IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In re Patent of: Michael J. Koss
`U.S. Patent No.:
`10,298,451
`Issue Date:
`May 21, 2019
`Appl. Serial No.: 16/057,360
`Filing Date:
`August 7, 2018
`Title:
`CONFIGURING WIRELESS DEVICES FOR A WIRELESS
`INFRASTRUCTURE NETWORK
`
` Attorney Docket No.: 50095-0020IP2
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. JEREMY COOPERSTOCK
`
`1
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`1
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Jeremy Cooperstock
`U.S. Patent No. 10,298,451
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS ...................................................................................... 2
`
`III. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................ 4
`
`IV. SUMMARY OF MY OPINIONS ................................................................. 7
`
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE ’451 PATENT ......................................................... 7
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Brief Description ..................................................................................................... 8
`
`Summary Of The Prosecution History .................................................................. 11
`
`Interpretations of Claim Terms ............................................................................. 13
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ....................................................................... 14
`
`VI. OVERVIEW OF PRIOR ART ...................................................................14
`
`A.
`
`The Scherzer-Subramaniam Combination ............................................................ 14
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`
`Overview of Scherzer ............................................................................... 14
`Overview of Subramaniam ....................................................................... 19
`Combination of Scherzer and Subramaniam ............................................ 27
`
`B.
`
`The Scherzer-Subramaniam-Baxter Combination ................................................ 37
`
`1.
`2.
`
`Overview of Baxter ................................................................................... 37
`Combination of Scherzer, Subramaniam, and Baxter ............................... 39
`
`C.
`
`The Scherzer-Subramaniam-Drader Combination ............................................... 42
`
`1.
`2.
`
`Overview of Drader .................................................................................. 42
`Combination of Scherzer, Subramaniam, and Drader .............................. 44
`
`D.
`
`The Scherzer-Subramaniam-Ramey Combination ............................................... 45
`
`1.
`2.
`
`Ramey ....................................................................................................... 45
`Combination of Scherzer, Subramaniam, and Ramey .............................. 46
`
`E.
`
`The Scherzer-Subramaniam-Montemurro Combination ...................................... 47
`
`1.
`2.
`
`Overview of Montemurro ......................................................................... 47
`Combination of Scherzer, Subramaniam, and Montemurro ..................... 52
`
`F.
`
`The Scherzer-Subramaniam-Gupta Combination ................................................. 54
`
`1.
`2.
`
`Overview of Gupta .................................................................................... 54
`Combination of Scherzer, Subramaniam, and Gupta ................................ 54
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`2
`
`

`

`VII. ANALYSIS OF THE PRIOR ART ............................................................55
`
`Claims 1, 6, 12, 13, And 16-20 Would Have Been Obvious Over Subramaniam
`A.
`And Scherzer ..................................................................................................................... 55
`
`1.
`1.
`1.
`
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................................... 55
`Claims 6, 12, 13, and 16-20 ...................................................................... 71
`Claims 18-20 ............................................................................................. 78
`
`Claims 2, 7-10, and 21 Would Have Been Obvious Over Subramaniam, Scherzer,
`B.
`and Baxter ......................................................................................................................... 98
`
`1.
`
`Claims 2, 7-10, and 21 .............................................................................. 98
`
`Claims 3 and 4 Would Have Been Obvious Over Subramaniam, Scherzer, and
`C.
`Drader 103
`
`1.
`
`Claims 3 and 4 ........................................................................................ 103
`
`D.
`
`Claim 5 Would Have Been Obvious Over Subramaniam, Scherzer, and Ramey
`103
`
`1.
`
`Claim 5 .................................................................................................... 103
`
`Claims 11 and 15 Would Have Been Obvious Over Subramaniam, Scherzer, and
`E.
`Montemurro .................................................................................................................... 104
`
`1.
`
`Claims 11 and 15 .................................................................................... 104
`
`F.
`
`Claim 14 Would Have Been Obvious Over Subramaniam, Scherzer, and Gupta
`107
`
`1.
`
`Claim 14 .................................................................................................. 107
`
`VIII. LEGAL PRINCIPLES ..............................................................................109
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Perspective of One of Ordinary Skill in the Art ................................................. 109
`
`Anticipation......................................................................................................... 109
`
`Obviousness ........................................................................................................ 110
`
`Claim Construction Standard .............................................................................. 114
`
`IX. ADDITIONAL REMARKS ......................................................................115
`
`ii
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`3
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Jeremy Cooperstock
`U.S. Patent No. 10,298,451
`
`1.
`
`I.
`
`2.
`
`I, Jeremy Cooperstock, of Montreal, Canada, declare that:
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`I have been retained by Fish & Richardson, P.C., on behalf of Apple
`
`Inc. (“Petitioner”), as an independent expert consultant in this inter partes review
`
`(“IPR”) proceeding before the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`(“PTO”).
`
`3.
`
`I have been asked by Petitioner’s counsel (“Counsel”) to consider
`
`whether certain references teach or suggest the features recited in Claims 1-21 of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,298,451 (“the ’451 patent”) (APPLE-1001). My opinions and
`
`the bases for my opinions are set forth below. My opinions are based on my
`
`education and experience.
`
`4.
`
`In writing this Declaration, I have considered the following: my own
`
`knowledge and experience, including my teaching and work experience in the
`
`above fields; and my experience of working with others involved in those fields.
`
`5.
`
`I have no financial interest in either party or in the outcome of this
`
`proceeding. I am being compensated for my work as an expert on an hourly basis,
`
`for all tasks involved. My compensation is not dependent on the outcome of these
`
`proceedings or on the content of my opinions.
`
`1
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`4
`
`

