UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`___________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`___________
`
`ADOBE INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`SYNKLOUD TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`___________
`
`Case IPR2020-01301
`Patent No. 9,219,780
`___________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`II.
`III.
`
`Table of Contents ....................................................................................................... i
`List of Exhibits ....................................................................................................... vii
`Mandatory Notices Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8 ............................................................xi
`Real Party-in-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)) .............................................xi
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)) ......................................................xi
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)) ................................. xii
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)) ............................................. xii
`Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1
`Grounds for Standing ...................................................................................... 2
`The Challenged Patent .................................................................................... 2
`A.
`Effective Filing Date ............................................................................ 2
`B.
`Overview of the ’780 Patent ................................................................. 2
`C.
`Prosecution History .............................................................................. 4
`D.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ...................................................... 5
`IV. Construction of Terms in the Challenged Claims .......................................... 5
`A.
`“cached in a cache storage of the first wireless device” (claim
`9) ........................................................................................................... 5
`Overview of the Prior Art References ............................................................ 7
`A.
`Overview of Prust ................................................................................. 7
`B.
`Overview of Nomoto ............................................................................ 9
`C.
`Overview of Major ............................................................................. 10
`D.
`Overview of Kraft .............................................................................. 11
`E.
`Overview of McCown ........................................................................ 11
`The Challenged Claims Are Rendered Obvious by Prust as the
`Primary Prior Art Reference ......................................................................... 13
`A.
`Prust Alone or Combined with the Teachings of Major or Kraft
`Renders Claims 9 and 11-15 Obvious ................................................ 13
`1.
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 13
`
`V.
`
`VI.
`
`i
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`a.
`b.
`c.
`
`A server comprising ....................................................... 13
`a pool of a plurality of storage spaces, and ................... 13
`non-transitory computer-readable storage medium
`comprising program instructions which, being
`executed by the server, causes the server delivering
`storage service, the program instructions include… ..... 14
`program instructions for allocating exclusively, via
`the storage pool, a first one of the storage spaces to
`a user of a first wireless device ...................................... 15
`program instructions for establishing a
`communication link for the first wireless device
`remotely access to the first one of the storage
`spaces ............................................................................. 16
`program instructions for sending information of
`the first one of the storage spaces to the first
`wireless device for presenting the first one of the
`storage spaces to the user on the wireless device .......... 17
`program instructions for updating the first one of
`the storage spaces in response to the user from the
`first wireless device performing an operation for
`said remotely access to the first one of the storage
`spaces ............................................................................. 19
`wherein said access to the first one of the storage
`spaces comprises storing data therein or retrieving
`data therefrom ................................................................ 20
`the storing of the data including to download a file
`from a remote server into the first one of the
`storage spaces through utilizing download
`information for the file, including name of the file
`and internet protocol (“IP”) address of the remote
`server, cached in a cache storage of the first
`wireless device in response to the user from the
`first wireless device performing the operation for
`the downloading............................................................. 20
`Claim 11 ................................................................................... 27
`Claim 12 ................................................................................... 27
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`2.
`3.
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`B.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`4.
`5.
`6.
`7.
`
`Claim 13 ................................................................................... 28
`Claim 14 ................................................................................... 28
`Claim 15 ................................................................................... 29
`Motivation to Combine Prust with the Teachings of
`Major ........................................................................................ 30
`Motivation to Combine Prust with the Teachings of Kraft ..... 32
`8.
`Dependent Claim 10 Is Also Obvious ................................................ 33
`1.
`Claim 10 ................................................................................... 33
`2.
`Motivation to Combine with the Teachings of McCown ........ 36
`VII. The Challenged Claims Are Rendered Obvious by Nomoto as the
`Primary Prior Art Reference ......................................................................... 38
`A.
`Nomoto Alone or Combined with the Teachings of Major or
`Kraft Renders Claims 9 and 11-15 Obvious ...................................... 38
`1.
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 38
`a.
`A server comprising ....................................................... 38
`b.
`a pool of a plurality of storage spaces, and ................... 39
`c.
