130
06973-00001/8978191.1 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION ALACRITECH, INC., Plaintiff, v. CENTURYLINK COMMUNICATIONS LLC, et al. Defendants. Case No. 2:16-cv-693-JRG-RSP LEAD CASE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ALACRITECH, INC., Plaintiff, v. WINSTRON CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. Case No. 2:16-cv-692-JRG-RSP JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MEMBER CASE ALACRITECH, INC., Plaintiff, v. DELL INC., Defendant. Case No. 2:16-cv-695-RWS-RSP JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MEMBER CASE INTEL CORPORATION, Intervenor. JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING STATEMENT PURSUANT TO PATENT RULE 4-3 Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 4126 INTEL Ex.1039.001

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN ...€¦ · Case No. 2:16-cv-695-RWS-RSP JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MEMBER CASE INTEL CORPORATION, Intervenor. JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    2

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 06973-00001/8978191.1 1

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

    MARSHALL DIVISION

    ALACRITECH, INC.,

    Plaintiff,

    v.

    CENTURYLINK COMMUNICATIONS

    LLC, et al.

    Defendants.

    Case No. 2:16-cv-693-JRG-RSP

    LEAD CASE

    JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

    ALACRITECH, INC.,

    Plaintiff,

    v.

    WINSTRON CORPORATION, et al.,

    Defendants.

    Case No. 2:16-cv-692-JRG-RSP

    JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

    MEMBER CASE

    ALACRITECH, INC.,

    Plaintiff,

    v.

    DELL INC.,

    Defendant.

    Case No. 2:16-cv-695-RWS-RSP

    JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

    MEMBER CASE

    INTEL CORPORATION,

    Intervenor.

    JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING STATEMENT

    PURSUANT TO PATENT RULE 4-3

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 4126

    INTEL Ex.1039.001

  • 06973-00001/8978191.1 2

    Pursuant to Patent Rule 4-3 and the Court’s Docket Control Order, Plaintiff Alacritech,

    Inc. (“Alacritech”) and Intervenor and Defendants (collectively, “Defendants”) hereby submit

    this Joint Claim Construction Statement.

    A. CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE CLAIM TERMS, PHRASES, OR CLAUSES

    ON WHICH THE PARTIES AGREE

    The parties do not presently agree on the constructions of any terms.

    B. EACH PARTY’S PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF EACH DISPUTED

    CLAIM TERM, PHRASE, OR CLAUSE, TOGETHER WITH AN

    IDENTIFICATION OF INTRINSIC AND OTHER EVIDENCE

    Exhibits A and B, attached hereto, identify the disputed claim terms. Exhibit A contains

    Alacritech’s proposed constructions for each disputed claim term and intrinsic and other

    evidence in support; Exhibit B contains Defendants’ proposed constructions for each disputed

    claim term and intrinsic and other evidence in support.

    C. THE ANTICIPATED LENGTH OF TIME NECESSARY FOR THE

    CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING

    The parties anticipate that two hours per side will be sufficient time to present the parties’

    respective positions.

    D. POSSIBLE WITNESSES AT THE CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING

    The parties do not presently intend to call any witnesses at the Claim Construction

    Hearing.

    E. OTHER ISSUES WHICH MIGHT APPROPRIATELY BE TAKEN UP AT

    A PREHEARING CONFERENCE PRIOR TO THE CLAIM

    CONSTRUCTION HEARING

    The parties are not aware of any other issues that should be taken up at a pre-hearing

    conference before the Claim Construction Hearing.

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 4127

    INTEL Ex.1039.002

  • 06973-00001/8978191.1 3

    Dated: February 21, 2017 Respectfully submitted,

    QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &

    SULLIVAN, LLP

    /s/ Joseph M. Paunovich_______________

    Claude M. Stern

    California State Bar No. 96737

    [email protected]

    QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &

    SULLIVAN, LLP

    555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor

    Redwood Shores, CA 94065

    Telephone: (650) 801-5000

    Facsimile: (650) 801-5100

    Joseph M. Paunovich

    [email protected]

    California State Bar No. 228222

    Jordan Brock Kaericher

    California State Bar No. 265953

    [email protected]

    QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &

    SULLIVAN, LLP

    865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor

    Los Angeles, CA 90017

    Telephone: (213) 443-3000

    Facsimile: (213) 443-3100

    T. John Ward, Jr.

    Texas State Bar No. 00794818

    [email protected]

    Claire Abernathy Henry

    Texas State Bar No. 24053063

    [email protected]

    WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM

    1507 Bill Owens Parkway

    Longview, Texas 75604

    Telephone: (903) 757-6400

    Facsimile: (903) 757-2323

    ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

    ALACRITECH, INC.

    WEIL GOTSHAL & MANGES, LLP

    /s/ Garland T. Stephens

    Garland T. Stephens, Lead Attorney (24053910)

    Douglas W. McClellan (24027488)

    Melissa L. Hotze (24049831)

    Justin L. Constant (24067551)

    Richard D. Eiszner (65891)

    WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

    700 Louisiana, Suite 1700

    Houston, TX 77002

    Telephone: (713) 546-5000

    Facsimile: (713) 224-9511

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    Anne Marie Cappella (181402)

    Jeremy Jason Lang (255642)

    Amanda K. Branch (300860)

    WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

    201 Redwood Shores Parkway

    Redwood Shores, CA 94065

    Telephone: (650) 802-3000

    Facsimile: (650) 802-3100

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    William Sutton Ansley (80085)

    WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

    1300 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 900

    Washington, DC 20005

    Telephone: (202) 682-7000

    Facsimile: (202) 857-0940

    [email protected]

    David Mitchell DesRosier (676024)

    WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

    100 Federal Street, 34th Floor

    Boston, MA 02110

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 4128

    INTEL Ex.1039.003

  • 06973-00001/8978191.1 4

    Telephone: (617) 772-8300

    Facsimile: (617) 772-8333

    [email protected]

    Harry L. Gillam, Jr. (07921800)

    Gillam & Smith LLP

    303 S. Washington Ave.

    Marshall, TX 75670

    Telephone: (903) 934-8450

    Facsimile: (903) 934-9257

    [email protected]

    David Folsom (07210800)

    Jackson Walker L.L.P.

    6002 Summerfield Dr., Suite B

    Texarkana, TX 75503

    Telephone: (903) 255-3250

    Facsimile: (903) 255-3265

    [email protected]

    ATTORNEYS FOR INTERVENOR

    INTEL CORPORATION

    /s/ Frank V. Pietrantonio

    Deron R. Dacus

    Texas Bar No. 00790553

    THE DACUS FIRM, P.C.

    821 ESE Loop 323, Suite 430

    Tyler, TX 75701

    Tel: (903) 705-1117

    Fax: (903) 705-1117

    [email protected]

    Jonathan G. Graves (VA Bar 46136)

    Frank V. Pietrantonio (VA Bar 25473)

    Stephen C. Crenshaw (VA Bar 82016)

    COOLEY LLP

    One Freedom Square

    Reston Town Center

    11951 Freedom Drive

    Reston, VA 20190-5656

    Telephone: (703) 456-800

    Fax: (703) 456-8100

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 4129

    INTEL Ex.1039.004

  • 06973-00001/8978191.1 5

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    Phillip E. Morton (DC Bar 1032243)

    COOLEY LLP

    1299 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

    Suite 700

    Washington, DC 20004-2400

    Telephone: (202) 842-7800

    Fax: (202) 842-7899

    [email protected]

    ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS TIER 3,

    INC., SAVVIS COMMUNICATIONS CORP.,

    AND CENTURYLINK COMMUNICATIONS

    LLC

    /s/ Michael J. Newton

    Michael J. Newton (TX Bar No. 24003844)

    Brady Cox (TX Bar No. 24074084)

    ALSTON & BIRD, LLP

    2828 North Harwood Street, 18th Floor

    Dallas, Texas 75201-2139

    Tel: (214) 922-3400

    Fax: (214) 922-3899

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    Deron R. Dacus (TX Bar No. 00790553)

    THE DACUS FIRM, PC

    821 ESE Loop 323, Suite 430

    Tyler, Texas 75701

    (903) 705-1117

    (903) 581-2543 Fax

    [email protected]

    Kirk T. Bradley (NC Bar No. 26490)

    ALSTON & BIRD, LLP

    Bank of America Plaza

    101 South Tryon Street, Suite 4000

    Charlotte, NC 28280-4000

    Tel: (704) 444-1000

    Fax: (704) 444-1111

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 4130

    INTEL Ex.1039.005

  • 06973-00001/8978191.1 6

    [email protected]

    Lindsey Yeargin (GA Bar No. 248608)

    Emily Chambers Welch (GA Bar No. 606071)

    ALSTON & BIRD, LLP

    One Atlantic Center

    1201 West Peachtree St NW #4900

    Atlanta, GA 30309

    Tel: 404-881-7000

    Fax: 404-881-7777

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT DELL INC.

    /s/Harold H. Davis, Jr.

    Ravi S. Deol

    State Bar No. 24090073

    [email protected]

    K&L GATES LLP

    1717 Main St.

    Suite 2800

    Dallas, Texas 75201

    214.939.5500

    214.939.5849 Facsimile

    Harold H. Davis, Jr., Lead Counsel

    California Bar No. 235552 (admitted in E.D. Tex.)

    [email protected]

    Howard Chen

    Texas Bar No. 24009953

    Rachel Burnim

    California Bar No. 292952 (admitted in E.D. Tex.)

    K&L GATES LLP

    Four Embarcadero, Suite 1200

    San Francisco, CA 94111

    Telephone: 415.882.8200

    Facsimile: 415.882.8220

    ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS WISTRON

    CORP., WIWYNN CORP., AND SMS

    INFOCOMM CORP.

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 4131

    INTEL Ex.1039.006

  • 06973-00001/8978191.1 7

    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

    The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing

    document has been served on February 21, 2017, to all counsel of record who are deemed to

    have consented to electronic service via the Court’s CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3).