`

`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`
`6.
`
`I am a professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer
`
`Engineering at McGill University. My curriculum vitae is provided as Appendix
`
`A.
`
`7.
`
`I received my B.Sc. in Electrical Engineering from the University of
`
`British Columbia, my M.Sc. in Computer Science from the University of Toronto
`
`in 1992, and my Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University
`
`of Toronto in 1996.
`
`8.
`
`I am a member of the Centre for Intelligent Machines, and a founding
`
`member of the Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and
`
`Technology at McGill University. I also direct the Shared Reality Lab at McGill,
`
`which focuses on computer mediation to facilitate high-fidelity human
`
`communication and the synthesis of perceptually engaging, multimodal, immersive
`
`environments. I led the development of the Intelligent Classroom, the world's first
`
`Internet streaming demonstrations of Dolby Digital 5.1, multiple simultaneous
`
`streams of uncompressed high-definition video, a high-fidelity orchestra rehearsal
`
`simulator, a simulation environment that renders graphic, audio, and vibrotactile
`
`effects in response to footsteps, and a mobile game treatment for amblyopia.
`
`9. My work on the Ultra-Videoconferencing system was recognized by
`
`an award for Most Innovative Use of New Technology from ACM/IEEE
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`5
`
`

`

`Supercomputing and a Distinction Award from the Audio Engineering Society.
`
`The research I supervised on the Autour project earned the Hochhausen Research
`
`Award from the Canadian National Institute for the Blind and an Impact Award
`
`from the Canadian Internet Registry Association, and my Real-Time Emergency
`
`Response project won the Gold Prize (brainstorm round) of the Mozilla Ignite
`
`Challenge.
`
`10.
`
`I have worked with IBM at the Haifa Research Center, Israel, and the
`
`Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, New York, the Sony Computer
`
`Science Laboratory in Tokyo, Japan, and was a visiting professor at Bang &
`
`Olufsen, Denmark, where I conducted research on telepresence technologies as
`
`part of the World Opera Project. I led the theme of Enabling Technologies for a
`
`Networks of Centres of Excellence on Graphics, Animation, and New Media
`
`(GRAND) and I am an associate editor of the Journal of the AES.
`
`11.
`
`I have carried out significant research involving network
`
`communication protocols, including wireless communication employing IEEE
`
`802.11 (WiFi) and IEEE 802.15 (Bluetooth). My experience in these areas
`
`includes development of the Adaptive File Distribution Protocol (AFDP, 1995),
`
`analysis of the tradeoffs between bandwidth, power demands, and latency for audio
`
`streaming over WiFi, Bluetooth, and ultra-wideband protocols (2007), and
`
`assessment of the performance and scalability of wireless audio streaming for
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`6
`
`

