in a digital telephone modem.
`
`7.
`
`In 1983, I was appointed Assistant Professor of Electrical and
`
`Computer Engineering at the University of Texas at Austin. In 1987, I was
`
`promoted to Associate Professor and Professor in 1991. During this period, I
`
`taught Computer Engineering courses at the undergraduate and graduate level,
`
`directed the research of graduate students, and consulted with numerous
`
`organizations.
`
`8.
`
`In 1995, I was appointed Professor of Electrical and Computer
`
`Engineering, Leader of the Computer Engineering Group, and Holder of the
`
`3
`
`
`
`Computer Engineering Chair in Electrical Engineering at Texas A&M University
`
`in College Station, Texas. My teaching, my research, my technical publications,
`
`and my supervision of graduate students during this period included the areas of
`
`the modeling, design, and fabrication of digital hardware and software systems.
`
`My administrative duties included the development and enhancement of the
`
`Computer Engineering Group. As with previous my work (at The University of
`
`Texas at Austin), during this period, I taught courses at the undergraduate and
`
`graduate level, I directed the research of graduate students, and I consulted with
`
`numerous organizations on a variety of topics. I was also responsible for
`
`monitoring controlled experiments to optimize and quantify the use of tester time
`
`to detect defects in electrical products, and I was part of a team that used analytical
`
`techniques to predict the expected growth of quiescent currents in MOS transistors
`
`as a function of the reduction in integrated circuit feature sizes.
`
`9.
`
`In September 2005, I retired from my teaching position, and the
`
`Regents of the Texas A&M University System appointed me as Professor Emeritus
`
`of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Texas A&M University.
`
`10.
`
`In 1984, I formed Mercer and Associates, an independent consulting
`
`firm that I have owned and directed to this day. Since 1984, I have been providing
`
`private consultation and advice in Electrical and Computer Engineering to
`
`4
`
`
`
`numerous entities, including IBM Corp., Rockwell International, Motorola
`
`Semiconductor, AT&T, Inc., and SigmaTel.
`
`11.
`
`I first served as an expert witness at the request of the Office of the
`
`State Attorney General of Texas in 1984. Since that time, I have been hired by
`
`numerous law firms to provide them and their clients with expert consultation and
`
`expert testimony, often in the areas of patent infringement litigation related to
`
`Electrical and Computer Engineering. I have testified about systems that
`
`download entertainment media from the internet for presentation on home-based
`
`entertainment systems. I have testified regarding stand alone and on line gaming
`
`systems. I have testified regarding home entertainment systems which use wireless
`
`communications. I have testified regarding media advertising for automotive
`
`products. I have testified with respect to on-line educational institutions and
`
`technical aspects of their media distribution systems. I have testified with respect
`
`to media and entertainment systems for mobile vehicles. I have testified in a case
`
`involving the simultaneous acquisition of media from an external source to a
`
`storage device and presentation of different media stored on that same storage
`
`device via an entertainment device. I have testified in a case involving delta-sigma
`
`modulation for high performance analog-to-digital and digital-to-analog converters
`
`– such as those commonly utilized in personal computers.
`
`5
`
`
`
`12. Throughout my career, I have been actively involved in numerous
`
`professional organizations including the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
`
`Engineers ("IEEE"), and I was recognized as an IEEE Fellow in 1994. I was the
`
`Program Chairman for the 1989 International Test Conference, which is an IEEE
`
`sponsored annual conference with (at that time) more than one thousand attendees
`
`and over one hundred presented papers. I won the Best Paper Award at the 1982
`
`International Test Conference.
`
`13.
`
`I also won a Best Paper Award at the 1991 Design Automation
`
`Conference, an annual conference with (at that time) more than ten thousand
`
`attendees and five hundred submitted papers, many of which related to the design
`
`of integrated circuit-based systems.
`
`14.
`
`I also won a Best Paper Award at the 1999 VLSI Test Symposium.
`
`This paper was focused on manufacturing techniques to optimize the quality of
`
`manufactured digital systems. I am the inventor of two United States patents that
`
`relate to the design of integrated circuits and digital systems. I was selected as a
`
`National Science Foundation Presidential Young Investigator in 1986. This award
`
`included $500,000 for support of my research.
`
`15. Based on my above-described 46 years of dual industrial and
`
`academic experience in Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering, and the
`
`acceptance of my publications and professional recognition by societies in my
`
`6
`
`
`
`field, I believe that I am considered to be an expert in the field of digital media,
`
`and digital media distribution.
