Veeam Software Corporation
`v.
`Symantec
`
`IPR2013-00141, 00142, 00143,
`and 00150
`
`DEMONSTRATIVES OF PETITIONER
`Veeam Software Corporation
`
`
`v.
`Symantec
`
`IPR2013-00141, 00142, 00143,
`and 00150
`
`DEMONSTRATIVES OF PETITIONER
`Veeam Software Corporation
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`
`IPR2013-00150
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`
`|PR2013-00150
`
`2
`
`
`
`Claims 1 and 12
`
`1. A computer readable medium storing a
`plurality of instructions comprising
`instructions which, when executed:
`(i) capture a state of a first virtual machine
`executing on a first computer system, the
`state of the first virtual machine
`corresponding to a point in time in the
`execution of the first virtual machine,
`wherein the first virtual machine comprises
`at least one virtual disk storing at least one
`file used by at least one application
`executing in the first virtual machine, and
`wherein the state of the first virtual
`machine comprises the at least one file;
`and
`(ii) copy at least a portion of the state to a
`destination separate from a storage device
`to which the first virtual machine is
`suspendable, wherein suspending the first
`virtual machine is performed responsive to
`a suspend command.
`
`12. An apparatus comprising: a first computer
`system configured to execute at least a first
`virtual machine, wherein the first computer
`system is configured to:
`(i) capture a state of the first virtual machine,
`the state corresponding to a point in time in
`the execution of the first virtual machine,
`wherein the first virtual machine comprises
`at least one virtual disk storing at least one
`file used by at least one application
`executing in the first virtual machine, and
`wherein the state of the first virtual
`machine comprises the at least one file;
`and
`(ii) copy at least a portion of the state to a
`destination separate from a storage device
`to which the first virtual machine is
`suspendable, wherein suspending the first
`virtual machine is performed responsive to
`a suspend command.
`
`3
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`Claims 11 and 22
`
`11. The computer readable medium as recited in claim 1 wherein
`(i) comprises creating a new log of uncommitted updates for each
`virtual disk in the first virtual machine and creating a memory area
`to capture writes to a memory of the first virtual machine, such that
`the first virtual machine can continue executing during (ii).
`
`22. The apparatus as recited in claim 12 wherein (i) comprises
`creating a new log of uncommitted updates for each virtual disk in
`the first virtual machine and creating a memory area to capture
`writes to a memory of the first virtual machine, such that the first
`virtual machine can continue executing during (ii).
`
`4
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`The independent claims are not limited to
`“backup”
`
`2. The computer readable medium as recited
`in claim 1 wherein the destination is a backup
`medium coupled to the first computer system
`and used to backup data from the first
`computer system.
`
`the checkpoint
`“[T]he backup program 42,
`program 76, and/or the recovery program 78
`(or portions thereof) may be implemented as
`part of the VM kernel.”(’086 patent, 14:11-14.)
`
`1. A computer readable medium storing a
`plurality of instructions comprising
`instructions which, when executed:
`(i) capture a state of a first virtual machine
`executing on a first computer system, the
`state of the first virtual machine
`corresponding to a point in time in the
`execution of the first virtual machine,
`wherein the first virtual machine
`comprises at least one virtual disk
`storing at least one file used by at least
`one application executing in the first
`virtual machine, and wherein the state of
`the first virtual machine comprises the at
`least one file; and
`(ii) copy at least a portion of the state to a
`destination separate from a storage
`device to which the first virtual machine
`is suspendable, wherein suspending the
`first virtual machine is performed
`responsive to a suspend command.
`
`5
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, p. 3
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`“State”
`
`The Board
`construed
`“state” as:
`
`“information regarding the [first] virtual machine to permit
`the virtual machine to resume execution of the application
`at the point in time the state was captured.”
`
`PO In this
`Proceeding:
`
`PO In the
`District
`Court:
`
`6
`
`•
`
`•
`
`“capturing the state of a virtual machine . . . requires capturing all
`of the information that is needed to resume execution of the
`virtual machine on any computer.” (PO Response, p. 26.)