`

`applications requiring latency-optimized multimedia streaming (2008). I have led
`
`all aspects of development and experimentation in the Autour project (2009-2016),
`
`which employs a combination of wireless communication protocols, and manages
`
`authentication for communication between clients and server, in addition to third-
`
`party information services. I have supervised a variety of projects that require
`
`sharing of WiFi network access credentials across multiple devices. I am currently
`
`leading a research project (MIMIC), which communicates sensor data between two
`
`coupled smartwatches using Bluetooth for local communication between the
`
`smartwatches and their peered smartphones, and the public Internet between the
`
`smartphones. I am also leading a project that uses both Bluetooth and WiFi
`
`communication between smartphones, a GPU-based physics engine, and a
`
`microelectronics architecture that renders vibrotactile effects on mobile footwear.
`
`III. BACKGROUND
`
`12.
`
`I have reviewed the ’451 patent and relevant excerpts of the
`
`prosecution history of the ’451 patent (“the Prosecution History” or APPLE-1002).
`
`The ’451 patent claims priority through a string of applications that includes U.S.
`
`Patent Application No. 13/832,719 filed on March 15, 2013. See APPLE-1001,
`
`Face. Additionally, in prosecution of the application that issued as the ’451 patent,
`
`Applicant submitting an inventor declaration stating that the invention date was
`
`May 14, 2012. APPLE-1002, 50-57. I also understand that Patent Owner has
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`7
`
`

`

`stated that the invention date is July 12, 2010. While I am not opining on whether
`
`the ’451 patent is entitled to the July 12, 2010, March 15, 2013, and May 14, 2012
`
`priority dates, for purposes of this declaration and to review and apply prior art
`
`references only, I am using July 12, 2010 as the purported priority date (“Critical
`
`Date”).
`
`13.
`
`I have reviewed the following materials:
`
`• U.S. Pat. No. 10,298,451 to Koss, et al. (APPLE-1001)
`
`• Excerpts from the Prosecution History of the ’451 patent
`
`(APPLE-1002)
`
`• U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2007/0033197 (“Scherzer”) (APPLE-
`
`1004)
`
`• U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2011/0289229 (“Subramaniam”)
`
`(APPLE-1005)
`
`• U.S. Provisional Pat. App. No. 61/331,459 (“’459 Provisional”)
`
`(APPLE-1006)
`
`• U.S. Provisional Pat. App. No. 60/728,918 (“’918 Provisional”)
`
`(APPLE-1007)
`
`• U.S. Provisional Pat. App. No. 60/687,463 (“’463 Provisional”)
`
`(APPLE-1008)
`
`5
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`8
`
`

`

`• U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2007/0245028 (“Baxter”) (APPLE-
`
`1009)
`
`• U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2011/0025879 (“Drader”) (APPLE-
`
`1010)
`
`• U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2010/0307916 (“Ramey”) (APPLE-
`
`1011)
`
`• U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2010/0165879 (“Gupta”) (APPLE-1012)
`
`• U.S. Pat. No. 9,949,305 (“Montemurro”) (APPLE-1013)
`
`• U.S. Provisional Pat. App. No. 61/248,328 (“’328 Provisional”)
`
`(APPLE-1014)
`
`• U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2002/0131404 (“Mehta”) (APPLE-1015)
`
`14. Counsel has informed me that I should consider these materials
`
`through the lens of a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA,” which is
`
`discussed further in Section V.D below) related to the ’451 patent at the time of the
`
`earliest purported priority date of the ’451 patent, and I have done so during my
`
`review of these materials. Unless otherwise stated, my testimony below refers to
`
`the knowledge of a POSITA as of the Critical Date.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`9
`
`

`

`IV. SUMMARY OF MY OPINIONS
`
`15. This Declaration explains the conclusions that I have formed based on
`
`my knowledge and experience and my review of the prior art references listed
`
`above. To summarize, I have concluded that:
`
`• Claims 1, 6, 12, 13, and 16-20 are obvious over Scherzer and
`
`Subramaniam;
`
`• Claims 2, 7-10, and 21 are obvious over Scherzer, Subramaniam, and
`
`Baxter;
`
`• Claims 3 and 4 are obvious over Scherzer, Subramaniam, and Drader;
`
`• Claim 5 is obvious over Scherzer, Subramaniam, and Ramey;
`
`• Claims 11 and 15 are obvious over Scherzer, Subramaniam, and
`
`Montemurro; and
`
`• Claim 14 is obvious over Scherzer, Subramaniam, and Gupta
`
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE ’451 PATENT
`
`16.
`
`I have reviewed the ’451 patent, titled “Configuring Wireless Devices
`
`for a Wireless Infrastructure Network.” APPLE-1001, 1:1. The ’451 patent
`
`includes 21 claims, of which claims 1 f send out ad hoc network requests to all
`
`computing 1 and 18 are independent. APPLE-1001, 8:30-10:52.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`10
`
`

