Paper No. 1
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION and HP INC.
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`SYNKLOUD TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Patent No. 10,015,254
`Issued: July 3, 2018
`Filed: December 21, 2015
`
`Inventor: Sheng Tai Tsao
`
`SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR WIRELESS DEVICE ACCESS TO
`EXTERNAL STORAGE
`________________________
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2020-01032
`________________________
`PETITION
`REGARDING U.S. PATENT NO. 10,015,254
`________________________
`
`Title:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION and HP INC.
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`SYNKLOUD TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Patent No. 10,015,254
`Issued: July 3, 2018
`Filed: December 21, 2015
`
`Inventor: Sheng Tai Tsao
`
`SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR WIRELESS DEVICE ACCESS TO
`EXTERNAL STORAGE
`________________________
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2020-01032
`________________________
`PETITION
`REGARDING U.S. PATENT NO. 10,015,254
`________________________
`
`Title:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`
`COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 2
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Certification the 254 Patent May Be Contested by Petitioners ............. 2
`
`Fee for Inter Partes Review (§ 42.15 (a)) .............................................. 2
`
`C. Mandatory Notices (§ 42.8(b)) .............................................................. 2
`
`III.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS ....................................... 4
`
`IV. RELEVANT INFORMATION CONCERNING THE CONTESTED
`
`PATENT .......................................................................................................... 4
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Effective Filing Date ............................................................................. 4
`
`Level of Ordinary Skill ......................................................................... 4
`
`Overview of 254 Patent ......................................................................... 5
`
`Claim Construction................................................................................ 6
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`“cache storage . . . ” .................................................................... 7
`
`“utilizing information . . .” .......................................................... 9
`
`“folder or directory structure” ................................................... 11
`
`“updating the storage space” ..................................................... 12
`
`“web console” ........................................................................... 15
`
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART ............................................................. 16
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`A. McCown (EX1005) ............................................................................. 17
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Dutta (EX1006) ................................................................................... 17
`
`Coates (EX1007) ................................................................................. 18
`
`VI. PRECISE REASONS FOR REQUESTED RELIEF .................................... 19
`
`A.
`
`The Challenged Claims Are Unpatentable Over McCown in View of
`
`Dutta .................................................................................................... 19
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`Claim 9 is Unpatentable ............................................................ 19
`
`Claim 10 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 46
`
`Claim 11 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 48
`
`Claim 12 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 49
`
`Claim 13 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 50
`
`Claim 15 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 57
`
`B.
`
`The Challenged Claims Are Unpatentable Over McCown in View of
`
`Dutta, in Further View of Coates ........................................................ 60
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Claim 9 is Unpatentable ............................................................ 60
`
`Claim 10 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 68
`
`Claim 11 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 68
`
`Claim 12 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 68
`
`Claim 13 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 69
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`Claim 14 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 69
`
`Claim 15 is Unpatentable .......................................................... 74
`
`VII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 75
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254 (“the 254 Patent”) claims a system and method
`
`for a wireless device to interact with a remote storage server for remote storage of
`
`files. McCown, a PCT application published more than a year before the priority
`
`date of the 254 Patent, describes exactly such a system and method. In particular,
`
`McCown discloses a user site, which can be, for example, an enhanced cellular
`
`telephone, that can manipulate a remote site and a storage site in order to cause a
`
`file to be downloaded from the remote site and thereby stored in the storage site.
`
`While the 254 Patent mentions a “cache” only once, its claims have several
`
`limitations directed to “cache storage.” While a Skilled Artisan would understand
`
`McCown’s Internet-based system to employ a cache storage, to remove any doubt
`
`and to simplify the issues before the Board, this petition is based on the obvious
`
`combination of McCown and Dutta, a prior art published patent application
`
`directed to the capture and subsequent remote storage of web content using a web
`
`cache.
