UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`DISH NETWORK L.L.C., AT&T SERVICES, INC.,
`And DIRECTV, LLC,1
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`BROADBAND ITV, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`______________________
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`______________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S SUR-REPLY
`TO PETITIONER’S REPLY
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`1 AT&T Services, Inc. and DIRECTV, LLC filed a motion for joinder and a
`petition in Case IPR2021-00556, which were granted, and, therefore, have been
`joined as petitioners in this proceeding.
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
`I.
`II. GONDER IS NOT PRIOR ART TO THE ’026 PATENT ................................ 1
`A. The ’192 Application Constructively Reduces an Internet-Connected Digital
`Device to Practice ................................................................................................... 1
`B. BBiTV Has Shown an Earlier Conception of an ICDD ................................ 10
`C. BBiTV Has Shown Conception of Reserved Area Content Generated Using
`Received Video Content ....................................................................................... 14
`III. GONDER DOES NOT PROPERLY INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE
`THE CABLELABS STANDARD, AND THE CABLELABS STANDARD DOES
`NOT CORRECT ANY DEFICIENCIES IN GONDER ......................................... 16
`IV. GONDER FAILS TO TEACH THE THIRD LAYER, AS RECITED IN
`CLAIM 1 .................................................................................................................. 17
`A. Petitioner Should Not Be Permitted to Introduce a New Claim Construction
`Position in its Reply .............................................................................................. 17
`B. Gonder Does Not Disclose Displaying a Background and Reserved Area
`Content Generated Using a Plurality of Images ................................................... 18
`V. A POSITA WOULD NOT COMBINE GONDER AND SON IN A MANNER
`THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE CLAIMED WEB-BASED CONTENT
`MANAGEMENT SYSTEM .................................................................................... 26
`VI. GONDER FAILS TO DISCLOSE OR RENDER OBVIOUS THE
`DEPENDENT CLAIMS .......................................................................................... 27
`A. Claim 6 ........................................................................................................... 27
`B. Claims 11 and 12 ........................................................................................... 28
`C. Claim 15 ......................................................................................................... 29
`VII. SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................... 29
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`No.
`
`2001
`
`2002
`
`2003
`
` Exhibit
`
`2004
`
`2005
`
`2006
`
`2007
`
`2008
`
`2009
`
`2010
`
`2011
`
`PUBLIC
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`UPDATED EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Description
`
`Complaint for Patent Infringement, BroadbandiTV, 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, BroadbandiTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC,
`Case No. 6:19-cv-00716-ADA (W.D. Tex.), August 31, 2020.
`“The last thing anyone should think about WDTXisthat it is patent
`plaintiff friendly, says Albright,” (IAM, Apr. 7, 2020),
`ight-the-last-thing-
`https://www.iam-media.com/law-poli
`anyone-should-think-about-venue-it-plaintiff-friendly (accessed
`Sept. 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.), July 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, U.S. District
`Court for the Western District of Texas, August 18, 2020.
`Divisional Standing Order Regarding Trials in Waco, U.S. District
`Court for the Western District of Texas, September 23, 2020.
`Divisional Standing Order Regarding Trials in Waco, U.S. District
`Court for the Western District of Texas, March 24, 2020.
`Order Granting Motion to Consolidate Cases, BroadbandiTV, 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,
`BroadbandiTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv-
`00716 (W.D. Tex.), August 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).
`
`
`
`T=
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`PUBLIC
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`age
`Description
`
`2012
`
`2013
`
`2014
`
`2015
`
`2016
`
`2017
`
`2018
`
`2019
`
`2020
`
`2021-2025
`
`2026
`
`2027-2029
`
`2030
`
`2031
`
`2032
`
`2033
`
`2034
`
`Order Denying Motion to Dismiss, BroadbandiTV, Inc. v. DISH
`Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv-00716-ADA (W.D.Tex.), July
`25, 2020.
`Dish Network LLC’s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions,
`BroadbandiTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv-
`00716-ADA (W.D. Tex.), June 25, 2020.
`Intentionally Left Blank
`Defendants’ Opening Claim Construction Brief, BroadbandiTV,
`Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv-716, U.S. District
`Court for the Western District of Texas, dated September 10, 2020.