`

`A. Brief Description
`
`17.
`
` The ‘451 patent relates to systems and methods for providing a
`
`wireless device with credentials for an infrastructure wireless network, such as a
`
`WiFi network that were input on a remote server and passed to the wireless device
`
`through a mobile computer. APPLE-1001, 2:52-54. Figure 1 (reproduced below)
`
`shows a system 10 that includes an earphone set 12 (which includes a pair of
`
`earphones 14) as one example of such a wireless device. Id., 3:2-4.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`11
`
`

`

`APPLE-1001, FIG. 1
`
`18. As shown in Figure 1 above, system 10 includes a content access
`
`point (CAP) 16, along with a wireless access point 24 that provides an
`
`infrastructure wireless network, e.g., WiFi network. Id., 2:52-54, 3:40-44. The
`
`earphones 14 may communicate wirelessly with the CAP 16 via an ad hoc
`
`communication link 18, and the CAP 16 may connects, e.g., via a USB connector,
`
`to a personal digital audio player (DAP) 20 or a computer 22. Id., 3:17-21, 3:29-
`
`30. Alternatively, “the CAP 16 may be an integral part of the DAP 20 or the
`
`computer 22.” Id., 3:35-36. Both the computer 22 and the wireless access point 24
`
`may be connected to a communications network 28, e.g., the Internet, along with a
`
`remote server system 30. APPLE-1001, 3:45-50.
`
`19. The earphones 14 can, “when properly configured, also receive
`
`wireless content via infrastructure networks,” such as the infrastructure wireless
`
`network provided by the wireless access point 24. Id., 4:45-47. Figure 3
`
`(reproduced below) shows a flow chart of a process that, among other things,
`
`“allows the earphones 14 to be configured for infrastructure network (and Internet)
`
`access.” Id., 5:22-23.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`12
`
`

`

`APPLE-1001, FIG. 3
`
`
`
`20. At step 60 in the flow chart shown above, “the user (e.g., a user of the
`
`earphones 14), using the Internet-enabled computer 22 with a browser, logs into a
`
`website associated with the earphones 14, hosted by the remote server(s) 30, and
`
`sets up an account (if the user does not already have one).” Id., 4:50-55. The ‘451
`
`patent explains that, “[a]t the website, the user can, for example, add Wi-Fi
`
`hotspots,” and further explains that “a JAVA applet from the website may be used
`
`by the computer 22 to search for nearby Wi-Fi hotspots, which, upon detection,
`
`may be displayed for the user on the website.” Id., 4:55-64. To add a Wi-Fi
`
`hotspot, at step 62, the user may click on the desired Wi-Fi hotspot displayed on
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`13
`
`

`

`the website and “enter a password and/or encryption type (e.g., WPA or WPA2)
`
`for the selected Wi-Fi hotspot.” Id., 4:64-5:1. The ‘451 patent explains that “[t]he
`
`SSID, password, and encryption type for the Wi-Fi hotspot is stored for the user's
`
`account by the remote server(s) 30.” Id., 5:1-3. At step 64, “the IDs for the CAP
`
`16, as well as the IDs for the earphones 14, stored in the non-volatile memory 44
`
`of the CAP 16, are uploaded to the remote server(s) 30 and stored at the remote
`
`server(s) 30 as part of the user's account information.” Id., 5:9-13.
`
`21. At step 66, “the user may update the earphones 14 with the WiFi
`
`hotspot credentials (e.g., SSID, password if one is used for the hotspot, and/or
`
`encryption type),” and may do so “by clicking on or otherwise selecting a link on
`
`the website to update the ear-phones 14.” Id., 5:14-18. This process uses the CAP,
`
`which has been “plugg[ed] into the computer.” Id., 5:8. The computer obtains the
`
`credentials from the remote server. Then, “[u]pon clicking the link, the CAP 16
`
`transmits the credentials (e.g., SSID, password, encryption type) for each of the
`
`added Wi-Fi hotspots to the earphones 14, via the ad hoc wireless communication
`
`link 18,” which “allows the earphones 14 to be configured for infrastructure
`
`network (and Internet) access.” Id., 5:16-23.
`
`B.
`
`Summary Of The Prosecution History
`
`22.
`
`The ‘451 patent was filed on August 7, 2018, claiming priority
`
`through a chain of applications to a non-provisional application filed on March 15,
`
`11
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`14
`
`

