UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________________
`CODE200, UAB; TESO LT, UAB; METACLUSTER LT, UAB; AND
`OXYSALES, UAB,
`Petitioners
`v.
`LUMINATI NETWORKS LTD.,
`Patent Owner
`_________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-01266
`Patent 10,257,319
`_________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. V. THOMAS RHYNE
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 001
`
`
`_________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________________
`CODE200, UAB; TESO LT, UAB; METACLUSTER LT, UAB; AND
`OXYSALES, UAB,
`Petitioners
`v.
`LUMINATI NETWORKS LTD.,
`Patent Owner
`_________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-01266
`Patent 10,257,319
`_________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. V. THOMAS RHYNE
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 001
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`
`1 INTRODUCTION
`
`I, Dr. V. THOMAS RHYNE, declare the following:
`
`1. I have been retained as an independent expert in this matter by counsel for
`
`Patent Owner Luminati Networks Ltd. (“Luminati”). I have been asked to
`
`provide my opinions on certain references in the above-identified IPR
`
`proceedings (IPR2020-01266) involving US Patent 10,257,319 (“the ’319
`
`patent hereafter). Those references are:
`
`a. Crowds: Anonymity for Web Transactions (“Crowds” (Ex.
`
`1011));
`
`b. United States Patent 6,795,848 (“Border” (Ex. 1017)); and,
`
`c. MorphMix - A Peer-to-Peer-based System for Anonymous
`
`Internet Access (“MorphMix” (Ex. 1013))
`
`2. I have reviewed each of these references.
`
`3. I am being paid for my work preparing this declaration at my normal
`
`consulting rate plus reimbursement of direct expenses. My compensation is
`
`not tied to the outcome of this matter and is not based on the substance of the
`
`opinions that I provide.
`
`1.1 My Qualifications
`4. My background and qualifications as a technical expert for this matter are
`
`summarized below.
`
`Page 2
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`5. I hold degrees from Mississippi State University (Bachelors of Science in
`
`Electrical Engineering with Honors, 1962), the University of Virginia
`
`(Masters of Electrical Engineering in 1964), and the Georgia Institute of
`
`Technology (Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering, 1967). I have been a
`
`Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Texas since 1969. I have
`
`also been a Registered Patent Agent with the U.S. Patent and Trademark
`
`Office (the “USPTO”) since 1999.
`
`6. I taught electrical engineering, computer engineering, computer architecture,
`
`and computer science at the undergraduate and graduate levels full-time at
`
`Texas A&M University from 1967 to 1983 and part-time at the graduate level
`
`at the University of Texas from 1983 to 1991. My twenty-plus years of
`
`industrial experience include work at the Electric Power Research Institute,
`
`Texas Instruments, Control Data Corporation, NASA, Texas Digital
`
`Systems, Inc. (a company I co-founded to produce microprocessor-based
`
`computer peripherals in 1976), the Microelectronics and Computer
`
`Technology Corporation (MCC), and Motorola, Inc.
`
`7. I have extensive experience with computer technology, including design and
`
`teaching experience with a variety of computer systems, microcomputer
`
`systems, and microcontrollers. I have participated in the design of several
`
`computer systems and microprocessors and have designed systems which
`
`Page 3
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 003
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`made use of those devices as controllers. I am familiar with a variety of
`
`computer architectures and am an experienced programmer in a variety of
`
`programming languages as well as assembly-level language on a number of
`
`different computers and microprocessors. I have been an Internet user since
`
`the early 1990’s.
`
`8. Based on my academic and consulting experience, I am familiar with a variety
`
`of computer interfaces, website operations, and data-communications
`
`protocols. I have managed large and complex software-development
`
`programs, and I have been and am familiar with the Internet and its use for
`
`providing both data and services to its users. Prior to joining MCC, I was
`
`responsible for bringing access to the ARPANET to Texas A&M University,
`
`an activity which gave me insight and experience with the exchange of
`
`information over wide-area networks.
`
`9. My experience has also included the use of a variety of networked
`
`communications systems, including use of the ARPANET and extensive use
`
`of the Internet itself as that system came into being in the early 1990s. I also
`
`coordinated MCC’s initial access to the ARPANET, and later to the Internet.
`
`I am an experienced user of numerous search engines, including Google
`
`Chrome, Internet Explorer, Microsoft Edge, and Mozilla Firefox. In
`
`addition, in the early 1990s, MCC researchers developed “EINet Galaxy,”
`
`Page 4
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 004
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`one of the first web browsers with search engine capabilities; I was one of
`
`the alpha testers for that effort.1 I also managed distributed database
`
`development for several years at MCC, as well as MCC’s successful research
`
`and development program on Internet-based credit card fraud detection using
`
`neural networks.
`
`10. I have worked as a technical expert on patent cases dealing with complex
`
`software systems, the provision of secured communication using SSL/TLS
`
`during web sessions conducted with cellular telephones, and with remotely
`
`accessed home security systems. My litigation work has also included cases
`
`dealing with XML and HTTP.
`
`11. While working at MCC in 1994 I was assigned to represent MCC and
`
`its participating companies in the planning efforts of the U.S. Technology
`
`Policy Working Group addressing the technical challenges associated with
`
`the planned National Information Infrastructure (NII). In that role I
`
`
`1 The EiNet program was spun-out of MCC in April of 1995. See, for
`example, https://www.einet.net/static/history.htm (“Launched in January
`1994, Galaxy/EiNet was the first searchable Internet directory. Galaxy was
`created as part of the EiNet division at the MCC Research Consortium at
`the University of Texas, Austin. The original initiative was to develop tools
`for large-scale directory services to support electronic commerce.”) Also
`see the webpages available at
`http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2000/06/12/story7. Many of the
`researchers who worked in the EINet Program had previously worked for
`me as part of the MCC CAD Program.”
`
`Page 5
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 005
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`contributed to the portion of planning effort dealing with “Security and
`
`Privacy Challenges” within the NII.
`
`12. I have chaired and otherwise participated in a number of national and
`
`international IEEE and ISO/IEC standards committees.
`
`13. During my academic career I authored thirty technical papers. I have also
`
`presented papers at thirty-seven conferences and authored an award-winning
`
`textbook, Fundamentals of Digital System Design, published by Prentice-
`
`Hall in 1973 and adopted at over thirty-five U.S. and international
`
`universities during its lifetime. My textbook has been cited as a reference by
`
`the USPTO. I have also served as a technical reviewer for Prentice-Hall, the
`
`IEEE Transactions on Computers, and IEEE Spectrum.
`
`14. I was elected to serve on the IEEE Board of Directors for two terms
`
`representing the engineering education community and the IEEE Computer
`
`Society. I was also elected to two terms as the IEEE Treasurer and served one
`
`term on the Board of Governors of the IEEE Computer Society.
`
`15. I have extensive experience with the accreditation of engineering and
`
`computer science programs in the U.S. and abroad, an activity which has
`
`provided me an excellent opportunity to become and remain familiar with the
`
`program curricula, faculties, and graduates from a large number of U.S. and
`
`international colleges and universities. I represented the IEEE for five years
`
`Page 6
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 006
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`on the Engineering Accreditation Commission and for six years on the Board
`
`of Directors of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
`
`(ABET). In 2004, I completed a three-year pro bono assignment, assisting
`
`Japanese universities and industries in the establishment of the Japanese
`
`Accreditation Board for Engineering Education (JABEE), and have led
`
`several other international accreditation missions.
`
`16. I was appointed by the U.S. National Research Counsel to the Panel of
`
`Assessment for the Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory of the
`
`U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology. I served on that Panel
`
`for seven years, including three terms as its chair, and I provided invited
`
`testimony before the U.S. Congress regarding the status of the Laboratory.
`
`17. My experience and qualifications have been recognized by the Texas Society
`
`of Professional Engineers (Young Engineer of the Year in Texas, 1973), the
`
`American Society for Engineering Education (Terman Awardee as the
`
`“Outstanding Young Electrical Engineering Educator in the U.S.,” 1980), the
`
`Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE Fellow, 1990,
`
`recognizing my contributions to “computer engineering and computer
`
`engineering education), the Accreditation Board for Engineering and
`
`Technology (ABET Fellow, 1992), and the IEEE Computer Society (Golden
`
`Core Awardee, 2000).
`
`Page 7
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 007
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`18. I retired from full-time work as of 1997 and draw retirement benefits from
`
``Texas A&M University. In addition to the full-time work described above,
`
`and in my CV, I have worked part-time as a consulting engineer for the past
`
`thirty years doing computer systems design, application-specific system
`
`design, and expert witness work in intellectual property matters.
`
`2
`
` PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`19. As I stated in my declaration submitted in the district court case, I believe the
`
`qualifications of a person of ordinary skill in the art (a “POSA”) in the field
`
`of the ’319 patent would be an individual who, as of October 8, 2009, the
`
`filing date of the provisional application to which the ‘319 patent claims
`
`priority, had a Master’s Degree or higher in the field of Electrical
`
`Engineering, Computer Engineering, or Computer Science or as of that time
`
`had a Bachelor’s Degree in the same fields and two or more years of
`
`experience in Internet Communications.
`
`20. Based on the foregoing, I believe that I am qualified to provide reliable
`
`opinions in the field of the ’319 Patent, including what a POSA would have
`
`understood from the ’319 Patent and the prior art in the field at the time of
`
`the invention (October 8, 2009).
`
`21. Set forth below is a brief summary of each of the references based on my
`
`review of them.
`
`Page 8
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 008
`
`
`
`3 CROWDS
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`
`22. Crowds (Ex. 1011) describes a system comprised of groups (“crowds”) of
`
`user computers that can interact with one or more web servers. (Crowds at 8-
`
`9). In order to participate in a crowd, a user installs software on his/her
`
`computer to initiate a process called a “jondo.” (Crowds at 8.) “When the
`
`jondo is started, it contacts a server called the blender to request admittance
`
`to the crowd.” (Id.)(emphasis in original) If a jondo gets admitted to a crowd,
`
`“the blender reports to [the new] jondo the current membership of the crowd
`
`and information that enables this jondo to participate in the crowd.” (Id.)
`
`23. The user can “select[] this jondo as her web proxy by specifying its host name
`
`and port number in her web browser as the proxy for all services. Thus, any
`
`request coming from the browser is sent directly to the jondo.” (Id.) “Upon
`
`receiving the first user request from the browser, the jondo initiates the
`
`establishment of a random path of jondos that carries its users’ transactions
`
`to and from their intended web servers.” (Id.) (emphasis in original) “More
`
`precisely, the jondo picks a jondo from the crowd (possibly itself) at random,
`
`and forwards the request to it.” (Id.) (emphasis added) “When this jondo
`
`receives the request, it flips a biased coin to determine whether or not to
`
`forward the request to another jondo; the coin indicates to forward with
`
`probability pf.” (Id.) “So, each request travels from the user’s browser,
`
`Page 9
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 009
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`through some number of jondos, and finally to the end server.” (Id.) “[S]erver
`
`replies traverse the same path as the requests, only in reverse.” (Id.)
`
`24. Figure 2 of Crowds depicts various members of a “crowd” and a possible set
`
`of paths:
`
`
`
`25. Each jondo is merely a process running on a user’s computer. Thus, the
`
`only disclosed architecture(s) in Crowds is/are as follows:
`
`Crowds:
`
`(i) User Computer <-> Web Server
`
`
`
`
`
`(ii) User Computer <-> User Computer <-> Web Server
`
`26. As explained above, because when it “flips the coin,” a user’s jondo may
`
`decide to transmit the user’s request directly to the appropriate web server
`
`(without sending the request to another jondo), the identity(ies) of the
`
`Page 10
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 010
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`members of the crowd do not necessarily remain anonymous to the web
`
`server. Rather, the system of Crowds offers a user “some degree of
`
`deniability” that it originated a particular request – but not necessarily
`
`anonymity. (Crowds Exhibit 1011 at 2).
`
`27. In addition to the numerous security risks described in Crowds, the system
`
`suffers from a number of additional weaknesses such as: (i) unpredictable or
`
`“particularly pronounced” latency (Id. at 19) and (ii) inability to handle
`
`firewalls (“Firewalls present a problem for Crowds.”) (Id. at 25). Because of
`
`these limitations necessarily associated with the Crowds architecture and
`
`implementation, “Crowds will be most useful across academic institutions,
`
`as a service provided by Internet service providers, and within large
`
`corporations.” (Id. at 25.)
`
`4 BORDER
`
`28. Border (Ex. 1017) describes “a communication system for receiving web
`
`content.” (Border at Abstract) As shown in Border’s Figs. 1 and 2 (copied
`
`below), “[a] downstream proxy server receives a URL request message from
`
`a web browser, in which the URL request message specifies a URL content
`
`that has an embedded object.” (Id. at 3:34-38) “An upstream proxy server
`
`receives the URL request message from the downstream proxy server.” (Id.)
`
`“The upstream proxy server selectively forwards the URL request message
`
`Page 11
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 011
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`to a web server and receives the URL content from the web server. (Id.) “The
`
`upstream proxy server forwards the URL content to the downstream proxy
`
`server and parses the URL content to obtain the embedded object prior to
`
`receiving a corresponding embedded object request message initiated by the
`
`web browser.” (Id.) (emphasis added.)
