throbber
IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`John Albert Kembel, et al.
`In re Patent of:
`8,510,407
`U.S. Patent No.:
`August 13, 2013
`Issue Date:
`Appl. Serial No.: 11/932,553
`Filing Date:
`October 31, 2007
`Title:
`DISPLAYING TIME-VARYING INTERNET BASED DATA
`USING APPLICATION MEDIA PACKAGES
`
` Attorney Docket No.: 39843-0149IP1
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. DOUGLAS C. SCHMIDT
`
`I, Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt, of Nashville, Tennessee, declare that:
`
`QUALIFICATIONS AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
`My qualifications can be found in my Curriculum Vitae, which is
`
`1.
`
`submitted with this Declaration as Exhibit 1004 and includes a complete list of my
`
`education, patents and publications, employment and research history, and
`
`professional activities and awards.
`
`2.
`
`I am currently tenured as the Cornelius Vanderbilt Professor of
`
`Engineering with the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
`
`at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, TN, where I also serve as the Associate
`
`Chair of the Computer Science Department. I have been a full-time university
`
`professor since 1994, and I was previously a tenured professor at the University of
`
`California, Irvine with the Electrical and Computer Engineering department from
`
`2000 to 2003 and Washington University in St. Louis, MO with the Computer
`
`Science and Engineering department from 1994 to 2000. In addition, I served as
`
`1
`
`SAMSUNG 1003
`
`

`

`the Chief Technology Officer for the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie
`
`Mellon University from 2010 to 2012.
`
`3.
`
`I hold a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree in Computer Science
`
`from the University of California (UC) Irvine in Irvine, CA, which I received in
`
`1994. I also earned a Master’s Degree in Computer Science from UC Irvine in
`
`1990, as well as a Bachelor’s Degree in Sociology in 1986 and Master’s Degree in
`
`Sociology in 1984 from the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, VA.
`
`Prior to completing my graduate studies at UC Irvine, I worked with the Urban
`
`Information Systems (“URBIS”) project at UC Irvine’s Public Policy Research
`
`organization, where I studied end-user computing interactivity with municipal
`
`institutions in 40 cities across the United States. I also worked at the International
`
`Center for Information Technology (“ICIT”) in Washington, D.C. on projects
`assessing techniques for improving software productivity for enterprise IT systems.
`
`4.
`
`I first started programming in 1983 when I was an undergraduate
`
`student taking statistics courses at the College of William and Mary in
`
`Williamsburg, VA. While I was an undergraduate and graduate student at William
`
`and Mary I programmed with the SPSS and SAS statistical packages and worked
`
`as a programmer at the National Center for State Courts during the summer of
`
`1986 as I was completing my Master’s degree. From 1985 through 1988 I learned
`
`how to program in Pascal, C, C++, Ada, Prolog, and Lisp, both at the College of
`
`2
`
`

`

`William and Mary (where I was a graduate student in the Sociology department)
`
`and at UC Irvine (where I was a graduate student in the Information and Computer
`
`Science department). During this time period I also learned how to program
`
`networked software services and applications using platforms, libraries, and
`
`protocols available at the time, such as UNIX Sockets and TCP/IP. During the time
`
`I was also an avid user of popular networked applications, such as remote login
`
`(rlogin and TELNET), email, and file transfer (FTP), which provided distributed
`
`services for accessing remote computer resources and collaborating over local area
`
`and wide area networks.
`
`5.
`
`During the past 30 years, I have conducted and supervised a
`
`significant number of research projects involving a wide range of software-related
`
`topics including patterns, optimization techniques, and empirical analyses of
`
`object-oriented middleware frameworks for distributed real-time embedded
`
`systems and mobile cloud computing applications, including applications backed
`
`by relational database management systems. I have published over 640 scholarly
`
`articles and technical papers, and I am the co-author or editor of 12 books or book-
`
`length manuscripts on various topics, including software architecture, network
`
`programming, object-oriented frameworks, distributed and real-time systems,
`
`open-source middleware platforms, and mobile cloud computing applications. My
`
`work has been cited more than 38,000 times across a comprehensive spectrum of
`
`3
`
`

`

`high-impact publications, and my current h-index score is 90, which indicates the
`
`significant impact of my publications on scholarly literature in the field of
`
`Computer Science.1 I have also supervised the research of more than 40 PhD and
`
`Master’s graduate students to date. In addition to conducting and publishing my
`
`own research, I have served on the editorial board of numerous journals, including
`
`publications by IEEE and the ACM, and I have been a guest editor of numerous
`
`special issue journals based on my research expertise.
`
`6. My research has been funded by a variety of organizations, including
`
`both federal agencies, such as DARPA, NSF, NASA, NIH, the U.S. Air Force, and
`
`the U.S. Navy, as well as leading companies, such as Northrup Grumman,
`
`Raytheon, Lockheed- Martin, Boeing, McDonnell-Douglas, General Electric, and
`
`Siemens. I have also received other honors and awards, including election to
`
`professional organizations, engagements for invited talks and the 2015 Award for
`
`Excellence in Teaching from the Vanderbilt University Department of Electrical
`
`Engineering.
`
`
`
`
`
`1 The h-index is a popular measure of scholarly productivity. The definition
`
`of the index is that a scholar with an index of h has published h papers each of
`
`which has been cited in other papers at least h times. Thus, the h-index reflects
`
`both the number of publications and the number of citations
`
`4
`
`

`

`7.
`
`In addition to my research experience, I have decades of hands-on
`
`programming experience with a variety of different programming languages. I
`
`have programmed with object-oriented languages since the mid-1980s, when I
`
`began to program with C++. I have programmed with Java and other related
`
`object-oriented and functional languages (such as C# and Python) since the mid-
`
`1990s and early 2000s. While at the University of California Irvine starting in 1991
`
`I led the development of one of the first C++ object-oriented frameworks for
`
`concurrent and networked middleware and applications (ACE) and later starting in
`
`1996 developed one of the first Java object-oriented frameworks for concurrent
`
`and networked middleware and applications (Java ACE). Since 1990, I have
`
`taught more than 1,000 students in dozens of face-to-face courses on network
`
`programming to both undergraduate and graduate students at UC Irvine,
`
`Washington University St. Louis, and Vanderbilt University. Since 2013, I have
`
`taught mobile cloud computing to more than 200,000 students in Massive Open
`
`Online Courses (MOOCs) on the Coursera platform, which have focused on
`
`technologies such as mobile app programming with Android and JavaScript and
`
`cloud service programming with various web services frameworks, such as Spring
`
`and Node.js. Mobile cloud computing applications commonly connect to relational
`
`database management systems to provide access to large data repositories.
`
`5
`
`

`

`8.
`
`In addition to my regular course offerings, over the past 35 years I
`
`have also taught over 600 short-courses and tutorials on numerous subjects,
`
`including: object-oriented and functional design patterns and programming
`
`techniques; systems programming and network programming for UNIX and
`
`Windows; object-oriented and functional programming languages; and, various
`
`courses on distributed operating systems, web apps and services, mobile cloud
`
`computing, compiler construction, algorithms, and data structures.
`
`9.
`
`For the past three decades, I have led the development of ACE, Java
`
`ACE, TAO, and CIAO.2 The millions of lines of object-oriented code in these
`
`frameworks provide layers of system infrastructure middleware that simplify the
`
`development of concurrent and networked software apps and services and often
`
`integrate with relational database systems.
`
`10.
`
`In addition to my various academic and research engagements, from
`
`2010 to 2014 I served as a member of the United States Air Force Scientific
`
`Advisory Board, where I was the Vice Chair of Cyber Situational Awareness, a
`
`study for the U.S. Air Force on the network security of mission operations. I also
`
`
` 2
`
` See Obtaining ACE, TAO, CIAO, and DAnCE, Vanderbilt,
`http://download.dre.vanderbilt.edu/ (for access to ACE, TAO and CIAO
`downloads) (attached herein as Exhibit E); Java ACE, Vanderbilt,
`http://www.dre.vanderbilt.edu/JACE/ (for access to Java ACE downloads)
`(attached herei
`
`6
`
`

