`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ERICSSON AB,
`Patent Owner.
`____________________
`
`Case IPR2022-00618
`Patent No. 9,313,178
`____________________
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S CONTINGENT MOTION TO AMEND
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Google Exhibit 1030
`Google v. Ericsson
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`
`Table of Contents
`Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1
`I.
`Statement of Relief Requested .......................................................................... 2
`II.
`III. The Substitute Claims Satisfy 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a) ....................................... 2
`IV. The Substitute Claim Satisfies 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(b) ..................................... 6
`V. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ..................................................................... 9
`VI. Claim Construction ........................................................................................... 9
`VII. Patentability Over the Prior Art ........................................................................ 9
`VIII. Conclusion ......................................................................................................10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`Declaration of Kayvan B. Noroozi in Support of
`Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice
`U.S. Patent Publ. No. 2014/0237243 (publication
`of U.S. Application No. 14/266,368 filed April
`30, 2014)
`U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No.
`61/500,316, filed Jun. 23, 2011
`U.S. Patent Publ. No 2012/0331293(Publication
`of U.S. Application Ser. No.: 13/530,997, filed on
`Jun. 22, 2012)
`
`- ii -
`
`
`
`Ex. 2001
`
`Ex. 2002
`
`Ex. 2003
`
`Ex. 2004
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`Ericsson AB (“Ericsson” or “Patent Owner”) respectfully moves under 35
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00468
`MOTION TO AMEND
`
`U.S.C. § 316(d) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.121 to conditionally amend challenged claims
`
`1-5, 7-11, 16-19 of the ’178 patent. In the event the Board finds the challenged
`
`claims unpatentable, Ericsson respectfully requests that the Board grant this motion
`
`to amend with respect to the corresponding proposed substitute claims.
`
`“Before considering the patentability of any substitute claims, the Board first
`
`must determine whether the motion to amend meets the statutory and regulatory
`
`requirement set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 316(d) and 37 C.F.R. §42.121.” Lectrosonics,
`
`Inc. v. Zaxcom, Inc., IPR2018-01129, -01130, Paper 15 at 4 (PTAB Feb. 25, 2019).
`
`The substitute claims must be i) presented in a claim listing; ii) reasonable in
`
`number; iii) responsive to a ground of unpatentability involved in the trial; iv) non-
`
`broadening; and v) supported by the written description. Id. at 4-8. As shown
`
`below, this motion and the substitute claims meet all requirements of 37 C.F.R §
`
`42.121. Moreover, the motion confirms Patent Owner’s belief that the proposed
`
`substitute claims are patentable over all known prior art, whether alone or in
`
`combination.
`
`In light of the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in Aqua Products v. Matal,
`
`872 F.3d 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2017), Patent Owner need not do more. Having met its
`
`burdens, Patent Owner is entitled to the contingent substitute claim unless
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`Petitioner “prove[s] all propositions of unpatentability.” Id. at 1310.
`
`
`
`II.
`
`Statement of Relief Requested
`Pursuant to the Board’s Pilot Program, Patent Owner requests the Board’s
`
`Preliminary Guidance as to this Motion to Amend.
`
`To the extent the Board finds any of original claims 1-5, 7-11, and 16-19
`
`unpatentable, Ericsson respectfully requests that the Board grant this motion to
`
`amend with respect to the corresponding proposed substitute claim(s) presented
`
`herein.
`
`III. The Substitute Claims Satisfy 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a)
`A. The substitute claims are non-broadening.
`As shown in the attached claims appendix, the proposed substitute claims
`
`retain all features of the corresponding original claims, and only add clarifying
`
`amendments. The proposed claims thus do not enlarge the scope of the
`
`corresponding original claims in any way. Rather, the clarifying amendments
`
`simply render more explicit the claim scope discussed in Patent Owner's Response.
`
`Thus, although Patent Owner believes the original claims, properly construed,
`
`already contain the requirements set forth in the contingent amended claims
`
`presented herein, Patent Owner provides the contingent amended claims in the
`
`event the Board declines to so construe the original claims.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Amendments
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`Broadening
`Amendments
`None
`
`(cid:120) said content expiration key expiration
`times defining normal periods of use
`for each said content encryption key;
`(cid:120) detecting an explicit key change
`notification requesting a key change
`outside of the normal period-based
`expiration of the current key;
`(cid:120) the key rotation boundary
`constituting either the expiration time
`for said content encryption key or an
`explicit key change notification
`
`
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`21 instead of claim 1
`
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`21 instead of claim 1
`
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`23 instead of claim 3
`
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`24 instead of claim 4
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`24 instead of claim 4
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`21 instead of claim 1
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`26 instead of claim 7
`
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`21 instead of claim 1
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`21 instead of claim 1
`(cid:120) said content expiration key expiration
`times defining normal periods of use
`
`- 3 -
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`
`
`Substitute
`claim #
`21
`
`Original
`claim #
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`16
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`for each said content encryption key;
`(cid:120) detecting an explicit key change
`notification requesting a key change
`outside of the normal period-based
`expiration of the current key;
`(cid:120) the key rotation boundary
`constituting either the expiration time
`for said content encryption key or an
`explicit key change notification
`
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`31 instead of claim 16
`
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`32 instead of claim 17
`(cid:120) Claim depends from amended claim
`31 instead of claim 16
`
`
`None
`
`None
`
`None
`
`32
`
`33
`
`34
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`
`B.
`
`The substitute claims are responsive to a ground of
`unpatentability involved in the trial.
`The proposed substitute claims are also responsive to at least one ground of
`
`unpatentability in the trial. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a)(2)(i). Petitioner has alleged
`
`that U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2002/0172368 to Peterka, Ex. 1004 (“Peterka”), teaches a
`
`method for handling secure distribution of content that comprises initiating a media
`
`playback request and receiving a playback request response; parsing content
`
`information from the playback request response, the content information including
`
`content encryption keys, content encryption key identifiers, and content encryption
`
`key expiration times; retrieving content and manifest files from a content delivery
`
`server; detecting content encryption key rotation boundaries between periods of
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`use of different content encryption keys in decrypting retrieved content; issuing
`
`
`
`requests to a license server ahead of a key rotation boundary to retrieve a second
`
`content encryption key to be used after a content encryption key rotation boundary
`
`is reached; and applying the second key for content decryption after the key
`
`rotation boundary is reached, as recited in the original claims. Each proposed
`
`substitute claim: (1) clarifies that the content expiration key expiration times define
`
`normal periods of use for each said content encryption key; (2) clarifies that the
`
`step of detecting content encryption key rotation boundaries between periods of
`
`use of different content encryption keys in decrypting retrieved content requires
`
`detecting an explicit key change notification requesting a key change outside of the
`
`normal period-based expiration of the current key; and (3) clearly notes that the
`
`key rotation boundary recited in limitations 21.5 and 31.6 encompasses either the
`
`expiration time for said content encryption key or an explicit key change
`
`notification. Neither Peterka nor the other cited references teach or suggest a
`
`system or method with those limitations.
`
`At the same time, it is not necessary “that every word added to or removed
`
`from a claim in a motion to amend must be solely for the purpose of overcoming
`
`an instituted ground.” Veeam Software Corp. v. Veritas Techs., LLC, IPR2014-
`
`00090, Paper 48 at 28 (Jul. 17, 2017). Rather, the question is whether “the
`
`proposed claim as a whole is ‘responsive to a ground of unpatentability involved in
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`the trial.’” Id. at 29. Beyond that threshold, Patent Owner may add other
`
`
`
`amendments that “serve[ ] the public interest by ensuring issuance of valid and
`
`clear patents,” including “additional limitations to address potential § 101 or § 112
`
`issues.” Id. To the extent the Board finds that any other proposed amendments in a
`
`given substitute claim are not directly responsive to a ground of unpatentability
`
`here, those amendments are appropriate in view of the legal principles above.
`
`C. The substitute claims are reasonable in number.
`For each original challenged claim, Ericsson proposes only one substitute
`
`claim, fitting the “presumption . . . that only one substitute claim would be needed
`
`to replace each challenged claim.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a)(3).
`
`IV. The Substitute Claim Satisfies 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(b)
`A. The substitute claims are presented in claim listing.
`As required by 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(b), this motion is accompanied by an
`
`appendix that lists the proposed substitute claim and clearly shows the proposed
`
`amendments to the claim in light of the corresponding original claim.
`
`B.
`
`The substitute claims are supported by the original and earlier-
`filed disclosures for each claim.
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(b)(1) and (b)(2), the below table
`
`demonstrates that each substitute claim is supported by each earlier-filed disclosure
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`as to which the benefit of the filing date is sought.1 In particular, the ’178 patent
`
`
`
`issued from Application No. 14/266,368 that was published as Patent Application
`
`Publ. No. 2014/0237243 (Application filed April 30, 2014)(Ex. 2002). The ‘178
`
`patent claims priority to U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 61/500,316, filed
`
`Jun. 23, 2011 (Ex. 2003), and U.S. patent application Ser. No.: 13/530,997, filed
`
`on Jun. 22, 2012, which was published as U.S. Patent Application Publ. No
`
`2012/0331293 (Ex. 2004) and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,751,807.
`
`Limitation2 Ex. 2002
`
`Ex. 2003
`
`Ex. 2004
`
`Abstract; ¶5; cls.
`1, 16
`¶5; cls. 1-3, 16
`
`¶¶3, 5, 36; cls. 1,
`16
`
`Abstract; ¶¶2, 3, 5; cls.
`1, 16
`¶¶26, 30, 31, 36, cls. 8,
`23, 29
`
`Abstract; pp.
`1, 3
`pp. 3-8; 11-
`12; Fig. 2; cl.
`1
`pp. 7-11; cl. 1 Abstract; ¶¶3, 5, 7-8,
`17-18, 21, 23, 27, 29,
`37
`Abstract; ¶¶3, 5, 15,
`19; Figs, 1, 3
`
`¶¶5; 22; cls. 1, 16 pp. 5-6, 7-8,
`11-12; Figs.
`2-3; cl.1, 16,
`17
`pp. 10-13;
`Figs 2-3
`
`¶¶20, 26, 33, 34, 37;
`Fig. 3
`
`pp. 11-13;
`Figs. 2-3
`
`¶¶3, 5, 7-8, 15, 19-20,
`26, 30, 33, 34, 37; Fig.
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`[21P]
`
`[21.1]
`
`[21.2]
`
`[21.3]
`
`[21.4]
`
`[21.5]
`
`Claim
`#
`21
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Abstract; ¶¶5, 9,
`23, 25, 26, 35,
`36, 39; Fig. 3
`¶¶3, 5, 8, 9, 21,
`26, 32, 35, 36,
`
`1 The support citations herein are not necessarily exhaustive or meant to
`limit the meaning of the corresponding limitations.
`2 Limitation citations correspond to numbering shown in the claims
`appendix attached hereto.
`
`
`
`
`
`39; Fig. 3; cls. 1,
`16
`¶¶5, 36, 39; Fig.
`3; cl. 1
`¶¶3, 5, 8, 10, 20,
`21, 35; cls. 1, 16
`¶¶5, 20, 23, 29,
`32; cls. 3
`¶¶6, 8-10, 20, 21,
`24, 25, 26, 29,
`31, 39; cl. 4
`¶¶21, 23, 31, 39;
`cl. 4
`¶¶8, 10, 20; cls.
`7, 19
`¶¶9, 10, 20; cl. 8 pp. 4-5, 7
`¶¶8-10, 20; 21,
`pp. 4-5, 7
`31 cl. 9
`¶¶22, 33; cl. 10
`¶¶33; cl. 11
`¶¶16, 17; cls. 16-
`20
`¶¶16, 17; cls. 16-
`20
`¶5; cls. 1-3, 16
`
`pp. 10-13
`
`pp. 7-11
`
`pp. 4-6, 7-9
`
`pp. 4-6, 7-9,
`11-13; cl. 8
`
`pp. 4-6, 7-9,
`11-13; cl. 8
`pp. 5-7
`
`pp. 4, 6-7
`pp. 4, 6-7
`Abstract; pp
`1, 3
`pp. 1, 7
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`
`
`
`3
`
`¶¶20-21; Fig. 3
`
`¶¶7-8, 17, 33
`
`¶¶7-8, 17, 21, 23, 27
`
`¶¶7-8, 17, 21, 23, 27
`
`¶¶7-8, 17, 21, 23, 27
`
`¶¶7-8, 17-18
`
`¶¶6, 17; cl. 18, 35
`¶¶7-8, 17-18. 27, 32,
`37
`¶¶19, 31; cl. 21, 22
`¶¶19, 31; cl. 22
`Abstract; ¶¶3, 14, 15;
`Fig. 1; cl. 37
`¶¶14-15; cl. 25, 37;
`Fig. 1
`¶¶26, 30, 31, 36, cls. 8,
`23, 29
`
`pp. 3-8; 11-
`12; Fig. 2; cl.