`
`Finally, several dependent claims are drawn to certain low-level
`
`functionality for manipulating files stored remotely, such as moving, copying or
`
`deleting. A prior art patent to Coates discloses exactly that functionality in great
`
`detail. As demonstrated below and in the exhibits filed herewith, the combination
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`of these prior art references renders claims 9-15 of the 254 Patent unpatentable for
`
`obviousness.
`
`II. COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES
`REVIEW
`A. Certification the 254 Patent May Be Contested by Petitioners
`
`Petitioners certify that the 254 Patent for which review is sought is available
`
`for inter partes review and Petitioners are not barred or estopped from requesting
`
`inter partes review of the 254 Patent (EX1001) on the grounds identified in this
`
`Petition. 37 C.F.R. § 42.104 (a). Petitioners also certify this petition for inter
`
`partes review is not being filed more than one year from the date of service of a
`
`complaint on Petitioners alleging infringement of a patent. Petitioners also certify
`
`that they have not filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the 254
`
`Patent.
`
`B.
`
`Fee for Inter Partes Review (§ 42.15 (a))
`
`The Director is authorized to charge the fee specified by 37 CFR § 42.15 (a)
`
`to Deposit Account No. 50-1597.
`
`C. Mandatory Notices (§ 42.8(b))
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`The real parties-in-interest of this petition are Microsoft Corporation
`
`(“Microsoft”), located at One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052, and HP
`
`Inc. (“HP”), located at 1501 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, CA 94304.
`
`Lead counsel and backup lead counsel are as follows:
`
`Lead Counsel
`Joseph A. Micallef
`Reg. No. 39,772
`jmicallef@sidley.com
`(202) 736-8492
`
`Backup Lead Counsel
`Scott M. Border
`Reg. No. 77,744
`sborder@sidley.com
`(202) 736-8818
`
`
`Service on Petitioners may be made by email (iprnotices@sidley.com), mail
`
`or hand delivery to: Sidley Austin LLP, 1501 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
`
`20005. The fax number for lead and backup counsel is (202) 736-8711.
`
`The 254 Patent is or has been the subject to, or relates to, the following
`
`proceedings:
`
`• SynKloud Technologies, LLC v. HP, Inc., 1-19-cv-01360 (D. Del.)
`
`• SynKloud Technologies, LLC v. BLU Products, Inc., 1-19-cv-00553
`(D. Del.)
`
`• SynKloud Technologies, LLC v. Dropbox Inc., 6-19-cv-00526 (W.D.
`Tex.)
`
`• SynKloud Technologies, LLC v. Adobe Inc., 6-19-cv-00527 (W.D.
`Tex.)
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`• Microsoft Corp. v. Synkloud Technologies, LLC, 1-20-cv-00007 (D.
`Del.)
`
`III.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`Claims 9-15 of the 254 Patent are unpatentable over the prior art as follows:
`
`i. Claims 9-13 and 15 are Obvious under §103 Based on McCown in
`View of Dutta;
`
`ii. Claims 9-15 are Obvious under §103 Based on McCown in View of
`Dutta, and in Further View of Coates;
`
`IV. RELEVANT INFORMATION CONCERNING THE CONTESTED
`PATENT
`Effective Filing Date
`A.
`The 254 Patent claims a priority date of December 4, 2003. EX1001, Face.
`
`Petitioners assume that date in its analysis.
`
`Level of Ordinary Skill
`B.
`A person of ordinary skill in the art in the field of the 254 Patent in the 2003
`
`time frame (“a Skilled Artisan”) would have been someone with a bachelor’s
`
`degree in electrical, computer engineering, computer science, or related field with
`
`two years of experience in a relevant technical field, such as remote storage
`
`systems, with related experience in wireless technologies and wireless devices. As
`
`evidenced by the prior art cited below, such a person would have been
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`knowledgeable about memory structures in both mobile and computer
`
`technologies, techniques for remotely accessing and manipulating databases and
`
`computer files, and communications over computer networks such as the Internet.
`
`EX1003,¶47.
