IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`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
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026
`Issue Date: July 17, 2018
`
`Title: SYSTEM FOR ADDRESSING ON-DEMAND TV PROGRAM
`CONTENT ON TV SERVICES PLATFORM OF A DIGITAL TV
`SERVICES PROVIDER
`
`Case No. IPR2020-01267
`
`
`PETITION FOR REVIEW OF
`U.S. PATENT 10,028,026
`CHALLENGING CLAIMS 1-16
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 312 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`
` 4146-5037-3924
`
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`
`V.
`
`Page
`TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................... i
`Petitioner’s Exhibit List ......................................................................................... vii
`I.
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES ............................................................................ 4
`A.
`Real Party in Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)) .................................... 4
`B.
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)) ............................................. 4
`C.
`Counsel, Service and Fee Information ................................................. 5
`III. REQUIREMENTS UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ........................................... 6
`A. Grounds for Standing ........................................................................... 6
`B.
`Identification of Challenged Claims and Statement of Precise
`Relief Requested ................................................................................... 6
`IV. DISCRETIONARY DENIAL UNDER §§ 314(A) OR 325(D) IS
`INAPPROPRIATE HERE .............................................................................. 7
`THE ’026 PATENT ...................................................................................... 10
`A.
`Summary of the ’026 Patent ............................................................... 10
`B.
`Prosecution History of the ’026 Patent .............................................. 13
`VI. STATE OF THE ART .................................................................................. 14
`A.
`The Priority Date of the ’026 Patent .................................................. 14
`B.
`The Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ............................................... 16
`VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................... 17
`A.
`“Web-based content management system” ........................................ 17
`B.
`“Hierarchically-arranged category information associated with
`the respective title.” ............................................................................ 18
`“Internet Protocol TV (IPTV) system” .............................................. 18
`C.
`D. Other Terms ........................................................................................ 19
`VIII. GROUND 1: CLAIMS 1-16 ARE OBVIOUS IN VIEW OF
`GONDER, SON AND/OR KELTS .............................................................. 19
`A.
`Summary ............................................................................................ 19
`-i-
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`B. Overview of Gonder ........................................................................... 20
`C. Overview of Son ................................................................................. 28
`D. Overview of Kelts .............................................................................. 31
`E.
`Detailed Claim Mapping .................................................................... 35
`1.
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 35
`[1.preamble] 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, ............................................................... 35
`[1.a] 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 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; ................................. 38
`[1.b] wherein the templatized video-on-demand display
`has been generated in a plurality of layers,
`comprising: .................................................................... 43
`(a) a first layer comprising a background screen to
`provide at least one of a basic color, logo, or
`graphical theme to display; ............................................ 43
`
`-ii-
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`(b) a second layer comprising a particular display
`template from the plurality of different display
`templates layered on the background screen,
`wherein the particular display template comprises
`one or more reserved areas that are reserved for
`displaying content provided by a different layer of
`the plurality of layers; and ............................................. 46
`(c) a third layer comprising reserved area content
`generated using the received video content, the
`associated metadata, and an associated plurality of
`images to be displayed in the one or more reserved
`areas in the particular display template as at least
`one of text, an image, a navigation link, and a
`button; ............................................................................ 48
`[1.c] wherein the navigating through titles in a drill-down
`manner comprises navigating from a first level of
`the hierarchical structure of a video-on-demand
`content menu to a second level of the hierarchical
`structure to locate the particular one of the titles,
`and .................................................................................. 54
`[1.d] wherein a first template of the plurality of different
`display templates is used as the particular display
`template for the templatized display for displaying
`the first level of the hierarchical structure and
`wherein a second template of the plurality of
`different display templates is used as the particular
`display template for the templatized display for
`displaying the second level of the hierarchical
`structure, ........................................................................ 55
`
`-iii-
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`[1.e] wherein the received video content was uploaded to
`a Web-based content management system by a
`content provider device associated with the video
`content provider via the Internet in a digital video
`format, along with associated metadata including
`title information and category information, and
`along with the associated plurality of images
`designated by the video content provider, the
`associated metadata specifying a respective
`hierarchical location of a respective title of the
`video content within the electronic program guide
`to be displayed on the Internet-connected digital
`device using the respective hierarchically-arranged
`category information associated with the
`respective title, ............................................................... 55
`[1.f] wherein at least one of the uploaded associated
`plurality of images designated by the video content
`provider is displayed with the associated respective
`title in the templatized video-on-demand display. ........ 57
`
`-iv-
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`Claim 2 ..................................................................................... 57
`2.
