`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`___________________
`
`
`DISH NETWORK L.L.C.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`BROADBAND ITV, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`
`___________________
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`___________________
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`I. GONDER IS NOT PRIOR ART TO THE ’026 PATENT ......................... 1
`A. Conception of Claims 1-9 ............................................................................ 2
`1. Claim 1 ..................................................................................................... 2
`a) 1. Preamble ........................................................................................... 3
`b) Limitation 1.[a] ..................................................................................... 8
`c) Limitation 1.[b] ....................................................................................15
`d) Limitation 1.[c] ....................................................................................21
`e) Limitation 1.[d] ....................................................................................24
`f) Limitation 1.[e] ....................................................................................27
`g) Limitation 1.[f] .....................................................................................28
`2. Claim 2 ....................................................................................................30
`3. Claim 3 ....................................................................................................32
`4. Claim 4 ....................................................................................................36
`5. Claim 5 ....................................................................................................38
`6. Claim 6 ....................................................................................................38
`7. Claim 7 ....................................................................................................43
`8. Claim 8 ....................................................................................................48
`9. Claim 9 ....................................................................................................49
`B. Inventor Was Diligent In Constructively Reducing to Practice ...................50
`C. Filing of the ’192 Application Is a Constructive Reduction to Practice .......57
`II.
`SUMMARY OF THE ASSERTED PRIOR-ART REFERENCES ........59
`A. Gonder ........................................................................................................59
`B. Son .............................................................................................................60
`C. Kelts ...........................................................................................................61
`III. PETITIONER FAILS TO SHOW THAT GONDER DISCLOSES A
`TEMPLATIZED VIDEO-ON-DEMAND DISPLAY HAVING THE THREE
`LAYERS RECITED IN CLAIM 1.....................................................................61
`A. Petitioner fails to show that Gonder includes both the first layer and the third
`layer of claim 1, where the third layer includes reserved area content generated
`using images. .....................................................................................................62
`1. Figure 4 shows a menu generated using a single video segment, which
`cannot be used to show both a first background layer and a third layer
`comprising reserved area information generated using images. ......................65
`2. Petitioner misinterprets Figure 6, which also shows a menu generated
`using a single video segment and cannot be mapped to both the first and third
`layers. .............................................................................................................69
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`3. Figure 7 does not show a third layer is generated using any images, or
`otherwise fails to show a first layer. ...............................................................71
`B. It would not have been obvious to modify Gonder to generate any layer
`separate from the video segment using images. .................................................75
`IV. THERE IS NO MOTIVATION TO COMBINE GONDER AND SON
`TO SHOW “THE RECEIVED VIDEO CONTENT WAS UPLOADED TO A
`WEB-BASED CONTENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM . . . ALONG WITH
`ASSOCIATED METADATA . . . .” ...................................................................76
`A. If a POSA combined Gonder and Son in a reasonable manner, it would not
`result in modifying Gonder’s video-on-demand system for a cable television
`system. ..............................................................................................................76
`B. Mere similarity in data does not mean Gonder and Son should be combined
`in the manner suggested in the Petition. .............................................................78
`C. Incorporating the HTTP server from Son into Gonder would create a system
`with unpredictable and undesirable results. ........................................................79
`V.
`PETITIONER FAILS TO SHOW HOW CERTAIN DEPENDENT
`CLAIMS ARE OBVIOUS IN LIGHT OF GONDER, SON, AND KELTS. ...79
`A. Claim 6 .......................................................................................................79
`B. Claims 11 and 12 ........................................................................................82
`1. Kelts fails to disclose displaying video-on-demand content on digital
`phones or PDAs. ............................................................................................82
`2. A POSA would not combine Gonder and Kelts because they embody
`different principles of operation. ....................................................................84
`C. Claim 15 .....................................................................................................85
`VI. SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS WEIGH IN FAVOR OF A
`FINDING OF NON-OBVIOUSNESS. ...............................................................86
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`

`

`PATENT OWNER’S UPDATED EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2001
`
`2002
`
`2003
`
`2004
`
`2005
`
`2006
`
`2007
`
`2008
`
`2009
`
`2010
`
`2011
`
`
`
`Complaint for Patent Infringement, Broadband iTV, Inc. v. DISH
`Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19—cv-00716-ADA (W.D. Tex.),
`December 19, 2019.