`Intentionally Left Blank
`U.S. Patent Appl. Publ. No. 2002/00104099 to Novak (“Novak”)
`“Roku Beats $41M Infringement Claim In Texas Trial” Law360,
`October 14, 2020,
`https://www.law360.com/articles/1319005/print?section=ip
`accessed October 21, 2020).
`“3 Things To Know After Busy WDTX Patent Judge's 1st Trial”
`Law360, October 16, 2020,
`https://www.law360.com/articles/1320360/print?section=ip
`accessed October 21, 2020).
`Transcript of Telephonic Discovery Hearing Before the Honorable
`Alan D. Albright, BroadbandiTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC,
`Case No. 6:19-cv-00716-ADA (W.D. Tex.), March 26, 2020.
`Intentionally Left Blank
`BBiTV Court’s Claim Constructions Final At Hearing 11/13/20,
`BroadbandiTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv-716,
`U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, dated
`November 13, 2020.
`Intentionally Left Blank
`Teleconference Transcript, November 25, 2020.
`DISH FinalInvalidity Contentions and Example Claim Charts
`AT&TFinal Invalidity Contentions and Example Claim Charts
`Civil Docket for BroadbandiTV, Inc. v. DISH Network, LLC, Case
`No. 6:16-cv-00716-ADA (W.D. Tex.), February
`2, 2021.
`Teleconference Transcript, February 2, 2021.
`
`- li -
`
`
`
`
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`
`
`Michael Shamos Declaration (PARTIALLY CONFIDENTIAL)
`Milton Diaz Perez Declaration (PARTIALLY 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 DemandIs Ready, but the MarketIs
`Not,” New York Times, Oct. 10, 2002
`“Behind Comcast's video-on-demand growth”dated Oct. 4, 2004,
`available at
`https://money.cnn.com/2004/10/04/technology/techinvestor/hellwe
`o/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-
`strategy-to-deliver-exponentially-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-
`2045
`
`20-billion-vod-views-327466
`Comcastpress release dated Mar. 31, 2009, available at
`https://www.prlog.org/10880181-comcast-media-center-to-
`:
`:
`:
`introduce-express-lane-service-for-video-on-demand-content-
`providers-at.html
`Navic meeting 07/03 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`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)
`Specs / Flowcharts late 2003-early 2004 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`2035
`2036
`2037
`2038
`2039
`2040
`2041
`2042
`
`2043
`
`2044
`
`2046
`
`2047
`2048
`2049
`2050
`2051
`2052
`2053
`2054
`
`PUBLIC
`
`Exhibit
`
`age
`Description
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`
`
`ae
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`PUBLIC
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`age
`Description
`
`2055
`
`2056
`
`2057
`
`2058
`
`2059
`
`2060
`
`2061
`
`2062
`
`2063
`
`2064
`
`2065
`
`2066
`
`2067
`
`2068
`
`2069
`
`2070
`
`2071
`
`2072
`
`2073
`
`Email from Nestel to Diaz, dated January 12, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated Jan. 25, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawato Hoctor dated Dec. 7, 2003
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated Jan. 27, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawato Diaz (Perez) dated Jan. 27, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Chong to Kagawadated Mar. 31, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Marchdraft application (attached to 3/31 March draft email)
`CONFIDENTIAL
`U.S. Patent Application No. 10/909,192
`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
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0066106
`“April Development Document” (BBiTV Community
`Classified spec 04 26 04 mdp.doc)
`(CONFIDENTIAL
`“Servlet” definition:
`https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/servlet-technology.html
`“February Presentation” (demo-nissan-infinity-02-18-04.ppt)
`Email from Kagawato Evard dated Mar. 23, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`PUBLIC
`
`Exhibit
`
`age
`Description
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. 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 Kagawato Evard dated Mar. 31, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawato Evard dated Apr. 8, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawato Kalbrener dated Apr. 2, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawa to Yamashita dated Apr. 21, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawato 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 Kagawato Evard dated May 7, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Moratin to Goldberg dated May 17, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawato Diaz (Perez) dated May 21, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawato Evard dated June 4, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kagawato 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
`
`-vi-
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`PUBLIC
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`age
`Description
`
`2092
`
`2093
`
`2094
`
`2095
`
`2096
`
`2097
`
`2098
`
`2099
`
`2100
`
`2101
`
`2102
`
`2103
`
`2104
`
`2105
`
`2106
`
`2107
`
`2108
`
`2109
`
`2110
`
`Email from Evard to Kagawadated July 14, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`May 04 ManagementReport (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
`CONFIDENTIAL
`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
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Reynolds to Diaz (Perez) dated July 12, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Geist to Diaz (Perez) dated July 15, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Chongto Diaz (Perez) dated June 1, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Declaration of Michael Kunkel
`Email from Diaz (Perez) to Chong dated June 9, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Chongto 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
`Fig la vod content delivery system arch.doc (5/23, 6/27)
`
`- Vii -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`PUBLIC
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`age
`Description
`
`2111
`
`2112
`
`2113
`
`2114
`
`2115
`
`2116
`
`2117
`
`2118
`
`2119
`
`2120
`
`2121
`
`2122
`
`2123
`
`2124
`
`2125
`
`2126
`
`2127
`
`2128
`
`2129
`
`2130
`
`2131
`
`2132
`
`2133
`
`2134
`
`2135
`
`Fig 1b drill down navigation example.ppt (10/1, 6/27)
`Fig lc 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 System.doc (6/29)
`Fig 2d content feed and conversion system.doc (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
`7/15 Patent Application Draft (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Chongto Diaz (Perez) dated July 21, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Chongto 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 ManagementReport (created 4/16)
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Emails regarding functionality requirements (4/29)
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Emails regarding updating specs/flowcharts (4/28)
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Product Status Report 4/6 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Product Status Report 4/13 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Product Status Report 4/20 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Product Status Report 4/28 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`
`- Vill -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

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

`

`PUBLIC
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`age
`Description
`
`2155
`
`2156
`
`2157
`
`2158
`
`2159
`
`2160
`
`2161
`
`2162
`
`2163
`
`2164
`
`2165
`
`2166
`
`2167
`
`2168
`
`2169
`
`2170
`
`2171
`
`2172
`
`2173
`
`2174
`
`2175
`
`2176
`
`2177
`
`2178
`
`2179
`
`Email from Wall to Diaz (Perez) dated June 2, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Nestel to Diaz (Perez) dated June 2, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Product Status Report 6/14 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Product Status Report 6/29 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Hoctor to Nestel dated June 30, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Kuniyuki to Nestel dated July 29, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`Email from Wall to Nestel dated July 28, 2004 (CONFIDENTIAL)
`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
`Ericsson R320s- cellular phone - GSM Series Specs, CNET
`Ericsson R320s User Manual, 2nd Ed., 1999
`Palm VII Series Specs, CNET
`Palm VII Series User Guide
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,253,375 to Gordonetal.
`U.S. Patent Application No. 15/192,598
`U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/253,350
`U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/253,369
`U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/253,488
`Intentionally Left Blank
`Redline of ?192 Application vs. March Draft (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Q2 2004 business plan (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated Mar. 30, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`PUBLIC
`
`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`a
`
`2180
`
`2181
`
`2182
`
`2183
`
`2184
`
`2185
`
`2186
`
`2187
`
`2188
`
`2189
`
`Express Lane User Guide v3
`Email from Chongto 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
`Email from Chong to Diaz (Perez) dated May 27, 2004
`CONFIDENTIAL
`7/30 Confirmation Of Filing (CONFIDENTIAL)
`Email from Patrick Herman Regarding Patent Owner’s Motionto
`Seal and Enter Default Protective Order, May 7th, 2021
`Color version of EX2177 (“Redline of 7192 Application vs. March
`Draft”)
`(CONFIDENTIAL)
`(served but notfilea
`Supplemental Declaration of Milton Diaz Perez
`CONFIDENTIAL)
`(servedbutnotfileca
`Supplemental Declaration of Leighton Chong (CONFIDENTIAL)
`served but notfilea
`
`
`
`=e
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Gonder is not prior art to claims 1-9 of the ’026 patent because (1) claims 1-
`
`9 are entitled to priority of the ’192 Application, and (2) the inventor can swear
`
`behind Gonder’s filing date. Even if the Board finds that Gonder qualifies as prior
`
`art, Petitioner fails to show that claim 1 is obvious. Petitioner’s attempts to add
`
`new claim construction and obviousness theories to show or remove from
`
`consideration the claimed “third layer” should be rejected. Petitioner repeatedly
`
`mischaracterizes the way Gonder generates its selection menus in order to make it
`
`appear relevant to the ’026 patent claims. But Gonder teaches a specific approach
`
`of superimposing selection links over a single video segment in order to overcome
`
`limitations of the traditional data carousel. Gonder cannot be stretched so broadly
`
`so as to undermine its very reason for existence based on tricks like turning
`
`standard patent language like “may” upside down (i.e., the use of “may”
`
`necessarily discloses the opposite).
