UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONERFORPATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`90/014,875
`
`FILING DATE
`
`10/07/2021
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`CONFIRMATION NO.
`
`10257319
`
`HOLA-005-US4-EPR
`
`3994
`
`03/25/2022
`7590
`131926
`May Patents Ltd. c/o Dorit Shem-Tov
`P.O.B 7230
`Ramat-Gan, 5217102
`ISRAEL
`
`EXAMINER
`
`WORJLOH. JALATEE
`
`ART UNIT
`
`3992
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`03/25/2022
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 1 of 18
`
`

`

`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Commissioner for Patents
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`DO NOT USE IN PALM PRINTER
`(THIRD PARTY REQUESTER'S CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS)
`
`Charhon Callahan Robson & Garza, PLLC
`3333 Lee Parkway, Suite 460
`Dallas, TX 75219
`
`EX PARTEREEXAMINATION COMMUNICATION TRANSMITTAL FORM
`
`REEXAMINATION CONTROL NO. 90/014,875.
`
`PATENT UNDER REEXAMINATION 10257319.
`
`ART UNIT 3992.
`
`Enclosed is a copy of the latest communication from the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office in the above identified ex parte reexamination proceeding (37 CFR 1.550(f)).
`
`Where this copy is supplied after the reply by requester, 37 CFR 1.535, or the time for filing a
`reply has passed, no submission on behalf of the ex parte reexamination requester will be
`acknowledged or considered (37 CFR 1.550(g)).
`
`PTOL-465 (Rev.07-04)
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 2 of 18
`
`

`

`Office Action in Ex Parle Reexamination
`
`Control No.
`90/014,875
`
`Patent Under Reexamination
`10257319
`
`Examiner
`JALATEE WORJLOH
`
`Art Unit
`3992
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`No
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`a. D Responsive to the communication(s) filed on _ _
`.
`D A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on _ _
`
`.
`
`b. D This action is made FINAL.
`c. 0 A statement under 37 CFR 1.530 has not been received from the patent owner.
`A shortened statutory period for response to this action is set to expire 2 month(s) from the mailing date of this letter.
`Failure to respond within the period for response will result in termination of the proceeding and issuance of an ex parte reexamination
`certificate in accordance with this action. 37 CFR 1.550(d). EXTENSIONS OF TIME ARE GOVERNED BY 37 CFR 1.550(c).
`If the period for response specified above is less than thirty (30) days, a response within the statutory minimum of thirty (30) days
`will be considered timely.
`
`Interview Summary, PTO-474.
`
`Part I
`THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENT(S) ARE PART OF THIS ACTION:
`1. D Notice of References Cited by Examiner, PTO-892.
`3. D
`2. 0 Information Disclosure Statement, PTO/SB/08.
`4. D
`Part II
`SUMMARY OF ACTION
`1 a. 0 Claims 1-2, 12, 14-15, 17-19,21-22 and 24-29 are subject to reexamination.
`1 b. 0 Claims 3-11, 13, 16,20 and 23 are not subject to reexamination.
`2. D Claims _ _
`have been canceled in the present reexamination proceeding.
`3. D Claims _ _
`are patentable and/or confirmed.
`4. 0 Claims 1-2, 12, 14-15, 17-19,21-22 and 24-29 are rejected.
`5. D Claims _ _
`are objected to.
`6. D The drawings, filed on _ _
`are acceptable.
`7. D The proposed drawing correction, filed on _ _
`has been (7a) D approved (7b) D disapproved.
`8. D Acknowledgment is made of the priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`a) D All b) D Some* c) D None
`of the certified copies have
`1 D been received.
`2 D not been received.
`3 D been filed in Application No. _ _
`4 D been filed in reexamination Control No. - -
`5 D been received by the International Bureau in PCT application No. _ _
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`9. D Since the proceeding appears to be in condition for issuance of an ex parte reexamination certificate except for formal
`matters, prosecution as to the merits is closed in accordance with the practice under ExparteQuayle, 1935 C.D.