`
`C. Overview of 254 Patent
`The 254 Patent is entitled “System and Method for Wireless Device Access
`
`to External Storage,” EX1001, Face, and describes a device interacting with a
`
`remote storage server for remote storage of data. Id., Abstract. The primary
`
`focuses of the 254 Patent are the transfer of data objects from a remote site to an
`
`allocated storage space on a remote server under control of a wireless device, and
`
`the retrieval of data objects from the storage space to the wireless device. Id.,
`
`4:59-5:43.
`
`In the system described in the 254 Patent, a user can employ a web browser
`
`on a user device to setup folder/directory structures in the file system of his or her
`
`assigned storage space. Id., 4:33-38. The user can also use the web browser to
`
`perform data management operations to delete, copy, move and rename data
`
`objects in the file system. Id., 4:38-41. Upon receiving the data management
`
`request from the user device, the storage server’s software modules perform the
`
`requested operation on the assigned file system of the assigned external storage
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`volume of the server. Id., 4:54-58. The 254 patent describes the steps required to
`
`complete the process to download data from a remote web server into allocated
`
`storage volume and depicts the steps in Figure 3 (below).
`
`
`
`Id., Fig. 3.
`
`D. Claim Construction
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`Claims in an inter partes review proceeding are construed according to their
`
`ordinary and customary meaning in light of the specification and file history of the
`
`patent in which those claims appear.
`
`“cache storage . . . ”
`1.
`The ordinary meaning in the context of the 254 Patent of “cache storage for
`
`caching data received from the Internet” is storage for data received from the
`
`Internet that is more readily accessible by the user or user application than the
`
`original Internet storage location. Similarly, “cache storage” is storage that is
`
`more readily accessible by the user or user application than the original Internet
`
`storage location. EX1003,¶61.
`
`
`
`The 254 Patent uses the word “cache,” or conjugations thereof, only once in
`
`the specification, in its description of Figure 3. EX1001, 5:10-19. Thus, the 254
`
`Patent discloses that the user accesses a web page via a web browser “to obtain
`
`information for the downloading,” EX1001, 5:10-12, and explains that
`
`“downloading information” can be “IP address of the remote web site and the data
`
`name for the downloading.” EX1001, 5:13-17. The downloading information
`
`“becomes available in the cached web-pages on the wireless device (1) after the
`
`web-browser (8) accessing the web site (15).” EX1001, 5:17-19; see EX1001, Fig.
`
`3; EX1003,¶62; see also EX1003,¶¶63-64.
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`
`
`Dr. Houh explains that a Skilled Artisan would understand this description
`
`indicates that the disclosed wireless device accesses the remote server site via a
`
`web browser to obtain information for the data to be downloaded. The wireless
`
`device then stores this download information into a cache in the form of a web
`
`page, and later retrieves it from the cache and sends it to the storage server, in
`
`order to indicate what information should be downloaded or stored. He also
`
`explains that a Skilled Artisan would understand from this disclosure, particularly
`
`its use of the word “cache,” that the download information is stored on the wireless
`
`device in some convenient memory location of that device, so that it can be more
`
`readily accessed, without having to make another request to the remote server site
`
`for the information, when the user makes a selection of what information should be
`
`downloaded and stored. See, e.g., EX1010; EX1003,¶65.
`
`
`
`That reading is consistent with the understanding of the word cache in this
`
`technological field. For example, when used as a noun in this technical field the
`
`word “cache” is generally understood to mean “[a] special memory subsystem in
`
`which frequently used data values are duplicated for quick access.” EX1030, 72.
`
`The word “cache” is also used as a verb to mean storing data close to the user or
`
`user application so that it can be more readily and speedily accessed than the
`
`original storage location. EX1008, 114; EX1003,¶66.
