`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________________
`
`NFL ENTERPRISES LLC,
`NFL ENTERPRISES LLC,
`
`Petitioner
`Petitioner
`
`
`v.
`v.
`
`OPENTV, INC.,
`OPENTV, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`Patent Owner.
`____________________
`
`Case No. ________
`Case No.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF STEPHEN MELVIN, Ph.D.
`DECLARATION OF STEPHEN MELVIN, Ph.D.
`IN SUPPORT OF NFL ENTERPRISES LLC’S PETITION FOR
`IN SUPPORT OF NFL ENTERPRISES LLC'S PETITION FOR
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,055,169
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,055,169
`
`
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 1
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 1
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`
`I, Stephen Melvin, hereby declare as follows:
`I, Stephen Melvin, hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`1.
`
`I have prepared this Declaration in connection with NFL Enterprises
`I have prepared this Declaration in connection with NFL Enterprises
`
`LLC’s Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169 (“the ’169
`LLC's Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169 ("the '169
`
`Patent”) (NFLE. 1001), which is to be filed concurrently with this Declaration.
`Patent") (NFLE. 1001), which is to be filed concurrently with this Declaration.
`
`2.
`2.
`
`In the course of preparing this Declaration, I reviewed the ’169 Patent
`In the course of preparing this Declaration, I reviewed the '169 Patent
`
`and its prosecution file history, as well as the documents discussed in this
`and its prosecution file history, as well as the documents discussed in this
`
`Declaration.
`Declaration.
`
`3.
`3.
`
`I have been retained by NFL Enterprises LLC (“Petitioner”) as an
`I have been retained by NFL Enterprises LLC ("Petitioner") as an
`
`expert in the fields of computer science, computer communications, and related
`expert in the fields of computer science, computer communications, and related
`
`technologies. I am being compensated at my normal consulting rate of $450 per
`technologies. I am being compensated at my normal consulting rate of $450 per
`
`hour for my time. My compensation is not dependent on and in no way affects the
`hour for my time. My compensation is not dependent on and in no way affects the
`
`substance of my statements in this Declaration.
`substance of my statements in this Declaration.
`
`4.
`4.
`
`I have no financial interest in Petitioner or its products or services. I
`I have no financial interest in Petitioner or its products or services. I
`
`similarly have no financial interest in the ’169 Patent or the owner of the ’169
`similarly have no financial interest in the '169 Patent or the owner of the '169
`
`Patent, and I have had no contact with the named inventors of the ’169 Patent.
`Patent, and I have had no contact with the named inventors of the '169 Patent.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`
`5.
`5.
`
`I received a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of
`I received a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of
`
`California at Berkeley in 1991 and a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and Computer
`California at Berkeley in 1991 and a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and Computer
`
`Science from the University of California at Berkeley in 1982. I have more than
`Science from the University of California at Berkeley in 1982. I have more than
`
`1
`1
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 2
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 2
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`30 years of experience in computer science and computer engineering. I am an
`30 years of experience in computer science and computer engineering. I am an
`
`inventor on over 45 patents, and I am a registered patent agent before the USPTO.
`inventor on over 45 patents, and I am a registered patent agent before the USPTO.
`
`6. My Ph.D. research areas included high-performance computer
`6. My Ph.D. research areas included high-performance computer
`
`architecture and microarchitecture, and microcode-based system performance
`architecture and microarchitecture, and microcode-based system performance
`
`analysis tools. From September 2001 through April 2002, I was a Visiting Scholar
`analysis tools. From September 2001 through April 2002, I was a Visiting Scholar
`
`at the University of Texas at Austin, where I directed graduate students in research
`at the University of Texas at Austin, where I directed graduate students in research
`
`in the area of high-performance computer architecture.
`in the area of high-performance computer architecture.
`
`7.
`7.