`
`II. Materials Considered
`
`16.
`
`In writing this Declaration, I have considered the following: my own
`
`knowledge and experience, including my work experience in the fields of digital
`
`media, and digital media distribution; my industry experience with those subjects;
`
`and my experience in working with others involved in those fields. I have also
`
`analyzed the following publications and materials, in addition to other materials I
`
`cite in my declaration:
`
` U.S. Patent No. 8,090,309 and its accompanying prosecution history
`
`(“the ’309 Patent”)
`
` US Publication No. 2005/0132405 (“AbiEzzi”)
`
` US Patent No. 6,563,769 (“VDM”)
`
` US Patent No. 8,156,528 (“Baumgartner”)
`
` US Patent No. 6,728,729 (“Jawa”)
`
` US Publication No. 2003/0236906 (“Klemets”)
`
` US Publication No. 2002/0129693 (“Wilks”)
`
` US Patent No. 8,577,205 (“Barton”)
`
` US Patent No. 7,542,814 (“Barr”)
`
` US Publication No. 2002/0093593 (“Perkes”)
`
`7
`
`
`
` US Patent No. 5,666,422 (“Harrison”)
`
` US Patent No. 6,897,905 (“Kaminosono”)
`
` US Publication No. 2002/0080166 (“Sweatt”)
`
`17. Although for the sake of brevity this Declaration refers to selected
`
`portions of the cited references, it should be understood that one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art would view the references cited herein in their entirety and in combination
`
`with other references cited herein or cited within the references themselves. The
`
`references used in this Declaration, therefore, should be viewed as being
`
`incorporated herein in their entirety.
`
`18.
`
`I am not currently and have not at any time in the past been an
`
`employee of Apple, Inc. I have been engaged in the present matter to provide my
`
`independent analysis of the issues raised in the petition for inter partes review of
`
`the ’309 patent. I received no compensation for this declaration beyond my normal
`
`hourly compensation based on my time actually spent studying the matter, and my
`
`compensation does not depend on the outcome of this inter partes review of the
`
`’309 patent.
`
`III. Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`19.
`I am familiar with the content of the ’309 patent, which, I have been
`
`informed by counsel, has an earliest possible filing date of October 27, 2004 (the
`
`“Critical Date”). Additionally, I have reviewed the other references cited above in
`
`8
`
`
`
`this declaration. Counsel has informed me that I should consider these materials
`
`through the lens of one of ordinary skill in the art related to the ’309 patent at the
`
`time of the invention. I believe that a person having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`effective filing date of the ’309 Patent (“POSITA”) would have had a Bachelor of
`
`Science Degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, or Computer
`
`Science with related work experience. Individuals with additional education or
`
`additional industrial experience could still be of ordinary skill in the art if that
`
`additional aspect compensates for a deficit in one of the other aspects of the
`
`requirements stated above. I base my evaluation of a person of ordinary skill in
`
`this art on my own personal experience, including my knowledge of students,
`
`colleagues, and related professionals at the time of interest.
`
`IV. Claim Construction
`
`20.
`
`I understand that, for the purposes of my analysis in this matter, the
`
`claims of the ‘309 Patent must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation
`
`consistent with the specification. Stated another way, it is contemplated that the
`
`claims are understood by their broadest reasonable interpretation except where
`
`construed in the specification. I also understand that this “broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation” is with respect to how one of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`interpret the claim language. I have followed these principles in my analysis. In a
`
`9
`
`
`
`few instances, I have discussed my understanding of the claims in the relevant
`
`paragraphs below.
`
`V. Threshold Issues
`A. A POSITA would have combined VDM and Jawa
`21. As described in greater detail below, VDM teaches that the media
`
`device obtains media metadata from the content source over the network. Jawa
`
`teaches a media device requesting and receiving metadata for media content from a
`
`server over a network.
`
`22.
`
`Jawa teaches that a client (e.g., the media device) “issues a . . . request
`
`to obtain metadata about available songs” to a particular server (a content source)
`
`over a network “such as a LAN, WAN or the Internet.” Jawa, 7:26-27, 4:3-6. The
`
`server includes a “music database” storing “song records . . . contain[ing] metadata
`
`about each media item available in the database.” Id. at 4:50-51. Upon receiving a
`
`request from the client, the server “issues a reply” containing “song records”
`
`including metadata about the available songs. Id. at 7:46-57. The song records in
`
`the reply “may either be a partial or complete representation of the server-side song
`
`records 215, having metadata that might, for example, include the names of songs,
`
`an identification number, a persistent identification number, the artist, the album,
`
`the size of the song, the format of the song, the required bit rate, and any other
`
`appropriate information.” Id. at 7:51-57.