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`
`
`The claims of the 254 Patent do not use the word “cache” as a noun and do
`
`not recite any specific type of cache memory or process of caching. Instead, the
`
`claims recite “cache storage for caching data received from the Internet” and “file
`
`cached” (i.e., they use the word “cache” as an adjective modifying the noun
`
`“storage” and “file” and as a verb modifying the terms “data received from the
`
`Internet”). Such a claim term should be interpreted consistent with its grammatical
`
`usage, i.e., to mean a type of “storage” modified by the adjective “cache.”
`
`EX1003,¶67.
`
`
`
`Accordingly, a Skilled Artisan would conclude that the meaning of “cache
`
`storage [for caching data received from the Internet]” in the context of the 254
`
`Patent is storage [for data received from the Internet] that is more readily
`
`accessible by the user or user application than the original Internet storage location.
`
`EX1003,¶68.
`
`“utilizing information . . .”
`2.
`The ordinary meaning in the context of the 254 Patent of “utilizing
`
`information for the file cached in [the/a] cache storage in the [first] wireless
`
`device” is broad enough to cover using information stored in the cache storage of
`
`the [first] wireless device to download a file from a remote server. EX1003,¶69.
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`In context, this claim language relates to a storage operation that causes a
`
`file from a remote server to be stored into an assigned storage space:
`
`the storing data comprising to download a file from a second server
`across a network into the remote storage space through utilizing
`information for the file cached in the cache storage in the wireless
`device.
`
`EX1001, 6:20-24 (emphasis added). EX1003,¶70. Dr. Houh explains, however,
`
`that the phrase is ambiguous as to what information is “stored in [the/a] cache
`
`storage in the [first] wireless device,” i.e., the “information” or the “file”?
`
`EX1003,¶71.
`
`The “cache storage” is claimed as part of the wireless device. Id., 5:64-66.
`
`The specification of the 254 Patent explains that the file being downloaded is never
`
`sent to the wireless device, but is instead transferred directly from the remote site
`
`to the assigned storage location. Id., 5:23-28. Indeed, this aspect of the disclosed
`
`system appears to be what the inventors viewed as the novel aspect of their
`
`invention. EX1009, 64, 110, 137, 177, 215, 245. Moreover, in the disclosed
`
`system, it is the download information that gets stored in the cache of the wireless
`
`device. EX1001, 5:16-19; EX1003,¶72. Dr. Houh explains that “a cache storage
`
`in the first wireless device” is a cache storage in the wireless device that is
`
`correlated with the first storage space. EX1003,¶73.
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`Accordingly, when read in the context of the 254 Patent specification, the
`
`ordinary meaning of “utilizing information for the file cached in [the/a] cache
`
`storage in the [first] wireless device” is broad enough to cover using information
`
`stored in the cache storage of the [first] wireless device to download a file from a
`
`remote server. EX1003,¶74.
`
`“folder or directory structure”
`3.
`The ordinary meaning of “folder or directory structure” is an arrangement of
`
`folders and subfolders (or directories and subdirectories) for holding files.
`
`EX1003,¶75.
`
`The 254 Patent explains that “the user on the web-browser (8) is facilitated
`
`to perform creating structured layered file directories or folders.” EX1001, 3:10-
`
`12. EX1003,¶76. A “folder” is “a means of organizing programs and documents on
`
`a disk and can hold both files and additional folders.” EX1030, 202-203;
`
`EX1003,¶77. A “directory” is “a catalog for filenames and other directories stored
`
`on a disk.” EX1030, 148-149; EX1003,¶78. “Structure” is defined as “the
`
`arrangement or organization of parts in a system.” See, e.g., EX1023; EX1003,¶
`
`79.
`
` The terms “folder” or “directory” modify the term “structure.” Thus, when
`
`combined, a “folder or directory structure” is a structure of folders or directories.
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`That correlates to the description in the 254 Patent at EX1001, 3:10-12.
`
`EX1003,¶80.
`
`Accordingly, in the context of the 254 Patent, the ordinary meaning of a
`
`“folder or directory structure” is an arrangement of folders and subfolders or
`
`(directories and subdirectories) for holding files. EX1003,¶81.
`
`“updating the storage space”
`4.