`
`In May 2001, I co-founded and was the Chief Architect of Flowstorm,
`In May 2001, I co-founded and was the Chief Architect of Flowstorm,
`
`Inc., a start-up company based in Silicon Valley, where I defined and guided the
`Inc., a start-up company based in Silicon Valley, where I defined and guided the
`
`overall chip architecture for a multithreaded packet processor. From March 2000
`overall chip architecture for a multithreaded packet processor. From March 2000
`
`through May 2001, I worked as the Senior CPU Architect at Clearwater Networks,
`through May 2001, I worked as the Senior CPU Architect at Clearwater Networks,
`
`where I was involved in defining the architecture and microarchitecture of
`where I was involved in defining the architecture and microarchitecture of
`
`Clearwater’s CNP810S multithreaded network processor.
`Clearwater's CNP810S multithreaded network processor.
`
`8.
`8.
`
`From August 1983 to the present, I have been the President of Zytek
`From August 1983 to the present, I have been the President of Zytek
`
`Communications Corporation (“Zytek”). Zytek is an engineering, consulting, and
`Communications Corporation ("Zytek"). Zytek is an engineering, consulting, and
`
`small-scale manufacturing company that currently provides intellectual property
`small-scale manufacturing company that currently provides intellectual property
`
`consulting services as well as services related to the design, implementation, and
`consulting services as well as services related to the design, implementation, and
`
`testing of embedded systems. Zytek’s general areas of activity have included
`testing of embedded systems. Zytek's general areas of activity have included
`
`industrial control and measurement, Internet-related services, hard disk analysis
`industrial control and measurement, Internet-related services, hard disk analysis
`
`and file recovery, and computer engineering research services. Through my work
`and file recovery, and computer engineering research services. Through my work
`
`2
`2
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 3
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 3
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`at Zytek, I have designed numerous microprocessor-based embedded systems,
`at Zytek, I have designed numerous microprocessor-based embedded systems,
`
`including analog and digital circuit design, firmware development for embedded
`including analog and digital circuit design, firmware development for embedded
`
`microcontrollers, and software development for host interfacing, product
`microcontrollers, and software development for host interfacing, product
`
`development, and debugging.
`development, and debugging.
`
`9.
`9.
`
`I am a member of the following professional organizations: The
`I am a member of the following professional organizations: The
`
`Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE); The Association for
`Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE); The Association for
`
`Computing Machinery (ACM); The American Intellectual Property Law
`Computing Machinery (ACM); The American Intellectual Property Law
`
`Association (AIPLA); The Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO); and
`Association (AIPLA); The Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO); and
`
`The National Association of Patent Practitioners (NAPP).
`The National Association of Patent Practitioners (NAPP).
`
`10.
`10.
`
`I served as General Chair of the 45th Annual International Symposium
`I served as General Chair of the 45th Annual International Symposium
`
`on Microarchitecture (Micro-45), held in Vancouver in December of 2012. I also
`on Microarchitecture (Micro-45), held in Vancouver in December of 2012. I also
`
`served as co-chair of the 29th Annual International Symposium on
`served as co-chair of the 29th Annual International Symposium on
`
`Microarchitecture (Micro-29), held in Paris in December of 1996.
`Microarchitecture (Micro-29), held in Paris in December of 1996.
`
`11. For further details regarding my employment and academic history,
`11. For further details regarding my employment and academic history,
`
`please refer to my curriculum vitae, attached as NFLE 1005.
`please refer to my curriculum vitae, attached as NFLE 1005.
`
`III. RELEVANT LAW
`III. RELEVANT LAW
`
`12.
`12.
`
`I am not an attorney. For the purposes of this Declaration, I have been
`I am not an attorney. For the purposes of this Declaration, I have been
`
`informed about certain aspects of the law that are relevant to my opinions. My
`informed about certain aspects of the law that are relevant to my opinions. My
`
`understanding of the law is summarized below.
`understanding of the law is summarized below.
`
`3
`3
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 4
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 4
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`I have been informed and understand that claim construction is a
`I have been informed and understand that claim construction is a
`
`13.
`13.
`
`matter of law and that the final claim constructions for this proceeding will be
`matter of law and that the final claim constructions for this proceeding will be
`
`determined by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
`determined by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
`
`14.
`14.
`
`I have been informed and understand that in the context of an Inter
`I have been informed and understand that in the context of an Inter
`
`Partes review, a claim of an unexpired patent must be construed according to its
`Partes review, a claim of an unexpired patent must be construed according to its
`
`broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification.
`broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification.
`
`15.
`15.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a patent claim is obvious and
`I have been informed and understand that a patent claim is obvious and
`
`therefore invalid if the claimed subject matter, as a whole, would have been
`therefore invalid if the claimed subject matter, as a whole, would have been
`
`obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art as of the priority date of the patent
`obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art as of the priority date of the patent
`
`based on one or more prior art references and/or the knowledge of one of ordinary
`based on one or more prior art references and/or the knowledge of one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art. I understand that an obviousness analysis must consider (1) the
`skill in the art. I understand that an obviousness analysis must consider (1) the
`
`scope and content of the prior art, (2) the differences between the claims and the
`scope and content of the prior art, (2) the differences between the claims and the
`
`prior art, (3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, and (4) secondary
`prior art, (3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, and (4) secondary
`
`considerations, if any, of non-obviousness (such as unexpected results, commercial
`considerations, if any, of non-obviousness (such as unexpected results, commercial
`
`success, long-felt but unmet need, failure of others, copying by others, and
`success, long-felt but unmet need, failure of others, copying by others, and
`
`skepticism of experts).
`skepticism of experts).
`
`16.
`16.
`
`I understand that a prior art reference may be combined with other
`I understand that a prior art reference may be combined with other
`
`references to disclose each element of the invention under 35 U.S.C. § 103. I
`references to disclose each element of the invention under 35 U.S.C. § 103. I
`
`understand that a reference may also be combined with the knowledge of a person
`understand that a reference may also be combined with the knowledge of a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art, and that this knowledge may be used to combine
`of ordinary skill in the art, and that this knowledge may be used to combine
`
`4
`4
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 5
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 5
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`multiple references. I further understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is
`multiple references. I further understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is
`
`presumed to know the relevant prior art. I understand that the obviousness analysis
`presumed to know the relevant prior art. I understand that the obviousness analysis
`
`may take into account the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary
`may take into account the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would employ.
`skill in the art would employ.
`
`17.
`17.
`
`In determining whether a prior art reference could have been combined
`In determining whether a prior art reference could have been combined
`
`with other prior art or other information known to a person having ordinary skill in
`with other prior art or other information known to a person having ordinary skill in
`
`the art, I understand that the following principles may be considered:
`the art, I understand that the following principles may be considered:
`
`a. A combination of familiar elements according to known methods is
`a. A combination of familiar elements according to known methods is
`
`likely to be obvious if it yields predictable results;
`likely to be obvious if it yields predictable results;
`
`b. The substitution of one known element for another is likely to be
`b. The substitution of one known element for another is likely to be
`
`obvious if it yields predictable results;
`obvious if it yields predictable results;
`
`c. The use of a known technique to improve similar items or methods in
`c. The use of a known technique to improve similar items or methods in
`
`the same way is likely to be obvious if it yields predictable results;
`the same way is likely to be obvious if it yields predictable results;
`
`d. The application of a known technique to a prior art reference that is
`d. The application of a known technique to a prior art reference that is
`
`ready for improvement, to yield predictable results;
`ready for improvement, to yield predictable results;
`
`e. Any need or problem known in the field and addressed by the
`e. Any need or problem known in the field and addressed by the
`
`reference can provide a reason for combining the elements in the
`reference can provide a reason for combining the elements in the
`
`manner claimed;
`manner claimed;
`
`f. A person of ordinary skill often will be able to fit the teachings of
`f. A person of ordinary skill often will be able to fit the teachings of
`
`multiple references together like a puzzle; and
`multiple references together like a puzzle; and
`
`5
`5
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 6
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 6
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`g. The proper analysis of obviousness requires a determination of
`g. The proper analysis of obviousness requires a determination of
`
`whether a person of ordinary skill in the art would have a “reasonable
`whether a person of ordinary skill in the art would have a "reasonable
`
`expectation of success” – not “absolute predictability” of success – in
`expectation of success" — not "absolute predictability" of success — in
`
`achieving the claimed invention by combining prior art references.