`

`recently served on the Advisory Board for the U.S. Naval Air Systems Command
`
`(NavAir) Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE) and was recently a co-
`
`lead of a task force on “Published Open Interfaces and Standards” for the U.S.
`
`Navy's Open Systems Architecture initiative.
`
`11. From 2000 to 2003 I served as a Deputy Office Director and Program
`
`Manager at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), where I
`
`led the national research and development effort on portable open system
`
`architecture middleware for distributed real-time and embedded (DRE) systems,
`
`which focused on the systematic use of adaptation, supported by redundancy,
`
`heterogeneity, and use of computer network security mechanisms, such as access-
`
`control, intrusion detection and packet filtering.
`
`12. My work on middleware for DRE systems has transitioned to the Joint
`
`Tactical Terminal (JTT) and Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) software defined
`
`radio programs, manned/unmanned combat air vehicles, the Orbital Express low
`
`earth orbit (LEO) satellite telemetry and control framework, the Ground Support
`
`System (GSS) for the X33 Single Stage To Orbit (SSTO) Reusable Launch
`
`Vehicle, and the USS Ronald Reagan and USS Zumwalt, the USAF upgraded early
`
`warning radar system, as well as the Facebook iPhone app and electronic medical
`
`imaging systems from Siemens and GE, among many other governmental and
`
`commercial applications. During 2001 to 2003, I also co-chaired the Software
`
`7
`
`

`

`Design and Productivity (SDP) Coordinating Group of the U.S. government's
`
`multi-agency Networking and Information Technology Research and Development
`
`(NITRD) Program, which helped to formulate a national interagency software
`
`research agenda.
`
`13. Additionally, over the last two decades I have been retained as an
`
`expert consultant more than two dozen times in a variety of computer software-
`
`related matters, focusing primarily on topics related to the software and network
`
`infrastructure of mobile and cloud computing platforms.
`
`14.
`
`In writing this Declaration, I have considered the following: my own
`
`knowledge and experience, including my work experience in the fields of
`
`computer science and electrical engineering; my experience in teaching those
`
`subjects; and my experience in working with others involved in those fields. In
`
`addition, I have analyzed the following publications and materials, in addition to
`
`other materials I cite in my declaration:
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407 (Exhibit 1001), and its accompanying
`
`prosecution history (Exhibit 1002)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,278,448 B1 (“Brown”) (Exhibit 1005)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,449,638 B1 (“Wecker”) (Exhibit 1006)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,793,368 (“Beer”) (Exhibit 1007)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,789,263 B1 (“Shimada”) (Exhibit 1008)
`
`8
`
`

`

`• U.S. Patent No. 6,088,340 (“Buchholz”) (Exhibit 1009)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,819,345 B1 (“Jones”) (Exhibit 1010)
`
`• HTML 4 Unleashed (“Darnell”) (Exhibit 1011)
`
`• IPR2019-01279 Final Written Decision (Exhibit 1012)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,342,907 B1 (“Petty”) (Exhibit 1013)
`
`• Lenovo Holding Company, Inc. v. DoDots Licensing Solutions LLC, No.
`
`2021-1247, 2021 WL 5822248 (Dec. 8, 2021) (Exhibit 1014)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,311,058 B1 (“Wecker 2”) (Exhibit 1015)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,737,560 (“Yohanan”) (Exhibit 1016)
`
`• CNET News, “PointCast unveils free news service,”
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20110616130215/http://news.cnet.com/Poin
`
`tCast-unveils-free-news-service/2100-1023_3-204658.html, last
`
`accessed Feb. 16, 2023 (Exhibit 1017)
`
`• Declaration of June Ann Munford (Exhibit 1018)
`
`• DoDots Licensing Solutions LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.,
`
`6:22-cv-00535, W.D. Tex., filed May 24, 2022 (Exhibit 1019)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,094,681 (“Shaffer”) (Exhibit 1020)
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,185,614 B1 (“Cuomo”) (Exhibit 1022)
`
`LEGAL PRINCIPLES
`
`9
`
`

`

`Anticipation
`
`15.
`
`I have been informed that a patent claim is invalid as anticipated
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 102 if each and every element of a claim, as properly construed,
`
`is found either explicitly or inherently in a single prior art reference. Under the
`
`principles of inherency, if the prior art necessarily functions in accordance with, or
`
`includes the claimed limitations, it anticipates.
`
`16.
`
`I have been informed that a claim is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)
`
`if the claimed invention was known or used by others in the U.S., or was patented
`
`or published anywhere, before the applicant’s invention. I further have been
`
`informed that a claim is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) if the invention was
`
`patented or published anywhere, or was in public use, on sale, or offered for sale in
`
`this country, more than one year prior to the filing date of the patent application
`
`(critical date). I have been informed that a claim is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
`
`if an invention described by that claim was described in a U.S. patent granted on an
`
`application for a patent by another that was filed in the U.S. before the date of
`
`invention for such a claim.
`
`Obviousness
`
`17.
`
`I have been informed that a patent claim is invalid as “obvious” under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 in light of one or more prior art references if it would have been
`
`obvious to a POSITA, taking into account (1) the scope and content of the prior art,
`
`10
`
`

`

`(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” 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.
`
`For purposes of my analysis above and because I know of no indication from the
`
`patent owner or others to the contrary, I have applied a date of April 26, 2000, as
`
`the date of invention in my obviousness analyses, although in many cases the same
`
`analysis would hold true even at an earlier time than April 26, 2000.
`
`18.
`
`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 or “common sense” 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
`
`11
`
`

`

`no more than yield predictable results. I also understand it is improper to rely on
`
`hindsight in making the obviousness determination.
`
`OVERVIEW OF CONCLUSIONS FORMED
`19. This expert Declaration explains the conclusions that I have formed
`
`based on my analysis. To summarize those conclusions:
`
`• Based upon my knowledge and experience and my review of the prior
`
`art publications listed above, I believe that claims 1-4, 7-11, 13-16,
`
`and 19-23 of the ’407 patent are obvious over Brown.
`
`• Based upon my knowledge and experience and my review of the prior
`
`art publications listed above, I believe that claims 1-4, 7-16, and 19-24
`
`of the ’407 patent are obvious over Brown in view of Wecker.
`
`• Based upon my knowledge and experience and my review of the prior
`
`art publications listed above, I believe that claims 5-6 and 17-18 of the
`
`’407 patent are obvious over Brown in view of Beer, and/or Brown
`
`and Wecker in view of Beer.
`
`• Based upon my knowledge and experience and my review of the prior
`
`art publications listed above, I believe that claims 1-24 of the ’407
`
`patent are obvious over Shimada in view of Buchholz.
`
`12
`
`

`

`BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE ONE OF SKILL IN THE ART WOULD
`HAVE HAD PRIOR TO THE PRIORITY DATE OF THE ’407 PATENT
`20. A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) relating to the
`
`subject matter of the ’407 Patent would have had (1) a bachelor’s degree in
`
`computer science, computer engineering, electrical engineering, or a related field,
`
`and (2) at least three years of corresponding industry work experience. Additional
`
`graduate education could substitute for professional experience, or significant
`
`experience in the field could substitute for formal education. This definition is
`
`consistent with the previous definition of a POSITA adopted in IPR2019-01279.
`
`SAMSUNG-1012, Page 8.
`
`21. Based on my experiences, I have a good understanding of the
`
`capabilities of a POSITA. Indeed, I have taught, participated in organizations, and
`
`worked closely with many such persons over the course of my career.
`
`TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
`
`A. World Wide Web
`22. The World Wide Web, commonly referred to as the “Internet,” serves
`
`as a repository for various forms of digital content. SAMSUNG-1005, see
`
`generally 1:10-18. This content can be present within “Web Pages” hosted by
`
`remote computers, known as “servers” or “web servers.” Id., see also 2:4-12.
`
`Web pages can include various forms of content, including text, image, audio, and
`
`video content. Id., 2:20-23. An example, period-correct, web page is provided
`
`13
`
`

`

`below. Personal computers, or “clients” can request to view web pages and receive
`
`data hosted on server computers via the “Transfer Control Protocol/Internet
`
`Protocol” or “TCP/IP.” SAMSUNG-1005, 2:13-18; SAMSUNG-1011, 88-92.
`
`One example protocol that operates using TCP/IP is the “Hypertext Transfer
`
`Protocol” or “HTTP.” SAMSUNG-1011, 88-92.
`
`SAMSUNG-1011, 123
`
`
`
`B. Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI)
`23. To identify the location of a webpage or resource on the internet a
`
`unique identifier known as a “Uniform Resource Identifier” or “URI” is used.
`
`SAMSUNG-1011, 102-108. One of the most common forms of URI is the
`
`“Uniform Resource Locator,” or “URL.” Id., 103. URLs are used, among other
`
`14
`
`

`

`things, to locate webpages or content on the Internet using HTTP and TCP/IP. Id.
`
`An example URL syntax is provided below.
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG-1011, 103
`
`C. Hyper Text Markup Language (HTML)
`24. One format for writing Web pages and documents is the “Hyper Text
`
`Markup Language,” or “HTML.” SAMSUNG-1005, 18-28; SAMSUNG-1011,
`
`70-86. HTML is a “platform independent” markup language, since it is
`
`“recognized on all available computing platforms using available software.”
`
`SAMSUNG-1011, 70. Said another way, HTML does not require anything beyond
`
`commonly available browsers and viewers for interpretation (“without having to
`
`pay for specific hardware and software with proprietary schemes”). Id. HTML
`
`“elements” and “tags” describe how internet content is presented, and can include
`
`controls for interacting with content (e.g., an “anchor tag” with a URL).
`
`SAMSUNG-1011, 72-86, see also 223-232. An example set of HTML instructions
`
`is provided below.
`
`15
`
`

`

`SAMSUNG-1005, 11:51-67
`
`
`
`D.
`Subscriptions
`25. The Internet is known to host various forms of in-demand digital
`
`content, so systems have been created that are directed to providing “up-to-date”
`
`information on a recurring basis (a “subscription”). SAMSUNG-1005, 13:1-13;
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, 3:58-67, 2:1-13; SAMSUNG-1009, 1:13-26. One early example
`
`of Internet subscriptions was the “PointCast” system first released to the public in
`
`February, 1996. SAMSUNG-1017. PointCast was designed to “display regularly
`
`updated news in place of a user’s more conventional screensaver” and included
`
`categories for “News, Companies, Industries, Weather, Sports, and Lifestyle.” Id.
`
`As one example of data retrieved through a subscription, a user can be subscribed
`
`to receive regular updates of information related to stocks. SAMSUNG-1005, FIG.
`
`3A, SAMSUNG-1006, 10:48-55; SAMSUNG-1009, 1:13-20. One additional
`
`example of a subscription service is Microsoft’s Channel Definition Format (CDF),
`
`16
`
`

`

`which is discussed by both Brown and Wecker. SAMSUNG-1005, 13:1-13;
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, 3:3-16.
`
`INTERPRETATIONS OF THE ’407 PATENT CLAIMS AT ISSUE
`
`26.
`
`I understand that, for purposes of my analysis in this inter partes
`
`review proceeding, the terms appearing in the patent claims should be interpreted
`
`according to their “broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification of
`
`the patent in which it appears.” 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, I have used the earliest priority date of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407 as the
`
`point in time for claim interpretation purposes. That date was April 26, 1999.
`
`27.
`
`I understand that the following terms should be interpreted as follows:
`
`“networked information monitor” (“NIM”)
`
`28.
`
`I understand that for the purposes of the present proceeding, this term,
`
`which appears in claims 1, 11, 13, and 23, should be construed to mean “a fully
`
`17
`
`

`

`configurable frame, with one or more controls, through which content is presented
`
`to the user.” This definition is consistent with the use of the term in the
`
`specification of the ’407 patent. See, e.g., SAMSUNG-1001, 5:21-24 (“As used
`
`herein, the term networked information monitor or NIM refers to a fully
`
`configurable frame with one or more controls; the frame through which content
`
`is optionally presented”). Moreover, in IPR2019-01279, Patent Owner explained
`
`that “application media package” means “networked information monitor.”
`
`SAMSUNG-1012, Page 10-11. Thus, for purposes of this IPR, I have adopted
`
`Patent Owner’s construction of networked information monitor, which was
`
`adopted in IPR2019-01279. SAMSUNG-1012, Page 10-11; SAMSUNG-1014, *3-
`
`4.
`
`“networked information monitor template”
`
`29.
`
`I understand that for the purposes of the present proceeding, this term,
`
`which appears in claims 1-8, 10-16, and 22-24, should be construed to mean “a
`
`data structure that defines the characteristics of a NIM, including the NIM frame,
`
`view, and control characteristics, and that excludes executable
`
`applications/compiled code.” This definition is consistent with the use of the term
`
`in the specification of the ’407 Patent. See, e.g., SAMSUNG-1001, 6:66-67, 7:1-2
`
`(“Each NIM template defines the characteristics of a specific NIM, including fully
`
`configurable frame characteristics, viewer and control characteristics, and NIM
`
`18
`
`

`

`content references.”). Moreover, the ’407 Patent states, “NIMs allow a developer
`
`to provide an application feel without developing custom client applications.” Id.,
`
`26:38-40. According to Patent Owner in IPR2019-01279, a networked information
`
`monitor template “is not compiled code, and cannot be an executable application or
`
`applet.” SAMSUNG-1012, Page 12. Thus, for purposes of this IPR, I have
`
`adopted Patent Owner’s construction of networked information monitor template,
`
`which was adopted in IPR2019-01278. SAMSUNG-1012, Page 13-14;
`SAMSUNG-1014, *3-4.
`ANALYSIS OF BROWN AND WECKER
`Brown
`30. Brown describes “a method of creating a composite desktop built
`
`from Web content retrieved from one or more Web sites.” SAMSUNG-1005,
`
`Abstract. Brown’s composite desktop includes components, which can be “a static
`
`image or an active desktop component providing dynamic content.” Id.
`
`19
`
`

`

`SAMSUNG-1005, FIG. 3A (annotated)
`
`
`
`31. As shown in FIG. 3A (above), Brown’s “composite desktop 302
`
`includes one or more desktop components,” where each “desktop component is a
`
`distinct geometric region that displays a single piece of Web-based content.”
`
`SAMSUNG-1005, 7:21-23. Brown describes that “the component may be selected
`
`from a Web page, within which the component is embedded.” SAMSUNG-1005,
`
`7:40-41.
`
`32. Brown also describes desktop component instructions, which “include
`
`a URL specifying an Internet location where additional HTML code corresponding
`
`to the active desktop component 308 resides.” SAMSUNG-1005, 13:1-4. In some
`
`cases, these HTML instructions include “a URL corresponding to a CDF file.” Id.,
`
`20
`
`

`

`13:4-5. Brown explains that Channel Definition Format (CDF) “files are used to
`
`implement ‘subscriptions’ in which information is regularly retrieved and updated
`
`within the active desktop component 308,” noting that “[t]he use of CDF files is
`
`known to those skilled in the art of Web page construction.” Id., 13:5-9.
`
`Wecker
`
`33. Wecker describes “a method for rendering
`
`information,”
`
`the
`
`information including “a content structure file, a data file and a script file.”
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, Abstract. Wecker describes that “the content structure file is
`
`read to ascertain which script in the script file is associated with data to be
`
`rendered.” Id. Thereafter, “[t]he data from the data file is retrieved and the
`
`associated script file is executed to render the data.” Id.
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, FIG. 1 (annotated)
`
`
`
`21
`
`

`

`SAMSUNG-1006, FIG. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`34. Wecker describes that “the content is provided in a standard format,
`
`such as HTML, JPEG, GIF, WAV, etc.” and that “[t]he web content is also
`
`preferably described in a content structure file also known commonly as a channel
`
`definition format (CDF) file.” SAMSUNG-1006, 3:2-6. Wecker further describes
`
`that:
`
`“a single portion of content (such as a web page or a web site) is
`referred to herein as a mobile channel. A mobile channel is a self describing
`web site that contains all the information necessary for efficient download of
`web content to mobile device 18. Three components are provided in a
`preferable mobile channel. The components include a channel definition
`
`22
`
`

`

`format (CDF) file, a set of script files to render the channel, and a set of data
`files to be rendered.” SAMSUNG-1006, 3:6-14.
`
`
`Motivation to combine Brown and Wecker
`
`35.
`
`I believe that a POSITA would have found it obvious to combine
`
`Brown and Wecker (collectively the “Brown-Wecker combination”). Among
`
`other things, both Brown and Wecker are generally directed to “accessing and
`
`viewing internet content” and further describe the use of Microsoft’s channel
`
`definition format (CDF) to implement subscriptions to internet content, with
`
`Brown explicitly directing the reader toward additional references that discuss
`
`CDF. SAMSUNG-1005, Abstract, 13:4-13, 13:39-44; SAMSUNG-1006, Abstract,
`
`3:1-16. Given the similarity of the disclosures, and spurred by Brown’s directive,
`
`a POSITA would have found it obvious to consider Wecker’s disclosure in the
`
`context of Brown’s system for multiple reasons. For example, a POSITA would
`
`have found it obvious to leverage Wecker’s disclosure of a cache to store HTML
`
`style templates. A POSITA also would have found it obvious that Brown’s
`
`desktop components could be implemented as mobile channels, such that a user
`
`could download desktop components, and their associated HTML instructions, to
`
`their composite desktop. SAMSUNG-1005, 7:21-23; SAMSUNG-1006, 3:6-14.
`
`36.
`
`I believe a POSITA would have been motivated to combine Brown
`
`and Wecker for various reasons, outlined below.
`
`23
`
`

`

`37. First, a POSITA would have recognized that Wecker’s mobile channel
`
`“script files,” also referred to as “templates,” are data structures that are similar in
`
`objective to the “HTML instructions” that define Brown’s “desktop components.”
`
`SAMSUNG-1005, 12:61-62; SAMSUNG-1006, 3:17-20.
`
` Indeed, Wecker
`
`describes that “the users of desktop 16 can preferably subscribe to channels in a
`
`standard fashion which provide the user with certain channel content” and that the
`
`desktop can “periodically retrieve or receive new and updated script, data and CDF
`
`files.” SAMSUNG-1005, 3:63-66, 4:3-6. I believe that a POSITA would have
`
`recognized or found obvious that the “desktop,” as contemplated by Wecker,
`
`would have possessed similar features to the “composite desktop” of Brown and
`
`that these features of Wecker’s desktop could be incorporated into Brown with a
`
`reasonably high expectation of success.
`
`38. A POSITA would have been prompted to pursue this combination
`
`because doing so is merely the application of known techniques (e.g., rendering
`
`content using templates/script files) to a known structure (e.g., Brown’s composite
`
`desktop) to yield predictable results. Moreover, both Brown and Wecker describe
`
`the Windows 95 operating system as a suitable operating system that can
`
`implement their techniques. SAMSUNG-1005, 6:26-32; SAMSUNG-1006, 8:15-
`
`21. Finally, both Brown and Wecker are assigned to the “Microsoft Corporation”
`
`and, therefore, a POSITA would have reasonably expected their techniques to be
`
`24
`
`

`

`compatible as the assignee would have been motivated by business reasons to
`
`provide commonality between
`
`their products.
`
` SAMSUNG-1005, Cover;
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, Cover. In view of the above, I believe that a POSITA would
`
`have had a reasonable expectation of success in implementing Wecker’s
`
`techniques into the disclosure of Brown.
`
`39. Second, a POSITA would have recognized or found obvious that,
`
`because Brown’s desktop components are retrieved from “remote computers,”
`
`such components could also be accessed via Wecker’s “wireless push server” or
`
`“remote computer.” SAMSUNG-1005, 4:16-21; SAMSUNG-1006, 3:34-38, 7:55-
`
`63. In fact, Wecker describes that a “user typically runs the same types of
`
`applications on both the desktop computer and on the mobile device.”
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, 1:39-44. A POSITA would have recognized or found obvious
`
`from this disclosure that the “composite desktop” taught by Brown would have
`
`been compatible with certain features of the interfaces running on mobile devices,
`
`as contemplated by Wecker. SAMSUNG-1005, 4:13-19. Indeed, Brown describes
`
`that its techniques may be practiced in “other computer system configurations,
`
`including hand-held devices.” SAMSUNG-1005, 4:44-49.
`
`40. A POSITA would have been prompted to pursue this combination
`
`because doing so is merely the application of known techniques (e.g., rendering
`
`content using templates/script files) to a known structure (e.g., Brown’s composite
`
`25
`
`

`

`desktop) to yield predictable results. Additionally, Wecker describes that
`
`“Windows CE” is a suitable operating system upon which to implement its
`
`techniques, and that this operating system is made available by the “Microsoft
`
`Corporation” – the assignee of Brown. SAMSUNG-1005, Cover; SAMSUNG-
`
`1006, 5:30-32. Finally, both Brown and Wecker are assigned to the “Microsoft
`
`Corporation” and, therefore, a POSITA would have reasonably expected their
`
`techniques to be compatible as the assignee would be motivated by business
`
`reasons to provide commonality between their products. SAMSUNG-1005, Cover;
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, Cover. In view of the above, I believe that a POSITA would
`
`have had a r

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket