Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Facebook, Inc., WhatsApp, Inc.
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`Uniloc USA, Inc., Uniloc Luxembourg S.A.,
`Patent Owner
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`TITLE: SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSTANT VOIP MESSAGING
`
`DECLARATION OF TAL LAVIAN, PH.D.
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 1
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`Page
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS .............................................. 1
`A. Qualifications and Experience ............................................................. 1
`B. Materials Considered ............................................................................ 5
`PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ......................................... 6
`II.
`III. BASIS FOR MY OPINION AND STATEMENT OF LEGAL
`PRINCIPLES .................................................................................................. 8
`A.
`Claim Construction .............................................................................. 9
`B.
`Anticipation .......................................................................................... 9
`C.
`Obviousness .......................................................................................... 9
`1. Motivation to Combine ............................................................ 12
`IV. RELEVANT TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND ....................................... 14
`A.
`The Internet and TCP/IP Protocol Suite ............................................. 15
`B.
`Voice over IP (VoIP) .......................................................................... 16
`C.
`Instant messaging (IM) ....................................................................... 19
`1.
`IETF in RFC 2778 – “A Model for Presence and Instant
`Messaging” ............................................................................... 23
`IETF RFC 2779 “Instant Messaging / Presence Protocol
`Requirements” .......................................................................... 24
`Prior Art Instant Messaging (“IM”) Systems .......................... 24
`3.
`THE ’622 PATENT ...................................................................................... 28
`A.
`The Specification ................................................................................ 28
`B.
`The Claims of the ’622 Patent ............................................................ 30
`C.
`Claim Construction ............................................................................ 30
`“an instant voice messaging application” ................................ 30
`
`“client platform system” .......................................................... 36
`“communication platform system” .......................................... 38
`“connection object messages” .................................................. 40
`
`VI. APPLICATION OF THE PRIOR ART TO THE CLAIMS ........................ 42
`
`2.
`
`V.
`
`
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 2
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Brief Description and Summary of the Prior Art ............................... 43
`Brief Summary of Zydney [Ex. 1003/1103] ............................ 43
`
`Brief Summary of Shinder [Ex. 1014/1114] ............................ 49
`Brief Summary of Appelman [Ex. 1004/1104] ....................... 50
`Brief Summary of Clark [Ex. 1008/1108] ............................... 55
`Brief Summary of Hethmon [Ex. 1009/1109] ......................... 58
`Brief Summary of Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary
`(1991) [Ex. 1018/1118] and Moghe [Ex. 1019/1119] ............. 61
`Zydney and Shinder Render Obvious Claims 3, 6-8, 10, 11, 13,
`18-21, 23, 27, 32-35, and 38. ............................................................. 64
`Independent Claim 3 ................................................................ 64
`
`(a)
`Preamble of claim 3: “A system comprising:” ............. 65
`(b)
`“a network interface connected to a packet-
`switched network” (Claim 3[a]) .................................... 65
`“a messaging system communicating with a
`plurality of instant voice message client systems
`via the network interface; and” (Claim 3[b]) ................ 75
`“a communication platform system maintaining
`connection information for each of the plurality of
`instant voice message client systems indicating
`whether there is a current connection to each of the
`plurality of instant voice message client systems,”
`(Claim 3[c]) ................................................................... 80
`“wherein the messaging system receives an instant
`voice message from one of the plurality of instant
`voice message client systems, and” (Claim 3[d]) .......... 83
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`(e)
`
`- ii -
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 3
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`(f)
`
`“wherein the instant voice message includes an
`object field including a digitized audio file.”
`(Claim 3[e]) ................................................................... 84
`Dependent Claim 6 .................................................................. 90
`Dependent Claim 7 .................................................................. 93
`Dependent Claim 8 ................................................................ 102
`Dependent Claim 10 .............................................................. 104
`Dependent Claim 11 .............................................................. 106
`(a)
`“wherein, upon receipt of an instant voice
`message, the communication platform system
`determines if there is the current connection to one
`of the plurality of instant voice message client
`systems identified as a recipient of the instant
`voice message,” ........................................................... 106
`“and if there is no connection with the one of the
`plurality of instant voice message client system
`identified as the recipient, the instant voice
`message is stored and delivered when the one of
`the plurality of instant voice message client
`systems identified as the recipient re-established a
`connection.” ................................................................. 110
`Dependent Claim 13 .............................................................. 111
`(a)
`“wherein each of the instant voice message client
`systems comprises an instant voice messaging
`application…” .............................................................. 112
`“…[an instant voice messaging application]
`generating an instant voice message and
`transmitting the instant voice message over the
`packet-switched network to the messaging system” ... 113
`
`(b)
`
`(b)
`
`- iii -
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 4
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(d)
`
`Dependent Claim 18 .............................................................. 119
`Dependent Claim 19 .............................................................. 120
` Dependent Claim 20 .............................................................. 123
` Dependent Claim 21 .............................................................. 128
` Dependent Claim 23 .............................................................. 128
`Independent Claim 27 ............................................................ 129
`
`(a)
`Preamble of claim 27: “A system comprising:” ......... 130
`(b)
`“a client device” (Claim 27[a]) .................................... 130
`(c)
`“a network interface coupled to the client device
`and connecting the client device to a packet-
`switched network; and” (Claim 27[b]) ........................ 131
`“an instant voice messaging application installed
`on the client device, wherein the instant voice
`messaging application includes” (Claim 27[c]) .......... 133
`“a client platform system for generating an instant
`voice message and,” (Claim 27[c1]) ........................... 133
`“a messaging system for transmitting the instant
`voice message over the packet-switched network
`via the network interface,” (Claim 27[c2]) .................. 135
`“wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes a document handler system for attaching
`one or more files to the instant voice message.”
`(Claim 27[d]) ............................................................... 136
` Dependent Claim 32 .............................................................. 143
` Dependent Claim 33 .............................................................. 143
` Dependent Claim 34 .............................................................. 144
` Dependent Claim 35 .............................................................. 144
`
`(e)
`
`(f)
`
`(g)
`
`- iv -
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 5
`
`

`

`
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`Independent Claim 38 ............................................................ 145
`(a)
`“A system comprising:” (Claim 38 Preamble) ............ 146
`“a client device; and” (Claim 38[a]) ...................................... 146
`“a network interface coupled to the client device and
`connecting the client device to a packet-switched
`network; and” (Claim 38[b]) ....................................... 146
`“an instant voice messaging application installed on the
`client device, wherein the instant voice messaging
`application includes” (Claim 38[c]) ............................ 146
`“a client platform system for generating an instant voice
`message and” (Claim 38[c1]) ...................................... 146
`“a messaging system for transmitting the instant voice
`message over the packet-switched network via the
`network interface,” (Claim 38[c2]) ............................. 146
`“a display displaying a list of one or more potential
`recipients for an instant voice message.” (Claim
`38[d]) ........................................................................... 146
`Zydney in View of Shinder and Appelman Renders Obvious
`Claims 22 and 39 .............................................................................. 147
`Dependent Claim 22 .............................................................. 147
`
`Dependent Claim 39 .............................................................. 154
`
`Zydney in View of Shinder and Clark Renders Obvious Claims
`14-17 and 28-31 ................................................................................ 155
`Dependent Claim 14 .............................................................. 155
`
`(a)
`“wherein the instant voice messaging application
`includes a message database storing the instant
`voice message,” ........................................................... 155
`
`(b)
`
`- v -
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 6
`
`

`

`
`
`E.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`(b)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“wherein the instant voice message is represented
`by a database record including a unique identifier.” ... 167
`Dependent Claim 15 .............................................................. 169
`Dependent Claim 16 .............................................................. 170
`Dependent Claim 17 .............................................................. 175
`Dependent Claim 28 .............................................................. 185
`Dependent Claim 29 .............................................................. 186
`Dependent Claim 30 .............................................................. 186
`Dependent Claim 31 .............................................................. 187
`
`Zydney in View of Shinder and Hethmon Renders Obvious
`Claims 4, 5, and 24-26 ..................................................................... 188
`Dependent Claim 4 ................................................................ 188
`
`Dependent Claim 5 ................................................................ 198
`Independent Claim 24 ............................................................ 199
`(a)
`Preamble of claim 24: “A system comprising:” ......... 200
`(b)
`“a network interface connected to a packet-
`switched network;” (Claim 24[a]) ............................... 201
`“a messaging system communicating with a plurality of
`instant voice message client systems via the
`network interface; and” (Claim 24[b]) ........................ 201
`“a communication platform system maintaining
`connection information for each of the plurality of
`instant voice message client systems indicating
`whether there is a current connection to each of the
`plurality of instant voice message client systems,”
`(Claim 24[c]) ............................................................... 201
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- vi -
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 7
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`“wherein the messaging system receives
`connection object messages from the plurality of
`instant voice message client systems,” (Claim
`24[d]) ........................................................................... 201
`“wherein each of the connection object messages
`includes data representing a state of a logical
`connection with a given one of the plurality of
`instant voice message client systems.” (Claim
`24[d1]) ......................................................................... 214
`Dependent Claim 25 .............................................................. 215
`Dependent Claim 26 .............................................................. 215
`
`Zydney in View of Shinder and Microsoft (1991) and Moghe
`Renders Obvious Claim 12 .............................................................. 218
`Dependent Claim 12 .............................................................. 218
`
`VII. ENABLEMENT OF THE PRIOR ART .................................................... 226
`VIII. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 228
`
`
`
`F.
`
`- vii -
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 8
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`I, Tal Lavian, Ph.D., declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS
`A. Qualifications and Experience
`1.
`I have more than 25 years of experience in the networking,
`
`telecommunications, Internet, and software fields. I received a Ph.D. in Computer
`
`Science, specializing in networking and communications, from the University of
`
`California at Berkeley in 2006 and obtained a Master’s of Science (“M.Sc.”) degree
`
`in Electrical Engineering from Tel Aviv University, Israel, in 1996. In 1987, I
`
`obtained a Bachelor of Science (“B.Sc.”) in Mathematics and Computer Science,
`
`also from Tel Aviv University.
`
`2.
`
`I am employed by the University of California at Berkeley and was
`
`appointed as a lecturer and Industry Fellow in the Center of Entrepreneurship and
`
`Technology (“CET”) as part of UC Berkeley College of Engineering. I have been
`
`with the University of California at Berkeley since 2000 where I served as Berkeley
`
`Industry Fellow, Lecturer, Visiting Scientist, Ph.D. Candidate, and Nortel’s Scientist
`
`Liaison. I have taught several classes on wireless devices and smartphones. Some
`
`positions and projects were held concurrently, while others were held sequentially.
`
`3.
`
`I have more than 25 years of experience as a scientist, educator and
`
`technologist, and much of my experience relates to telecommunication, data
`
`- 1 -
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 9
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`communications, and computer networking technologies. For eleven years from
`
`1996 to 2007, I worked for Bay Networks and Nortel Networks. Bay Networks was
`
`in the business of making and selling computer network hardware and software.
`
`Nortel Networks acquired Bay Networks in 1998, and I continued to work at Nortel
`
`after the acquisition. Throughout my tenure at Bay and Nortel, I held positions
`
`including Principal Scientist, Principal Architect, Principal Engineer, Senior
`
`Software Engineer, and led the development and research involving a number of
`
`networking technologies. I led the efforts of Java technologies at Bay Networks and
`
`Nortel Networks. In addition, during 1999-2001, I served as the President of the
`
`Silicon Valley Java User Group with over 800 active members from many
`
`companies in the Silicon Valley.
`
`4.
`
`Prior to that, from 1994 to 1995, I worked as a software engineer and
`
`team leader for Aptel Communications, designing and developing wireless
`
`technologies, mobile wireless devices and network software products.
`
`5.
`
`From 1990 to 1993, I worked as a software engineer and team leader at
`
`Scitex Ltd., where I developed system and network communications tools (mostly
`
`in C and C++).
`
`6.
`
`I have extensive experience in communications technologies including
`
`wireless technologies, routing and switching architectures and protocols, including
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 10
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`Multi-Protocol Label Switching Networks, Layer 2 and Layer 3 Virtual Private
`
`Networks, and Pseudowire technologies. Much of my work for Nortel Networks
`
`(mentioned above) involved the research and development of these technologies.
`
`For example, I wrote software for Bay Networks and Nortel Networks switches and
`
`routers, developed network technologies for the Accelar 8600 family of switches
`
`and routers, the OPTera 3500 SONET switches, the OPTera 5000 DWDM family,
`
`and the Alteon L4-7 switching product family. I wrote software for Java-based
`
`device management, including a software interface for device management and
`
`network management in the Accelar routing switch family’s network management
`
`system. I have also worked on enterprise Wi-Fi solutions, wireless mobility
`
`management, and wireless infrastructure.
`
`7.
`
`I am named as a co-inventor on more than 100 issued patents and I co-
`
`authored more than 25 scientific publications, journal articles, and peer-reviewed
`
`papers. Furthermore, I am a member of a number of professional affiliations,
`
`including the Association of Computing Machinery (“ACM”) and the Institute of
`
`Electrical and Electronics Engineers (“IEEE”) (senior member). I am also certified
`
`under the IEEE WCET (Wireless Communications Engineering Technologies)
`
`Program, which was specifically designed by the IEEE Communications Society
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 11
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`(ComSoc) to address the worldwide wireless industry’s growing and ever-evolving
`
`need for qualified communications professionals.
`
`8.
`
`From 2007 to the present, I have served as a Principal Scientist at my
`
`company TelecommNet Consulting Inc., where I develop network communication
`
`technologies and provide research and consulting in advanced technologies, mainly
`
`in computer networking and Internet technologies. In addition, I have served as a
`
`Co-Founder and Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of VisuMenu, Inc. from 2010 to
`
`the present, where I design and develop architecture of visual IVR technologies for
`
`smartphones and wireless mobile devices in the area of network communications.
`
`9.
`
`I have worked on wireless and cellular systems using a variety of
`
`modulation technologies including time-division multiple-access (TDMA), code-
`
`division multiple-access (CDMA), and orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing
`
`(OFDM). I have additionally worked on various projects involving the transmission
`
`and streaming of digital media content.
`
`10. The above outline of my experience with communications systems is
`
`not comprehensive of all of my experience over my years of technical experience.
`
`Additional details of my background are set forth in my curriculum vitae, attached
`
`as Exhibit A to this Declaration, which provides a more complete description of my
`
`educational background and work experience.
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 12
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`
`11.
`
`I am being compensated for the time I have spent on this matter at the
`
`rate of $400 per hour. My compensation does not depend in any way upon the
`
`outcome of this proceeding. I hold no interest in the Petitioners (Facebook, Inc. and
`
`WhatsApp Inc.) or the Patent Owner (Uniloc Luxembourg, S.A.) or plaintiff Uniloc
`
`USA, Inc.
`
`B. Materials Considered
`12. The analysis that I provide in this Declaration is based on my education
`
`and experience in the telecommunications and information technology industries, as
`
`well as the documents I have considered, including U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`(“’622” or “’622 patent”) [Ex. 1001/1101], which states on its face that it issued
`
`from an application filed on July 11, 2012, in turn claiming priority back to an
`
`earliest application filed on December 18, 2003. For purposes of this Declaration, I
`
`have assumed December 18, 2003 as the effective filing date for the ’622 patent. I
`
`have cited to the following documents in my analysis below:
`
`Title of Document
`Exhibit No.
`1001/1101 U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622 to Michael J. Rojas (filed July 11, 2012,
`issued May 13, 2014)
`1003/1103 PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US00/21555 to Herbert Zydney
`et al. (filed August 7, 2000, published February 15, 2001 as WO
`01/11824 A2) (“Zydney”) (with line numbers added)
`1004/1104 U.S. Patent No. 6,750,881 to Barry Appelman (filed February 24,
`1997, issued June 15, 2004) (“Appelman”)
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 13
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`
`Title of Document
`Exhibit No.
`1005/1105 Excerpts from MARGARET LEVINE YOUNG, INTERNET: THE
`COMPLETE REFERENCE (McGraw-Hill/Osborne, 2d ed. 2002)
`(“Young”)
`1006/1106 N. Borenstein et al., Request for Comments (RFC) 1521: MIME
`(Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part One: Mechanisms for
`Specifying and Describing the Format of Internet Message Bodies,
`September 1993 (“RFC 1521”)
`1007/1107 U.S. Patent No. 6,757,365 B1 to Travis A. Bogard (filed October
`16, 2000, issued June 29, 2004) (“Bogard”)
`1008/1108 U.S. Patent No. 6,725,228 to David Morley Clark et al. (filed Oct.
`31, 2000, issued April 20, 2004) (“Clark”)
`1009/1109 Excerpts FROM PAUL S. HETHMON, ILLUSTRATED GUIDE TO HTTP
`(Manning Publications Co., 1997) (“Hethmon”)
`1010/1110 Excerpts from CRAIG HUNT, TCP/IP NETWORK ADMINISTRATION
`(O’Reilly, 2d Ed. 1998) (“Hunt”)
`1011/1111 HTTP Working Group, Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.1,
`Nov. 22, 1995 (draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-00.txt)
`1012/1112 Excerpts from Microsoft Computer Dictionary (3d ed. 1997)
`1014/1114 Excerpts from DEBRA LITTLEJOHN SHINDER, COMPUTER
`NETWORKING ESSENTIALS (Cisco Press, 2002) (“Shinder”)
`1018/1118 Excerpts from Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary (1991)
`(“Microsoft (1991)”)
`1019/1119 U.S. Patent No. 6,173,323 to Pratyush Moghe (“Moghe”)
`
`
`II.
`
`PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`13.
`I understand that an assessment of claims of the ’622 patent should be
`
`undertaken from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art as of the
`
`earliest claimed priority date, which I understand is December 18, 2003. I have also
`
`been advised that to determine the appropriate level of a person having ordinary skill
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 14
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`in the art, the following factors may be considered: (1) the types of problems
`
`encountered by those working in the field and prior art solutions thereto; (2) the
`
`sophistication of the technology in question, and the rapidity with which innovations
`
`occur in the field; (3) the educational level of active workers in the field; and (4) the
`
`educational level of the inventor.
`
`14. The ’622 patent states that the perceived problem and the purported
`
`solution are generally related to the field of Internet telephony (IP telephony). The
`
`patent states: “More particularly, the present invention is directed to a system and
`
`method for enabling local and global instant VoIP messaging over an IP network,
`
`such as the Internet, with PSTN support.” (’622, 1:18-22.) The ’622 patent purports
`
`to describe a “voice messaging system (and method) for delivering instant messages
`
`over a packet switched network.” (Id., Abstract). The ’622 patent purports to depict
`
`architectures of Internet and PSTN technologies, global and local IP networks, VoIP
`
`switches and gateways, and phone systems. The patent also purports to disclose
`
`local and global instant voice messaging servers communicating over an IP Network.
`
`In the Summary of the Invention, the applicant states: “The present invention is
`
`directed to a system and method for enabling local and global instant VoIP
`
`messaging over an IP network, such as the Internet.” (Id., 2:57-59.)
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 15
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`
`15.
`
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art as of December 2003
`
`would have possessed at least a bachelor’s degree in computer science, computer
`
`engineering, or electrical engineering with at least two years of experience in
`
`development and programming relating to network communication systems (or
`
`equivalent degree or experience).
`
`16. My opinions regarding the level of ordinary skill in the art are based
`
`on, among other things, my over 25 years of experience in computer science and
`
`network communications, my understanding of the basic qualifications that would
`
`be relevant to an engineer or scientist tasked with investigating methods and systems
`
`in the relevant area, and my familiarity with the backgrounds of colleagues, co-
`
`workers, and employees, both past and present.
`
`17. Although my qualifications and experience exceed those of the
`
`hypothetical person having ordinary skill in the art defined above, my analysis and
`
`opinions regarding the ’622 patent have been based on the perspective of a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art as of December 2003.
`
`III. BASIS FOR MY OPINION AND STATEMENT OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES
`18. My opinions and views set forth in this declaration are based on my
`
`education, training, and experience in the relevant field, as well as the materials I
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 16
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`have reviewed for this matter, and the scientific knowledge regarding the subject
`
`matter that existed prior to December 2003.
`
`A. Claim Construction
`19.
`It is my understanding that, when construing claim terms, a claim
`
`subject to inter partes review receives the “broadest reasonable construction in light
`
`of the specification of the patent in which it appears.”
`
`B. Anticipation
`20.
`It is my understanding that in order for a patent claim to be valid, the
`
`claimed invention must be novel. It is my understanding that if each and every
`
`element of a claim is disclosed in a single prior art reference, then the claimed
`
`invention is anticipated, and the invention is not patentable according to pre-AIA 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102 effective before March 16, 2013. In order for the invention to be
`
`anticipated, each element of the claimed invention must be described or embodied,
`
`either expressly or inherently, in the single prior art reference. In order for a
`
`reference to inherently disclose a claim limitation, that claim limitation must
`
`necessarily be present in the reference.
`
`C. Obviousness
`21. Counsel has advised me that obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103 effective before March 16, 2013 is the basis for invalidity in the Petitions.
`
`Counsel has advised me that a patent claim may be found invalid as obvious if, at
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 17
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`the time when the invention was made, the subject matter of the claim, considered
`
`as a whole, would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the field of
`
`the technology (the “art”) to which the claimed subject matter belongs. I understand
`
`that the following factors should be considered in analyzing obviousness: (1) the
`
`scope and content of the prior art; (2) the differences between the prior art and the
`
`claims; and (3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. I also understand that
`
`certain other factors known as “secondary considerations” such as commercial
`
`success, unexpected results, long felt but unsolved need, industry acclaim,
`
`simultaneous invention, copying by others, skepticism by experts in the field, and
`
`failure of others may be utilized as indicia of nonobviousness. I understand,
`
`however, that secondary considerations should be connected, or have a “nexus”, with
`
`the invention claimed in the patent at issue. I understand that a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art is assumed to have knowledge of all prior art. I understand that one
`
`skilled in the art can combine various prior art references based on the teachings of
`
`those prior art references, the general knowledge present in the art, or common sense.
`
`I understand that a motivation to combine references may be implicit in the prior art,
`
`and there is no requirement that there be an actual or explicit teaching to combine
`
`two references. Thus, one may take into account the inferences and creative steps
`
`that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ to combine the known
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 18
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`elements in the prior art in the manner claimed by the patent at issue. I understand
`
`that one should avoid “hindsight bias” and ex post reasoning in performing an
`
`obviousness analysis. But this does not mean that a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art for purposes of the obviousness inquiry does not have recourse to common sense.
`
`I understand that when determining whether a patent claim is obvious in light of the
`
`prior art, neither the particular motivation for the patent nor the stated purpose of the
`
`patentee is controlling. The primary inquiry has to do with the objective reach of
`
`the claims, and that if those claims extend to something that is obvious, then the
`
`entire patent claim is invalid. I understand one way that a patent can be found
`
`obvious is if there existed at the time of the invention a known problem for which
`
`there was an obvious solution encompassed by the patent’s claims. I understand that
`
`a motivation to combine various prior art references to solve a particular problem
`
`may come from a variety of sources, including market demand or scientific
`
`literature. I understand that a need or problem known in the field at the time of the
`
`invention can also provide a reason to combine prior art references and render a
`
`patent claim invalid for obviousness. I understand that familiar items may have
`
`obvious uses beyond their primary purpose, and that a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art will be able to fit the teachings of multiple prior art references together “like the
`
`pieces of a puzzle.” I understand that a person of ordinary skill is also a person of
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`
`
`Facebook's Exhibit No. 1002/1102
`Page 19
`
`

`

`Declaration of Tal Lavian, Ph.D., in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622
`
`at least ordinary creativity. I understand when there is a design need or market
`
`pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable
`
`solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options
`
`within his or her technical grasp. If these finite number of predictable solutions lead
`
`to the anticipated success, I understand that the invention is likely the product of
`
`ordinary skill and common sense, and not of any sor