`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`———————
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`———————
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.
`Petitioners
`v.
`
`UNILOC LUXEMBOURG, S.A.,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`———————
`
`
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,216,158
`Case IPR No.: IPR2018-01503
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF HENRY HOUH, PHD,
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.68
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 1 of 186
`LGE v. Uniloc
`
`

`

`
`
`Table of Contents
`
`
`I.
`
`Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4
`
`II. Qualifications and Professional Experience ........................................................ 6
`
`III. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art .....................................................................20
`
`IV. Relevant Legal Standards ..................................................................................20
`
`V. The ’158 Patent ..................................................................................................22
`
`A. State of the Art before the ’158 Patent ....................................................... 22
`
`B. Overview of the ’158 Patent ....................................................................... 25
`
`C. History of the ’158 Patent ........................................................................... 28
`
`VI. Claim Construction ............................................................................................29
`
`A. “palm sized computer” ................................................................................ 29
`
`B. “means for accessing a description of a service”....................................... 30
`
`C. “means for downloading the program code” ............................................. 31
`
`D. “means for executing at least a portion of the program code” .................. 32
`
`E. “means for sending control commands to the service in response to the
`means for executing” .................................................................................. 33
`
`VII. Challenges ....................................................................................................35
`
`A. Challenge #1: Claims 1-2, 6-9, 12, 14-15, and 20 are invalid under 35
`U.S.C § 103 over Jini-QS in view of Arnold and McCandless .................. 35
`
`a) Overview of Jini-QS .............................................................................. 36
`
`b) Overview of Arnold ............................................................................... 39
`
`c) Overview of McCandless ...................................................................... 42
`
`d) Reasons to Combine Jini-QS, Arnold, and McCandless ...................... 42
`
`e) Detailed Analysis .................................................................................. 53
`
`
`
`– 2 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 2 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`B. Challenge #2: Claims 1-2, 6-9, 12, and 14-15 are invalid under 35
`U.S.C § 103 over Riggins in view of Devarakonda ................................. 102
`
`a) Overview of Riggins ........................................................................... 102
`
`b) Overview of Devarakonda................................................................... 105
`
`c) Reasons to Combine Riggins and Devarakonda ................................. 107
`
`d) Detailed Analysis ................................................................................ 111
`
`VIII. Declaration .................................................................................................185
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`– 3 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 3 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`I, Henry Houh, Ph.D., declare:
`
`1.
`
`I am making this declaration at the request of LG Electronics Inc.
`
`(“LG”) in the matter of the Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,216,158
`
`(“the ’158 Patent”) to Luo, et al.
`
`2.
`
`I am being compensated for my work in this matter. I am also being
`
`reimbursed for reasonable and customary expenses associated with my work and
`
`testimony in this matter. My compensation is not contingent on the outcome of
`
`this matter or the specifics of my testimony. I hold no direct interest in LG
`
`Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., or LG Electronics MobileComm USA,
`
`Inc., or the Patent Owner Uniloc Luxembourg S.A.
`
`3.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have studied:
`
`(1) The ’158 Patent, Exhibit EX-1001;
`
`(2) The Prosecution History of the ’158 Patent, Exhibit EX-1002;
`
`(3)
`
`“Jini: Quick Study,” COMPUTERWORLD, Dec. 7, 1998, at 29 (“Jini-
`
`QS”), Exhibit EX-1005;
`
`(4) U.S. Patent No. 6,393,497 (“Arnold”), Exhibit EX-1006;
`
`(5) M. McCandless, “The PalmPilot and the Handheld Revolution,” IEEE
`
`EXPERT at 6-8 (Dec. 1997) (“McCandless”), Exhibit EX-1007;
`
`
`
`– 4 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 4 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`(6) U.S. Patent No. 6,131,111 (“Riggins”), Exhibit EX-1008;
`
`(7) U.S. Patent No. 6,757,729 (“Devarakonda”), Exhibit EX-1009;
`
`(8)
`
`J. Waldo, “Jini Architecture Overview,” SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC.
`
`(1998) (“Waldo”) Exhibit EX-1010;
`
`(9) B. Venners, “Jini technology, out of the box,” JAVAWORLD (Dec.
`
`1998) (“Venners”), Exhibit EX-1011;
`
`(10) “Why Jini Now?” SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC. (Aug. 1998) (“Why Jini
`
`Now”), Exhibit EX-1012;
`
`(11) R. Guth, “More than just another pretty name: Sun’s Jini opens up a
`
`new world of distributed computer systems,” SUNWORLD (Aug. 1998)
`
`(“Guth”), Exhibit EX-1013;
`
`(12) M. Sheehan, “Thin Clients and Network-Centric Computing,” ONLINE
`
`(Dec. 1998) (“Sheehan”), Exhibit EX-1014;
`
`(13) J. Friedrichs, “Java Thin-Client Programming for a Network
`
`Computing Environment,” IBM REDBOOK (Jun. 1998) (“Redbook”),
`
`Exhibit EX-1015;
`
`(14) T. Hodes, “Composable Ad-hoc Mobile Services for Universal
`
`Interaction,” PROC. 3RD ACM/IEEE INTL. CONF. ON MOBILE
`
`COMPUTING AND NETWORKING (Aug. 2, 1997) (“Hodes”), Exhibit
`
`
`
`– 5 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 5 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`EX-1016;
`
`(15) U.S. Patent No. 6,832,223 (“Sheifler”), Exhibit EX-1017;
`
`(16) M. Swaine, “Sun Dreams of Jini,” DR. DOBB’S JOURNAL Vol. 23 No.
`
`11 at 113-14, 117 (Nov. 1998) (“Swaine”), Exhibit EX-1018;
`
`(17) K. Kelly, “One Huge Computer,” WIRED (Aug. 1, 1998) (“Kelly”),
`
`Exhibit EX-1019; and
`
`(18) “Computer Dictionary,” MICROSOFT PRESS 3D ED. (1997), Exhibit
`
`EX-1020.
`
`4.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed below, I have considered:
`
`(1) The documents listed above, and
`
`(2) My own knowledge and experience, including my work experience in
`
`the field of wireless communication, as described below.
`
`II. Qualifications and Professional Experience
`
`5. My complete qualifications and professional experience are described
`
`in my curriculum vitae, a copy of which can be found in Exhibit EX-1004. The
`
`following is a brief summary of my relevant qualifications and professional
`
`experience.
`
`6. My professional career has spanned more than 25 years. As set forth
`
`
`
`– 6 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 6 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`in my curriculum vitae, during these years I have gained extensive experience in
`
`web site architectures, dynamically generated web pages, distributed network
`
`applications, remote control of devices and applications, and protocols and
`
`languages for the networking and remote application control.
`
`7.
`
`I was awarded a Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering and Computer
`
`Science in February 1998 from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
`
`I also received a Master of Science (M.S.) in Electrical Engineering and Computer
`
`Science (February, 1991), a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering and
`
`Computer Science (June, 1989) and a Bachelor of Science in Physics (February,
`
`1990) from MIT.
`
`8.
`
`I defended and submitted my Ph.D. thesis, titled “Designing Networks
`
`for Tomorrow’s Traffic,” in January 1998. As part of my thesis research, I
`
`analyzed local-area and wide-area data flows to show a more efficient method for
`
`routing content (including email, web pages, and streaming media such as voice
`
`and video) in a network, based on traffic patterns at the time.
`
`9.
`
`I am currently self-employed as an independent technical consultant.
`
`I also founded a company that provides supplemental science, technology,
`
`engineering, art, and mathematics (“STEAM”) education to children of all ages.
`
`10.
`
`I first worked in the area of telecommunications in 1987 when I
`
`
`
`– 7 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 7 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`worked at AT&T Bell Laboratories as part of a five-year dual degree program at
`
`MIT.
`
`11. My research and work experience in multimedia content delivery over
`
`networks including the internet, streaming media over the internet, networking,
`
`and network architecture dates back to the popularization of the Web in the early
`
`1990s and coincides with when I started my doctoral research at MIT. After
`
`returning full time to MIT for graduate school after completing an internship at
`
`AT&T Bell Laboratories, I worked as a research assistant in the Telemedia
`
`Network Systems (TNS) group at the Laboratory for Computer Science at MIT.
`
`The TNS group built a high speed gigabit network and applications which ran
`
`over the network, such as remote video capture, processing, and display on
`
`computer terminals. I designed the core networking hardware and software,
`
`including the high speed data links and the device drivers for the network
`
`interface cards.
`
`12. My group’s work focused on high speed networking and the types of
`
`applications that require increased network bandwidth and computing power. One
`
`of the applications I investigated was live streaming video and real-time
`
`processing of such video. My work was focused around the transport, switching,
`
`and routing of data (including video streams), and the integration of TNS’s
`
`network into the computing environment, including the protocols, IP/ATM
`
`
`
`– 8 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 8 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`integration, operating system software and device drivers. TNS created a
`
`computing environment where it was possible to stream video live, and also
`
`created software processing modules to further process video to perform advanced
`
`functions such as green screening, scene change detection, motion detection,
`
`compression, video blending and video overlay, among the many features – all in
`
`real-time while displaying the processed video live. While the Internet at the time
`
`did not have the capability for such applications to be widely deployed, my group
`
`at TNS researched what would be possible when the required network and
`
`computing power became available.
`
`13. As discussed above, my Ph.D. thesis work focused on studying the
`
`routing resources required to route streams of video through the network,
`
`proposing several alternative labeling strategies to speed up network routing. Part
`
`of what I proposed was borne out later in the form of Multiprotocol Label
`
`Switching (MPLS), which is a method of tagging packets at the edge of the
`
`network to enable more efficient routing inside the network.
`
`14. During the early part of my graduate studies, a time when there were
`
`perhaps a hundred or so web servers in existence, I set up a web server on one of
`
`our lab computers, and created content rich web pages for my research group and
`
`my research activities. Eventually, I, together with others I was working with,
`
`added live video demonstrations to TNS’s web site. TNS’s web site was one of
`
`
`
`– 9 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 9 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`the first several hundred web servers to exist, and the first to offer live video
`
`demonstrations initiated from the web site to a user’s remote computer. In
`
`addition to TNS’s live video demonstrations, TNS offered pre-recorded video and
`
`computer-processed video demonstrations. I helped to build the web pages that
`
`initiated these video sessions via a web interface. After selection a specific
`
`demonstration from a list of various demonstrations available on the web server,
`
`the remote web browser user sent a selection over the network to our server to
`
`initiate the video stream demonstration. After the video demonstration was started
`
`in a separate window, commands in the graphical user interface window
`
`controlled the video presentation from the remote servers. The graphical user
`
`interface elements included buttons or sliders to control the speed of the video,
`
`buttons to pause/resume the video, key frame icons representing different points in
`
`the video recording or different videos.
`
`
`
`– 10 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 10 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`See Figure 1 from Lindblad, “ViewStation Applications: Implications for Network
`
`Traffic,” IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS Vol. 13 No. 5
`
`
`
`(Jun. 1995).
`
`15. TNS’s web site was nominated for the Best of the Web 1994 Awards
`
`in “Best Entertainment Servers” and “Best Use of Multiple Media,” and received
`
`an honorable mention in the “Best Use of Multiple Media” category.
`
`16. Vice-President Al Gore visited our group in 1996 and received a
`
`
`
`– 11 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 11 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`demonstration of – and remotely drove – a radio controlled toy car with a wireless
`
`video camera mounted on it; the video was encoded by TNS-designed hardware,
`
`streamed over the TNS-designed network and displayed using TNS-designed
`
`software. Commands were transmitted from the computer to the car wirelessly for
`
`direct control of the car’s steering and speed through a specially designed
`
`hardware interface. The demonstration showed the successful application of live,
`
`interactive remote applications, and real-time remote control using video streamed
`
`across a network.
`
`17.
`
`I co-authored several papers about web site development which were
`
`presented at the very first World-Wide Web conference held in 1994 at CERN in
`
`Geneva, Switzerland. CERN is the birthplace of the Web, and the conference was
`
`chaired by Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World-Wide Web. One of the
`
`papers, “The Media Gateway: Live Video on the World Wide Web,” was about
`
`TNS’s web-based video demonstrations that I worked on, and the other paper,
`
`“Active Pages: Intelligent Nodes on the World Wide Web” discussed database
`
`backed web pages which were generated from a computer program accessing a
`
`database each time the page was requested. Today, many content providers use
`
`this method to generate dynamic and personalized web sites.
`
`18.
`
`I started a web consulting business in 1994, and won contracts to set
`
`up and manage web sites for various companies, including Bay Networks and
`
`
`
`– 12 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 12 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`Data Communications Magazine. Our customers at the time were concerned
`
`about web server load and how to scale their web sites in case the load became
`
`unmanageable for a single web server. My company investigated many methods
`
`of load balancing and distributing the load over multiple servers. My web
`
`company also created software for staging updates to the web site and pushing
`
`approved changes into production through a system of multiple servers.
`
`19.
`
`I authored or co-authored twelve papers and conference presentations
`
`on my group’s research at TNS. I also co-edited, with the Professor and Senior
`
`Research Scientist of the group, David Clark, who is generally considered to be
`
`one of the fathers of the Internet Protocol, TNS’s final report on its gigabit
`
`networking research effort. I have also participated in various Internet
`
`Engineering Task Force (IETF) working groups, and attended IETF meetings in
`
`the mid-to-late 1990’s.
`
`20. As an undergraduate at MIT, I was a Laboratory Teaching Assistant,
`
`head Laboratory Teaching Assistant, and Teaching Assistant. I was also a
`
`Teaching Assistant and head Teaching Assistant when I was a graduate student
`
`there. One class that I was a Teaching Assistant for was a Computer Architecture
`
`course, which was a required class for all Electrical Engineering and Computer
`
`Science majors.
`
`21.
`
`I defended and submitted my Ph.D. thesis, titled “Designing Networks
`
`
`
`– 13 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 13 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`for Tomorrow’s Traffic,” in January 1998. As part of my thesis research, I
`
`analyzed local-area and wide-area flows to show a more efficient method for
`
`routing packets in a network, based on traffic patterns at the time. My thesis also
`
`addressed real-time streamed audio and video.
`
`22. Prior to the acquisition of US Robotics by 3Com in 1997, I became
`
`personally familiar with a PalmPilot device. I purchased several devices over
`
`time and learned the proper graffiti strokes for user input. I installed the desktop
`
`application on several computers and used it to download and install applications
`
`onto the Palm device.
`
`23. From 1997 to 1999, I was a Senior Scientist and Engineer at NBX
`
`Corporation, a start-up that made business telephone systems for streaming
`
`packetized audio over data networks instead of using traditional telephone lines.
`
`NBX was later acquired by 3Com Corporation, and the phone system is still used
`
`today by numerous businesses. As part of my work at NBX, I designed the core
`
`audio reconstruction algorithms for the telephones, as well as the packet
`
`transmission algorithms. I also designed and validated the core packet transport
`
`protocol used by the phone system. The protocol was used for all signaling in the
`
`phone system, including for all command and control communications over the
`
`data network between the physical telephone device and the central controller.
`
`The NBX system also supported TAPI, the Telephony Application Programming
`
`
`
`– 14 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 14 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`Interface, thus allowing other computer programs to integrate with our system
`
`telephony features. The NBX system was among the first to support a web-
`
`browser interface to control features of the telephone by using a remote
`
`application which issued remote controls to the central controller. Accessing the
`
`system controller’s web server produced a representation of the telephone, and
`
`allowed users to set speed dials and other features of the user’s physical telephone
`
`such as a call forwarding number. The user could also access and initiate various
`
`telephone functions through the interface, such as initiating a conference call or
`
`initiating call forwarding. Two of the company founders and I obtained U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,697,963, entitled “Telecommunication method for ensuring on-time
`
`delivery of packets containing time-sensitive data,” as a result of part of the work
`
`I did at NBX.
