UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`TOUCHSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 8,356,251
`Filing Date: September 26, 2011
`Issue Date: January 15, 2013
`Title: PLAY CONTROL OF CONTENT ON A DISPLAY DEVICE
`
`Inter Partes Review No.: IPR2024-01231
`
`DECLARATION OF DAVID B. LETT
`
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW UNDER 35
`U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq.
`
` Charter Ex. 1102
`
`

`

` 1.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
`PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS ........................ 1
`2.
`3. MATERIALS CONSIDERED ............................................................................. 7
`4.
`UNDERSTANDING OF APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS .................... 11
`5.
`THE RELEVANT ART AND LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE
`RELEVANT ART .............................................................................................. 16
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................ 17
`OVERVIEW OF THE ’251 PATENT................................................................ 21
`7.1. Prosecution History .................................................................................. 23
`1.
`Prosecution History of the ’998 Application ............................................ 23
`2.
`Prosecution History of the ’289 Patent ..................................................... 23
`3.
`Prosecution History of the ’251 Patent ..................................................... 24
`OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART .................................................................. 28
`8.1. Streaming Formats and VOD ................................................................... 28
`8.2. Media Players ........................................................................................... 30
`8.3. Applications on TVs and STBs ................................................................ 31
`8.4. Device Casting .......................................................................................... 32
`8.5. Remote Viewing ....................................................................................... 33
`8.6. File Extensions and MIME Types ............................................................ 34
`8.7. Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) ............................................ 36
`8.8. Look-Up Tables (LUTs) ........................................................................... 38
`8.9.U.S. Pat. No. 9,490,998 - Danciu (Ex. 1112) ............................................... 38
`8.10. U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0172757 - Aldrey (Ex. 1115) ................................... 50
`8.11. U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0078812 - Calvert (Ex. 1111) .................................. 56
`8.12. U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0248802 - Mahajan (Ex. 1114) ................................ 63
`IDENTIFICATION OF HOW CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE .................. 67
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE ’251 PATENT ........ 67
`11. Danciu-Mahajan or Danciu-Mahajan-Calvert Render Claims 1-26
`
`6.
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`10.
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`Obvious ..................................................................................................... 68
`11.1 Independent Claim 1 ................................................................................. 68
`11.2 Dependent Claim 2 ................................................................................... 94
`11.3 Dependent Claim 3: “The method of claim 1 wherein converting the
`command into corresponding programming code to control the media
`player includes using information in a look-up table.” ............................ 97
`11.4 Dependent Claim 4: “The method of claim 3 wherein the look-up table
`stores a plurality of specific commands, each of which represents,
`respectively, a corresponding command for a different media player.” .. 98
`11.5 Dependent Claim 5: “The method of claim 1 wherein the universal
`command represents an instruction to play the video content, to stop
`playing the video content or to pause playing the video content.” ........ 100
`11.6 Dependent Claim 6: “The method of claim 1 wherein the video content is
`an interactive video game.” .................................................................... 100
`11.7 Dependent Claim 7: “The method of claim 1 wherein the video content is
`streaming media.” ................................................................................... 102
`11.8 Dependent Claim 8: “The method of claim 1 wherein the synchronization
`code is uniquely associated with the display device on which the video
`content is to be played.” ......................................................................... 103
`11.9 Dependent Claim 9: “The method of claim 8 wherein the synchronization
`code is different from an IP address associated with the display device
`and is different from a MAC address associated with the display device.”