`
`Transcript of Telephonic Discovery Hearing Before the Honorable
`Alan D. Albright, Broadband iTJ/Z Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC,
`Case No. 6:19-cv—007l6—ADA
`.D. Tex. , Au t 31, 2020.
`
`“The last thing anyone should think about WDTX is that it is patent
`plaintiff friendly, says Albright,” (1AM, Apr. 7, 2020),
`ht
`s://www.iam—media.com/law— olic /albri
`t—the—last—thin —
`
`anyone—should—think-about-venue-it—plaintiff—friendly (accessed
`Set- 14, 2020 .
`
`Order Denying Motion to Stay Case, Continental Intermodal
`Group-Trucking, LLC v. Sand Revolution, LLC, Case No. 7:18-cv-
`00147 W.D. Tex. , Jul 22, 2020.
`
`Order Denying Motion to Stay Case, Kerr Machine Co. v. Vulcan
`Indus. Holdings, LLC, Case No. 6:20—cv—00200 (W.D. Tex.),
`August 18, 2020.
`Divisional Standing Order Regarding Trials in Waco, US. District
`Court for the Western District of Texas, Au_ t 18, 2020.
`
`Divisional Standing Order Regarding Trials in Waco, US. District
`Court for the Western District of Texas, September 23, 2020.
`Divisional Standing Order Regarding Trials in Waco, US. District
`Court for the Western District of Texas, March 24, 2020.
`
`Order Granting Motion to Consolidate Cases, Broadband iTVI Inc.
`v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv-00712 (W.D. Tex.), April
`15, 2020.
`
`Minute Entry for Proceedings held before Judge Alan D. Albright,
`Broadband iTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv—
`
`
`
`00716 W.D. Tex. , Au_
`
`t 31, 2020.
`
`“Roku Tells WDTX Patent Jury Its Tech's Web Access Is Key”
`Law360, October 5, 2020,
`https://www.law360.com/articles/1302893/print?section=ip_
`accessed October 20, 2020 .
`
`-iii-
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2012
`
`2013
`
`Order Denying Motion to Dismiss, Broadband iTVI Inc. v. DISH
`Network, LLC, Case No. 6: l9—cv-00716-ADA (W.D. Tex.), July
`25, 2020.
`
`Dish Network LLC’s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions,
`Broadband iTI/Z Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6: l9—cv—
`
`00716-ADA W.D. Tex. _, June 25, 2020.
`
`2014
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`2015
`
`2016
`
`2017
`
`2018
`
`2019
`
`2020
`
`Defendants’ Opening Claim Construction Brief, Broadband i TV,
`Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv—716, US District
`
`Court for the Western District of Texas, dated September 10, 2020.
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`US. Patent Appl. Pub]. No. 2002/00104099 to Novak (“Novak”)
`
`“Roku Beats $41M Infringement Claim In Texas Trial” Law360,
`October 14, 2020,
`https ://Www. law3 60.com/articles/1 3 19005/print?section=ip
`(accessed October 21, 2020).
`“3 Things To Know After Busy WDTX Patent Judge's lst Trial”
`Law360, October 16, 2020,
`https ://www. law360.com/articles/ l 320360/print?section=ip
`accessed October 21, 2020 .
`
`Transcript of Telephonic Discovery Hearing Before the Honorable
`Alan D. Albright, Broadband iTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC,
`Case No. 6:19-cv—00716-ADA (W.D. Tex.), March 26, 2020.
`
`2021-2025
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`2026
`
`BBiTV Court’s Claim Constructions Final At Hearing 11/13/20,
`Broadband iTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv-716,
`
`US. District Court for the Western District of Texas, dated
`
`November 13, 2020.
`
`2027-2029
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`2030
`
`2031
`
`2032
`
`2033
`
`Teleconference Transcript, November 25, 2020.
`
`DISH Final Invalidity Contentions and Example Claim Charts
`
`AT&T Final Invalidity Contentions and Example Claim Charts
`
`Civil Docket for Broadband iTVZ Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case
`
`No. 6:16-cv—007l6-ADA W.D. Tex. , Februa
`
`2, 2021.
`
`2034
`
`Teleconference Transcript, February 2, 2021.