`

`2013. APPLE-1002, 274. The ‘451 patent was filed with a preliminary
`
`amendment to the specification, which added a sentence stating that “the CAP 16
`
`may be an integral part of the DAP 20 or the computer 22.” Id., 70-93; APPLE-
`
`1001, 3:35-36.
`
`23. A Non-final Rejection was mailed to the applicant on November 1,
`
`2018, which included rejections under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) and 35 U.S.C.
`
`103(a) citing U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2014/0279122 (“Luna”). APPLE-1002, 70-
`
`93. On January 17, 2018, the applicant filed a response to the Non-final Rejection
`
`mailed November 1, 2018, which included copies of a declaration and exhibits that
`
`were previously submitted by the applicant during the prosecution of the parent
`
`application of the ‘451 patent to swear behind art cited by the examiner, as well as
`
`arguments as to why the previously-submitted declaration and exhibits also
`
`purportedly demonstrate an invention date for the claims of the ‘451 patent that
`
`pre-dates the filing date of Luna. Id., 50-57. A notice of allowance was mailed to
`
`the application on March 11, 2019, followed by an issue notification on May 1,
`
`2019. Id., 7-14.
`
`24. Each reference applied in this petition not only predates the filing date
`
`of the ‘451 patent, but also predates the invention date purportedly demonstrated
`
`by the declaration and exhibits submitted by the applicant during the prosecution
`
`of the parent application of the ‘451 patent. However, none of these prior art
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`15
`
`

`

`references were considered by the examiner during the prosecution of the ‘451
`
`patent. Had the examiner been aware of these prior art references, the claims of
`
`the ‘451 patent would not have been allowed.
`
`C.
`
`Interpretations of Claim Terms
`
`25.
`
`I understand that, for purposes of my analysis in this inter partes
`
`review proceeding, the terms appearing in a patent claim should be interpreted
`
`according to their “ordinary and customary meaning of such claim as understood
`
`by one of ordinary skill in the art and the prosecution history pertaining to the
`
`patent.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). In that regard, I understand that the best indicator
`
`of claim meaning is its usage in the context of the patent specification as
`
`understood by a POSITA. I further understand that the words of the claims should
`
`be given their plain meaning unless that meaning is inconsistent with the patent
`
`specification or the patent’s history of examination before the Patent Office. I also
`
`understand that the words of the claims should be interpreted as they would have
`
`been interpreted by a POSITA at the time of the invention was made (not today).
`
`Because I do not know at what date the invention as claimed was made, if ever, I
`
`have used the Critical Date of the ’451 patent as the point in time for claim
`
`interpretation purposes. My opinion does not change if the invention date is
`
`earlier.
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`16
`
`

`

`D.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`26. Based upon my experience in this area and taking into account the
`
`above references, a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the ’451
`
`patent’s Critical Date (“POSITA”) would have had at least a Bachelor's Degree in
`
`an academic area emphasizing electrical engineering, computer science, or a
`
`similar discipline, and at least two years of experience in wireless communications
`
`across short distance or local area networks. Superior education could compensate
`
`for a deficiency in work experience, and vice-versa.
`
`27.
`
`I base this characterization of a POSITA based on my professional,
`
`academic, and personal experiences, including my knowledge of colleagues and
`
`others at the time of the invention of the ’415 patent on or shortly before the
`
`Critical Date. Specifically, my experience working with industry, undergraduate
`
`and post-graduate students, colleagues from academia, and designers and engineers
`
`practicing in industry has allowed me to become directly and personally familiar
`
`with the level of skill of individuals and the general state of the art. I am familiar
`
`with the knowledge of persons of ordinary skill in the art as of the Critical Date.
`
`VI. OVERVIEW OF PRIOR ART
`
`A. The Scherzer-Subramaniam Combination
`
`1. Overview of Scherzer
`
`28. Scherzer describes various systems in which a community of
`
`registered users can share, through a server, credentials used to access each other’s
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`17
`
`

