`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., MICROSOFT CORPORATION, AMAZON.COM,
`INC., AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC., AND AMAZON.COM SERVICES
`LLC
`Petitioners
`v.
`LS CLOUD STORAGE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`
`Case IPR2023-00733
`U.S. Patent No. 10,154,092
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,154,092
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
`I.
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES ........................................................................... 2
`A. Real Parties-in-Interest ....................................................................... 2
`B.
`Related Matters ................................................................................... 2
`C. Counsel and Service ............................................................................ 3
`D.
`Power of Attorney ............................................................................... 5
`E.
`Fees ........................................................................................................ 6
`III. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW ................................ 6
`A. Grounds for Standing ......................................................................... 6
`B.
`Identification of Challenge and Relief Requested ............................ 6
`IV. THE ’092 PATENT ....................................................................................... 8
`V.
`PROSECUTION HISTORY ...................................................................... 10
`VI. THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE ..................... 13
`A.
`State of the Art ................................................................................... 13
`B. Overview of the Prior Art ................................................................. 14
`a.
`Heil ............................................................................................ 14
`b.
`Nakayama ................................................................................ 16
`c.
`Gulick ....................................................................................... 18
`d.
`Berman ..................................................................................... 18
`Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ................................................... 18
`C.
`D. Claim Construction ........................................................................... 19
`
`ii
`
`
`
`v.
`
`E. Ground 1: Claims 1-3, 7-12, and 19-23 are anticipated by
`Heil under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) ........................................................... 22
`a.
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 22
`i.
`Claim 1.pre ....................................................................... 22
`ii.
`Claim 1.a: “a first interface configured to receive
`input/output (I/O) traffic from a first host device
`via a dedicated I/O channel, the I/O traffic
`comprising a read command” ........................................ 23
`iii. Claim 1.b: “a second interface configured to
`receive first data via a network” .................................... 25
`iv. Claim 1.c: “a cache memory configured to store
`second data” ..................................................................... 27
`Claim 1.d: “a storage device configured to store
`third data” ........................................................................ 27
`vi. Claim 1.e: “a processor coupled to the cache
`memory, the processor coupled to the storage
`device via a communication path that is distinct
`from the dedicated I/O channel, the processor
`configured to access the cache memory during
`processing of the I/O traffic” .......................................... 28
`vii. Claim 1.f: “the processor further configured to
`perform an access operation at the storage device
`based on the I/O traffic” ................................................. 31
`Claim 2 ..................................................................................... 32
`Claim 3 ..................................................................................... 32
`Claim 7 ..................................................................................... 34
`Claim 8 ..................................................................................... 35
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 36
`
`b.
`c.
`d.
`e.
`f.
`
`iii
`
`
`
`g.
`h.
`
`i.
`j.
`
`ii.
`
`i.
`
`ii.
`
`Claim 9.a: “the storage device and the dedicated
`I/O channel are independently accessible” ................... 36
`Claim 9.b: “wherein the processor is configured to
`read at least a portion of the second data from the
`cache memory based on the read command” ............... 37
`Claim 10 ................................................................................... 38
`Claim 11 ................................................................................... 39
`i.
`Claim 11.a: “configuration manager circuitry
`configured to route an I/O request included in the
`I/O traffic to the cache memory, to route the I/O
`request to the storage device, or to deny the I/O
`request” ............................................................................ 39
`Claim 11.b: “front-end circuitry configured to
`process the I/O request” ................................................. 40
`iii. Claim 11.c: “back-end circuitry configured to
`perform a read operation or a write operation at
`the storage device based on the I/O request” ............... 41
`Claim 12 ................................................................................... 41
`Claim 19 ................................................................................... 42
`i.
`Claim 19.pre ..................................................................... 42
`ii.
`Claim 19.a: “a first interface configured to receive
`input/output (I/O) traffic from a host computer via
`a dedicated I/O channel, the I/O traffic comprising
`one or more read commands, one or more write
`commands, or a combination thereof” .......................... 42
`iii. Claim 19.b: “a second interface configured to
`receive data via a network” ............................................ 42
`iv. Claim 19.c: “a cache memory” ...................................... 42
`v.