    /s/ Antonio Sistos

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 4132

    INTEL Ex.1039.007

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 1 -

    Exhibit A

    Alacritech’s Claim Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    JointlyProposedClaimConstructionTermsClaim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    1. “fast-path processing”

    / “slow-path processing”

    Fast-path: “the protocol stack of the

    host computer performs little or no

    network layer or transport layer

    processing”

    ---------------------------------

    Slow-path: No construction necessary

    ‘205 Patent at Abstract

    ‘205 Patent at 3:48-51

    ‘205 Patent at 3:63 through 4:4

    ‘205 Patent at 8:8-40

    ‘205 Patent at 8:41-60

    ‘205 Patent at 11:18-30

    ‘205 Patent at 15:51-55

    ‘205 Patent at 17:6-34

    ‘205 Patent at 18:16-37

    ‘205 Patent at 21:45-50

    ‘205 Patent at 24:45-50

    ‘205 Patent at 39:35-45

    ‘205 Patent Claim 1

    ‘205 Patent Claim 8

    ‘205 Patent Claim 31

    ‘205 File History, 4/18/2006

    Amendment at ALA00014037,

    ALA00014043

    ‘036 Patent at 39:10-20

    ‘036 Patent at 39:45-48

    ‘241 File History, 10/04/2006

    Amendment at ALA00015142

    ‘809 Provisional at 7-8

    ‘809 Provisional at 13

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    2. “context [for

    communication]”

    “data regarding an active connection” ‘036 Patent Claim 1

    ‘036 Patent Claim 6

    ‘036 Patent Claim 7

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Context: the set of circumstances or

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 23 PageID #: 4133

    INTEL Ex.1039.008

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 2 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    ‘036 Patent at 7:62 through 8:2

    ‘036 Patent at 8:25-30

    ‘036 Patent at 10:10-22

    ‘036 Patent at 15:22-27

    ‘036 Patent at 37:63 through 38:10

    ‘036 Patent at 39:33-40

    ‘036 Patent at 39:45-48

    ‘036 Patent at Fig. 2

    ‘036 Patent at Fig. 4B

    ‘072 Patent Claim 7

    ‘072 Patent Claim 15

    ‘072 Patent Claim 21

    ‘036 File History, 03/28/2006

    Amendment at ALA00014675,

    ALA00014686

    ‘036 File History, 10/10/2006

    Amendment at ALA00014513,

    ALA00014514

    ‘241 File History, 10/04/2006

    Amendment at ALA00015142

    ‘809 Provisional at 4-6

    facts that surround a particular event,

    situation, etc.1

    Context: the circumstances in which

    an event occurs.2

    3. “flow key” “an identifier for a connection”

    ‘880 Patent Claim 1

    ‘880 Patent Claim 9

    ‘880 Patent Claim 10

    ‘880 Patent Claim 12

    ‘880 Patent Claim 13

    ‘880 Patent Claim 22

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    02/11/2011 Boucher Tr. (Patent

    Interference No. 105,775), 63:23-

    65:17.

    1 Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999).

    2 The American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd ed. (1994).

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 2 of 23 PageID #: 4134

    INTEL Ex.1039.009

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 3 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    ‘880 Patent Claim 23

    ‘880 Patent Claim 31

    ‘880 Patent Claim 32

    ‘880 Patent Claim 35

    ‘880 Patent Claim 36

    ‘880 Patent Claim 42

    ‘880 Patent Claim 48

    ‘880 Patent Claim 52

    ‘880 Patent Claim 56

    ‘880 Patent Claim 58

    ‘880 Patent Claim 59

    ‘880 Patent at 7:15-28

    ‘880 Patent at 7:47-60

    ‘880 Patent at 11:66 through 12:13

    ‘880 Patent at 13:29-48

    ‘880 Patent at 18:15-26

    ‘880 Patent at 36:38-46

    ‘880 Patent at 37:66 through 38:21

    ‘880 Patent at 59:27-33

    ‘880 Patent at 60:19-35

    ‘880 Patent at 61:56 through 62:2

    ‘880 Patent at 64:4-18

    ‘880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to

    Provoke Interference at

    ALA07368392, ALA07368395,

    ALA07368397, ALA07368401,

    ALA07368412, ALA07368414

    2/10/2011 Boucher Dep. Tr. 99:13-

    20.

    Key: In databases, a unique value

    that is used to identify a data record.

    Synonymous with primary key.3

    Key: In database management, an

    identifier for a record or group of

    records in a datafile.4

    Key: a group of characters that

    identifies a record in a database or

    other computer file.5

    3 Webster’s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000).

    4 Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 4th ed. (1999).

    5 Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999).

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 3 of 23 PageID #: 4135

    INTEL Ex.1039.010

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 4 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    ‘880 File History, 6/14/2010

    Amendment at ALA00016718

    4. “database” / “flow

    database”

    “collection of organized data” ‘880 Patent Claim 43

    ‘880 Patent at 36:38-42

    ‘880 Patent at 64:4-18

    ‘880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to

    Provoke Interference at

    ALA07368397, ALA07368408,

    ALA07368412, ALA07368415

    ‘880 File History, 6/14/2010

    Amendment at ALA00016722

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Database: A collection of organized,

    related data, esp. one in electronic

    form that can be accessed and

    manipulated by specialized computer

    software.6

    Database: A collection of related

    information about a subject

    organized in a useful manner that

    provides a base or foundation for

    procedures, such as retrieving

    information, drawing conclusions,

    and making decisions. Any

    collection of information that servers

    these purposes qualifies as a

    database, even if the information

    isn’t stored on a computer. In fact,

    important predecessors of today’s

    sophisticated business database

    systems were files kept on index

    cards and stored in file cabinets.

    Information usually is divided into

    data records, each with one or more

    data fields.7

    6 Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999).

    7 Webster’s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000).

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 4 of 23 PageID #: 4136

    INTEL Ex.1039.011

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 5 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    5. “a destination [] in the

    memory of the

    computer” / “a

    destination memory;” /

    “a destination in

    memory;” / “a

    destination . . . on the

    host computer system”

    “a single contiguous block or several

    associated blocks of memory in the

    computer”

    ‘699 Patent Claim 1

    ‘699 Patent Claim 2

    ‘699 Patent Claim 7

    ‘699 Patent Claim 13

    ‘699 Patent Claim 19

    ‘699 Patent Claim 20

    ‘699 Patent at Abstract

    ‘699 Patent at 2:44-60

    ‘699 Patent at 2:67 through 3:11

    ‘699 Patent at 5:36 through 6:8

    ‘699 Patent at 6:60-7:2

    ‘699 Patent at Figs. 2 and 3

    ‘241 Patent Claim 1

    ‘241 Patent Claim 3

    ‘241 Patent Claim 22

    ‘241 Patent Claim 23

    ‘205 Patent Claim 1

    ‘205 Patent Claim 6

    ‘205 Patent Claim 8

    ‘205 Patent at 43:4-18

    ‘809 Provisional at 1-3

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Destination: 1. the place to which a

    person or thing travels or is sent. 2.

    The purpose for which something is

    destined.8

    Destination: The record, file,

    document, or disk to which

    information is copied or moved, as

    opposed to the source.9

    Destination: The location (drive,

    folder, or directory) to which a file is

    copied or moved. Compare source

    (definition 1).10

    8 Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999)

    9 Webster’s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000)

    10 Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 4th ed. (1999)

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 5 of 23 PageID #: 4137

    INTEL Ex.1039.012

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 6 -

    TermsProposedByPlaintiffClaim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    6. “operation code” “status data” ’880 Patent Claim 1

    ‘880 Patent Claim 13

    ‘880 Patent Claim 17

    ‘880 Patent Claim 32

    ‘880 Patent Claim 34

    ‘880 Patent Claim 46

    ‘880 Patent Claim 51

    ‘880 Patent Claim 52

    ‘880 Patent Claim 56

    ‘880 Patent at 7:47-60

    ‘880 Patent at 53:63 through 54:6

    ‘880 Patent at 63:28 through 64:18

    ‘880 Patent File History, 6/19/2003

    Request to Provoke Interference

    at ALA07368393,

    ALA07368397, ALA07368406,

    ALA07368411, ALA07368415

    ‘880 Patent File History, 6/14/2010

    Amendment at ALA00016214,

    ALA00016218

    ‘880 Patent File History, 11/1/2010

    Amendment at ALA00016880,

    ALA00016884

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Word: The native unit of storage on

    a particular machine. A word is the

    largest amount of data that can be

    handled by the microprocessor in one

    operation and is also, as a rule, the

    width of the main data bus. Word

    sizes of 16 bits and 32 bits are the

    most common.11

    Word: A unit of information

    composed of characters, bits, or bytes

    that’s treated as an entity and that can

    be stored in one location.12

    11 Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 4th ed. (1999).

    12 Webster’s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000)

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 6 of 23 PageID #: 4138

    INTEL Ex.1039.013

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 7 -

    TermsProposedByDefendantsClaim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    7. “prepending” /

    “prepended”

    No construction necessary ‘036 Patent Claim 4

    ‘072 Patent Claim 1

    ‘072 Patent Claim 9

    ‘072 Patent Claim 15

    ‘104 Patent Claim 1

    ‘104 Patent Claim 22

    ‘241 Patent Claim 7

    ‘241 Patent Claim 9

    ‘241 Patent Claim 12

    ‘241 Patent Claim 17

    ‘241 Patent Claim 18

    ‘036 Patent at 14:5-12

    ‘036 Patent at 4:14-18

    ‘036 Patent at 4:28-33

    ‘036 Patent at 4:39-46

    ’036 Patent at 8:8-14

    ‘036 Patent at 11:10-16

    ‘036 Patent at 11:36-42

    ‘036 Patent at 29:61-64

    ‘036 Patent at 39:21-27

    ‘036 Patent at Fig. 5

    ‘241 File History, 4/19/2007

    Amendment at ALA00015063-

    064, ALA00015071

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    8. “status information”

    No construction necessary ‘072 Patent Claim 2

    ‘072 Patent Claim 3

    ‘072 Patent Claim 9

    ‘072 Patent Claim 10

    ‘072 Patent Claim 14

    ‘072 Patent Claim 15

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 7 of 23 PageID #: 4139

    INTEL Ex.1039.014

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 8 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    ‘072 Patent Claim 17

    ‘072 Patent Claim 21

    ‘072 Patent at 11:18-33

    ‘072 Patent at 13:51 through 14:10

    ‘072 Patent at 27:24-30

    ‘072 Patent at 30:14-16

    ‘072 Patent at 63:59-67

    ‘072 Patent at 64:21-38

    9. “substantially no

    network layer or

    transport layer

    processing” /

    “significant network

    layer or significant

    transport layer

    processing”

    No construction necessary ‘205 Patent Claim 22

    ‘205 Patent Claim 31

    ‘205 Patent at Abstract

    ‘205 Patent at 4:48-50

    ‘205 Patent at 39:35-45

    ‘205 Patent at 43:13-17

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    10. “substantially

    contiguous manner”

    No construction necessary ‘205 Patent Claim 6

    ‘205 Patent at 42:30-47

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    11. “without an interrupt

    dividing”

    No construction necessary.13 ‘241 Patent Claim 1

    ‘241 Patent Claim 2

    ‘241 Patent Claim 17

    ‘241 Patent Claim 18

    ‘241 Patent Claim 22

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Interrupt: A hardware or software

    signal that temporarily stops program

    execution in a computer so that

    13 Should Defendants seek unnecessary judicial review of the term, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely on the provided extrinsic evidence.

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 8 of 23 PageID #: 4140

    INTEL Ex.1039.015

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 9 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    ‘241 Patent at 4:20-33

    ‘241 Patent at 5:24-28

    ‘241 Patent at 11:34-46

    ‘241 Patent at 14:9-33

    ‘241 Patent at 14:64 through 16:1

    ‘241 Patent at 16:19-22

    ‘241 Patent at 34:60 through 35:1

    ‘241 Patent at 36:24-54

    ‘241 Patent at 37:16-32

    ‘241 Patent at 41:27-40

    another procedure can be carried

    out.14

    Interrupt: A signal to the

    microprocessor indicating that an

    event has occurred that requires its

    attention. Processing is halted

    momentarily so that input/output or

    other operations can take place.

    When the operation is finished,

    processing resumes.15

    Interrupt: A signal from a device to

    a computer’s processor requesting

    attention from the processor. When

    the processor receives an interrupt, it

    suspends its current operations, saves

    the status of its work, and transfers

    control to a special routine known as

    an interrupt handler, which contains

    the instructions for dealing with the

    particular situation that caused the

    interrupt. Interrupts can be generated

    by various hardware devices to

    request service or report problems, or

    by the processor itself in response to

    program errors or requests for

    operating-system services. Interrupts

    14 Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999)

    15 Webster’s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000)

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 9 of 23 PageID #: 4141

    INTEL Ex.1039.016

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 10 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    are the processor’s way of

    communicating with the other

    elements that make up a computer

    system. A hierarchy of interrupt

    priorities determines which interrupt

    request will be handled first if more

    than one request is made. A program

    can temporarily disable some

    interrupts if it needs the full attention

    of the processor to complete a

    particular task.16

    12. “re-assembly buffer”

    No construction necessary ‘880 Patent Claim 1

    ‘880 Patent Claim 18

    ‘880 Patent Claim 32

    ‘880 Patent Claim 56

    ‘880 Patent Claim 57

    ‘880 Patent at 22:57 through 23:4

    ‘880 Patent at 29:35-48

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    13. “Flow re-assembler”

    No construction necessary. ‘880 Patent Claim 41

    ‘880 Patent at 11:66 through 12:13

    ‘880 Patent at 13:13-28

    ‘880 Patent at 13:29-48

    ‘880 Patent at 13:49-51

    ‘880 Patent at 14:4-9

    ‘880 Patent at 18:15-26

    ‘880 Patent at 33:64-34:9

    ‘880 File History, 11/1/2010

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    16 Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 4th ed. (1999)

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 10 of 23 PageID #: 4142

    INTEL Ex.1039.017

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 11 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    Amendment at ALA07367744

    ‘880 File History, 6/14/2010 at

    ALA07367903

    ‘880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to

    Provoke Interference at

    ALA07368408, ALA07368415-

    16

    14. “packet batching

    module”

    No construction necessary.

    ‘880 Patent Claim 41

    ‘880 Patent Claim 54

    ‘880 Patent Claim 60

    ‘880 Patent at 64:4-18

    ‘880 Patent at Fig. 50

    ‘880 Patent at 5:48-63

    ‘880 Patent at 36:38-46

    ‘880 Patent at 37:66 through 38:21

    ‘880 Patent at 59:27-33

    ‘880 Patent at 60:19-35

    ‘880 Patent at 61:56 through 62:2

    ‘880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to

    Provoke Interference at

    ALA07368408

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    15. “traffic classifier”

    No construction necessary.17

    ‘880 Patent Claim 41

    ‘880 Patent Claim 42

    ‘880 Patent at 59:27-33

    ‘880 Patent at 63:25-63

    ‘880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to

    Provoke Interference at

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Traffic: The messages sent and

    received over a communication

    channel.18

    17 Should Defendants seek unnecessary judicial review of the term, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely on the provided extrinsic evidence.

    18 Modern Dictionary of Electronics, 6th ed. (1997).

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 11 of 23 PageID #: 4143

    INTEL Ex.1039.018

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 12 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    ALA07368407

    ‘880 File History, 11/1/2010

    Amendment at ALA07367744

    Traffic: Bellcore’s definition: A flow

    of attempts, calls, and messages. My

    definition: The amount of activity

    during a given period of time over a

    circuit, line or group of lines, or the

    number of messages handled by a

    communications switch. There are

    many measures of “traffic.”

    Typically it’s so many minutes of

    voice conversation, or so many bits

    of data conversation. Note that

    Bellcore includes attempts in its

    definition of traffic. I don't. The

    decision is yours. But you should be

    aware of what you include in your

    calculations.19

    Traffic: Messages that are

    transmitted and received over a

    communication channel.20

    Prioritization of Network Traffic

    Prioritization can be explained as

    follows: implement some method to

    get important packets through a

    network when the network is

    congested and delay unimportant

    packets until later. Important packets

    19 Newton’s Telecom Dictionary, 16th ed. (2000).

    20 IEEE Standard Glossary of Computer Networking Terminology (1995).

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 12 of 23 PageID #: 4144

    INTEL Ex.1039.019

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 13 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    are generally classified as delay-

    sensitive traffic such as that generated

    by live videoconferencing, voice

    calls, mission-critical transaction

    processing, remote monitoring, and

    collaborative computing (in which

    people work in real time on their

    computer screens across networks).

    Unimportant packets may include

    packets carrying electronic mail or

    packets downloaded from Internet

    Web sites by freeloading users.21

    See also Gupta, Sanjay et al., Traffic

    classification and scheduling in ATM

    networks (1993).

    See also Kubbar, Osama et al.,

    Traffic Classification and Resource

    Allocation in ATM Networks (1996)

    16. “flow database

    manager”

    No construction necessary [beyond

    proposal for “database”]22

    ‘880 Patent Claim 42

    ‘880 Patent Claim 56

    ‘880 Patent at 59:11-12

    ‘880 Patent at 59:54-58

    ‘880 Patent at 64:29-35

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Database: A collection of organized,

    related data, esp. one in electronic

    form that can be accessed and

    21 Encyclopedia of Networking (1998).

    22 Should Defendants seek unnecessary judicial review of the term, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely on the provided extrinsic evidence.

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 13 of 23 PageID #: 4145

    INTEL Ex.1039.020

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 14 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    ‘880 Patent at 68:25-29

    ‘880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to

    Provoke Interference at

    ALA07368408

    manipulated by specialized computer

    software.23

    Database: A collection of related

    information about a subject organized

    in a useful manner that provides a

    base or foundation for procedures,

    such as retrieving information,

    drawing conclusions, and making

    decisions. Any collection of

    information that servers these

    purposes qualifies as a database, even

    if the information isn’t stored on a

    computer. In fact, important

    predecessors of today’s sophisticated

    business database systems were files

    kept on index cards and stored in file

    cabinets. Information usually is

    divided into data records, each with

    one or more data fields.24

    Database management: Tasks

    related to creating, maintaining,

    organizing, and retrieving

    information from a database. See

    data manipulation.25

    23 Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999).

    24 Webster’s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000).

    25 Webster’s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000).

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 14 of 23 PageID #: 4146

    INTEL Ex.1039.021

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 15 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    17. “flow manager”

    No construction necessary.26 ‘880 Patent Claim 43

    ‘880 Patent Claim 46

    ‘880 Patent Claim 49

    ‘880 Patent at 11:66 through 12:13

    ‘880 Patent at 18:15-26

    ‘880 Patent at 59:27-33

    ‘880 Patent at 63:47-64

    ‘880 Patent at 87:60-65

    ‘880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to

    Provoke Interference at

    ALA07368409, ALA07368411,

    ALA07368412

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Traffic: The messages sent and

    received over a communication

    channel.27

    Traffic: Bellcore’s definition: A flow

    of attempts, calls, and messages. My

    definition: The amount of activity

    during a given period of time over a

    circuit, line or group of lines, or the

    number of messages handled by a

    communications switch. There are

    many measures of “traffic.”

    Typically it’s so many minutes of

    voice conversation, or so many bits

    of data conversation. Note that

    Bellcore includes attempts in its

    definition of traffic. I don't. The

    decision is yours. But you should be

    aware of what you include in your

    calculations.28

    26 Should Defendants seek unnecessary judicial review of the term, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely on the provided extrinsic evidence.