`Claim 3 ..................................................................................... 58
`3.
`Claim 4 ..................................................................................... 58
`4.
`Claim 5 ..................................................................................... 60
`5.
`Claim 6 ..................................................................................... 60
`6.
`Claim 7 ..................................................................................... 62
`7.
`Claim 8 ..................................................................................... 63
`8.
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 63
`9.
`10. Claim 10 ................................................................................... 64
`11. Claim 11 ................................................................................... 65
`12. Claim 12 ................................................................................... 65
`13. Claim 13 ................................................................................... 66
`14. Claim 14 ................................................................................... 66
`15. Claim 15 ................................................................................... 67
`16. Claim 16 ................................................................................... 67
`F. Motivation to Combine ...................................................................... 68
`G.
`Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness ................................ 75
`IX. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 75
`
`
`-v-
`
`

`

`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`
` Page(s)
`
`Cases
`Broadband iTV, Inc. v. Hawaiian Telcom, Inc.,
`136 F. Supp. 3d 1228 (D. Haw. 2015) .................................................................. 5
`DivX, LLC v. Netflix, Inc., et al.,
`19-cv-1602-PSG (DFMx) (C.D. Cal. May 11, 2020) ........................................... 8
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 101 .......................................................................................................... 5
`35 U.S.C. § 102(a) ................................................................................................... 20
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ................................................................................. 20, 22, 28, 31
`35 U.S.C. § 102(e) ............................................................................................. 20, 28
`35 U.S.C. § 315(b) ..................................................................................................... 4
`35 U.S.C. § 120 ........................................................................................................ 16
`
`-vi-
`
`

`

`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`
`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`1011
`1012
`1013
`1014
`1015
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026 (“’026 patent”)
`Declaration of Dr. Samuel Russ
`Intentionally omitted
`Curriculum Vitae for Dr. Samuel Russ
`U.S. Patent No. 8,434,118 (“Gonder”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,159,233 (“Son”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2001/0030667 (“Kelts”)
`Intentionally omitted
`Intentionally omitted
`Intentionally omitted
`CableLabs Video-On-Demand Content Specification Version 1.1
`Declaration of Christie Poland
`U.S. Patent No. 7,631,336 (“’336 patent”)
`Intentionally omitted
`Scheduling Order, Broadband iTV, Inc v. DISH Network, L.L.C., Case
`No. 6:19-cv-716-ADA (W.D. Tex. Apr. 10, 2020), ECF No. 34
`Civil Minutes-General, DivX, LLC v. Netflix, Inc., et al., 19-cv-1602-
`1016
`PSG (DFMx) (C.D. Cal. May 11, 2020)
`1017
`U.S. Patent No. 7,590,997 (“’997 patent”)
`1018
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026 (“’026 File History”)
`Claim Construction Order, Broadband iTV, Inc. v. Hawaiian Telcom,
`1019
`Inc., et al., 14-00169 ACK-RLP (D. Haw. June 24, 2015)
`1020
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0138619 (“Ramaley”)
`1021 Western District of Texas Order RE: COVID-19 dated May 8, 2020
`1022
`Unified Patent’s Q1 2020 Patent Dispute Report (March 31, 2020)
`1023
`Judge Alan D. Albright Patent Statistics
`Excerpt from File History for related U.S. Patent Application No.
`1024
`12/632,745
`1025
`Family Chart for the ’997 patent
`Broadband iTV, Inc.’s Preliminary Infringement Contentions and
`1026
`Identification of Priority Dates cover pleading dated April 30, 2020
`Broadband iTV, Inc.’s Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026 (Ex.
`1) dated April 30, 2020
`Highlighted Claim 1 for ‘026 Patent
`Intentionally omitted
`
`1027
`1028
`1029
`
`-vii-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`1030
`
`1031
`
`Description
`Comcast’s 2004 Annual Report – Excerpts
`http://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReportArchive/c/NAS
`DAQ_CMCSA_2004.pdf
`Time Warner, Inc.’s Form 10-K for the year 2003 – Excerpts
`http://getfilings.com/o0000950144-04-002438.html
`AT&T U-Verse Wikipedia page
`1032
`https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_U-verse.