`
`II. GONDER IS NOT PRIOR ART TO THE ’026 PATENT
`A. The ’192 Application Constructively Reduces an Internet-
`Connected Digital Device to Practice
`The ’192 Application (EX2062) incorporates by reference the ’106
`
`Publication to Navic (EX2069, “’106 Publication”), and discloses an “Internet-
`
`connected digital device” (ICDD) based on the parties’ agreed construction of
`
`ICDD. Pet. Reply, 2. As discussed below, a set-top box that is configured to
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`browse the Web (as disclosed in the ’106 Publication), and receives video content
`
`from a headend over traditional (non-Internet) means still qualifies as an ICDD if
`
`the video content was transferred to a WBCMS using the Internet (as disclosed in
`
`the ’192 Application). DISH attempts to confuse the issue by mischaracterizing
`
`BBiTV’s positions on what constitutes an ICDD.
`
`In ¶3 of the Background, the ’192 Application describes digital set top
`
`boxes, VOD applications, and “other advanced interactive television services, such
`
`as webpage browsing, e-mail, television purchase (“t-commerce”) transactions, and
`
`multimedia delivery.” EX2062, ¶3. The ’192 Application also identifies the
`
`claimed “Internet-connected digital device,” which is a set-top box provided by
`
`Navic Systems. Id., ¶4. In particular, the ’192 Application discloses:
`
`With the increasing interactive functionality and customer reach of
`interactive television services, advertisers and content providers are
`find it increasingly attractive to employ on-demand advertising,
`program content, and TV transactions for home viewers. VOD content
`delivery platforms are being designed to seamlessly and conveniently
`deliver a wide range of types of advertising, content, and transaction
`services on demand to home viewers. An example of an advanced VOD
`delivery platform is the N-Band (TM) system offered by Navic
`Systems, Inc., d/b/a Navic Networks, of Needham, MA. This is an
`integrated system which provides an application development platform
`for third party application developers to develop new VOD service
`applications, viewer interfaces, and ancillary interactive services for
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`deployment on VOD channels of CATV operators in cable service
`areas throughout the U.S. A detailed description of the Navic N-Band
`system is contained in U.S. Patent Application 2002/066,106, filed on
`May 30, 2002, which is incorporated herein by reference.
`Id. The incorporated ’106 Publication discloses: “In the future, the functionality
`
`offered by these set-top boxes or other embedded platforms will be expanded even
`
`further. For example, they may offer Internet browsing capabilities and e-
`
`commerce serving capabilities.” EX2069, ¶5. “Indeed, millions of digital set-top
`
`boxes have already been deployed in the United States. It is estimated that the
`
`Worldwide market for Internet appliances such as digital set-top boxes and other
`
`Internet-connected terminals will reach $17.8 billion in 2004. Increasingly,
`
`advertisers and content providers therefore view the cable set-top as the first
`
`platform of choice for widespread delivery of a suite of intelligent content
`
`management and distribution services.” Id., ¶6.
`
`Finally, to remove any doubt, the ’192 Application specifically references
`
`the incorporated Navic N-Band technology in ¶21 of the detailed description when
`
`describing the invention’s VOD Application Server. EX2062, ¶21 (“An example of
`
`such a VOD Application Server is the Navic N-Band(TM) server as previously
`
`described”) (emphasis added). Incorporating the Navic System and the ’106
`
`Publication shows that the inventor was purposefully describing a system which
`
`would be compatible with Navic’s Internet-connected set top boxes. EX2036, ¶12.
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`This is further evident when considering the April Development Document, which
`
`shows the Navic ITV set-top box communicating with a Java Servlet. Id., ¶13;
`
`EX2035, ¶40.
`
`DISH argues that the ’192 Application “makes no mention of [ICDDs] or
`
`any other client device that would satisfy the … construction,” Pet. Reply, 2, but
`
`ignores the disclosure of the ’106 Publication that was “incorporated by reference”
`
`in the ’192 Application. DISH further argues that the ’026 patent relies on only
`
`new matter from U.S. Patent No. 7,361,336 (the “’336 Patent”) as the only support
`
`for “access[ing] of the electronic program guide … through an Internet-connected
`
`digital device.” Pet. Reply, 2-3; EX1053, ¶¶16-19. At ¶18, Dr. Russ states “BBiTV
`
`has itself acknowledged that the written description support for ‘Internet-connected
`
`digital device’ is this newly added matter in the ’336 patent.” But there was no
`
`such acknowledgement. A limitation can be supported in multiple portions of a
`
`specification, and identifying one portion does not prevent other portions from also
`
`providing support. Further, the limitation identified by Dr. Russ is not limited to
`
`“ICDD,” but is a longer limitation that also refers to other terms like “electronic
`
`program guide.” The ’192 Application does not expressly use the term “electronic
`
`program guide,” so it was natural for BBiTV to point to a portion of the
`
`specification that does.
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`DISH ignores the plain language of the ’192 Application and the ’106
`
`Publication, which as Dr. Shamos explains, includes a detailed description of the
`
`Navic N-Band system. The N-Band system includes set-top boxes (STBs) and
`
`other Internet-connected terminals. This confirms the STBs are themselves
`
`“Internet-connected terminals” and provides support for ICDDs in the claims of the
`
`’026 patent. EX2035, ¶¶38-40, preambles of claims 1, 8, 9. The ’106 Publication
`
`emphasizes the importance of an Internet-connected STB as a part of a “platform
`
`of choice for widespread delivery of a suite of intelligent content management and
`
`distribution services.” Id., ¶38; EX2069, ¶6.
`
`DISH misinterprets what BBiTV contends satisfies an ICDD. BBiTV does
`
`not contend that an ICDD is an otherwise non-Internet connected device that is
`
`merely capable of receiving data that was previously transmitted over the Internet.
`
`Pet. Reply, 3-4; EX1053 ¶¶20-25. Any device that meets the parties’ agreed
`
`construction of an ICDD is an ICDD. An STB that is not configured to send or
`
`receive information via the Internet is not an ICDD. However, an STB that is so
`
`configured is an ICDD whether or not it is actually connected to the Internet. But
`
`there is a separate issue of whether the ICDD needs to receive video content over
`
`the Internet. It does not. The preamble of claim 1 only requires that the ICDD
`
`receive video content “via the Internet.” “Via” does not connote a direct
`
`connection and thus the video content may be transferred to the WBCMS over the
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`Internet and then to the VOD delivery system and ICDD over a non-Internet
`
`connection.
`
`DISH argues “[t]he ’192 application’s incorporation by reference is vague
`
`and, at best, is only effective as to the ’106 Publication’s ‘detailed description of
`
`the N-Band system.’” Pet. Reply, 6. DISH misapplies the law in arguing that the
`
`’192 Application does not properly incorporate the ’106 Publication. The Federal
`
`Circuit is clear that the standard is whether a POSITA would understand the
`
`application as describing with sufficient particularity the material to be
`
`incorporated. Harari v. Lee, 656 F.3d 1331, 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As shown
`
`above, the ’192 Application describes the material to be incorporated with
`
`sufficient particularity, and describes the reasons for the incorporation, giving
`
`examples of how the ’106 Publication describes a VOD delivery platform
`
`(including sub-elements) and advanced digital set-top boxes. EX2062, ¶¶3-4, 21;
`
`EX2069, ¶¶5-6; EX2035, ¶38; EX2036, ¶12.
`
`DISH argues that “the passages [Dr.] Shamos points to in the ’106
`
`Publication refer to Internet-connected set-top boxes—they do not show that Mr.
`
`Diaz possessed the idea of using such a device in the manner claimed in the ’026
`
`patent.” Pet. Reply, 7. But the ’106 Publication discloses the use of Internet-
`
`connected set-top boxes in the type of “advanced VOD delivery platform” on
`
`which the claimed invention operates, e.g., the Navic N-band system. EX2062,
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`¶¶3-4, 21. The ’192 Application, including the ’106 Publication, describes “the
`
`subject matter … in terms that establish that [the inventor] was in possession of the
`
`later-claimed invention, including all of the elements and limitations . . . .” Hyatt v.