    27 Modern Dictionary of Electronics, 6th ed. (1997).

    28 Newton’s Telecom Dictionary, 16th ed. (2000).

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 15 of 23 PageID #: 4147

    INTEL Ex.1039.022

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 16 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    Traffic: Messages that are

    transmitted and received over a

    communication channel.29

    Prioritization of Network Traffic

    Prioritization can be explained as

    follows: implement some method to

    get important packets through a

    network when the network is

    congested and delay unimportant

    packets until later. Important packets

    are generally classified as delay-

    sensitive traffic such as that generated

    by live videoconferencing, voice

    calls, mission-critical transaction

    processing, remote monitoring, and

    collaborative computing (in which

    people work in real time on their

    computer screens across networks).

    Unimportant packets may include

    packets carrying electronic mail or

    packets downloaded from Internet

    Web sites by freeloading users.30

    See also Gupta, Sanjay et al., Traffic

    classification and scheduling in ATM

    networks (1993).

    29 IEEE Standard Glossary of Computer Networking Terminology (1995).

    30 Encyclopedia of Networking (1998).

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 16 of 23 PageID #: 4148

    INTEL Ex.1039.023

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 17 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    See also Kubbar, Osama et al.,

    Traffic Classification and Resource

    Allocation in ATM Networks (1996)

    18. “re-assembler”

    No construction necessary. ‘880 Patent Claim 43

    ‘880 Patent at 6:58 through 7:7

    ‘880 Patent at 13:49-56

    ‘880 Patent at 87:60-64

    ‘880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to

    Provoke Interference at

    ALA07368405, ALA07368410,

    ALA07367744-45

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    19. “means for

    receiving, by the

    network interface device

    from the computer, a

    command to transmit

    data from the computer

    to the network”

    No construction necessary

    Not subject to 112(6)

    To the extent the Court determines

    otherwise,

    Function: Receiving a command to

    transmit data from the computer to the

    network

    Structures: a network interface

    device, a register on the network

    interface device, and equivalents

    thereof.

    ‘104 Patent Claim 22

    ‘104 Patent at Fig. 4

    ‘104 Patent at 3:30-44

    ‘104 Patent at 5:3-32

    ‘104 Patent at 6:14-26

    ‘205 Patent at 38:15-26

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    20. “means for sending,

    by the network interface

    No construction necessary

    ‘104 Patent Claim 22

    ‘104 Patent at 3:37-44

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 17 of 23 PageID #: 4149

    INTEL Ex.1039.024

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 18 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    device to the network,

    data corresponding to

    the command, including

    means for prepending a

    transport layer header to

    at least some of the

    data”

    Not subject to 112(6)

    To the extent the Court determines

    otherwise,

    Function: Sending data corresponding

    to the command, including means for

    prepending a transport layer header to

    at least some of the data

    Structures: a network interface

    device and equivalents thereof.

    ‘104 Patent at 5:5-16

    ‘104 Patent at 6:14-26

    ‘205 Patent at 38:15-26

    21. “means for sending,

    by the network interface

    device to the computer,

    an indication that the

    data has been sent from

    the network interface

    device to the network,

    prior to receiving, by the

    network interface device

    from the network, an

    acknowledgement

    (ACK) that the data has

    been received.”

    No construction necessary

    Not subject to 112(6)

    To the extent the Court determines

    otherwise,

    Function: Sending an indication that

    the data has been sent from the

    network interface device to the

    network prior to receiving, by the

    network interface device from the

    network, an acknowledgment (ACK)

    that the data was received.

    Structures: a network interface

    device and equivalents thereof.

    ‘104 Patent Claim 22

    ‘104 Patent at Abstract

    ‘104 Patent at 2:41-51

    ‘104 Patent at 4:1-11

    ‘104 Patent at 4:35-44

    ‘104 Patent at 4:45-62

    ‘205 Patent at 38:15-26

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    22. “means, coupled to Subject to 112(6) ‘205 Patent Claim 23 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 18 of 23 PageID #: 4150

    INTEL Ex.1039.025

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 19 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    the host computer, for

    receiving from outside

    the apparatus a response

    to an ISCSI read request

    command and for fast-

    path processing a

    portion of the response

    to the ISCSI read

    request command, the

    portion including data,

    the portion being fast-

    path processed such that

    the data is placed into

    the destination memory

    on the host computer

    without the protocol

    stack of the host

    computer doing

    significant network

    layer or significant

    transport layer

    processing, the means

    also being for receiving

    a subsequent portion of

    the response to the

    ISCSI read request

    command and for slow-

    path processing the

    subsequent portion such

    that the protocol stack of

    the host computer does

    network layer and

    Function: “receiving from outside the

    apparatus a response to an ISCSI read

    request command and for fast-path

    processing a portion of the response to

    the ISCSI read request command, the

    portion including data, the portion

    being fast-path processed such that the

    data is placed into the destination

    memory on the host computer without

    the protocol stack of the host

    computer doing significant network

    layer or significant transport layer

    processing, the means also being for

    receiving a subsequent portion of the

    response to the ISCSI read request

    command and for slow-path

    processing the subsequent portion

    such that the protocol stack of the host

    computer does network layer and

    transport layer processing on the

    subsequent portion”

    Structure: A network interface

    device, a processor in a network

    interface device, and equivalents

    thereof

    ‘205 Patent Claim 31

    ‘205 Patent at Abstract

    ‘205 Patent at Fig. 27

    ‘205 Patent at 4:23-39

    ‘205 Patent at 4:40-59

    ‘205 Patent at 6:15-18

    ’205 Patent at 17:6-19,

    ’205 Patent at 17:35-46

    ’205 Patent at 17:60-67

    ‘205 Patent at 38:4 through 40:63

    ‘205 Patent at 41:23-35

    ‘205 Patent at 43:4-22

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 19 of 23 PageID #: 4151

    INTEL Ex.1039.026

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 20 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    transport layer

    processing on the

    subsequent portion”

    23. “first mechanism” /

    “second mechanism”

    No construction necessary

    Not subject to 112(6)

    To the extent the Court determines

    otherwise,

    Claim 1

    Function (1: “first mechanism”):

    processing the packets so that for each

    packet the network layer header and

    the transport layer header are validated

    without an interrupt dividing the

    processing of the network layer header

    and the transport layer header…

    sending the data from each packet of

    the first type to a destination in

    memory allocated to an application

    without sending any of the media

    access control layer headers, network

    layer headers or transport layer

    headers to the destination

    Structures (1: “first mechanism”):

    A network interface device, a

    processor in a network interface

    device, and equivalents thereof

    ‘241 Patent Claim 1

    ‘241 Patent Claim 3

    ‘241 Patent Claim 17

    ‘241 Patent at 7:42-58

    ‘241 Patent at 8:61 through 9:5

    ‘241 Patent at 9:34-48

    ’241 Patent at 9:66 through 10:23

    ‘241 Patent at 10:24-40

    ‘241 Patent at 11:36-46

    ‘241 Patent at 13:8-33

    ‘241 Patent at 14:34-46

    ‘241 Patent at 15:16-30

    ‘241 Patent at 15:53-60

    ‘241 Patent at 17:20-36

    ‘241 Patent at 17:37 through 18:9

    ‘241 Patent at 31:51-66

    ‘241 Patent at 32:9-16

    ‘241 Patent at 39:32-45

    ‘241 Patent at 40:22-42

    ‘241 Patent at 43:9-35

    ‘241 Patent at Fig. 4B

    ‘241 Patent at Fig. 11

    ‘036 Patent at 5:21-29

    ‘036 Patent at 6:32-33

    ‘036 Patent at 39:21-27

    ‘036 Patent at 41:31-37

    ‘036 Patent at Fig. 3

    ‘036 Patent at Fig. 6

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 20 of 23 PageID #: 4152

    INTEL Ex.1039.027

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 21 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    Claims 3 & 4:

    Function (Claim 3: “second mechanism”): “processing an upper

    layer header of at least one of the

    packets thereby determining the

    destination, wherein the upper layer

    header corresponds to a protocol layer

    above the transport layer.

    Function (Claim 4: “second mechanism”): processing an upper

    layer header of at least one of the

    packets of the second type thereby

    determining the destination

    Structure(s) (Claims 3 & 4: “second

    mechanism”): a host CPU operating

    a TCP protocol stack, as detailed in,

    e.g., ’241 Patent, 9:66 to 10:23, 40:22-

    42, 43:9-35, Fig. 4B, and equivalents

    thereto.

    Claim 5

    Function (Claim 5: “second mechanism”): processing a transport

    layer header of another packet prior to

    receiving the plurality of packets

    from the network, thereby establishing

    a Transmission Control Protocol

    ‘036 Patent at Fig. 9

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 21 of 23 PageID #: 4153

    INTEL Ex.1039.028

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 22 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    (TCP) connection for the packets of

    the first type.

    Structure(s) (Claim 5: “second

    mechanism”): a host CPU operating

    a TCP protocol stack, as detailed in,

    e.g., ‘241 patent, 9:34-48, 9:66 to

    10:23, 39:32-45, 43:9-35, Fig. 4B, and

    equivalents thereto

    Claim 17

    Function (17: “first mechanism”):

    providing a block of data and a

    Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)

    connection

    Structures (17: “first mechanism”):

    a host CPU operating a TCP protocol

    stack, as detailed in, e.g., ‘241 patent,

    7:42-58; 17:20-36; Fig. 11; and

    equivalents thereof.

    Function (17: “second mechanism”):

    dividing the block of data into

    multiple segments; prepending an

    outbound packet header to each of the

    segments, thereby forming an

    outbound packet corresponding to

    each segment, the outbound packet

    header containing an outbound media

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 22 of 23 PageID #: 4154

    INTEL Ex.1039.029

  • 06973-00001/8977889.2 - 23 -

    Claim Term Proposed Construction(s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence

    access control layer header, an

    outbound Internet Protocol (IP) header

    and an outbound TCP header, wherein

    the prepending of each outbound

    packet header occurs without an

    interrupt dividing the prepending of

    the outbound media access control

    layer header, the outbound (IP) header

    and the outbound TCP header.