`In particular, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have
`recognized that a configuration information must be captured
`according to the proper construction of the term “state of a virtual
`machine.” (PO Response, p. 26.)
`
`“The patent specification uses the term “state” broadly to
`potentially include any of a variety of information regarding
`the virtual machine, and the construction should reflect this
`usage.” (Symc CC Opening Brief, p. 6; see also Veeam Reply, p. 4..)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`The claims do not require the VM to execute during
`capture
`
`1. A computer readable medium storing a plurality of
`instructions comprising instructions which, when
`executed:
`(i) capture a state of a first virtual machine executing on
`a first computer system, the state of the first virtual
`machine corresponding to a point in time in the
`execution of the first virtual machine, wherein the first
`virtual machine comprises at least one virtual disk
`storing at least one file used by at least one
`application executing in the first virtual machine, and
`wherein the state of the first virtual machine
`comprises the at least one file; and
`(ii) copy at least a portion of the state to a destination
`separate from a storage device to which the first
`virtual machine is suspendable, wherein
`suspending the first virtual machine is performed
`responsive to a suspend command.
`
`11. The computer readable medium as recited
`in claim 1
`
`wherein (i) comprises creating a new log of
`uncommitted updates for each virtual disk in
`the first virtual machine and creating a
`memory area to capture writes to a memory of
`the first virtual machine, such that the first
`virtual machine can continue executing during
`(ii).
`
`10. The computer readable medium as
`recited in claim 1 wherein (i) comprises
`suspending the first virtual machine, and
`wherein the instructions, when executed,
`resume the first virtual machine on the first
`computer system subsequent to (ii).
`
`7
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, pp. 5-6
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`Lim discloses capturing “state”
`
`“the total machine state is the entire
`collection of all information that is
`necessary and sufficient to uniquely
`determine the status of all hardware and
`software components at the completion of
`any given processor instruction.” (Lim, 10:26-30)
`
`(Second Shenoy Decl., ¶ 17)
`
`8
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, p. 9
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`PO’s Expert Agrees
`
`(Ex. 1026., 257:11-259-24)
`
`(Ex. 1026., 257:11-258-24)
`
`9
`
`(Ex. 1026., 284:4-7)
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, p. 9
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`“Memory Area”
`
`PO in litigation contends that this is a reasonable interpretation:
`
`“VMware creates a memory area to capture writes to a
`memory of the first virtual machine in response to a
`snapshot call
`from VBR6, such that
`the first virtual
`machine can continue executing during (ii). The
`allocation of memory is a requirement for a running
`machine.” (Symantec Infring. Contentions, p. 12; see also Veeam’s Reply, p. 12.).)
`
`10
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`Lim & “Memory Area”
`
`state vector
`
`Updates
`
`state vector
`
`Mem. Updates
`
`state vector
`
`Mem. Updates
`
`Memory partition
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, pp. 11-12
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`(Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 21)
`
`(Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 21)
`
`(Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 22)
`
`11
`
`
`
`ESX/GSG .REDO logs store “state”
`
`“When the virtual machine is operating, “changes are saved in a redo-log file.”
`(VMware ESX, p. 39.) These changes stored in the redo log include any
`modification to a virtual disk made during execution of the virtual machine.
`(VMware ESX, p. 94.) As a result, any files that are changed while a redo log is
`active will be placed in the redo log.” (Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 26)
`
`“Depending on the application, this may be enough to resume execution of the
`application.” (Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 26)
`
`“[I]f the application is the well-known Microsoft Notepad application, merely
`saving the currently open file in the redo log would be enough to permit the
`Windows Notepad application to resume execution at the point-in-time of the
`capture, as all it needs is the file.” (Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 26)
`
`12
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, p. 10
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`GSG discloses copying “state”
`
`“In other words, the VMware workstation software
`intercepts writes unbeknownst to the software
`running in the virtual machine and redirects them to
`the redo log file instead of the disk file. ” (Second Shenoy
`Decl.,¶ 33)
`
`“All writes to an undoable disk issued by
`software running inside the virtual
`machines appear to be written to the
`disk, but are in fact stored in a temporary
`file (.REDO).” (GSG, 4-2.)
