Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 1 of 43
`
`Exhibit 12
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 2 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 1 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`EXHIBIT B
`
`Joint Disputed Claim Construction Chart
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`Plain and ordinary
`meaning—i.e.,
`network element
`that establishes a
`communication
`
`“communicatio
`n controller”
`(’606 patent
`claims 31, 34,
`40, 43, 44, 45,
`46;
`’872 patent
`claims 28, 29)
`
`Case No. 5:18-cv-06217-LHK,
`ECF No. 96; id., ECF No. 106;
`Case No. 5:18-cv-06216-LHK,
`ECF No. 114; id., ECF No. 121;
`Abstract (“A process and
`apparatus to facilitate
`communication between callers
`and callees in a system
`comprising a plurality of nodes
`with which callers and callees are
`associated is disclosed. In
`response to initiation of a call by
`a calling subscriber, a caller
`identifier and a callee identifier
`are received. Call classification
`criteria associated with the caller
`identifier are used to classify the
`call as a public network call or a
`
`
`1 All citations are to the ’606 patent unless otherwise noted.
`
`1
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`An apparatus or
`machine that uses a
`routing message to
`establish a
`communication
`within a network or
`between networks
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`Plain claim language;
`FIG. 1; FIG. 3; FIG. 4; FIG. 5;
`FIG. 6; FIGS. 8A-D,FIG. 15; FIG.
`16; FIG. 32; FIG. 51; FIG. 52;
`FIG. 53; FIG. 55;
`1:15-16 (U.S. Provisional
`Application No. 60/856,212,
`incorporated by reference);
`1:18-34 (“BACKGROUND OF
`THE INVENTION
`Field of Invention
`This invention relates to voice
`over IP communications and
`methods and apparatus for routing
`and billing.
`Description of Related Art
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 3 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 165 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`depending on whether or not the
`formatted callee identifier has a
`DID bank table record and this
`depends on how the call
`classification criteria are met and
`block 402 directs the processor
`202 of FIG. 7 to classify the call
`as a private network call when
`the callee identifier complies with
`a pre-defined format, i.e. is a
`valid user name and identifies a
`subscriber to the private network,
`after the callee identifier has been
`subjected to the classification
`criteria of blocks 257, 380, 390
`and 396.”);
`’606 Patent, claim 8.
`
`Case No. 5:18-cv-06217-LHK,
`ECF No. 96; id., ECF No. 106;
`Case No. 5:18-cv-06216-LHK,
`ECF No. 114; id., ECF No. 121;
`Abstract (“A process and
`apparatus to facilitate
`communication between callers
`and callees in a system
`
`165
`
`Plain and ordinary
`meaning
`
`“communicatio
`n system node”
`(’606 patent
`claims 10;
`’872 patent
`claims 10, 17,
`21, 22, 24, 26,
`
`At least one
`network element
`that is part of a
`communication
`system and
`provides
`communication
`services
`
`Plain claim language;
`Abstract (“A process and
`apparatus to facilitate
`communication between callers
`and callees in a system comprising
`a plurality of nodes with which
`callers and callees are associated
`is disclosed. In response to
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 4 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 166 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`27)
`
`comprising a plurality of nodes
`with which callers and callees are
`associated is disclosed. In
`response to initiation of a call by
`a calling subscriber, a caller
`identifier and a callee identifier
`are received. Call classification
`criteria associated with the caller
`identifier are used to classify the
`call as a public network call or a
`private network call. A routing
`message identifying an address,
`on the private network,
`associated with the callee is
`produced when the call is
`classified as a private network
`call and a routing message
`identifying a gateway to the
`public network is produced when
`the call is classified as a public
`network call.”);
`Figs. 1, 8A-D, 13-18, 32;
`1:63-2:11 (“In accordance with
`one aspect of the invention, there
`is provided a process for
`operating a call routing controller
`
`166
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`initiation of a call by a calling
`subscriber, a caller identifier and a
`callee identifier are received. Call
`classification criteria associated
`with the caller identifier are used
`to classify the call as a public
`network call or a private network
`call. A routing message
`identifying an address, on the
`private network, associated with
`the callee is produced when the
`call is classified as a private
`network call and a routing
`message identifying a gateway to
`the public network is produced
`when the call is classified as a
`public network call.”);
`FIG. 1; FIG. 8A; FIG. 8C; FIG.
`13; FIG. 16; FIG. 17; FIG. 18;
`FIG. 32;
`1:15-16 (U.S. Provisional
`Application No. 60/856,212,
`incorporated by reference);
`1:42-52 (“The PSTN network
`typically includes complex
`network nodes that contain all
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 5 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 167 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`to facilitate communication
`between callers and callees in a
`system comprising a plurality of
`nodes with which callers and
`callees are associated. The
`process involves, in response to
`initiation of a call by a calling
`subscriber, receiving a caller
`identifier and a callee identifier.
`The process also involves using
`call classification criteria
`associated with the caller
`identifier to classify the call as a
`public network call or a private
`network call. The process further
`involves producing a routing
`message identifying an address,
`on the private network,
`associated with the callee when
`the call is classified as a private
`network call. The process also
`involves producing a routing
`message identifying a gateway to
`the public network when the call
`is classified as a public network
`call.”);
`3:5-29 (“Producing the routing
`
`167
`
`information about a local calling
`service area including user
`authentication and call routing.
`The PSTN network typically
`aggregates all information and
`traffic into a single location or
`node, processes it locally and then
`passes it on to other network
`nodes, as necessary, by
`maintaining route tables at the
`node. PSTN nodes are redundant
`by design and thus provide
`reliable service, but if a node
`should fail due to an earthquake or
`other natural disaster, significant,
`if not complete service outages
`can occur, with no other nodes
`being able to take up the load.”);
`1:61-67 (“SUMMARY OF THE
`INVENTION
`In accordance with one aspect of
`the invention, there is provided a
`process for operating a call
`routing controller to facilitate
`communication between callers
`and callees in a system comprising
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 6 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 168 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`message identifying a node on
`the private network may involve
`setting a callee identifier in
`response to a username
`associated with the DID bank
`table record.
`Producing the routing message
`may involve determining whether
`a node associated with the
`reformatted callee identifier is the
`same as a node associated the
`caller identifier.
`Determining whether a node
`associated with the reformatted
`callee identifier is the same as a
`node associated the caller
`identifier may involve
`determining whether a prefix of
`the re-formatted callee identifier
`matches a corresponding prefix
`of a username associated with the
`caller dialing profile.
`When the node associated with
`the caller is not the same as the
`node associated with the callee,
`the process involves producing a
`
`168
`
`a plurality of nodes with which
`callers and callees are
`associated.”);
`3:5-29 (“Producing the routing
`message identifying a node on the
`private network may involve
`setting a callee identifier in
`response to a username associated
`with the DID bank table record.
`Producing the routing message
`may involve determining whether
`a node associated with the
`reformatted callee identifier is the
`same as a node associated the
`caller identifier.
`Determining whether a node
`associated with the reformatted
`callee identifier is the same as a
`node associated the caller
`identifier may involve
`determining whether a prefix of
`the re-formatted callee identifier
`matches a corresponding prefix of
`a username associated with the
`caller dialing profile.
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 7 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 169 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`routing message including the
`caller identifier, the reformatted
`callee identifier and an
`identification of a private
`network node associated with the
`callee and communicating the
`routing message to a call
`controller.
`When the node associated with
`the caller is the same as the node
`associated with the callee, the
`process involves determining
`whether to perform at least one of
`the following: forward the call to
`another party, block the call and
`direct the caller to a voicemail
`server associated with the
`callee.”);
`5:26-45 (“The private network
`routing message producing
`provisions may be operably
`configured to determine whether
`a node associated with the
`reformatted callee identifier is the
`same as a node associated the
`caller identifier.
`
`169
`
`When the node associated with the
`caller is not the same as the node
`associated with the callee, the
`process involves producing a
`routing message including the
`caller identifier, the reformatted
`callee identifier and an
`identification of a private network
`node associated with the callee
`and communicating the routing
`message to a call controller.
`When the node associated with the
`caller is the same as the node
`associated with the callee, the
`process involves determining
`whether to perform at least one of
`the following: forward the call to
`another party, block the call and
`direct the caller to a voicemail
`server associated with the
`callee.”);
`3:65-4:14 (“In accordance with
`another aspect of the invention,
`there is provided a call routing
`apparatus for facilitating
`communications between callers
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 8 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 170 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`The private network routing
`provisions may include
`provisions for determining
`whether a prefix of the re-
`formatted callee identifier
`matches a corresponding prefix
`of a username associated with the
`caller dialing profile.