`
`Boone, 146 F.3d 1348, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 1998). In a number of paragraphs in its
`
`Reply, DISH complains that relevant passages are found in the background
`
`sections. First, there is no requirement that supporting material may not be in a
`
`background section. The ’192 Application incorporating the ’106 Publication
`
`shows that the inventor was purposefully describing a system which would be
`
`compatible with a system like the Navic system, with Internet connectivity of a
`
`STB as part of that system. Furthermore, the ’192 Application specifically
`
`references the incorporated Navic N-Band technology in paragraph 21 of the
`
`detailed description when describing the invention’s VOD Application Server.
`
`EX2062, ¶21 (“An example of such a VOD Application Server is the Navic N-
`
`Band(TM) server as previously described”) (emphasis added). Dr. Russ also
`
`argues that the STBs in the ’106 Publication are connected via a “conventional
`
`cable television network,” and not connected to the Internet, yet even the
`
`paragraphs he cites describe the Internet connectivity: “The content delivery
`
`system may be any type of Cable Television (CATV) network system … even
`
`digital video content distribution systems based on Digital Subscriber Line (DSL)
`
`or broadband wireless technologies.” EX1053, ¶37 (citing EX2069, ¶22).
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`DISH’s citations to Flash-Control, LLC v. Intel Corp., No. 2020-2141, 2021
`
`U.S. App. LEXIS 20790, at *7-8 (Fed. Cir. July 14, 2021), and Modine Mfg. Co. v.
`
`U.S. Int'l Trade Comm’n, 75 F.3d 1545, 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1996) are inapposite. In
`
`Flash-Control, the patentee tried to combine two different embodiments which had
`
`no connection, and the patentee did not explain how the embodiments could be
`
`combined by a POSITA. Flash-Control, LLC v. Intel Corp., No. 1:19-cv-01107-
`
`ADA, 2020 WL 4561591 at *8 (W.D. Tex. July 21, 2020). Unlike Flash-Control’s
`
`amalgam of disclosures, the disclosures in the ’192 Application directly involve
`
`the same system related to the uploading, managing, and delivery of VOD content.
`
`The only question is whether the delivery of content may be over the Internet, and
`
`such delivery is directly contemplated and disclosed by both the ’192 Application
`
`and the ’106 Publication.
`
`DISH cites Modine for the proposition that BBiTV cannot rely on the ’106
`
`Publication because it is not BBiTV’s own invention. But Modine simply stands
`
`for the proposition that an incorporated reference cannot override the disclosure
`
`within a patent. Modine, 75 F.3d at 1553. Modine does not change the rule that an
`
`incorporated reference is treated as if “the material is effectively part of the host
`
`document as if it were explicitly contained therein.” Cook Biotech Inc. v. Acell,
`
`Inc., 460 F.3d 1365, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2006). BBiTV’s incorporation of the ’106
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`Publication shows the type of system that BBiTV’s invention was created to work
`
`with.
`
`DISH’s argument that the ’192 Application did not reduce an entire genus to
`
`practice is a red herring and incorrect. Pet. Reply, 8; EX1053, ¶¶39-40. This case
`
`involves claims with different scopes (compare claims 1-9 with claims 11-14), not
`
`genus/species claiming. EX2035, ¶38. Genus/species claiming is useful for
`
`chemical patents due to the “unpredictability in performance of certain species or
`
`subcombinations.” Application of Smythe, 480 F.2d 1376, 1383 (C.C.P.A. 1973)
`
`(footnote omitted). Here, there is no unpredictability regarding the claimed ICDD.
`
`And, regardless, the ’106 Publication discloses a range of Internet-connected
`
`digital device, such as “Internet appliances,” “digital set-top boxes,” “other
`
`Internet-connected terminals,” and even provides specific technologies, such as
`
`Navic N-Band.
`
`BBiTV acknowledges that the ’192 Application did not explicitly disclose
`
`devices like phones (claim 11), which in 2004, did not have bandwidth capabilities
`
`similar to STBs. But the ’192 Application did provide support for Internet-
`
`connected STBs, so there is support for ICDDs as claimed in claims 1, 8, and 9 of
`
`the ’026 patent. EX2035, ¶¶38-39. “Different claims of such an application may
`
`therefore receive different effective filing dates.” Augustine Med., Inc. v. Gaymar
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`PUBLIC
`
`

`

`Case IPR2020-01267
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`Indus., Inc., 181 F.3d 1291, 1302 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The fact that additional types of
`
`ICDDs were disclosed later does not alter this.
`
`The only requirement to comply with written description under section 112,
`
`¶ 1 is tha