`
`24. From 1999-2004, I was employed by Empirix or its predecessor
`
`company, Teradyne. Empirix was a leader in test tools for telecommunications
`
`protocols and systems, providing functional testing tools as well as load testing
`
`tools. From 2000-2001, I conceived and built a test platform for testing Voice-
`
`over-IP (VoIP). The first application on this new test platform was a cloud
`
`emulator for simulating the effects of transmitting VoIP over a busy network.
`
`25. From 2001 to 2004, I was chief technologist for the Web Application
`
`Test Group of Empirix. My division provided software and services for testing
`
`
`
`– 15 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 15 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`web sites. Empirix’s customers included many large companies with highly
`
`complex web sites, such as Dell (a full e-commerce web site for configuring and
`
`ordering computers) and H&R Block (a web site for filing income taxes for which
`
`users provided input for the tax application running on back-end servers). The
`
`software emulated individual users exercising the complex features of a web site,
`
`such as filling out tax forms or configuring computers for purchase. The software
`
`could also create the load of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of users
`
`hitting a particular web site at once, all using complex features (rather than just
`
`accessing the home page). Because of the complex and highly varying web sites
`
`of Empirix’s customers, I had to understand many different types of web site
`
`architectures. I was the architect for my division’s next-generation web testing
`
`product, for which I helped write a JavaScript interpreter that ran the code on a
`
`web site similar to a standard web browser so that the software could understand
`
`the dynamic aspects of the code on a web site.
`
`26.
`
`I worked at BBN Technologies from 2004 to 2009. BBN
`
`Technologies, formerly known as Bolt, Beranek and Newman, was a pioneer of
`
`the Internet. BBN received the first contract to build components of a packet
`
`switched network as part of the ARPANET, a U.S. Department of Defense effort
`
`funded through the Advanced Projects Research Agency (ARPA). While this
`
`effort preceded my time at BBN by many years, BBN continued to maintain a
`
`
`
`– 16 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 16 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`strong presence in network research and development.
`
`27.
`
`In 2006, as part of my role at BBN Technologies, I helped found
`
`PodZinger Inc., now known as RAMP Inc. PodZinger utilized BBN’s speech
`
`recognition algorithms to search through the spoken words inside audio and video.
`
`After managing the creation of the initial prototype system, PodZinger built out a
`
`full web-based streaming audio and video search solution when I was the Vice
`
`President of Operations and Technology there. The web site had a full load-
`
`balanced back end which provided search and indexing solutions for our hosted
`
`multimedia (audio and video) content. I was responsible for procuring,
`
`configuring, and deploying all the servers into our data center. Our back-end
`
`consisted of over 40 individual servers.
`
`28.
`
`In 2012, I founded Einstein’s Workshop, a science, technology,
`
`engineering, art, and math enrichment program for kids of all ages. The
`
`Workshop teaches programming, robotics, “making” (akin to creating, building
`
`and tinkering), engineering, 3D CAD, mobile application development and many
`
`other subjects. We operate year-round, with weekly school-year programs as well
`
`as week-long vacation programs. We also created and developed BlocksCAD, a
`
`3D CAD system for kids and adults. BlocksCAD is used world-wide and has over
`
`8,500 registered users and 35,000 stored CAD projects. BlocksCAD is being used
`
`in maker spaces worldwide and is integrated into school curriculum in various
`
`
`
`– 17 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 17 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`school systems in the U.S. at elementary, middle, and high school levels.
`
`BlocksCAD is delivered as a web-based application, and we have created a rich
`
`application and content-sharing site for users. Recently, BlocksCAD was spun
`
`out into a separate company which was accepted as part of the LearnLaunch
`
`business accelerator program for educational technologies. We also teach mobile
`
`application development for Android devices using various development
`
`platforms.
`
`29.
`
`I have been awarded several United States patents, and I have several
`
`patent applications pending including the following examples:
`
` U.S. Patent No. 9,697,231, “Methods and apparatus for providing
`
`virtual media channels based on media search,”
`
` U.S. Patent No. 9,697,230, “Methods and apparatus for dynamic
`
`presentation of advertising, factual, and informational content using
`
`enhanced metadata in search-driven media applications,”
`
` U.S. Patent No. 7,975,296, “Automated security threat testing of web
`
`pages,”
`
` U.S. Patent No. 7,877,736, “Computer language interpretation and
`
`optimization for server testing,”
`
` U.S. Patent No. 7,801,910, “Method and apparatus for timed tagging
`
`of media content,”
`
`
`
`– 18 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 18 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
` U.S. Patent 7,590,542, “Method of Generating Test Scripts Using a
`
`Voice-Capable Markup Language,”
`
` U.S. Patent No. 6,967,963, “Telecommunication method for ensuring
`
`on-time delivery of packets containing time-sensitive data,”
`
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2007/0106685, “Method and apparatus
`
`for updating speech recognition databases and reindexing audio and
`
`video content using the same,”
`
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2007/0112837, “Method and apparatus
`
`for timed tagging of media content,”
`
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2007/0118873, “Methods and apparatus
`
`for merging media content,”
`
` U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0222442, “User-directed navigation
`
`of multimedia search results.”
`
`30.
`
`In addition to the patents and applications listed above, I am an
`
`inventor/co-inventor on several other U.S. Patents, European Patents and Patent
`
`Publications that are listed in my curriculum vitae (EX-1004).
`
`31. Based on my academic and work experiences relating to computer
`
`networking, distributed systems, remote applications protocols, remote
`
`applications technology, and palm-sized devices, I believe I am well-positioned to
`
`understand and address the skills and mindset of a person of ordinary skill in this
`
`
`
`– 19 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 19 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`field circa 1998-1999.
`
`III. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`32.
`
`I am familiar with computer networking art. I am also aware of the
`
`state of the art at the time the application resulting in the ’158 Patent was filed. I
`
`have been informed by LG’s counsel that the earliest alleged priority date for the
`
`’158 Patent is January 25, 1999. Based on the technologies disclosed in the ’158
`
`Patent, I believe that a person of ordinary skill in the art would include someone
`
`who had, at the priority date of the ’158 Patent, a B.S. degree in Electrical
`
`Engineering, Computer Engineering, or Computer Science, or equivalent training,
`
`as well as at least three years of technical experience in the field of computer
`
`networking. Unless otherwise stated, when I provide my understanding and
`
`analysis below, it is consistent with the level of a person of ordinary skill in these
`
`technologies prior to the priority date of the ’158 Patent.
`
`IV. Relevant Legal Standards
`
`33.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether claims 1-
`
`2, 6-9, 12, 14-15, and 20 of the ’158 Patent are anticipated or would have been
`
`obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged
`
`invention, in light of the prior art.
`
`34.
`
`I am not an attorney. In preparing and expressing my opinions and
`
`
`
`– 20 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 20 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`considering the subject matter of the ’158 Patent, I am relying on certain basic
`
`legal principles that counsel have explained to me. These principles are discussed
`
`below.
`
`35.
`
`I have been informed by counsel that a patent claim is invalid as
`
`anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 if each element of that claim is present either
`
`explicitly or inherently in a single prior art reference. I have also been informed
`
`that, to be an inherent disclosure, the prior art reference must necessarily disclose
`
`the limitation, and the fact that the reference might possibly practice or contain a
`
`claimed limitation is insufficient to establish that the reference inherently teaches
`
`the limitation.
`
`36.
`
`I have been informed that a claimed invention is unpatentable under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103, if the differences between the invention and the prior art are such
`
`that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
`
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the
`
`subject matter pertains. I have also been informed by counsel that the obviousness
`
`analysis takes into account factual inquiries including the level of ordinary skill in
`
`the art, the scope and content of the prior art, and the differences between the prior
`
`art and the claimed subject matter.
`
`37.
`
`I have been informed by counsel that the Supreme Court has
`
`recognized several rationales for combining references or modifying a reference to
`
`
`
`– 21 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 21 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`show obviousness of claimed subject matter. Some of these rationales include the
`
`following: (a) combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield
`
`predictable results; (b) simple substitution of one known element for another to
`
`obtain predictable results; (c) use of a known technique to improve a similar
`
`device (method, or product) in the same way; (d) applying a known technique to a
`
`known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable
`
`results; (e) choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with
`
`a reasonable expectation of success; and (f) some teaching, suggestion, or
`
`motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the
`
`prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the
`
`claimed invention.
`
`V. The ’158 Patent
`
`A.
`
`State of the Art before the ’158 Patent
`
`38. Network computing was already well known at the time of the ’158
`
`Patent. The client/server model in which a client relies upon the processing power
`
`of a remote server to accomplish some computational task has been around since
`
`at least 1940. EX-1015, p. 9 (explaining that “network computing is nothing
`
`fundamentally new” with example from Bell Labs in 1940 of a calculator
`
`computer in New York being remotely controlled by users in New
`
`Hampshire). Because of certain advantages such as lower cost and ease of
`
`
`
`– 22 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 22 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`administration, persons of ordinary skill in the art had been utilizing so-called
`
`“thin clients” or “network computers” to access software and hardware services
`
`over network for many decades before the ’158 Patent. EX-1014, pp. 90 (“The
`
`thin client story has its roots in client/server technology. In the beginning was the
`
`mainframe, a powerful computer for its day with access limited to a few elite
`
`programmers. … In response, the terminal was invented. The mainframe still did
`
`all the processing, but the terminal took care of the user’s input and output[.] The
`
`expectation of access to the mainframe via terminal from remote offices or from
`
`home brought us the beginnings of computer networks.”), p. 93 (“The greatest
`
`virtue NCs [network computers] and WTs [windows terminals] have in the
`
`management and support arena is that their software environments are stored
`
`entirely on centrally controlled servers.”).
`
`39. As network capabilities matured through the 1990s, persons of
`
`ordinary skill in the art were developing more robust client/server models to take
`
`advantage of increasing bandwidth. For example, Sun Microsystems’ Jini
`
`platform, announced in the summer of 1998, sought to turn any resource on a
`
`network into a service that any device on the network could locate and
`
`access. EX-1005, p. 29; EX-1018, p. 113-14 (“Jini embodies a model for how
`
`devices and software connect on a network and how distributed systems can
`
`operate. … A service is, according to Sun’s Jini Architecture Overview white
`
`
`
`– 23 –
`
`
`
`LGE Exhibit-1003/Page 23 of 186
`
`

`

`
`
`paper[,] ‘an entity that can be used by a person, a program, or another service.’ It
`
`can be ‘a computation, storage, a communication channel to another user, a
`
`software filter, a hardware device, or another user.’”). Services could encompass
`
`“any useful function” including “applications” and “software components.” EX-
`
`1005, p. 29; see also EX-1006, 7:26-37 (“Within an exemplary distributed system
`
`are various logical groupings of services provided by one or more devices, and
`
`each such logical grouping is known as a Djinn. A ‘service’ refers to a resource,
`
`data, or functionality that can be accessed by a user, program, device, or another
`
`service and that can be computational, storage related, communication related, or
`
`related to providing access to another user. Examples of services provided as part
`
`of a Djinn include devices, such as printers, displays, and disks; software, such as
`
`programs or utilities; information, such as databases and files; and users of the
`
`system.”). In an effort to make this platform widely available, Sun designed Jini
`
`to require very little memory, “which will let it run in devices with very low
`
`memory, such as printers, personal digital assistants, and cellular phones.” EX-
`
`1005, p. 29. As such, Jini enabled lightweight PDAs to access, via a service,
`
`applications that were too computationally and memory intensive to run directly
`
`on the PDA. EX-1005, p. 29; EX-1007, p. 7 (“The network relaxes where and
`
`how computation occurs. For example, applications that are too compute- or space
`
`intensive to run directly on yo