001 - Unified - Petition-021315

8/9/2019 001 - Unified - Petition-021315

1/70

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

____________

Unified Patents Inc.,

Petitioner

v.

Vantage Point Technology, Inc.

Patent Owner

IPR2015-____

Patent 6,615,233

____________

PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW


2/70


3/70


4/70

iv

[7a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein thecontroller commands the client computer to generate andtransmit a download request message to the server computerafter a predetermined condition is satisfied. .................................. 40

[8a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein eachdocument is identified by a document identifier, theapparatus further comprising: ........................................................ 41

[8c] memory that stores a list of the set of documents, the listhaving the document identifier of each document in the setof documents, ................................................................................. 42

[8d] the selector accessing the list to select the selecteddocument. ....................................................................................... 42

[9a/b] The apparatus as define by claim 1 wherein the controlleris incorporated into at least one document in the set ofdocuments. ...................................................................................... 42

[10a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1wherein the servercomputer includes a retriever that retrieves the selecteddocument for forwarding to the client computer. .......................... 43

[11a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 10 wherein the

retriever is server software. ............................................................ 44

[12a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein theselector is a control script. .............................................................. 45

[13a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein theselector executes on the server computer. ...................................... 45

[15a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein thedownload request message is forwarded to the selector by

the server computer. ....................................................................... 46 [16a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein the

selected one of the set of documents is a web page that, after being forwarded to the client computer, is interpreted andgraphically displayed upon a client-side display device. ............... 47


5/70


6/70


7/70


8/70

viii

[59b] a document list having at least one identifier, eachidentifier in the list identifying one of the set of documents;and .................................................................................................. 59

[59c] a list manager to receive a download request originatingfrom the client computer and responsively access the list toidentify a first identifier, the list manager controlling theserver computer to transmit a copy of the documentidentified by the first identifier to the client computer, thedownload request message including no address informationidentifying the document,............................................................... 59

[59d] the list manager transmitting a controller to the clientcomputer in response to receipt of the download request, ............. 60

[59e] the controller controlling the client computer to transmit asecond download request to the server computer after a

predetermined condition is satisfied. ............................................. 60

VIII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 60


9/70


10/70

2

II. MANDATORY NOTICES

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1), Unified provides the following

mandatory disclosures.

A. Real Party-in-Interest

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1), Petitioner certifies that Unified is the real

party-in-interest, and further certifies that no other party exercised control or could

exercise control over Unified’s participation in this proceeding, the filing of this

petition, or the conduct of any ensuing trial. See Ex. 1005.

B. The Patent Owner

The ’233 Patent is assigned to Vantage Point Technology, Inc. (“Vantage

Point”).

C. Related Matters

The ’233 Patent has been asserted in the following litigations, none of which

involve Unified:

1. Vantage Point v. Apple, Inc., 2-14-cv-00985 (EDTX, filed 10/21/14)

2. Vantage Point v. SugarSync, Inc., 2-14-cv-00989 (EDTX, filed

10/21/14)

3. Vantage Point v. Google Inc., 2-14-cv-00988 (EDTX, filed 10/21/14)

4. Vantage Point v. Dropbox, Inc., 2-14-cv-00987 (EDTX, filed 10/21/14)

5. Vantage Point v. Box, Inc., 2-14-cv-00986 (EDTX, filed 10/21/14)

6. Vantage Point v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2-14-cv-00984 (EDTX, filed

10/21/14)


11/70

3

D. Identification of Lead and Back-Up Counsel

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3), Petitioner provides the following

designation of counsel: Lead counsel is Michael L. Kiklis (Reg. No. 38,939) and

back-up counsel are Scott A. McKeown (Reg. No. 42,866) and Katherine D.

Cappaert (Reg. No. 71,639).

E. Service Information

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4), papers concerning this matter should be

served on the following:

Address: Michael L. KiklisOblon1940 Duke StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

Email: [email protected] Telephone: (703) 413-2707/(703)413-3000 (main)Fax: (703) 413-2220

III. PAYMENT OF FEES

The undersigned authorizes the Office to charge the required fees as well as

any additional fees that might be due to Deposit Account No. 15-0030.

IV. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW

As set forth below and pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104, each requirement for

inter partes review of the ’233 patent is satisfied.

A. Grounds for Standing


12/70

4

Petitioner certifies pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) that the ’233 Patent is

available for inter partes review and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped from

requesting inter partes review challenging the patent claims on the grounds

identified herein.

B. Statement of Precise Relief Requested (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)) andIdentification of Challenges (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))

Petitioner requests inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-3, 6-13,

15-17, 27, 31, 41, 42, 49, and 59 of the ’233 Patent as being anticipated by the

following printed publication, which is prior art pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102(b):

CGI Manual of Style, Robert McDaniel, Ziff-Davis Press, January 1, 1996; ISBN

1-562-76397-0; ISBN-13 978-1562763978 (“CGI Manual”) (Ex.1002).

C. How the Construed Claims are Unpatentable under the StatutoryGrounds identified in 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(2) and Supporting

Evidence Relied upon to Support the Challenge

The challenged claims are to be construed as indicated in Section VI, below.

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4), an explanation of how the challenged claims

are unpatentable under the statutory grounds identified above, including the

identification of where each element of the claim is found in the prior art, is

provided in Section VII, below, in the form of an analysis. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §

42.104(b)(5), the appendix numbers of the supporting evidence relied upon to

support the challenges and the relevance of the evidence to the challenges raised,


13/70

5

including identifying specific portions of the evidence that support the challenges,

are provided in Section VII, below, in the form of an analysis.

D. Threshold Showing of Reasonable Likelihood That PetitionerWould Prevail With Respect To At Least One Challenged Claim(35 U.S.C. § 314(a)) Has Been Met

Information presented in this Petition, including the unpatentability ground

detailed in Section VII, below, establishes a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner

will prevail with respect to at least one of the challenged claims. See 35 U.S.C. §

314(a). Indeed, that section, supported by the Hutchinson declaration (Ex. 1003)

and the Gregory declaration (Ex. 1004), demonstrates how the challenged claims

are anticipated by the relied upon prior art.

V. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Declaration Evidence

This Petition is supported by the declaration of Professor Norman

Hutchinson, Ph.D. from the University of British Columbia (attached as Ex. 1003).

Dr. Hutchinson offers his opinion with respect to the skill level of one of ordinary

skill in the art (Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 20-21), the content and state of the prior art (Ex. 1003,

¶¶ 22-30), claim construction (Ex. 1003, ¶ 16), and the teachings and suggestions

that one of ordinary skill would understand based on the CGI Manual (Ex. 1003,

pp. 30-76). Dr. Hutchinson is an Associate Professor of Computer Science at the

University of British Columbia. He has over twenty-five years of experience in


14/70

6

distributed systems and has written and lectured extensively on this topic. See Ex.

1003.

This petition is also supported by a declaration from Ms. Jodi Gregory. Ms.

Gregory authenticates Ex. 1002 and testifies that it was publicly available before

Feb. 17, 1997, one year before the earliest priority date of the ’233 Patent. See Ex.

1004.

B. The State of the Art as of 1998

The Internet was widely used well before 1998. By 1993, for example, “a

wide variety of clients and servers were developed that used the World Wide Web

protocol (HTTP) to download documents from the World Wide Web servers to

clients.” Ex. 1003, ¶ 26. The CGI Manual–from 1996–explains the basic

interactions between clients and servers, the use of HTTP, HTML, URLs, Web

browsers, as well as CGI scripts and the META-REFRESH tag. Ex. 1002, pps. 5-

13; 15-26; 192-212. In fact, the ’233 Patent itself admits that HTTP, HTML, web

server/browser interactions, browsers displaying web pages, and the META-

REFRESH tag were all well known. Ex. 1001, 1:21-39; 4:52-55.

Downloading static web pages has its limits, and the industry soon

recognized the benefits of downloading dynamically generated web pages. CGI

scripts provide the ability to do exactly this. CGI can be used to retrieve web


15/70

7

pages and modify them before transmitting them for display by a browser. Ex.

1002, p. 12; Ex. 1003, ¶ 28.

The META-Refresh tag was implemented by Netscape Navigator in 1995.

If included in a web page downloaded to a browser, it instructs the browser to

request a refresh of that web page or, if a URL is provided in the tag, to request

another web page. The ’233 Patent uses this tag as its controller, and this is the

exact same tag that the CGI Manual discloses for the automatic slide show that

anticipates the challenged claims. Ex. 1003, ¶ 30; Ex. 1002, p. 192, 196-198.

C. The Challenged ’233 Patent

The ’233 Patent attempts to patent a very basic and well-known idea:

downloading to a browser a web page that was selected by the web server and that

automatically requests an additional web page without user interaction. Ex. 1001,

Abstract. The ’233 Patent simply claims well-known, even ubiquitous, prior art

functionality. For example, claim 1 merely recites receiving download requests

from a client, selecting a document using information not in the download request,

and downloading that document and a controller to the client, where the controller

causes the client to send a download request to the server.

VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(B)(3))

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.204(b)(3), the claims subject to inter partes review

shall receive the “broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification of


16/70

8

the patent in which [they] appear[].” See 42 C.F.R. § 100(b). If the Patent Owner

contends that a claim construction different than the Broadest Reasonable

Interpretation should apply to avoid prior art, the appropriate course is for the

Patent Owner to seek to amend its claims. For the purposes of this petition, the

Petitioner adopts the plain meaning for all claim terms. The Petitioner proposes a

specific construction for several terms below:

Claim Term Proposed construction

Document (all claims) A collection of computer dataSelector (all claims) Any mechanism used to select or choose one itemfrom a set or collection of items

Controller Any mechanism used to cause an entity to performsome action

Means for accessing(claim 41)

Invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(6)Function: accessing, in response to receiving thefirst download request, the document list to identifythe identifier of a first document in the documentlist, the first download request including no addressinformation identifying the first documentStructure: software code in the memory of acomputer that, when executed by the computer

processor, accesses a list of document identifiers toselect one of the identifiers

Means for causing theserver computer totransmit (claim 41)

Invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(6)Function: causing the server computer to transmit

the first document and a controller to the clientcomputer after the identifier of the first document isidentifiedStructure: software code in the memory of acomputer that, when executed by the computer

processor, causes the server computer to transmit


17/70

9

the first document and a controller to the clientcomputer over a network

Means for receiving thesecond download request

from the client computer(claim 42)

Invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(6)Function: receiving the second download requestfrom the client computerStructure: software code in the memory of acomputer that, when executed by the computer

processor, receives the second download requestfrom the client computer over a network

Means for accessing(claim 42)

Invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(6)Function: accessing, in response to receiving thesecond download request, the document list toidentify the identifier of a second document in thedocument listStructure: software code in the memory of acomputer that, when executed by the computer

processor, accesses the document list to identify theidentifier of a second document in the document list

Means for causing theserver computer totransmit the seconddocument (claim 42)

Invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(6)Function: causing the server computer to transmitthe second document to the client computer after the

identifier of the second document is identifiedStructure: software code in the memory of acomputer that, when executed by the computer

processor, causes the server computer to transmitthe second document to the client computer over anetwork

A. Support for Claim Construction

Lack of support for all means-plus-function elements – As an initial matter, Dr.

Hutchinson testifies that the ’233 Patent does not provide adequate support for any

of the means-plus-function elements of claims 41 and 42 discussed below. See Ex.

1003, ¶ 16. If the Board agrees and decides that claims 41 and 42 cannot be


18/70

10

construed because the ’233 Patent lacks adequate support for the means-plus-

function elements in those claims, the Petitioner respectfully requests that the

Board so state in its institution decision to effectively preclude the Patent Owner

from asserting those claims.

Document (all claims) – Webster’s New World College Dictionary (Fourth

Edition) defines a document as: anything printed, written, etc. that contains

information or is relied upon to record or prove something. The Microsoft

Computer Dictionary (Fifth Edition) defines the term in a more restrictive manner,

including “Any self-contained piece of work created with an application program. .

. .” But it also recognizes that “To a computer, however, data is nothing more than

a collection of characters.” Dr. Hutchinson thus testifies that “one of ordinary skill

in the art would understand that with reference to computers, a document is any

collection of information, including information to be manipulated by an

application.” The ‘233 Patent describes a document in this general sense and uses

a web page as an example of a document, but does not otherwise contradict the

ordinary meaning. See Ex. 1001, at 1:24-30; 2:19-20; 3:1-10. Dr. Hutchinson

therefore concludes that one of ordinary skill would understand that “the broadest

reasonable interpretation of this term is therefore ‘a collection of computer data’

and that this definition includes a World Wide Web page.” Ex. 1003, ¶ 16.


19/70

11

Selector (all claims) – The Microsoft Computer Dictionary (Fifth Edition) does

not contain a definition of selector, but does define ‘select’ as: “In information

processing, to choose from a number of options or alternatives.” Webster’s New

World College Dictionary (Fourth Edition) defines selector as: “a person or thing

that selects.” Dr. Hutchinson thus testifies that “the ordinary meaning of a selector

is ‘any mechanism used to select or choose one item from a set or collection of

items.’” A selector is described in only a single place at Ex. 1001, 2:25-27; see

also 2:23-35. Dr. Hutchinson concludes therefore that the lack of description

would lead one of ordinary skill to understand that the ordinary meaning is the

broadest reasonable interpretation, which is “any mechanism used to select or

choose one item from a set or collection of items.” Ex. 1003, ¶ 16.

Controller – The Microsoft Computer Dictionary (Fifth Edition) defines a

controller as: “A device that other devices rely on for access to a computer

subsystem.” Dr. Hutchinson testifies that this definition is clearly not applicable to

the ’233 Patent because it does not discuss hardware devices at all. Rather, the

controller of the ’233 Patent is an HTML tag. Webster’s New World College

Dictionary (Fourth Edition) defines controller as: “a person or device that

controls.” Dr. Hutchinson testifies that the ’233 Patent describes the controller

broadly and generally at Ex. 1001, Abstract, 1:65-2:3 and at 3:4-10; 4:44:5:30. He

therefore concludes that one of ordinary skill would understand that this term is


20/70


21/70


22/70

14

Conversely, if it is determined at step 302 that the end of the list 108

has not been reached, then the process continues to step 304 in which

the current page (i.e., the current page and its associated controller) is

transmitted to the client computer 100. Ex 1001, at 2:26-30.

He also notes that “Fig. 1 shows that the server computer is connected to the client

computer via the Internet, indicating that all communication between the two is

accomplished via the Internet, including the transmission of the first document and

a controller to the client computer.” He therefore concludes that “one of ordinary

skill would understand that the structure that corresponds to the claimed function is

‘software code in the memory of a computer that, when executed by the computer

processor, causes the server computer to transmit the first document and a

controller to the client computer over a network.’” He has reviewed the ’233

Patent and found that it is essentially silent on the way this element is

accomplished, other than the above quote and Fig. 1. Given the lack of

description, Dr. Hutchinson testifies that “the way the function of this element is

performed is by ‘software in the memory of the server and executed by the web

server’s processor transmits the first document and the controller to the client

computer over a network after the identifier of the first document is identified.’”

He also testifies that the “result of this element is that ‘a first document and a

controller are transmitted to the client computer.’” Ex. 1003, ¶ 16.


23/70

15

Means for receiving the second download request from the client computer

(claim 42) – The function for this limitation follows: “receiving the second

download request from the client computer.” Dr. Hutchinson notes that the only

place the patent discusses receiving a second download request is in the summary:

In accordance with other aspects of the invention, in response to

receipt of the second download request, the server again accesses the

document list to identify the identifier of a second document in the

document list. Ex 1001, at 2:4-7.

He also notes that Fig. 1, as mentioned above, shows that the server computer is

connected to the client computer via the Internet, which means that all

communication between the client and server is accomplished via the Internet.

Given this lack of description, Dr. Hutchinson concludes that “one of ordinary skill

would understand that the structure that corresponds to the claimed function is


processor, receives the second download request from the client computer over a

network.’” Dr. Hutchinson also testifies that the ’233 Patent does not disclose the

way in which the function is performed, and thus concludes that “one of ordinary

skill in the art would understand the way is ‘software code in the memory of a

computer that, when executed by the computer processor, receives the second

download request from the client computer over a network.’” He testifies that the


24/70

16

“result of this element is that “a second download request is received.’” Ex. 1003,

¶ 16.

Means for accessing (claim 42) – The function for this limitation follows:

“accessing, in response to receiving the second download request, the document

list to identify the identifier of a second document in the document list.” Dr.

Hutchinson notes that the patent only discusses this function in the summary:


receipt of the second download request, the server again accesses thedocument list to identify the identifier of a second document in the

document list. Ex 1001, at 2:4-7.

Based on the lack of description, Dr. Hutchinson concludes that “the structure that

corresponds to the claimed function is ‘software code in the memory of a computer

that, when executed by the computer processor, accesses the document list to

identify the identifier of a second document in the document list.’” Likewise, Dr.

Hutchinson notes that the way this function is performed is also unspecified, and

that, “[g]iven the lack of description, one of ordinary skill would understand the

way for performing the recited function is ‘software code in the memory of a

computer that, when executed by the computer processor, accesses the document

list to identify the identifier of a second document in the document list in response

to receiving the second download request.’” Dr. Hutchinson also testifies that the


25/70

17

“result of this element is that ‘the identifier of a second document in the document

list is identified.’” Ex. 1003, ¶ 16.

Means for causing the server computer to transmit the second document

(claim 42) – The function for this limitation follows: “causing the server computer

to transmit the second document to the client computer after the identifier of the

second document is identified.” Dr. Hutchinson notes that the patent only

discusses this limitation in the summary:


receipt of the second download request, the server again accesses the

document list to identify the identifier of a second document in the

document list. Once identified, the second document is transmitted to

the client computer. Ex 1001, at 2:4-9.

As noted above, Fig. 1 shows the client and server connected to the Internet. Dr.

Hutchinson testifies that there is no structure disclosed for this limitation. Based

on this limited description, Dr. Hutchinson concludes that “one of ordinary skill

would understand that the structure that corresponds to the claimed function is


processor, causes the server computer to transmit the second document to the client

computer over a network.’” Dr. Hutchinson notes that the way the function is

performed is also unspecified, and therefore, “one of ordinary skill would

understand the way to be ‘software code in the memory of a computer that, when


26/70

18

executed by the computer processor, causes the server computer to transmit the

second document to the client computer over a network after the identifier of the

second document is identified.’” Dr. Hutchinson also testifies that the “result of

this element is that ‘the server computer transmits the second document to the

client computer.’” Ex. 1003, ¶ 16.

VII. THE GROUNDS SHOWING THAT PETITIONER HAS AREASONABLE LIKELIHOOD OF PREVAILING

A. The Prior Art Relied Upon Was Publicly Available BeforeFebruary 17, 1997

Jodi Gregory and Dr. Hutchinson authenticate Ex. 1002 and testify that this

exhibit was published on January 1, 1996 and was publicly available before

February 17, 1997, which is one year before the earliest priority date of the ’233

Patent. Ex. 1003, ¶ 38; Ex. 1004, ¶ 6.

B. Analysis Demonstrating How The Prior Art Anticipates Claims 1-3, 6-13, 15-17, 27, 31, 41, 42, 49, and 59 of the ’233 Patent

1. Overview

The following is Dr. Hutchinson’s analysis from his declaration, Ex. 1003,

pps. 30-76. Although the Petitioner reformats that analysis and in some places

shortens the analysis, this analysis is Dr. Hutchinson’s, and as such, Petitioner

quotes liberally from his declaration. The following includes quotations from Dr.

Hutchinson in italics and quotes from Ex. 1002 in quotation marks.


27/70


28/70

20

The guided tour example takes the user through a sequence of web

pages automatically, without manual intervention. Ex. 1003, ¶ 32.

By 1997, many websites were using this technology to showautomatically advancing “slide shows” of current news stories, sports

stories, or pictures. Such slide show scripts were often discussed in

the USENET discussion groups that brought web authors together. 1 . .

. Listing 8.4 of Ex. 1002 shows a web page that directs the user to the

guided tour slide show where the web pages are advanced

automatically. This web page is initially downloaded to the client’s

browser and displayed to the user. The user can then start the guided

tour slide show by selecting the “Guided Tour” link on the page.

Page 200 depicts how this web page is rendered in the browser.

1

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi/

before$3A1997$2F02$2F17$20AND$20slideshow/comp.infosystems.www.author

ing.cgi/jzbbOrUq30s/Ugk415uH8KsJ


29/70

21

I have reproduced the HTML page listing 8.4 below and added line

numbers to the listings of program code found in the CGI Manual for

convenience in referring to them.


30/70

22

On line 15, the HTML code, refers the reader to a Guided Tour which

can be activated by clicking on the link named “Guided Tour” which

includes the URL: “/cgi-bin/guided.pl”. Another link to the Guided

Tour web page is included in lines 19-20 of Listing 8.4 above. TheGuided Tour application in the CGI Manual is an example of this sort

of slide show, and uses the META Refresh tag to cause the client to

send an additional download request in exactly the same manner as

the ’233 Patent . Ex. 1003, ¶ 33.

The guided.pl script appears in the CGI Manual on pages 209-212. I

have reproduced it below.


31/70

23


32/70

24


33/70

25

I have added line numbers to the script for convenience in referring to

sections of the script more precisely. Ex. 1003, ¶ 34.

The script is installed in a Web server with the name “guided.pl” in a

manner consistent with how the script is referred to in Listing 8.4, that

is, in the cgi-bin directory on the Web server. When the script is

executed using a URL like that in Listing 8.4 (“/cgi-bin/guided.pl”),

the web server executes the script and passes any additional

information from the user on the client to the CGI script. The

User_Data subroutine on lines 77-124 of the script process the user-

provided data. The elements of the independent claims of the ’233

Patent are all found in the guided.pl script and the World Wide Web

server in which it is installed as described by the CGI Manual. With

respect to claim 1, the input is the portion of the Web server that

receives the user’s request and initializes the execution of the

guided.pl script. The selector is the guided.pl script itself. It contains

a list of documents, shown on line 9. Short descriptions of these Web pages are on lines 10-13, and expanded descriptions are on lines 14-

23. The guided.pl script selects one of the documents as shown on

lines 39-40. In particular, line 39 chooses the “home.html” page if

the initial download request does not contain an indication of which

page is desired. In Listing 8.4 at line 15, it can be readily seen that

the guided.pl script is invoked without any address information for the

first document. Therefore, when the client’s initial request is received

by the guided.pl script running on the server, no identifying

information of a web page is received. The guided.pl script thus

selects the “home.html” page to download without any such


34/70

26

identifying information. The guided.pl script further includes a

document modifier that modifies the selected document to include a

controller before it is transmitted to the client computer. Specifically,

on line 48 of the guided.pl script, the controller, an HTML 3.0

tag (or META-REFRESH tag), is stored in the variable

$add_tag. This is the exact same tag (i.e., controller) that is

described in the ’233 Patent. On lines 54-57 the selected document is

read into the variable @template. Line 61 modifies the document by

splicing the controller into the document in the @template variable.

Finally, the guided.pl script prints the resulting document in lines 63-64. The CGI Manual explains that the data printed during the

execution of a CGI script is sent to the client that made the initial

request. See Ex. 1002, p. 10:

“For instance, this example just prints three lines of text to standard

out (stdout), which is the default location to which a program sends its

output. In most cases standard out is the monitor. However, for CGIscripts, standard out is sent to the Web server and then on to the Web

browser.”

The output is the portion of the Web server that returns the document

to the client computer. See Ex. 1002, pps. 6-10. As explained

previously, the HTML tag with the HTML-EQUIV attribute

set to “Refresh” is a controller that causes the client computer to generate and transmit a download request message to the server

computer. Ex. 1003, ¶ 35; see also ¶ 30-32 .


35/70

27

One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize, as I do, that the CGI

Manual (Ex. 1002) discloses all the features of the challenged claims.

Ex. 1003, ¶ 36.

2. Element-by-element Analysis

The following analysis demonstrates, on a limitation-by-limitation basis,

how claims of the ’233 Patent are anticipated by Ex. 1002 under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

For ease of reference, this analysis includes letters for the individual claim

elements (e.g., 1a). This analysis is a presentation of Dr. Hutchinson’s analysis

from his claim chart in his declaration, although shortened in various places. Ex.

1003, pp. 48-76. Text in italics is explanatory testimony from Dr. Hutchinson’s

claim chart (i.e., his testimony). Id . All other text below are direct quotes from

Ex. 1002.

[1a] An apparatus for transmitting a set of documents from a servercomputer to a client computer, the apparatus comprising:

CGI MANUAL discloses the operation of web servers, an apparatus

for transmitting a set of documents from a server computer to a client

computer. [Ex. 1003, p. 48]

See Ex. 1002, pps. 1-26.

“Clients and Servers

To understand the World Wide Web and CGI programming, you must

understand the division between Web clients and Web servers and

how HTTP facilitates the interaction between the two. Simply put, a

server handles requests from various clients.” [Ex. 1002, p. 5]


36/70

28

“With networked computers, clients and servers are very common. A

server typically runs on a different machine than the client, although

this is not always the case. The interaction between the two usually

begins on the client side. The client software requests an object or

transaction from the server software, which either handles the request

or denies it. If the request is handled, the object is sent back to the

client software. On the World Wide Web, servers are known as Web

servers, and clients are known as Web browsers. Web browsers

request documents from Web servers, allowing you to view

documents on the World Wide Web.” [Ex. 1002, p. 5]

“The process of viewing a document on the Web starts when a Web

browser sends a request to a Web server. The Web browser sends

details about itself and the file it is requesting to the Web server in

HTTP request headers. The Web server receives and reviews the

HTTP request headers for any relevant information, such as the name

of the file being requested, and sends back the file with HTTPresponse headers. The Web browser then uses the HTTP response

headers to determine how to display the file or data being returned by

the Web server.” [Ex. 1002, p. 6]

[1b] an input that receives download request messages from the clientcomputer;

CGI MANUAL discloses that all web servers comprise an input that

receives download request message from the client computer. The

CGI Manual describes that this is what Web servers do: repeatedly

receive a request from a client, process the request, and transmit the

result back to the client. [Ex. 1003, pp. 48-49]


37/70

29






of the file being requested, and sends back the file with HTTP

response headers. The Web browser then uses the HTTP response



[1c] a selector that, in response to receipt of a download requestmessage, selects one of the set of documents based upon information not in thedownload request, the download request message including no addressinformation identifying the selected one of the set of documents; and

A selector that, in response to receipt of a download request message, selects one

of the set of documents based on information not in the download request

CGI MANUAL discloses a selector (a CGI program written in the

Perl programming language) that, in response to receipt of a

download request message, selects one of the set of documents based

on information not in the download request.

The set of documents are identified in the beginning of the guided.pl

script in CGI Listing 8.8. For convenience in referring to specific

portions of the web scripts in CGI MANUAL, I have added line

numbers to the lines of the scripts in Listings 8.4 and 8.8. [Ex. 1003,

p. 49]

[Ex. 1002, Listing 8.8, line 9, pp. 209-212]


38/70

30

When the request contains no address information (address

information is in the ‘page’ field of the form if it is present), the

selector selects one of the documents, in this case the first one, which

has not been identified in the request. The Perl language clause

“unless $data{‘page’}” indicates that the assignment of “home.html”

to $data{‘page’} is to be performed only if a page has not been

specifically requested by the request from the client; if the client

specifically requests a page it is stored in the $data{‘page’} variable

by the User_Data subroutine on lines 77-124, and in this case the

“unless” prevents the overwriting of the page requested by the user. [Ex. 1003, pp. 49-50]


The download request message including no address information identifying the

selected one of the set of documents

CGI MANUAL discloses the selector processing a download request

message that includes no address information identifying the selected

one of the set of documents. [Ex. 1003, p. 50]


The identifier of the selected document is held in the variable

$url_prefix . [Ex. 1003, p . 50]


39/70

31

[Ex. 1002, Listing 8.8, lines 39-46, pp. 209-212]

CGI MANUAL discloses how the guided tour script is invoked by

including the HTML code for the Educational Software Home Page,

included in Listing 8.4. [Ex. 1003, p . 51]

The reference to the /cgi-bin/guided.pl script on line 15 does not

include any address information for a document in the set of

documents. This is simply a call of the script. Therefore, the CGI

script (guided.pl) will select the first document without any address

identification. [Ex. 1003, p . 51]


40/70

32

[Ex. 1002, Listing 8.4, lines 14-16, p. 199](emphasis added)

[1d] an output that forwards both a controller and the selected one ofthe set of documents to the client computer,

CGI MANUAL discloses an output that forwards both a controller

and the selected one of the set of documents to the client computer.

The CGI Manual describes that this is what Web servers do:

repeatedly receive a request from a client, process the request, and

transmit the result back to the client. [Ex. 1003, p. 51]


browser sends a request to a Web server. The Web browser sendsdetails about itself and the file it is requesting to the Web server in





headers to determine how to display the file or data being returned bythe Web server.” [Ex. 1002, p. 6]

“Remember, CGI stands for Common Gateway Interface. As its name

implies, it is a gateway between the Web server and your CGI script.

It enables the CGI program that you write to receive input from and

send output to a Web browser.” [Ex. 1002, p. 9]

CGI MANUAL discloses that the response includes the requested file. At line 54 the file is opened using the file handle TEMPLATE. The

content of the file is read into the array @template on line 56. The

controller, the META Refresh tag, is stored in the variable $add_tag


41/70

33

on line 48, and the controller is added to the document on line 61

when the contents of the variable $add_tag is spliced into the

@template variable containing the content of the file. The URL in the

META Refresh tag indicates the file that the client should request

when it makes the second request as commanded by the controller.

[Ex. 1003, p . 52]

[Ex. 1002, Listing 8.8, lines 48-63, pp. 209-212](emphasis added)

The print statement at line 63 sends the document to standard outwhich, for CGI scripts, means it is sent to the client browser. [Ex.

1003, p. 53]

[Ex. 1002, p. 10]


42/70

34

[1e] when executing on the client computer, the controller commandingthe client computer to generate and transmit a download request message tothe server computer.

CGI MANUAL discloses that, when executing on the client computer

the controller commands the client computer to generate and transmit

a download request message to the server computer. The following

quotes describe what happens when the META-REFRESH tag is

executed on the client when it has a URL for the document that should

be downloaded. This tag was added to the web page downloaded to

the client on lines 48 and 61 of the guided.pl script discussed

immediately above. [Ex. 1003, pp. 53-54]

“Client Pull

…

Client pull only occurs when there is a special directive in a document

you told your Web browser to request from a Web server. This special

directive is a simple HTML 3.0 tag, , that is used to simulate

HTTP response headers. In other words, directives in the

tag are included with the HTTP response headers sent from the Web

server. For example, when the tag

is included in an HTML document, a Web browser that supports the

tag will include the header

Refresh: 5with the HTTP response headers that were sent from the Web server.

You can use the tag and Refresh HTTP response header

together to cause a user's Web browser to reload the current page or

load a different Web document after a specified amount of time. So, a


43/70

35

document containing the preceding tag would reload itself

after 5 seconds had elapsed. This reload will continue to occur as long

as the Web browser is displaying an HTML page with the preceding

tag.

…

Apart from the tag, this HTML code is similar to the code

at numerous other Web sites. As you learned earlier in this chapter,

the tag drives the client pull action. This version of the

tag is slightly different from the ones you saw earlier. In the

attribute CONTENT is the URL for another document. By specifyingthe URL in this manner, you can instruct the Web browser to load a

different document instead of reloading the same one. The line

tells a client pull enabled Web browser to load the URL

http://www.castingguild. com/actors-album/ after five seconds.” [Ex.

1002, pp. 192-198]

[2a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 further comprising: adocument modifier that adds the controller to documents in the set ofdocuments.

CGI MANUAL discloses a document modifier that adds the controller

to documents in the set of documents. CGI MANUAL discloses that

each document has the controller added to it when it is sent to theclient by the guided.pl script.

At line 54 the file is opened using the file handle TEMPLATE. The

content of the file is read into the array @template on line 56. The


44/70

36

controller, the META Refresh tag, is stored in the variable $add_tag

on line 48, and the controller is added to the document on line 61

when the contents of the variable $add_tag is spliced into the

@template variable containing the content of the file. [Ex. 1003, p.

55]

[Ex. 1002, Listing 8.8, lines 48-63, pp. 209-212](emphasis added)

[3a/b]. The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein the downloadrequest-messages request to download the selector.

CGI MANUAL discloses that the download request messages request

to download the selector. The Educational Software Home Page is

included in Listing 8.4. [Ex. 1003, p. 56]


45/70

37

The request message that starts the Guided Tour is shown on line 15

as: “/cgi-bin/guided.pl”, which is the name of the selector. One

skilled in the art would recognize that when a web server receives a

download request message that begins with the name of a script,

rather than sending the script itself to the client, the web server runs

the script and sends the output to the client. In the below example, the

request is a request to download the script, but the web server will run

the script instead and return the output. [Ex. 1003, pp. 56-57]

“When a Web browser requests a CGI script from a Web server, the

server starts the CGI script and passes the HTTP request headers to

it.” Ex. 1002, p. 6.

“14: If you have Netscape Navigator 1.1 or greater, you can select the

Guided Tour, which will

acquaint you

16: with our Web site.}” [Ex. 1002, Listing 8.4, lines 14-16, p. 199]

The second download is also a request to download the selector. The

controller transmitted to the client after receiving the first download

request message commands the client to generate and transmit the

second download request message to the server. The controller, the

META Refresh tag, includes the URL that the client is to include in the

second download request message in its CONTENT attribute. As seenon lines 7, 43, 48, and 61 of the guided.pl script, the URL field of the

CONTENT attribute is set to "http://www.robertm.com/cgi-

bin/guided.pl?page=" on line 7, has the name of the next page to


46/70

38

request added to it on line 43, is included in the URL field of the

CONTENT attribute of the META Refresh tag on line 48, and is

spliced into the document on line 61. This URL is also a request to

download the selector. It differs from the first download request

message only in 2 ways. First, it is an absolute (starts with http://)

URL rather than a relative URL. Second, it contains an address of

the document that is to be requested, the “page=” portion of the URL

after the “?”. [Ex. 1003, p. 57]

“7: $url_prefix = "http://www.robertm.com/cgi-bin/guided.pl?page=";

…

43: $url_prefix .= $pages[1];

…

48: $add_tag = "\n";

…

61: splice(@template, 2, Ø, $add_tag);” [Ex. 1002, Listing 8.8, lines7, 43, 48, 61, pp. 209-212].

[6a/b]. The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein the controller is atag incorporated into each document in the set of documents.

CGI MANUAL discloses that the controller is a tag incorporated into

each document in the set of documents. The tag is the META Refresh

tag, identical to the tag in the ’233 patent.

At line 54 of the guided.pl script, the file is opened using the file

handle TEMPLATE. The content of the file is read into the array

@template on line 56. The controller, the META Refresh tag, is stored

in the variable $add_tag on line 48, and the controller is added to the


47/70

39

document on line 61 when the contents of the variable $add_tag is

spliced into the @template variable containing the content of the file.

[Ex. 1003, p. 58]

“ 48: $add_tag = "\n";

49: $guide =

"$guide_text{$data{\"page\"}}"

;

50:

51:

52: # Windows users need to change the string

"$path/$data{\"page\"}" to

53: # "$path\\$data{\"page\"}"

54: open(TEMPLATE, "$path/$data{\"page\"}") || die "Content-

type:

55: text/html\n\nCannot open HTML files!";56: @template = ;

57: close(TEMPLATE);

58:

59: $template[2] = "Guided Tour -

$page_names{$data{\"page\"}}\n";

60: splice(@template, 5, Ø, $guide);

61: splice(@template, 2, Ø, $add_tag);

62:

63: print "Content-type: text/html\n\n";

print @template; ”[Ex. 1002, Listing 8.8, lines 48-63, pp. 209-212]


48/70

40

[7a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein the controllercommands the client computer to generate and transmit a download requestmessage to the server computer after a predetermined condition is satisfied.

CGI MANUAL discloses that the controller (the META-REFRESH

tag) commands the client computer to generate and transmit a

download request message to the server computer after a

predetermined condition is satisfied, the predetermined condition

being that a certain period of time has elapsed. In the guided.pl script

at line 48, the time period is 30 seconds. The CGI Manual describes

in detail the effect of this tag and uses an example of 5 seconds for a

predetermined condition. [Ex. 1003, p. 59; see also Ex. 1003, ¶ 14;

Ex. 1002, pps. 192-212]

“Client Pull

…

Client pull only occurs when there is a special directive in a document

you told your Web browser to request from a Web server. This special

directive is a simple HTML 3.0 tag, , that is used to simulate

HTTP response headers. In other words, directives in the

tag are included with the HTTP response headers sent from the Web

server. For example, when the tag

is included in an HTML document, a Web browser that supports the

tag will include the headerRefresh: 5

with the HTTP response headers that were sent from the Web server.

You can use the tag and Refresh HTTP response header

together to cause a user's Web browser to reload the current page or


49/70

41

load a different Web document after a specified amount of time. So, a

document containing the preceding tag would reload itself

after 5 seconds had elapsed. This reload will continue to occur as long

as the Web browser is displaying an HTML page with the preceding

tag.

…

Apart from the tag, this HTML code is similar to the code

at numerous other Web sites. As you learned earlier in this chapter,

the tag drives the client pull action. This version of the

tag is slightly different from the ones you saw earlier. In theattribute CONTENT is the URL for another document. By specifying

the URL in this manner, you can instruct the Web browser to load a

different document instead of reloading the same one. The line

tells a client pull

enabled Web browser to load the URL http://www.castingguild.

com/actors-album/ after five seconds.” [Ex. 1002, pp. 192-198]

[8a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein each document isidentified by a document identifier, the apparatus further comprising:

CGI MANUAL teaches that each document is identified by a

document identifier, the identifier being the name of the file in which

the document is stored.

The set of documents are identified in the beginning of the guided.pl

script in CGI MANUAL Listing 8.8. The three documents are

identified using the names “home.html”, “downloads.html”, and

“tech-support.html”. [Ex. 1003, pp. 60-61]


50/70


51/70


52/70


53/70

45

CGI MANUAL discloses that the retriever of a web server is server

software, that is, it executes in the web server. guided.pl is a CGI

script that executes on the web server, and the underlying operating

system also executes on the web server. [Ex. 1003, p. 63]

See claim element [10a/b].

[12a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein the selector is acontrol script.

CGI MANUAL discloses that the selector (guided.pl) is a control

script. A CGI program is a control script. [Ex. 1003, p. 63]


server starts the CGI script and passes the HTTP request headers to it.

The information stored in the request headers is available for your

script to use. Normally, when a CGI script is finished executing, the

output is passed back to the Web server, which formats an HTTP

response header and sends the information to the Web browser.” [Ex.

1002, p. 6]

See claim element [1c].

[13a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein the selectorexecutes on the server computer.

CGI MANUAL discloses that the selector executes on the server

computer. The selector is the CGI script guided.pl, which is executed

on the server computer. [Ex. 1003, p. 64]

“Let's take a look at what is happening behind the scenes when you

call this script from your browser. First, the browser sends an HTTP

request for the first-one.pl file in the cgi-bin directory on the


54/70

46

www.robertm.com machine. The Web server on the

www.robertm.com machine receives the request and finds the file on

the system. Because the request is for a document in the cgi-bin

directory, the Web server knows that it is a CGI script, and executes

it. At this point, the script takes over. It executes its three lines and

sends the output, stdout in this case, to the Web server. The Web

server receives the data and checks the header the CGI script returned.

The header in the preceding script is the Content-type: text/html line.

(Valid headers are discussed in detail in Chapter 2.) This header tells

the Web server that the data it received from the CGI script is justHTML. The Web server then forms an HTTP response header and

sends the header and the CGI output to the Web browser that called

it.” [Ex. 1002, p. 11]

[15a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein the downloadrequest message is forwarded to the selector by the server computer.

CGI MANUAL discloses that the download request message is forwarded to the selector by the server computer. The selector is a

CGI script. All CGI scripts are initiated by the web server, which

forwards both the URL that is the request message as well as any

additional data sent by the client in the request message to the

selector (the guided.pl CGI script) when it is executing. [Ex. 1003, p.

64]


server starts the CGI script and passes the HTTP request headers to it.

The information stored in the request headers is available for your

script to use. Normally, when a CGI script is finished executing, the


55/70

47

output is passed back to the Web server, which formats an HTTP

response header and sends the information to the Web browser.” [Ex.

1002, p. 6]

“CGI scripts also provide a mechanism for making Web pages

interactive. By using the tag in HTML, you can receive data

directly from the user who is viewing your Web pages. All of this data

can be sent to a CGI script that can then act upon it.” [Ex. 1002, p. 13]

“You don't need to do much to ensure that your CGI script receives

the necessary data from your Web server. The CGI has already

defined how this is done and the task is performed automatically

every time your Web server executes a CGI script. All of the relevant

data sent to the server from the Web browser, such as form input, plus

the HTTP request headers are sent from the server to the CGI script in

either environment variables or by standard input (stdin), which is the

default location at which your program receives input.” [Ex. 1002, p.

15]

[16a/b] The apparatus as defined by claim 1 wherein the selected one ofthe set of documents is a web page that, after being forwarded to the clientcomputer, is interpreted and graphically displayed upon a client-side displaydevice.

CGI MANUAL discloses that the selected one of the documents is a

web page that, after being forwarded to the client computer, is

interpreted and graphically displayed upon a client-side display

device. [Ex. 1003, p. 65]




56/70

48








CGI MANUAL shows that the content of the response is a web page,

being the content of one of the three files: home.html, downloads.html,

tech-support.html.

CGI MANUAL shows how the three pages look when they are

displayed on the client-side display device. See Figures 8.6, 8.7, and

8.8, CGI MANUAL, pp. 200-203. Thus, one of ordinary skill would

understand that the three downloaded web pages are interpreted and

graphically displayed on a display device. [Ex. 1003, p. 66]


57/70

49

[17a] A computer program product for use on a computer system fortransmitting a set of documents from a server computer to a client computer,the computer program product comprising a computer usable medium havingcomputer readable program code thereon, the computer readable programcode comprising:

See claim element [1a].


58/70


59/70

51

CGI MANUAL discloses that the server has server software for

retrieving documents on the server computer. The server software for

retrieving documents on the server computer includes the guided.pl

script and that portion of the web server that finds and retrieves

requested files (document). [Ex. 1003, p. 69]

See claim element [10a/b].

[27d] an input that receives download request message from the clientcomputer;

See claim element [1b].

[27e] a selector that, in response to receipt of a download requestmessage, selects one of the set of documents and commands the serversoftware to retrieve the selected one of the set of documents, the downloadrequest message including no address information identifying the selected onof the set of documents; and

See claim elements [1c] and [10a/b].

These sections of the claim chart above show that the guided.pl script

and the web server’s operating system perform this functionality. [Ex.

1003, p. 70]

[27f] an output that forwards the selected one of the set of documents tothe client computer.

See claim element 1[d].

[31a] A method of transmitting a set of documents from a server

computer to a client computer, each documents in the set of documents beingidentified by an identifier in a document list, the method comprising:

See claim elements [1a] and [8a/b].


60/70


61/70

53

The CGI Manual describes this same structure performing the same

function in substantially the same way to produce substantially the

same result. The guided.pl script is software code (a CGI script

written in the Perl programming language) in the memory of the Web

server computer, that when executed by the processor of the Web

server accesses a list of document identifiers to select one of the

identifiers of a first document in the document list. This software code

accesses the document list responsive to receiving the first download

request and this download request does not include address

information identifying the first document. This is shown on pps. 6and 9, lines 39-40 of the guided.pl script, and line 15 of Listing 8.4

which shows that only the name of the script is passed to the server so

that when the guided.pl script runs it does not have any address

information identifying the first document. The CGI Manual therefore

discloses the same structure performing the same function. The CGI

Manual discloses the recited function performed in substantially the

same way because the software (the guided.pl CGI script) executed by

a processor and residing in the memory of the Web server computer

accesses a list of document identifiers to select one of the identifiers of

the first document without having received any address information

from the client for the first document. This is shown on pps. 6 and 9,

lines 39-40 of the guided.pl script, and line 15 of Listing 8.4. The

result is substantially the same because a document identifier is

selected. See lines 39-40 of the guided.pl script. Ex. 1003, ¶ 37.

See also claim elements [8d] and [1c].


62/70

54

[41d] means for causing the server computer to transmit the firstdocument and a controller to the client computer after the identifier of thefirst document is identified, the controller controlling the client computer totransmit a second download request to the server computer after a

predetermined condition is satisfied.The CGI Manual discloses the same structure performing the same


same result. The structure disclosed in the CGI Manual is software

code (the code of the Web server and a CGI script (guided.pl) written

in the Perl programming language) in the memory of the Web server

computer that when executed by the processor of the Web server

causes the server computer to transmit the first document and a

controller (an embedded META-REFRESH tag) to the client computer

over a network. This is shown on pps. 6, 9 and is shown on lines 48,

54-57, 61, and 63-64 of the guided.pl script. After identifying the first

document on lines 39-40, the controller (the META-REFRESH tag) is

stored in a variable on line 48, the document is prepared on lines 54-

57, the controller is added to the document on line 61, and the result

is printed on lines 63-64. The data printed by the CGI script is

transmitted to the client by the software code of the Web server. Ex.

1002, p. 10. The META-REFRESH tag instructs the client to transmit

a second download request after 30 seconds elapses as shown on line

48 of the guided.pl script. Therefore, the CGI Manual discloses the

same structure performing the same function as the means for causinglimitation. The way the CGI Manual performs the recited function is

substantially the same because the software (the code of the Web

server and the guided.pl CGI script) executed by a processor and


63/70

55

residing in the memory of the Web server computer causes the server

computer to transmit the first document and a controller to the client

computer over a network after the identifier of the first document is

identified. See lines 39, 40, 48, 54-57, 61 and 63-64 of the guided.pl

script and pps 6, 9, 10. The result is substantially the same as the

means for causing element because a first document and a controller

is transmitted to the client computer, as shown by the evidence I cited

in this paragraph. See Ex. 1003, ¶ 37.

See also claim elements [1d], [1e] and [7a/b].

[42a] The apparatus as defined by claim 41 further including:


[42b] means for receiving the second download request from the clientcomputer;

The CGI Manual discloses the same structure performing the same


same result as this element. The CGI Manual discloses that the

second download request is received from the client computer by

software code (the code of the Web server) in the memory of the Web

server computer, that when executed by the processor of the Web

server, receives the second download request from the client

computer. Ex. 1002, pps. 6, 9. As stated in the previous paragraph,

the guided.pl script inserts the META-REFRESH tag into the web page that is downloaded to the client. This tag instructs the client to

transmit a second download request after 30 seconds elapses as

shown on line 48 of the guided.pl script. See also, Ex. 1002, pps. 192-


64/70


65/70


66/70

58

identifier is identified in lines 39-40, the controller is stored in a

variable on line 48, the document is prepared on lines 54-57, the

controller is added to the document on line 61, and the result is

printed on lines 63-64. The data printed by the CGI script is

transmitted to the client by the software code of the Web server. Ex.

1002, p. 10. The CGI Manual therefore discloses the same structure

performing the same function. The way the function is performed is

substantially the same because software (the code of the Web server

and the guided.pl CGI script) executed by a processor and residing in

the memory of the Web server computer causes the server computer totransmit the second document to the client computer over a network

after the identifier of the second document is identified. See lines 39-

40, 48, 54-57, 61, and 63-64 of the guided.pl script and pps. 6, 9, 10,

and 192-212. The result is that a second document is transmitted to

the client computer. See lines 48, 54-57, 61, and 63-64 of the

guided.pl script and pps. 6, 9, 10, and 192-212. See Ex. 1003, ¶ 37.

See also claim element [1d].

[49a] A computer program product for use on a computer system fortransmitting a set of documents from a server computer to a client computer,


[49b] each document in the set of documents being identified by anidentifier in a document list, the computer program product comprising a

computer usable medium having computer readable program code thereon,the computer readable program code including:

See claim elements [8a/b] and [31a].

[49c] program code for receiving a first download request from theclient computer;


67/70

59

See claim element [1b].

[49d] program code for accessing, in response to receiving the firstdownload request, the document list to identify the identifier of a first

document in the document list, the first download request including noaddress information identifying the first document; and

See claim elements [1c] and [8d].

[49e] program code for causing the server computer to transmit the firstdocument and a controller to the client computer after the identifier of thefirst document is identified,

See claim element [1d].

[49f] the controller controlling the client computer to transmit a seconddownload request to the server computer after a predetermined condition issatisfied.

See claim elements [1e] and [7a/b].

[59a] An apparatus for transmitting a set of documents from a servercomputer to a client computer, the apparatus comprising:


[59b] a document list having at least one identifier, each identifier in thelist identifying one of the set of documents; and

See claim elements [8a/b], [8c], and [31a].

[59c] a list manager to receive a download request originating from theclient computer and responsively access the list to identify a first identifier,the list manager controlling the server computer to transmit a copy of thedocument identified by the first identifier to the client computer, the

download request message including no address information identifying thedocument,

See claim elements [1b], [8c], [1c] and [31c].

The list manager is the guided.pl script described in these sections . . .

[Ex. 1003, p. 75]


68/70

60

[59d] the list manager transmitting a controller to the client computer inresponse to receipt of the download request,

See claim element [1d].

[59e] the controller controlling the client computer to transmit a seconddownload request to the server computer after a predetermined condition issatisfied.

See claim elements [1e] and [7a/b].

VIII. CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, Petitioner has established a reasonable

likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one claim of the ’233 Patent.

Therefore, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

institute an inter partes review and then proceed to cancel claims 1-3, 6-13, 15-17,

27, 31, 41, 42, 49, and 59.

Respectfully submitted,

OBLON

Dated: February 13, 2015 /Michael L. Kiklis/Michael L. KiklisReg. No. 38,939

Customer Number22850

Tel. (703) 413-3000Fax. (703) 413-2220


69/70

61

Petitioner’s Exhibit List (February 13, 2015)

PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LISTFebruary 13, 2015

Exhibit Description

Ex. 1001 U.S. Patent No. 6,615,233

Ex. 1002 CGI Manual of Style, Robert McDaniel, Ziff-Davis Press,January 1, 1996; ISBN 1-562-76397-0; ISBN-13 978-1562763978 (“CGI Manual”)

Ex. 1003 Declaration of Norman Hutchinson, Ph.D.

Ex. 1004 Declaration of Jodi Gregory

Ex. 1005 Unified Patents’ First Set of Voluntary Interrogatories


70/70

Documents

001 - Unified - Petition-021315