`1
`pp. 7-11; cl. 1 Abstract; ¶¶3, 5, 7-8,
`17-18, 21, 23, 27, 29,
`37
`Abstract; ¶¶3, 5, 15,
`19; Figs, 1, 3
`
`¶¶3, 5, 36; cls. 1,
`16
`
`Abstract; ¶¶5, 9,
`23, 25, 26, 35,
`36, 39; Fig. 3
`¶¶3, 5, 8, 9, 21,
`
`¶¶5; 22; cls. 1, 16 pp. 5-6, 7-8,
`11- 12; Figs.
`2-3; cl.1, 16,
`17
`pp. 10-13;
`Figs 2-3
`
`¶¶20, 26, 33, 34, 37;
`Fig. 3
`
`pp. 11-13;
`
`¶¶3, 5, 7-8, 15, 19-20,
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`[21.6]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[31.P]
`
`[31.1]
`
`[31.2]
`
`[31.3]
`
`[31.4]
`
`[31.5]
`
`[31.6]
`
`
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`28
`
`29
`30
`31
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Figs. 2-3
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`26, 30, 33, 34, 37; Fig.
`3
`
`pp. 10-13
`
`¶¶20-21; Fig. 3
`
`pp. 7-11
`
`¶¶7-8, 17, 33
`
`pp. 4-6, 7-9,
`11-13; cl. 8
`
`¶¶7-8, 17, 21, 23, 27
`
`pp. 5-7
`
`¶¶7-8, 17-18
`
`
`
`32
`
`33
`
`34
`
`[31.7]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`26, 32, 35, 36,
`39; Fig. 3; cls. 1,
`16
`¶¶5, 36, 39; Fig.
`3; cl. 1
`¶¶3, 5, 8, 10, 20,
`21, 35; cls. 1, 16
`¶¶6, 8-10, 20, 21,
`24, 25, 26, 29,
`31, 39; cl. 4
`¶¶8, 10, 20; cls.
`7, 19
`V. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`Patent Owner agrees with Petitioner’s expert regarding the level of ordinary
`
`skill in the art. Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 23-26.
`
`VI. Claim Construction
`At this stage, Patent Owner does not propose any specific claim
`
`constructions as it is not Patent Owner’s burden to demonstrate patentability of the
`
`proposed substitute claim over the prior art. While Patent Owner believes the new
`
`proposed limitations, plainly understood, establish patentability of the proposed
`
`claim, Patent Owner reserves the right to propose claim constructions as needed to
`
`respond to any allegations of unpatentability presented by Petitioner.
`
`VII. Patentability Over the Prior Art
`In light of the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in Aqua Products v. Matal,
`
`872 F.3d 1290, 1296, 1310 (Fed. Cir. 2017), Patent Owner need not prove the
`
`patentability of the proposed substitute claim. And as the Patent Office has
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`acknowledged before the Federal Circuit, and the Federal Circuit has held, Patent
`
`
`
`Owner adequately meets its duty of candor by simply confirming—as it does
`
`here—its belief that the proposed substitute claim is patentable over all known
`
`prior art, alone or combined. Nike Inc. v. Adidas AG, 812 F.3d 1326, 1350 (Fed.
`
`Cir. 2016) (overruled en banc on other grounds). Nonetheless, the proposed
`
`amended claims are patentable at least for the reasons set forth in Section III.A.
`
`VIII. Conclusion
`Patent Owner respectfully requests the Board’s Preliminary Guidance as to
`
`this Motion, and further requests that, to the extent any original claim is deemed
`
`unpatentable, the Board grant the corresponding proposed substitute claim.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s Peter C. Knops/
`Peter C. Knops, Reg. No. 37,659
`Kayvan B. Noroozi, Admitted Pro Hac Vice
`NOROOZI PC
`11601 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 2170
`Los Angeles, CA 90025
`
`Attorneys for the Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: November 28, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`
`CLAIMS APPENDIX
`Underlining and strikethrough text show the modifications to the original
`
`claim being made in the corresponding substitute claim.
`
`1-5
`
`
`
`7-11
`
`16-19
`
`21.
`
`
`
`(Canceled)
`
`(Canceled)
`
`(Cancelled)
`
`(Substitute for claim 1, if found unpatentable)
`
`[21.1P] A method for handling secure distribution of content comprising:
`
`
`[21.1] initiating a media playback request and receiving a playback request
`response;
`
`[21.2] parsing content information from the playback request response, the content
`information including content encryption keys, content encryption key identifiers,
`and content encryption key expiration times, said content expiration key expiration
`times defining normal periods of use for each said content encryption key;
`
`[21.3] retrieving content and manifest files from a content delivery server;
`
`[21.4] detecting content encryption key rotation boundaries between periods of use
`of different content encryption keys in decrypting retrieved content by detecting an
`explicit key change notification requesting a key change outside of the normal
`period-based expiration of the current key;
`
`[21.5] issuing requests to a license server ahead of a key rotation boundary to
`retrieve a second content encryption key to be used after a content encryption key
`rotation boundary is reached, said key rotation boundary constituting either the
`expiration time for said content encryption key or an explicit key change
`notification; and
`
`[21.6] applying the second key for content decryption after the key rotation
`boundary is reached.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`
`
`
`22.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 2, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 211, wherein the content encryption keys and content
`encryption key identifiers returned in the playback request response include the
`content encryption key and associated identifier currently being applied as well as
`a future content encryption key and associated identifier yet to be applied.
`
`23.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 3, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 211, wherein the content encryption key expiration returned
`in the playback request response is expressed as an expected minimum interval
`between periodic key rotation.
`
`24.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 4, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 233, further comprising: timing the prefetching of a next un-
`retrieved content encryption key based on an expected expiration of the content
`encryption key currently being used.
`
`25.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 5, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 244, further comprising: prefetching a next un-retrieved key a
`fixed duration before the expected expiration of the content encryption key
`currently being used.
`
`26.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 7, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 211, wherein subsequent content encryption key identifiers
`are predictable based on a predetermined known progression.
`
`27.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 8, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 267, further comprising: the identifier being calculated as
`monotonically increasing sequential integer values based on the number of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`segments or video frames generated during a fixed periodic content encryption key
`expiration interval.
`
`
`
`28.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 9, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 267, further comprising: the identifier being calculated as an
`expected wall clock time for applying the next content encryption key based on a
`fixed periodic content encryption key expiration interval.
`
`29.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 10, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 211, wherein license server communications are
`secured and authenticated using a selected one of Secure Sockets Layer and a
`token-based technique using a token encrypted with a symmetric key.
`
`30.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 11, if found unpatentable)
`
`The method of claim 2910, wherein the token-based technique employs white box
`encryption to encrypt the token.
`
`31.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 16, if found unpatentable)
`
`[31.P] A computerized device operable as a client for handling secure distribution
`of content, comprising:
`[31.1] memory operative to store computer program instructions;
`one or more processors;
`input/output interface circuitry; and
`interconnect circuitry coupling the memory, processors and input/output interface
`circuitry together,
`wherein the processors are operative to execute the computer program instructions
`from the memory to cause the computerized device to:
`[31.2] initiate a media playback request and receive a playback request response;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- iii -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00618
`MOTION TO AMEND
`[31.3] parse content information from the playback request response, the content
`information including content encryption keys, content encryption key identifiers,
`and content encryption key expiration times;
`[31.4] retrieve content and manifest files from a content delivery server;
`[31.5] detect content encryption key rotation boundaries between periods of use of
`different content encryption keys in decrypting retrieved content;
`[31.6] issue requests to a license server ahead of a key rotation boundary to retrieve
`a second content encryption key to be used after a content encryption key rotation
`boundary is reached; and
`[31.7] apply the second key for content decryption after the key rotation boundary
`is reached.
`32.
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 17, if found unpatentable)
`
`The computerized device of claim 31 16, wherein the content encryption keys and
`content encryption key identifiers returned in the playback request response
`include the content encryption key and associated identifier currently being applied
`as well as a future content encryption key and associated identifier yet to be
`applied.
`
`33.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 18, if found unpatentable)
`
`The computerized device of claim 3217, wherein the computer program
`instructions further cause the computerized device to time the prefetching of a next
`un-retrieved content encryption key based on an expected expiration of the content
`encryption key currently being used.
`
`34.
`
`
`
`(Substitute for claim 19, if found unpatentable)
`
`The computerized device of claim 3116, wherein subsequent content encryption
`key identifiers are predictable based on a predetermined known progression.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00468
`MOTION TO AMEND
`
`
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing PATENT OWNER’S
`
`CONTINGENT MOTION TO AMEND was served electronically via e-mail on
`
`November 28, 2022, on the following counsel of record for Petitioner:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Kayvan Noroozi/
`Kayvan Noroozi
`NOROOZI PC
`11601 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 2170
`Los Angeles, CA 90025
`Tel.: 310-975-7074
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: November 28, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