`

`access points. As a result, in Scherzer’s system, each user is “able to access the
`
`Internet, its services and information, from a large number of locations.” APPLE-
`
`1004, [0015], [0020]. This system is illustrated in Scherzer’s Figure 1, below,
`
`which shows a plurality of devices, i.e., devices 104, 106, 108, 110, and 112,
`
`which can share credential data for the networks provided by wireless access
`
`points 100 and 102, through server 116.
`
`APPLE-1004, FIG. 1.
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`18
`
`

`

`29.
`
`In the system of Scherzer, a user may allow other users to access “the
`
`user’s access point in exchange for being allowed to access other user’s access
`
`points.” Id., [0020]. Each user of Scherzer’s system “registers with the provider
`
`of network access by communicating with provider application server 116.” Id.
`
`The application server 116, as shown above, “receives and stores registration
`
`information” from each user. This information is used by the provider “to set up a
`
`user contribution account and to enable other registered users of the network to
`
`access the user’s access point.” Id. [0021]. The registration information stored in
`
`the provider application server can include information that enables a second user
`
`to use the user’s access point, such as an SSID, wired equivalent privacy (WEP)
`
`key or password, and Wi-Fi protected access (WPA) key or password. Id. [0021].
`
`30. Users of Scherzer’s system install a software client on a device, such
`
`as a laptop or PDA, to enable the device “to contact the provider application server
`
`and to acquire access information for network access points that are made available
`
`by a given user to other network users,” e.g., via a cell phone network. Id. [0020]-
`
`[0021], [0023]. The access information “enables the user to use another user’s
`
`access point in order to gain access to the Internet,” and “can include SSID’s [sic],
`
`WEP or WPA passwords or keys or any other appropriate information for
`
`accessing access points.” APPLE-1004, [0021], [0024]. In this way, the software
`
`client enables the user to “contact the provider's application server in order to
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`19
`
`

`

`obtain access information for a location where the user is not able to use the user’s
`
`own access point” and gain access to the Internet at said location. Id.
`
`31. For example, Figure 4 shows a process in some implementations of
`
`the Scherzer system for providing network access that can run as part of a software
`
`client on a user’s device:
`
`
`
`APPLE-1004, FIG. 4
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`20
`
`

`

`32. As Figure 4 illustrates, when Scherzer’s system is used in a particular
`
`location, “in [step] 400, visible access points are determined,” and, “[i]n [step] 402,
`
`access information with respect to the visible access points is determined.” Id.,
`
`[0023]. Scherzer further explains step 402’s process of determining access
`
`information can involve the information being “downloaded or accessed via a
`
`cellular connection . . . or any other appropriate manner.” As Scherzer explains,
`
`Figure 5 provides an implementation example of step 402. Id., [0023]-[0024].
`
`Similarly, Figure 6 discloses a corresponding process that the application server
`
`116 can perform to provide access information to a device that implements step
`
`402 using the Figure 5 process. Id., [0025].
`
`33. Referring back to Figure 4, after the device has acquired the necessary
`
`access information from the server, “[i]n 404, an access point is selected” and,
`
`“[i]n 406, a connection is attempted to the selected access point.” APPLE-1004,
`
`[0023]. Scherzer explains that, in step 406, access information, e.g., as determined
`
`in step 402, “is used to attempt a connection to the access point” and further that
`
`“communication via the access point is attempted to the Internet.” Id. In order to
`
`ensure that the user device has access to the Internet, in 408, “it is determined if the
`
`connection attempt was successful” and “[i]n the event that the attempt was not
`
`successful, control is passed to 404.” Id.
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`21
`
`