`
`10
`
`
`
`23. A POSITA would have modified the media client of VDM to obtain
`
`media metadata from a content source by transmitting a request for the media
`
`metadata, as taught by Jawa, because such a modification amounts to simply
`
`combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable
`
`results. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to make such a modification
`
`to conform the interactions of the media device and content source to the typical
`
`client-server model used in modern networks. See, e.g., Jawa, 4:18-25; Wilks,
`
`Abstract, ¶¶ 0042, 0045 (describing a media device using the HTTP protocol to
`
`request media metadata from a server). Such a client-server model would be
`
`appropriate for many of the network capable content sources described in VDM,
`
`e.g., networked CD/DVD device, storage device (e.g., a hard disk drive 110), and
`
`an internet site. VDM, 5:9-14, 3:52-55, claim 6 (“the content source is the integral
`
`CD/DVD device 130, or via an external connection 220,” where connection 220 is
`
`a type of connection used “for accessing [] items, or appliances, on a network,” and
`
`“wherein the content source is at least one of: a playback device, a storage device,
`
`and an Internet site.”) The artisan would have been further motivated to improve
`
`the network efficiency of the VDM system. If the media device does not send such
`
`a request, the content source has no information regarding what metadata is needed
`
`by the media device. The content source may thus provide metadata the media
`
`device does not need, which consumes network resources and reduces network
`
`11
`
`
`
`efficiency. Moreover, the content source of VDM must be prompted in some
`
`manner to send the metadata. The skilled artisan would seek the operational
`
`efficiency of having the receiving media device, a device that is already configured
`
`to communicate with the content source and already on the network, prompt the
`
`content source by requesting the data, rather than resorting to having an outside
`
`input, e.g., by the user or some other device, or some other prompt initiate sending
`
`the metadata. Such a configuration avoids the complexity of having additional
`
`outside input or other prompt.
`
`24. The results of such a combination would have been predictable to a
`
`POSITA as of the Critical Date, because media devices requesting metadata from
`
`servers over a network was known in the art as of the effective filing date of the
`
`’309 patent. See, e.g., Jawa, 4:10-17, 7:26-57; Wilks, Abstract, ¶¶ 0042, 0045.
`
`B. A POSITA would have combined AbiEzzi and Baumgartner
`25.
`In my opinion, it would have been obvious to a POSITA to combine
`
`the set-top boxes of AbiEzzi and Baumgartner to produce a set-top box that is i)
`
`operable in a first mode allowing a user to select locally-stored video content for
`
`playback on a connected display device (as described in Baumgartner); and ii)
`
`operable in a second mode to allow the user to select video content stored on a
`
`remote DVD jukebox for playback on the connected display device (as described
`
`in AbiEzzi). Baumgartner, 1:24-27, 6:1-3, 22:50-60; AbiEzzi, Abstract, ¶ 0024.
`
`12
`
`
`
`26. A POSITA would have modified the device of AbiEzzi operable to
`
`access a DVD jukebox over a network to include the PVR functionality of
`
`Baumgartner because such a modification amounts to simply combining prior art
`
`elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. The skilled
`
`artisan would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to
`
`eliminate the need to have two separate devices to perform the functions of
`
`AbiEzzi and Baumgartner, thereby reducing the amount of equipment a user needs
`
`to configure and maintain, reducing the space the equipment consumes in the
`
`user’s television cabinet, facilitating using the devices with a common remote
`
`control, and enabling one set of connections to the television. The artisan would
`
`have been motivated to consolidate the similar video playback functionality of
`
`AbiEzzi and Baumgartner in a single device to allow the user to navigate a single
`
`interface to access both local recorded programs and remote DVDs from the
`
`jukebox, thereby producing a more unified and user-friendly viewing experience.
`
`27. The results of such a combination would have been predictable,
`
`because media devices allowing for playback of media from both local and remote
`
`sources were known in the art as of the effective filing date of the ’309 patent. See,
`
`e.g., Barton, Abstract (describing a “digital video recorder (DVR) system” with an
`
`“integrated DVD player/recorder”); Klemets, Abstract (describing a device
`
`13
`
`
`
`operable to “stream[] media content” and “allow[] streaming content to be
`
`recorded for playback at a later time[.]”).