`non-transitory computer-readable storage medium
`comprising program instructions which, being
`executed by the server, causes the server delivering
`storage service, the program instructions include… ..... 40
`program instructions for allocating exclusively, via
`the storage pool, a first one of the storage spaces to
`a user of a first wireless device ...................................... 40
`program instructions for establishing a
`communication link for the first wireless device
`remotely access to the first one of the storage
`spaces ............................................................................. 41
`program instructions for sending information of
`the first one of the storage spaces to the first
`wireless device for presenting the first one of the
`storage spaces to the user on the wireless device .......... 42
`
`f.
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`program instructions for updating the first one of
`the storage spaces in response to the user from the
`first wireless device performing an operation for
`said remotely access to the first one of the storage
`spaces ............................................................................. 43
`wherein said access to the first one of the storage
`spaces comprises storing data therein or retrieving
`data therefrom ................................................................ 45
`the storing of the data including to download a file
`from a remote server into the first one of the
`storage spaces through utilizing download
`information for the file, including name of the file
`and internet protocol (“IP”) address of the remote
`server, cached in a cache storage of the first
`wireless device in response to the user from the
`first wireless device performing the operation for
`the downloading............................................................. 45
`Claim 11 ................................................................................... 51
`Claim 12 ................................................................................... 51
`Claim 13 ................................................................................... 52
`Claim 14 ................................................................................... 52
`Claim 15 ................................................................................... 52
`Motivation to Combine Nomoto with the Teachings of
`Major ........................................................................................ 53
`Motivation to Combine Nomoto with the Teachings of
`Kraft ......................................................................................... 54
`Dependent Claim 10 Is Also Obvious ................................................ 55
`1.
`Claim 10 ................................................................................... 55
`2.
`Motivation to Combine with the Teachings of McCown ........ 57
`VIII. Discretionary Denial Would Be Neither Appropriate nor Equitable ........... 59
`IX. Conclusion .................................................................................................... 68
`
`2.
`3.
`4.
`5.
`6.
`7.
`
`8.
`
`B.
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`FEDERAL CASES
`Abbot Vascular, Inc. v. FlexStent, LLC,
`IPR2019-00882, Paper 11 (PTAB Oct. 7, 2019) ................................................ 60
`
`Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc.,
`IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020) ................................. 60, 65, 68
`
`Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc.,
`IPR2020-00019, Paper 15 (PTAB May 13, 2020) ............................................. 61
`
`Apple Inc. v. Seven Networks, LLC,
`IPR2020-00156, Paper 10 (PTAB June 15, 2020) ....................................... 61, 65
`
`B/E Aerospace, Inc. v. C&D Zodiac, Inc.,
`2020 WL3478651 (Fed. Cir. June 26, 2020) ...............................................passim
`
`Bumble Trading Inc. v. Match Group, LLC,
`IPR2019-01000, Paper 10 (PTAB Nov. 6, 2019) ............................................... 62
`
`General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha,
`IPR2016-01357, Paper 19 (PTAB Sept. 6, 2017) ......................................... 59, 60
`
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
`550 U.S. 398 (2007) .....................................................................................passim
`
`NHK Spring Co. v. Intri-Plex Technologies, Inc.,
`IPR2018-00752, Paper 8 (PTAB Sept. 12, 2018) ......................................... 60, 65
`
`Oticon Medical AB v. Cochlear Ltd.,
`IPR2019-00975, Paper 15 (PTAB Oct. 16, 2019) .............................................. 65
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp.,
`415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ............................................................................ 5