`

`2. Overview of Subramaniam
`
`34. Subramaniam describes “the configuration of wireless networks and
`
`the configuration of electronic devices to connect to wireless networks…” APPLE-
`
`1005, Abstract; APPLE-1006, 12-13. One example of such a configuration is
`
`using a wireless security scheme to secure a wireless access point (e.g., a router)
`
`and then “providing each wireless client with the settings and passwords to be used
`
`(i.e., the ones associated with the type of security scheme used in the router).”
`
`APPLE-1005, [0005]; APPLE-1006, 12-13.
`
`35. Subramaniam recognizes that the process of configuring a wireless
`
`device to connect to a secure wireless access point “may be tedious and
`
`challenging for an average home user…” APPLE-1005, [0005]; APPLE-1006, 12.
`
`To address this issue, Subramaniam contemplates a technique of “gathering
`
`settings pertaining to connecting a device to the wireless network” from a
`
`“computing device that may already be a member of the wireless network…”
`
`APPLE-1005, [0009]; APPLE-1006, 13. Using this technique, a user can retrieve
`
`wireless configuration settings from a member computing device (i.e., a device
`
`already configured to connect to a wireless network) and then provide the wireless
`
`configuration settings to a non-member computing device (i.e., a device that is not
`
`configured to connect to the wireless network) without having to manually input
`
`the wireless configuration settings on the non-member computing device. Id.
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`22
`
`

`

`36. Subramanian teaches that wireless configuration settings can be
`
`exchanged between devices “us[ing] a shared communication medium between [a]
`
`connected device and an unconnected device in order to share the connection
`
`settings to connect the unconnected device. APPLE-1005, Abstract; APPLE-1006,
`
`12-13. Subramanian’s Figure 3 illustrates a technique for configuring electronic
`
`device 240 to connect to wireless access point 210 based on exchanging wireless
`
`configuration settings between computing device 220 and electronic device 240.
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`23
`
`

`

`APPLE-1005, Figure 31
`
`
`
`37. Wireless access point 210 creates the wireless network and connects
`
`to computing device 220 as a member through network link 230. APPLE-1005,
`
`
`
`1 Figure 3 of Subramaniam depicts concepts similar to those shown in Figure 4 of
`
`the ’459 Provisional Application. See APPLE-1006, 15.
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`24
`
`

`

`[0034]; APPLE-1006, 19-20. Wireless device 240 is not a member of the wireless
`
`network since “it is not communicating with the wireless access point 210.”
`
`APPLE-1005, [0034]; APPLE-1006, 19.
`
`38. To start the configuration process, device 240 is initially put into a
`
`“configuration mode.” APPLE-1005, [0035]; APPLE-1006, 19-21. This can be
`
`accomplished in “a variety of forms,” such as an input on “physical button” on the
`
`outer case of the device, or “a touch screen input on which a virtual button is
`
`displayed.” APPLE-1005, [0035]; APPLE-1006, 19-21. Devices 220 and 240
`
`then communicate over network link 380, which in some embodiments is an “ad
`
`hoc network.” APPLE-1005, [0044]-[0045]; APPLE-1006, 20. In these
`
`embodiments, device 240 “transmits requests to form ad hoc wireless networks to
`
`computing devices within the range of its transmission” and device 220 “can detect
`
`the ad hoc network requests and form a network link.” APPLE-1005, [0038];
`
`APPLE-1006, 20.
`
`39. Once devices 220 and 240 have established a connection over network
`
`link 380, device 220 “gathers settings pertaining to that connection,” such as
`
`“security settings necessary for a device to connect to the wirelsss 210, such as a
`
`security protocol or a passphrase.” APPLE-1005, [0039]; APPLE-1006, 19-21.
`
`Device 220 then “uses the connection settings information” and “uses network link
`
`380 in order to configure electronic device 240 to connect to the wireless network
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`25
`
`

`

`created by wireless access point 210.” APPLE-1005, [0049]; APPLE-1006, 19-21.
`
`As one example, Subramaniam describes that device 240 “communicates across
`
`network link 380 with the operating sysem or a network utility on electronic device
`
`240[]” and “provides the connection settings information…to the operating system
`
`or network utility thereby causing the operating system or network utility to
`
`properly store the connection settings.” APPLE-1005, [0050]; APPLE-1006, 19-
`
`21.
`
`40. After receiving the connection settings information from device 220,
`
`device 240 can then use the connection settings information to “join the wireless
`
`network created by wireless access point 210.” APPLE-1005, [0050]; APPLE-
`
`1006, 19-21. This process of enabling device 240 to join a wireless network using
`
`device 220 (which is already connected to wireless access point 210) is shown in
`
`Figure 4:
`
`
`
`23
`
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`26
`
`

`

`APPLE-1005, Figure 4
`
`
`
`41. As shown above, at step S430, device 240 is placed into configuration
`
`mode. APPLE-1005, [0054]-[0055]; APPLE-1006, 19-21. At step S440, devices
`
`220 an