`11, 453 O.G. 213.
`10. D Other:
`
`cc: Requester (if third oartv requester)
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-466 (Rev. 08-13)
`
`Office Action in Ex Parte Reexamination
`
`Part of Paper No.
`
`20220303
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 3 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 2
`
`NON-FINAL ACTION
`
`Introduction
`
`This is the ex parte reexamination of claims 1, 2, 12, 14, 15, 17-19, 21, 22, and 24-29 of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,257,319 to Shribman et al. ("Shribman") for which a substantial new question
`
`of patentability has been deemed to exist.
`
`Notice o f Pre-AJA or AJA Status
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
`
`References cited in Request
`
`• Reiter, M. & Rubin A , Crowds: Anonymity for Web Transactions, ACM Transactions on
`
`Information and System Security, Vol. 1, No. 1, at pp. 66-2 (Nov. 1998) ("Crowds");
`
`• Fielding, R. et al., Hypertext Transfer Protocol -HTTP 1.1., RFC 2616, IETF (June 1999)
`
`("RFC 2616);
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,795,848 to Border et al. ("Border"); and
`
`• Rennhard, M. MorphMix-A Peer-to-Peer-based System for Anonymous Internet Access,
`
`Doctoral Thesis (2004) ("MorphMix').
`
`• Declaration of Dr. Michael J. Freedman
`
`Other
`
`No Patent Owner statement was filed.
`
`Patent Owner Statement
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 4 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 3
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`Regarding IDS submissions MPEP 2256 recites the following: "Where patents,
`
`publications, and other such items of information are submitted by a party (patent owner or
`
`requester) in compliance with the requirements of the rules, the requisite degree of consideration
`
`to be given to such information will be normally limited by the degree to which the party filing
`
`the information citation has explained the content and relevance of the
`
`information." Accordingly, the IDS submissions have been considered by the Examiner only
`
`with the scope required by MPEP 2256.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC§ 102
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that
`
`form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
`
`A person shall be entitled to a patent unless -
`
`(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed
`publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
`
`Claims 1, 12, 14, 17, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27-29 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`102(a) as being anticipated by Border.
`
`1. A method for use with a first client device, for use with a first server that comprises a
`
`web server that is a Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) server that responds to HTTP
`
`requests, the first server stores a first content identified by a first content identifier, and for
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 5 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`use with a second server, the method by the first client device comprising:
`
`Page 4
`
`Ff{"3. 1
`
`:., _;,E i
`S:si''\'!,>'
`
`<
`,,..
`
`,<),
`
`IP{;
`
`••. +1. '.'. :: :::'.:_i __ f"'
`
`H>3
`
`Fig. 1. Communication system 101 contains the following components: user station 101
`downstream proxy server 105, upstream proxy server 107. and web server 100. User station 101
`is further comprised of web browser 103, Additionally. Border discloses that downstream proxy
`server 105 and upstream proxy server 107 contain caches 115 and 117, respectively. Further,
`downstream proxy server 105 and upstream proxy server 107 communicate over network 111 via
`a persisten TCP connection. Border discloses that user stations IO I use communication system
`100 to request and receive web content stored on web servers 109, with proxy servers 105 and 107
`acting as intermediary devices between one or more user stations SOI and many web servers 109.
`Col. 1, 11. 34-35 and col. 4, 11. 29-31.
`
`Proxy servers 105 and 107 are Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) proxy servers with HTTP
`caches 115 and 117, respectively. Col. 4, 11. 7-11.
`
`',t,:fi
`S r, .f"
`
`,,,);sN-
`, ,r r:, :i:.
`:;r: \•·r:&
`
`-30':' n1R
`
` -----" ·••-'~·····- ---·1
`--······1
`
`i
`
`Fig. 2.