`
`Precision Planting, LLC v. Deere & Co.,
`IPR2019-01048, Paper 17 (PTAB Dec. 4, 2019) ............................................... 62
`
`Sand Revolution II, LLC v. Continental Intermodal Group – Trucking LLC,
`IPR2019-01393, Paper 24 (PTAB June 16, 2020) ......................................passim
`
`v
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Unified Patents Inc. v. Fall Line Patents, LLC,
`IPR2019-00610, Paper 14 (PTAB Aug. 7, 2019) ............................................... 62
`
`Unified Patents, LLC v. SynKloud Technologies, LLC,
`IPR2019-01655, Paper 13 (PTAB Mar. 19, 2020) ............................................. 67
`
`FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102 .................................................................................................passim
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 .......................................................................................................... 1
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112 .......................................................................................................... 1
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ..................................................................................................... 2
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.106 ..................................................................................................... 2
`
`vi
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,219,780 (the “’780 Patent”)
`
`Prosecution history of U.S. Application No. 14/623,476, which led
`to the issuance of the ’780 Patent
`
`Declaration of Jon Weissman, Ph.D. Regarding U.S. Patent
`No. 9,219,780
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,735,623 (“Prust”)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication US2001/0028363 (“Nomoto”)
`
`PCT Publication WO 02/052785, PCT/CA01/01857 (“Major”)
`
`U.S. Patent 6,309,305 (“Kraft”)
`
`International Patent Application Publication WO 01/67233
`(“McCown”)
`
`RFC 1738: “Uniform Resource Locators (URL)”
`
`RFC 793: “Transmission Control Protocol, DARPA Internet
`Program, Protocol Specification”
`
`RFC 959: “File Transfer Protocol (FTP)”
`
`RFC 1945: “Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0”
`
`RFC 2518: “HTTP Extensions for Distributed Authoring –
`WEBDAV”
`
`“Disconnected Operation in the Coda File System,” James J. Kistler
`and M. Satyanarayanan, ACM Transactions on Computer Systems,
`Vol. 10, No. 1, February 1992
`
`“TranSquid: Transcoding and Caching Proxy for Heterogeneous E-
`Commerce Environments,” Maheshwari et al., Proceedings of the
`12th International Workshop on Research Issues in Data
`Engineering: Engineering e-Commerce/e-Business Systems (RIDE
`
`vii
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`’02), 2002
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`“Managing Update Conflicts in Bayou, a Weakly Connected
`Replicated Storage System,” Terry et al., SOSP ’95: 15th ACM
`Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Copper Mountain
`Colorado USA, December, 1995
`
`“A Mobility-Aware File System for Partially Connected Operation”
`by Dwyer et al., ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, January
`1997
`
`“Reducing File System Latency using a Predictive Approach” by
`Griffioen et al., USTC ’94: Proceedings of the USENIX Summer
`1994 Technical Conference on USENIX Summer 1994 Technical
`Conference - Volume 1, 1994
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,117,644
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,907,225
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2003/0167316
`(“Bramnick”)
`
`“Wireless Application Protocol Architecture Specification,”
`Wireless Application Protocol Forum, Ltd., (Apr. 30, 1998)
`
`“WebDAV: What It Is, What It Does, Why You Need It,”
`Hernández, et al., SIGUCCS ’03: Proceedings of the 31st annual
`ACM SIGUCCS Fall Conference, 2003
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2002/0067742
`Newton’s Telecom Dictionary, 15th Edition, Miller Freeman, Inc.,
`1999 (excerpts)
`
`Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary, Third Edition, Microsoft
`Press, 1997 (excerpts)
`
`The New Penguin Dictionary of Computing, Dick Pountain, 2001
`(excerpts)
`
`viii
`
`

`

`Exhibit
`
`1028
`
`1029
`
`1030
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1037
`
`1038
`
`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Description
`
`Agreed Scheduling Order in SynKloud Technologies LLC v. Adobe,
`Inc., Case No. 6:19-cv-00527-ADA (W.D. Tex.) dated January 22,
`2020
`
`Agreed Scheduling Order in SynKloud Technologies LLC v.
`Dropbox, Inc., Case No. 6:19-cv-00525-ADA (W.D. Tex.) dated
`January 22, 2020
`
`Agreed Scheduling Order in SynKloud Technologies LLC v.
`Dropbox, Inc., Case No. 6:19-cv-00526-ADA (W.D. Tex.) dated
`January 22, 2020
`
`Supplemental Order Regarding Court Operations Under the Exigent
`Circumstances Created by the COVID-19 Pandemic, United States
`District Court for the Western District of Texas dated May 8, 2020
`
`Supplemental Order Regarding Court Operations Under the Exigent
`Circumstances Created by the COVID-19 Pandemic, United States
`District Court for the Western District of Texas dated June 18, 2020
`
`Defendant Adobe Inc.’s Disclosure of Proposed Constructions,
`dated May 15, 2020
`
`Plaintiff SynKloud Technologies, LLC’s Revised Claim
`Construction Chart, dated June 12, 2020
`
`Summon in a Civil Action with Affidavit of Service in SynKloud
`Technologies LLC v. Adobe, Inc., Case No. 6:19-cv-00527-ADA
`(W.D. Tex.)
`
`Complaint for Patent Infringement filed in SynKloud Technologies,
`LLC v. HP, Inc., Case No. 1:19-cv-01360-UNA (D. Del.)
`
`Complaint for Patent Infringement filed in SynKloud Technologies,
`LLC v. BLU Products, Inc., Case No. 1:19-cv-00553-UNA (D. Del.)
`
`Complaint for Declaratory Judgment filed in Microsoft Corp. v.
`SynKloud Technologies, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-00007-UNA (D.
`Del.)
`
`ix
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Exhibit
`
`1039
`
`1040
`
`1041
`
`1042
`
`Description
`
`Microsoft Corporation’s Opposition to SynKloud’s Motion to
`Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), 12(h)(3), Lack of
`Standing and 12(b)(6)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,098,526 (the “’526 Patent”)
`
`Stipulation
`
`Declaration of Winston Liaw in Support of Petition for Inter Partes
`Review
`
`x
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8
`
`Real Party-in-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1))
`
`The real party-in-interest is petitioner Adobe Inc. (“Petitioner”). No
`
`unnamed entity is funding, controlling, or directing this petition or has the
`
`opportunity to control or direct this petition or Petitioner’s participation in any
`
`resulting inter partes review. Petitioner understands and believes that the ’780
`
`Patent is owned by SynKloud Technologies, LLC (“Patent Owner”).
`
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2))
`
`Petitioner is aware of the following pending district court matters involving
`
`the ’780 Patent: SynKloud Technologies, LLC v. Adobe Inc., Case No. 6:19-cv-
`
`00527 (W.D. Tex.); SynKloud Technologies, LLC v. Dropbox, Inc., Case No. 6:19-
`
`cv-00526 (W.D. Tex.); and Microsoft Corporation v. SynKloud Technologies,
`
`LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-00007 (D. Del.).
`
`Petitioner previously filed a petition for inter partes review challenging
`
`claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,015,254, which is related to and based on the same
`
`specification as the ’780 Patent: Adobe Inc. v. SynKloud Technologies, LLC, Case
`
`IPR2020-01235 (filed on July 3, 2020). Petitioner is also aware of the following
`
`matters pending before the Board involving U.S. Patent No, 10,015,254: Microsoft
`
`Corp. and HP Inc. v. SynKloud Technologies, LLC, Case IPR2020-01031;
`
`xi
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Microsoft Corp. and HP Inc. v. SynKloud Technologies, LLC, Case IPR2020-
`
`01032.
`
`Petitioner is also aware of the following matters pending before the Board
`
`involving U.S. Patent No. 9,098,526, which is related to and based on the same
`
`specification as the ’780 Patent: Unified Patents, Inc. v. SynKloud Technologies,
`
`LLC, Case IPR2019-01655 (in which review was instituted on March 19, 2020);
`
`Microsoft Corp. and HP Inc. v. SynKloud Technologies, LLC, Case IPR2020-
`
`00316 (in which review was instituted on June 29, 2020).
`
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3))
`
`Petitioner appoints James L. Day (Reg. No. 72,681) of Farella Braun +
`
`Martel LLP as lead counsel and appoints Winston Liaw (Reg. No. 78,766) and
`
`Daniel Callaway (Reg. No. 74,267) of Farella Braun + Martel LLP as back-up
`
`counsel.
`
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4))
`
`Service of any documents to lead and back-up counsel can be made via
`
`hand-delivery to Farella Braun + Martel LLP, 235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor,
`
`San Francisco, California, 94104. Petitioner consents to electronic service to the
`
`following email addresses: jday@fbm.com, dcallaway@fbm.com,
`
`wliaw@fbm.com, and calendar@fbm.com.
`
`xii
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Adobe Inc. (“Petitioner”) respectfully requests inter partes review of
`
`claims 9-15 of U.S. Patent No. 9,219,780 (the “’780 Patent”) (Ex. 1001), assigned
`
`to SynKloud Technologies, LLC (“Patent Owner”). The ’780 Patent is directed to
`
`a remote storage system for wireless devices, which was known in the art as
`
`evidenced by this petition and the supporting expert testimony of Jon Weissman,
`
`Ph.D (EX-1003). The challenged claims are unpatentable as obvious based on the
`
`following grounds:
`
`Ground
`
`Reference(s)
`
`Basis1
`
`Claim(s)
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`Prust (EX-1004)
`
`Prust and Major (EX-1006)
`
`Prust and Kraft (EX-1007)
`
`Prust and Major or Kraft further in
`light of McCown (EX-1008)
`
`Nomoto (EX-1005)
`
`Nomoto and Major
`
`Nomoto and Kraft
`
`Nomoto and Major or Kraft further
`in light of McCown
`
`Section 103
`
`Section 103
`
`Section 103
`
`Section 103
`
`Section 103
`
`Section 103
`
`Section 103
`
`Section 103
`
`9-15
`
`9-15
`
`9-15
`
`10
`
`9-15
`
`9-15
`
`9-15
`
`10
`
`1 Pre-AIA Sections 102, 103, and 112 apply.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`II. GROUNDS FOR STANDING
`Petitioner certifies that the ’780 Patent is available for inter partes review
`
`and Petitioner is not barred or estopped from requesting this review. 37 C.F.R.
`
`§42.104(a). This Petition is filed under 37 C.F.R. §42.106(a).
`
`III. THE CHALLENGED PATENT
`
`A.
`
`Effective Filing Date
`
`The ’780 Patent claims priority to an application filed on December 4, 2003.
`
`EX-1001 at cover. Thus, the effective filing date of the claims of the ’780 Patent is
`
`no earlier than December 4, 2003.
`
`In the related litigation, the Patent Owner has claimed that the priority date
`
`for the ’780 Patent is January 22, 2003, which would not impact the analysis here
`
`even if proved.
`
`B.
`
`Overview of the ’780 Patent
`
`The ’780 Patent is entitled “Method and System for Wireless Device Access
`
`to External Storage.” EX-1001 at cover. It describes storing data from a wireless
`
`device to a remote storage server (EX-1001 at 5:3-14) and retrieving data from the
`
`storage server to the wireless device (id. at 5:47-57). The ’780 Patent describes
`
`what it refers to as “Wireless out-band download,” the steps for which are
`
`illustrated in Figure 3. Id. at 5:15-46.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`’780 Patent Fig. 3
`
`First, “[t]he user of the wireless device (1) via a web-browser (8) access[es] to a
`
`remote web server site (15) to obtain information of the data for the downloading
`
`via the path (a)” in the figure. Id. at 5:22-24. For example, the browser of the
`
`wireless device can obtain “a web-page which contains the data name for the
`
`downloading and also contains [the] IP address of the remote web site.” Id. at
`
`5:25-26. Second, software modules “of the wireless device (1) obtain the
`
`downloading information for the data, which becomes available in the cached web-
`
`pages on the wireless device (1)” after accessing the website with the web-browser.
`
`Id. at 5:28-32. Third, the wireless device sends “the obtained downloading
`
`3
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`information to other service modules (7) of the storage server (3) via the path (b)”
`
`in the figure. Id. at 5:33-36. Fourth, “the other service module (7) of the storage
`
`server (3) sends a web download request to the web-site (15) via the path (c)” and
`
`then “receives the downloading data from the web server of the web-site (15).” Id.
