IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`John Albert Kembel, et al.
`In re Patent of:
`8,510,407 Attorney Docket No.: 39843-0149IP1
`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 US-
`ING APPLICATION MEDIA PACKAGES
`
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF UNITED STATES
`PATENT NO. 8,510,407 PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319,
`37 C.F.R. § 42
`
`
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR .......................................................................... 1
`A. Grounds for Standing ................................................................................ 1
`B. Challenge and Relief Requested ............................................................... 1
`C. Claim Construction ................................................................................... 3
`1.
`“networked information monitor” (“NIM”) .................................... 3
`2.
`“networked information monitor template” .................................... 4
`D. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ............................................................. 5
`SUMMARY OF THE ’407 PATENT ............................................................. 5
`A. Brief Description ....................................................................................... 5
`B. Prosecution History ................................................................................... 7
`III. THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE ............................ 8
`A. [GROUND 1A/1B] – Claims 1-4, 7-11, 13-16, and 19-23 are rendered
`obvious by Brown [1A], claims 1-4, 7-16, and 19-24 are rendered
`obvious by Brown and Wecker [1B] ........................................................ 8
`1. Overview of Brown ........................................................................ 9
`2. Overview of Wecker ..................................................................... 10
`3.
`Combination of Brown and Wecker ............................................. 12
`4. Analysis ......................................................................................... 16
`B. [GROUND 1C] – Claims 5-6 and 17-18 are rendered obvious by Brown
`and Beer, and/or Brown and Wecker in view of Beer ............................ 58
`1. Overview of Beer .......................................................................... 58
`2.
`Combination of Brown and Beer .................................................. 59
`3. Analysis ......................................................................................... 63
`C. [GROUND 2] – Claims 1-24 are rendered obvious by Shimada and
`Buchholz ................................................................................................. 65
`1. Overview of Shimada .................................................................... 65
`2. Overview of Buchholz .................................................................. 66
`3.
`Combination of Shimada and Buchholz ....................................... 68
`4. Analysis ......................................................................................... 69
`IV. PTAB DISCRETION SHOULD NOT PRECLUDE INSTITUTION ........100
`A. The General Plastic Factors Favor Institution .....................................100
`B. The Fintiv Factors Favor Institution .....................................................103
`C. The Advanced Bionics Test Favors Institution .....................................104
`CONCLUSION AND FEES .......................................................................105
`V.
`VI. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R § 42.8(a)(1) .......................105
`A. Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ............................105
`
`i
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`B. Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) .....................................105
`C. Lead And Back-Up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .................106
`D. Service Information ..............................................................................106
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`EXHIBITS
`
`SAMSUNG-1001 U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407 to Kembel, et al. (“the ’407 Patent”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1002 Excerpts from the Prosecution History of the ’407 Patent (“the
`Prosecution History”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1003 Declaration of Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt
`
`SAMSUNG-1004 Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt
`
`SAMSUNG-1005 U.S. Patent No. 6,278,448 B1 (“Brown”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1006 U.S. Patent No. 6,449,638 B1 (“Wecker”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1007 U.S. Patent No. 5,793,368 (“Beer”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1008 U.S. Patent No. 6,789,263 B1 (“Shimada”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1009 U.S. Patent No. 6,088,340 (“Buchholz”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1010 U.S. Patent No. 6,819,345 B1 (“Jones”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1011 HTML 4 Unleashed (“Darnell”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1012 IPR2019-01279 Final Written Decision
`
`SAMSUNG-1013 U.S. Patent No. 6,342,907 B1 (“Petty”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1014 Lenovo Holding Company, Inc. v. DoDots Licensing Solutions
`LLC, No. 2021-1247, 2021 WL 5822248 (Dec. 8, 2021).
`
`SAMSUNG-1015 U.S. Patent No. 6,311,058 B1 (“Wecker 2”)
`
`SAMSUNG-1016 U.S. Patent No. 5,737,560 (“Yohanan”)
`SAMSUNG-1017 CNET News, “PointCast unveils free news service,”
`https://web.ar-
`chive.org/web/20110616130215/http://news.cnet.com/PointCas
`t-unveils-free-news-service/2100-1023_3-204658.html, last ac-
`cessed Feb. 16, 2023
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`SAMSUNG-1018 Declaration of June Ann Munford
`
`SAMSUNG-1019 DoDots Licensing Solutions LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co.,
`Ltd. et al., 6:22-cv-00535, W.D. Tex., filed May 24, 2022
`
`SAMSUNG-1020 U.S. Patent No. 6,094,681 (“Shaffer”)
`SAMSUNG-1021 RESERVED
`SAMSUNG-1022 U.S. Patent No. 6,185,614 B1 (“Cuomo”)
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`LISTING OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`
`
`A client computing device configured to access content over a net-
`work, the client computing device comprising:
`
`electronic storage configured to store networked information monitor
`template associated with a networked information monitor, the net-
`worked information monitor template having therein a definition of a
`viewer graphical user interface having a frame within which time
`varying content in a web browser-readable language may be pre-
`sented on a display associated with the client computing device,
`wherein the frame of the viewer graphical user interface lacks con-
`trols for enabling a user to specify a network location at which con-
`tent for the networked information monitor is available; and
`
`one or more processors configured to execute one or more computer
`program modules, the one or more computer program modules being
`configured to access the networked information monitor defined by
`the networked information monitor template, wherein accessing the
`networked information monitor defined by the networked infor-
`mation monitor template results in:
`
`transmission, over a network to a web server at a network location,
`of a content request for content to be displayed within the frame of
`the viewer graphical user interface defined by the networked infor-
`mation monitor template:
`
`reception, over the network from the web server at the network loca-
`tion, of content transmitted from the web server in response to the
`content request, the content being time-varying:
`
`presentation, on the display, of the viewer graphical user interface
`defined by the networked information monitor template outside of
`and separate from any graphical user interface of any other applica-
`tion; and
`
`presentation, on the display within the frame of the viewer graphical
`user interface defined by the networked information monitor, of the
`time-varying content received from the web server.
`
`Claim 1
`
`[1pre]
`
`[1.1]
`
`[1.2]
`
`[1.3]
`
`[1.4]
`
`[1.5]
`
`[1.6]
`
`v
`
`

`

`Claim 2
`
`[2]
`
`Claim 3
`
`[3]
`
`Claim 4
`
`[4]
`
`Claim 5
`
`[5]
`
`Claim 6
`
`[6]
`
`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`The method of claim 1, further comprising, responsive to reception
`of one or more elements included in the received time-varying con-
`tent, modifying a feature of said viewer graphical user interface de-
`fined by the networked information monitor template in accordance
`with a modification corresponding to the received one or more ele-
`ments.
`
`The client computing device of claim 2, wherein said modification
`corresponding to the received one or more elements comprises a
`modification to an image defined by the networked information mon-
`itor template as forming a part of said viewer graphical user inter-
`face.
`
`The client computing device of claim 2, wherein the correspondence
`between the modification and the received one or more elements is
`defined by the networked information monitor template.
`
`The client computing device of claim 2, wherein the one or more
`computer program modules and the networked information monitor
`template are configured such that modifying the feature of the viewer
`graphical user interface comprises adjusting a size of the frame of the
`viewer graphical user interface.
`
`The client computing device of claim 2, wherein the one or more
`computer program modules and the networked information monitor
`template are configured such that modifying the feature of the viewer
`graphical user interface comprises changing a color of a frame bor-
`der or background of the viewer graphical user interface.
`
`
`vi
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`Claim 7
`
`[7]
`
`Claim 8
`
`[8]
`
`Claim 9
`
`[9]
`
`Claim 10
`
`[10]
`
`Claim 11
`
`[11]
`
`Claim 12
`
`[12.1]
`
`The client computing device of claim 2, wherein the one or more
`computer program modules and the networked information monitor
`template are configured such that modifying the feature of the viewer
`graphical user interface comprises modifying text of the viewer
`graphical user interface in a manner defined by the networked infor-
`mation monitor template.
`
`The client computing device of claim 1, wherein the networked in-
`formation monitor template includes a markup language file.
`
`The client computing device of claim 1, wherein one or more com-
`puter program modules are configured such that the time-varying
`content is received from the web server over the network according
`to the TCP/IP protocol.
`
`The client computing device of claim 1, wherein the network loca-
`tion corresponds to a uniform resource locator included in the net-
`worked information monitor template.
