UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE …

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Vimeo, Inc., and IAC/InterActiveCorp,

Petitioners,

v.

British Telecommunications plc,

Patent Owner.

U.S. Patent No. 7,974,200

Inter Partes Review Case No.: IPR2019-00833

PETITIONERS’ DEMONSTRATIVE EXHBITS

Demonstrative Exhibit—Not EvidenceJune 4, 2020

Vimeo,Inc.,etal.v.BritishTelecommunicationsplc

IPR2019‐00833Petitioners’Demonstratives

1


U.S.Patent7,974,200

2

Demonstrative Exhibit—Not EvidenceJune 4, 2020 3

Petition at 4-6


Claim1 Claim41. A method of operating a real-time communication apparatus comprising a real-time data sender, a real-time data display device having a store, and a network connecting said sender and said display device, said method comprising:operating said sender to transmit a plurality of first-encoding-rate data packets encoded at a first encoding rate and representing a first part of a real-time presentation to said display device at a transmission rate higher than said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets;operating said display device to:

receive said first-encoding-rate data packets into said store;read-out said received first-encoding-rate data packets from said store at a data rate equal to said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets for decoding so as to present said first part of said real-time presentation to a user at a first level of quality;on said store being filled with said first-encoding-rate data to a predetermined level, sending an indication that said level has been reached to said data sender;

operating said data sender, on receipt of said indication from said display device, to send second-encoding-rate data packets encoded at a second encoding rate and representing subsequent parts of said real-time presentation to said display device, said second encoding rate of said second-encoding-rate data packets being higher than said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets;operating said display device to:

receive the second-encoding-rate data packets representing the subsequent part of real-time presentation into said store;read out said second-encoding-rate data packets from said store at a data rate equal to said second encoding rate of said second-encoding-rate data packets for decoding so as to present said subsequent part of said real-time presentation to said user at a second level of quality which is higher than said first level of quality.

4. A method of operating a communication apparatus comprising a data sender, a data presentation device having a store, and a network connecting said data sender and said data presentation device, said method comprising:operating said data sender to transmit a first plurality of first-encoding-rate data packets encoded at a first encoding rate to said data presentation device, wherein said first plurality of first-encoding-rate data packets are transmitted at a first transmission rate which is higher than said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets;operating said data presentation device to:

receive said first plurality of first encoding rate data packets into said store;read out said received first-encoding-rate data packets from said store at a data rate equal to said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets for decoding so as to present to a user at a first level of quality, wherein the removing of said first-encoding-rate data packets from said store is initiated when said first-encoding-rate data packets first arrive at said store;

on said store being filled with data packets to a predetermined level, sending an indication to said data sender that said predetermined level has been reached;operating said data sender, on receipt of said indication from said data presentation device, to transmit a second plurality of second-encoding-rate data packets encoded at a second encoding rate to said data presentation device, wherein said second plurality of second-encoding-rate data packets are transmitted at a second transmission rate which is higher than said first transmission rate; and wherein said second encoding rate is higher than said first encoding rate;operating said data presentation device to:

receive said second plurality of second-encoding-rate data packets into said store;read out said second-encoding-rate data packets from said store at a data rate equal to said second encoding rate of said second-encoding-rate data packets for decoding, so as to present to said user at a second level of quality, wherein said second level of quality is higher than said first level of quality.

4


SummaryofPriorArt

5


Petition at 16.


Petition at 18.


Petition at 20-21.


TCP/IPTransmission “TCP‐Friendly”Transmission

9

Petition at 18.Reply at 25.


Petition at 14.


Reply at 26-27.


Claims1‐3,7and10‐12

12


PetitionObvious over Lippman, Chou & Muroi.

Petition, Ground 1.

PTAB:Instituted ReviewA “skilled worker would ‘apply Chou’s teachings to … Lippman’s to avoid [start-up] delays.’”

Inst. Dec. at 25.

“A person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to improve Lippman with Muroi’s client-side approach.”

Inst. Dec. at 26.

BT“[I]t would not have been obvious for a person of skill in the art to modify and combine the teachings of Lippman, Chou, and Muroi in the manner proposed by Petitioners.”

Sur-Reply at 1.

1. A method of operating a real-time communication apparatus comprising a real-time data sender, a real-time data display device having a store, and a network connecting said sender and said display device, said method comprising:

operating said sender to transmit a plurality of first-encoding-rate data packets encoded at a first encoding rate and representing a first part of a real-time presentation to said display device at a transmission rate higher than said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets;

operating said display device to:

receive said first-encoding-rate data packets into said store;

read-out said received first-encoding-rate data packets from said store at a data rate equal to said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets for decoding so as to present said first part of said real-time presentation to a user at a first level of quality;

on said store being filled with said first-encoding-rate data to a predetermined level, sending an indication that said level has been reached to said data sender;

operating said data sender, on receipt of said indication from said display device, to send second-encoding-rate data packets encoded at a second encoding rate and representing subsequent parts of said real-time presentation to said display device, said second encoding rate of said second-encoding-rate data packets being higher than said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets;

operating said display device to:

receive the second-encoding-rate data packets representing the subsequent part of real-time presentation into said store;

read out said second-encoding-rate data packets from said store at a data rate equal to said second encoding rate of said second-encoding-rate data packets for decoding so as to present said subsequent part of said real-time presentation to said user at a second level of quality which is higher than said first level of quality.

13


KSR“The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results.”

550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007); Petition at 23.

“If a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill.”

550 U.S. at 418; Petition at 27.

14


Lippman:“[P]re-roll times (‘Buffer Times’) can vary from 1.7 to 5.8 seconds.”

Chou:“[S]tart-up delays of 2-10 seconds are ‘annoying’ and ‘intolerable.’”

Petition at 26.

“Large start-up and seek delays are particularly annoying when the user is trying to browse through a large amount of audiovisual content trying to find a particular video or a particular location in a video. … [D]elays of two to ten seconds between aborts seem intolerable. What is needed is a method for reducing the start-up and seek delays for such ‘on demand’ interactive multimedia applications.”

Chou (Ex.1011), col. 3:8-19.

15

Petition at 26; Lippman (Ex. 1010) at 782.



Chou:“Proposes solutions to avoid such delays.”“A first data stream is a low resolution stream encoded at a bit rate below the transmission bit rate. A second data stream is a normal resolution stream encoded at a bit rate equal to the transmission bit rate. The server initially transmits the low resolution stream faster than real time, at a bit rate equal to the transmission bit rate. ... When the client buffer has grown sufficiently large to guard against future underflow by the normal resolution stream, the server stops transmission of the low resolution stream and begins transmission of the normal resolution stream.”

Petition at 26 (citing Chou (Ex.1011), col. 4:8-19).

16




Chou:“[I]dentifies RealNetworks’ RealAudio and RealVideo players … as the types of players that would be improved by his technique.”

“The video clients 208 also comprise any commonly available application for viewing streamed multimedia file types, including QuickTime (a format for video and animation), RealAudio (a format for audio data), RealVideo (a format for video data), ASF (Advanced Streaming Format) and MP4 (the MPEG-4 file format).”

Petition at 26 (citing Chou (Ex.1011), col. 6:67-7:5).

17




Chou:“[S]tart-up delays of 2-10 seconds are ‘annoying’ and ‘intolerable.’”

Petition at 26.

BT’sSur‐Reply“With Lippman’s approach, transmitting higher quality video requires buffering more pre-roll, which for a given target audience results in buffering more data before starting playback, which leads to the delays identified in Chou.” Sur-Reply at 12.

18



LippmanLippman “prepare[s] multiple codings of video at different coding rates and switch[es] among them to match changing bandwidth.” “Lippman does not explain how bandwidth is measured in his system.”

Petition at 27.

MuroiMuroi “prepare[s] multiple codings of video at different coding rates and switch[es] among them to match changing bandwidth.” “Muroi explains that switches between different data-rate encodings can be accomplished by measuring a volume of data stored in the receiver’s storage buffer 22, comparing the measured volume to fullness thresholds (a) and (b), and sending rate switch request messages based on these comparisons.”

Petition at 27 (citing Muroi (Ex. 1013) ¶¶ 0006-07, 0016, 0024-25).

19

Muroi (Ex. 1013), Figs. 1 & 2


LippmanLippman “prepare[s] multiple codings of video at different coding rates and switch[es] among them to match changing bandwidth.” “Lippman does not explain how bandwidth is measured in his system.”

Petition at 27.

MuroiMuroi “prepare[s] multiple codings of video at different coding rates and switch[es] among them to match changing bandwidth.” “Muroi explains that switches between different data-rate encodings can be accomplished by measuring a volume of data stored in the receiver’s storage buffer 22, comparing the measured volume to fullness thresholds (a) and (b), and sending rate switch request messages based on these comparisons.”

Petition at 27 (citing Muroi (Ex. 1013) ¶¶ 0006-07, 0016, 0024-25).

20

BT’sSur‐Reply“Lippman describes a commercially-available -product (SureStream) that switches between different versions of video based on a bandwidth measurement, but does not explain how the SureStream product measures bandwidth to perform the switching.” “Muroi describes how to perform the same switching feature as Lippman, i.e., switching between different versions of video when the volume of data in the buffer at the client exceeds or falls below certain threshold levels.” Sur-Reply at 8-9 (emphases added).


PatentOwnerResponseA. “It would not have been obvious to modify Lippman to implement Muroi’s approach for

determining when to switch between different versions of video.B. “Modifying Lippman with Chou and Muroi would frustrate a main goal of Lippman and change

Lippman’s principle of operation.”1. “Modifying Lippman to transmit low quality video at startup as taught in Chou would

change Lippman’s principle of operation.”2. “Modifying Lippman to transmit low quality video at startup as taught in Chou would

frustrate a main goal of Lippman.”3. “Modifying Lippman to implement Muroi’s client-controlled scheme would further change

Lippman’s principle of operation.”C. “Modifying Lippman with the teachings of Chou and Muroi would render Lippman unsatisfactory

for its intended purpose.” Response at i-ii.

PatentOwnerSur‐Replyi. “Lippman and Muroi are directed to overlapping and redundant solutions to the problem of

determining when to switch between different versions of video;”ii. “[T]he proposed modification would frustrate the main goal of Lippman – to deliver the highest

quality of streaming video to the client from the outset – and change Lippman’s primary principle of operation;”

iii. “[M]odifying Lippman with the teachings of Chou and Muroi as Petitioners propose would render Lippman unsatisfactory for its intended purpose.” Sur-Reply at 1.

21


BTA. “It would not have been obvious to modify Lippman to implement Muroi’s approach for

determining when to switch between different versions of video.”Response at 28-32 (citing Rinkevich).

i. “Lippman and Muroi are directed to overlapping and redundant solutions to the problem of determining when to switch between different versions of video.”

Sur-Reply at 1.

“BT’srelianceonRinkevich isunavailing.”“The Board reversed an Examiner’s obviousness rejection based on two references, Savill and Wu, because the prior art did not support the Examiner’s rationale for combining reference teachings.” “The Examiner argued that the first reference, Savill, presented a problem—‘logging out [of one session in a data processing system] before logging on to another session’—that Wu solved.” “The Board reversed, finding that Savill already solved the identified problem and, therefore, a skilled worker ‘would not have reasonably looked to Wu to solve a problem already solved by Savill.’”

Reply at 10.

PTAB:Decision to Institute“[O]n this record, Patent Owner’s assertion does not undermine Petitioners’ persuasive showing that a skilled person would have had reason to look to Muroi to modify Lippman.”

Inst. Dec. at 22-23.

22


BTA. “It would not have been obvious to modify Lippman to implement Muroi’s approach for

determining when to switch between different versions of video.”Response at 28-32 (citing Rinkevich).


Sur-Reply at 1.

“ThepresentcircumstancesresembleUnwiredPlanet”“[A] primary reference (Brohoff) provided search results that grouped service providers by location within a geographic zone, but did not explain how service providers are prioritized within those zones.” “[A] secondary reference (Galitz) … taught different ordering techniques and the benefits of using them to the Brohoff system.”

Reply at 10.

23


BTA. “It would not have been obvious to modify Lippman to implement Muroi’s approach for determining when

to switch between different versions of video.”Response at 28-32 (citing Rinkevich).


Sur-Reply at 1.

“ThepresentcircumstancesresembleUnwiredPlanet”Reply at 10.

BT’sSur‐Reply“Brohoff disclosed ‘a system that allows users to search for information and be provided results based on their location’ but ‘[did] not explain how the service providers are prioritized.’” “The secondary reference (Galitz) disclosed ‘various ordering techniques and suggest[ed] using them in combination.’”

Sur-Reply at 8.

“Lippman describes a commercially-available product (SureStream) that switches between different versions of video based on a bandwidth measurement, but does not explain how the SureStream product measures bandwidth to perform the switching.” “Muroi describes how to perform the same switching feature as Lippman, i.e., switching between different versions of video when the volume of data in the buffer at the client exceeds or falls below certain threshold levels.”

Sur-Reply at 8-9.

24


BTB. “Modifying Lippman with Chou and Muroi would frustrate a main goal of Lippman and

change Lippman’s principle of operation.”Response at 32.

ii. “[T]he proposed modification would frustrate the main goal of Lippman – to deliver the highest quality of streaming video to the client from the outset – and change Lippman’s primary principle of operation.”

Sur-Reply at 11-13.

Lippman“Our approach measures available bandwidth and switches between separate (non-layered) video encodings to match the channel capacity.”

Lippman (Ex. 1010) at 780.

“The player collects a certain minimum amount of packets (specified by a pre-roll amount) and then starts to decode the packets and combine the decoded results into a multimedia presentation.”


“Our approach to maximizing the quality of the streamed video experience is to conduct a balancing act between maximizing bandwidth usage and not creating excessive loss by exceeding this rate.”


“[T]he player will switch to a lower or higher bandwidth stream when conditions are appropriate.”Lippman (Ex. 1010) at 781.

25


BTB.1. “Modifying Lippman to transmit low quality video at startup as taught in Chou

would change Lippman’s principle of operation.”Response at 36-37.

“[A]skilledworkerwouldrecognizethatitwouldchangeLippman’ssystemforthebetter.”

Reply at 12.

Chou:“Large start-up and seek delays are particularly annoying when the user is trying to browse through a large amount of audiovisual content trying to find a particular video or a particular location in a video. … [D]elays of two to ten seconds between aborts seem intolerable. What is needed is a method for reducing the start-up and seek delays for such ‘on demand’ interactive multimedia applications.”

Chou, Ex.1011, col. 3:8-19.

26

Lippman at 782 (annotated)



would frustrate a main goal of Lippman.”Response at 37-39.

ii. “[T]he proposed modification would frustrate the main goal of Lippman – to deliver the highest quality of streaming video to the client from the outset – and change Lippman’s primary principle of operation; “ Sur-Reply at 1.

“Lippmanneverstatesthatthequalityofvideoatinitialplaybackmustbemaintainedatthehighestquality.”

Reply at 14



“We have a strong belief in creating easily scalable content and a dynamic player/server combination that maximizes the quality of a streaming multimedia experience regardless of the vagaries of a users Internet connection.”


27



would frustrate a main goal of Lippman.”Response at 37-39.

ii. “[T]he proposed modification would frustrate the main goal of Lippman – to deliver the highest quality of streaming video to the client from the outset – and change Lippman’s primary principle of operation.” Sur-Reply at 1.

“Lippmanneverstatesthatthequalityofvideoatinitialplaybackmustbemaintainedatthehighestquality.”

Reply at 14

“A skilled worker, reading Lippman, would recognize that Chou’s fast startup technique represents further progress in streaming experiences by avoiding the ‘particularly annoying,’ ‘intolerable’ startup delays present in Lippman’s system.”

Reply at 15.

28


BTB.3. “Modifying Lippman to implement Muroi’s client-controlled scheme would further change Lippman’s principle of operation.”

“The problem, however, is that Lippman, Chou and Muroi, are directed to fundamentally different approaches to delivering streaming media, and each propose and implement different trade-offs in doing so.” “Lippman and Chou teach server control; Muroi requires client control.”

Response at 12.

Lippman“[T]he player will switch to a lower or higher bandwidth stream when conditions are appropriate.”


29


BTB.3. “Modifying Lippman to implement Muroi’s client-controlled scheme would further change Lippman’s principle of operation.”

“The problem, however, is that Lippman, Chou and Muroi, are directed to fundamentally different approaches to delivering streaming media, and each propose and implement different trade-offs in doing so.” “Lippman and Chou teach server control; Muroi requires client control.”

Response at 12.

“BT’sargumentregardingthepurportedlocationofswitching‘control’isaredherring.”

“[I]t would have been obvious for a server to switch streams in response to a client’s buffer-fullness messages that represent network bandwidth.”“Lippman does not explain how such measurements are performed. …”“Muroi teaches that the volume of data in a client’s buffer memory reflects changing ‘delivery speed of video data associated with traffic fluctuation on the delivery path,’ and, therefore, rate switching requests are sent based on the volume of data in a client buffer.”“Lu teaches the same concept: Dynamic stream switching relies on ‘estimated available bandwidth reported by a client.’”

Reply at 16-17.

30


BTC. “Modifying Lippman with the teachings of Chou and Muroi would render Lippman unsatisfactory for its intended purpose.”

“Lippman’s disclosed system implements a centralized, server-controlled scheme where a video server determines when to switch between transmitting different encoding-rate video streams to a client based on the video server’s estimate of available network bandwidth between the video server and the video client.”

Response at 45 (emphasis added); see also Sur-Reply at 1 (no. iii).

“Lippmanachieveshisgoalby‘maximizingbandwidthusageandnotcreatingexcessivelossbyexceedingthisrate.’”

“[T]he player will switch to a lower or higher bandwidth stream when conditions are appropriate.”

Lippman (Ex. 1010) at 781 (emphasis added).

“Our approach measures available bandwidth and switches between separate (non-layered) video encodings to match the channel capacity.”

Lippman (Ex. 1010) at 780 (emphasis added).

31


BTC.“Modifying Lippman with the teachings of Chou and Muroi would render Lippman unsatisfactory for its intended purpose.”

“Lippman’s disclosed system implements a centralized, server-controlled scheme where a video server determines when to switch between transmitting different encoding-rate video streams to a client based on the video server’s estimate of available network bandwidth between the video server and the video client.”

Response at 45 (emphasis added); see also Sur-Reply at 1 (no. iii).

“Muroi’stechniqueisconsistentwithLippman’sapproach.”“Lippman teaches that stream-switching should ‘maintain[] the proper amount of pre-roll data in the player.’”“Muroi’s technique preserves buffer pre-roll and ‘prevents interruptions in video display’ [Ex. 1013, ¶ 29], just as Lippman suggests.’”

Reply at 19-20 (citing Lippman (Ex. 1010) at 781, Muroi (Ex. 1013) ¶ 29).

32


BT“Lippman discloses a centralized, server-controlled scheme where a video server determines whether to switch between transmitting different versions of video encoded at different encoding rates (and having different quality levels) to a client based on the video server’s estimate of available network bandwidth between the video server and the video client.” Response at 13.








33


BT“Lippman initially transmits high quality video to the client, and switches to lower quality video if (and only if) the client begins to experience a bad internet connection.”

Sur-Reply at 10.








34


“PatentOwnerassertsthataskilledpersonwouldhavenoreasontolooktoMuroiforastreamingsolutionwhenLippmanalreadydisclosesasatisfactorystreamingsolution.”“In our view, on this record, rather than disclosing a redundant solution, Muroi discloses a specific measurement technique, while Lippman discloses measuring bandwidth without providing a specific measurement technique.”

Inst. Dec.at 23.

“PatentOwnerarguesthatMuroi’sstreamswitchingfeaturewouldrequireanevenfurtherfundamentalchangeinLippman’sprincipleofoperation.”“On this record, however, we disagree with Patent Owner’s assertion that the techniques of Lippman and Muroi are incompatible. Rather, we are sufficiently persuaded at this stage of the proceeding by Petitioners’ position that ‘Lippman does not explain how bandwidth is measured,’ whereas ‘Muroi . . . measur[es] a volume of data . . . and send[s] rate switch request messages.’”

Inst. Dec. at 26.

35


“PatentOwnercontendsthatmodifyingLippmanwithChouandMuroiwouldchangetheprincipleofoperationofLippman’ssystem.”“Ratti is inapposite because in Ratti, a prior art reference ‘did not teach . . . how to solve the problems which existed in that art at the time of . . . invention,’ whereas here, Dr. Reader testifies that Chou teaches how to solve the problems of Lippman.”“Dr. Reader testifies, ‘Lippman discloses that his pre-roll operations induce delays,’ whereas Chou recognizes that such start-up delays are ‘annoying’ and ‘intolerable.’”

Inst. Dec.at 24-25.

“PatentOwnerfurtherarguesthatmodifyingLippmanwithChouandMuroiwouldhaverequiredasubstantialredesignofLippman’ssystem.”“Petitioners are not, as we understand the Petition, proposing a bodily incorporation of Chou and Muroi into Lippman. … Petitioners propose using, in the system of Lippman, the fast start operation in Chou to overcome Lippman’s buffering delay and the switching indication in Muroi to facilitate switching streams in Lippman.”

Inst. Dec. at 26-27.36


“PatentOwnerarguesthatmodifyingLippmanwithMuroiwouldrenderLippmanunsatisfactoryforitsintendedpurpose.”“While we have given due consideration to Patent Owner’s arguments, on this record, the scenarios Patent Owner presents are speculative and supported only with conclusory declaration testimony that is entitled to little or no weight.”


37


Claim4

38


Petition“A skilled worker would recognize that [Lippman’s, Chou’s and Muroi’s] techniques can be used cooperatively with the TCP-Friendly flow controls described widely in literature.” Petition at 27.“When Chou’s teachings are applied, it would cause a skilled worker to use Lippman’s server to switch to a higher rate coding and transmit it at increasingly higher transmission rates according to the probe-lose-throttle” principle. See Ex. 1008, § VII.A.1 (discussing probe-lose-throttle” techniques).” Petition at 54.

PTAB“[A]t this stage, we determine that Petitioners’ arguments with respect to limitation [4.6][c] are not persuasive.” Inst. Dec. at 29-31.

Element[4.6][c]“wherein said second plurality of second-encoding-rate data packets are transmitted at a second transmission rate which is higher than said first transmission rate." Petition at 54.

BT’sSur‐Reply“Probe-lose-throttle argument is untimely.”Element [4.6][c] “was not a byproduct of probe-lose-throttle rate controls in ordinary Internet protocols.”“The prior art teaches away from using TCP’s ordinary probe-lose-throttle mechanism with video transmission.” Sur-Reply at ii.

4. A method of operating a communication apparatus comprising a data sender, a data presentation device having a store, and a network connecting said data sender and said data presentation device, said method comprising:operating said data sender to transmit a first plurality of first-encoding-rate data packets encoded at a first encoding rate to said data presentation device, wherein said first plurality of first-encoding-rate data packets are transmitted at a first transmission rate which is higher than said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets;operating said data presentation device to:

receive said first plurality of first encoding rate data packets into said store;read out said received first-encoding-rate data packets from said store at a data rate equal to said first encoding rate of said first-encoding-rate data packets for decoding so as to present to a user at a first level of quality, wherein the removing of said first-encoding-rate data packets from said store is initiated when said first-encoding-rate data packets first arrive at said store;on said store being filled with data packets to a predetermined level, sending an indication to said data sender that said predetermined level has been reached;

operating said data sender, on receipt of said indication from said data presentation device, to transmit a second plurality of second-encoding-rate data packets encoded at a second encoding rate to said data presentation device, wherein said second plurality of second-encoding-rate data packets are transmitted at a second transmission rate which is higher than said first transmission rate; and wherein said second encoding rate is higher than said first encoding rate;operating said data presentation device to:

receive said second plurality of second-encoding-rate data packets into said store;read out said second-encoding-rate data packets from said store at a data rate equal to said second encoding rate of said second-encoding-rate data packets for decoding, so as to present to said user at a second level of quality, wherein said second level of quality is higher than said first level of quality.

39


“BackgroundKnowledgeofaSkilledWorker”“[T]he skilled worker would understand basic operational protocols at work in the Internet.”“[T]he Internet is a packet-based delivery network that operates according to a ‘best effort’ model.”“Several protocols support packet communication over the Internet, including the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) and the User Datagram Protocol (UDP).”“As originally designed, TCP included protocols to manage congestion over the Internet.”“When packet loss is discovered, for example, source devices on the Internet reduce their transmission rates for a time, then gradually increase their transmission rates in an effort to determine if higher rate transmission can be supported. Id. See also, Ex. 1001, Col. 2:55-67, Ex. 1014, p. 747 (called the ‘probe-lose-throttle’ principle).”

Petition at 11-12.

40


The’200Patent“The Internet protocol TCP has a built-in control mechanism whereby the data transmission rate is steadily increased until packet loss is detected, whereupon the data rate is reduced. The data rate is then increased again until packet loss reoccurs. A variable transmission rate is said to be elastic and applications which are able to control the transmission rate of data in response to network conditions are said to be TCP-friendly. … A further benefit of TCP-friendly data delivery is that congestion in the network is managed as individual applications themselves reduce data rates until each has a fair share of the bandwidth.”

Ex. 1001, col. 2:55-67 (cited by Petition at 11-12).

Lee(Ex.1014)“The sender estimates the available connection capacity by probing the network, i.e. periodically incrementing the transmission rate till some router drops a packet due to queue overflow. Upon detecting this loss via end-to-end feedback from the receiver, the sender throttles the transmission rate by a large multiplicative factor (typically 0.5).”

Ex. 1014 at 747 (cited by Petition at 11-12).

41


Ground1“A skilled worker also would recognize that these techniques can be used cooperatively with the TCP-Friendly flow controls described widely in literature. SeeEx. 1008, § VII.A.1 (discussing ‘source quench’ and ‘slow start’ operations (Exs. 1016-1017) and applications to Internet video (Exs. 1014, 1020-1024). Thus, a skilled worker would recognize that, over the course of the streaming session, transmission rates would rise from an initial, relatively-slow transmission rate to a higher steady-state transmission rate.”

Petition at 27.

42


SourceQuenchOperation“RFC 896 describes techniques to address congestion collapse. As part of these techniques, devices send ‘source quench’ messages to senders whenever a packet is dropped. Id., p. 7. When a sender receives a source quench message, the sender reduces the amount of data to be sent. Id. Communication can continue but at a reduced rate. Id., p. 8. Sending at the reduced rate continues until predetermined number of acknowledgements are received at which time the sending TCP returns to normal operation. Id. Source quench messages are codified in RFC 1122 (Ex. 1018). When the ‘200 Patent refers to TCP’s built-in protocol for reducing data transmission when packet loss is detected (Ex. 1001, Col. 2:55-58), it describes such protocols.”

Ex. 1008 ¶ 65.

43


SlowStartProtocol“RFC 2581 defines a ‘slow start’ protocol that governs an amount of data to be injected into a network by TCP. Ex. 1017, § 3.1. The bandwidth available to a TCP entity cannot be known prior to transmission, and it would be inappropriate to inject a large amount of data suddenly into the network. Id. The slow start protocol limits the amount of data that a sender may transmit into the network without an acknowledgment (ACK) from a receiver. Id. TCP is required to probe the network slowly to determine available capacity. The sending TCP increments the amount of data it sends into the network in a controlled way each time it receives an acknowledgment from the receiver. Id.”

Ex. 1008 ¶ 66.

44


Petition at 18 Reply at 25

“TCP‐Friendly”Transmission TCP/IPTransmission

45


Dr.Polish’sSecondDeclaration:“[P]resented a new reference, Rejaie (Ex. 2006), that further corroborates Dr. Reader’s explanation of probe-lose-throttle techniques:”

Reply at 26-27

Dr.Polish: Rejaie FIG. 1 “appears to be an example of such a rate control protocol.” Ex. 1034 at 85-87

46


Ex. 1034 at 85-86.


Ex. 1034 at 86-87.


QuestionsfromBoard“First, the parties should address whether the ‘Target Total Bitrates’ in Lippman’s table are transmission rates, as Lippman does not appear to describe the ‘Target Total Bitrates’ as transmission rates.”“Second, the parties should address whether the asserted second-encoding-rate data packets in Lippman are transmitted at a second transmission rate that is higher than the first transmission rate.”


49


QuestionsfromBoard“First, the parties should address whether the ‘Target Total Bitrates’ in Lippman’s table are transmission rates, as Lippman does not appear to describe the ‘Target Total Bitrates’ as transmission rates.”


Petitioners’Reply“On the first issue, Lippman teaches that, when the Internet is uncongested, the system transmits coded video at the Target Total Bitrates shown in Lippman’s table.”“[C]onsumers access Lippman’s system through different Internet access devices, such as 28.8k modems, 56k modems, Single ISDN devices, and Dual ISDN devices. Pet. at 15-17, 52-54.” “Lippman’s system transmits data according to the UDP protocol (Ex. 1010 at 780), in which applications (e.g., RealSystem) manage packetization and congestion avoidance.”

Reply at 23.

50


QuestionsfromBoard“First, the parties should address whether the ‘Target Total Bitrates’ in Lippman’s table are transmission rates, as Lippman does not appear to describe the ‘Target Total Bitrates’ as transmission rates.”


Petitioners’Reply“Thus, in the absence of Internet congestion, RealSystem transmits coded video at transmission rates (orange) associated with each device’s type:”

These transmission rates exceed the video’s coding rate (green).Reply at 24-25.

51


QuestionsfromBoard“Second, the parties should address whether the asserted second-encoding-rate data packets in Lippman are transmitted at a second transmission rate that is higher than the first transmission rate.”


Petitioners’Reply“Second, although Lippman does not disclose that packets are transmitted at a second transmission rate that is higher than the first transmission rate, the Petition explains that this feature is rendered obvious by ‘probe-lose-throttle’ rate control techniques that are prevalent in ordinary Internet protocols and are known as part of the background knowledge of the ordinarily skilled worker. See Pet. at 12 (citing Ex. 1014 at 747), 53 (citing Ex. 1008 § VII.A.1).” “In this technique, a server transmits packets at ever-increasing transmission rates (the ‘probe’) until a packet is lost (‘lose’), at which time the server drops the transmission rate to a lower level (‘throttle’), and the process repeats.”

Reply at 24.

52


Response“BT Does not address probe-lose-throttle technique anywhere in POR.”

Reply at 25.

Sur‐Reply“Probe-lose-throttle argument is untimely.”“‘[T]ransmit[ting] a second plurality of second encoding rate data packets … at a second transmission rate which is higher than said first transmission rate’ is not a byproduct of probe-lose-throttle controls in ordinary Internet protocols.”“The prior art teaches away from using TCP’s ordinary probe-lose-throttle mechanism with video transmission.”

Sur-Reply at ii.

53


Lippman“[T]he player will switch to a lower or higher bandwidth stream when conditions are appropriate.”

Ex. 1010 at 781.

BT“Lippman’s statement does not address which end decides/determines whether to switch, only that the switch is made. But Lippman’s server – not the client – decides whether to switch between streaming different versions of video to an individual client based on the ‘channel capacity’ from the server to the client.” “Discussing Lippman’s SureStream protocol, Lu states: ‘The idea is that the server can switch among multiple streams to serve a client with one that best matches the client’s available bandwidth. The switching is dynamic, depending on the estimated available bandwidth reported by a client and the server’s decision on whether it will respond.’”

Sur-Reply at 3-4.

54

IPR2019-00833

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Petitioners' Demonstrative

Exhibits were served upon counsel for Patent Owner via email:

Jeffrey P. Armstrong [email protected]

Daniel A. Boehnen [email protected]

Grantland G. Drutchas [email protected]

George T. Lyons, III [email protected]

Date: June 1, 2020 / Robert L. Hails / Robert L. Hails

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE …

Documents

Transcript of UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE …