`U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Sling TV L.L.C. and Vudu, Inc. v. Uniloc 2017 LLC
`IPR2019-01367*
`December 3, 2020
`
`* Vudu, Inc., which filed a petition in IPR2020-00677, has been joined as a petitioner in this proceeding
`
`1
`
`
`
`Overview of the ’609 Patent
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 2-4
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), 13:43-48
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), Fig. 10
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), 12:67-13:9
`
`2
`
`
`
`Asserted Grounds
`
`Ground
`1
`2
`
`Claims
`1-3
`1-3
`
`Basis for Challenge
`35 U.S.C. § 103: Jacoby in view of Bland
`35 U.S.C. § 103: Mcternan in view of Robinson
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`3
`
`
`
`Ground 2
`
`Ground 2
`
`4
`
`
`
`Ground 2: Identification of Disputes
`
`Claim Dispute
`1[f]
`Whether Mcternan discloses two “distinct” computer systems
`1[h]
`Whether a POSA would have been motivated to combine the
`teachings of Mcternan and Robinson
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`5
`
`
`
`Claim Element 1[f]
`
`Ground 2
`Ground 2
`Claim Element 1[f]
`
`6
`
`
`
`The ’609 Patent – Claim 1
`
`[1b]
`[1c]
`
`1. [pre] A method for tracking digital media presentations delivered from a first computer system to a user's computer via a
`network comprising:
`[1a]
`providing a corresponding web page to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using
`the first computer system;
`providing identifier data to the user's computer using the first computer system;
`providing an applet to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using the first computer
`system, wherein the applet is operative by the user's computer as a timer;
`receiving at least a portion of the identifier data from the user's computer responsively to the timer applet each time a
`predetermined temporal period elapses using the first computer system; and
`storing data indicative of the received at least portion of the identifier data using the first computer system;
`wherein each provided webpage causes corresponding digital media presentation data to be streamed from a second
`computer system distinct from the first computer system directly to the user's computer independent of the first
`computer system;
`[1g] wherein the stored data is indicative of an amount of time the digital media presentation data is streamed from the
`second computer system to the user's computer; and
`1[h] wherein each stored data is together indicative of a cumulative time the corresponding web page was displayed by
`the user's computer.
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`[1d]
`
`[1e]
`[1f]
`
`7
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 8-9
` Patent Owner’s argument that the prior art does not disclose two distinct computer
`systems would require construing the term “distinct” to mean “not under common
`operation or control”
`
`Paper 13, POR, 33.
` Neither party has proposed construing the term “distinct” to mean “not under
`common operation or control.”
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 8.
`
`8
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 8-9
`Paper 13, POR, 12-14
`Paper 15, Reply, 3-5 and 8-9
` Neither Party construes “computer system” to prevent two distinct computer systems
`from having a common operator or being under common control.
`
`Petitioner
`A “computer system” refers to “one or
`more computing devices having a common
`operator or under common control.”
`
`Patent Owner
`The Board need not expressly construe any
`claim term.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`9
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
`
` Petitioner construed “computer system” based on language in the specification
`• The specification only uses the phrase “common operator or common control” to
`describe a collection of computing devices, not to define the word “distinct”
` Patent Owner states that the language is non-limiting
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 8-9
`Paper 13, POR, 14
`Paper 15, Reply, 8-9
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), 3:52-55
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`10
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
` Petitioner’s proposal does not prevent two distinct computer systems
`from having a common operator or being under common control
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 3-5 and 8-9
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Paper 7, Inst. Decision, 21-22
`
`11
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 3-5 and 8-9
` Patent Owner admits its interpretation does not prevent two distinct computer
`systems from having a common operator or being under common control.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Paper 13, POR, 14
`
`12
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 3-5 and 8-9
` Patent Owner admits its interpretation does not prevent two distinct computer
`systems from having a common operator or being under common control.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`13
`
`Ex. 2001 (Claim Construction Order, CD Cal), 14
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
`
` The ’609 Patent indicates that the first and second computer systems (i.e., the two
`“distinct” computer systems in the claims) can have a common operator or control.
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 9
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), 12:46-50
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`14
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
`
` The’609 Patent uses the term “distinct” in only three instances
` Each instance recites the claim language without further context or explanation
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 5-6
`
`* * *
`
`* * *
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), Abstract
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), 2:10-33
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), Claim 1
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`15
`
`
`
`Claim Construction for “Computer System”
`
`Paper 15, Petitioner’s Reply, 5-6
` Based on the surrounding claim language, a second computer system that streams “directly to the user’s
`computer independent of the first computer system” is “distinct” from the first computer system.
` The ’609 Patent accomplishes this by using separate servers with separate functionality.
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), 4:57-62
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`16
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), Fig. 1
`
`Ex. 1001 (’609 Patent), 5:20-25
`
`
`
`Mcternan discloses two “distinct” computer systems
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 41-45
`Paper 15, Reply, 7-8
`
` Mcternan discloses two distinct computer
`systems made up of separate servers with
`separate functionality:
`• Mcternan’s first computer system collects
`heartbeat data and serves webpages to
`client 108.
`• Mcternan’s second computer system
`provides content directly to client 108 via
`a media path 107a-c that does not include
`servers of the first computer system.
`
`Pet. at 42, annotating Ex. 1007 (Mcternan), Fig. 1
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`17
`
`
`
`Mcternan discloses two “distinct” computer systems
`
` Even if the claim term “distinct” requires the computer systems be operated or
`controlled by different entities, the combination teaches this.
`• Dr. Storer testified that Mcternan’s two computer systems are not under common control.
`• Patent Owner did not provide any rebuttal evidence, nor did it cross examine Dr. Storer.
`• Dr. Storer’s testimony stands as unrebutted and admitted
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 10
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Ex. 1002 (Storer Declaration) , para. 183
`
`18
`
`
`
`Mcternan discloses two “distinct” computer systems
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 10-11
` Even if the claim term “distinct” requires the computer systems be operated or
`controlled by different entities, the combination teaches this.
`• Mcternan describes separating the server functionalities and applying encryption
`at the security servers because of the different interests of the entities involved.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Ex. 1007 (Mcternan) 18:18-21
`
`Ex. 1007 (Mcternan) 8:20-22
`
`19
`
`
`
`Claim Element 1[h]
`
`Ground 2
`Ground 2
`Claim Element 1[h]
`
`20
`
`
`
`The ’609 Patent – Claim 1
`
`[1b]
`[1c]
`
`1. [pre] A method for tracking digital media presentations delivered from a first computer system to a user's computer via a
`network comprising:
`[1a]
`providing a corresponding web page to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using
`the first computer system;
`providing identifier data to the user's computer using the first computer system;
`providing an applet to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using the first computer
`system, wherein the applet is operative by the user's computer as a timer;
`receiving at least a portion of the identifier data from the user's computer responsively to the timer applet each time a
`predetermined temporal period elapses using the first computer system; and
`storing data indicative of the received at least portion of the identifier data using the first computer system;
`wherein each provided webpage causes corresponding digital media presentation data to be streamed from a second
`computer system distinct from the first computer system directly to the user's computer independent of the first
`computer system;
`[1g] wherein the stored data is indicative of an amount of time the digital media presentation data is streamed from the
`second computer system to the user's computer; and
`wherein each stored data is together indicative of a cumulative time the corresponding web page was displayed by
`the user's computer.
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`[1d]
`
`[1e]
`[1f]
`
`1[h]
`
`21
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 11-16
` A POSA would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Mcternan and
`Robinson under obviousness rationales set forth in KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
`
`“[A]ny need or problem known in the field of endeavor at the time of invention and addressed by
`the patent can provide a reason for combining the elements in the manner claimed.”
`
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 419-20 (2007).
`
`“[T]he analysis need not seek out precise teachings directed to the specific subject matter of the
`challenged claim, for a court can take account of the inferences and creative steps that a person of
`ordinary skill in the art would employ.”
`
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007).
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`22
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 52-53, 61-62, 70-73
`Paper 15, Reply, 11-16
`
`Petitioner has provided evidence that a POSA would have been motivated
`to combine the references for at least three reasons, each of which is
`sufficient on its own:
`1. A POSA would have been motivated to apply a known technique to a
`known system ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
`2. A POSA would have been motivated to combine prior art elements
`according to known methods to yield predictable results.
`3. A POSA would have been motivated to perform a simple substitution of
`one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`23
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine #1
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 52-53, 61-62, 70-73
`Paper 15, Reply, 11-16
`A POSA would have been motivated to apply a known technique to a known system
`ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
`
`Element
`Known System
`Known Technique
`Improvement
`
`Predictable Results
`
`Description
`Mcternan’s system that uses heartbeats to track time spent viewing a show.
`Robinson’s known technique of using heartbeats to track time spent on a page.
`• More effective tracking of the use of content by consumers.
`•
`Improved security.
`The results are predictable because of the substantial similarities between
`Robinson’s and Mcternan’s tracking methods.
`Each provides a client with software that causes the client to regularly send
`heartbeats comprising identifiers that can be tracked.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`24
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine #1
`
` Effective Tracking
`McTernan:
`
`Robinson:
`
`Improvement:
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 71-72
`Paper 15, Reply, 11-16
`
`Ex. 1007 (Mcternan), 9:10-11
`
`Ex. 1007 (Mcternan), 19:10-12
`
`Ex. 1008 (Robinson), para. 9, 18, 21
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 15
`
`25
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine #1
`
` Improved security
`McTernan:
`
`Robinson:
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 71-72
`Paper 15, Reply, 11-16
`
`Ex. 1007 (Mcternan), 9:8-9
`
`Improvement:
`
`Ex. 1008 (Robinson), para. 21
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 16
`
`26
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine #2
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 52-53, 61-62, 70-73
`Paper 15, Reply, 11-13
`A POSA would have been motivated to combine prior art elements according to known
`methods to yield predictable results.
`
`Element
`Prior art elements
`
`Known Methods
`
`Predictable Results
`
`Description
`• Mcternan’s system that uses heartbeats to track time spent viewing a show.
`• Robinson’s use of heartbeats to track time spent on a page.
`Providing the client with software for generating heartbeats, as disclosed by both
`Mcternan and Robinson.
`The results are predictable because of the substantial similarities between
`Robinson’s and Mcternan’s tracking methods.
`Each provides a client with software that causes the client to regularly send
`heartbeats comprising identifiers that can be tracked.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`27
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine #3
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 52-53, 61-62, 70-73
`Paper 15, Reply, 11-13
`A POSA would have been motivated to perform a simple substitution of one known
`element for another to obtain predictable results.
`
`Element
`Known element 1
`Known element 2
`Predictable Results
`
`Description
`Mcternan’s use of heartbeats to track time spent viewing a show.
`Robinson’s use of heartbeats to track time spent on a page.
`The results are predictable because of the substantial similarities between
`Robinson’s and Mcternan’s tracking methods.
`Each provides a client with software that causes the client to regularly send
`heartbeats comprising identifiers that can be tracked.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`28
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 13-14
` Patent Owner’s analysis requires the prior art to disclose the same motivation as the
`’609 Patent, but the law has no such requirement
`
`* * *
`
`Paper 13, POR, 38-39
`“In determining whether the subject matter of a patent claim is obvious, neither
`the particular motivation nor the avowed purpose of the patentee controls. What
`matters is the objective reach of the claim.”
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 419 (2007) (emphasis added).
`
`29
`
`
`
`Motivation to Combine
`
`Ex. 1002, Storer Declaration, para. 237-243
`Paper 15, Reply, 16-17
`
` Petitioner has provided testimony of its expert, Dr. Storer, as
`evidence that:
`• A POSA would have been motivated to combine the references
`• A POSA would have had a reasonable expectation of success
` Patent Owner has not introduced any evidence to counter
`Petitioner’s evidence
` Dr. Storer’s testimony stands as unrebutted and admitted
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`30
`
`
`
`Ground 1
`
`Ground 1
`
`31
`
`
`
`Ground 1: Identification of Disputes
`
`1[c]
`
`Claim Dispute
`1[a]
`Whether Jacoby provides a corresponding web page for each
`digital media presentation
`Whether the Jacoby-Bland combination provides a timer applet
`for “each” digital media presentation
`Whether Jacoby discloses two “distinct” computer systems
`Whether Jacoby discloses stored data indicative of an amount
`of time the digital media presentation data is streamed
`
`1[f]
`1[g]
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`32
`
`
`
`Claim Element 1[a]
`
`Ground 1
`Ground 1
`Claim Element 1[a]
`
`33
`
`
`
`The ’609 Patent – Claim 1
`
`[1b]
`[1c]
`
`1. [pre] A method for tracking digital media presentations delivered from a first computer system to a user's computer via a
`network comprising:
`[1a]
`providing a corresponding web page to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered
`using the first computer system;
`providing identifier data to the user's computer using the first computer system;
`providing an applet to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using the first computer
`system, wherein the applet is operative by the user's computer as a timer;
`receiving at least a portion of the identifier data from the user's computer responsively to the timer applet each time a
`predetermined temporal period elapses using the first computer system; and
`storing data indicative of the received at least portion of the identifier data using the first computer system;
`wherein each provided webpage causes corresponding digital media presentation data to be streamed from a second
`computer system distinct from the first computer system directly to the user's computer independent of the first
`computer system;
`[1g] wherein the stored data is indicative of an amount of time the digital media presentation data is streamed from the
`second computer system to the user's computer; and
`1[h] wherein each stored data is together indicative of a cumulative time the corresponding web page was displayed by
`the user's computer.
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`[1d]
`
`[1e]
`[1f]
`
`34
`
`
`
`Jacoby discloses providing a web page for each presentation
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 16-18
` Jacoby’s mediaframe servers 140 deliver a media player to present a particular media
`file requested by a user, this includes publishing a web page on the user’s browser
`
`Ex. 1006 (Jacoby) , para. 36
`
`Ex. 1006 (Jacoby) , para. 44
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`35
`
`
`
`Jacoby discloses providing a web page for each presentation
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 17-18
` Patent Owner’s analysis, which requires the web page to include “corresponding ads,”
`is incorrect because it imports an embodiment from the specification into the claims
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`36
`
`Paper 13, POR, 29-30
`
`
`
`Claim Element 1[c]
`
`Ground 1
`Ground 1
`Claim Element 1[c]
`
`37
`
`
`
`The ’609 Patent – Claim 1
`
`[1b]
`[1c]
`
`1. [pre] A method for tracking digital media presentations delivered from a first computer system to a user's computer via a
`network comprising:
`[1a]
`providing a corresponding web page to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using
`the first computer system;
`providing identifier data to the user's computer using the first computer system;
`providing an applet to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using the first
`computer system, wherein the applet is operative by the user's computer as a timer;
`receiving at least a portion of the identifier data from the user's computer responsively to the timer applet each time a
`predetermined temporal period elapses using the first computer system; and
`storing data indicative of the received at least portion of the identifier data using the first computer system;
`wherein each provided webpage causes corresponding digital media presentation data to be streamed from a second
`computer system distinct from the first computer system directly to the user's computer independent of the first
`computer system;
`[1g] wherein the stored data is indicative of an amount of time the digital media presentation data is streamed from the
`second computer system to the user's computer; and
`1[h] wherein each stored data is together indicative of a cumulative time the corresponding web page was displayed by
`the user's computer.
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`[1d]
`
`[1e]
`[1f]
`
`38
`
`
`
`The combination teaches a timer applet for each presentation
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 18-23, 64-66
`Paper 15, Reply, 18-20
` Jacoby prepares a presentation that includes delivering a media player to the user for
`each media file that the user requests to stream
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`39
`
`Ex. 1006 (Jacoby) , para. 44
`
`
`
`The combination teaches a timer applet for each presentation
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 18-23, 64-66
`Paper 15, Reply, 18-20
` Jacoby’s media player is delivered with metering software that is operative by the
`user's computer as a timer
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`Ex. 1006 (Jacoby) , para. 49, 51, 52, 53
`
`40
`
`
`
`The combination teaches a timer applet for each presentation
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 18-23, 64-66
`Paper 15, Reply, 18-20
` A POSA would understand Jacoby’s metering software to teach an applet (an “applet”
`refers to “a software component that runs in the context of another program”)
` Alternatively, a POSA would have found it obvious to deliver Jacoby’s metering
`software using the applet disclosed by Bland
`
`Bland does not require the applet
`(extensions 131)
`to always be
`present,
`such that
`the same
`applet would be used for multiple
`presentations. To the contrary,
`Bland states that its extensions
`may be sent to the client with a
`data collection request.
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`41
`
`Ex. 1009 (Bland) , 5:24-37
`
`
`
`The combination teaches a timer applet for each presentation
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 18-23, 64-65
`Paper 15, Reply, 18-20
` Patent Owner incorrectly argues that the proposed combination would change
`Jacoby’s principle of operation because Jacoby somehow requires metering events to
`be strategically placed at different points of a streaming media file
` Jacoby discloses embodiments that place metering events according to regular time
`intervals
`
`Ex. 1006 (Jacoby) , para. 29
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`42
`
`
`
`Claim Element 1[f]
`
`Ground 1
`Ground 1
`Claim Element 1[f]
`
`43
`
`
`
`The ’609 Patent – Claim 1
`
`[1b]
`[1c]
`
`1. [pre] A method for tracking digital media presentations delivered from a first computer system to a user's computer via a
`network comprising:
`[1a]
`providing a corresponding web page to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using
`the first computer system;
`providing identifier data to the user's computer using the first computer system;
`providing an applet to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using the first computer
`system, wherein the applet is operative by the user's computer as a timer;
`receiving at least a portion of the identifier data from the user's computer responsively to the timer applet each time a
`predetermined temporal period elapses using the first computer system; and
`storing data indicative of the received at least portion of the identifier data using the first computer system;
`wherein each provided webpage causes corresponding digital media presentation data to be streamed from a second
`computer system distinct from the first computer system directly to the user's computer independent of the first
`computer system;
`[1g] wherein the stored data is indicative of an amount of time the digital media presentation data is streamed from the
`second computer system to the user's computer; and
`1[h] wherein each stored data is together indicative of a cumulative time the corresponding web page was displayed by
`the user's computer.
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`[1d]
`
`[1e]
`[1f]
`
`44
`
`
`
`Jacoby discloses two “distinct” computer systems
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 12-16
`Paper 15, Reply, 20-21
`
` Jacoby discloses two distinct computer
`systems made up of separate servers with
`separate functionality:
`• Jacoby’s first computer system facilitates
`administrative functionality (e.g.,
`metering, billing, authenticating access to
`content)
`• Jacoby’s second computer system
`facilitates content delivery functionality
`(e.g., streaming directly to the user’s
`computer independently of the first
`computer system)
`
`Pet. at 13, annotating Ex. 1006 (Jacoby), Fig. 1
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`45
`
`
`
`Claim Element 1[g]
`
`Ground 1
`Ground 1
`Claim Element 1[g]
`
`46
`
`
`
`The ’609 Patent – Claim 1
`
`[1b]
`[1c]
`
`1. [pre] A method for tracking digital media presentations delivered from a first computer system to a user's computer via a
`network comprising:
`[1a]
`providing a corresponding web page to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using
`the first computer system;
`providing identifier data to the user's computer using the first computer system;
`providing an applet to the user's computer for each digital media presentation to be delivered using the first computer
`system, wherein the applet is operative by the user's computer as a timer;
`receiving at least a portion of the identifier data from the user's computer responsively to the timer applet each time a
`predetermined temporal period elapses using the first computer system; and
`storing data indicative of the received at least portion of the identifier data using the first computer system;
`wherein each provided webpage causes corresponding digital media presentation data to be streamed from a second
`computer system distinct from the first computer system directly to the user's computer independent of the first
`computer system;
`[1g] wherein the stored data is indicative of an amount of time the digital media presentation data is streamed from the
`second computer system to the user's computer; and
`1[h] wherein each stored data is together indicative of a cumulative time the corresponding web page was displayed by
`the user's computer.
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`[1d]
`
`[1e]
`[1f]
`
`47
`
`
`
`Jacoby discloses stored data that indicates streaming time
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 35-36
`Paper 15, Reply, 22
` Jacoby stores account information that is indicative of an amount of time the digital
`media presentation data is streamed
`
`Ex. 1006 (Jacoby) , para. 42
`
`Ex. 1006 (Jacoby) , para. 37
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`48
`
`
`
`Jacoby discloses stored data that indicates streaming time
`
`Paper 15, Reply, 22
`
` Patent Owner argues that it is unclear whether the Petition maps the “stored data” to
`Jacoby’s “decrement amount” or to a user meter itself/user account itself
` The Petition is sufficiently clear:
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit – Not Evidence
`IPR2019-01367 – U.S. Patent No. 8,407,609
`
`49
`
`Paper 2, Petition, 35
`
`