`The private network routing
`message producing provisions
`may be operably configured to
`produce a routing message
`including the caller identifier, the
`reformatted callee identifier and
`an identification of a private
`network node associated with the
`callee and to communicate the
`routing message to a call
`controller.
`The private network routing
`message producing provisions
`may be operably configured to
`perform at least one of the
`following forward the call to
`another party, block the call and
`direct the caller to a voicemail
`
`170
`
`and callees in a system comprising
`a plurality of nodes with which
`callers and callees are associated.
`The apparatus includes receiving
`provisions for receiving a caller
`identifier and a callee identifier, in
`response to initiation of a call by a
`calling subscriber. The apparatus
`also includes classifying
`provisions for classifying the call
`as a private network cal or a
`public network call according to
`call classification criteria
`associated with the caller
`identifier. The apparatus further
`includes provisions for producing
`a routing message identifying an
`address, on the private network,
`associated with the callee when
`the call is classified as a private
`network call. The apparatus also
`includes provisions for producing
`a routing message identifying a
`gateway to the public network
`when the call is classified as a
`public network call.”);
`5:26-39 (“The private network
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 9 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 171 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`server associated with the callee,
`when the node associated with
`the caller is the same as the node
`associated with the callee.”);
`6:20-36(“In accordance with
`another aspect of the invention,
`there is provided a data structure
`for access by an apparatus for
`producing a routing message for
`use by a call routing controller in
`a communications system. The
`data structure includes dialing
`profile records comprising fields
`for associating with respective
`subscribers to the system, a
`subscriber user name, direct-in-
`dial records comprising fields for
`associating with respective
`subscriber usernames, a user
`domain and a direct-in-dial
`number, prefix to node records
`comprising fields for associating
`with at least a portion of the
`respective subscriber usernames,
`a node address of a node in the
`system, whereby a subscriber
`name can be used to find a user
`
`171
`
`routing message producing
`provisions may be operably
`configured to determine whether a
`node associated with the
`reformatted callee identifier is the
`same as a node associated the
`caller identifier.
`The private network routing
`provisions may include provisions
`for determining whether a prefix
`of the re-formatted callee
`identifier matches a corresponding
`prefix of a username associated
`with the caller dialing profile.
`The private network routing
`message producing provisions
`may be operably configured to
`produce a routing message
`including the caller identifier, the
`reformatted callee identifier and
`an identification of a private
`network node associated with the
`callee and to communicate the
`routing message to a call
`controller.”);
`6:20-36(“In accordance with
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 10 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 172 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`domain, at least a portion of the a
`subscriber name can be used to
`find a node with which the
`subscriber identified by the
`subscriber name is associated,
`and a user domain and subscriber
`name can be located in response
`to a direct-in-dial number.);
`13:20-67 (“Referring to FIG. 1, a
`system for making voice over IP
`telephone/videophone calls is
`shown generally at 10. The
`system includes a first super node
`shown generally at 11 and a
`second super node shown
`generally at 21. The first super
`node 11 is located in
`geographical area, such as
`Vancouver, B.C., Canada for
`example and the second super
`node 21 is located in London,
`England, for example. Different
`super nodes may be located in
`different geographical regions
`throughout the world to provide
`telephone/videophone service to
`subscribers in respective regions.
`
`172
`
`another aspect of the invention,
`there is provided a data structure
`for access by an apparatus for
`producing a routing message for
`use by a call routing controller in
`a communications system. The
`data structure includes dialing
`profile records comprising fields
`for associating with respective
`subscribers to the system, a
`subscriber user name, direct-in-
`dial records comprising fields for
`associating with respective
`subscriber usernames, a user
`domain and a direct-in-dial
`number, prefix to node records
`comprising fields for associating
`with at least a portion of the
`respective subscriber usernames, a
`node address of a node in the
`system, whereby a subscriber
`name can be used to find a user
`domain, at least a portion of the a
`subscriber name can be used to
`find a node with which the
`subscriber identified by the
`subscriber name is associated, and
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 11 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 173 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`These super nodes may be in
`communication with each other
`by high speed/high data
`throughput links including optical
`fiber, satellite and/or cable links,
`forming a backbone to the
`system. These super nodes may
`alternatively or, in addition, be in
`communication with each other
`through conventional internet
`services.
`In the embodiment shown, the
`Vancouver supernode 11
`provides telephone/videophone
`service to western Canadian
`customers from Vancouver Island
`to Ontario. Another node (not
`shown) may be located in Eastern
`Canada to provide services to
`subscribers in that area.
`Other nodes of the type shown
`may also be employed within the
`geographical area serviced by a
`supernode, to provide for call
`load sharing, for example within
`a region of the geographical area
`
`173
`
`a user domain and subscriber
`name can be located in response to
`a direct-in-dial number.);
`13:19-14:63 (“DETAILED
`DESCRIPTION
`Referring to FIG. 1, a system for
`making voice over IP
`telephone/videophone calls is
`shown generally at 10. The system
`includes a first super node shown
`generally at 11 and a second super
`node shown generally at 21. The
`first super node 11 is located in
`geographical area, such as
`Vancouver, B.C., Canada for
`example and the second super
`node 21 is located in London,
`England, for example. Different
`super nodes may be located in
`different geographical regions
`throughout the world to provide
`telephone/videophone service to
`subscribers in respective regions.
`These super nodes may be in
`communication with each other by
`high speed/high data throughput
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 12 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 174 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`serviced by the supernode.
`However, in general, all nodes
`are similar and have the
`properties described below in
`connection with the Vancouver
`supernode 11.
`In this embodiment, the
`Vancouver supernode includes a
`call controller (C) 14, a routing
`controller (RC) 16, a database 18
`and a voicemail server 19 and a
`media relay 9. Each of these may
`be implemented as separate
`modules on a common computer
`system or by separate computers,
`for example. The voicemail
`server 19 need not be included in
`the node and can be provided by
`an outside service provider.
`Subscribers such as a subscriber
`in Vancouver and a subscriber in
`Calgary communicate with the
`Vancouver supernode using their
`own internet service providers
`which route internet traffic from
`these subscribers over the internet
`
`174
`
`links including optical fiber,
`satellite and/or cable links,
`forming a backbone to the system.
`These super nodes may
`alternatively or, in addition, be in
`communication with each other
`through conventional internet
`services.
`In the embodiment shown, the
`Vancouver supernode 11 provides
`telephone/videophone service to
`western Canadian customers from
`Vancouver Island to Ontario.
`Another node (not shown) may be
`located in Eastern Canada to
`provide services to subscribers in
`that area.
`Other nodes of the type shown
`may also be employed within the
`geographical area serviced by a
`supernode, to provide for call load
`sharing, for example within a
`region of the geographical area
`serviced by the supernode.
`However, in general, all nodes are
`similar and have the properties
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 13 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 175 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`shown generally at 13 in FIG. 1.
`To these subscribers the
`Vancouver supernode is
`accessible at a pre-determined
`internet protocol (IP) address or a
`fully qualified domain name that
`can be accessed in the usual way
`through a subscriber's internet
`service provider. The subscriber
`in Vancouver uses a telephone 12
`that is capable of communicating
`with the Vancouver supernode 11
`using Session Initiation Protocol
`(SIP) messages and the Calgary
`subscriber uses a similar
`telephone 15, in Calgary AB.”);
`14:1-7 (“It should be noted that
`throughout the description of the
`embodiments of this invention,
`the IP/UDP addresses of all
`elements such as the caller and
`callee telephones, call controller,
`media relay, and any others, will
`be assumed to be valid IP/UDP
`addresses directly accessible via
`the Internet or a private IP
`network, for example, depending
`
`175
`
`described below in connection
`with the Vancouver supernode 11.
`In this embodiment, the
`Vancouver supernode includes a
`call controller (C) 14, a routing
`controller (RC) 16, a database 18
`and a voicemail server 19 and a
`media relay 9. Each of these may
`be implemented as separate
`modules on a common computer
`system or by separate computers,
`for example. The voicemail server
`19 need not be included in the
`node and can be provided by an
`outside service provider.
`Subscribers such as a subscriber in
`Vancouver and a subscriber in
`Calgary communicate with the
`Vancouver supernode using their
`own internet service providers
`which route internet traffic from
`these subscribers over the internet
`shown generally at 13 in FIG. 1.
`To these subscribers the
`Vancouver supernode is
`accessible at a pre-determined
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 14 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 176 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`on the specific implementation of
`the system.”);
`14:18-24 (“It will be appreciated
`that in many situations, the IP
`addresses assigned to various
`elements of the system may be in
`a private IP address space, and
`thus not directly accessible from
`other elements. Furthermore, it
`will also be appreciated that NAT
`is commonly used to share a
`“public” IP address between
`multiple devices, for example
`between home PCs and IP
`telephones sharing a single
`Internet connection.”);
`14:50-63 (“Referring to FIG. 1,
`in an attempt to make a call by
`the Vancouver
`telephone/videophone 12 to the
`Calgary telephone/videophone
`15, the Vancouver
`telephone/videophone sends a
`SIP invite message to the
`Vancouver supernode 11 and in
`response, the call controller 14
`
`176
`
`internet protocol (IP) address or a
`fully qualified domain name that
`can be accessed in the usual way
`through a subscriber's internet
`service provider. The subscriber in
`Vancouver uses a telephone 12
`that is capable of communicating
`with the Vancouver supernode 11
`using Session Initiation Protocol
`(SIP) messages and the Calgary
`subscriber uses a similar telephone
`15, in Calgary AB.
`It should be noted that throughout
`the description of the
`embodiments of this invention, the
`IP/UDP addresses of all elements
`such as the caller and callee
`telephones, call controller, media
`relay, and any others, will be
`assumed to be valid IP/UDP
`addresses directly accessible via
`the Internet or a private IP
`network, for example, depending
`on the specific implementation of
`the system. As such, it will be
`assumed, for example, that the
`caller and callee telephones will
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 15 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 177 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`sends an RC request message to
`the RC 16 which makes various
`enquiries of the database 18 to
`produce a routing message which
`is sent back to the call controller
`14. The call controller 14 then
`communicates with the media
`relay 9 to cause a
`communications link including
`an audio path and a videophone
`(if a videopath call) to be
`established through the media
`relay to the same node, a
`different node or to a
`communications supplier
`gateway as shown generally at 20
`to carry audio, and where
`applicable, video traffic to the
`call recipient or callee.”);
`18:59-19:3 (“Referring back to
`FIG. 10, the domain field 260
`includes a domain name as
`shown at 282, including a node
`type identifier 284, a location
`code identifier 286, a system
`provider identifier 288 and a
`domain portion 290. The domain
`
`177
`
`have IP/UDP addresses directly
`accessible by the call controllers
`and the media relays on their
`respective supernodes, and those
`addresses will not be obscured by
`Network Address Translation
`(NAT) or similar mechanisms. In
`other words, the IP/UDP
`information contained in SIP
`messages (for example the SIP
`Invite message or the RC Request
`message which will be described
`below) will match the IP/UDP
`addresses of the IP packets
`carrying these SIP messages.
`It will be appreciated that in many
`situations, the IP addresses
`assigned to various elements of
`the system may be in a private IP
`address space, and thus not
`directly accessible from other
`elements. Furthermore, it will also
`be appreciated that NAT is
`commonly used to share a
`“public” IP address between
`multiple devices, for example
`between home PCs and IP
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00272-ADA Document 65-14 Filed 03/14/22 Page 16 of 43
`Case 5:20-cv-02995-LHK Document 93-2 Filed 07/27/21 Page 178 of 315
`
`Twitter, Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; Apple Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.; AT&T Corp. et al. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case Nos. 5:20-cv-02397-LHK, -02460-LHK, and -02995-LHK)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606 (the “’606 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,935,872 (the “’872 patent”)1
`
`Claim Element Plaintiffs’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`Plaintiffs’ Evidence
`
`VoIP-Pal’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`
`VoIP-Pal’s Evidence
`
`field 260 effectively identifies a
`domain or node associated with
`the user identified by the contents
`of the user name field 258. In this
`embodiment, the node type
`identifier 284 includes the code
`“sp” identifying a supernode and
`the location identifier 286
`identifies the supernode as being
`in Vancouver (YVR). The system
`provider identifier 288 identifies
`the company supplying the
`service and the domain portion
`290 identifies the “corn”
`domain.”);
`21:10-20 (“Subscriber to
`Subscriber Calls Between
`Different Nodes
`R