`1033 Western District of Texas Order RE: COVID-19 dated June 18, 2020
`1034 Western District of Texas Order RE: COVID-19 dated July 2, 2020
`Minute Entry, MV3 Partners LLC v. Roku, Inc., No. 6:18-cv-00308-ADA
`1035
`(W.D. Tex., Jun. 15, 2020), ECF 293
`1036
`Intentionally omitted
`1037
`Intentionally omitted
`Scientific-Atlanta Launches Explorer 4200 Set-Top,
`https://www.tvtechnology.com/equipment/scientificatlanta-launches-
`explorer-4200-settop.
`Samsung gains first OpenCable Certification on two-way digital
`television, https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/samsung-gains-first-
`opencable-certification-on-twoway-digital-television
`The Razor V3 was launched 14 years ago: Here’s why it still has a place
`in our hearts, https://www.androidauthority.com/motorola-razr-v3-
`888664/
`CableLabs OpenCable - www.opencable website Way Back Machine
`capture,
`https://web.archive.org/web/20060326111508/http://www.opencable.co
`m/ocap/ocap.html
`Google pays the price to capture online video zeitgeist, Way Back
`Machine capture,
`https://web.archive.org/web/20070901031352/http://www.eurekastreet.c
`om.au/article.aspx?aeid=1837
`Mpeg-2 Wikipedia page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-2
`Sony’s PS3 makes U.S. debut to long lines, short supplies,
`https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/gaming/2006-11-17-ps3-
`debut_x.htm
`The Federal Circuit Bar Association Model Patent Jury Instructions, last
`edited May 2020
`
`1043
`
`1038
`
`1039
`
`1040
`
`1041
`
`1042
`
`1044
`
`1045
`
`-viii-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`
`Exhibit
`
`1046
`1047
`1048
`
`
`
`Description
`CableLabs Specifications Library,
`https://www.cablelabs.com/specifications
`Merriam-Webster’s definition of “effect”
`Document Details from CableLabs website re CableLabs Video-On-
`Demand Content Specification Version 1.1
`
`-ix-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Petitioner DISH Network L.L.C. (“Petitioner”) requests inter partes review
`
`of claims 1-16 (“the Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 10,028,026 (“’026
`
`patent”), attached as Ex. 1001. The ’026 patent is owned by Broadband iTV, Inc.
`
`(“Patent Owner”).
`
`The ’026 patent is directed to a purported incremental improvement to video-
`
`on-demand (“VOD”) systems. The patent concedes that VOD systems were well-
`
`known and in existence before its filing. The ’026 patent attempts to improve on
`
`these known systems in two ways. First, the claims includes a template-based
`
`hierarchically-arranged user interface or electronic program guide (“EPG”) that
`
`organizes available videos by category and subcategory. According to the ’026
`
`patent, this makes it easier for subscribers to locate a video of interest. Second, the
`
`claims include a web-based upload system. According to the ’026 patent, this allows
`
`many different individual content providers to upload content—like movies,
`
`television programs, advertisements, and the like—and associated metadata for
`
`delivery to subscribers. The claims of the ’026 patent further require that the video
`
`content and hierarchical electronic program guide (“EPG”) be provided via the
`
`Internet to an Internet-connected digital device.
`
`As of the ’026 patent’s filing date, video-on-demand systems—including
`
`systems possessing the very same “improved” features referenced in the ’026
`
`-1-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`patent—were well known. Indeed, during its prosecution, all of the claim limitations
`
`reciting these alleged improvements were found in the prior art. The ’026 patent
`
`was only allowed after the claims were amended to include limitations that required
`
`additional conventional concepts: (1) navigating through levels of the hierarchical
`
`menu in a “drill-down” manner and (2) using different templates for different levels
`
`of the hierarchical menu. Neither of these additions was even purported to be novel
`
`in the patent’s specification, and both were likewise well-known and obvious in view
`
`of the prior art.
`
`This petition discusses three exemplary references demonstrating this: U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,434,118 to Gonder et al (Ex. 1005, “Gonder”), U.S. Patent No.
`
`7,159,233 to Son et al. (Ex. 1006, “Son”), and U.S. Patent Application Publication
`
`No. 2001/0030667 to Kelts (Ex. 1007, “Kelts”).
`
`Like the ’026 patent, Gonder relates to a system that makes VOD content
`
`available to end-users. Users access this content through a device running software
`
`that displays a template-based hierarchical menu. Gonder’s menu employs the same
`
`categorically-arranged hierarchical “drill-down” structure as the menu of the ’026
`
`patent, and further shows different templates used at different levels of the menu.
`
`Gonder also teaches that its menu allows users to easily find desired content.
`
`Further, Gonder teaches that its menu uses industry standard metadata provided by
`
`content providers.
`
`-2-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`While Gonder does not teach that content providers upload video content and
`
`metadata using a web-based content management system, this was well-known when
`
`the ’026 patent was filed. Son provides an example. Like both the ’026 patent and
`
`Gonder, Son relates to a method and system for making video—including video-on-
`
`demand—available to end users. Son explains that such a system should employ a
`
`web-based upload system. Using this type of upload system allows many different
`
`individual content providers to upload content to the system over the Internet. It also
`
`allows the content to be converted into a format that allows a single central server to
`
`distribute the content to many different types of users located on different types of
`
`networks.
`
`Gonder explains that its menu is generated using software running on a
`
`generic device, but does not specifically teach the numerous types of Internet-
`
`connected digital devices recited in the dependent claims. As of the filing of the
`
`’026 patent, however, it was well known that VOD content could be accessed via
`
`applications running on a variety of potential devices. Kelts, for instance, teaches a
`
`web-application that, like Gonder’s system, presents hierarchical menus of
`
`multimedia content. This allows VOD content to be made available through
`
`interactive mobile application on any web-enabled device. Given the proliferation
`
`of mobile devices at the time the ’026 patent was filed, one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art would have considered it highly obvious to apply Kelts’s teaching to Gonder.
`
`-3-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`Further, because Kelts anticipates that the user may use Kelts’ service from many
`
`different devices, Kelts also teaches features helpful in that context – such as
`
`allowing a user to login and/or save “favorites.”
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES
`A. Real Party in Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1))
`Petitioner DISH Network, L.L.C. and DISH Network Corporation, a publicly
`
`traded corporation and indirectly holds DISH Network, L.L.C., are the real parties-
`
`in-interest.
`
`B. Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2))
`The ’026 patent is asserted against Petitioner in a lawsuit brought by Patent
`
`Owner, Broadband iTV, Inc v. DISH Network, L.L.C., Case No. 6:19-cv-716-ADA
`
`(W.D. Tex.). Petitioner was served with the Complaint for that matter on December
`
`19, 2019 and this petition is therefore timely under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b).
`
`The ’026 patent is also being asserted by Patent Owner in Broadband iTV,
`
`Inc. v. AT&T Services, Inc., et al., Case No. 6:19-cv-712-ADA (W.D. Tex.) and
`
`Broadband iTV, Inc. v. DirectTV, LLC, Case No. 6:19-cv-714-ADA (W.D. Tex.).
`
`The ’026 patent has not been subject to any inter partes review or
`
`reexamination. Petitioner is separately filing petitions for inter partes review against
`
`U.S. Patent Nos. 10,506,269, 9,998,791 and 9,648,388. These patents are all
`
`members of the same family. Petitioner is also concurrently filing a second IPR
`
`petition against the ’026 patent. In light of Petitioner’s second petition challenging
`
`-4-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`the ’026 patent, Petitioner has concurrently filed a statement with the Board
`
`explaining the need for separately filed petitions.
`
`The ’026 patent is related to U.S. Patent No. 7,631,336 (“’336 patent”) and
`
`shares the same specification. Ex. 1013. The ’336 patent was the subject of a prior
`
`petition for inter partes review (IPR2014-01222) and a prior petition for covered
`
`business method review (CBM2014-00189). Institution was denied for both
`
`petitions. Petitioner had no involvement in either prior petition. The ’336 patent
`
`was held invalid in district court litigation for lack of patentable subject matter under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 101. Broadband iTV, Inc. v. Hawaiian Telcom, Inc., 136 F. Supp. 3d
`
`1228 (D. Haw. 2015).
`
`C. Counsel, Service and Fee Information
`Petitioner designates the following counsel:
`
`Lead Counsel
`Alyssa Caridis
`Registration No. 57,545
`(A8CPTABDocket@orrick.com)
`
`Postal & Hand-Delivery Address:
`Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
`777 South Figueroa Street, Suite 3200
`Los Angeles, CA 90017-5855
`T: 213-629-2020; F: 213-612-2499
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`K. Patrick Herman
`Registration No. 75,018
`(P52PTABDocket@orrick.com)
`
`Postal & Hand-Delivery Address:
`Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
`51 West 52nd Street
`New York, NY 10019
`T: 212-506-5000; F: 212-506-5151
`
`Petitioner consents to service by electronic mail at the following addresses:
`
`
`
`A8CPTABDocket@orrick.com, P52PTABDocket@orrick.com. Petitioner’s Power
`
`of Attorney is attached.
`
`-5-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`The USPTO is authorized to charge the filing fee and any other fees incurred
`
`by Petitioner to the deposit account of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP: 15-0665.
`
`III. REQUIREMENTS UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`A. Grounds for Standing
`Petitioner certifies that the Challenged Patent is available for inter partes
`
`review and that neither the Petitioner, nor any real party-in-interest or any privy of
`
`Petitioner is barred or estopped from requesting this review. 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a).
`
`B.
`
`Identification of Challenged Claims and Statement of Precise
`Relief Requested
`Petitioner requests IPR of claims 1-16. This petition discusses claim
`
`construction, explains why the claims are unpatentable, provides details regarding
`
`where the various claim limitations are found in the prior art, and is supported by the
`
`accompanying Declaration of Dr. Samuel Russ (Ex. 1002, “Russ”), a leading expert
`
`in computer engineering applications in the Video-On-Demand industry.
`
`Petitioner relies on the following references: (1) Gonder (Ex. 1005), (2) Son
`
`(Ex. 1006), and (3) Kelts (Ex. 1007).
`
`Petitioner challenges the claims on the following ground:
`
`Ground 1: Claims 1-16 are obvious over the combination of Gonder, Son,
`
`and/or Kelts, when considered in view of the knowledge of a person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art (“POSITA”).
`
`-6-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`IV. DISCRETIONARY DENIAL UNDER §§ 314(A) OR 325(D) IS
`INAPPROPRIATE HERE
`Petitioner has established a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits and
`
`all other requirements for IPR have been met. The Board should institute IPR.
`
`The parallel district court proceeding involving the ’026 patent does not weigh
`
`against institution. As of the filing of this petition, no trial has been formally
`
`scheduled. The Scheduling Order entered in that proceeding indicates that trial may
`
`be set for some not yet determined date “52 weeks after [the] Markman hearing (or
`
`as soon as practicable).” See Ex. 1015. But the Court does not plan to schedule
`
`trial until “the conclusion of the Markman Hearing.” Id. The Markman hearing is
`
`currently scheduled for November 13, 2020 and the schedule includes numerous
`
`other intermediary deadlines extending to October 1, 2021, suggesting a trial at least
`
`52 weeks after Markman is contemplated. Even assuming this hearing is not
`
`delayed, the earliest date on which trial could occur is November 18, 2021.
`
`It is, however, highly likely that trial will occur much later. Over the last year,
`
`the number of patent cases initiated in the Western District of Texas has ballooned
`
`from 257 to 632 cases, and Judge Albright’s patent case load grew from 248 cases
`
`in 2019 to 400 new cases so far in 2020. See Ex. 1022, Ex. 1023. At the same time,
`
`patent trials have not been moving forward even while the number of filings has
`
`grown. Indeed, no patent trials have been conducted in the Western District this year
`
`and none of Judge Albright’s patent cases has gone to trial.
`
`-7-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`Further, the current pandemic continues to delay district court trials. On May
`
`8, 2020, the Western District of Texas issued an order continuing all civil trials
`
`scheduled between now through June 30, 2020. See Ex. 1021. A second order
`
`pushed out trials until July 31, 2020, and a more recent order pushed them out again
`
`until August 31, 2020. Exs. 1033 and 1034. On June 15, 2020 Judge Albright
`
`pushed an already-continued trial by yet another month, stating that he could not
`
`“guarantee that the pandemic will allow the trial to go forward then.” Ex. 1035. All
`
`of these trials will need to be rescheduled, causing cascading delays and likely
`
`continuances of more recently filed cases, including the parallel district court
`
`proceeding at issue here. See Civil Minutes-General, DivX, LLC v. Netflix, Inc., et
`
`al., 19-cv-1602-PSG (DFMx) (C.D. Cal. May 11, 2020) at *5 (“‘the Court, parties,
`
`and counsel face unprecedented challenges from COVID-19’ … It is likely that if
`
`these cases were to proceed on their current schedule, hearings and trial would be
`
`subject to delays, particularly because criminal matters will take priority over these
`
`patent infringement actions.”). Ex. 1016.
`
`In sum, the growing volume of patent cases pending before Judge Albright,
`
`the fact that none of those patent cases has been tried, and the delays the Federal
`
`Court system is experiencing, make it highly likely that the parallel district court
`
`proceeding will reach trial well after the projected final written decision date for this
`
`petition.
`
`-8-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`The district court proceeding is also still in its early stages. Petitioner was not
`
`served with Patent Owner’s infringement contentions and the identification of
`
`asserted claims until April 30, 2020, and diligently prepared and filed this petition
`
`promptly thereafter. Exs. 1026 and 1027. Petitioner did not wait until near the end
`
`of the statutorily provided one-year period for filing IPRs. Instead, it filed only
`
`seven months after being served with a complaint. No preliminary injunction motion
`
`has been filed, no claim construction has occurred, a motion to transfer is pending,
`
`and there has been no meaningful fact or expert discovery. Further, this petition also
`
`challenges claim 10, a claim not asserted in the district court litigation, which weighs
`
`in favor of institution.
`
`The arguments set forth here are also different from those addressed both by
`
`the Patent Office during prosecution and by the Board in proceedings involving
`
`related patents. None of the relied-upon references has been presented in any PTAB
`
`proceedings against any related patents. Although Gonder and CableLabs are listed
`
`on the face of the ’026 patent, they were not substantively involved in prosecution.
`
`CableLabs was buried in a set of 26 simultaneously filed IDS forms that collectively
`
`listed 396 references. Ex. 1018 at 67-658. Gonder was briefly mentioned, but its
`
`substance was never discussed or analyzed during prosecution. Ex. 1018 at 1067-
`
`68. Neither Gonder nor CableLabs ever formed the basis for any rejection. Thus,
`
`neither the Office nor the Board has ever had an opportunity to assess the
`
`-9-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`patentability of the ’026 patent’s claim over combinations that include Gonder, Son,
`
`and/or Kelts. These references explicitly disclose the ’026 patent’s purportedly
`
`“inventive” features: hierarchical menus generated from metadata provided by the
`
`content provider, web-based uploading, implementation via an Internet-connected
`
`digital device, and drill-down navigation through pages using differing templates.
`
`The Board should, therefore, grant this petition.
`
`V. THE ’026 PATENT
`Summary of the ’026 Patent
`A.
`The ’026 patent issued July 17, 2018 and names Milton Diaz Perez as its sole
`
`inventor. Ex. 1001 at (45), (72). The ’026 patent has a priority date of March 12,
`
`2007, based on the filing of a continuation-in-part application that issued as the ’336
`
`patent (Ex. 1013). Ex. 1001 at (60).
`
`The ’026 patent relates to a system for making video content available through
`
`a VOD server to subscribers of, for example, a cable television service. As the ’026
`
`patent explains, traditional cable TV service was provided using a set-top box that
`
`was “individually addressable from the CATV head end.” Ex. 1001, 2:3-12.
`
`According to the ’026 patent, delivery of content through VOD systems was
`
`expected to “increase dramatically,” as a result of commercial publishers and “self-
`
`publishers or so called ‘citizen’ content publishers” providing additional content. Id.
`
`2:66-3:8. In this context, the ’026 patent’s system seeks to add to existing VOD
`
`-10-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.S. Patent 10,028,026
`systems in two ways. First, the ’026 patent’s system purportedly permits content
`
`publishers to “transmit their programs to the home TV.” Id. 3:8-10. Second, it
`
`allows viewers to find desired content among the large amount of available content.
`
`Id. 3:8-12.
`
`To accomplish this, the ’026 patent uses conventional and well-known
`
`methods. For example, the ’026 patent employs a web-based content management
`
`server to allow content publishers to transmit their programs to the home TV. Id.
`
`3:54-58. But the ’026 patent acknowledges that existing websites like YouTube.com
`
`and Brightcove.com similarly allowed users to upload video content to web servers
`
`over the Internet. Id. 16:48-51.
`
`To allow the content to be presented in an easily browsable manner, the ’026
`
`patent requires the content publisher to provide certain metadata concerning the
`
`video content at the time of upload, such as its title and the categories and
`
`subcategories to which it belongs. Id. 3:58-66. This metadata is used to place the
`
`program title within the hierarchical structure of the EPG menu. Id. A user can
`
`navigate the categories and subcategories of the hierarchical EPG until they locate
`
`video content of interest. Id. 6:9-20.
`
`The ’026 patent refers to menu pages as “templatized display[s]” Id. 6:16-20.
`
`These templatized displays are generated in three layers, as shown in Figure 1C
`
`below.
`
`-11-
`
`

`

`IPR2020-01267, Petition
`U.