`
`C. Querying a remote resource involves transmitting a request
`28. AbiEzzi teaches that the media server maintains a “title directory for
`
`the titles stored on the jukebox,” which is media metadata. AbiEzzi, ¶ 0022, claim
`
`1. The media device “retrieves the title directory compiled by the media server
`
`and displays the directory as a sequence of interactive user interface menus for
`
`navigation and selection by the user.” Id. at ¶ 0026. AbiEzzi teaches that the
`
`media device retrieves the title directory by “querying the media server connected
`
`to the jukebox for information on titles stored in the jukebox,” and that the media
`
`server “receiv[es] a request . . . from [the] media client on the home network” as
`
`part of this process. AbiEzzi, claims 1 and 11. The media client querying the
`
`media server for information on the stored titles over the network involves the
`
`media device transmitting a request over a network for media metadata to the
`
`media source, because the term “querying” implies a request from one component
`
`and a response from another.
`
`D.
`
`Playing the audio portion of a video program on a separate
`component within a home theater was known in the art as of the
`Critical Date
`29. AbiEzzi teaches that the content retrieved from the media server for
`
`viewing includes “high quality video images and multi-channel audio provided by
`
`digital storage media such as Digital Video Discs (DVD’s).” AbiEzzi, ¶ 0002.
`
`14
`
`
`
`AbiEzzi teaches that an “audio playback system[]” separate from the display
`
`device can be used to render the audio portion of the content while the video
`
`portion is rendered on the display device. See AbiEzzi, ¶ 0018. In such a case, the
`
`media device outputs the audio portion of the media stream to the “audio playback
`
`system,” which is “a media output device separate from the media device” and also
`
`is a different device than the media device display (the connected television). See
`
`AbiEzzi, ¶ 0018. Such configurations were well-known as of the Critical Date in
`
`“home theater” type applications, where dedicated audio components were often
`
`used to render audio portions of video programs. AbiEzzi, ¶ 0002; see, e.g.,
`
`Harrison, 2:13-17 (“many consumers have abandoned the sound system in their
`
`TV sets completely, using an external amplifier and speakers (in most cases an
`
`existing stereo setup) driven by the stereo output from the TV (if present), or from
`
`a VCR to drive two front speakers”); Barr, 4:12-15 (“the television 12 may be
`
`interfaced with a home stereo system . . . so that the speakers of this home stereo
`
`system are utilized to deliver the audio portion of the audio-visual program from
`
`the television 12”); Perkes, ¶ 0024.
`
`VI. AbiEzzi and Baumgartner
`A. Claim 1
`30. The combination of AbiEzzi and Baumgartner teaches a method of
`
`using a media device operable in first and second modes.
`
`15
`
`
`
`31. AbiEzzi describes a “media client,” which is a set-top box (media
`
`device) that allows a user to “navigate . . . titles” loaded in a DVD jukebox
`
`accessible by the media client over a “home network.” AbiEzzi, Abstract, ¶0022.
`
`The media client provides a user interface through which “the user can select a title
`
`from the DVD jukebox for viewing on” a display device connected to the media
`
`client. AbiEzzi, Abstract, ¶ 0024. AbiEzzi teaches that a “media server controls
`
`the jukebox and functions as its proxy to allow discovery and control of the
`
`jukebox by other devices on the home network,” such as the media client. Id.
`
`32. Baumgartner teaches a recording device (media device) that includes
`
`a “personal video recorder (PVR)” that can “record programs on hard-disk drives”
`
`and “play back the recorded programs at a later time.” Baumgartner, 1:24-27, 6:1-
`
`3. Baumgartner teaches that the recording device includes a graphical user
`
`interface that displays “a list of recorded programs 2704 that the user may select.”
`
`Id. at 22:50-51, FIG. 27. “The user may view a previously recorded program by
`
`selecting the program from” the list of recorded programs. Id. at 22:59-60. As
`
`discussed in greater detail below, it would have been obvious to a POSITA to
`
`combine the devices of AbiEzzi and Baumgartner to produce a device that is
`
`operable in a first mode allowing a user to select locally-stored video content for
`
`playback on a connected display device (as described in Baumgartner); and
`
`operable in a second mode to allow the user to select video content stored on a
`
`16
`
`
`
`remote DVD jukebox for playback on the connected display device (as described
`
`in AbiEzzi). Baumgartner, 1:24-27, 6:1-3, 22:50-60; AbiEzzi, Abstract, ¶ 0024.
`
`33. A POSITA would have modified the media client of AbiEzzi based on
`
`the teachings of Baumgartner for the reasons discussed above at Section V.B.
`
`34. As described above, Baumgartner teaches a media device that that can
`
`“record programs on hard-disk drives” and “play back the recorded programs at a
`
`later time.” Baumgartner, 1:24-27, 6:1-3. Baumgartner describes that the media
`
`device includes “any suitable hardware, software, or both including, for example . .
`
`. memory 806 (e. g., random access memory a (RAM) or any other suitable solid
`
`state volatile or non-volatile memory devices), . . . storage devices 814 (e.g., hard-
`
`drives or any other suitable magnetic storage devices, optical storage devices, or
`
`any other suitable storage devices), . . . or any other suitable hardware or software.
`
`PVR device 802 may provide, among other things, functionality related to the
`
`recording, storage, scheduling, retrieval, and playback of television programming.”
`
`Id. at 13:19-38.
`
`35. Baumgartner teaches that the media device can “record programs on
`
`hard-disk drives” and “play back the recorded programs at a later time.”
`
`Baumgartner, 1:24-27, 6:1-3. The media device presents a graphical user interface
`
`that displays “a list of recorded programs 2704 that the user may select.” Id. at
`
`22:50-51, FIG. 27. “The user may view a previously recorded program by
`
`17
`
`
`
`selecting the program from” the list of recorded programs. Id. at 22:59-60. The
`
`media device responds to a user “request to present a recording” by generat[ing] a
`
`presentation of the recording in display screen 2802.” Id. at 23:32-34. When
`
`recorded content is selected for viewing, the content is streamed from the hard-disk
`
`for output by the media device on the display screen. See id. at 1:24-37, 22:50-60,
`
`23:32-34.
`
`36. As previously discussed, AbiEzzi teaches a media device that allows a
`
`user to “navigate . . . titles” loaded in a DVD jukebox accessible by the media
`
`client over a “home network.” AbiEzzi, Abstract. The media client provides a
`
`user interface through which “the user can select a title from the DVD jukebox for
`
`viewing on” a display device connected to the media client. AbiEzzi, Abstract, ¶
`
`0024. AbiEzzi teaches that a “media server 100 functions as a proxy for the
`
`jukebox 80 to allow the jukebox to be discovered and controlled by other devices
`
`connected to the home network 70, such as the media clients 86, 88 [media
`
`devices] of the televisions 82, 84.” Id. at ¶ 0022. FIG. 2 from AbiEzzi shows this
`
`configuration:
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`Network
`
`Media
`device
`Media source
`remote from
`the media
`device
`
`AbiEzzi, Detail of FIG. 2 (annotated)
`
`
`
`37. Baumgartner teaches that the media device includes a graphical user
`
`interface that displays “a list of recorded programs 2704 that the user may select.”
`
`Id. at 22:50-51, FIG. 27. “The user may view a previously recorded program by
`
`selecting the program from” the list of recorded programs. Id. at 22:59-60. As
`
`shown in FIG. 27 of Baumgartner, the list of recorded programs includes a
`
`program title 2704 and a program rating 2106 for each program in the list:
`
`19
`
`
`
`Program title
`(media
`metadata)
`
`Program
`rating (media
`metadata)
`
`
`
`Baumgartner, Detail of FIG. 27 (annotated)
`
`38. The ’309 Patent provides “title” and “stream characteristic” as
`
`examples of metadata. See ’309 Patent, claim 5. In my opinion, the program title
`
`(a “title”) and program rating (a “stream characteristic,” specifically the rating of
`
`the stream) of Baumgartner are thus “media metadata.”
`
`39.
`
`In my opinion, the graphical user interface of Baumgartner is a
`
`“display.” The term “display” should not be limited to apply only to hardware
`
`components. The ’309 specification and claims, in fact, use the term “display” to
`
`also refer to a display of information, e.g., a graphical user interface. See, e.g.,
`
`’309 Patent, 2:16-17, 17:50-53, 18:64-19:1, claim 9 (“a display unit,” versus “a
`
`display of the media device,” “a media device display”).
`
`40. When a user “select[s] a previously recorded program” through the
`
`graphical user interface of the media device, the media device plays the content
`
`20
`
`
`
`associated with the selected program on a connected television. See id. at 22:50-
`
`60, 23:40-41.
`
`41. As previously discussed, Baumgartner teaches that the media device
`
`“record[s] programs on hard-disk drives” and “play[s] back the recorded programs
`
`at a later time.” Baumgartner, 1:24-27, 6:1-3. When a user “select[s] a previously
`
`recorded program” through the graphical user interface of the media device, “video
`
`content of [the] recorded program may be . . . displayed in [a] display screen” such
`
`as the connected television. See id. at 22:50-60, 23:40-41.
`
`42. As previously discussed, AbiEzzi teaches that the “media server 100
`
`functions as a proxy for the jukebox 80 to allow the jukebox to be discovered and
`
`controlled by other devices connected to the home network 70, such as the media
`
`clients 86, 88 of the televisions 82, 84.” Id. at ¶ 0022. AbiEzzi teaches that “the
`
`home network is built on an IP-based Ethernet network” and includes a “wireless
`
`access point” for servicing “wireless devices connected thereto” (e.g., media client
`
`88). FIG. 2 from AbiEzzi shows this configuration:
`
`21
`
`
`
`Network
`
`Media
`device
`Media source
`remote from
`the media
`device
`
`AbiEzzi, Detail of FIG. 2 (annotated)
`
`
`
`43. AbiEzzi teaches that the media server maintains a “title directory for
`
`the titles stored on the jukebox,” which is media metadata. AbiEzzi, ¶ 0022, claim
`
`1. The media device “retrieves the title directory compiled by the media server
`
`and displays the directory as a sequence of interactive user interface menus for
`
`navigation and selection by the user.” Id. at ¶ 0026. AbiEzzi teaches that the
`
`media device retrieves the title directory by “querying the media server connected
`
`to the jukebox for information on titles stored in the jukebox,” and that the media
`
`server “receiv[es] a request . . . from [the] media client on the home network” as
`
`part of this process. AbiEzzi, claims 1 and 11. The media client querying the
`
`media server for information on the stored titles over the network involves the
`
`22
`
`
`
`media device transmitting a request over a network for media metadata to the
`
`media source.
`
`44. As previously discussed, the media device “retrieves the title directory
`
`compiled by the media server.” Id. at ¶ 0026. AbiEzzi teaches that the media
`
`device “receiv[es] from the media server the information on titles stored in the
`
`jukebox” (the media metadata) over the home network. Id. at claim 11. AbiEzzi
`
`further teaches that “the media server sends the title directory 116 and other user
`
`interface data to the media client 86 of the television for display on the television
`
`to allow the user to interactively navigate the titles and select a title for playback.”
`
`Id. at ¶ 0022. AbiEzzi teaches that “[w]hen the user selects a title for viewing, the
`
`media server 100 controls the DVD jukebox 80 to read the contents on the DVD
`
`for that title,” thereby indicating that the title information indicates a DVD (a
`
`media file or media stream) available from the media source. Id. at ¶ 0023.
`
`45. As previously discussed, AbiEzzi teaches that “the media server sends
`
`the title directory 116 and other user interface data to the media client 86 of the
`
`television for display on the television to allow the user to interactively navigate
`
`the titles and select a title for playback.” Id. at ¶ 0022. As discussed above, a
`
`graphical user interface is a “display,” so the user interface produced by the media
`
`device, of metadata, is a “media device display.”
`
`23
`
`
`
`46. AbiEzzi teaches that “when the user selects a title for viewing” using
`
`the user interface of the media client “the media client sends [a] request to the
`
`media server, and the media server controls the DVD jukebox to retrieve the
`
`contents for that title.” AbiEzzi, ¶ 0026.
`
`47. AbiEzzi teaches that “when the user selects to view a title [], the
`
`media client sends the request to the media server, and the media server controls
`
`the DVD jukebox to retrieve the contents for that title.” Id. at ¶ 0026. Because the
`
`media server responds to the request by retrieving the contents of the particular
`
`title selected by the user, the request sent by the media device (the corresponding
`
`signal) includes information (at least one media file or media stream metadata)
`
`identifying the particular title (the media file or media stream). See id at ¶ 0026.
`
`48. AbiEzzi teaches that “[w]hen the user selects a title for viewing, the
`
`media server 100 controls the DVD jukebox 80 to read the contents on the DVD
`
`for that title, and transmits the contents to the media client of the display device
`
`(e.g., a television) being viewed