    Structures (17: “second

    mechanism”): A network interface

    device, a processor in the network

    interface device, and equivalents

    thereof

    24. second

    apparatus[es]”

    No construction necessary

    Not subject to 112(6).

    ‘036 Patent Claim 1

    ‘036 Patent Claim 5

    ‘036 Patent Claim 7

    ‘036 Patent at Abstract

    ‘036 Patent at 7:53-66

    ‘036 Patent at 8:9-15

    ‘036 Patent at 15:9-27

    ‘036 Patent at 15:

    Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-1 Filed 02/21/17 Page 23 of 23 PageID #: 4155

    INTEL Ex.1039.030

  • 1

    Exhibit B

    Defendants’ and Intervenors’ Proposed Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    “prepending” /

    “prepended”

    036: 4

    072: 1, 9, 15

    104: 1, 22

    241: 7, 9, 12,

    15, 17, 18

    “adding to the

    front” / “added to

    the front”

    [Alacritech 1997 Prov. pp. 6, 57, ALA00138383 at ALA00138392, 443]

    [Alacritech 1998 Prov. pp. 91-92, ALA00138562 at ALA00138654-55]

    [Alacritech 2002 Prov., 2002-04-22 Specification, 60/374,788, pp. 122, 159, 338, 377,

    378, 521, 562, 725, 782]

    [241 Patent Claim 7]

    [241 Patent Claim 9]

    [241 Patent Claim 12]

    [241 Patent Claim 15]

    [241 Patent Claim 17]

    [241 Patent Claim 18]

    [241 Patent Claim 21]

    [241 Patent 11:9-46]

    [241 Patent 12:19-50]

    [241 Patent 13:48-14:33]

    [241 Patent 16:9-33]

    [241 Patent 16:57-17:19]

    [241 Patent 29:42-55]

    [241 Patent 32:56-33:18]

    [241 Patent 68:48-50]

    [072 Patent Claim 1]

    [072 Patent Claim 9]

    1 To the extent that the cited Supporting Evidence includes references to other portions of specifications, figures, or other documents,

    they are expressly incorporated. To the extent that the testimony of Mark Lanning is cited as Supporting Evidence, all references or

    citations included in the Declarations of Mr. Mark Lanning regarding claim construction in this case are expressly incorporated.

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 100 PageID #: 4156

    INTEL Ex.1039.031

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    2

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [072 Patent Claim 15]

    [072 Patent 11:18-54]

    [072 Patent 12:26-57]

    [072 Patent 13:52-14:36]

    [072 Patent 16:10-34]

    [072 Patent 16:57-17:18]

    [072 Patent 29:33-45]

    [072 Patent 32:41-33:2]

    [072 Patent 67:57-67]

    [104 Patent Claim 1]

    [104 Patent Claim 21]

    [104 Patent Claim 22]

    [104 Patent Claim 23]

    [036 Patent Claim 4]

    [036 Patent Claim 21]

    [036 Patent 11:20-57]

    [036 Patent 12:30-61]

    [036 Patent 13:59-14:44]

    [036 Patent 16:20-44]

    [036 Patent 17:1-30]

    [036 Patent 29:52-64]

    [036 Patent 32:65-33:27]

    [036 Patent 68:40-52]

    “fast-path

    processed” /

    “fast-path

    processing”

    205: 1, 8, 31

    “a mode of

    operation in

    which the

    network interface

    device performs

    all physical layer,

    [Alacritech 1997 Prov. pp. 6, 7, 10-14, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25-28, 30, 35, 39-45, 53, 55, 57,

    ALA00138383 at ALA00138392, 393, 396-400, 401, 404, 407, 410, 411-414, 416, 421,

    425-431, 439, 441, 443]

    [205 Patent Claim 1]

    [205 Patent Claim 8]

    [205 Patent Claim 14]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 2 of 100 PageID #: 4157

    INTEL Ex.1039.032

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    3

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    MAC layer, IP

    layer, and TCP

    layer processing”

    [205 Patent Claim 17]

    [205 Patent Claim 31]

    [205 Patent 1:37-56]

    [205 Patent 2:19-31]

    [205 Patent 3:40-59]

    [205 Patent 3:60-4:6]

    [205 Patent 4:23-39]

    [205 Patent 4:40-64]

    [205 Patent 5:40-42]

    [205 Patent 6:14-17]

    [205 Patent 8:8-24]

    [205 Patent 8:25-40]

    [205 Patent 8:41-60]

    [205 Patent 9:17-29]

    [205 Patent 10:26-38]

    [205 Patent 10:39-57]

    [205 Patent 10:58-11:17]

    [205 Patent 11:18-31]

    [205 Patent 11:53-12:3]

    [205 Patent 12:4-24]

    [205 Patent 12:59-13:13]

    [205 Patent 13:14-42]

    [205 Patent 14:21-49]

    [205 Patent 15:51-16:9]

    [205 Patent 16:24-52]

    [205 Patent 16:53-17:5]

    [205 Patent 17:6-18]

    [205 Patent 17:19-34]

    [205 Patent 17:35-49]

    [205 Patent 18:1-15]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 3 of 100 PageID #: 4158

    INTEL Ex.1039.033

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    4

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [205 Patent 18:16-37]

    [205 Patent 18:38-56]

    [205 Patent 18:57-19:10]

    [205 Patent 19:11-31]

    [205 Patent 20:61-21:12]

    [205 Patent 21:13-26]

    [205 Patent 22:43-56]

    [205 Patent 35:27-44]

    [205 Patent 36:8-21]

    [205 Patent 36:22-43]

    [205 Patent 36:44-49]

    [205 Patent 36:50-37:7]

    [205 Patent 37:8-18]

    [205 Patent 37:19-61]

    [205 Patent 39:30-45]

    [205 Patent 39:46-62]

    [205 Patent 39:63-40:11]

    [205 Patent 40:36-63]

    [205 Patent 41:23-35]

    [205 Patent 42:11-16]

    [205 Patent 42:48-60]

    [205 Patent 43:4-28]

    “slow path

    processing”

    205: 8, 31

    “a mode of

    operation in

    which the host

    performs at least

    some of the

    physical layer,

    MAC layer, IP

    layer, or TCP

    [Alacritech 1997 Prov. pp. 6, 7, 10-14, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25-28, 30, 35, 39-45, 53, 55,

    ALA00138383 at ALA00138392, 393, 396-400, 401, 404, 407, 410, 411-414, 416, 421,

    425-431, 439, 441]

    [205 Patent Claim 8]

    [205 Patent Claim 14]

    [205 Patent Claim 31]

    [205 Patent Claim 34]

    [205 Patent 2:52-3:13]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 4 of 100 PageID #: 4159

    INTEL Ex.1039.034

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    5

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    layer processing”

    [205 Patent 4:23-39]

    [205 Patent 4:40-64]

    [205 Patent 5:40-42]

    [205 Patent 6:14-17]

    [205 Patent 8:25-40]

    [205 Patent 11:53-12:3]

    [205 Patent 14:21-49]

    [205 Patent 17:6-18]

    [205 Patent 17:19-34]

    [205 Patent 18:16-37]

    [205 Patent 18:57-19:10]

    [205 Patent 28:63-29:17]

    [205 Patent 30:43-31:5]

    [205 Patent 36:8-21]

    [205 Patent 36:44-49]

    [205 Patent 36:50-37:7]

    [205 Patent 39:30-45]

    [205 Patent 40:36-63]

    [205 Patent 40:64-41:22]

    [205 Patent 41:23-35]

    “a destination

    [] in the [a]

    memory of the

    computer”

    699: 1, 2, 7, 13,

    20

    “a destination

    memory”

    205: 1, 8, 22,

    31, 36

    “the location in

    host memory

    where data

    resides when all

    MAC layer,

    network layer,

    and transport

    layer processing

    is complete”

    ALA00120474-512

    [Alacritech 1997 Prov. pp. 1-3, 6-16, ALA00138383 at ALA00138387-389, 392-402]

    [880 File History, ALA00016191 at ALA0016422]

    [241 Patent Claim 1]

    [241 Patent Claim 3]

    [241 Patent Claim 4]

    [241 Patent Claim 5]

    [241 Patent Claim 7]

    [241 Patent Claim 9]

    [241 Patent Claim 11]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 5 of 100 PageID #: 4160

    INTEL Ex.1039.035

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    6

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    “a destination

    in memory”

    241: 1, 22

    “a

    destination...on

    the host

    computer

    system”

    880: 5

    [241 Patent Claim 16]

    [241 Patent Claim 18]

    [241 Patent Claim 22]

    [241 Patent Claim 23]

    [241 Patent Claim 24]

    [241 Patent 1:50-2:18]

    [241 Patent 2:27-44]

    [241 Patent 2:61-3:10]

    [241 Patent 3:27-49]

    [241 Patent 3:50-65]

    [241 Patent 3:66-4:19]

    [241 Patent 4:20-33]

    [241 Patent 5:18-38]

    [241 Patent 5:39-60]

    [241 Patent 6:6-9]

    [241 Patent 7:17-19]

    [241 Patent 7:42-58]

    [241 Patent 7:59-8:4]

    [241 Patent 8:39-60]

    [241 Patent 9:17-33]

    [241 Patent 9:49-65]

    [241 Patent 9:66-10:23]

    [241 Patent 10:24-40]

    [241 Patent 11:9-46]

    [241 Patent 11:47-62]

    [241 Patent 12:51-13:7]

    [241 Patent 13:8-33]

    [241 Patent 13:34-47]

    [241 Patent 13:48-14:33]

    [241 Patent 14:48-64]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 6 of 100 PageID #: 4161

    INTEL Ex.1039.036

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    7

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [241 Patent 14:65-15:16]

    [241 Patent 15:17-30]

    [241 Patent 15:31-56]

    [241 Patent 15:57-16:8]

    [241 Patent 16:9-33]

    [241 Patent 16:34-56]

    [241 Patent 16:57-17:19]

    [241 Patent 17:20-36]

    [241 Patent 18:10-27]

    [241 Patent 18:39-64]

    [241 Patent 18:65-19:30]

    [241 Patent 19:61-20:8]

    [241 Patent 20:20-60]

    [241 Patent 21:12-30]

    [241 Patent 21:65-22:27]

    [241 Patent 23:46-24:3]

    [241 Patent 26:24-49]

    [241 Patent 27:2-31]

    [241 Patent 27:32-47]

    [241 Patent 30:40-53]

    [241 Patent 30:54-31:8]

    [241 Patent 31:14-39]

    [241 Patent 31:40-50]

    [241 Patent 31:51-32:26]

    [241 Patent 32:27-35]

    [241 Patent 33:19-29]

    [241 Patent 34:14-59]

    [241 Patent 35:20-46]

    [241 Patent 35:64-36:11]

    [241 Patent 36:40-47]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 7 of 100 PageID #: 4162

    INTEL Ex.1039.037

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    8

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [241 Patent 37:23-25]

    [241 Patent 37:26-30]

    [241 Patent 37:38-38]

    [241 Patent 37:50-50]

    [241 Patent 37:51-65]

    [241 Patent 38:7-24]

    [241 Patent 38:25-38]

    [241 Patent 38:41-45]

    [241 Patent 38:54-62]

    [241 Patent 39:21-31]

    [241 Patent 39:52-67]

    [241 Patent 40:15-15]

    [241 Patent 40:16-21]

    [241 Patent 40:23-35]

    [241 Patent 40:36-42]

    [241 Patent 40:43-56]

    [241 Patent 40:57-41:3]

    [241 Patent 41:42-42]

    [241 Patent 41:43-51]

    [241 Patent 42:27-27]

    [241 Patent 42:28-47]

    [241 Patent 43:10-36]

    [241 Patent 43:37-40]

    [241 Patent 44:8-18]

    [241 Patent 44:33-55]

    [241 Patent 47:41-50]

    [241 Patent 48:10-12]

    [241 Patent 48:20-24]

    [241 Patent 48:29-38]

    [241 Patent 50:4-14]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 8 of 100 PageID #: 4163

    INTEL Ex.1039.038

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    9

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [241 Patent 50:28-35]

    [241 Patent 50:38-38]

    [241 Patent 52:18-26]

    [241 Patent 53:8-13]

    [241 Patent 54:23-29]

    [241 Patent 55:4-6]

    [241 Patent 56:4-4]

    [241 Patent 56:5-9]

    [241 Patent 56:10-10]

    [241 Patent 56:11-37]

    [241 Patent 56:42-48]

    [241 Patent 56:61-62]

    [241 Patent 56:64-57:7]

    [241 Patent 57:8-15]

    [241 Patent 57:28-45]

    [241 Patent 57:57-60]

    [241 Patent 58:12-17]

    [241 Patent 58:62-59:4]

    [241 Patent 60:12-22]

    [241 Patent 60:33-42]

    [241 Patent 60:43-47]

    [241 Patent 60:54-61:2]

    [241 Patent 61:3-16]

    [241 Patent 61:18-34]

    [241 Patent 61:36-51]

    [241 Patent 61:53-62]

    [241 Patent 62:22-25]

    [241 Patent 62:42-45]

    [241 Patent 62:47-57]

    [241 Patent 62:59-63:7]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 9 of 100 PageID #: 4164

    INTEL Ex.1039.039

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    10

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [241 Patent 63:18-35]

    [241 Patent 63:63-65]

    [241 Patent 64:2-5]

    [241 Patent 64:7-16]

    [241 Patent 64:17-36]

    [241 Patent 64:47-62]

    [241 Patent 65:19-45]

    [241 Patent 66:6-10]

    [241 Patent 66:23-43]

    [241 Patent 67:41-52]

    [241 Patent 67:61-68:15]

    [241 Patent 68:17-46]

    [241 Patent 68:48-50]

    [241 Patent 70:17-21]

    [241 Patent 71:30-41]

    [241 Patent 72:32-54]

    [241 Patent 72:64-73:13]

    [241 Patent 73:14-23]

    [241 Patent 73:28-34]

    [241 Patent 75:1-15]

    [241 Patent 76:16-19]

    [241 Patent 77:54-61]

    [241 Patent 78:21-28]

    [241 Patent 78:29-30]

    [241 Patent 78:55-58]

    [241 Patent 79:60-65]

    [241 Patent 79:66-80:3]

    [241 Patent 80:4-5]

    [241 Patent 84:53-85:52]

    [241 Patent 85:62-86:2]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 10 of 100 PageID #: 4165

    INTEL Ex.1039.040

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    11

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [241 Patent 86:8-16]

    [241 Patent 86:17-30]

    [241 Patent 86:31-36]

    [241 Patent 86:37-56]

    [241 Patent 87:32-37]

    [241 Patent 88:56-62]

    [241 Patent 95:15-37]

    [241 Patent 96:23-34]

    [241 Patent 97:50-65]

    [241 Patent 97:66-67]

    [241 Patent 98:6-30]

    [205 Patent Claim 1]

    [205 Patent Claim 2]

    [205 Patent Claim 5]

    [205 Patent Claim 6]

    [205 Patent Claim 7]

    [205 Patent Claim 8]

    [205 Patent Claim 11]

    [205 Patent Claim 12]

    [205 Patent Claim 15]

    [205 Patent Claim 20]

    [205 Patent Claim 22]

    [205 Patent Claim 23]

    [205 Patent Claim 24]

    [205 Patent Claim 26]

    [205 Patent Claim 28]

    [205 Patent Claim 29]

    [205 Patent Claim 31]

    [205 Patent Claim 32]

    [205 Patent Claim 33]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 11 of 100 PageID #: 4166

    INTEL Ex.1039.041

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    12

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [205 Patent Claim 35]

    [205 Patent Claim 36]

    [205 Patent 1:37-56]

    [205 Patent 4:23-39]

    [205 Patent 4:40-64]

    [205 Patent 4:65-67]

    [205 Patent 6:12-13]

    [205 Patent 6:25-42]

    [205 Patent 8:8-24]

    [205 Patent 8:41-60]

    [205 Patent 8:61-9:16]

    [205 Patent 9:17-29]

    [205 Patent 9:30-48]

    [205 Patent 10:39-57]

    [205 Patent 10:58-11:17]

    [205 Patent 11:18-31]

    [205 Patent 12:25-58]

    [205 Patent 13:14-42]

    [205 Patent 13:43-57]

    [205 Patent 14:8-20]

    [205 Patent 14:21-49]

    [205 Patent 15:27-50]

    [205 Patent 15:51-16:9]

    [205 Patent 16:10-23]

    [205 Patent 16:53-17:5]

    [205 Patent 17:19-34]

    [205 Patent 17:35-49]

    [205 Patent 17:50-67]

    [205 Patent 18:16-37]

    [205 Patent 19:47-20:8]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 12 of 100 PageID #: 4167

    INTEL Ex.1039.042

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    13

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [205 Patent 21:45-60]

    [205 Patent 22:13-25]

    [205 Patent 22:26-42]

    [205 Patent 22:57-23:8]

    [205 Patent 23:9-21]

    [205 Patent 24:7-26]

    [205 Patent 24:51-25:11]

    [205 Patent 25:12-42]

    [205 Patent 26:5-19]

    [205 Patent 26:31-60]

    [205 Patent 27:23-41]

    [205 Patent 28:9-38]

    [205 Patent 29:58-30:15]

    [205 Patent 32:41-59]

    [205 Patent 33:5-20]

    [205 Patent 36:8-21]

    [205 Patent 36:22-43]

    [205 Patent 36:50-37:7]

    [205 Patent 37:8-18]

    [205 Patent 37:19-61]

    [205 Patent 37:62-38:3]

    [205 Patent 38:27-38]

    [205 Patent 38:39-51]

    [205 Patent 38:65-39:11]

    [205 Patent 39:30-45]

    [205 Patent 39:46-62]

    [205 Patent 39:63-40:11]

    [205 Patent 40:12-26]

    [205 Patent 40:27-35]

    [205 Patent 40:36-63]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 13 of 100 PageID #: 4168

    INTEL Ex.1039.043

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    14

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [205 Patent 40:64-41:22]

    [205 Patent 41:23-35]

    [205 Patent 41:54-42:10]

    [205 Patent 42:31-47]

    [205 Patent 42:48-60]

    [205 Patent 42:61-43:3]

    [205 Patent 43:4-28]

    [880 Patent Claim 1]

    [880 Patent Claim 2]

    [880 Patent Claim 4]

    [880 Patent Claim 5]

    [880 Patent Claim 6]

    [880 Patent Claim 7]

    [880 Patent Claim 13]

    [880 Patent Claim 14]

    [880 Patent Claim 15]

    [880 Patent Claim 18]

    [880 Patent Claim 24]

    [880 Patent Claim 31]

    [880 Patent Claim 32]

    [880 Patent Claim 41]

    [880 Patent Claim 42]

    [880 Patent Claim 43]

    [880 Patent Claim 45]

    [880 Patent Claim 46]

    [880 Patent Claim 48]

    [880 Patent Claim 52]

    [880 Patent Claim 53]

    [880 Patent Claim 55]

    [880 Patent Claim 56]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 14 of 100 PageID #: 4169

    INTEL Ex.1039.044

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    15

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [880 Patent Claim 57]

    [880 Patent 1:37-49]

    [880 Patent 1:57-2:14]

    [880 Patent 2:31-44]

    [880 Patent 3:4-16]

    [880 Patent 3:45-60]

    [880 Patent 4:24-25]

    [880 Patent 5:48-63]

    [880 Patent 6:5-23]

    [880 Patent 6:24-37]

    [880 Patent 6:48-57]

    [880 Patent 7:15-28]

    [880 Patent 7:47-62]

    [880 Patent 8:7-11]

    [880 Patent 8:12-24]

    [880 Patent 8:25-32]

    [880 Patent 8:33-46]

    [880 Patent 8:47-60]

    [880 Patent 9:27-34]

    [880 Patent 10:1-19]

    [880 Patent 10:41-11:2]

    [880 Patent 11:3-12]

    [880 Patent 11:40-50]

    [880 Patent 11:66-12:13]

    [880 Patent 12:14-26]

    [880 Patent 13:49-59]

    [880 Patent 15:45-50]

    [880 Patent 15:51-56]

    [880 Patent 16:14-25]

    [880 Patent 16:26-36]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 15 of 100 PageID #: 4170

    INTEL Ex.1039.045

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    16

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [880 Patent 17:60-18:3]

    [880 Patent 18:16-26]

    [880 Patent 18:27-29]

    [880 Patent 20:1-8]

    [880 Patent 20:32-37]

    [880 Patent 21:5-13]

    [880 Patent 21:32-41]

    [880 Patent 23:21-28]

    [880 Patent 23:29-41]

    [880 Patent 23:42-51]

    [880 Patent 23:58-67]

    [880 Patent 24:1-9]

    [880 Patent 24:10-20]

    [880 Patent 24:21-33]

    [880 Patent 24:43-48]

    [880 Patent 24:52-25:2]

    [880 Patent 25:60-67]

    [880 Patent 26:18-25]

    [880 Patent 27:21-30]

    [880 Patent 27:37-45]

    [880 Patent 27:46-49]

    [880 Patent 27:55-28:3]

    [880 Patent 28:4-17]

    [880 Patent 28:21-35]

    [880 Patent 28:36-53]

    [880 Patent 28:54-62]

    [880 Patent 29:14-16]

    [880 Patent 29:24-34]

    [880 Patent 29:35-48]

    [880 Patent 29:57-64]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 16 of 100 PageID #: 4171

    INTEL Ex.1039.046

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    17

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [880 Patent 30:14-23]

    [880 Patent 30:24-44]

    [880 Patent 30:53-67]

    [880 Patent 31:21-46]

    [880 Patent 32:4-7]

    [880 Patent 32:19-39]

    [880 Patent 33:26-37]

    [880 Patent 33:43-63]

    [880 Patent 33:64-34:14]

    [880 Patent 34:15-27]

    [880 Patent 36:8-18]

    [880 Patent 37:25-34]

    [880 Patent 37:48-53]

    [880 Patent 38:3-9]

    [880 Patent 38:10-21]

    [880 Patent 38:28-32]

    [880 Patent 38:33-47]

    [880 Patent 38:48-55]

    [880 Patent 38:56-60]

    [880 Patent 39:28-41]

    [880 Patent 44:40-43]

    [880 Patent 46:36-43]

    [880 Patent 46:44-53]

    [880 Patent 46:61-62]

    [880 Patent 46:66-67]

    [880 Patent 47:3-19]

    [880 Patent 47:26-37]

    [880 Patent 48:56-67]

    [880 Patent 49:1-3]

    [880 Patent 49:4-23]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 17 of 100 PageID #: 4172

    INTEL Ex.1039.047

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    18

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [880 Patent 49:54-57]

    [880 Patent 49:58-67]

    [880 Patent 50:1-3]

    [880 Patent 50:4-5]

    [880 Patent 50:19-23]

    [880 Patent 51:5-16]

    [880 Patent 52:17-23]

    [880 Patent 52:24-26]

    [880 Patent 53:39-47]

    [880 Patent 54:1-17]

    [880 Patent 54:22-27]

    [880 Patent 54:28-37]

    [880 Patent 54:38-50]

    [880 Patent 54:59-55:3]

    [880 Patent 55:9-23]

    [880 Patent 55:24-33]

    [880 Patent 56:11-19]

    [880 Patent 56:31-42]

    [880 Patent 57:28-35]

    [880 Patent 57:40-53]

    [880 Patent 58:8-9]

    [880 Patent 58:10-12]

    [880 Patent 58:24-25]

    [880 Patent 58:26-27]

    [880 Patent 58:30-31]

    [880 Patent 58:57-59]

    [880 Patent 59:3-3]

    [880 Patent 59:59-65]

    [880 Patent 60:19-35]

    [880 Patent 60:45-54]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 18 of 100 PageID #: 4173

    INTEL Ex.1039.048

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    19

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [880 Patent 60:55-67]

    [880 Patent 61:3-9]

    [880 Patent 61:23-38]

    [880 Patent 63:36-40]

    [880 Patent 63:41-46]

    [880 Patent 64:4-18]

    [880 Patent 66:10-23]

    [880 Patent 68:3-13]

    [880 Patent 70:1-13]

    [880 Patent 71:1-10]

    [880 Patent 73:24-30]

    [880 Patent 73:31-40]

    [880 Patent 74:53-65]

    [880 Patent 74:66-75:9]

    [880 Patent 75:10-16]

    [880 Patent 75:29-37]

    [880 Patent 75:38-45]

    [880 Patent 75:51-59]

    [880 Patent 75:60-76:6]

    [880 Patent 76:7-12]

    [880 Patent 76:26-30]

    [880 Patent 76:34-45]

    [880 Patent 77:51-56]

    [880 Patent 78:33-62]

    [880 Patent 79:24-42]

    [880 Patent 80:21-50]

    [880 Patent 81:38-44]

    [880 Patent 87:50-88:15]

    [880 Patent 88:65-89:7]

    [699 Patent Claim 1]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 19 of 100 PageID #: 4174

    INTEL Ex.1039.049

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    20

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [699 Patent Claim 2]

    [699 Patent Claim 3]

    [699 Patent Claim 4]

    [699 Patent Claim 5]

    [699 Patent Claim 6]

    [699 Patent Claim 7]

    [699 Patent Claim 8]

    [699 Patent Claim 9]

    [699 Patent Claim 10]

    [699 Patent Claim 11]

    [699 Patent Claim 12]

    [699 Patent Claim 13]

    [699 Patent Claim 14]

    [699 Patent Claim 15]

    [699 Patent Claim 16]

    [699 Patent Claim 17]

    [699 Patent Claim 18]

    [699 Patent Claim 19]

    [699 Patent Claim 20]

    [699 Patent 2:28-43]

    [699 Patent 2:44-61]

    [699 Patent 2:64-3:20]

    [699 Patent 3:27-30]

    [699 Patent 3:39-42]

    [699 Patent 3:49-60]

    [699 Patent 4:11-27]

    [699 Patent 4:28-44]

    [699 Patent 4:55-67]

    [699 Patent 5:11-24]

    [699 Patent 5:25-35]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 20 of 100 PageID #: 4175

    INTEL Ex.1039.050

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    21

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [699 Patent 5:36-48]

    [699 Patent 5:49-53]

    [699 Patent 5:54-58]

    [699 Patent 5:59-64]

    [699 Patent 5:65-6:8]

    [699 Patent 6:9-16]

    [699 Patent 6:17-28]

    [699 Patent 6:29-37]

    [699 Patent 6:38-43]

    [699 Patent 6:58-7:5]

    “database”

    880: 9, 10, 12,

    13, 23, 32, 35,

    42, 43, 48, 50,

    56, 58

    “a collection of

    logically related

    data stored

    together in one or

    more

    computerized

    files”

    [Definition of “database” in The New IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and

    Electronics Terms, 6th ed. (1996), 88801DOC000883-000887]

    [880 File History, ALA00016191 at ALA00016423-25, 29, 32-34, 36-38, 40, 43, 44]

    [880 Patent Claim 9]

    [880 Patent Claim 10]

    [880 Patent Claim 12]

    [880 Patent Claim 13]

    [880 Patent Claim 23]

    [880 Patent Claim 32]

    [880 Patent Claim 35]

    [880 Patent Claim 42]

    [880 Patent Claim 43]

    [880 Patent Claim 48]

    [880 Patent Claim 50]

    [880 Patent Claim 56]

    [880 Patent Claim 58]

    [880 Patent 7:15-28]

    [880 Patent 7:29-42]

    [880 Patent 7:43-46]

    [880 Patent 7:47-62]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 21 of 100 PageID #: 4176

    INTEL Ex.1039.051

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    22

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [880 Patent 7:63-67]

    [880 Patent 11:13-27]

    [880 Patent 17:51-59]

    [880 Patent 21:42-55]

    [880 Patent 21:56-61]

    [880 Patent 22:23-38]

    [880 Patent 22:39-42]

    [880 Patent 22:51-56]

    [880 Patent 36:38-46]

    [880 Patent 59:5-7]

    [880 Patent 59:11-12]

    [880 Patent 60:19-35]

    [880 Patent 60:45-54]

    [880 Patent 60:55-67]

    [880 Patent 61:1-2]

    [880 Patent 61:10-22]

    [880 Patent 61:41-49]

    [880 Patent 61:50-55]

    [880 Patent 61:56-62:2]

    [880 Patent 62:19-44]

    [880 Patent 62:52-52]

    [880 Patent 62:55-55]

    [880 Patent 62:56-59]

    [880 Patent 63:5-22]

    [880 Patent 63:47-64]

    [880 Patent 63:65-64:3]

    [880 Patent 64:4-18]

    [880 Patent 64:24-47]

    [880 Patent 64:48-65:6]

    [880 Patent 65:19-22]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 22 of 100 PageID #: 4177

    INTEL Ex.1039.052

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    23

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [880 Patent 65:25-26]

    [880 Patent 65:27-27]

    [880 Patent 65:28-28]

    [880 Patent 65:29-29]

    [880 Patent 65:33-43]

    [880 Patent 65:58-67]

    [880 Patent 66:1-9]

    [880 Patent 66:10-23]

    [880 Patent 66:42-54]

    [880 Patent 67:9-20]

    [880 Patent 67:44-68:2]

    [880 Patent 68:19-33]

    [880 Patent 68:44-69:7]

    [880 Patent 69:8-11]

    [880 Patent 69:30-42]

    [880 Patent 69:43-50]

    [880 Patent 69:56-60]

    [880 Patent 69:61-67]

    [880 Patent 70:1-13]

    [880 Patent 70:14-16]

    [880 Patent 71:42-58]

    “operation

    code”

    880: 1, 17, 32,

    34, 45

    “the portion of a

    machine language

    or assembly

    language

    instruction that

    specifies the type

    of instruction and

    the structure of

    the data on which

    [Definition of “operation code” in Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary, 3rd ed. (1997)]

    [88801DOC000888-000893]

    [88801DOC000894-000916]

    [880 File History, ALA00016191 at ALA00016300, 304, 421, 425, 427, 433, 434, 439,

    440, 451, 453, 784]

    [Alacritech 1997 Prov., pp. 77-82, ALA00138383 at ALA00138463-68]

    [Alacritech 1998 Prov., pp. 110-116, ALA00138562 at ALA00138673-79]

    [880 Patent Claim 1]

    [880 Patent Claim 13]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 23 of 100 PageID #: 4178

    INTEL Ex.1039.053

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    24

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    it operates”

    [880 Patent Claim 17]

    [880 Patent Claim 32]

    [880 Patent Claim 34]

    [880 Patent Claim 45]

    [880 Patent Claim 46]

    [880 Patent Claim 51]

    [880 Patent Claim 52]

    [880 Patent Claim 53]

    [880 Patent Claim 56]

    [880 Patent 5:48-63]

    [880 Patent 7:47-62]

    [880 Patent 10:1-19]

    [880 Patent 12:61-13:12]

    [880 Patent 13:13-28]

    [880 Patent 13:29-48]

    [880 Patent 13:49-59]

    [880 Patent 15:35-41]

    [880 Patent 30:45-52]

    [880 Patent 31:3-17]

    [880 Patent 32:47-64]

    [880 Patent 42:4-10]

    [880 Patent 53:30-35]

    [880 Patent 53:62-67]

    [880 Patent 54:59-55:3]

    [880 Patent 62:60-64]

    [880 Patent 63:26-30]

    [880 Patent 63:31-35]

    [880 Patent 63:47-64]

    [880 Patent 63:65-64:3]

    [880 Patent 64:4-18]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 24 of 100 PageID #: 4179

    INTEL Ex.1039.054

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    25

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [880 Patent 74:20-31]

    [880 Patent 74:53-65]

    [880 Patent 78:7-18]

    [880 Patent 78:19-22]

    [880 Patent 78:33-62]

    [880 Patent 79:43-80:20]

    [880 Patent 80:57-67]

    [880 Patent 81:1-4]

    [880 Patent 81:38-44]

    [880 Patent, Fig. 2]

    [880 Patent, Fig. 4]

    [880 Patent, Fig. 23B]

    “context”

    036: 1, 3-7;

    072: 1, 2, 7, 9,

    15, 16, 19

    Indefinite. Expert Testimony of Mark Lanning.

    [ALA00019278-286]

    [ALA00019294-300]

    [“Fast-path TCP_TASK_OFFLOAD Porting Effort Summary,” Dkt. 38-3 in Alacritech

    v. Microsoft, Case No. Case 3:04-cv-03284-JSW, ALA07371911]

    [Connery Exhibit 2047, filed July 21, 2011 in In the matter of Connery v. Boucher,

    Patent Interference No. 105,775, ALA07396518]

    [Alacritech, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., Case No. 3:04-cv-03284-JSW, Dkt. 38 (N.D. Cal.

    Nov. 11, 2004) (Declaration of Peter Craft In Support of Alacritech’s Motion for

    Preliminary Injunction)]

    [Alacritech, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., Case No. 3:04-cv-03284-JSW, Dkt. 96 (N.D. Cal.

    Apr. 12, 2005) (Order regarding Alacritech’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction)]

    [Interference No. 105,775 (Blightman testimony) at 67:21-68:2, ALA07369508 at

    ALA07369574-75]

    [Interference No. 105,775 (Higgen testimony) at 122:11-123:12, ALA07369639 at

    ALA07369760-61]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 25 of 100 PageID #: 4180

    INTEL Ex.1039.055

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    26

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    RFC 793 (88801DOC000917-88801DOC001006).

    [Alacritech 1997 Prov., pp. 4-7, 11, 25-27, 42-45, 49-58, 71, ALA00138383 at

    ALA00138390-393, 397, 411-413, 428-431, 435-444, 457]

    [072 Patent Claim 1]

    [072 Patent Claim 2]

    [072 Patent Claim 3]

    [072 Patent Claim 6]

    [072 Patent Claim 7]

    [072 Patent Claim 9]

    [072 Patent Claim 10]

    [072 Patent Claim 14]

    [072 Patent Claim 15]

    [072 Patent Claim 16]

    [072 Patent Claim 17]

    [072 Patent Claim 19]

    [072 Patent Claim 20]

    [072 Patent Claim 21]

    [072 Patent 6:34-37]

    [072 Patent 7:56-8:5]

    [072 Patent 8:6-18]

    [072 Patent 9:49-52]

    [072 Patent 10:9-33]

    [072 Patent 11:18-54]

    [072 Patent 13:52-14:36]

    [072 Patent 15:1-19]

    [072 Patent 16:57-17:18]

    [072 Patent 20:55-21:4]

    [072 Patent 21:24-56]

    [072 Patent 21:57-22:19]

    [072 Patent 24:15-34]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 26 of 100 PageID #: 4181

    INTEL Ex.1039.056

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    27

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [072 Patent 24:38-40]

    [072 Patent 24:55-25:3]

    [072 Patent 27:24-40]

    [072 Patent 29:66-30:23]

    [072 Patent 30:43-64]

    [072 Patent 30:65-31:2]

    [072 Patent 31:3-27]

    [072 Patent 31:38-32:12]

    [072 Patent 32:13-21]

    [072 Patent 32:41-33:2]

    [072 Patent 37:31-45]

    [072 Patent 37:46-53]

    [072 Patent 38:63-63]

    [072 Patent 39:1-11]

    [072 Patent 39:12-26]

    [072 Patent 39:27-31]

    [072 Patent 39:33-48]

    [072 Patent 39:49-54]

    [072 Patent 43:27-39]

    [072 Patent 44:11-33]

    [072 Patent 45:56-46:3]

    [072 Patent 49:38-47]

    [072 Patent 49:48-56]

    [072 Patent 50:43-47]

    [072 Patent 52:21-25]

    [072 Patent 53:6-23]

    [072 Patent 53:29-33]

    [072 Patent 53:34-44]

    [072 Patent 53:45-47]

    [072 Patent 53:48-54]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 27 of 100 PageID #: 4182

    INTEL Ex.1039.057

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    28

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [072 Patent 53:55-62]

    [072 Patent 53:63-67]

    [072 Patent 54:1-7]

    [072 Patent 54:8-12]

    [072 Patent 54:14-21]

    [072 Patent 54:31-34]

    [072 Patent 54:35-39]

    [072 Patent 54:40-61]

    [072 Patent 54:64-55:3]

    [072 Patent 55:9-11]

    [072 Patent 63:61-67]

    [072 Patent 64:22-38]

    [072 Patent 64:65-65:9]

    [072 Patent 66:2-19]

    [072 Patent 66:59-67:3]

    [072 Patent 67:12-34]

    [072 Patent 68:2-7]

    [072 Patent 69:44-64]

    [072 Patent 71:3-6]

    [072 Patent 71:8-17]

    [072 Patent 71:29-32]

    [072 Patent 71:37-40]

    [072 Patent 71:50-67]

    [072 Patent 72:1-9]

    [072 Patent 72:10-24]

    [072 Patent 72:25-34]

    [072 Patent 72:35-38]

    [072 Patent 72:50-57]

    [072 Patent 72:58-73:4]

    [072 Patent 73:6-8]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 28 of 100 PageID #: 4183

    INTEL Ex.1039.058

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    29

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [072 Patent 73:10-15]

    [072 Patent 73:16-29]

    [072 Patent 73:31-36]

    [072 Patent 73:43-43]

    [072 Patent 73:44-44]

    [072 Patent 73:45-45]

    [072 Patent 73:46-46]

    [072 Patent 73:50-51]

    [072 Patent 73:64-64]

    [072 Patent 73:65-74:3]

    [072 Patent 74:10-24]

    [072 Patent 74:32-50]

    [072 Patent 74:54-60]

    [072 Patent 75:8-8]

    [072 Patent 75:14-20]

    [072 Patent 75:21-22]

    [072 Patent 75:30-31]

    [072 Patent 75:37-47]

    [072 Patent 75:48-48]

    [072 Patent 75:49-76:17]

    [072 Patent 76:27-27]

    [072 Patent 76:28-41]

    [072 Patent 76:48-60]

    [072 Patent 76:61-67]

    [072 Patent 77:1-4]

    [072 Patent 84:42-42]

    [072 Patent 86:2-27]

    [072 Patent 96:38-52]

    [072 Patent 96:59-97:15]

    [036 Patent Claim 1]

    Case 2:16-cv-00693-JRG-RSP Document 134-2 Filed 02/21/17 Page 29 of 100 PageID #: 4184

    INTEL Ex.1039.059

  • Defendants’ and Intervenor Proposed

    Constructions and Supporting Evidence

    Exhibit B

    30

    Term and

    Asserted

    Claims

    Proposed

    Construction Supporting Evidence

    1

    [036 Patent Claim 3]

    [036 Patent Claim 4]

    [036 Patent Claim 5]

    [036 Patent Claim 6]

    [036 Patent Claim 7]

    [036 Patent Claim 8]

    [036 Patent 6:28-31]

    [036 Patent 7:53-8:2]

    [036 Patent 8:3-15]

    [036 Patent 9:50-53]

    [036 Patent 10:10-34]