`
`The client computing device of claim 10, wherein the one or more
`computer program modules are further configured such that access-
`ing the networked information monitor defined by the networked in-
`formation monitor template results in transmission of the content re-
`quest to the uniform resource locator included in the networked in-
`formation monitor template, and the content request being transmit-
`ted according to the TCP/IP protocol over the network.
`
`The client computing device of claim 1, wherein the one or more
`computer program modules are further configured:
`
`vii
`
`

`

`[12.2]
`
`[12.3]
`
`[12.4]
`
`Claim 13
`
`[13pre]
`
`[13.1]
`
`[13.2]
`
`[13.3]
`
`[13.4]
`
`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`to transmit, over the network to a networked information monitor
`server, a request for the networked information monitor template:
`
`to receive, from the networked information monitor server over the
`network, the networked information monitor template; and
`
`to store the networked information monitor template to the electronic
`storage.
`
`A computer-implemented method of accessing content over a net-
`work on a client computing device, the client computing device hav-
`ing electronic storage and one or more processors configured to exe-
`cute one or more computer program modules, the client method com-
`prising:
`
`storing, to the electronic storage, a networked information monitor
`template associated with a networked information monitor, the net-
`worked information monitor template having therein a definition of a
`viewer graphical user interface having a frame within which time-
`varying content in a web browser-readable language may be pre-
`sented on a display associated with the client computing device,
`wherein the frame of the viewer graphical user interface lacks con-
`trols for enabling a user to specify a network location at which con-
`tent for the networked information monitor is available;
`
`accessing the networked information monitor defined by the net-
`worked information monitor template, wherein accessing the net-
`worked information monitor defined by the networked information
`monitor template results in:
`
`transmission, over a network to a web server at a network location,
`of a content request for content to be displayed in the viewer graph-
`ical user interface defined by the networked information monitor
`template;
`
`reception, over the network from the web server at the network loca-
`tion, of content transmitted from the web server in response to the
`content request, the content being time-varying:
`
`viii
`
`

`

`[13.5]
`
`[13.6]
`
`Claim 14
`
`[14]
`
`Claim 15
`
`[15]
`
`Claim 16
`
`[16]
`
`Claim 17
`
`[17]
`
`Claim 18
`
`[18]
`
`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`presentation, on the display, of the viewer graphical user interface
`defined by the application media package template outside of and
`separate from any graphical user interface of any other application;
`and
`
`presentation, on the display within the frame of the viewer graphical
`user interface defined by the networked information monitor, of the
`time-varying content received from the web server.
`
`The method of claim 13, responsive to reception of one or more ele-
`ments included in the received time-varying content, modifying a
`feature of said viewer graphical user interface defined by the net-
`worked information monitor template in accordance with a modifica-
`tion corresponding to the received one or more elements.
`
`The method of claim 14, wherein said modification corresponding to
`the received one or more elements comprises a modification to an
`image defined by the networked information monitor template as
`forming a part of said viewer graphical user interface.
`
`The method of claim 14, wherein the correspondence between the
`modification and the received one or more elements is defined by the
`networked information monitor template.
`
`The method of claim 14, wherein modifying the feature of the viewer
`graphical user interface comprises adjusting a size of the frame of the
`viewer graphical user interface.
`
`The method of claim 14, wherein modifying the feature of the viewer
`graphical user interface comprises changing a color of a frame bor-
`der or background of the viewer graphical user interface.
`
`ix
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`Claim 19
`
`[19]
`
`Claim 20
`
`[20]
`
`Claim 21
`
`[21]
`
`Claim 22
`
`[22]
`
`Claim 23
`
`[23]
`
`Claim 24
`
`[24.1]
`
`The method of claim 14, wherein modifying the feature of the viewer
`graphical user interface comprises modifying text of the viewer
`graphical user interface in a manner defined by the networked infor-
`mation monitor template.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein the networked information monitor
`template includes a markup language file, and wherein storing the
`networked information monitor template comprises storing the
`markup language file.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein the time-varying content is re-
`ceived from the web server over the network according to the
`TCP/IP protocol.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein the network location corresponds
`to a uniform resource locator included in the networked information
`monitor template.
`
`The method of claim 22, wherein accessing the networked infor-
`mation monitor defined by the networked information monitor tem-
`plate results in transmission of the content request to the uniform re-
`source locator included in the networked information monitor tem-
`plate, and the content request being transmitted according to the
`TCP/IP protocol over the network.
`
`The method of claim 13, further comprising: prior to storing the net-
`worked information monitor template to the electronic storage, trans-
`mitting, over the network to a networked information monitor server,
`a request for the networked information monitor template; and
`
`x
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`receiving, from the networked information monitor server over the
`network, the networked information monitor template.
`
`[24.2]
`
`
`
`xi
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Petitioner” or “Samsung”) petitions for In-
`
`ter Partes Review (“IPR”) of claims 1-24 (“the Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Pa-
`
`tent No. 8,510,407 (“the ’407 Patent”).
`
`I.
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR
`A. Grounds for Standing
`Samsung certifies that the ’407 Patent is available for IPR. This petition is
`
`being filed within one year of service of a complaint against Samsung. Samsung is
`
`not barred or estopped from requesting review of the Challenged Claims on the be-
`
`low-identified grounds.
`
`B. Challenge and Relief Requested
`Samsung requests IPR of the Challenged Claims on the grounds below. Dr.
`
`Douglas Schmidt provides supporting testimony. SAMSUNG-1003, ¶¶1-234.
`
`Ground
`
`Claim(s)
`
`§103 Basis
`
`1A
`
`1B
`
`1C
`
`2
`
`1-4, 7-11, 13-16, 19-23 Obvious over Brown
`
`1-4, 7-16, 19-24
`
`Obvious over Brown and Wecker
`
`5-6, 17-18
`
`Obvious over Brown and Beer, and/or
`Brown, Wecker, and Beer
`
`1-24
`
`Obvious over Shimada and Buchholz
`
`The ’407 Patent claims priority to an application filed on April 26, 2000, as
`
`well as to a number of provisional applications, the earliest of which was filed on
`
`1
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`April 26, 1999. SAMSUNG-1001, Cover. Solely for purposes of evaluating prior
`
`art in this proceeding and without conceding the propriety of these priority claims,
`
`this Petition will treat April 26, 1999, as the effective filing date (“Critical Date”).
`
`The applied references qualify as prior art at least under Pre-AIA §102(e) as indi-
`
`cated below.
`
`Reference
`
`Filing Date
`
`Publication
`Date
`
`Brown
`
`Wecker
`
`Beer
`
`Shimada
`
`Buchholz
`
`
`08/21/2001
`
`02/17/1998
`
`09/10/2002
`
`06/30/1998
`
`11/14/1996
`
`08/11/1998
`
`09/07/2004
`
`06/18/1997
`
`07/11/2000
`
`06/23/1998
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`C. Claim Construction
`All claim terms should be construed according to the Phillips standard.
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005); 37 C.F.R. §42.100. Under
`
`the Phillips standard, the “words of a claim are generally given their ordinary and
`
`customary meaning as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art when read
`
`in the context of the specification and prosecution history.” Thorner v. Sony Com-
`
`puter Entertainment America LLC, 669 F. 3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citing
`
`Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1313). All claim terms should be given their ordinary and
`
`customary meaning in the context of the specification as detailed in the relevant
`
`sections below, except that Petitioner provides the following discussion to aid the
`
`Board in interpreting the following terms.1
`
`1.
`“networked information monitor” (“NIM”)
`For the purposes of this proceeding, this term, which appears in claims 1, 11,
`
`13, and 23, should be construed to mean “a fully configurable frame, with one or
`
`more controls, through which content is presented to the user.” SAMSUNG-1003,
`
`
`1 Petitioner does not concede that the challenged claims meet all statutory stand-
`
`ards. Patentability under §101 or compliance with §112 is not appropriate to re-
`
`solve in IPR, and Petitioner reserves all rights to challenge claims for reasons out
`
`of scope for IPR.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`¶28. This definition is consistent with the use of the term in the specification of the
`
`’407 patent, as well as the definition adopted by Patent Owner in prior proceed-
`
`ings. See, e.g., SAMSUNG-1001, 5:21-24; SAMSUNG-1012, Pages 10-11; SAM-
`
`SUNG-1014, *3-4. Thus, for purposes of this IPR, Petitioner adopts Patent
`
`Owner’s construction of networked information monitor, which was adopted in
`
`IPR2019-01279. SAMSUNG-1012, Pages 10-11; SAMSUNG-1003, ¶28.
`
`2.
`“networked information monitor template”
`For the purposes of this proceeding, this term, which appears in claims 1-8,
`
`10-16, 19-20, 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 char-
`
`acteristics, and that excludes executable applications/compiled code.” SAM-
`
`SUNG-1003, ¶29. This definition is consistent with the use of the term in the spec-
`
`ification 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 config-
`
`urable frame characteristics, viewer and control characteristics, and NIM content
`
`references”). Additionally, the ’407 Patent states, “NIMs allow a developer to pro-
`
`vide an application feel without developing custom client applications.” Id.,
`
`26:38-40. The ’407 Patent further states that a NIM definition “is content, rather
`
`than compiled code.” Id., 21:49-50. According to Patent Owner in IPR2019-
`
`4
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`01279, a networked information monitor template “is not compiled code, and can-
`
`not be an executable application or applet.” SAMSUNG-1012, Page 12. Thus, for
`
`purposes of this IPR, Petitioner adopts Patent Owner’s construction of networked
`
`information monitor template, which was adopted in IPR2019-01279. SAM-
`
`SUNG-1012, Pages 13-14; SAMSUNG-1014, *3-4; SAMSUNG-1003, ¶29.
`
`D. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`A person of ordinary skill (“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. SAMSUNG-1003, ¶¶20-21. Additional
`
`graduate education could substitute for professional experience, or significant ex-
`
`perience in the field could substitute for formal education. Id. This definition is
`
`consistent with the previous definition of a POSITA adopted in IPR2019-01279.
`
`SAMSUNG-1012, Page 8.
`
`II.
`
`SUMMARY OF THE ’407 PATENT
`A. Brief Description
`The ’407 Patent is directed to “accessing and viewing internet content”
`
`through a plurality of software “networked information monitors” or “NIMs”
`
`SAMSUNG-1001, Abstract, 5:21-24. The ’407 Patent discloses that NIMs include
`
`“a fully configurable frame with one or more controls; the frame through which
`
`5
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`content is optionally presented.” Id. Figure 4 below provides an example of a col-
`
`lection of NIMs according to the ’407 Patent.
`
`SAMSUNG-1001, FIG. 4
`
`NIMs are executed by a “Home NIM” which “coordinates the activities of all
`
`other NIMs.” SAMSUNG-1001, 5:29-31. Figure 11 provides an example process
`
`of downloading and generating a NIM according to the ’407 Patent.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`SAMSUNG-1001, FIG. 11
`
`
`
`B.
`Prosecution History
`The ’407 application was allowed after two Office Actions, which presented
`
`rejections over prior art references that are substantially different from those relied
`
`upon in this petition. SAMSUNG-1002, 137-142, 903-914, 938-948, 973-977. In-
`
`deed, during prosecution, the examiner did not consider any of Brown, Wecker,
`
`Beer, Shimada, and Buchholz, which render the Challenged Claims obvious, as
`
`discussed below.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`III. THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE
`A.
`[GROUND 1A/1B] – Claims 1-4, 7-11, 13-16, and 19-23 are
`rendered obvious by Brown [1A], claims 1-4, 7-16, and 19-
`24 are rendered obvious by Brown and Wecker [1B]
`Below, the Petition presents a first ground based on Brown alone and a sec-
`
`ond ground based on the combination of Brown and Wecker. In the first ground
`
`[1A], the Petition relies on the disclosure of Brown and explains why Brown’s dis-
`
`closure, when interpreted in view of the general knowledge of a POSITA, renders
`
`obvious claims 1-4, 7-11, 13-16, and 19-23. In the second ground [1B], the Peti-
`
`tion relies on the same disclosure of Brown and explanation of obviousness as pre-
`
`sented in the first ground [1A], but turns to Wecker’s disclosure for a single feature
`
`of claim 1 (“electronic storage configured to store networked information
`
`monitor template”) and features of claims 12 and 24. Although all of the features
`
`of claim 1 are rendered obvious by Brown alone as explained below, Petitioner has
`
`advanced a combination of the Brown and Wecker for claim 1 to the extent Patent
`
`Owner argues that the single feature of claim 1 is not explicit in Brown. Because
`
`the use of Brown’s disclosure and corresponding obviousness arguments are simi-
`
`lar for both grounds [1A/1B], the Petition discusses these grounds together for ease
`
`of presentation. SAMSUNG-1003, ¶43.
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`1. Overview of Brown 2
`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., Abstract; SAM-
`
`SUNG-1003, ¶30.
`
`SAMSUNG-1005, FIG. 3A (annotated)
`
`
`
`As shown in FIG. 3A (above), Brown’s “composite desktop 302 includes
`
`one or more desktop components,” where each “desktop component is a distinct
`
`
`2 Descriptions of the references and combinations thereof are incorporated into
`
`each mapping that includes citations to these references. All emphasis is added un-
`
`less otherwise indicated.
`
`9
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`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;
`
`SAMSUNG-1003, ¶31.
`
`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; SAM-
`
`SUNG-1003, ¶32.
`
`2. Overview of Wecker
`Wecker describes “a method for rendering information,” the information in-
`
`cluding “a content structure file, a data file and a script file.” SAMSUNG-1006,
`
`Abstract; SAMSUNG-1003, ¶33. Wecker describes that “the content structure file
`
`is read to ascertain which script in the script file is associated with data to be ren-
`
`dered.” Id. Thereafter, “[t]he data from the data file is retrieved and the associated
`
`script file is executed to render the data.” Id.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, FIG. 1 (annotated)
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG-1006, FIG. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`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 de-
`
`scribed in a content structure file also known commonly as a channel definition
`
`format (CDF) file.” SAMSUNG-1006, 3:2-6; SAMSUNG-1003, ¶34.
`
`3.
`Combination of Brown and Wecker
`A POSITA would have found it obvious to combine Brown and Wecker
`
`(collectively the “Brown-Wecker combination”). SAMSUNG-1003, ¶35. 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 defi-
`
`nition 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; SAMSUNG-1003, ¶35. 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, as
`
`Dr. Schmidt explains, 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 would be imple-
`
`mented as mobile channels, such that a user would download desktop components,
`
`12
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`and their associated HTML instructions, to their composite desktop. SAMSUNG-
`
`1005, 7:21-23; SAMSUNG-1006, 3:6-14; SAMSUNG-1003, ¶35.
`
`As Dr. Schmidt explains, a POSITA would have been motivated to combine
`
`Brown and Wecker for various reasons. SAMSUNG-1003, ¶36.
`
`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; SAMSUNG-1003, ¶37.
`
`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 con-
`
`tent” 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; SAMSUNG-1003,
`
`¶37. 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 would be incorpo-
`
`rated into Brown with a reasonably high expectation of success. SAMSUNG-
`
`1003, ¶37.
`
`A POSITA would have been prompted to pursue this combination because
`
`doing so is merely the application of known techniques (e.g., rendering content us-
`
`ing templates/script files) to a known structure (e.g., Brown’s composite desktop)
`
`13
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`to yield predictable results. SAMSUNG-1003, ¶38; see also KSR Int’l Co. v. Tele-
`
`flex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007). Additionally, both Brown and Wecker de-
`
`scribe 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
`
`compatible as the assignee would have been motivated by business reasons to pro-
`
`vide commonality between their products. SAMSUNG-1005, Cover; SAMSUNG-
`
`1006, Cover. Thus, as Dr. Schmidt explains, a POSITA would have had a reasona-
`
`ble expectation of success in implementing Wecker’s techniques into the disclo-
`
`sure of Brown. SAMSUNG-1003, ¶38.
`
`Second, a POSITA would have recognized or found obvious that, because
`
`Brown’s desktop components are retrieved from “remote computers,” such compo-
`
`nents would also be accessed via Wecker’s “wireless push server” or “remote com-
`
`puter.” SAMSUNG-1005, 4:16-21; SAMSUNG-1006, 3:34-38, 7:55-63; SAM-
`
`SUNG-1003, ¶39. 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; SAMSUNG-1003, ¶39. A POSITA would have rec-
`
`ognized or found obvious from this disclosure that the “composite desktop” taught
`
`14
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 39843-0149IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407
`by Brown would have been compatible with certain features of the interfaces run-
`
`ning on mobile devices, as c