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 6 of 18
`
`

`

`Page 5
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`Fig. 2. To request web content at a particular URL, browser 103 of user station 101 sends an HTTP
`GET request containing the URL (which identifies the requested content) to downstream proxy
`server 105. Col. 5, 11. 14-17. After receiving the request, downstream server 105 checks its cache
`115 to determine if it contains a valid copy of the requested content. If downstream proxy server
`I 05 does not have a valid copy of the content stored in its cache, downstream server I 05 sends an
`HTTP GET request containing the URL to upstream proxy server I 07. If downstream proxy server
`I 05 does have a copy of the content stored in its cache, but it is uncertain whether that cached copy
`is still valid, downstream server 105 sends a "conditional" HTTP IF MODIFIED SINCE GET
`request containing the URL to upstream proxy server 107 (which based on the upstream proxy
`server's later response, serves to either revalidate the downstream proxy server's cached content or
`causes the downstream proxy server to receive a new version of the cached content if the content
`has subsequently changed since the downstream proxy server had last received it). Col. 6, 1. 68-
`col.7, 1. 19.
`
`Upon receiving an HTTP GET request (or IF MODIFIED SINCE GET request), upstream proxy
`server 107 likewise checks its cache for a valid copy of the requested content. If upstream proxy
`server I 07 does not have a valid copy of the content, it sends an HTTP GET request to web server
`100 Webserver 109 then transmits the requested content at the URL to upstream server 107, which
`stores the content in its cache (if it is cacheable. Alternatively, if upstream proxy server 107 does
`have a copy of the content stored in its cache, but it is uncertain whether (hat cached copy is still
`valid, the upstream proxy server 107 sends a "conditional" HTTP IF MODIFIED SINCE (SET
`request containing the URL to the Webserver 109. which either responds (hat the cached content
`is still valid or with a new version of the content if the content has subsequently changed since the
`downstream proxy server had last received it. Col. 6, 1. 68-col. 7, 1. 19. Upstream server 117 then
`forwards the content (or revalidation information) to downstream server 105. which stores the
`content in its cache (if it is cacheable), and then forwards the content to web browser 103, In steps
`3 through 7 of Figure 2. communication, system I 00 prefetches embedded objects in the requested
`content.
`
`After receiving a user request from browser 103. downstream proxy 105 forwards the web request
`to upstream server 107, which forwards the web request to web server 109. Therefore, upstream
`server 107 is the "first client device" that serves as an intermediary between downstream server
`I 05 and web server I 09.
`
`Downstream proxy server 105 is the second server.
`
`receiving, from the second server, the first content identifier;
`
`As shown in Figure 2, Border discloses that web browser 103 sends a GET request containing the
`URL for the content "HTML" to downstream server 105, and downstream server 105 then sends
`a GET request containing the URL "HTML" to upstream server 107. Col. 5, 11. 14-24, Fig. 2.
`
`The first client device ("upstream server 107*') receiving, from the second server ("downstream
`server 105"). the first content identifier ("URL HTML"):
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 7 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`sending, to the first server over the Internet, a Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)
`
`Page 6
`
`request that comprises the first content identifier;
`
`Web server 109 is the "first server." Border teaches that upstream server 107 sends a GET
`request for the URL "HTML" to web server 109. Col. 5, 11. 33-35, Figure 2.
`
`In Fig. 2, the first client device ("upstream server 107") sending, to the first server ("web server
`109") over (the Internet a Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) GET request that comprises the
`first content identifier ("URL HTML"'):
`
`receiving, the first content from the first server over the Internet in response to the sending
`
`of the first content identifier;
`
`Border then teaches that, in response to upstream server 107 issuing the GET URL HTML request
`the web server 109 for the HTML page ... the web server 109 transmits the requested HTML page
`to the upstream server. Col. 5, 11. 34-37. Thus, Border teaches the first client device receiving the
`first content (the HTML page at the URL "HTML") front the first server in response to sending
`the first content identifier (the URL "HTML").
`
`and sending, the first content by the first client device to the second server, in response to
`
`the receiving of the first content identifier.
`
`After receiving the first content ("the HTML page at the URL "'HTML"') from the first server
`"web server 109"), Border discloses that the first client device ("upstream server 107'') "forwards
`the HTML page to the downstream server 105. Col. 5, 11. 38-40.
`
`The second server ("downstream server 105") then forwards the first content to web browser 103.
`In response to web browser 103's original GET request, in accordance with the second server's role
`is a "server." Col. 5, 11. 38-40.
`
`12. The method according to claim 1, further comprising storing, by the first client device
`
`in response to the receiving from the first server, the first content, and wherein the sending,
`
`of the HTTP request is in response to the receiving of the first content identifier.
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 8 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`Border discloses that the first client device (upstream server 107) sends the GET request to the
`first server (web server 109) after it receives the first content identifier (URL "HTML") from the
`second server (downstream server 105). Border further discloses that downstream proxy server
`105 and upstream proxy server 107 contain caches 115 and 117, respectively. Additionally,
`Border teaches that the caches are "HTTP caches." Exhibit D at 4:8-11. In response to receiving
`the first content (the URL "HTML?") from the first server (web server 109), the first client
`device (upstream server 107) stores the first content (the HTML page at the URL "HTML") in
`HTTP cache 117. Col. 5, 11. 36-38.
`
`Page 7
`
`14. The method according to claim 1, further comprising determining, by the first client
`
`device, that the received first content, is valid.
`
`Border teaches that the caches are "HTTP caches." Col. 4, 11. 8-1. In response to response to
`receiving the first content (the URL "HTML") from the first server (web server 109), the first
`client device (upstream server 107) stores the first content (the HTML page at the URL
`"HTML") in HTTP cache 117. Col. 5, 11. 36-38. Border discloses that upstream server 107 stores
`the received first content in HTTP cache 117 to provide in response to future requests; for the
`same content, in the event upstream server 107 receives a subsequent request for the received
`first content. Border discloses that upstream server 107 may determine whether such content is
`still valid by sending a conditional HTTP GET request using IF MODIFIED SINCE headers to
`web server 109. Col. 7, 11. 5-10, col. 9, 11. 14-15. If there has been no change to the received first
`cornent since the time specified in the IF MODIFIED SINCE header, then the content is still
`valid and web server 109 returns a NO CHANGE response. Col. 7, 11. 5-10. Border discloses the
`servers with caches perform this action "to avoid stale information [and] determine whether the
`information stored at URL HTML, has been updated since the time it was last requested." Col. 6,
`11. 55-57.
`
`17. The method according to claim 1, further comprising periodically communicating
`
`between the second server and the first client device.
`
`See claim 1 above. Also, each of the "second server"and "first client device" is a HTTP caching
`proxy, and they comunicate via the HTTP protocol for the purpose of sending web requests. Fig.
`1, 2. A POSA would understand that downstream server 105 and upstream server 107
`communicate via HTTP.
`
`Border discloses downstream server 105 and upstream server 107 communicating via HTTP over
`a persistent TCP connection. This persistent TCP connection is labeled P-TCP in Figures 1 and 3
`of Border.
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 9 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`21. The method according to claim 1, wherein the first or second server is a Transmission
`
`Page 8
`
`Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) server that communicates over the Internet
`
`based on, or according to, using TCP/IP protocol or connection, and wherein the first client
`
`device is a Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) client that
`
`communicates respectively with the first or second server over the Internet based on, or
`
`according to, TCP/IP protocol or connection.
`
`Border discloses that downstream server 105 and upstream server 107 maintain and communicate
`over a persistent TCP connection to carry HTTP transactions, which is shown in Figure 1 by the
`connection labeled "P-TCP'' that is made over network 111. Fig. 1,4: 11 - 15, 7:50-52. Border also
`discloses that TCP communications of communication system 100 are made over IP. 7:52-35.
`Thus, at least the second server (downstream server 105) is a TCP/IP server that communicates
`over the Internet using the TCP/IP protocol. Further, the first client device (upstream server 10")
`is a TCPTP client that communicates over the Internet with the second server using the TCP/IP
`protocol.
`
`24. The method according to claim 1, further comprising establishing, by the first client
`
`device, a Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) connection with the second server using
`
`TCP/IP protocol.
`
`See claims land 21 above. Border discloses a first client device (upstream server 105) and second
`server ( downstream server 107) in communication with one another. Border also discloses that
`they connect using TCP/IP connections. Borde therefore discloses the first client device
`establishing a TCP connection with the second server using the TCP/IP protocol.
`
`25. The method according to claim 1, wherein the first or second server is a Transmission
`
`Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) server, wherein the first client device
`
`communicates over the Internet with the first or second server based on, or according to,
`
`using TCP/IP protocol or connection.
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 10 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`See claims 1 and 24 above. Border discloses a first client device (upstream server 105) an second
`server ( downstream server 107) in communication with one another. Border also discloses that
`they connect using TCP/IP connections. Border therefore discloses the first client device
`establishing a TCP connection with the second server and the TCP/IP protocol.
`
`Page 9
`
`26. The method according to claim 1, further comprising storing, operating, or using, a
`
`client operating system.
`
`Border discloses the use of a client operating system. Border discloses that "communication
`system 100 includes a user station 101 that utilizes a standard web browser 103 (e.g .. Microsoft
`Internet Explorer, Netscape Navigator). In this example, the user station 101 is a personal computer
`(PC); however, any computing platform may be utilized, such as a workstation, web enabled set-
`top boxes, web applications, etc." Col. 3, 11. 55-61, Further, "FIG. 6 is a diagram of a conventional
`communication system for providing retrieval of web content by a personal computer (PC), PC is
`loaded with a web browser 603 to access the web pages that are resident on web server 605;
`collectively the web pages and web server 605 denote a "web site." 1 :43-48. "FIG. 7 is a diagram
`of a computer system that can be configured as a proxy server, in accordance with an embodiment
`of the present invention ... computer system 701 also includes a main memory 707, such asa random
`access memory (RAM) or other dynamic storage device, coupled to bus 703 for storing
`information and instructions to be executed by processor 705," 10:6-24, FIG 7.
`
`27. The method according to claim 1, wherein the steps are sequentially executed.
`
`Border. Figure 2, Steps 1 and 2.
`
`Claims 28 and 29 are rejected on the same rationale as claim 1 above.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC§ 103
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set
`forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art
`are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 11 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not
`be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`Page 10
`
`Claims 2 and 22 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`
`Border as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Crowds.
`
`2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the first client device is identified by a Media
`
`Access Control (MAC) address or a hostname, and wherein the method further comprising
`
`sending, by the first client device, during, as part of, or in response to, a start-up of the first
`
`client device, a first message to the second server, and wherein the first messages comprises
`
`the first IP address, the MAC address, or the hostname.
`
`Claim 2 initially recites that "the first client device is identified by a Media Access Control (MAC)
`address or a hostname." Border further discloses that upstream server 107 operates on computer
`system 701,which is comprised of communication interface 719, which may be a network interface
`card. Col. 4, 11. 40-44, col. 11, 11. 24-38. A person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA) would readily
`understand that a network interface card or other communication interface 719 and therefore the
`computer system 701 comprising communication interface 719 would be identified by a MAC
`address as required by IEEE 802. Further, a POSA would have readily understood that upstream
`server 107 that serves as a web proxy and communicates using the TCP/IP protocol, see, e.g .. , col.
`4, 11.11-15 and col. 7, 11. 32-38, would also be identified by an IP address.
`
`Also, Crowds discloses the method of claim 2:
`Claim 2 initially recites that "the first client device is identified by a Media Access Control (MAC)
`address or a hostname." The "first client device" is disclosed in Crowds as ajondo. Crowds further
`discloses that a jondo has a host name, stating, "The user selects this jondo as her web proxy by
`specifying its host name and port number in her web browser as the proxy for all services" p, 73;
`Fig. 6 (identifying host names of multiple jondos). Crowds therefore expressly discloses that the
`"first client device" is identified by a hostname.
`
`Claim 2 further requires that "during, as part of, or in response to. a start-up of the first client
`device" the first client device sends a "first message" to the second server comprising "the first IP
`address." MAC address, or the hostname. Crowds discloses a setup phase for new jondos. such
`that other jondos learn the IP address, port number, and account name of the new jondos, and these
`other jondos use this information to select a jondo as a proxy. Crowds discloses that tins can be
`done through a server, to which the jondo sends its information on startup: "When the jondo is
`started, it contacts a server called the blender to request admittance to the crowd. If admitted, the
`blender reports to this jondo the current membership of the crowd and information that enables
`this jondo to participate in the crowd." p. 73 "When the user starts a jondo, ... the blender adds the
`new jondo (i.e .. its IP address, port number, and account name) to its list of members, and reports
`this list back to the jondo." p. 87. Crowds also discloses that a jondo can communicate directly
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 12 of 18
`
`

`

`Page 11
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`with other jondos during startup to share information, particularly in a more secure manner;
`"jondos will establish shared keys using Diffie-Hellman key exchange [Diffie and Heilman 1976],
`where the blender serves only to distribute the Diffie-Heilman public keys of crowd members" pp.
`87-88. A POSA would understand that Diffie-Hellman is a cryptographic key-exchange protocol,
`also used in the SSL/TLS protocol employed by secure HTTP (HTTPS), whereby two nodes
`directly communicate to establish a shared cryptographic key not known by anybody else. The
`messages sent as part of that key exchange would include the IP address of both sender and
`recipient, and thus the other jondo would receive a message from the first jondo, during the first
`jondo' s initialization period, that includes the first jondo's IP address and port number.
`
`22. The method according to claim 1, wherein the first client device communicates over the
`
`Internet based on, or according to, one out of UDP, DNS, TCP, FTP, POP#, SMTP, or SQL
`
`standards.
`
`Crowds discloses the first client device communication over the Internet based on at least TCP and
`FTP. The "first client device" of Crowds is a jondo operating on a user's computer. Because
`Crowds' disclosure of TCP/IP is in reference to "the TCP/IP connection to the jondo." Crowds
`discloses that the first client device communicates over the Internet based on TCP.
`
`In addition, Crowds discloses the use of FTP. Crowds states that "any request coming from the
`browser is sent directly to the jondo" and there includes a footnote stating that "the services that
`must be proxied include Gopher, HTTP, and SSL "p.73 n.l. Further, FTP is supported to further
`the goal of anonymity, because otherwise "FTP requests triggered by downloading a w eb page
`would not go through the crowd, and would thus reveal the user's IP address to the end server. p
`73 n. 1. Crowds therefore also discloses that ( the first client device communicates over the Internet
`based on FTP.
`
`Claims 15 and 18 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Border as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of RF 2616.
`
`15. The method according to claim 14, wherein the determining is based on the received
`
`HTTP header according to, or based on, IETF RFC 2616.
`
`HTTP ( as described in RFC 2616) includes a mechanism for ensuring to content is valid in terms
`of ensuring to that the content is consistent with content on a web server. Border discloses HTTP
`and therefore discloses this claim. Border discloses, upstream server 1 O? usine HTTP headers to
`determine whether the content stored in its cache is stale.
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 13 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 12
`
`A POSA would havebeen well aware in 2009 that RFC 2616 specifies a caching proxy's (e.g.
`upstream server 107) use of HTTP headers received from an origin server (e.g. web server 109)
`to determine the validity of cached content, for example, an origin server may include the
`Expires header in response to an HTTP GET request, which "gives the date/time alter which, the
`response is considered stale" i.e. not valid. RFC 2616 § 14,2 I. Alternatively, an origin server
`may include the Cache-Control header with a max-age directive in response to a GET request,
`which specifies the amount of time after which the response is considered stale, RFC 2616 §§ 13
`.2,4, 14,9, 14.9,3, The caching proxy stores this header information received from the origin
`server, and uses them to determine whether the stored cornent is valid.
`
`Further, even after the expire time or max-age period of a piece of cached content, Border
`discloses, RFC 2616 § 13 further details, the use of conditional HTTP GET requests to validate
`content stored in cache 117 on the upstream server 107. Col. 5, 11. 25-47, Col. 7, 11.5-19; RFC
`2616 §13.
`
`Border discloses the use of HTTP and TCP, which in turn disclose claim 15, For the same reasons,
`claim 15 at a minimum would have been obvious to a POSA in view of the disclosure of Border
`and the general knowledge of a POSA, and/or with the disclosure of RFC 2616 (regarding
`HTTP/1,1) which similarly reflects Internet communication details with which a POSA would
`have been familiar, and with the disclosure of the TCP/IP protocol.
`
`As discussed in RFC 2616, one of the HTTP/I. I headers is a "Keep-Alive" header. See RFC 2616
`§ 8.1.3 ("Keep-Alive header implemented by many HTTP/1.0clients"), § 13.5.1 (referring to
`Keep-Alive header), § 19.6 (referring to Keep-Alive version of persistent connections). As the
`name suggests, a "Keep-Alive" message in HTTP is a mechanism to allow two communicating
`devices to ensure that their connection remains "alive" by sending periodic communications, The
`usage of such "'Keep-Alive" messages in HTTP headers is old and well-known.
`
`18. The method according to claim 17, wherein the periodically communicating comprises
`
`exchanging 'keep alive' messages.
`
`Periodically communicating is included the exchange of "keep alive" messages, which are
`discussed in RFC 2616 (e.g., §§8.1.3, 13.5,1, 19,6) and would have been well known to a POSA.
`The usage of such '"keep alive"' messages in the context of claim 17 would have been disclosed
`to a POSA in view of the disclosure of Border and the general knowledge of a POSA, and/or with
`the disclosure of RFC 2616
`(regarding HTTP/1.1) which Similarly reflects
`Internet
`communication details with which a POSA would have been familiar.
`
`As discussed in RFC 2616, one of the HTTP/I. I headers is a "Keep-Alive" header. See RFC 2616
`§ 8.1.3 ("Keep-Alive header implemented by many HTTP/1.0clients"), § 13.5.1 (referring to
`Keep-Alive header), § 19.6 (referring to Keep-Alive version of persistent connections). As the
`
`Code200, UAB, et al. v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Code200's Exhibit 1029
`Page 14 of 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/014,875
`Art Unit: 3992
`name suggests, a "Keep-Alive" message in HTTP is a mechanism to allow two communicating
`devices to ensure that their connection remains "alive" by sending periodic communications. The
`usage of such "'Keep-Alive" messages in HTTP headers is old and well-known.
`
`Page 13
`
`Claim 19 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Border
`
`as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of MorphMix.
`
`19. The method according to claim 1, for use with a software application that includes
`
`computer instructions that, when executed by a computer processor, cause the processor to
`
`perform the sending of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) request, the receiving and
`
`storing of the first content, the receiving of the first content identifier, and the sending of
`
`the part of, or the whole of, the stored first content, the method is further preceded by:
`
`downloading, by the first client device from the Internet, the software application; and
`
`installing, by the first client device, the downloaded software application.
`
`MorphMix discloses that consumer computers can be the "firs