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 012
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`
`
`
`29. As described in its specification, the system of Border relates to obtaining
`
`“embedded objects” from a web server (or from a local cache) “prior to
`
`receiving corresponding embedded object requests initiated by [a] web
`
`browser.” (Id. at 5:45-49)
`
`30. To that end, the Border system as disclosed incorporates two servers, each
`
`having its own cache (“downstream server 105 checks its cache 115 to
`
`determine whether the requested URL has been previously visited” (Id. at
`
`5:19-21) and “upstream server 117 in turn searches for the URL HTML in its
`
`cache 117”). Then, “if the HTML page is not found in cache 117, the server
`
`117 issues the GET URL HTML request [to] web server 109 for the HTML
`
`page.” (Id. at 5:34-36) “[U]pstream server 117 parses the HTML page and
`
`Page 13
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 013
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`requests the embedded objects within the HTML page from the web server
`
`109; the embedded objects are requested prior to receiving corresponding
`
`embedded object requests initiated by the web browser 103.” (Id. at 43-48)
`
`31. “[D]ownstream proxy server 105 initiates and maintains a TCP connection
`
`to the upstream proxy server 107 as needed to carry HTTP transactions.” (Id.
`
`at 7:50-53) “The persistent TCP connection may also be set up when the first
`
`transaction is required and torn down after the connection has been idle for
`
`some period.” (Id. at 7:56-58)
`
`32. Thus, the disclosed architecture over which the Border system operates is:
`
`Border:
`User Computer <-> Downstream Server <-> Upstream Server <-> Web Server
`
`
`5 MORPHMIX
`
`33. MorphMix discloses “a peer-to-peer-based dynamic mix network …”
`
`(MorphMix at 115) As copied below, Fig. 5 of MorphMix depicts the “Basic
`
`Idea of MorphMix”:
`
`Page 14
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 014
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`
`
`
`34. In the disclosed system, “[a]t any time, MorphMix [Ex. 1013] consists of a
`
`set of participating nodes.” (Id. at 118) Those nodes can join and leave the
`
`system at any time and must therefore not necessarily participate in the
`
`MorphMix protocol all the time.” (Id.) “We assume that at any time, a node
`
`knows about some other nodes, i.e., their IP addresses, the ports on which the
`
`MorphMix application is listening for incoming connection requests, and
`
`their public keys.” (Id.) “Learning about other nodes requires a peer
`
`discovery mechanism …” (Id.)
`
`35. Further, “[a] node that is participating in MorphMix has established a virtual
`
`link to one or more other MorphMix nodes at any time.” (Id. at 119)
`
`(emphasis in original) “In MorphMix, a virtual link means that (1) there is a
`
`TCP connection between the two nodes and (2) they share a symmetric key
`
`Page 15
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 015
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`that is only known to these two nodes.” (Id.) “In Figure 5.1, a has five
`
`neighbors because it has established virtual links to five other nodes.” (Id.)
`
`36. “Since MorphMix is basically a circuit-based mix network, a node
`
`establishes a circuit via some other nodes to access servers in the Internet
`
`anonymously.” (Id). A node can be established by “[a]nyone who has access
`
`to a computer that is connected to the Internet should be able to join and use
`
`MorphMix after having installed the MorphMix software.” (Id. at 116)
`
`37.
`
`MorphMix operates by creating one or more anonymous tunnels –
`
`“[A]n anonymous tunnel is set up hop-by-hop in the sense that the initiator
`
`picks the first intermediate node and establishes the layer of encryption with
`
`it.” (Id. at 134) “Then the initiator tells the first intermediate node to
`
`append another node to the tunnel and establishes the layer of encryption
`
`with the second intermediate node.” (Id.) “This continues until the initiator
`
`decides the tunnel is long enough.” (Id.) “The key is that the initiator selects
`
`only the first intermediate node and each node along the anonymous tunnel
`
`then picks the following node.” (Id.)The architecture and configuration of
`
`MorphMix suffers from a number of problems. For example, “a centralized
`
`lookup service that keeps track of the nodes that are currently participating
`
`in MorphMix is out of the question.” (Id. at 135.) “Free riding” is also a
`
`problem in MorphMix, where “users only consume but do not provide the
`
`Page 16
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 016
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01266
`PATENT 10,257,319
`files that they download to others.” (Id. at 143) “MorphMix suffers from
`
`the same problem.” (Id.)
`
`38. The disclosed architecture over which MorphMix operates is:
`
`MorphMix: Peer < - > Peer < - > Server
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I declare that the foregoing is true and correct under penalty of perjury of the
`
`laws of the United States of America.
`
`Signed in Austin, TX on October 25, 2020
`
`
`
`Page 17
`
`Luminati Exhibit 2012
`Code200 et al. v. Luminati Networks LTD.
`IPR2020-01266 Page 017
`
`
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