` 103
`11.10 Dependent Claim 10: “The method of claim 8 wherein assigning a
`synchronization code includes assigning a randomly generated code to
`the display device each time the display device connects to the server
`system.” .................................................................................................. 104
`11.11 Independent Claim 11 ............................................................................. 105
`11.12 Dependent Claim 12: [12A]-[12C]: “The system of claim 11 including: a
`library storing protocols or application programming interfaces, wherein
`the server system is configured to check the identity of the media player
`identified in the one or more signals from the personal computing device,
`load an appropriate set of protocols or application programming
`interfaces from the library based on the identity of the media player, and
`convert the command from the personal computing device into a
`corresponding programming code to control the media player.” .......... 109
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`11.13 Dependent Claim 13: “[13A]-[13C]: “The system of claim 11 including: a
`look-up table storing a plurality of commands each of which is for a
`particular type of media player, wherein the server system is configured
`to convert the command into corresponding programming code to control
`the media player based on information in the look-up table.” ............... 109
`11.14 Dependent Claim 14: “The system of claim 11 wherein the look-up table
`stores a correspondence between the universal command and a plurality
`of specific commands, each of which is for a different media player.” . 109
`11.15 Dependent Claim 15: “The system of claim 14 the server system is
`configured to convert the universal command by selecting from among
`the plurality of specific commands stored in the look-up table.” .......... 110
`11.16 Dependent Claim 16: “The system of claim 11 wherein the universal
`command represents an instruction to play the video content, to stop
`playing the video content or to pause playing the video content.” ........ 110
`11.17 Dependent Claim 17: “The system of claim 11 wherein the video content
`is an interactive video game.” ................................................................ 110
`11.18 Dependent Claim 18: “The system of claim 11 wherein the video content
`is streaming media.” ............................................................................... 111
`11.19 Dependent Claim 19: “The system of claim 11 wherein the
`synchronization code is uniquely associated with the display device on
`which the video content is to be played.” .............................................. 111
`11.20 Dependent Claim 20: “The system of claim 19 wherein the
`synchronization code is different from an IP address associated with the
`display device and is different from a MAC address associated with the
`display device.” ...................................................................................... 111
`11.21 Dependent Claim 21: “The system of claim 19 wherein the server system
`is configured to assign as the synchronization code a randomly generated
`code each time the display device connects to the server system.” ....... 111
`11.22 Independent Claim 22 ............................................................................. 112
`11.23 Dependent Claim 23: “The method of claim 22 wherein the display device
`comprises a television set with a display screen.” ................................. 117
`11.24 Dependent Claim 24: “The method of claim 22 wherein the display
`device comprises a laptop or personal computer.” ................................ 117
`11.25 Dependent Claim 25: “The method of claim 22 wherein each of the first
`and second commands represents an instruction to play the respective
`video file, to stop playing the respective video file or to pause playing the
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`respective video file.” ............................................................................. 118
`11.26 Dependent Claim 26: “The method of claim 22 wherein the display device
`checks whether the respective media player needed to play the particular
`one of the video files already is loaded in the display device before
`obtaining a copy of the media player over the Internet.” ....................... 118
`12. Aldrey-Mahajan Renders Claims 1-26 Obvious .................................... 119
`12.1 Independent Claim 1 ............................................................................... 119
`12.2 Dependent Claim 2 ................................................................................. 135
`12.3 Dependent Claim 3: “The method of claim 1 wherein converting the
`command into corresponding programming code to control the media
`player includes using information in a look-up table.” .......................... 137
`12.4 Dependent Claim 4: “The method of claim 3 wherein the look-up table
`stores a plurality of specific commands, each of which represents,
`respectively, a corresponding command for a different media player.” 138
`12.5 Dependent Claim 5: “The method of claim 1 wherein the universal
`command represents an instruction to play the video content, to stop
`playing the video content or to pause playing the video content.” ........ 140
`12.6 Dependent Claim 6: “The method of claim 1 wherein the video content is
`an interactive video game.” .................................................................... 140
`12.7 Dependent Claim 7: “The method of claim 1 wherein the video content is
`streaming media.” ................................................................................... 141
`12.8 Dependent Claim 8: “The method of claim 1 wherein the synchronization
`code is uniquely associated with the display device on which the video
`content is to be played.” ......................................................................... 142
`12.9 Dependent Claim 9: “The method of claim 8 wherein the synchronization
`code is different from an IP address associated with the display device
`and is different from a MAC address associated with the display device.”