`achieving the claimed invention by combining prior art references.
`
`18.
`18.
`
`I am informed that whether a prior art reference invalidates a patent
`I am informed that whether a prior art reference invalidates a patent
`
`claim as obvious is determined from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in
`claim as obvious is determined from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art. While there is no requirement that the prior art contain an express
`the art. While there is no requirement that the prior art contain an express
`
`suggestion to combine known elements to achieve the claimed invention, a
`suggestion to combine known elements to achieve the claimed invention, a
`
`suggestion to combine known elements to achieve the claimed invention may
`suggestion to combine known elements to achieve the claimed invention may
`
`come from the prior art as a whole, or individually, as filtered through the
`come from the prior art as a whole, or individually, as filtered through the
`
`knowledge of one skilled in the art. In addition, the inferences and creative steps
`knowledge of one skilled in the art. In addition, the inferences and creative steps
`
`that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ are also relevant to the
`that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ are also relevant to the
`
`determination of obviousness.
`determination of obviousness.
`
`19. When a work is available in one field, design alternatives and other
`19. When a work is available in one field, design alternatives and other
`
`market forces can prompt variations of it, either in the same field or in another. If
`market forces can prompt variations of it, either in the same field or in another. If
`
`a person of ordinary skill in the art can implement a predictable variation and
`a person of ordinary skill in the art can implement a predictable variation and
`
`would see the benefit of doing so, that variation is likely to be obvious. In many
`would see the benefit of doing so, that variation is likely to be obvious. In many
`
`fields, there may be little discussion of obvious combinations, and in these fields
`fields, there may be little discussion of obvious combinations, and in these fields
`
`market demand – not scientific literature – may drive design trends. When there is
`market demand — not scientific literature — may drive design trends. When there is
`
`a design need or market pressure, and there are a finite number of predictable
`a design need or market pressure, and there are a finite number of predictable
`
`6
`6
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 7
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 7
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`solutions, a person of ordinary skill in the art has good reason to pursue those
`solutions, a person of ordinary skill in the art has good reason to pursue those
`
`known options.
`known options.
`
`20.
`20.
`
`It is my understanding that there is no rigid rule that a reference or
`It is my understanding that there is no rigid rule that a reference or
`
`combination of references must contain a “teaching, suggestion, or motivation” to
`combination of references must contain a "teaching, suggestion, or motivation" to
`
`combine references. But, I understand that the “teaching, suggestion, or
`combine references. But, I understand that the "teaching, suggestion, or
`
`motivation” test can be a useful guide in establishing a rationale for combining
`motivation" test can be a useful guide in establishing a rationale for combining
`
`elements of the prior art. This test poses the question as to whether there is an
`elements of the prior art. This test poses the question as to whether there is an
`
`express or implied teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine prior art
`express or implied teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine prior art
`
`elements in a way that realizes the claimed invention, and it seeks to counter
`elements in a way that realizes the claimed invention, and it seeks to counter
`
`impermissible hindsight analysis.
`impermissible hindsight analysis.
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`21. Based on my review of the ’169 Patent and my background and
`21. Based on my review of the '169 Patent and my background and
`
`experience in the field of computer science, it is my opinion that one of ordinary
`experience in the field of computer science, it is my opinion that one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art as of the priority date would be someone with a bachelor’s degree in
`skill in the art as of the priority date would be someone with a bachelor's degree in
`
`computer science, computer engineering, or the equivalent, plus approximately
`computer science, computer engineering, or the equivalent, plus approximately
`
`two years of experience in the field of computer engineering or software
`two years of experience in the field of computer engineering or software
`
`development, or an equivalent amount of relevant work and/or research
`development, or an equivalent amount of relevant work and/or research
`
`experience.
`experience.
`
`22.
`22.