`The ordinary meaning of “program instructions for the server updating the
`
`first one of the storage spaces according to a requested operation received from
`
`the first wireless device upon a user thereof, through the displayed information of
`
`the first one of the storage spaces performing the operation for remotely accessing
`
`the first one of the storage spaces” is program instructions for the server to update
`
`the first one of the storage spaces according to a requested operation received from
`
`the first wireless device by a user thereof in response to the user performing the
`
`operation for remotely accessing the first one of the storage spaces by
`
`manipulating the displayed information of the first one of the storage spaces.
`
`EX1003,¶87.
`
`
`
`The 254 Patent discloses a user employing data and storage volume
`
`management operations through the use of a web browser on a wireless device.
`
`EX1001, 4:34-41. These data management operations include operations to
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`“delete, copy, move, or rename…files or folders on that file system.” EX1001,
`
`4:38-41. The 254 Patent details that the server system must communicate with the
`
`wireless device of the web browser to present the external storage to a user.
`
`EX1001, 4:44-47; EX1003,¶88.
`
`In Dr. Houh’s analysis, the phrase “program instructions for the server
`
`updating [to update] the first one of the storage spaces according to a requested
`
`operation received from the first wireless device” would be consistent with the 254
`
`Patent’s disclosure that the server system performs the requested data management
`
`operation “upon receiving each data management operation” from the wireless
`
`device. EX1001, 7:10-12, 4:54-58. Thus, the server system must necessarily
`
`receive the data management operations from the wireless device in order to
`
`“update the first one of the storage spaces according to a requested operation.”
`
`EX1003,¶89.
`
`
`
`Similarly, the update process is performed “according to a requested
`
`operation from the first wireless device upon by a user thereof.” That construction
`
`is consistent with the 254 Patent’s disclosure that “the user…of the wireless device
`
`can choose and submit desired data management operation for the wireless device
`
`sending the operation information to the…server system.” EX1001, 4:47-52. Thus,
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`the “requested operation received from the wireless device,” EX1001, 7:11-13, is
`
`submitted “from the first wireless device by a user thereof.” EX1003,¶90.
`
`
`
`The 254 Patent discloses that the user can “choose and submit desired data
`
`management operation[s].” EX1001, 4:47-49. A Skilled Artisan would understand
`
`that this process would require the manipulation of the “displayed information” by
`
`the user of the wireless device, i.e. clicking, dragging, pressing a key on a
`
`keyboard in order to make a selection. E.g., EX1035, 16:25-47. Thus, the update
`
`process must be requested “by a user thereof…performing the operation for
`
`remotely accessing the first one of the storage spaces by manipulating the
`
`displayed information of the first one of the storage spaces.” EX1003,¶91.
`
`
`
`Accordingly, when read in the context of the 254 Patent specification, the
`
`ordinary meaning of “program instructions for the server updating the first one of
`
`the storage spaces according to a requested operation received from the first
`
`wireless device upon a user thereof, through the displayed information of the first
`
`one of the storage spaces performing the operation for remotely accessing the first
`
`one of the storage spaces” is program instructions for the server to update the first
`
`one of the storage spaces according to a requested operation received from the first
`
`wireless device by a user thereof in response to the performing the operation for
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`remotely accessing the first one of the storage spaces by manipulating the
`
`displayed information of the first one of the storage spaces. EX1003, ¶92.
`
`“web console”
`5.
`The ordinary meaning of “web console” is a control unit through which a
`
`user communicates with the computer to access interlinked documents in a
`
`hypertext system, such as the World Wide Web. EX1003,¶93.