`Claim 19.d: “a storage device” ....................................... 42
`
`iv
`
`
`
`vi. Claim 19.e: “a processor coupled via a
`communication path to the storage device, the
`processor configured to access the cache memory
`during processing of the I/O traffic” ............................. 42
`vii. Claim 19.f: “the processor further configured to
`perform one or more access operations at the
`storage device based on the I/O traffic, wherein
`the communication path is distinct from the
`dedicated I/O channel” ................................................... 43
`Claim 20 ................................................................................... 43
`k.
`Claim 21 ................................................................................... 43
`l.
`m. Claim 22 ................................................................................... 43
`n.
`Claim 23 ................................................................................... 44
`F. Ground 2: Claims 10 and 11 are anticipated by Heil under 35
`U.S.C. § 102(b) ................................................................................... 44
`G. Ground 3: Claims 1-3 and 6-24 are obvious over Heil and
`Nakayama under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ............................................... 45
`a.
`A POSITA Would Have Combined Heil and
`Nakayama ................................................................................ 45
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 46
`i.
`Claim 1.pre ....................................................................... 46
`ii.
`Claim 1.a .......................................................................... 46
`iii. Claim 1.b .......................................................................... 48
`iv. Claim 1.c ........................................................................... 48
`v.
`Claim 1.d .......................................................................... 48
`vi. Claim 1.e ........................................................................... 48
`vii. Claim 1.f ........................................................................... 48
`
`b.
`
`v
`
`
`
`c.
`d.
`e.
`f.
`g.
`h.
`i.
`j.
`k.
`l.
`
`Claim 2 ..................................................................................... 49
`Claim 3 ..................................................................................... 49
`Claim 6 ..................................................................................... 49
`Claim 7 ..................................................................................... 49
`Claim 8 ..................................................................................... 49
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 50
`Claim 10 ................................................................................... 50
`Claim 11 ................................................................................... 51
`Claim 12 ................................................................................... 52
`Claim 13 ................................................................................... 52
`i.
`Claim 13.pre ..................................................................... 52
`ii.
`Claim 13.a ........................................................................ 52
`iii. Claim 13.b ........................................................................ 54
`iv. Claim 13.c ......................................................................... 54
`v.
`Claim 13.d ........................................................................ 54
`vi. Claim 13.e ......................................................................... 54
`vii. Claim 13.f ......................................................................... 54
`viii. Claim 14 ........................................................................... 56
`ix. Claim 15 ........................................................................... 56
`m. Claim 16 ................................................................................... 57
`n.
`Claim 17 ................................................................................... 58
`i.
`Claim 17.a ........................................................................ 58
`ii.
`Claim 17.b ........................................................................ 59
`
`vi
`
`
`
`o.
`p.
`
`Claim 18 ................................................................................... 60
`Claim 19 ................................................................................... 62
`i.
`Claim 19.pre ..................................................................... 62
`ii.
`Claim 19.a ........................................................................ 62
`iii. Claim 19.b ........................................................................ 63
`iv. Claim 19.c ......................................................................... 63
`v.
`Claim 19.d ........................................................................ 63
`vi. Claim 19.e ......................................................................... 63
`vii. Claim 19.f ......................................................................... 63
`Claim 20 ................................................................................... 63
`Claim 21 ................................................................................... 63
`Claim 22 ................................................................................... 63
`Claim 23 ................................................................................... 64
`Claim 24 ................................................................................... 64
`i.
`Claim 24.pre ..................................................................... 64
`ii.
`Claim 24.a ........................................................................ 64
`iii. Claim 24.b ........................................................................ 67
`iv. Claim 24.c ......................................................................... 68
`v.
`Claim 24.d ........................................................................ 69
`vi. Claim 24.e ......................................................................... 70
`H. Ground 4: Claim 4 is obvious over Heil, Nakayama, and
`Gulick under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ...................................................... 73
`a.
`A POSITA Would Have Combined Heil, Nakayama,
`and Gulick ................................................................................ 73
`
`q.
`r.
`s.
`t.
`u.
`
`vii
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Claim 4 is obvious ................................................................... 74
`b.
`Ground 5: Claim 5 is obvious over Heil, Nakayama, and
`Berman under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) .................................................... 75
`a.
`A POSITA Would Have Combined Heil, Nakayama,
`and Berman ............................................................................. 75
`Claim 5 is obvious ................................................................... 76
`b.
`VII. SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................ 76
`VIII. DISCRETION .............................................................................................. 77
`A.
`The Fintiv Factors Strongly Favor Institution ............................... 77
`B.
`Discretionary Denial Under General Plastic Is Unwarranted ....... 80
`C.
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d) Favors Institution .............................................. 80
`IX. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 80
`
`
`
`
`
`viii
`
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
` Page(s)
`
`Cases
`Brown v. 3M,
`265 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2001) .......................................................................... 34
`Samsung Elecs. Am. Inc. v. Prisua Eng’g Corp.,
`948 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2020) .......................................................................... 20
`Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Techs., LP,
`140 S. Ct. 1367 (2020) ........................................................................................ 79
`Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC,
`792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) .......................................................................... 19
`Agency Decisions
`Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc.,
`IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (Mar. 20, 2020) .................................................. 77, 79
`Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. v. Dynamics Inc.,
`IPR2020-00505, Paper 11 (Aug. 12, 2020) ........................................................ 79
`General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha,
`IPR2016-01357, Paper No. 19 (Sept. 6, 2017) ................................................... 80
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 102 .................................................................................................passim
`35 U.S.C. § 103 .................................................................................................passim
`35 U.S.C. § 112 .................................................................................................. 19, 20
`35 U.S.C. § 132 .................................................................................................... 7, 11
`35 U.S.C. § 325 ........................................................................................................ 80
`Regulations
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10 ....................................................................................................... 5
`
`ix
`
`
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ................................................................................................... 19
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ................................................................................................... 20
`Patent Procedures
`MPEP § 211 ............................................................................................................. 12
`
`
`
`x
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Exhibit Number
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,154,092
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 10,154,092 (Application No.
`14/997,327)
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 6,549,988 (Application No.
`09/236,409)
`
`1004
`
`Declaration of Dr. Paul Franzon, Ph.D.
`
`1005
`
`CV of Dr. Paul Franzon, Ph.D.
`
`1006
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,173,374 (“Heil”)
`
`1007
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,920,893 (“Nakayama”)
`
`1008
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,692,211 (“Gulick”)
`
`1009
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,118,776 (“Berman”)
`
`xi
`
`
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`United States District Courts – National Judicial Caseload
`Profile, https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/
`fcms_na_distprofile0331.2022.pdf (accessed September 21,
`2022)
`
`Order Staying Case in LS Cloud Storage Technologies, LLC
`v. Google LLC, 1:22-cv-00853 (W.D. Tex. 2022)
`
`USPTO Memo: Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials
`in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court
`Litigation, June 21, 2022
`
`Order Setting Initial Pretrial Conference for 11/3/2022 in LS
`Cloud Storage Technologies, LLC v. Google LLC, 1:22-cv-
`00853 (W.D. Tex. 2022)
`
`D. Patterson, G. Gibson, R. Katz, entitled “A Case for
`Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Disks (RAID)”.
`
`SIGMOD88: International Conference On Management of
`Data Chicago Illinois USA June 1 - 3, 1988
`
`R. H. Katz, “Network-attached storage systems,”
`Proceedings Scalable High Performance Computing
`Conference SHPCC-92., Williamsburg, VA, USA, 1992, pp.
`68-75
`
`xii
`
`
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`Gang Ma and A. L. Narasimha Reddy, “An evaluation of
`storage systems based on network-attached disks,”
`Proceedings. 1998 International Conference on Parallel
`Processing (Cat. No.98EX205), Minneapolis, MN, USA,
`1998, pp. 278-285.
`
`Average Time to Trial for Patent Cases before Judge Yeakel,
`retrieved from www.docketnavigator.com
`
`Infringement Contentions served in LS Cloud Storage
`Technologies, LLC v. Google LLC, 1:22-cv-00853 (W.D.
`Tex. 2022)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`xiii
`
`
`
`[1.pre]
`
`[1.a]
`
`[1.b]
`
`[1.c]
`
`[1.d]
`
`[1.e]
`
`LISTING OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`
`Reference
`
`Claim Limitation
`
`Claim 1
`
`An apparatus comprising:
`
`a first interface configured to receive
`input/output (I/O) traffic from a first
`host device via a dedicated I/O
`channel, the I/O traffic comprising a
`read command;
`
`a second interface configured to receive
`first data via a network;
`
`a cache memory configured to store
`second data;
`
`a storage device configured to store
`third data; and
`
`a processor coupled to the cache
`memory, the processor coupled to the
`storage device via a communication
`path that is distinct from the dedicated
`I/O channel, the processor configured
`to access the cache memory during
`processing of the I/O traffic,
`
`xiv
`
`
`
`[1.f]
`
`[2.pre]
`
`[2.a]
`
`[3.pre]
`
`[3.a]
`
`[4.pre]
`
`[4.a]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the processor further configured to
`perform an access operation at the
`storage device based on the I/O traffic.
`
`Claim 2
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the dedicated I/O channel is
`associated with dedicated throughput
`that corresponds to the I/O traffic.
`
`Claim 3
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the I/O traffic is distinct from
`the first data.
`
`Claim 4
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the dedicated I/O channel
`comprises a small computer system
`interface (SCSI) channel.
`
`Claim 5
`
`[5.pre]
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`xv
`
`
`
`[5.a]
`
`[6.pre]
`
`[6.a]
`
`[7.pre]
`
`[7.a]
`
`[8.pre]
`
`[8.a]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`wherein the second interface comprises
`an Ethernet interface or an
`asynchronous transfer mode (ATM)
`interface.
`
`Claim 6
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the I/O traffic further
`comprises a write command.
`
`Claim 7
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the first data comprises a
`second read request, a write request, or
`a combination thereof.
`
`Claim 8
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the network comprises a
`plurality of interconnected computing
`devices.
`
`xvi
`
`
`
`[9.pre]
`
`[9.a]
`
`[9.b]
`
`
`
`
`
`[10.pre]
`
`[10.a]
`
`[11.pre]
`
`[11.a]
`
`Claim 9
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the storage device and the
`dedicated I/O channel are
`independently accessible,
`
`and wherein the processor is
`configured to read at least a portion of
`the second data from the cache
`memory based on the read command.
`
`Claim 10
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the processor is further
`configured to route the read command
`to the cache memory or to the storage
`device.
`
`Claim 11
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`configuration manager circuitry
`configured to route an I/O request
`included in the I/O traffic to the cache
`memory, to route the I/O request to the
`
`xvii
`
`
`
`[11.b]
`
`[11.c]
`
`
`
`
`
`[12.pre]
`
`[12.a]
`
`[13.pre]
`
`[13.a]
`
`[13.b]
`
`[13.c]
`
`storage device, or to deny the I/O
`request;
`
`front-end circuitry configured to
`process the I/O request; and
`
`back-end circuitry configured to
`perform a read operation or a write
`operation at the storage device based
`on the I/O request.
`
`Claim 12
`
`The apparatus of claim 1,
`
`wherein the host device comprises a
`server.
`
`Claim 13
`
`A method comprising:
`
`receiving input/output (I/O) traffic
`from a host device via a dedicated I/O
`channel at a first interface, the I/O
`traffic comprising a write command;
`
`receiving first data via a network at a
`second interface;
`
`storing second data at a cache memory;
`
`xviii
`
`
`
`[13.d]
`
`[13.e]
`
`[13.f]
`
`[14.pre]
`
`[14.a]
`
`[15.pre]
`
`[15.a]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`storing third data at a storage device;
`
`accessing the cache memory during
`processing of the I/O traffic; and
`
`performing one or more access
`operations at the storage device based
`on the I/O traffic, the one or more
`access operations utilizing a
`communication path between a
`processor and the storage device, the
`communication path distinct from the
`dedicated I/O channel.
`
`Claim 14
`
`The apparatus of claim 13,
`
`wherein the I/O traffic is distinct from
`the first data.
`
`Claim 15
`
`The apparatus of claim 13,
`
`further comprising performing a first
`access operation at the storage device
`independently of the dedicated I/O
`channel.
`
`xix
`
`
`
`[16.pre]
`
`[16.a]
`
`[17.pre]
`
`[17.a]
`
`[17.b]
`
`
`
`
`
`[18.pre]
`
`[18.a]
`
`Claim 16
`
`The apparatus of claim 13,
`
`wherein the second data is written at the
`cache memory in response to the write
`command.
`
`Claim 17
`
`The apparatus of claim 13,
`
`further comprising: receiving a read
`request via the network; and
`
`transmitting at least a portion of the
`second data from the cache memory
`via the network responsive to the read
`request being associated with a cache
`hit.
`
`Claim 18
`
`The apparatus of claim 13,
`
`further comprising storing fourth data
`at the cache memory, wherein the
`second data is indicated by the write
`command, and wherein the fourth data
`is indicated by a second write
`
`xx
`
`
`
`
`
`[19.pre]
`
`[19.a]
`
`[19.b]
`
`[19.c]
`
`[19.d]
`
`[19.e]
`
`[19.f]
`
`command received at the second
`interface.
`
`Claim 19
`
`An apparatus comprising:
`
`a first interface configured to receive
`input/output (I/O) traffic from a host
`computer via a dedicated I/O channel,
`the I/O traffic comprising one or more
`read commands, one or more write
`commands, or a combination thereof;
`
`a second interface configured to receive
`data via a network;
`
`a cache memory;
`
`a storage device; and
`
`a processor coupled via a
`communication path to the storage
`device, the processor configured to
`access the cache memory during
`processing of the I/O traffic,
`
`the processor further configured to
`perform one or more access operations
`at the storage device based on the I/O
`traffic, wherein the communication
`
`xxi
`
`
`
`[20.pre]
`
`[20.a]
`
`[21.pre]
`
`[21.a]
`
`[22.pre]
`
`[22.a]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`path is distinct from the dedicated I/O
`channel.
`
`Claim 20
`
`The apparatus of claim 19,
`
`wherein the dedicated I/O channel is
`associated with dedicated throughput
`that corresponds to the I/O traffic.
`
`Claim 21
`
`The apparatus of claim 19,
`
`wherein the I/O traffic is distinct from
`the data.
`
`Claim 22
`
`The apparatus of claim 19,
`
`wherein the data corresponds to one or
`more read requests, one or more write
`requests, or a combination thereof.
`
`Claim 23
`
`[23.pre]
`
`The apparatus of claim 19,
`
`xxii
`
`
`
`[23.a]
`
`[24.pre]
`
`[24.a]
`
`[24.b]
`
`[24.c]
`
`[24.d]
`
`[24.e]
`
`
`
`
`
`wherein the storage device and the
`dedicated I/O channel are
`independently accessible.
`
`Claim 24
`
`An apparatus comprising:
`
`means for receiving input/output (I/O)
`traffic from a first host device via a
`dedicated I/O channel, the I/O traffic
`comprising a write command;
`
`means for receiving data via a
`network;
`
`means for short-term data storage;
`
`means for long-term data storage; and
`
`means for performing one or more
`access operations at the means for
`short-term data storage during
`processing of the I/O traffic and for
`performing one or more access
`operations at the means for long-term
`data storage based on the I/O traffic,
`the means for performing distinct from
`the dedicated I/O channel.
`
`xxiii
`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”), Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”),
`
`Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and Amazon.com Services LLC
`
`(“Amazon”) (collectively, “Petitioner”) request inter partes review (IPR) of claims
`
`1-24 (the “Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 10,154,092 (the “’092 Patent”)
`
`assigned to LS Cloud Storage Technologies LLC (“PO”).
`
`The ’092 Patent relates to cached data storage systems and describes an
`
`apparatus and method in which host computers provide input to a cache memory or
`
`a disk storage device. The host may be a local host that accesses the cache or disk
`
`storage via a dedicated I/O channel, or a remote host that accesses the cache or
`
`disk storage via a network interface.
`
`As the ’092 Patent admits, such data storage and caching architectures were
`
`already well known in the art. “Numerous prior art systems and methods exist for
`
`managing cache memory in a data storage system,” and a “typical data processing
`
`system generally involves a cached data storage system that connects to local host
`
`computers via I/O channels or remote host computers via network links.” Ex.1001,
`
`1:56-58, 1:30-34. Indeed, U.S. Patent 6,173,374 to Heil discloses a data storage
`
`and caching architecture identical to that of the ’092 Patent that similarly provides
`
`for host access to cache memory and disk storage via either a dedicated I/O
`
`channel or a network interface.
`
`1
`
`
`
`Petitioner respectfully requests review and cancellation of the Challenged
`
`Claims based on the grounds as set forth below.
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES
`A. Real Parties-in-Interest
`The following are the real parties-in-interest for this petition: Cisco,
`
`Microsoft, Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and Amazon.com
`
`Services LLC.
`
`B. Related Matters
`PO asserted the ’092 Patent against Petitioner and other parties in the
`
`following cases in the Waco Division of the Western District of Texas:
`
`• LS Cloud Storage Technologies, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 6:22-cv-
`
`00319 (W.D. Tex. 2022)
`
`o Dismissed and refiled as LS Cloud Storage Technologies, LLC v.
`
`Cisco Systems, Inc., 6:22-cv-00845 (W.D. Tex. 2022) (joint motion
`
`to transfer to the Austin Division granted November 22, 2022)
`
`• LS Cloud Storage Technologies, LLC v. Google LLC, 6:22-cv-00318
`
`(W.D. Tex. 2022)
`
`o Transferred to the Austin Division as LS Cloud Storage
`
`Technologies, LLC v. Google LLC, 1:22-cv-00853 (W.D. Tex.
`
`2022) by agreement of the parties on August 15, 2022
`
`2
`
`
`
`• LS Cloud Storage Technologies, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., 6:22-cv-
`
`00316 (W.D. Tex. 2022)
`
`o Transferred to the Austin Division as LS Cloud Storage
`
`Technologies, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., 1:22-cv-01167 (W.D.
`
`Tex. 2022) by agreement of the parties on October 31, 2022
`
`• LS Cloud Storage Technologies, LLC v. Microsoft Corporation, 6:22-cv-
`
`00321 (W.D. Tex. 2022)
`
`o Transferred to the Austin Division as LS Cloud Storage
`
`Technologies, LLC v. Microsoft Corporation, 1:22-cv-00974
`
`(W.D. Tex. 2022)
`
`The ’092 Patent is also the subject of the following proceeding:
`
`• Google LLC v. LS Cloud Storage Technologies, LLC, IPR2023-00120
`
`(U.S. Patent No. 10,154,092)
`
`Cisco, Microsoft, and Amazon were each first served with a complaint
`
`alleging infringement of the ’092 Patent on March 28, 2022.
`
`C. Counsel and Service
`
`PETITIONER’S LEAD AND BACK-UP COUNSEL
`
`Lead Counsel
`
`Brian E. Ferguson
`Reg. No. 36,801
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`1901 L Street, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`
`3
`
`
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`
`Telephone: 202-282-5276
`Email: beferguson@winston.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioners Cisco Systems,
`Inc. and Microsoft Corporation
`
`Juan C. Yaquian
`Reg. No. 70,755
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`800 Capital Street, Suite 2400
`Houston, TX 77002
`Telephone: (713) 651-2600
`Fax: (713) 651-2700
`Email: jyaquian@winston.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioners Cisco Systems,
`Inc. and Microsoft Corporation
`Krishnan Padmanabhan
`(to seek pro hac vice admission)
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`200 Park Avenue
`New York City, NY 10166
`Telephone: (212) 294-6700
`Fax: (212) 294-4700
`Email: kpadmanabhan@winston.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioner Cisco Systems,
`Inc.
`Michael Rueckheim
`(to seek pro hac vice admission)
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 520
`Redwood City, CA 94065
`Telephone: (650) 858-6500
`Fax: (650) 858-6550
`Email: mrueckheim@winston.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioner Microsoft
`
`4
`
`
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`
`Corporation
`Brian C. Nash
`Reg. No. 58,105
`MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
`701 Brazos Street, Suite 1100
`Austin, TX 78701
`Telephone: (737) 309-0700
`Email: BNash@mofo.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioners Amazon.com,
`Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and
`Amazon.com Services LLC
`
`Petitioner consents to service by electronic mail at the following addresses:
`
`
`
`
`beferguson@winston.com;
`
`jyaquian@winston.com;
`
`kpadmanabhan@winston.com;
`
`mrueckheim@winston.com;
`
`WS-Cisco-LSCloud@winston.com;
`
`Winston-Microsoft-LSCloud@winston.com;
`
`BNash@mofo.com; and
`
`Amazon-LSCloud@mofo.com.
`
`D.
`Power of Attorney
`Power of attorneys are filed herewith in accordance with 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.10(b).
`
`5
`
`
`
`E.
`Fees
`Petitioner concurrently electronically submits the required fees for this
`
`Petition.
`
`III. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`A. Grounds for Standing
`Petitioner certifies that the ’092 Patent is available for IPR, and that
`
`Petitioner is not barred or estopped from requesting this IPR.
`
`B.
`Identification of Challenge and Relief Requested
`Petitioner requests cancellation of the Challenged Claims on the following
`
`grounds:
`
`Ground 1: Anticipation of claims 1-3, 7-12, and 19-23 by U.S. Patent
`
`6,173,374 (“Heil”) issued January 9, 2001, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e);
`
`Ground 2: Anticipation of claims 10 and 11 by Heil under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`102(b);
`
`Ground 3: Obviousness of claims 1-3 and 6-24 based on Heil and U.S.
`
`Patent 5,920,893 (“Nakayama”) issued July 6, 1999, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a);
`
`Ground 4: Obviousness of claim 4 based on Heil, Nakayama, and U.S.
`
`Patent 5,692,211 (“Gulick”) issued November 25, 1997, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a);
`
`and
`
`6
`
`
`
`Ground 5: Obviousness of claim 5 based on Heil, Nakayama, and U.S.
`
`Patent 6,118,776 (“Berman”) issued September 12, 2000, under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`103(a).
`
`Each ground is supported by the Declaration of Dr. Paul Franzon, Ph.D., an
`
`expert in the field of computer networking and cache management. None of the
`
`prior art used in any of the grounds was cited during prosecution.
`
`As explained in Section V, the ’092 Patent claims priority through a chain of
`
`applications, the earliest of which (U.S. Application No. 09/236,409) has a filing
`
`date of January 22, 1999. The written description support for claims 10 and 11 of
`
`the ’092 Patent, however, was not included in the original specification of the ’409
`
`Application. Rather, it was introduced as new matter during the prosecution of the
`
`’409 Application. Because “[n]o amendment shall introduce new matter into the
`
`disclosure of the invention,” claims 10 and 11 are not entitled to claim the January
`
`22, 1999 priority date of the ’409 Application. 35 U.S.C. § 132. Instead, claims 10
`
`and 11 have a priority date no earlier than the