` 142
`12.10 Dependent Claim 10: “The method of claim 8 wherein assigning a
`synchronization code includes assigning a randomly generated code to
`the display device each time the display device connects to the server
`system.” .................................................................................................. 143
`12.11 Independent Claim 11 ............................................................................. 144
`12.12 Dependent Claim 12: [12A]-[12C]: “The system of claim 11 including: a
`library storing protocols or application programming interfaces, wherein
`
`
`
`iv
`
`

`

`the server system is configured to check the identity of the media player
`identified in the one or more signals from the personal computing device,
`load an appropriate set of protocols or application programming
`interfaces from the library based on the identity of the media player, and
`convert the command from the personal computing device into a
`corresponding programming code to control the media player.” .......... 148
`12.13 Dependent Claim 13: “[13A]-[13C]: “The system of claim 11 including: a
`look-up table storing a plurality of commands each of which is for a
`particular type of media player, wherein the server system is configured
`to convert the command into corresponding programming code to control
`the media player based on information in the look-up table.” ............... 148
`12.14 Dependent Claim 14: “The system of claim 11 wherein the look-up table
`stores a correspondence between the universal command and a plurality
`of specific commands, each of which is for a different media player.” . 148
`12.15 Dependent Claim 15: “The system of claim 14 the server system is
`configured to convert the universal command by selecting from among
`the plurality of specific commands stored in the look-up table.” .......... 148
`12.16 Dependent Claim 16: “The system of claim 11 wherein the universal
`command represents an instruction to play the video content, to stop
`playing the video content or to pause playing the video content.” ........ 149
`12.17 Dependent Claim 17: “The system of claim 11 wherein the video content
`is an interactive video game.” ................................................................ 149
`12.18 Dependent Claim 18: “The system of claim 11 wherein the video content
`is streaming media.” ............................................................................... 149
`12.19 Dependent Claim 19: “The system of claim 11 wherein the
`synchronization code is uniquely associated with the display device on
`which the video content is to be played.” .............................................. 149
`12.20 Dependent Claim 20: “The system of claim 19 wherein the
`synchronization code is different from an IP address associated with the
`display device and is different from a MAC address associated with the
`display device.” ...................................................................................... 150
`12.21 Dependent Claim 21: “The system of claim 19 wherein the server system
`is configured to assign as the synchronization code a randomly generated
`code each time the display device connects to the server system.” ....... 150
`12.22 Independent Claim 22 ............................................................................. 150
`12.23 Dependent Claim 23: “The method of claim 22 wherein the display device
`
`
`
`v
`
`

`

`comprises a television set with a display screen.” ................................. 155
`12.24 Dependent Claim 24: “The method of claim 22 wherein the display device
`comprises a laptop or personal computer.” ............................................ 157
`12.25 Dependent Claim 25: “The method of claim 22 wherein each of the first
`and second commands represents an instruction to play the respective
`video file, to stop playing the respective video file or to pause playing the
`respective video file.” ............................................................................. 157
`12.26 Dependent Claim 26: “The method of claim 22 wherein the display device
`checks whether the respective media player needed to play the particular
`one of the video files already is loaded in the display device before
`obtaining a copy of the media player over the Internet.” ....................... 157
`13. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 158
`CLAIM LISTING APPENDIX ................................................................................... 159
`
`vi
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`I, David B. Lett, declare that I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in
`
`this declaration and, if called to testify as a witness, could and would do so competently.
`
`1. INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained as an expert witness on behalf of the Petitioners,
`
`Charter Communications, Inc., for the above-referenced inter partes review proceeding.
`
`2.
`
`I have been asked to provide a declaration regarding certain matters
`
`pertaining to U.S. Patent No. 8,356,251 (“the ’251 Patent”) (Ex. 1101) and the
`
`unpatentability grounds set forth in the Petition for this proceeding. My experience with
`
`television distribution systems, Set Top Boxes (STBs), Electronic Program Guides
`
`(EPGs), Video on Demand (VOD), and content delivery systems provides me with an
`
`understanding of the subject matter described and claimed in the ’251 Patent.
`
`3.
`
`I am being compensated at my usual consulting rate of $385 per hour for
`
`my work on this matter. My compensation is in no way dependent upon my opinions or
`
`testimony or the outcome of this proceeding. I have no financial interest in the party or
`
`in the outcome of this proceeding.
`
`2. PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`
`I am a technical consultant and product development industry veteran with
`4.
`expertise in electronics, software, hardware, video, audio, and data
`
`communications, having led product development organizations in cable, satellite,
`
`consumer electronics, home automation, asset tracking, remote tank logistics, and alarm
`
`industries. My current curriculum vitae is attached as Appendix A and some highlights
`1
`
`
`

`

`follow.
`
`5.
`
`I earned my B.S. in Electrical Engineering (1982) with high honors from
`
`the University of Tennessee in Knoxville, Tennessee. I also attended the Georgia Institute
`
`of Technology from 1986 to 1987, completing 40% of the required degree hours for the
`
`M.S. Electrical Engineering program.
