IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`DAEDALUS BLUE LLC,
`
`Plaintiff
`
`vs.
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`
`Defendant.
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`C.A. No. 6:20-cv-01152-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`DEFENDANT’S REVISED PROPOSED
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS
`
`Pursuant to the Case Schedule (Dkt. No. 23), Defendant Microsoft Corporation
`
`(“Defendant”) hereby identifies its revised proposed claim constructions. Unless otherwise
`
`specified below, where a claim term or phrase is identified below, Defendant seeks to have it
`
`construed for purposes of all asserted claims of the identified patent-in-suit, and of all elements of
`
`all such claims containing the claim term or phrase.
`
`Defendant reserves the right to further revise its claim constructions, particularly in
`
`response to or in consideration of any revisions by Daedalus Blue, LLC (“Plaintiff”) to its
`
`proposed construction of the terms or phrases below, or arguments raised by Plaintiff in its
`
`Markman briefing or at the Markman hearing. Defendant also reserves the right to amend or
`
`supplement its revised claim constructions, including to add or withdraw terms, as may be
`
`appropriate.
`
` 4124-4268-7536.1
`
`IPR2021-00831
`
`Daedalus EX2018
`Page 1 of 7
`
`

`

`
`
`I.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,177,886
`
`Claim Term Identified for Construction
`
`Defendant’s Preliminary
`Proposed Construction
`
`“producing said acknowledgement signal
`subsequent to the applying and logging of the
`selected critical database transaction” (claim
`1) / “producing an acknowledgment
`indicating that the transferred log file entries
`have been received” (claims 6, 7, 10)
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, which
`is “producing the
`acknowledgement signal in
`response to the applying and
`logging of the selected critical
`database transaction” (claim 1) /
`“producing the acknowledgement
`signal in response to the receipt of
`the transferred log file entries”
`(claims 6, 7, 10)
`
`II.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,437,730
`
`Claim Term Identified for
`Construction
`
`Defendant’s Preliminary Proposed
`Construction
`
`“workload(s)”
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, which is that each
`workload is “a processing task that is divided”
`
`“resource management logic to
`distribute server resources to
`each of the plurality of virtual
`machines according to current
`and predicted resource needs
`of each of the multiple
`workloads utilizing the server
`resources”
`
`Under the Williamson doctrine, the phrase
`“resource management logic to distribute server
`resources . . . ” is a means-plus-function phrase
`under 35 U.S.C. section 112(f), because “logic” is
`equivalent to “means” or “module,” because
`“resource management logic” does not connote
`specific structure to a person of ordinary skill in
`the art, and because the phrase recites the
`function “to distribute server resources to each of
`the plurality of virtual machines according to
`current and predicted resource needs of each of
`the multiple workloads utilizing the server
`resources.”
`
`This term is indefinite because the specification
`does not detail any algorithm, much less a
`sufficient algorithm, to perform the claimed
`function.
`
`
` 4124-4268-7536.1
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00831
`
`Daedalus EX2018
`Page 2 of 7
`
`

`

`
`
`“dynamically adjusted”
`
`“global resource allocator
`(GRA) … for receiving said
`offered workload messages
`and assigning an optimum
`matching of combinations of
`whole integer numbers of
`workload servers and
`fractional virtual workload
`servers that the GRA controls
`to each of the respective
`customer workloads according
`to identified resource
`requirements”
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, which is
`“automatically shifted from one server to another
`server”
`
`Pursuant to the Williamson doctrine, the phrase
`“global resource allocator” is a means-plus
`function phrase under 35 U.S.C. section 112(f),
`because “global resource allocator” is a purely
`functional phrase reciting the function of “global
`resource allocation,” which does not connote
`specific structure to a person of ordinary skill in
`the art, and because the “global resource
`allocator” performs the function of “receiving
`said offered workload messages and assigning an
`optimum matching of combinations of whole
`integer numbers of workload servers and
`fractional virtual workload servers that the GRA
`controls to each of the respective customer
`workloads according to identified resource
`requirements.” The structure corresponding to
`the global resource allocator that performs the
`claimed function is a computer-implemented
`algorithm that includes the following steps:
`
`1. Split server resources between VMs evenly to
`start (see ’730 Patent, 5:24-56);
`
`2. Receive measurements and/or prediction data
`from the load balancer(s) (see id., 2:9-19, 2:42-
`52, 5:24-56, Claim 11, Fig. 3A);
`
`3. Predict what resources are needed by each
`customer (see id., 5:24-56, Fig. 3A);
`
`4. Determine if any server capacity would be
`exhausted based on the predicted resource
`requirements (see id., 6:58-7:58, Fig. 3A); IF NO
`GO TO STEP 5; IF YES GO TO STEP 6.
`
`5. (FROM STEP 4: If no), adjust resource
`allocation for each of the VMs on all servers to
`conform with the prediction (see id., 5:24-56,
`6:58-7:58, Fig. 3A).
`
`
` 4124-4268-7536.1
`
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00831
`
`Daedalus EX2018
`Page 3 of 7
`
`

`

`
`
`6. (FROM STEP 4: If yes), mark the servers as
`overloaded. Contact the resource control agents at
`each server with resource assignments for each
`virtual machine pursuant to a process of moving
`load from the overloaded servers (see id., 6:58-
`7:58, Figs. 3A, 3B).
`
`III. U.S. Patent No. 8,381,209
`
`Claim Term Identified for Construction
`
`Defendant’s Preliminary
`Proposed Construction
`
`“enforcing … routing at a hypervisor layer via
`dynamic updating of routing controls”
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, which
`is “upon migration, automatically
`changing the routing controls at a
`hypervisor layer to rout network
`traffic for the virtual machine to
`the second device”
`
`IV. U.S. Patent No. 8,572,612
`
`Claim Term Identified for Construction
`
`Defendant’s Preliminary
`Proposed Construction
`
`“flagging the instance of a VM”
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, which
`is “adding a marker to the
`configuration information for a
`particular VM occurrence
`indicating whether that VM
`occurrence is to be autonomically
`scaled”
`
`V.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,671,132
`
`Claim Term Identified for Construction Defendant’s Preliminary Proposed
`Construction
`
`“service class rule”
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning, which is
`“a rule implemented by the [data
`management system] (claims 1, 15,
`26), [metadata server] (claim 9), or
`[computer code executable by a
`processor] (claim 23) to
`
`
` 4124-4268-7536.1
`
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00831
`
`Daedalus EX2018
`Page 4 of 7
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`“communication module operable to
`communicate between the file evaluation
`module and a plurality of remote clients
`and configured to communicate with
`clients [comprising at least two different
`computing platforms] or [of varying
`computing platforms]” (Claims 1, 9)/
`“means for communicating with a plurality
`of clients comprising at least two different
`computing platforms.” (Claim 26)
`
`automatically assign a service class
`for a file based on an evaluation of
`the file.”
`
`Under the Williamson doctrine,
`“communication module operable to
`communicate. . . ” is a means-plus-
`function phrase under 35 U.S.C.
`section 112(f), because “module” is
`equivalent to “means,” because
`“communication module” does not
`connote specific structure to a person
`of ordinary skill in the art, and
`because the phrase recites a function
`“to communicate between the file
`evaluation module and a plurality of
`remote clients and configured to
`communicate with clients
`[comprising at least two different
`computing platforms] or [of varying
`computing platforms]” (Claims 1, 9).
`
`The phrase “means for
`communicating . . . ” is a means-plus-
`function phrase under 35 U.S.C.
`section 112(f), because the phrase
`recites a “means” for performing the
`function of “communicating with a
`plurality of clients comprising at least
`two different computing platforms”
`which does not connote specific
`structure to a person of ordinary skill
`in the art.
`
`This term is indefinite because the
`specification does not detail any
`algorithm, much less a sufficient
`algorithm, for performing the claimed
`function.
`
`Dated: August 11, 2021
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
` 4124-4268-7536.1
`
`
`/s/ Jared Bobrow
`
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00831
`
`Daedalus EX2018
`Page 5 of 7
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Barry K. Shelton
`Texas State Bar No. 24055029
`SHELTON COBURN LLP
`311 RR 320, Suite 205
`Austin, TX 78734-4775
`bshelton@sheltoncoburn.com
`Tel: (512) 263-2165
`Fax: (512) 263-2166
`
`Jared Bobrow (CA State Bar No. 133712)
`Jacob M. Heath (CA State Bar No. 238959)
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
`1000 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Tel: (650) 614-7400
`Fax: (650) 614-7401
`jbobrow@orrick.com
`jheath@orrick.com
`
`Donald E. Daybell (CA State Bar No. 210961)
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
`2050 Main Street, Suite 1100
`Irvine, CA 92614
`Tel: (949) 567-6700
`Fax: (949) 567-6710
`ddaybell@orrick.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Microsoft Corporation
`
`
`
`
` 4124-4268-7536.1
`
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00831
`
`Daedalus EX2018
`Page 6 of 7
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I, Don Daybell, hereby certify that on August 11, 2021, I caused the foregoing document
`
`to be served on the following counsel in the manner indicated:
`
`BY EMAIL:
`
`Denise M. De Mory - ddemory@bdiplaw.com
`Robin Curtis - rcurtis@bdiplaw.com
`Jennifer L. Gilbert - jgilbert@bdiplaw.com
`B. Russell Horton - rhorton@gbkh.com
`
`cc: bdip_daedalus_microsoft@bdiplaw.com
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Don Daybell
` Don Daybell
`
`
` 4124-4268-7536.1
`
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00831
`
`Daedalus EX2018
`Page 7 of 7
`
`