`
`
`
`
`
`-1V-
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2035
`
`2036
`
`Michael Shamos Declaration (PARTIALLY CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Milton Diaz Perez Declaration (PARTIALLY CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2037
`
`2038
`
`2039
`
`2040
`
`2041
`
`2042
`
`2043
`
`2044
`
`2045
`
`2046
`
`2047
`
`2048
`
`2049
`
`2050
`
`2051
`
`2052
`
`2053
`
`
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Specs / Flowcharts late 2003-early 2004 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Specs / Flowcharts late 2003—early 2004 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Specs / Flowcharts late 2003—early 2004 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Specs / Flowcharts late 2003-early 2004 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2054
`
`Specs / Flowcharts late 2003—early 2004 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Leighton Chong Declaration (PARTIALLY CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Clif Kagawa Declaration (PARTIALLY CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Deposition Transcript of Dr. Samuel Russ, April 30, 2021
`
`“Why Comcast Leads the Pack,” Bloomberg, May 31, 2001
`
`Comcast Fact Sheet
`
`"HOW IT WORKS: Video on Demand Is Ready, but the Market Is
`Not,” New York Times, Oct. 10, 2002
`
`“Behind Comcast's Video-on-demand growth” dated Oct. 4, 2004,
`available at
`https ://money.cnn.com/2004/ l 0/04/technology/techinvestor/hellwe
`; index.htm
`
`Comcast press release dated Jan. 8, 2008, available at
`https://corporate.comcast.com/news-information/news-
`feed/comcast—ceo—brian—l-roberts-announces—project-infinity-
`strate_ -to-deliver-exonentiall —more-content-choice—on—tv
`
`“Comcast’s Road to 20 Billion VOD Views” dated Aug. 10, 2011,
`available at https://www.multichannel.com/news/comcast-s-road-
`20-billion—vod—views-327466
`
`Comcast press release dated Mar. 31, 2009, available at
`https ://www.prlog.org/ l 08 801 8 l -comcast-media—center-to-
`.
`.
`.
`mtroduce-express—lane-serv1ce—for—Vldeo-on—demand-content-
`0 roviders -at. html
`
`Navic meeting 07/03 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2055
`
`2056
`
`2057
`
`2058
`
`2059
`
`2060
`
`Email from Nestel to Diaz, dated January 12, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated Jan. 25, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kagawa to Hoctor dated Dec. 7, 2003
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated Jan. 27, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kagawa to Diaz (Perez) dated Jan. 27, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Chong to Kagawa dated Mar. 31, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2061
`
`March draft application (attached to 3/31 March draft email)
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2062
`US. Patent Application No. 10/909,192
`
`2063
`
`2064
`
`206’;
`‘
`
`2066
`
`2067
`
`2068
`
`2069
`
`2070
`
`2071
`
`2072
`
`2073
`
`Hand drawn BBiTV road map diagram, dated 3/3/04
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated Mar. 18, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated Mar. 19, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Consumer Content patent outline v2.doc (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`System and Method for Managing, Converting and Displaying
`Consumer-Generated Content for Interactive Television Use
`
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Diaz (Perez) to Chong dated Mar. 30, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`US. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0066106
`
`“April Development Document” (BBiTV Community
`ClaSSIfied s cc 04 26 04 md . .doc CONFIDENTIAL
`
`“Servlet” definition:
`ht o s://www.oraclecoml'ava/technolo -ies/servlet-technolo 3 .html
`“February Presentation” (demo—nissan—infinity—OZ- l 8—04.ppt)
`
`Email from Kagawa to Evard dated Mar. 23, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`-vi-
`
`

`

`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`2074
`
`2075
`
`2076
`
`2077
`
`2078
`
`2079
`
`2080
`
`2081
`
`2082
`
`2083
`
`2084
`
`2085
`
`2086
`
`2087
`
`2088
`
`2089
`
`2090
`
`2091
`
`
`
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated Mar. 30, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kagawa to Evard dated Mar. 31, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kagawa to Evard dated Apr. 8, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kagawa to Kalbrener dated Apr. 2, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kagawa to Yamashita dated Apr. 21, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Kagawa to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 27, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Benz to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 27, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Shimamura to Kagawa dated Apr. 27, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Guinasso to Diaz (Perez) dated May 6, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Evard to Diaz (Perez) dated May 6, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kagawa to Evard dated May 7, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Moratin to Goldberg dated May 17, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Kagawa to Diaz (Perez) dated May 21, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kagawa to Evard dated June 4, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from kagawa t0 Evard dated June 11, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Felice to Diaz (Perez) dated June 15, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated June 18, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Yamashita to Evard dated June 25, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`-Vii-
`
`
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2092
`
`2093
`
`2094
`
`2095
`
`2096
`
`2097
`
`2098
`
`Email from Evard to Kagawa dated July 14, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`May 04 Management Report (June 23) (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Email from Kagawa to Yamashita dated May 21, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Evard to Wilcox dated Apr. 28, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Keyserling to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 28, 2004
`(CONFIDENTLAL)
`Email from Dowling to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 29, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Dakss to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 29, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Daoust to Diaz (Perez) dated July 14, 2004
`2099
`
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Reynolds to Diaz (Perez) dated July 12, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2100
`
`2101
`
`2102
`
`Email from Geist to Diaz (Perez) dated July 15, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated June 1, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2103
`
`Declaration of Michael Kunkel
`
`2104
`
`2105
`
`2106
`
`2107
`
`2108
`
`2109
`
`Email from Diaz (Perez) to Chong dated June 9, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated June 9, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated June 1, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated June 21, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated June 23, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated June 25, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2110
`
`Fig la vod content delivery system arch.doc (5/23, 6/27)
`
`- viii -
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2111
`
`2112
`
`2113
`
`2114
`
`2115
`
`2116
`
`2117
`
`2118
`
`2119
`
`Fig lb drill down navigation exampleppt (10/1, 6/27)
`
`Fig 1c template layer model.doc (6/20, 6/27)
`
`Fig 2a classified ad system arch.doc (6/27, 6/28)
`
`Fig 2b web—based cms.doc (6/27, 6/29)
`
`Fig 2c Content Screening Systemdoc (6/29)
`
`Fig 2d content feed and conversion systemdoc (6/29)
`
`Email from Diaz (Perez) to Chong dated June 29, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated June 30, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated July 15, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2120
`
`7/15 Patent Application Draft (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2121
`
`2122
`
`2123
`
`2124
`
`2125
`
`2126
`
`2127
`
`2128
`
`2129
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated July 21, 2004
`(CONFIDENTLAL)
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated July 22, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Product Status Report 3/1 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Product Status Report 3/8 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Product Status Report 3/ 15 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Product Status Report 3/23 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Product Status Report 3/30 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`March Monthly Management Report (created 4/ l 6)
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Emails regarding fimctionality requirements (4/29)
`2130
`
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Emails regarding updating specs/flowcharts (4/28)
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2131
`
`2132
`
`2133
`
`2134
`
`2135
`
`Product Status Report 4/6 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Product Status Report 4/ 13 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Product Status Report 4/20 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Product Status Report 4/28 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`-iX-
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Exhibit
`Description
`No.
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Alternate (later) version of April Development Document
`
`Email from Kanojia to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 19, 2004
`
`
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2136
`
`
`
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2137
`
`
`Email from Nestel to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 20, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2138
`
`
`Email from Nestel to Goldberg dated Apr. 21, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2139
`
`
`Email from Nestel to Goldberg dated Apr. 23, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2140
`
`
`Email from Goldberg to Nestel dated May 6, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2141
`
`
`
`Product Status Report 5/25 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`2142
`
`
`Email from Goldberg to Diaz (Perez) dated May 11, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2143
`
`
`Email from Nestel to Diaz (Perez) dated May 18, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2144
`
`
`Email from Nestel to Goldberg dated May 25, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2145
`
`
`Email from Goldberg to Diaz (Perez) dated May 26, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2146
`
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated May 1, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2147
`
`
`Email from Nestel to Tumilowicz dated May 20, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2148
`
`
`Email from Nestel to Diaz (Perez) dated May 3, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2149
`
`
`
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`2150
`
`
`
`Product Status Report 5/4 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`2151
`
`
`Claim Construction Order, Broadband iTV v. DISH; Broadband
`iTV v. AT&T and DirecTV
`2152
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`2153
`
`
`
`Product Status Report 6/2 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`2154
`
`April 2004 Monthly Management Report (created 5/14)
`
`- X -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2155
`
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated June 2, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2156
`
`Email from Nestel to Diaz (Perez) dated June 2, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2157
`
`Product Status Report 6/14 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`
`2158
`Product Status Report 6/29 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2159
`
`Email from Hoctor to Nestel dated June 30, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Kuniyuki to Nestel dated July 29, 2004
`2160
`
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Wall to Nestel dated July 28, 2004 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2161
`
`2162
`
`2163
`
`2164
`
`2165
`
`2166
`
`Email from Nestel to Diaz (Perez) dated July 23, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Nestel to Diaz (Perez) dated July 14, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Product Status Report 7/12 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Product Status Report 8/3/04 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Email from Nestel to Diaz (Perez) dated July 14, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2167
`
`Ericsson R3205 - cellular phone - GSM Series Specs, CNET
`
`
`2168
`Ericsson R3205 User Manual, 2nd Ed._, 1999
`
`
`
`2169
`
`2170
`
`Palm VII Series Specs, CNET
`
`Palm VII Series User Guide
`
`
`2171
`US. Patent No. 6,253,375 to Gordon et al.