`
`6.
`
`From 1982 to 1985, I worked at Scientific Atlanta as an Electrical Engineer
`
`designing video, audio, and data communications equipment for the cable television
`
`industry. I designed software and hardware including addressable data transmitters,
`
`video sync suppression scramblers, transaction format converters, and data channel
`
`monitors for addressable Cable Television systems and Set Top Boxes.
`
`7.
`
`From 1983 to 1985, while working at Scientific Atlanta, I also worked as
`
`an Assistant Professor at DeVry Institute of Technology, teaching courses in electronics
`
`and microprocessor hardware/software.
`
`8.
`
`From 1985 to 1990, I worked at Wegener Communications as a Senior
`
`Electrical engineer, designing satellite communications equipment including forward
`
`error correction (FEC) coding systems, PSK modems, and analog control systems for RF
`
`modulators and PSK demodulators. I was promoted to the Hardware Engineering
`
`Manager, where I managed product development of video, audio, and data satellite
`
`receivers, modulators, graphics display systems, DSP-based compandors, FSK and PSK
`
`satellite modems, multiplexers, forward error correction (FEC) codecs, RF upconverters
`
`and downconverters, and baseband analog and digital processing components.
`2
`
`
`

`

`9.
`
`In 1990, I returned to Scientific Atlanta, which was acquired by Cisco in
`
`2006. I worked as Engineering Manager running the set top box engineering group
`
`where I was promoted to Director and Vice President during my tenure until 2011. I led
`
`the design of many cable set top boxes and systems through the evolution of analog video,
`
`addressability, downloadable software, electronic program guides, digital video, VOD,
`
`software applications, high-definition TV, DVR, DOCSIS, full spectrum tuners, and
`
`multiroom DVR. These systems implemented various technologies including DOCSIS
`
`1/2/3 and hybrid gateways, 802.11, IPTV, DVR, cable modems, ADSL, VDSL, DVB-
`
`T/C/S, bootloaders, factory diagnostics, application frameworks, Nagra, DRMs,
`
`conditional access, secure microprocessors, device management, Android, Adobe Flash,
`
`Linux, DVD play/record, MPEG-4, MPEG-2, H.264, NTSC, PAL, DAVIC, MoCA,
`
`high-performance CPUs, cablecards, network processors, HDMI, multiple video/audio
`
`display interfaces, 2D/3D graphics, multiple RF tuners, and full spectrum tuners.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`10.
`
`From 2011 to 2016, I worked for EchoStar Technologies, which served as
`
`the product development organization for sister company DISH Network. I served as
`
`Vice President of Engineering and was the Head of the Atlanta research and development
`
`center. I led the development of satellite set top boxes, consumer electronic equipment,
`
`and a home automation and security system. Technologies used included video/audio,
`
`IoT, H.265, HEVC, 3D, Satellite, wireless, MoCA, transcoding, embedded C Linux
`
`applications, mobile applications (IOS and Android), SaaS, web applications (Javascript,
`
`HTML), BSS/OSS, AWS cloud storage, 2-way video/audio streaming, authentication,
`
`and VoIP.
`
`11.
`
`In 2016, I started an independent consulting business in technology and
`
`intellectual property projects. I have consulted in various technology areas and industries
`
`including consumer electronics, Internet of Things (IoT), cable, satellite, television,
`
`media, and cryptocurrency.
`
`12.
`
`From 2019 to 2022, I worked as Chief Technology Officer for Telular, an
`
`Ametek company. I was responsible for the development of Industrial Internet of Things
`
`(IIoT) recurring revenue solutions, combining wireless technologies, purpose-built
`
`hardware, and SaaS in the commercial telematics, security and home automation markets
`
`and sold under the SkyBitz and Telguard brands.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`13. My record of professional service includes awards on products I designed
`
`and developed from several organizations in my field of expertise, including Best of
`
`Show, Technology Emmy, and Best of Innovations.
`
`14.
`
`I am a named inventor on 86 patents and published patent applications
`
`corresponding to the areas of my professional work. The patents and published
`
`applications involving video and audio technologies include:
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 9,882,736 titled “Remote Sound Generation for a
`Home Automation System”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 9,615,139 titled “Determining Device That Performs
`Processing of Output Pictures”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 8,549,567 titled “Media Content Sharing Over a Home
`Network”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 8,161,388 titled “Interactive discovery of display
`device characteristics”
`
`• U.S. Patent Nos. 8,120,924, 7,240,217, 6,785,817, 6,564,324,
`6,212,278, and 5,440,632 titled “Reprogrammable Subscriber
`Terminal”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 7,908,625 titled “Networked Multimedia System”
`
`• U.S. Patent Nos. 7,861,272 and 7,849,486 titled “Networked
`Subscriber Television Distribution”
`
`• U.S. Patent Nos. 7,774,820 and 7,069,578 titled “Settop Cable
`Television Control Device and Method Including Bootloader Software
`and Code Version Table for Maintaining and Updating Settop Receiver
`Operating System Software”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,771,064 titled “Home Communications Terminal
`having an Applications Module”
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`• U.S. Patent No. 5,715,515 titled “Method and Apparatus for
`Downloading On-Screen Graphics and Captions to a Television
`Terminal”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,657,414 titled “Auxiliary Device Control for a
`Subscriber Terminal”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,592,551 titled “Method and Apparatus for Providing
`Interactive Electronic Programming Guide”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,539,822 titled “System and Method for Subscriber
`Interactivity in a Television System”
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,357,276 titled “Method of Providing Video On
`Demand with VCR Like Functions”
`
`• U.S. Patent Application Publication Nos. 2004/0068753 and
`2008/0072272 titled “Video Transmission Systems and Methods for a
`Home Network”
`
`• U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0133911
`“Subscriber Network in a Satellite System”
`I have a general understanding of the U.S. patent prosecution process and
`
`titled
`
`15.
`
`of the novelty and non-obviousness requirements for patentability.
`
`16.
`
`I believe that my extensive industry experience and educational
`
`background qualify me as an expert in the relevant field of multimedia content
`
`management retrieval and distribution systems. I am knowledgeable of the relevant skill
`
`set that would have been possessed by a hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`at the time of the invention of the ’251 Patent, which I (as I discuss below) understand is
`
`late 2010 or early 2011.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`3. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`
`17.
`
`In formulating my opinion, I reviewed and considered U.S. Pat.
`
`No.8,356,251 to Strober (Ex. 1101), as to which I am offering my opinion regarding the
`
`validity of certain claims, as discussed herein.
`
`18.
`
`In preparing this declaration, I also reviewed and considered the Petition
`
`and the file history of the ’251 Patent (included in Ex. 1104) as well as the following
`
`references:
`
`• Ex. 1103: Curriculum Vitae of David B. Lett
`
`• Ex. 1104:
`8,356,251
`
`Certified Copy of Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No.
`
`• Ex. 1105-10: Omitted
`
`• Ex. 1111: U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0078812 (“Calvert”)
`
`• Ex. 1112: U.S. Pat. No. 9,490,998 (“Danciu”)
`
`• Ex. 1113:
`Provisional”)
`
`U.S. Pat. Application No. 61/411,386 (“Danciu
`
`• Ex. 1114: U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0248802 (“Mahajan”)
`
`• Ex. 1115: U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0172757 (“Aldrey”)
`
`• Ex. 1116-19: Omitted
`
`• Ex. 1120:
`
`• Ex. 1121:
`
`Joint Claim Construction Statement, Touchstream
`Technologies, Inc. v. Google LLC, 6:21-cv-00569-ADA
`(WDTX) (Feb. 8, 2022)
`
`Exhibit 1 to Joint Disputed Claim Terms Charts,
`Touchstream Technologies, Inc. v. Vizbee, Inc., 1:17-
`cv- 06247-PGG-KNF (SDNY) (Aug. 6, 2018)
`
`• Ex. 1122:
`
`Jury Instructions, Touchstream Technologies, Inc. v.
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Google LLC, 6:21-cv-00569-ADA (WDTX) (July 21,
`2023)
`
`• Ex. 1123-29: Omitted
`
`• Ex. 1130:
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2002/0104096 (“Cramer”)
`
`• Ex. 1131:
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,356,575 (“Shapiro”)
`
`• Ex. 1132:
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,269,842 (“Estipona”)
`
`• Ex. 1133:
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0267899 (“Rahman”)
`
`• Ex. 1134:
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0098533 (“Henshaw”)
`
`• Ex. 1135:
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0172656 (“Kim”)
`
`• Ex. 1136:
`
`Omitted
`
`• Ex. 1137:
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,343,419 (“Robinson”)
`
`• Ex. 1138-40: Omitted
`
`CODING OF MOVING PICTURES AND AUDIO,
`• Ex. 1141:
`MPEG-4 Overview (Int’l Org. Standardisation 2002)
`
`Robert Godwin-Jones, Digital Video Update: YouTube,
`• Ex. 1142:
`Flash, High-Definition, 11 LANGUAGE LEARNING & TECH. 16, 17
`(2007)
`
`John C. Paolillo et al., A Network of Social Media
`• Ex. 1143:
`Platform History: Social Structure, Dynamics and Content on YouTube,
`PROC. 52ND HAWAII INT’L CONF. ON SYS. SCIS., 1, (2019)
`
`• Ex. 1144:
`YouTube Opens Internet Video to Masses; Serving 3
`Million Videos Daily and Growing, YouTube Unveils a Fast, Fun, and
`Easy Service for Consumers to Broadcast Original Video, MARKET
`WIRE, Dec. 15, 2005
`
`• Ex. 1145:
`Hulu Debuts via Private Beta and on Distribution
`Partners AOL, Comcast, MSN, MySpace and Yahoo!; Company
`Announces Major Licensing Deals with Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Inc. and Sony Pictures Television; Providence Equity Partners Makes
`Strategic Investment in News Corporation/NBC Universal Online Video
`Joint Venture, BUS. WIRE, Oct. 29, 2007
`
`Blockbuster Offers Cheaper Online Rental,
`• Ex. 1146:
`ASSOCIATED PRESS, Jun. 13, 2007
`
`• Ex. 1147:
`Adobe Delivers Flash Player 9 With H.264 Video
`Support; HD Quality Web Video and Audio Now Available With Adobe
`Flash Player Update, BUS. WIRE, Dec. 4, 2007
`
`• Ex. 1148:
`Microsoft Unveils Silverlight to Power the Next
`Generation of Media Experiences on the Web; Leading Media
`Companies and Solution Providers Announce Support for New Solution
`for Video and Interactivity on Mac- and Windows-Based Web Browsers,
`PR NEWSWIRE US, Apr. 16, 2007
`
`• Ex. 1149:
`Former Apple Multimedia Pioneers Unveil WebTV; New
`Company Brings Internet to Television Viewers, PR NEWSWIRE, Jun.
`12, 1996
`
`Netflix, TiVo Team Up After 4-Year Courtship,
`• Ex. 1150:
`ASSOCIATED PRESS, Oct. 30, 2008
`
`• Ex. 1151:
`TiVo and Amazon.com Announce New Service Enabling
`Amazon Unbox Video Download to TiVo; TiVo Subscribers Will Soon Be
`Able to Watch Amazon Unbox Movies and TV Shows on Their TVs, BUS.
`WIRE, Feb. 7, 2007
`
`Wall Crumbling Between Televisions and Computers,
`• Ex. 1152:
`AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE – ENGLISH, Jan. 8, 2009
`
`ENHANCED TV BINARY INTERCHANGE FORMAT
`• Ex. 1153:
`1.0, ETV (OpenCable Specifications, Nov. 25, 2009)
`
`• Ex. 1154:
`Award-Winning Sonos™ Digital Music System Begins
`Shipping to Customers, PR NEWSWIRE US, Jan. 27, 2005
`
`Sonos Introduces the Sonos™ ZonePlayer ZP80, PR
`• Ex. 1155:
`NEWSWIRE, Jan. 4, 2006
`
`• Ex. 1156:
`Sonos Introduces the Sonos Controller for iPhone; Free
`Application Lets Music Lovers Control Leading Multi- Room Music
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`System from Their iPhone, PR NEWSWIRE, Oct. 28, 2008
`
`AT&T Opens R&D Lab in Cambridge, England,
`• Ex. 1157:
`BUS. WIRE, Feb. 10, 1999
`
`• Ex. 1158:
`Microsoft Releases Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server
`Edition, M2 PRESSWIRE, Jun 16, 1998
`
`• Ex. 1159:
`TeamViewer: TeamViewer 3.0 Beta Published; Next
`Generation of the Popular Remote Support Software, M2
`PRESSWIRE, Aug. 27, 2007
