`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________________
`NETFLIX, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`VIDEOLABS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`________________________
`Case No. IPR2023-00630
`U.S. Patent No. 7,440,559
`________________________
`
`
`DECLARATION OF ANTHONY WECHSELBERGER
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,440,559
`
`
`
`Netflix v. VideoLabs
`IPR2023-00630
`Netflix. Ex. 1003
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST ............................................................................... i
`I.
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`II.
`QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................................................ 2
`III.
`SCOPE OF OPINIONS ................................................................................... 9
`IV. MATERIALS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED ...................................... 10
`V.
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................... 10
`VI. STATEMENT OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES .................................................... 11
`A.
`Claim Construction ............................................................................. 11
`B.
`Anticipation ......................................................................................... 12
`C.
`Obviousness ......................................................................................... 12
`VII. TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION OF THE
`PRIOR ART ................................................................................................... 13
`A.
`Systems for Delivery and Downloading of Multimedia Content
`from Remote Devices .......................................................................... 14
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0023427 to
`Cassin (Ex. 1004) ................................................................................ 16
`U.S. Patent No. 7,243,136 to Huston (Ex. 1005) ................................ 21
`C.
`D. Other Evidence Regarding the State of the Art ................................... 24
`VIII. SUMMARY OF THE ’559 PATENT ........................................................... 24
`B.
`Challenged Claims .............................................................................. 28
`C.
`The ’559 Patent File History (Ex. 1002) ............................................. 34
`D.
`Claim Construction (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3)) .................................. 36
`
`B.
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`IX. PRIORITY DATE OF THE ’559 PATENT ................................................. 38
`X. APPLICATION OF THE PRIOR ART TO CLAIMS 1–24 ......................... 38
`A. Ground 1: Cassin Anticipates Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14,
`16, 19, 20, and 22 of the ’559 Patent .................................................. 38
`1.
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 38
`2.
`Claim 2 ...................................................................................... 48
`3.
`Claim 4 ...................................................................................... 50
`4.
`Claim 7 ...................................................................................... 51
`5.
`Claim 8 ...................................................................................... 59
`6.
`Claim 10 .................................................................................... 60
`7.
`Claim 13 .................................................................................... 61
`8.
`Claim 14 .................................................................................... 67
`9.
`Claim 16 .................................................................................... 68
`10. Claim 19 .................................................................................... 70
`11. Claim 20 .................................................................................... 73
`12. Claim 22 .................................................................................... 73
`Ground 2: Cassin and Huston Render Obvious Claims 1-24 of
`the ’559 Patent ..................................................................................... 74
`1.
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 74
`2.
`Claim 2 ...................................................................................... 76
`3.
`Claim 3 ...................................................................................... 76
`4.
`Claim 4 ...................................................................................... 79
`5.
`Claim 5 ...................................................................................... 80
`6.
`Claim 6 ...................................................................................... 82
`7.
`Claim 7 ...................................................................................... 83
`8.
`Claim 8 ...................................................................................... 87
`9.
`Claim 9 ...................................................................................... 87
`10. Claim 10 .................................................................................... 88
`
`B.
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`11. Claim 11 .................................................................................... 88
`12. Claim 12 .................................................................................... 88
`13. Claim 13 .................................................................................... 90
`14. Claim 14 .................................................................................... 94
`15. Claim 15 .................................................................................... 94
`16. Claim 16 .................................................................................... 95
`17. Claim 17 .................................................................................... 95
`18. Claim 18 .................................................................................... 95
`19. Claim 19 .................................................................................... 97
`20. Claim 20 .................................................................................... 98
`21. Claim 21 .................................................................................... 98
`22. Claim 22 .................................................................................... 98
`23. Claim 23 .................................................................................... 99
`24. Claim 24 .................................................................................... 99
`25. Motivation to Combine ........................................................... 101
`Ground 3: Huston Renders Obvious Claims 1-24 of the ’559
`Patent ................................................................................................. 104
`1.
`Claims 1, 7, 13, 19: ................................................................. 104
`2.
`Claims 2, 8, 14, 20: ................................................................. 109
`3.
`Claims 3, 9, 15, 21: ................................................................. 110
`4.
`Claims 4, 10, 16, 22: ............................................................... 110
`5.
`Claims 5, 11, 17, 23: ............................................................... 111
`6.
`Claims 6, 12, 18, 24: ............................................................... 112
`XI. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 113
`
`
`C.
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`Exhibit
`Number
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`Description
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,440,559 to Muhonen, et al., “System and
`Associated Terminal, Method and Computer Program Product for
`Controlling the Flow of Content,” filed on October 22, 2003 (“the
`’559 patent”).
`
`File History of the ’559 patent (Application No. 10/690,692 (’559
`patent FH)).
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger.
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0023427 to Cassin
`filed on July 26, 2001 (“Cassin”).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,243,136 to Huston filed on January 17, 2001
`(“Huston”).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,447,486 to Tamura filed on March 25, 2003
`(“Tamura”).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,996,627 to Carden filed on May 25, 1999
`(“Carden”).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,721,337 to Syed filed on October 26, 2001
`(“Syed”).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,669,564 to Young filed on June 27, 2000
`(“Young”).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,732,183 to Graham filed on May 4, 2000
`(“Graham”).
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0023264 to Aaltonen
`filed on June 29, 2001 (“Aaltonen”).
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0087997 to
`Dahlstrom filed on December 27, 2001 (“Dahlstrom”).
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,507,727 to Henrick filed on October 13, 2000
`(“Henrick”).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,112,226 to Weaver filed on October 22, 1997
`(“Weaver”).
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0059624 to Machida
`filed on August 1, 2001 (“Machida”).
`
`Starz Entm’t, LLC v. VL Collective IP, LLC, Joint Claim
`Construction Chart, pages 1-16 (Dkt. 64), C.A. 21-1448-JLH (D.
`Del.).
`
`VideoLabs, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., Opening Claim Construction
`Brief filed by Defendants, pages 1-32 (Dkt. 48), C.A. 6-22-cv-
`00079 (W.D. Tex.).
`
`VideoLabs, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., Patent Owner’s Responsive
`Claim Construction Brief, pages 1-32 (Dkt. 63), C.A. 6-22-cv-
`00079 (W.D. Tex.).
`
`VideoLabs, Inc. v. Netflix Inc., Motion to Dismiss for Failure to
`State a Claim filed by Petitioner, pages 1-5 (Dkt. 15).
`
`VideoLabs, Inc. v. Netflix Inc., Opening Brief in Support re Motion
`to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Petitioner, pages 1-
`31 (Dkt. 16).
`
`VideoLabs, Inc. v. Netflix Inc., Answering Brief in Opposition re
`Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Patent
`Owner, pages 1-32 (Dkt. 18).
`
`VideoLabs, Inc. v. Netflix Inc., Reply Brief re Motion to Dismiss
`for Failure to State a Claim filed by Petitioner, pages 1-18 (Dkt.
`19).
`
`Starz Entm’t, LLC v. VL Collective IP, LLC, Claim Construction
`Order, pages 1-4 (Dkt. 88).
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1. My name is Anthony Wechselberger, and I have been retained by
`
`counsel for Netflix Inc. (“Netflix” or “Petitioner”) to submit this Declaration in
`
`support of Netflix’s petition for Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) and cancellation of
`
`claims 1–24 (the “Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 7,440,559 (“the ’559
`
`patent”) (Ex. 1001), which I understand has been assigned to VideoLabs Inc.
`
`(“VideoLabs” or “Patent Owner”).
`
`2.
`
`I have been asked to opine on whether the ’559 patent is anticipated
`
`and/or rendered obvious by the prior art. My opinions are based on my years of
`
`education, research and experience, as well as my investigation and study of relevant
`
`materials. The materials that I considered for this Declaration include all exhibits
`
`cited in this Declaration.
`
`3.
`
`I may rely upon these materials, my knowledge and experience, and/or
`
`additional materials to rebut arguments raised by Patent Owner. Further, I may also
`
`consider additional documents and information in forming any necessary opinions,
`
`including documents that may not yet have been provided to me.