`
`2172
`
`2173
`
`US. Patent Application No. 15/192,598
`
`US. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/253,350
`
`
`2174
`US. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/253,369
`
`2175
`
`2176
`
`2177
`
`2178
`
`US. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/253,488
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Redline of ’ 192 Application vs. March Draft (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`Q2 2004 business plan (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2179
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated Mar. 30, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`-Xl-
`
`
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2180
`
`2181
`
`2182
`
`2183
`
`Express Lane User Guide v3
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 22, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated Apr. 24, 2004
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Diaz (Perez) to Chong dated Apr. 24, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`2184
`
`
`
`
`
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated May 27, 2004
`(CONFIDENTLAL)
`2185
`7/30 Confirmation Of Filing (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`
`2186
`
`Email from Patrick Herman Regarding Patent Owner’s Motion to
`Seal and Enter Default Protective Order, Ma 7th, 2021
`
`-xii-
`
`

`

`I.
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`GONDER IS NOT PRIOR ART TO THE ’026 PATENT
`Petitioner asserts that Gonder is 102(e) prior art with a priority date of May
`
`27, 2004. Gonder is not prior art to claims 1-9 of the ’026 patent. The inventor,
`
`Milton Diaz Perez, conceived of the inventions in claims 1-9 by March 31, 2004,
`
`and, in any event, no later than April 29, 2004 (i.e., the latest date of a
`
`corroborating document, the “April Development Document”). Mr. Perez’s
`
`conception is corroborated by a March 31, 2004 draft of U.S. Patent Application
`
`10/909,192 (“March Draft”) and Patent Owner’s internal development documents
`
`as discussed below.
`
`Mr. Perez’s conception is further corroborated by the testimony of Leighton
`
`Chong and Clifton Kagawa. In February 2004, Mr. Perez discussed the inventions
`
`of claims 1-9 of the ’026 patent as well as the subject matter of the March Draft
`
`and the final version of U.S. Patent Application 10/909,192 (“’192 application”)
`
`filed on July 30, 2004 in accordance with the ordinary business practices of BBiTV
`
`in which Mr. Perez would discuss new ideas for product development and
`
`intellectual property with his CEO, Mr. Kagawa, to obtain approval to proceed and
`
`prepared a presentation showing how the system’s hierarchical EPG and layered
`
`templates would work. EX2038, ¶¶11-12; EX2036, ¶8. After discussing the subject
`
`matter of claims 1-9 of the ’026 patent, the March Draft, and the ’192 application
`
`with Mr. Kagawa, Mr. Kagawa provided Mr. Perez with authorization to proceed
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`with product development and the patenting of his invention. EX2038, ¶12;
`
`EX2036, ¶8. Following authorization from Mr. Kagawa, Leighton Chong, a patent
`
`attorney, was engaged to file a patent application on Mr. Perez’s invention.
`
`EX2038, ¶12; EX2036, ¶9.
`
`Mr. Perez met with Mr. Chong on March 3, 2004. EX2037, ¶3; EX2036, ¶9.
`
`At that meeting, Mr. Perez disclosed the subject matter of claims 1-9 of the ’026
`
`patent, the March Draft, and the resulting ’192 application, which is the final
`
`version of the patent application that began with the March Draft. EX2037, ¶¶3-7;
`
`EX2036, ¶7. Mr. Perez’s disclosure of his invention to Mr. Chong resulted in the
`
`March Draft of the patent application on March 31, 2004, corroborating conception
`
`of claims 1-9 of the ’026 patent. EX2037, ¶¶3-7; EX2036, ¶9.
`
`Patent Owner was further diligent in constructively reducing the inventions
`
`of claim 1-9 during the critical period from May 26, 2004 to the filing of the ’192
`
`application on July 30, 2004.