`
`• Ex. 1160:
`3am Labs Announces $10 Million Series A Financing;
`McNamee Lawrence & Co. Acts as Exclusive Financial Advisor to 3am
`Labs, BUS. WIRE, Nov. 16, 2004
`
`• Ex. 1161:
`Expertcity's GoToMyPC Product Wins A People's Choice
`Award At Upside Events' Showcase 2001, INTERNET WIRE, Feb. 1,
`2001
`
`• Ex. 1162:
`TV2Me(R) Goes Global By Partnering With Leading
`Asian Online Entertainment Company; Manila-Based ESL Adds Sales
`and Marketing Muscle to Bring Pioneering Place Shifting Technology to
`Wider Market, PR NEWSWIRE US, May 16, 2006
`
`• Ex. 1163:
`CES Innovations 2005 Award and Red Herring Finalist
`for 100 Most Innovative Companies are Latest Commendations for Sling
`Media, BUS. WIRE, Nov. 11, 2004
`
`• Ex. 1164:
`
`Final Written Decision, IPR2022-00795 (Sep. 27, 2023)
`
`• Ex. 1165:
`
`Patent Owner Response, IPR2022-00795 (Jan. 13, 2023)
`
`• Ex. 1166:
`
`Omitted
`
` Progressive Networks Launches the First Commercial
`• Ex. 1167:
`Audio-On-Demand System Over the Internet, BUS. WIRE, Apr. 10, 1995
`
`• Ex. 1168: Progressive Networks’ RealVideo Launched With Wide
`Industry Support, PR NEWSWIRE EUROPE, February 10, 1997
`
`• Ex. 1169:
`
`Omitted
`
`• Ex. 1170:
`
`
`
`U.S. Prov. App. No. 61/477,998
`10
`
`

`

`• Ex. 1171:
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,904,289 (“the ’289 Patent”)
`
`• Ex. 1172:
`
`Certified Copy of Prosecution History of U.S. Pat No.
`8,904,289
`
`• Ex. 1173:
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,767,195 (“the ’195 Patent”)
`
`• Ex. 1174:
`9,767,195
`
`Certified Copy of Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No.
`
`• Ex. 1175:
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,048,751 to Strober (“the ’751 Patent”)
`
`• Ex. 1176:
`
`Certified Copy of Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No.
`11,048,751
`
`• Ex. 1177:
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,356,251 to Strober (“the ’251 Patent”)
`
`• Ex. 1178:
`
`Certified Copy of Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No.
`8,356,251
`
`• Ex. 1179:
`
`(Omitted)
`
`• Ex. 1180:
`
`My analysis of Danciu Claim 1 in view of Danciu
`Provisional
`
`• Ex. 1181:
`
`Annotated Copy of Danciu Provisional in view of Danciu
`
`Claim Construction Order, Touchstream Technologies,
`• Ex. 1183
`Inc. v. Charter Communications, Inc. et al, 2-23-cv-00059-RJG (E.D.
`Tex.) (July 9, 2024)
`4. UNDERSTANDING OF APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`19.
`
`Although I am not an attorney, I have a general understanding of the
`
`applicable legal standards pertaining to the patentability issues presented in this
`
`proceeding. I understand that the Petitioner is challenging the patentability of the claims
`
`of the ’251 Patent based on the following grounds:
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`• Claims 1-26 as obvious under pre-AIA 35 § 103(a) based on Danciu in
`
`view of Mahajan.
`
`• Claims 1-26 as obvious under pre-AIA 35 § 103(a) based on Danciu in
`
`view of Mahajan and Calvert.
`
`• Claims 1-26 as obvious under pre-AIA 35 § 103(a) based on Aldrey in
`
`view of Mahajan.
`
`20.
`
`I understand that, in this inter partes review, Petitioner has the burden of
`
`proving that each challenged claim is unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence.
`
`21.
`
`I understand that to be valid, a patent claim must be “novel,” and is invalid
`
`if “anticipated” by a single prior art reference. I further understand a reference anticipates
`
`if it discloses each and every element as arranged in the claim so as to enable a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the claimed invention without undue
`
`experimentation.
`
`22.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is unpatentable if, at the time of the
`
`invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the
`
`teachings of the prior art to yield the patent claim. It is my understandi