`
`4. My analysis of the materials produced in this investigation is ongoing
`
`and I will continue to review any new material as it is provided. This Declaration
`
`represents only those opinions I have formed to date. I reserve the right to revise,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`supplement, and/or amend my opinions stated herein based on new information and
`
`on my continuing analysis of the materials already provided.
`
`5.
`
`I am being compensated at my standard consulting rate for my time
`
`spent working on issues in this matter. I am also being reimbursed for any
`
`reasonable and customary expenses associated with my work and testimony. I have
`
`no financial interest in, or affiliation with, Petitioner or Patent Owner. My
`
`compensation is not dependent upon the outcome of, or my testimony in, the present
`
`IPR or any litigation proceedings.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`6.
`I am qualified by education and experience to testify as an expert in the
`
`field of digital content management systems for wireless devices. My academic and
`
`professional background is in electrical engineering and communication sciences,
`
`and I have been working in those fields since the completion of my M.S. in electrical
`
`engineering approximately 43 years ago. My background and qualifications are
`
`supplemented in my curriculum vitae, attached as Appendix A hereto. Here, I
`
`provide a summary of my qualifications and professional experience.
`
`7.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering from
`
`the University of Arizona in 1974 and a Master of Science degree in electrical
`
`engineering from San Diego State University in 1979. In addition, in 1984, I
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`completed the Executive Program for Scientists and Engineers at the University of
`
`California at San Diego.
`
`8.
`
`I am currently the President of Entropy Management Solutions
`
`(“EMS”), a position I have held since I founded the company in 1999. In this
`
`capacity, I perform consulting services related to technology and business
`
`development, content management, distribution and merchandising, systems
`
`engineering, and product design in the areas of industrial and consumer broadband
`
`and multimedia technologies and associated commercial systems. As a result of my
`
`twenty-five years of extensive technology experience in corporate life, and
`
`continuing as President of EMS, I have worked with various aspects of Internet,
`
`cable, broadcast and satellite television programming distribution, including systems
`
`and equipment used at satellite uplinks and cable head-ends, such as real-time
`
`computer control systems and associated databases used in conjunction with
`
`consumer appliances, such as set-top boxes.
`
`9.
`
`I have over four decades of experience working with high technology
`
`systems related to military, commercial, and consumer communication systems,
`
`networks, and appliances. I have held various design, leadership, and executive
`
`positions in, for example, engineering, operations, sales and marketing, and product
`
`management at leading companies, such as TV/COM International, Inc. (TV/COM)
`
`and Oak Communications, Inc. (Oak), in those fields. As Vice President at Oak
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`Communications (in the 1980s), Chief Technology Officer at TV/COM (in the
`
`1990s), and a consulting systems engineer (1999 to present), I have specialized in
`
`the areas of digital communications technologies, systems and networks, including
`
`infrastructures, communications equipment and associated signal processing,
`
`network management and command-and-control, and information security as used
`
`for content management, merchandising, and delivery to the receivers/consumers of
`
`information/content.
`
`10. Consumer appliances are often the receivers/consumers of the
`
`communications systems I’ve worked with, and I’ve been involved, for example, in
`
`the design, manufacturing, sales, and servicing of consumer appliances, such as set-
`
`top boxes (STBs), since the early 1980s. My experience includes the development
`
`of terrestrial broadcast, satellite uplink, and cable head-end commercial equipment
`
`for television transmissions, as well as consumer appliance equipment, such as STBs
`
`and other home-based or home-networked devices. These architectures included
`
`computer control systems for networks and associated network device command and
`
`control, and for management of content distribution and consumer appliance
`
`functions. For example, these systems are addressable. “Addressability” enables the
`
`system operator to control the delivery of content and network services, network
`
`sourcing and receiving devices (e.g., servers and transmission equipment and PC or
`
`STB receivers), and the consumer experience. Examples are delivery of software or
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`data files, for which purchased or subscription services or content is available,
`
`electronic program guides, and à la carte functions such as pay-per-view (PPV) and
`
`video-on-demand (VOD).
`
`11. Of particular relevance to this matter, I have direct experience in the
`
`design and operation of centralized computer control systems used to support two-
`
`way addressable wired and wireless digital broadband content delivery systems.
`
`These computer control systems maintained a database of authorized users including
`
`their appliance types and subscription choices as well as supported real-time
`
`interaction with the appliance with respect to the types of information being received
`
`(e.g., EPG data and updates, requests for on-demand content, change in subscription
`
`choices, parental control functions, and home shopping and polling).
`
`12.
`
`In particular, control over the downloading of data for storage in a set
`
`top box (STB) was integral to the technologies I was involved with throughout the
`
`1980s and 1990s. Examples are EPG data, subscription and on-demand program
`
`entitlements, and executables for controlling STB functions and functionality. And
`
`as a participant and supplier of STBs for the digital television (DTV) industry in the
`
`late 1990s I was well aware of the arrival of the digital video recorder (DVR)
`
`appliances that became available from TiVo and ReplayTV in 1999. This got our
`
`attention because not only was the flow of data files to consumer appliances being
`
`controlled, but now (then) so would be multimedia files. Thus, the concepts found
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`in the challenged ’559 patent were well-known to me and the broadband industry at
`
`large well before its October 2003 priority date.
`
`13.
`
`I have been a participant in the development and evolution of modern
`
`consumer digital audio and digital video communications systems and technologies.
`
`In 1991, my employer, TV/COM, and I began to participate in the newly formed
`
`International Organization for Standardization (ISO) MPEG-2 digital television
`
`standards initiatives, and in the following year, we participated in both the European
`
`Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) and U.S. Advanced Television Systems Committee
`
`(ATSC) forums (which were based upon MPEG-2). By the mid-1990s, as the
`
`technologies and standards in support of digital television (DTV) moved towards
`
`implementation, the dawn of the Internet age also arrived. This had a dramatic
`
`impact on the way broadband systems engineers like myself began to plan for the
`
`future. This is because the concept of convergence—the melding of traditional
`
`broadband communications systems and equipment, computers, and computer
`
`networks, with that of the telecommunications world—was changing the
`
`communications infrastructure and technology landscape. When television
`
`distribution went all-digital, the information of television became simply “data” and
`
`it became possible for the technologies of digital television, computers and computer
`
`networks, and the telephony industry (which was in the midst of its transition to
`
`digital infrastructure that began in the 1970s) to coalesce. Support for on-line and
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`real-time Internet services demanded a high-performance two-way data transmission
`
`capability, and so broadband network providers began to upgrade their distribution
`
`infrastructures accordingly.
`
`14.
`
`In conjunction with this convergence, as TV/COM’s Chief Technology
`
`Officer, I directed the expansion of our network products into broadband data
`
`communications generally, from its initial focus on digital television. Networks
`
`became more advanced in order to support real-time interaction between consumers
`
`and various information sources, and interactive and on-line applications led to rapid
`
`adoption of client-server information access architectures. The ubiquitous set-top
`
`box began to evolve from a minimalist appliance towards its current status as a
`
`communications hub of the consumer’s media room. This was supported by the
`
`exponential increase in the capabilities of powerful yet inexpensive integrated
`
`circuits, such as microprocessors and memory that allowed STBs to become more
`
`software driven and support advanced digital signal processing (DSP) needs.
`
`15.
`
`In my consulting work, I have continued to work with technologies,
`
`equipment and network infrastructures for content generation, distribution, and
`
`consumption. My current work involves both traditional and newly developing
`
`architectures and distribution channels. As an example of the latter, I am the chief
`
`security systems architect on behalf of the five major Hollywood studios for their
`
`“Digital Cinema Initiatives” (DCI) consortium. DCI has developed and evolved the
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`requirements and specifications for transitioning first-run theatrical movie releases
`
`from film to digital files for distribution and exhibition display. I am responsible for
`
`all elements of command and control and digital rights management (DRM) for the
`
`digital cinema system design and implementation.
`
`16.
`
`I also represent DCI at the Society of Motion Picture and Television
`
`Engineers (SMPTE), which has developed and is continuing to develop a set of
`
`internationally recognized standards for global adoption of digital cinema. The
`
`migration to all-digital distribution impacts other content distribution channels, such
`
`as early window release for hospitality, airplane, and cable/satellite video-on-
`
`demand (VOD), as well as newer so called “over-the-top” (OTT) distribution
`
`channels based on Internet distribution. I have also been a strategy and technology
`
`consultant to content management and distribution entities in these areas.
`
`17.
`
`I am currently a member of
`
`the Society of Cable &
`
`Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE), the Society of Motion Picture and
`
`Television Engineers (SMPTE) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic
`
`Engineers (IEEE). I have previously been a member of the International
`
`Organization for Standardization (ISO), Motion Picture Experts Group (MPEG), the
`
`Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) group, and as Chief Technology Officer of TV/Com
`
`International I was a voting member of the Advanced Television Systems
`
`Committee (ATSC).
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`18.
`
`I am an inventor on U.S. Patent No. 4,531,020, issued July 23, 1985,
`
`and entitled “Multi-layer Encryption System for the Broadcast of Encrypted
`
`Information” and U.S. Patent No. 5,113,440, issued May 12, 1992, and entitled
`
`“Universal Decoder.” I am an inventor on two patent applications: Application No.
`
`10/028,113, filed December 21, 2001 and entitled “Storage and Delivery of
`
`Electronic Media Content with Advertising” (abandoned); and Application No.
`
`63/091,518, filed October 14, 2020 and entitled “Remote Audience Participation at
`
`Live Events.” I have participated in U.S. patent prosecution, and have a general
`
`understanding of the process, and of the novelty and non-obviousness requirements
`
`for patentability.
`
`19. As a result of the qualifications set forth supra, I consider myself to be
`
`knowledgeable about and an expert in the field of digital content staging,
`
`management and delivery in wired and wireless systems.
`
`III. SCOPE OF OPINIONS
`20.
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether:
`
` Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20 and 22 of the ’559 patent are
`
`anticipated by Cassin (Ex. 1004) (Ground I);
`
` Claims 1-24 of the ’559 patent would have been obvious to a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) at the time of the alleged invention in
`
`view of Cassin (Ex. 1004) and Houston (Ex. 1005) (Ground II); and
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
` Claims 1-24 of the ’559 patent would have been obvious to a POSITA at the
`
`time of the alleged invention in view of Houston (Ex. 1005) (Ground III).
`
`21. This Declaration, including the exhibits cited herein, sets forth my
`
`opinions on these topics. In short, it is my opinion that Cassin anticipates claims 1,
`
`2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20 and 22 of the ’559 patent; Cassin and Houston render
`
`obvious claims 1-24 of the ’559 patent; and Houston renders obvious claims 1-24 of
`
`the ’559 patent.
`
`IV. MATERIALS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED
`22. The materials I considered and relied upon in preparing my Declaration
`
`and forming my opinions include all exhibits cited to in this Declaration, including
`
`the ’559 patent, the ’559 file history, and the relevant prior art, as I discuss below.
`
`23.
`
`I also have relied on my academic and professional experience in
`
`reaching the opinions expressed in this Declaration.
`
`V. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`24.
`In rendering the opinions set forth in this Declaration, I was asked to
`
`consider the patent claims and the prior art through the eyes of a POSITA. The “art”
`
`is the field of technology to which a patent is related. I understand that the purpose
`
`of using the viewpoint of a POSITA is for objectivity.
`
`25.
`
`I considered factors such as the educational level and years of
`
`experience of those working in the pertinent art; the types of problems encountered
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`in the art; the teachings of the prior art; patents and publications of other persons or
`
`companies; and the sophistication of the technology. I understand that a POSITA is
`
`not a specific real individual, but rather a hypothetical individual having the qualities
`
`reflected by the factors discussed above.
`
`26. Taking these factors into consideration, it is my opinion that a POSITA
`
`as of the time of the alleged invention of the ’559 patent would have had a bachelor’s
`
`degree in electrical or computer engineering, or a closely related scientific field such
`
`as computer science, and two years of work experience with multimedia content
`
`transmission and management. Alternatively, any lack of experience could be
`
`remedied with additional education (e.g., a master’s degree), and likewise, a lack of
`
`education can be remedied with additional work experience (e.g., 4-5 years).
`
`VI. STATEMENT OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES
`A. Claim Construction
`27.
`I understand that terms appearing in the patent claims are to be
`
`interpreted according to their “ordinary and customary meaning” in an IPR
`
`proceeding. In determining the ordinary and customary meaning, the words of a
`
`claim are first given their plain meaning as they would have been understood by a
`
`POSITA at the time of the alleged invention, in light of the specification and file
`
`history. I understand that treatises and dictionaries may be consulted, albeit under
`
`limited circumstances, to determine the meaning attributed by a POSITA at the time
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`of the alleged invention. I have followed this approach in my analysis and have
`
`applied the ordinary and customary meaning of those terms throughout my analysis
`
`in this Declaration.
`
`28.
`
`I understand that the words of the claims should be interpreted as they
`
`would have been understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`alleged invention was made (not today).
`
`B. Anticipation
`29.
`I understand that if each and every element of a claim is disclosed in a
`
`single prior art reference, then the claimed invention is anticipated and not patentable
`
`under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102. In order for the invention to be anticipated, each
`
`element of the claimed invention must be described or embodied, either expressly or
`
`inherently, in a single prior art reference. I also understand that a reference
`
`inherently discloses a claim limitation when that claim limitation is necessarily
`
`present in the reference.
`
`C. Obviousness
`30.
`I have been informed that a patent claim is invalid as “obvious” under
`
`pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103 in light of one or more prior art references if it would have
`
`been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, taking into account (1) the scope and
`
`content of the prior art, (2) the differences between the prior art and the claims, (3)
`
`the level of ordinary skill in the art, and (4) any so-called “secondary considerations”
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`of non-obviousness, which include: (i) “long felt need” for the claimed invention,
`
`(ii) commercial success attributable to the claimed invention, (iii) unexpected results
`
`of the claimed invention, and (iv) “copying” of the claimed invention by others.
`
`31.
`
`I have been informed that a claim can be obvious in light of a single
`
`prior art reference or multiple prior art references. To be obvious in light of a single
`
`prior art reference or multiple prior art references, there must be a reason to modify
`
`the single prior art reference, or combine two or more references, in order to achieve
`
`the claimed invention. This reason may come from a teaching, suggestion, or
`
`motivation to combine, or may come from the reference or references themselves,
`
`the knowledge of one skilled in the art, or from the nature of the problem to be
`
`solved, and may be explicit or implicit from the prior art as a whole. I have been
`
`informed that the combination of familiar elements according to known methods is
`
`likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. I also
`
`understand it is improper to rely on hindsight in making the obviousness
`
`determination.
`
`VII. TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION OF THE PRIOR
`ART
`32.
`
`It is my opinion that all of the elements of claims 1-24 were already
`
`known in the prior art before the priority date of the ’559 patent. Accordingly, I
`
`conclude that there is nothing novel or non-obvious about the alleged invention
`
`disclosed in the ’559 patent.
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`A.
`
`33.
`
`Systems for Delivery and Downloading of Multimedia Content
`from Remote Devices
`It was well-known before 2003 how to download content from a remote
`
`device over a network. For example, it was known to deliver data to mobile terminals
`
`through broadcast channels, and to do so simultaneously to a plurality of user
`
`terminals. Ex. 1006, 1:28-30, 40-44. It was also known to download rich content
`
`such as images and music to mobile terminals via wireless networks such as cellular
`
`phone systems. Id. 2:16-20. By 2000, after the dot-com boom of the late 1990s, the
`
`popularity of the Internet increased such that users were turning from traditional
`
`media sources, such as television and newspaper, to the Internet to obtain media
`
`content. Ex. 1007, 1:12-16. A user may visit media servers that contain information
`
`from numerous types of content providers. Id., 1:16-19. It was known that a
`
`conventional arrangement for providing Internet content to a user from a plurality of
`
`various content providers was as diagrammed below:
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger
`
`IPR2023-00630
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005 at Fig. 1, 1:44-48.
`
`Additionally, different methods for transmitting/receiving data via a cellular phone
`
`had been developed well before to 2003, so that users can enjoy content having a
`
`large amount of data, such as video and music, on their cellular phones. Ex. 1006,
`
`1:17-20.
`
`34. Those of ordinary skill in the art would have understoo