`
`A. Conception of Claims 1-9
`Claim 1
`1.
`Mr. Perez conceived of the invention in claim 1 claims 1-9 by March 31,
`
`2004 (the date of the March Draft), and, in any event, no later than April 29, 2004
`
`(the last date of the April Development Document).
`
`Although conception must include every feature or limitation of the
`claimed invention, see, e.g., REG Synthetic Fuels, LLC v. Neste Oil
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`Oyj, 841 F.3d 954, 958 (Fed. Cir. 2016), “the corroboration
`requirement has never been so demanding” such that the
`corroborating evidence must “constitute[ ] definitive proof of [the
`inventor’s] account or disclose[ ] each claim limitation as written.”
`Fleming v. Escort Inc., 774 F.3d 1371, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The
`focus must be whether the totality of the evidence makes the
`inventor’s testimony credible. See id.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Motorola Mobility LLC, 692 F. App’x. 626, 627–28
`
`(Fed. Cir. 2017).
`
`a)
`
`1. Preamble1
`
`By not construing the preamble, Petitioner has waived any construction of
`
`the preamble as limiting. 37 C.F.R. §42.104(b)(3); Consolidated Trial Practice
`
`Guide, 45.2 While the preamble is not limiting, Mr. Perez conceived of “An
`
`Internet-connected digital device for receiving, via the Internet, video content to be
`
`viewed by a subscriber of a video-on-demand system using a hierarchically
`
`arranged electronic program guide” by March 31, 2004. EX2036, ¶11. Mr. Perez’s
`
`
`1 1.preamble and limitations 1[a]-1[f] correspond to Petitioner’s labeling of
`
`claim 1 in the Petition.
`
`2 The District Court held that preamble was not limiting with the exception
`
`of the ICDD which appears in the body of claim 1. EX2152, 3.
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`conception as of March 31, 2004 is corroborated by Mr. Chong and Mr. Kagawa.
`
`Mr. Perez disclosed the invention of claim 1 including the preamble to Mr. Chong
`
`in relation to preparing the ’192 application and to Mr. Kagawa in discussing
`
`product development at BBiTV. EX2037, ¶¶3-7; EX2038, ¶¶21-24.
`
`Mr. Perez’s conception is further corroborated by the “March Draft” and
`
`Patent Owner’s internal documents. EX2036, ¶12. The March Draft discloses “An
`
`Internet-connected digital device” (“ICDD”) such as an internet-connected set-top
`
`box. EX2061, ¶3 (
`
`). The March Draft
`
`incorporates by reference U.S. Patent Publication 2002/0066,106 (“Navic ’106
`
`Publication”) published May 30, 2002, which similarly discloses “Internet
`
`appliances such as digital set-top boxes” that can have offer Internet browsing
`
`capabilities and e-commerce serving capabilities.” EX2061, ¶¶5-6; EX2069, ¶4.
`
`From December 2003 through the entire critical period, BBiTV was partnering
`
`with Navic, the assignee of the Navic ’106 Publication, to develop video on
`
`demand services on their Internet-enabled platform. BBiTV signed a developer
`
`agreement with Navic. EX2036, ¶6. Parts of the Navic-based system were tested in
`
`a production environment in April 2004. Id., ¶74. Imageteq, another BBiTV
`
`partner, coded parts of the BBiTV system on top of Navic platform, as reflected in
`
`correspondence in May, June, and July 2004. Id., ¶¶74, 76, 77.
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`The March Draft discloses that the ICDD (e.g., set-top box) is “for
`
`receiving, via the Internet, video content to be viewed by a subscriber of a video-
`
`on-demand system” as
`
`EX2036, ¶13.3
`
`
`
`
`
`. EX2061, ¶¶8, 28, 31;
`
`Additionally, this is reiterated by Patent Owner’s internal product
`
`development document (the “April Development Document”) authored under the
`
`direction of the inventor, Mr. Perez, which shows that videos are uploaded via a
`
`web interface and thus those videos are received by the set-top box “via the
`
`Internet.” EX2070, 3 (“
`
`
`
`
`
`.”). The same
`
`document also depicts a client device (e.g., a set-top box) labeled as “ITV Product”
`
`that is coupled to the system via “Navic N-Band Components” including a “Java
`
`Servlet,” which indicates Internet connectivity since servlets in Java are for
`
`
`3 While “Internet-connected digital device” is not construed in the IPR, the
`
`parties agreed in the litigation it means “a device configured to send or receive
`
`information via the Internet.”
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10028026
`
`interactive web applications on the internet. EX2071: EX2035, fl40. This is
`
`consistent with Navic’s description of digital set top boxes as “Internet appliances”
`
`in the ’106 Publication.
`
`
`
`The March Draft discloses that Video content was Viewed “using a
`
`hierarchically arranged electronic program guide.” EX2036, 'fllS. The March Draft
`
`-6-
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`discloses that the video-on-demand system uses a “hierarchically arranged
`
`electronic program guide” (EPG) by, for example,
`
`
`
`
`
`EX2061, ¶¶7, 10, 24, 31. These hierarchical EPGs are discussed in detail below in
`
`relation to the claim limitations.
`
`Further, Exhibit 2038 (the “February Presentation”), dated February 18,
`
`2004, is a BBiTV development document authored by Mr. Perez that shows
`
`examples of hierarchically arranged EPGs and layered templates at different levels
`
`of the hierarchy. EX2072, 2-13; EX2070, ¶16-¶17. One example of a hierarchically
`
`arranged EPG is shown below in red wherein the user can choose categories and
`
`subcategories to select the desired video. EX2070, ¶16.
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`EX2072, 2 (annotated).
`
`
`
`A substantially similar diagram is reproduced in the ’026 patent (Exhibit 1001) at
`
`Figure 1B. See also EX2036, ¶17; EX2054.
`
`b)
`
`Limitation 1.[a]
`
`Mr. Perez conceived of “the Internet-connected digital device being
`
`configured to obtain and present to the subscriber an electronic program guide as a
`
`templatized video-on-demand display, which uses at least one of a plurality of
`
`different display templates to which the Internet-connected digital device has
`
`access, to enable a subscriber using the Internet-connected digital device to
`
`navigate in a drill-down manner through titles by category information in order to
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`locate a particular one of the titles whose associated video content is desired for
`
`viewing on the Internet-connected digital device using the same category
`
`information as was designated by a video content provider in metadata associated
`
`with the video content” by March 31, 2004 and in any event no later than April 29,
`
`2004. EX2036, ¶18. Mr. Perez’s conception as of March 31, 2004 is corroborated
`
`by Mr. Chong and Mr. Kagawa. Mr. Perez disclosed the invention of claim 1
`
`including limitation 1.[a] to Mr. Chong in relation to preparing the ’192 application
`
`and to Mr. Kagawa in discussing product development at BBiTV. EX2037, ¶¶3-7;
`
`EX2038, ¶21-24.
`
`Conception is further corroborated by the March Draft and Patent Owner’s
`
`documents. EX2036, ¶19. As discussed above in relation to the preamble, the
`
`March Draft discloses an ICDD. EX2061, ¶¶3-4 (
`
`
`
`
`
`); EX2069, ¶¶5-6 (discloses “Internet appliances such as
`
`digital set-top boxes” that can have offer Internet browsing capabilities and e-
`
`commerce serving capabilities.”).
`
`The April Development Document also depicts a client device (e.g., a set-
`
`top box) labeled as “ITV Product” that is an internet appliance. EX2035, ¶40.
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`
`US. Patent No. 10028026
`
`
`
`The March Draft. which concerns a templatized VOD system, discloses an
`
`IC DD “configured to obtain and present to the subscriber an electronic program
`
`guide as a templatized Video-on-demand display, which uses at least one of a
`
`plurality of different display templates to which the Internet-connected digital
`
`device has access.” EX2036, ‘120; EX2061, fl‘l9, 11, 22-24, 31, 35-36, 38, claim 1,
`
`claim 9, Abstract. The March draft further discloses—
`
`-10-
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`. EX2061, ¶¶6-7, 10-12, 22-24, 31, claims 2-4, 7, 10. The March
`
`Draft further discloses that the navigation in a drill-down manner is performed
`
`“using the same category information as was designated by a video content
`
`provider in metadata associated with the video content.” EX2061, ¶¶11
`
`(“...
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`...”), 27-28, 31, claims 4, 10.
`
`Moreover, the February Presentation shows an EPG provided to the ICDD
`
`(e.g., set-top box) that satisfies limitation 1.[a]. EX2072, 1-13; EX2036, ¶21. As
`
`shown below, the “templatized video-on-demand display, which uses at least one
`
`of a plurality of different display template