`
`The 254 Patent does not explicitly define a “web console” in the
`
`specification, but notes that it exists on a console host. EX1001, 4:10-13. The 254
`
`Patent notes that “the storage system (10)… can be partitioned into multiple
`
`volumes (11), for example, by administration staff through a web-console (13) of a
`
`console host.” EX1001, 3:34-36. The 254 Patent indicates, in Figure 2, that the
`
`web-console likely exists either in the form of or as part of a browser:
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`
`
`EX1001, Fig. 2 (annotated). This is consistent with the understood meaning of the
`
`term. EX1030, 114, 505 (“console” means “[a] control unit, such as a terminal,
`
`through which a user communicates with a computer”) (“web” means “a set of
`
`interlinked documents in a hypertext system. See also World Wide Web.”). In this
`
`claim, “web” modifies “console.” A browser on a device is consistent with this
`
`terminology. EX1003,¶94.
`
`Thus, when read in the context of the 254 patent specification, a “web
`
`console” is a control unit through which a user communicates with the computer to
`
`access interlinked documents in a hypertext system, such as the World Wide Web.
`
`EX1003,¶95.
`
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`A. McCown (EX1005)
`International Publication No. WO 01/67233 to McCown was published on
`
`September 13, 2001, from a PCT Application filed on March 3, 2000. EX1005,
`
`Face. McCown is prior art to the 254 Patent under at least §§102(a), (b) and (e).
`
`McCown describes a system in which “[s]elected files are downloaded
`
`across a network from a remote site into a client’s storage space account
`
`established within a storage site.” EX1005, Face. McCown explains that as part of
`
`the remote storage process, a client, operating from a user site (e.g., a wireless
`
`device) on a network, selects files for downloading through use of an input device.
`
`EX1005, 11:4-11. The user site software generates a data request from the user’s
`
`selections which is “sent across the Internet” to the storage site’s software
`
`application. EX1005, 11:20-22. The data request is received by the storage site’s
`
`software application which generates a download request based on user selections.
`
`EX1005, 12:24-25. The download request is provided to the storage site’s web
`
`server which sends it to the remote site’s server. EX1005, 12:25-27. The remote
`
`site’s server receives the download request and responds by downloading the files
`
`to the storage site and storing them into the client’s storage space account.
`
`EX1005, 12:27-13:2.
`
`B. Dutta (EX1006)
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`U.S. Publication No. 2002/0078102 to Dutta (“Dutta”) was filed on
`
`December 18, 2000 and was published on June 20, 2002. EX1006, Face. Dutta is
`
`prior art to the 254 Patent under at least §§102(a), (b) and (e).
`
`
`
`Dutta primarily describes the capture and subsequent storage of web content.
`
`EX1006, Abstract. The client receives a file, generally in a Web page, in response
`
`to a request by the user to browse the web page. EX1006, ¶[0010]. The captured
`
`data of the displayed web page and user parameters are sent to the server from the
`
`client. EX1006, ¶[0010]. The server receives the data and automatically stores the
`
`captured data received from the client at the server. EX1006, ¶¶[0010]-[0011].
`
`
`
`The client maintains local storage for use by the browser application and
`
`other applications. EX1006, ¶[0029]. The browser may store bookmarked files,
`
`browser cache, and various other types of files. EX1006, ¶[0029].
`
`Coates (EX1007)
`C.
`US Patent No. 7,266,555 to Coates was filed on December 8, 2000 and
`
`published on September 4, 2007. EX1007, Face. Coates is prior art to the 254
`
`Patent under at least §102(e).
`
`Coates is directed “toward the field of remote storage, and more particularly
`
`toward accessing remote storage through the use of a local device.” EX1007,
`
`Face, 1:21-24. Coates discloses a storage port that interfaces a client computer,
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`such as a web or application server, to a network storage system (seen below).
`
`EX1007, 3:7-8. Users only gain access to their media objects within the network
`
`storage system, using a highly secured “shared secret” authentication technology.
`
`EX1007, 4:65-67. The network storage system stores files at one or more storage
`
`centers, remote from the client site. EX1007, 3:8-10. To gain access to content
`
`stored at the remote storage center, the client computer mounts the storage port as a
`
`storage device for the client computer. EX1007, 3:10-13. The client computer
`
`issues local file system requests to conduct network storage system operations.
`
`EX1007, 3:13-14. In response, the storage port translates local file system requests
`
`to network storage system requests. EX1007, 3:14-16.
`
`VI. PRECISE REASONS FOR REQUESTED RELIEF
`Petitioners demonstrate below that the challenged claims are obvious in
`
`view of McCown in view of Dutta for claims 9-13 and 15, and McCown in view of
`
`Dutta in further view of Coates for claims 9-15. In order to improve the clarity of
`
`the analysis, the obviousness grounds set out below (including Ground #2)
`
`incorporate and build upon the basic comparison of the challenged claims to
`
`McCown or McCown in view of Dutta.
`
`A.
`
`The Challenged Claims Are Unpatentable Over McCown in
`View of Dutta
`1.
`Claim 9 is Unpatentable
`19
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`a.
`
`Preamble
`
`The preamble of claim 9 recites “[a] server for delivering storage service
`
`comprising…”
`
`McCown discloses network-based storage spaces having client accounts and
`
`methods for downloading client-selected files from remote sites into client
`
`accounts. EX1005, 1:3-5. A web server operates in the storage space to provide
`
`web pages, directories, and other information to aid the client (“a server for
`
`delivering storage space”). EX1005, 9:9-11. The storage site’s web server is also
`
`capable of communicating with, and downloading files to and from other internet
`
`sites. EX1005, 9:11-13; EX1003,¶284.
`
`Therefore, McCown satisfies the claim element. EX1003,¶285.
`
`b.
`
`Plurality of Storage Spaces and Devices
`
`Claim 9 further recites “[a] server for delivering storage space
`
`comprising…a plurality of storage spaces residing among a plurality of storage
`
`devices.”
`
`McCown discloses that storage space “accounts” (i.e., plural) (“plurality of
`
`storage spaces”) are implemented (“residing among”) on a storage medium.
`
`EX1005, 8:17-18. McCown further discloses that the storage medium “usually
`
`comprises magnetic hard drives but may also include other types such as
`
`20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`“magnetic tape, optical tape, optical disks, and solid state memory devices.”
`
`EX1005, 8:20-21. McCown therefore discloses embodiments in which multiple
`
`storage devices (“a plurality of storage devices”) are employed (e.g., “usually
`
`comprises magnetic hard drives”), and therefore discloses a “plurality of storage
`
`spaces residing among a plurality of storage devices.” EX1005, 8:19-20 (emphasis
`
`added); EX1003,¶287.
`
`McCown satisfies the claim element. EX1003,¶288.
`
`c.
`
`Computer-Readable Storage Device
`
`Claim 9 further recites “[a] server for delivering storage service
`
`comprising…a computer-readable storage device comprising program instructions
`
`that, when executed by the server, configure the server to control delivering the
`
`storage service.”
`
`McCown discloses a “storage site software application 150 and a user site
`
`software application that may be provided to the storage site 140 and the user site
`
`130 respectively as computer programs recorded on information storage
`
`media.” EX1005, 9:23-26 (emphasis added). McCown gives examples of
`
`“information storage media” as “magnetic disk, magnetic tape, optical disk, non-
`
`volatile memory, or other similar information storage media.” EX1005, 9:28-30;
`
`EX1003,¶290.
`
`
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254
`
`A Skilled Artisan would understand “computer programs recorded on
`
`information storage media” at the user site and storage site to encompass “one
`
`computer-readable storage device” at the user site and storage site, respectively.
`
`EX1030, 450 (defining “storage media” as “[t]he various types of physical material
`
`on which data bits are written and stored, such as floppy disks, hard disks, tape,
`
`and optical disks”); EX1009, 8:4-6 (“a computer readable storage medium which
`
`can be any memory device, compact disk, or floppy disk”); EX1003,¶291.
`
`Therefore, McCown satisfies the claim element. EX1003,¶292.
`
`Program Instructions
`(i)
`McCown discloses a preferred embodiment in which “a pair of software
`
`application packages
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