`“For the VMware workstation software to intercept the
`data intended to be written disks, the data naturally
`must first be stored in a different location than the disk
`or it would defeat the purpose of redirecting the writes
`to the redo log file.” (Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 33)
`
`“This “different location” where the data is
`first stored is the memory of the computer
`running the virtual machine.” (Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 34)
`
`13
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, p. 10
`
`“That is, if the data were first written to
`disk before being written to the redo log,
`it would defeat the purpose of only
`storing updates in the redo log.”(Second
`Shenoy Decl.,¶ 33)
`
`“In fact in the types of architectures (i.e.
`Intel Pentium or compatible processor)
`that the VMware workstation 1.0 product
`is compatible with, it is well known that
`all writes intended for disk must first be
`stored in memory (either RAM or
`processor register memory) because
`that is how Intel processors executes
`disk write instructions.”(Second Shenoy Decl.,¶
`33)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`ESX discloses copying “state”
`
`(VEEAM 1005, p. 106; see also Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 32)
`
`14
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, p. 13
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`ESX discloses copying “state”
`
`Patent Owner
`contends that
`vmkfstools requires
`the VM to be stopped
`based on the
`following Tech note:
`
`But, the Tech note is
`for different versions of
`ESX:
`
`15
`
`(VEEAM 1028; see also Second Shenoy Decl.,¶ 31)
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, p. 13
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`A PHOSITA would have combined Suzaki and Wang
`
`• Both describe checkpointing:
`
`Wang
`
`“‘checkpointing’ [to] record[]
`critical memory and file state
`at a given point of program
`execution on stable storage.”
`
`(Wang, p. 304.)
`
`Suzaki
`“[W]e developed a checkpoint
`function which makes it
`possible to take a snapshot of
`the state information without
`stopping the virtual computer.”
`(Suzaki, p. 5.).
`
`• Both concerned with the “consistency and
`recoverability of data”
`
`(First Shenoy Decl.,¶ 32, 35, 37; see also Petition, p. 34)
`16
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`The claims only require one application
`
`Patent Owner contends:
`“Suzaki teaches recording information about each
`application individually over a period of time. As a
`result, information for different applications is
`recorded at different points in time in the execution
`of the system.” (PO Response, p. 47)
`
`(Green Tr., 285:18-22.)
`
`17
`
`Veeam Reply Brief, p. 14
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`IPR2013-00150
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`© 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox P.L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`
`IPR2013-00143
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`
`IPR2013-00143
`
`18
`
`
`
`Replicating Said Storage Volume
`
`Petitioner
`“updating a second storage volume
`to cause the second storage volume
`to be consistent with a first or primary
`storage volume” (Petition, pg. 5)
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Patent Owner
`“creating a duplicate copy of the storage
`volume.”
`“with respect to claims 1 and 14, this
`‘replication’ should be further interpreted to
`include the ‘copying’ and ‘synchronizing’
`steps recited in these claims (i.e., an initial
`synchronization process).”
`“with respect to claims 12 and 15, this
`‘replication’ should be further interpreted to
`include the ‘copying’ and ‘restoring’ steps
`recited in these claims (i.e., an periodic
`replication sub-process)” (Patent Owner
`Response, pgs. 28-29)
`
`Board
`“copying data from said first point-in-time copy of said first storage
`volume to a second storage volume” (Institution Decision, pg. 6)
`
`19
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191.299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Board’s Construction is Supported by Claim Language
`
`In claim 1, the data is copied directly to the second storage volume while in claim 12, the data
`is first copied to a point-in-time copy of the second storage volume, followed by restoring that
`data to the second storage volume. It is my opinion that the Board’s construction still describes
`both replicating steps performed in claims 1 and 12. (Second Shenoy Decl., ¶8)
`
`20
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Argued Opposite Position in District Court
`
`Patent Owner’s argument that claims 1 and 14 are directed towards “initial
`synchronization” is contrary to their position taken in the co-pending district
`court litigation. (Petitioner Reply., pgs. 4-5)
`
`Claim Construction Brief, pg. 9
`
`that Patent Owner even argued that claims 1 and 14 are not limited to
`“initial synchronization” in the district court, shows that Patent Owner
`recognizes that the term has broader meaning than it now argues.
`(Petitioner Reply., pgs. 5-6)
`
`21
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Claims 1 and 14 are Not Limited to Initial Synchronization
`
`Patent Owner’s argument that claim 14 is directed towards “initial
`synchronization” is contradicted by plain language of claim 14. (Petitioner
`Reply, pg. 5)
`
`“I note that nothing in the claim
`language requires that the
`“synchronization” occurs for the
`first time between the first point-in-
`time copy of the first storage
`volume and the second storage
`volume.” (Second Shenoy Decl.,
`¶10)
`
`22
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Point-in-Time Copy
`
`Petitioner
`“the term point-in-time copy is
`broad enough to cover both a
`changed-block point-in-time copy
`and a ‘full’ point-in-time copy”
`(Petition, pg. 7)
`
`Patent Owner
`“a snapshot volume having
`locations that include a complete
`or virtual copy of each data block
`on the storage volume as it
`existed at a particular point in
`time.” (Patent Owner Response,
`pg. 34)
`
`Board
`“partial or complete copy of another data volume as it existed
`at a particular point in time” (Institution Decision, pg. 6)
`
`23
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Construction Disregards
`Space-Optimized Snapshots
`
`(‘299 Patent, 4:48-53)
`
`Based on the disclosure of the “space-
`optimized” snapshots, I believe that the Patent
`[Owner] incorrectly argues that “there is no
`mention in the ‘299 Patent of any point-in-time
`copies that are used to capture only a portion
`or part of the underlying storage volume.”
`(Second Shenoy Decl., ¶12)
`
`24
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`The two patents incorporated by reference do not disclose
`space-optimized point-in-time copies
`
`(‘789 patent, FIG. 3)
`
`(‘053 patent, FIG. 3)
`
`“because the virtual copy disclosed in the ’789 Patent includes the same number of
`equal size data blocks as the original memory volume, the virtual copy of the ’789
`Patent is not “space-optimized” in any way because it would take up the same
`amount of space as the original volume.” (Second Shenoy Decl., ¶14)
`
`“the point-in-time copy disclosed in the ’053 Patent includes the same number of
`equal size data blocks as the original volume” (Second Shenoy Decl., ¶15)
`
`25
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Point-in-Time Copy
`
`Patent Owner:
`
`“even when a space-optimized instant snapshot is used, it
`still has a block or location (albeit, often an empty one)
`corresponding to each data block on the storage volume.”
`(Patent Owner Response, pg. 33)
`
`Patent Owner
`Is Incorrect:
`
`“When data blocks on a storage volume have been
`allocated for a given purpose, those blocks are still taking
`up space on the storage volume even if the blocks contain
`no data. . . As such, having blocks allocated that
`correspond to each data block on a storage volume is not
`‘space optimized’ in any way.” (Second Shenoy Decl., ¶16)
`
`26
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Ohran
`
`(First Shenoy Decl., p. 15)
`
`27
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Ohran Snapshots an Entire Storage
`Volume
`
`Patent Owner:
`
`“unlike the point-in-time snapshot volume in the '299
`Patent, these elements in Ohran are, at best, only a copy
`of a portion of the storage device at a point in time.”
`(Patent Owner Response, pg. 41; emphasis added)
`
`Patent Owner
`Is Incorrect:
`
`“embodiments within the scope of this invention use a
`static snapshot of all or part of the mass storage device
`during the backup process.”
`(Ohran, 8:51-53; emphasis added)
`
`28
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Synchronization in Ohran
`
`Patent Owner:
`
`argues that “It is clear from Ohran’s disclosure, however, that
`[Ohran’s] backup processes do not perform any type of initial
`synchronization (e.g., to initially create and synchronize a
`replicated, second storage volume.)” (Patent Owner Response,
`pg. 36)
`Patent Owner’s expert testified that Ohran maintains synchronization between its
`primary volume and its backup system using snapshots.
`(Petitioner Reply, pg. 11)
`
`(Levy Deposition Tr, 108:18-24)
`“Ohran discloses that a full copy of the first storage volume can be transferred in the
`instance in which the entire first storage volume has been changed.” (Institution
`Decision, pg. 11)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`29
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Ohran Discloses a Second Point-in-Time Copy
`
`Patent Owner:
`
`“Ohran’s backup-capture buffer fails to disclose a point-in-time copy
`of the second storage volume.” (Patent Owner Response, pg. 44)
`
`Patent Owner
`Is Incorrect:
`
`“Given the Board’s construction for a point-in-time copy (that it can
`be a partial or complete copy of another data volume at a point in
`time), I believe the backup buffer in Ohran fits this description since
`it contains a partial copy (i.e., the changed data) of a first data
`volume at a given time before copying that data to a second storage
`volume” (Second Shenoy Decl., ¶18)
`
`“The backup buffer of Ohran contains only modified data from a first
`storage volume. This data is used to in-turn modify the data of the
`second storage volume. At this point, the backup buffer also
`contains modified data from the second storage volume. Thus, it is
`my opinion that the backup buffer of Ohran is an example of the
`space optimized snapshot disclosed in the ’299 Patent.” (Second
`Shenoy Decl., ¶19)
`
`30
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Kleiman Explicitly Discloses Backing Up
`Storage Volumes
`
`(Kleiman, ¶[0098])
`
`(Kleiman, ¶[0118])
`
`(Kleiman, ¶[0116])
`
`31
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Even under Patent Owner’s interpretation,
`Kleiman discloses backing up storage volumes
`
`Patent Owner:
`
`“a storage volume is a collection of fixed-size data blocks or regions.”
`(Patent Owner Response, pg. 48)
`
`Kleiman’s File System is
`a collection of storage blocks
`
`(Kleiman, ¶[0035])
`
`Kleiman’s blocks are fixed size
`
`* The word “size” was incorrectly transcribed as “file”
`(Levy Deposition Tr., 124:16-20)
`
`32
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`Kleiman Disclose Point-In-Time Copies
`
`Patent Owner:
`
`Kleiman “fails to disclose any point-in-time copies that
`include copies of any of the actual data blocks in its file
`system.” (Patent Owner Response, pg. 49)
`
`Patent Owner
`Is Incorrect:
`
`When a data block is updated and written to a new block
`location (as used in a WAFL system), the older data block
`must somehow be ‘copied’ in order to generate the updated
`data block. Indeed, one cannot have a ‘modified block’
`without starting with an ‘original block.’ (Second Shenoy
`Decl., ¶21)
`
`33
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,191,299
`IPR2013-00143
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`
`IPR2013-00141 and 00142
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`
`|PR2013-00141 and 00142
`
`34
`
`
`
`BMR References: Same Architecture
`
`The ‘558 Specification
`
`BMR Webpages
`(from the whitepaper)
`
`BMR Guide
`
`35
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`BMR References:
`Same Restoration Process
`
`BMR References (VSC1002 & VSC1003)
`
`36
`
`The ‘558 Specification
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`FIG. 5 Describes Operation of BMR Server
`(steps 402-406 of FIG 4)
`
`FIG. 5 describes operating a BMR server
`“according to the methods 200, 400 of
`FIGS. 2 and 4.” (‘558 patent, 7:36)
`
`“it is my opinion that steps 504 and 506
`actually disclose that the configuration
`data from step 404 in figure 4 includes
`information such as the disk structure
`and disk format given that Figure 5 is
`presented according to the method of
`Figure 4. Similarly, steps 508 and 510 of
`Figure 5 provide further detail of step 406
`in Figure 4.”
`(Second Shenoy Decl., ¶9)
`
`37
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`“client disk configuration information”
`
`Board Construction: “information regarding disk
`partitions, volume groups, logical volumes, and/or
`file systems.” (Institution Decision, p. 7.)
`
`1
`
`2
`
`11
`
`17
`
`18
`
`38
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`BMR References Save Client Disk
`Configuration Information
`
`When BMR saves the state of a machine,
`it saves disk configuration information:
`
`“all of the clients files are backed up, and a program is
`automatically run before the backup is performed to save the
`state of the machine configuration.” (BMR Webpages, pg. 2)
`
`“The ‘state’ of a computer or the computer’s ‘configuration information’ that is
`backed up as disclosed in the BMR References must include some sort of disk
`configuration information, since the disk is later configured in step 6 of the
`restoration process. Information regarding the partitions, logical volumes, and
`filesystems must have been previously saved in order for the system to know
`what to restore.” (Second Shenoy Decl., ¶13)
`
`39
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`BMR References Restore Client Disk
`Configuration Information
`
`When BMR restores a client machine,
`it restores disk configuration information:
`
`“It is my opinion that performing a complete restore or a “clone” of a
`machine would have to involve the disk(s) of that machine, in order
`to capture all of the data on the disk(s).” (Second Shenoy Decl., ¶11)
`
`“The restoration process kicks off with the BMR server retrieving the
`client’s configuration data. It would be logical, and readily apparent to one
`having ordinary skill in the art, that this configuration data includes data
`regarding how to configure the client device, which would include
`configuring the client’s disk as illustrated in step 6 of the restoration
`process.” (Second Shenoy Decl., ¶13)
`
`40
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`Goshey Discloses “Resetting the Client Device”
`
`(Goshey, 3:9-14)
`
`“A re-boot is a well-known term of the art. One
`having ordinary skill in the art would
`understand that by saying ‘re-boot’ rather than
`just ‘boot,’ the connotation is that the computer
`is already running when the boot is requested,
`thus requiring a reset of the computer first to
`start the re-boot process ” (first Shenoy Decl.,
`¶49)
`
`41
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`Goshey Saves Client Disk Configuration Information
`
`Goshey explicitly discloses backing up disk configuration information
`within an image file that is copied during an initial backup:
`
`“this image file is created and copied to the peripheral storage
`media during the initial backup . . . the image file will contain the
`items identified in table A below.” (Goshey, 15:48-67)
`
`42
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`Deshayes Backs Up and Restores Client Disk
`Configuration Information
`
`(Deshayes, 11:7-19)
`
`43
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,558
`IPR2013-00141 , 00142
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
`
`Case IPR2013-00150
`U.S. Patent No. 7,093,086
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that on this 2nd day of May, 2014, “Veeam’s
`
`Updated Demonstratives” was served electronically via e-mail upon the following
`
`counsel for Patent Owner, Symantec, Inc.:
`
`Joseph J. Richetti, Reg. No. 47,024
`BRYAN CAVE LLP
`1290 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10104
`joe.richetti@bryancave.com
`
`
`
`Daniel Crowe, Reg. No. 39,644
`BRYAN CAVE LLP
`One Metropolitan Square
`211 North Broadway, Suite 3600
`St. Louis, MO 63102-2750
`dacrowe@bryancave.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`
` _______________________________
`
`
`
` Lori A. Gordon
`Date: May 2, 2014
` Attorney for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`1100 New York Avenue, N.W. Registration No. 50,633
`Washington, D.C.20005-3934
`(202) 371-2600
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