`
`I have been informed and understand that claim construction is viewed
`I have been informed and understand that claim construction is viewed
`
`from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time
`from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time
`
`7
`7
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 8
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 8
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`of the invention. I have been informed that the owner of the ’169 Patent claims an
`of the invention. I have been informed that the owner of the '169 Patent claims an
`
`invention date of June 2001. I have been asked to assume that this is the proper
`invention date of June 2001. I have been asked to assume that this is the proper
`
`priority date for the ’169 Patent. However, the opinions I expressed in this report
`priority date for the '169 Patent. However, the opinions I expressed in this report
`
`would be the same if I applied a priority date of April 2002 (the provisional filing
`would be the same if I applied a priority date of April 2002 (the provisional filing
`
`date of the ’169 Patent) or April 2003 (the actual filing date of the ’169 Patent).
`date of the '169 Patent) or April 2003 (the actual filing date of the '169 Patent).
`
`23. The ’169 Patent generally relates to computer content control and
`23. The '169 Patent generally relates to computer content control and
`
`interactive television systems, although the lack of any limitation relating to
`interactive television systems, although the lack of any limitation relating to
`
`interactive television in certain claims, such as claims 1 and 23, show that the
`interactive television in certain claims, such as claims 1 and 23, show that the
`
`‘169 Patent’s scope is not so limited. See ’169 Patent at Claims 1 & 23.
``169 Patent's scope is not so limited. See '169 Patent at Claims 1 & 23.
`
`24. Based on my education and experience, I am familiar with the level of
`24. Based on my education and experience, I am familiar with the level of
`
`knowledge that one of ordinary skill would have possessed during the relevant
`knowledge that one of ordinary skill would have possessed during the relevant
`
`period of time.
`period of time.
`
`25.
`25.
`
`In reaching this opinion as to the qualifications of the hypothetical
`In reaching this opinion as to the qualifications of the hypothetical
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art, I have considered the types of problems
`person of ordinary skill in the art, I have considered the types of problems
`
`encountered in the art, the prior art solutions to those problems, the rapidity with
`encountered in the art, the prior art solutions to those problems, the rapidity with
`
`which innovations are made, the sophistication of the technology, and the
`which innovations are made, the sophistication of the technology, and the
`
`educational level of active workers in the field.
`educational level of active workers in the field.
`
`26. By the priority date of the ’169 Patent, I was a person who had more
`26. By the priority date of the '169 Patent, I was a person who had more
`
`than ordinary skill in the art.
`than ordinary skill in the art.
`
`8
`8
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 9
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 9
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE STATE OF THE ART IN JUNE 2001
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE STATE OF THE ART IN JUNE 2001
`
`27. During and before June 2001, the operation of web pages and the
`27. During and before June 2001, the operation of web pages and the
`
`Internet was well understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”).
`Internet was well understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art ("POSITA").
`
`28. During and before June 2001, Web pages were, at a high level, (1)
`28. During and before June 2001, Web pages were, at a high level, (1)
`
`downloaded from a server over the Internet, (2) rendered by a user’s computer, and
`downloaded from a server over the Internet, (2) rendered by a user's computer, and
`
`(3) displayed to a user.
`(3) displayed to a user.
`
`29. Downloading a web page refers to the process of the web browser
`29. Downloading a web page refers to the process of the web browser
`
`retrieving content from the Internet. Such content can be pointed to using a
`retrieving content from the Internet. Such content can be pointed to using a
`
`Uniform Resource Locator (“URL”), which identifies a server where the content is
`Uniform Resource Locator ("URL"), which identifies a server where the content is
`
`located such that the user’s computer can download the content. The content
`located such that the user's computer can download the content. The content
`
`received is generally composed of directions that instruct the computer in how to
`received is generally composed of directions that instruct the computer in how to
`
`render the web page as well as multiple “resources,” which can include, for
`render the web page as well as multiple "resources," which can include, for
`
`example, text, images, video and graphics.
`example, text, images, video and graphics.
`
`30. Rendering a web page refers to the process of utilizing resources
`30. Rendering a web page refers to the process of utilizing resources
`
`downloaded from the Internet, such as text and images, and processing HTML
`downloaded from the Internet, such as text and images, and processing HTML
`
`code to place and format the resources and display the resulting web page to the
`code to place and format the resources and display the resulting web page to the
`
`user. For example, the HTML code for a web page that refers to an image might
`user. For example, the HTML code for a web page that refers to an image might
`
`direct that the image be aligned in a certain way or have a certain size border. The
`direct that the image be aligned in a certain way or have a certain size border. The
`
`rendering software in the web browser would place the picture at the correct
`rendering software in the web browser would place the picture at the correct
`
`location and show it to the user. A feature known as “progressive rendering” was
`location and show it to the user. A feature known as "progressive rendering" was
`
`9
`9
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 10
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 10
`
`

`

` 
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`well known at the time of the ‘169 Patent and remains to this day the default
`well known at the time of the '169 Patent and remains to this day the default
`
`operation for most web browsers in handling images. Progressive rendering refers
`operation for most web browsers in handling images. Progressive rendering refers
`
`to the process of rendering and displaying to the user a partially constructed web
`to the process of rendering and displaying to the user a partially constructed web
`
`page as soon as possible, before all of the resources for the full web page have
`page as soon as possible, before all of the resources for the full web page have
`
`been downloaded, as opposed to rendering and displaying the web page after all
`been downloaded, as opposed to rendering and displaying the web page after all
`
`resources necessary to display the web page are downloaded.
`resources necessary to display the web page are downloaded.
`
`31. Displaying the rendered web page refers to the process of making the
`31. Displaying the rendered web page refers to the process of making the
`
`rendered web page available to a display that the user can view.
`rendered web page available to a display that the user can view.
`
`VI. OVERVIEW OF THE ’169 PATENT
`VI. OVERVIEW OF THE '169 PATENT
`
`32. The ’169 Patent is entitled “Supporting Common Interactive
`32. The '169 Patent is entitled "Supporting Common Interactive
`
`Television Functionality Through Presentation Engine Syntax.” NFLE 1001 at
`Television Functionality Through Presentation Engine Syntax." NFLE 1001 at
`
`Cover. It was filed on April 21, 2003, claims priority to a provisional application
`Cover. It was filed on April 21, 2003, claims priority to a provisional application
`
`filed on April 19, 2002, and issued on May 30, 2006. Id.
`filed on April 19, 2002, and issued on May 30, 2006. Id.
`
`33. The ’169 Patent includes 23 claims. I have been asked to analyze
`33. The '169 Patent includes 23 claims. I have been asked to analyze
`
`Claims 1, 2, 22, and 23.
`Claims 1, 2, 22, and 23.
`
`34. The limitations in Claim 1 define a method for handling a set of
`34. The limitations in Claim 1 define a method for handling a set of
`
`resources. Id. An example of a resource is a media file that contains audio, video,
`resources. Id. An example of a resource is a media file that contains audio, video,
`
`and/or graphics. See, e.g., NFLE 1001 at 21:8–20 (identifying a file called
`and/or graphics. See, e.g., NFLE 1001 at 21:8-20 (identifying a file called
`
`“background.mpg,” i.e. a “background” file, as a resource). The ’169 Patent
`"background.mpg," i.e. a "background" file, as a resource). The '169 Patent
`
`explains that resources utilize Internet protocols: “HTML pages [(i.e., web pages)]
`explains that resources utilize Internet protocols: "HTML pages [(i.e., web pages)]
`
`10
`10
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 11
`
`NFLE 1004 - Page 11
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`
` 
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,055,169
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`Declaration of Stephen Melvin, Ph.D.
`may use ‘http:’ URLs to load resources from the carousel.” Id. at 24:63–64. A
`may use littp:' URLs to load resources from the carousel." Id. at 24:63-64. A
`
`“carousel” is a term the ’169 Patent uses to refer to a collection of data objects
`"carousel" is a term the '169 Patent uses to refer to a collection of data objects
`
`being transmitted to the computer over a network from a broadcaster in a cyclical
`being transmitted to the computer over a network from a broadcaster in a cyclical
`
`or repeating format. Id. at 1:43–2:15.
`or repeating format. Id. at 1:43-2:15.
`
`35. The resources are organized into a presentation. For example, a
`35. The resources are organized into a presentation. For example, a
`
`presentation could be a web page, which is represented by HTML code in an
`presentation could be a web page, which is represented by HTML code in an
`
`“HTM