`
`at 5:38-42. Finally, once the storage server receives “the downloading data stream,
`
`the other service modules (7) of the storage server (3) write the data into the
`
`assigned storage volume (11) on the server (3) for the wireless device (1).” Id. at
`
`5:43-46.
`
`The ’780 Patent contains 20 claims. The challenged claims are provided in
`
`the Claim Appendix.
`
`C.
`
`Prosecution History
`
`The ’780 Patent issued from U.S. Patent Application No. 14/623,476, which
`
`was filed February 16, 2015. EX-1002 at 1-34. The examiner rejected the
`
`application based on double patenting, which the applicant addressed with a
`
`terminal disclaimer. Id. at 83-84, 103-107. Additionally, the applicant made
`
`various amendments to the application claims several times. See e.g., Id. at 96-
`
`100, 130-136, 140-146, 193-199. The examiner ultimately allowed the claims
`
`without having cited or discussed any prior art. Id. at 170-174. The challenged
`
`claims would not have been allowed if the prior art presented in this petition had
`
`been considered.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`D.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) for the ’780 Patent would
`
`have an undergraduate degree (or equivalent) in electrical engineering, computer
`
`science, or a comparable subject and two years of professional work experience in
`
`a technical field with exposure to remote storage systems and wireless technologies
`
`and wireless devices, such as portable digital assistants (PDAs) and similar
`
`devices. EX-1003 ¶51. A higher level of education could substitute for less
`
`industry experience, and more industry experience could substitute for the specific
`
`level of education. Such a person would have been knowledgeable about digital
`
`memory structures in computers and wireless devices, techniques for remotely
`
`accessing and manipulating computer files and databases, and communications
`
`over computer networks including the Internet. Id.
`
`IV. CONSTRUCTION OF TERMS IN THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`Claims in an inter partes review are construed according to their plain and
`
`ordinary meaning as a POSITA would have understood them at the time of the
`
`invention based on the language of the claims, the patent specification, and the
`
`prosecution history of record. Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312-16
`
`(Fed. Cir. 2005).
`
`A.
`
`“cached in a cache storage of the first wireless device” (claim 9)
`
`The concept of “cache storage” would have been well-known to a POSITA.
`
`EX-1003 ¶¶64-67. In the context of both wired and wireless networked computer
`
`5
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`systems, it would be understood to refer to storage that is more readily accessible
`
`than the original source of information. EX-1003 ¶89; see also EX-1025 at 126
`
`(Newton’s Telecom Dictionary: “In the context of computer systems and
`
`networks, information is cached by placing it closer to the user or user application
`
`in order to make it more readily and speedily accessible, and transparently so.”)2;
`
`EX-1026 at 72 (dictionary defining “cache” as “[a] special memory subsystem in
`
`which frequently used data values are duplicated for quick access”); EX-1027 at
`
`60-61 (dictionary stating that a cache is “[a] small region of fast MEMORY…to
`
`hold copies of the most frequently or recently used data so that they may be
`
`accessed more quickly”).
`
`For example, prior to the ’780 Patent, web-browsers on networked
`
`computers and hand-held devices employed cache storage to store viewed
`
`webpages. EX-1003 ¶¶64-67; EX-1006 at 4:18-21; EX-1027 at 60-61. The
`
`specification refers to this type of web-browser cache when describing the
`
`“Wireless out-band download” process. The user accesses a webpage “to obtain
`
`information of the data for the downloading.” EX-1001 at 5:23-24. The
`
`“information of the data for the downloading” can contain “the data name for the
`
`downloading and also contains [the] IP address of the remote website.” Id. at 5:25-
`
`27. Software modules on the wireless device “obtain the downloading information
`
`2 All emphasis is added unless otherwise indicated.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`for the data, which becomes available in the cached web-pages on the wireless
`
`device (1) after the web-browser (8) access to the web site (15).” Id. at 5:28-31.
`
`The term “cache storage” therefore includes using a web-browser cache on the first
`
`wireless device.
`
`However, neither the claim language “cached in a cache storage” nor the
`
`specification limits the recited “cache storage” to a web-browser cache. EX-1001
`
`at 5:28-32, 7:28-35. Based on plain meaning, a POSITA would have understood
`
`the claim to refer to storing information in any type of cache storage. Therefore,
`
`the phrase “cached in a cache storage of the first wireless device” means “stored in
`
`a location on the wireless device that is more readily accessible than the original
`
`source of the information.” EX-1003 ¶91.
`
`V.
`
`OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART REFERENCES
`
`A.
`
`Overview of Prust
`
`Prust discloses “[a] data storage system…that provides seamless access to
`
`remote data storage areas via a global computer network.” EX-1004 at Abstract.3
`
`Figure 2 illustrates Prust’s “computing system in which a storage server provides
`
`seamless access to remote storage areas.” Id. at 1:61-63.
`
`3 Prust is prior art under Section 102(e) because it is a U.S. patent filed on
`
`February 9, 2000, and issued on May 11, 2004.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Prust Fig. 2
`
`“Client computers 205” are “communicatively coupled to remote storage network
`
`220 via storage servers 210 and global computer network 215 such as the Internet.”
`
`Id. at 4:34-37. The “client computers” can be a “hand-held PC or personal digital
`
`assistant (PDA).” Id. at 3:17-20.
`
`Prust discloses an embodiment in which the user sends an email to the
`
`storage server including a URL for a file to be stored. EX-1004 at 6:67-7:4. The
`
`storage server downloads the data file from the supplied URL into the user’s
`
`8
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`virtual storage. Id.
`
`B.
`
`Overview of Nomoto
`
`Nomoto describes “a file storing-and-managing method and device, for
`
`receiving, storing and managing electronic files over the Internet.” EX-1005 at
`
`Abstract.4
`
`Nomoto Fig. 1
`
`Nomoto’s “file-managing device 1” is one or more computers with the functions of
`
`a webserver that “communicates with member computers 3 over the Internet, and
`
`provides service of receiving, storing and managing files.” Id. ¶[0042]. The
`
`4 Nomoto is prior art under Section 102(a) and (b), having been published on
`
`October 11, 2001.
`
`9
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`member computers of Nomoto can be “PDAs, lap-top computers and mobile
`
`phones capable of accessing the Internet.” Id. ¶[0006].
`
`Nomoto discloses “normal” user uploads and downloads between the
`
`member computer and file-managing device. See, e.g., EX-1005 ¶¶[0053]-[0055],
`
`¶¶[0063]-[0065]. Additionally, the file-managing device can “automatically
`
`download a file located at a specific URL to an appropriate folder in the storage
`
`resource.” Id. ¶¶[0097]-[0098]. The user enters the URL of the file and a target
`
`folder. Id. ¶[0099]. The file-managing device then “downloads the file at the
`
`specified URL through the Internet to the member’s specified folder.” Id.
`
`C.
`
`Overview of Major
`
`Major discloses a wireless device “web browser [that] comprises a page
`
`cache containing a plurality of pages in a plurality of formats, and a converter and
`
`renderer operatively connected to the page cache for rendering the plurality of
`
`pages for display by the browser.” EX-1006 at 4:18-21.5 “Page cache 114...is a
`
`cache of page objects 124” that “correspond[] to a requested Uniform Resource
`
`Locator (URL)” and “can be displayed by the browser object 106 very quickly.”
`
`Id. at 11:12-14. When a user visits a webpage, Major’s page cache is queried to
`
`5 Major is prior art under at least Section 102(a) and (b), having been published
`
`on July 4, 2002.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Patent No. 9,219,780—Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`determine if the page object corresponding to the webpage URL is available. Id. at
`
`10:7-9. “If it is, the browser object 106 displays it, via a display or screen user
`
`interface object….” Id. at 10: