Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 1 of 84 PageID# 1925
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`Richmond Division
`
`Case No. 3:15cv720-JAG
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`LIMELIGHT NETWORKS, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff and Counterclaim
` Defendant,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`XO COMMUNICATIONS, LLC.,
`
`
`
`Defendant,
`
`AKAMAI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
` Defendant and Counterclaim
` Plaintiff,
`
`MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF
`TECHNOLOGY,
`
` Counterclaim Plaintiff.
`
`OPENING DECLARATION OF KEVIN C. ALMEROTH
`REGARDING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`Akamai 1008
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 2 of 84 PageID# 1926
`
`I.(cid:1)
`II.(cid:1)
`III.(cid:1)
`IV.(cid:1)
`
`Table of Contents
`
`“the data source is configured to monitor a first connection
`
`BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 1(cid:1)
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................... 8(cid:1)
`ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ................................................................................... 9(cid:1)
`CLAIM TERMS .............................................................................................................. 10(cid:1)
`A.(cid:1)
`324 Patent ............................................................................................................. 10(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`“Uniform Resource Indicator” ................................................................. 11(cid:1)
`B.(cid:1)
`155 Patent ............................................................................................................. 14(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`for a request” ............................................................................................ 14(cid:1)
`002 Patent ............................................................................................................. 17(cid:1)
`C.(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`“cache hierarchy” ..................................................................................... 18(cid:1)
`348 Patent ............................................................................................................. 19(cid:1)
`D.(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`“acceleration techniques” ......................................................................... 19(cid:1)
`577 Patent ............................................................................................................. 23(cid:1)
`E.(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`“resource” ................................................................................................ 23(cid:1)
`2.(cid:1)
`“policy reconciliation service” ................................................................. 24(cid:1)
`3.(cid:1)
`“policy manager” ..................................................................................... 26(cid:1)
`4.(cid:1)
`“policy store” ........................................................................................... 29(cid:1)
`5.(cid:1)
`“mutator” .................................................................................................. 30(cid:1)
`6.(cid:1)
`“disposition parameter” ........................................................................... 33(cid:1)
`7.(cid:1)
`“applicability criteria” / “applicability parameter” .................................. 34(cid:1)
`8.(cid:1)
`“metadata” ................................................................................................ 35(cid:1)
`9.(cid:1)
`“tag” ......................................................................................................... 36(cid:1)
`133 Patent ............................................................................................................. 38(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`“protocol/communication protocol” ........................................................ 38(cid:1)
`
`F.(cid:1)
`
`i
`
`

`
`“high performance protocol/ high performance communication
`protocol/ communication protocol that it designed to be of higher
`
`“standard/standardized communication protocol” ................................... 43(cid:1)
`2.(cid:1)
`3.(cid:1)
`performance than a prevailing standard communication protocol” ......... 49(cid:1)
`“node” ...................................................................................................... 54(cid:1)
`4.(cid:1)
`959 Patent ............................................................................................................. 58(cid:1)
`“a CDN name service”/ “CDN name server(s)” ...................................... 59(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`2.(cid:1)
`originate” .................................................................................................. 64(cid:1)
`102 Patent ............................................................................................................. 68(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`“domain name service” and “DNS” ......................................................... 68(cid:1)
`178 Patent ............................................................................................................. 70(cid:1)
`1.(cid:1)
`“CDN storage sites” ................................................................................. 71(cid:1)
`2.(cid:1)
`“value that identifies the [first/second] content storage directory” ......... 79(cid:1)
`
`G.(cid:1)
`
`H.(cid:1)
`I.(cid:1)
`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 3 of 84 PageID# 1927
`
`“based on where the first and second DNS queries originate” /
`“based on where the respective first and second DNS queries
`
`ii
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 4 of 84 PageID# 1928
`
`I, Kevin C. Almeroth, hereby declare and state as follows:
`
`1.(cid:1)
`
`Counsel for Limelight Networks, Inc. (“Limelight”) have retained me as an
`
`expert to offer opinions regarding certain claim construction issues for U.S. Patent Nos.
`
`7,715,324; 8,750,155; 8,683,002; 9,015,348; 8,615,577; 6,820,133; 7,693,959; 8,122,102; and
`
`7,472,178.
`
`2.(cid:1)
`
`I submit this declaration based on my personal knowledge and in support of
`
`Limelight’s proposed claim constructions. If called upon as a witness, I could competently testify
`
`to the truth of each statement herein.
`
`3.(cid:1)
`
`In forming my opinions expressed herein, I have reviewed the above-mentioned
`
`patents, as well as their prosecution histories, along with dictionaries both technical and non-
`
`technical, and other sources that I identify in the paragraphs below.
`
`I.(cid:1)
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`1.(cid:1)
`
`My name is Kevin C. Almeroth. I am currently a Professor in the Department of
`
`Computer Science at the University of California, Santa Barbara. I also hold an appointment and
`
`am a founding member of the Computer Engineering (CE) Program. I am a founding member of
`
`the Media Arts and Technology (MAT) Program, and the Technology Management Program
`
`(TMP). I also served as the Associate Director of the Center for Information Technology and
`
`Society (CITS) from 1999 to 2012. I have been a faculty member at UCSB since July 1997.
`
`2.(cid:1)
`
`I hold three degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology: (1) a Bachelor of
`
`Science degree in Information and Computer Science (with minors in Economics, Technical
`
`Communication, and American Literature) earned in June, 1992; (2) a Master of Science degree
`
`in Computer Science (with specialization in Networking and Systems) earned in June, 1994; and
`
`(3) a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree in Computer Science (Dissertation Title: Networking
`
`1
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 5 of 84 PageID# 1929
`
`and System Support for the Efficient, Scalable Delivery of Services in Interactive Multimedia
`
`System, minor in Telecommunications Public Policy) earned in June, 1997.
`
`3.(cid:1)
`
`One of the major themes of my research has been the delivery of multimedia
`
`content and data between computing devices and users. In my research I have looked at large-
`
`scale content delivery systems and the use of servers located in a variety of geographic locations
`
`to provide scalable delivery to hundreds, even thousands, of users simultaneously. I have also
`
`looked at smaller-scale content delivery systems in which content, including interactive
`
`communication like voice and video data, is exchanged between computers and portable
`
`computing devices. As a broad theme, my work has examined how to exchange content more
`
`efficiently across computer networks, including the devices that switch and route data traffic.
`
`More specific topics include the scalable delivery of content to many users, mobile computing,
`
`satellite networking, delivering content to mobile devices, and network support for data delivery
`
`in wireless and sensor networks.
`
`4.(cid:1)
`
`Beginning in 1992, at the time I started graduate school, the initial focus of my
`
`research was the provision of interactive functions (e.g., VCR-style functions like pause, rewind,
`
`and fast-forward) for near video-on-demand systems in cable systems, in particular, how to
`
`aggregate requests for movies at a cable head-end and then how to satisfy a multitude of requests
`
`using one audio/video stream to broadcast to multiple receivers simultaneously. Continued
`
`evolution of this research has resulted in the development of new techniques to scalably deliver
`
`on-demand content, including audio, video, web documents, and other types of data, through the
`
`Internet and over other types of networks, including over cable systems, broadband telephone
`
`lines, and satellite links. An important component of my research from the very beginning has
`
`been investigating the challenges of communicating multimedia content between computers and
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 6 of 84 PageID# 1930
`
`across networks. Although the early Internet was used mostly for text-based non-real time
`
`applications, the interest in sharing multimedia content quickly developed. Multimedia-based
`
`applications ranged from downloading content to a device to streaming multimedia content to be
`
`instantly used. One of the challenges was that multimedia content is typically larger than text-
`
`only content, but there are also opportunities to use different delivery techniques since
`
`multimedia content is more resilient to errors. I have worked on a variety of research problems
`
`and used a number of systems that were developed to deliver multimedia content to users.
`
`5.(cid:1)
`
`An important component of my research from the very beginning has been
`
`investigating the challenges of communicating multimedia content between computers and
`
`across networks. Although the early Internet was designed mostly for text-based non-real time
`
`applications, the interest in sharing multimedia content quickly developed. Multimedia-based
`
`applications ranged from downloading content to a device to streaming multimedia content to be
`
`instantly used. One of the challenges was that multimedia content is typically larger than text-
`
`only content but there are also opportunities to use different delivery techniques since
`
`multimedia content is more resilient to errors. I have worked on a variety of research problems
`
`and used a number of systems that were developed to deliver multimedia content to users.
`
`6.(cid:1)
`
`In 1994, I began to research issues associated with the development and
`
`deployment of a one-to-many communication facility (called “multicast”) in the Internet (first
`
`deployed as the Multicast Backbone, a virtual overlay network supporting one-to-many
`
`communication). Some of my more recent research endeavors have looked at how to use the
`
`scalability offered by multicast to provide streaming media support for complex applications like
`
`distance learning, distributed collaboration, distributed games, and large-scale wireless
`
`communication. Multicast has also been used as the delivery mechanism in systems that perform
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 7 of 84 PageID# 1931
`
`local filtering (i.e., sending the same content to a large number of users and allowing them to
`
`filter locally content in which they are not interested).
`
`7.(cid:1)
`
`Starting in 1997, I worked on a project to integrate the streaming media
`
`capabilities of the Internet together with the interactivity of the web. I developed a project called
`
`the Interactive Multimedia Jukebox (IMJ). Users would visit a web page and select content to
`
`view. The content would then be scheduled on one of a number of channels, including delivery
`
`to students in Georgia Tech dorms delivered via the campus cable plant. The content of each
`
`channel was delivered using multicast communication.
`
`8.(cid:1)
`
`In the IMJ, the number of channels varied depending on the capabilities of the
`
`server including the available bandwidth of its connection to the Internet. If one of the channels
`
`was idle, the requesting user would be able to watch their selection immediately. If all channels
`
`were streaming previously selected content, the user’s selection would be queued on the channel
`
`with the shortest wait time. In the meantime, the user would see what content was currently
`
`playing on other channels, and because of the use of multicast, would be able to join one of the
`
`existing channels and watch the content at the point it was currently being transmitted.
`
`9.(cid:1)
`
`The IMJ service combined the interactivity of the web with the streaming
`
`capabilities of the Internet to create a jukebox-like service. It supported true Video-on-Demand
`
`when capacity allowed, but scaled to any number of users based on queuing requested programs.
`
`As part of the project, we obtained permission from Turner Broadcasting to transmit cartoons
`
`and other short-subject content. We also attempted to connect the IMJ into the Georgia Tech
`
`campus cable television network so that students in their dorms could use the web to request
`
`content and then view that content on one of the campus’s public access channels.
`
`4
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 8 of 84 PageID# 1932
`
`10.(cid:1) More recently, I have also studied issues concerning how users choose content,
`
`especially when considering the price of that content. My research has examined how dynamic
`
`content pricing can be used to control system load. By raising prices when systems start to
`
`become overloaded (i.e., when all available resources are fully utilized) and reducing prices
`
`when system capacity is readily available, users’ capacity to pay as well as their willingness can
`
`be used as factors in stabilizing the response time of a system. This capability is particularly
`
`useful in systems where content is downloaded or streamed on-demand to users.
`
`11.(cid:1)
`
`As a parallel research theme, starting in 1997, I began researching issues related
`
`to wireless devices and sensors. In particular, I was interested in showing how to provide greater
`
`communication capability to “lightweight devices,” i.e., small form-factor, resource-constrained
`
`(e.g., CPU, memory, networking, and power) devices. Starting by at least 2004, I researched
`
`techniques to wirelessly disseminate information, for example advertisements, between users
`
`using ad hoc networks. In the system, called Coupons, an incentive scheme is used to encourage
`
`users to relay information, including advertisements, to other nearby users.
`
`12.(cid:1)
`
`Starting in 1998, I published several papers on my work to develop a flexible,
`
`lightweight, battery-aware network protocol stack. The lightweight protocols we envisioned were
`
`similar in nature to protocols like Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) and Digital Living Network
`
`Alliance (DLNA).
`
`13.(cid:1)
`
`From this initial work, I have made wireless networking—including ad hoc, mesh
`
`networks and wireless devices—one of the major themes of my research. One topic includes
`
`developing applications for mobile devices, for example, virally exchanging and tracking
`
`“coupons” through “opportunistic contact” (i.e., communication with other devices coming into
`
`communication range with a user). Other topics include building network communication among
`
`5
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 9 of 84 PageID# 1933
`
`a set of mobile devices unaided by any other kind of network infrastructure. Yet another theme is
`
`monitoring wireless networks, in particular different variants of IEEE 802.11 compliant
`
`networks, to (1) understand the operation of the various protocols used in real-world
`
`deployments, (2) use these measurements to characterize use of the networks and identify
`
`protocol limitations and weaknesses, and (3) propose and evaluate solutions to these problems.
`
`14.(cid:1)
`
`Protecting networks, including their operation and content, has been an
`
`underlying theme of my research almost since the beginning. Starting in 2000, I have also been
`
`involved in several projects that specifically address security, network protection, and firewalls.
`
`After significant background work, a team on which I was a member successfully submitted a
`
`$4.3M grant proposal to the Army Research Office (ARO) at the Department of Defense to
`
`propose and develop a high-speed intrusion detection system. Once the grant was awarded, we
`
`spent several years developing and meeting the milestones of the project. I have also used
`
`firewalls in developing techniques for the classroom to ensure that students are not distracted by
`
`online content.
`
`15.(cid:1)
`
`As an important component of my research program, I have been involved in the
`
`development of academic research into available technology in the market place. One aspect of
`
`this work is my involvement in the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) including many
`
`content delivery-related working groups like the Audio Video Transport (AVT) group, the
`
`MBone Deployment (MBONED) group, Source Specific Multicast (SSM) group, the Inter-
`
`Domain Multicast Routing (IDMR) group, the Reliable Multicast Transport (RMT) group, the
`
`Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) group, etc. I have also served as a member of the
`
`Multicast Directorate (MADDOGS), which oversaw the standardization of all things related to
`
`6
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 10 of 84 PageID# 1934
`
`multicast in the IETF. Finally, I was the Chair of the Internet2 Multicast Working Group for
`
`seven years.
`
`16.(cid:1)
`
`I am an author or co-author of approximately 200 technical papers, published
`
`software systems, IETF Internet Drafts and IETF Request for Comments (RFCs). A list of these
`
`papers is included in my CV.
`
`17.(cid:1) My involvement in the research community extends to leadership positions for
`
`several journals and conferences. I am the co-chair of the Steering Committee for the ACM
`
`Network and System Support for Digital Audio and Video (NOSSDAV) workshop and on the
`
`Steering Committees for the International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), ACM
`
`Sigcomm Workshop on Challenged Networks (CHANTS), and IEEE Global Internet (GI)
`
`Symposium. I have served or am serving on the editorial boards of IEEE/ACM Transactions on
`
`Networking, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, IEEE Transactions on Networks and
`
`System Management, IEEE Network, ACM Computers in Entertainment, AACE Journal of
`
`Interactive Learning Research (JILR), and ACM Computer Communications Review.
`
`18.(cid:1)
`
`Furthermore, in the courses I teach, the class spends significant time covering all
`
`aspects of the Internet including each of the layers of the Open System Interconnect (OSI)
`
`protocol stack commonly used in the Internet. These layers include the physical and data link
`
`layers and their handling of signal modulation, error control, and data transmission. I also teach
`
`DOCSIS, DSL, and other standardized protocols for communicating across a variety of physical
`
`media including cable systems, telephone lines, wireless, and high-speed Local Area Networks
`
`(LANs). I teach the configuration and operation of switches, routers, and gateways including
`
`routing and forwarding and the numerous respective protocols as they are standardized and used
`
`7
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 11 of 84 PageID# 1935
`
`throughout the Internet. Topics include a wide variety of standardized Internet protocols at the
`
`Network Layer (Layer 3), Transport Layer (Layer 4), and above.
`
`19.(cid:1)
`
`In addition, I co-founded a technology company called Santa Barbara Labs that
`
`was working under a sub-contract from the U.S. Air Force to develop very accurate emulation
`
`systems for the military’s next generation internetwork. Santa Barbara Labs’ focus was in
`
`developing an emulation platform to test the performance characteristics of the network
`
`architecture in the variety of environments in which it was expected to operate, and in particular,
`
`for network services including IPv6, multicast, Quality of Service (QoS), satellite-based
`
`communication, and security. Applications for this emulation program included communication
`
`of a variety of multimedia-based services.
`
`20.(cid:1)
`
`In addition to having co-founded a technology company myself, I have worked
`
`for, consulted with, and collaborated with companies such as IBM, Hitachi Telecom, Digital
`
`Fountain, RealNetworks, Intel Research, Cisco Systems, and Lockheed Martin.
`
`21.(cid:1)
`
`I am a Member of the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) and a Fellow
`
`of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
`
`22.(cid:1)
`
`Additional details about my employment history, fields of expertise, and
`
`publications are further included in my curriculum vitae, attached as Ex. 17.
`
`II.(cid:1)
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`23.(cid:1)
`
`I understand that claim construction begins with the language of the claim and
`
`asks how a person of ordinary skill in the art, reading in light of the specification, would have
`
`understood the claim terms at the time of invention.
`
`24.(cid:1)
`
`To construe patent claims, I understand one must first consider the intrinsic
`
`evidence, which includes the claim language, the specification, and the prosecution history,
`
`including any prior art that was discussed in that prosecution history.
`
`8
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 12 of 84 PageID# 1936
`
`25.(cid:1)
`
`In particular, I understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is understood to
`
`read the claim term not only in the context of the particular claim in which the disputed term
`
`appears, but in the context of the entire patent, including the specification. I also understand that
`
`one must consider the specification to determine whether the inventor has employed any terms or
`
`words in a manner that is inconsistent with their plain and ordinary meaning. In addition to the
`
`claims and the specification, one must review the patent’s prosecution history, which is a
`
`complete record of all the proceedings before the Patent and Trademark Office, including any
`
`express representations made by the applicant regarding the scope of the claims. I understand
`
`that a patent applicant can limit claims during prosecution by, for example, altering claim
`
`language to overcome an examiner’s rejection, clearly and unambiguously arguing to overcome
`
`or distinguish a reference, or clearly and unambiguously disavowing claim coverage.
`
`26.(cid:1)
`
`I also understand that one may also consider extrinsic evidence, which may take
`
`the form of expert testimony, inventor testimony, dictionaries, technical treatises, other patents,
`
`and articles. It is my understanding that one may also consider such extrinsic evidence to confirm
`
`that a given claim construction is consistent with the expressly and widely held understanding of
`
`a term in a pertinent technical field. I further understand, however, that one may not rely on
`
`extrinsic evidence to the extent it contradicts or varies the meaning of claims provided by the
`
`intrinsic evidence.
`
`27.(cid:1)
`
`I also understand that claim terms can sometimes be termed “indefinite” if they
`
`fail to provide one with skill in the art with reasonable certainty about the scope of the claimed
`
`invention.
`
`III.(cid:1) ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`28.(cid:1)
`
`To assess the level of ordinary skill in the art, I understand one considers the type
`
`of problems encountered in the art, the prior solutions to those problems found in prior art
`
`9
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 13 of 84 PageID# 1937
`
`references, the rapidity with which innovations are made, the sophistication of the technology,
`
`and the level of education of active workers in the field.
`
`29.(cid:1)
`
`To assess the level of ordinary skill in the art of Limelight’s, Akamai’s, and
`
`MIT’s patents specifically, I have considered the type of problems encountered in the art, the
`
`prior solutions to those problems found in prior art references, the rapidity with which
`
`innovations are made, the sophistication of the technology, the level of education of active
`
`workers in the field, and my own experience working with those of skill in the art at the time of
`
`inventions. In my opinion a person of ordinary skill in the art of Limelight’s, Akamai’s, and
`
`MIT’s patents would have a Bachelor's degree in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, or
`
`the equivalent, and several years experience in the field of distributed systems, name services, or
`
`Internet content delivery. Although the filing dates of the various patents at issue range from
`
`1998 through the late 2000s, that does not change my opinion regarding the level of ordinary
`
`skill in the art.
`
`30.(cid:1)
`
`I am very familiar with people having this level of skill, as discussed in my
`
`curriculum vitae and background.
`
`IV.(cid:1) CLAIM TERMS
`A.(cid:1)
`
`324 Patent
`
`31.(cid:1)
`
`The 324 and 155 Patents both relate to improvements in the optimization of
`
`network protocols (such as TCP) used to connect networked computers—servers and clients in
`
`particular. The 155 and 324 Patents disclose systems and methods where a server can actively
`
`monitor network connections, such as TCP sockets, for requests. When requests come in, the
`
`server can analyze the request to determine whether the connection should be optimized. If the
`
`connection should be optimized the server can re-configure the connection. The 155 and 324
`
`Patents disclose systems and methods that can therefore update the protocol configuration of
`
`10
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 14 of 84 PageID# 1938
`
`protocols being used for active connections, throughout the duration of the connections, on a
`
`request-by-request basis.
`
`1.(cid:1)
`
`“Uniform Resource Indicator”
`
`32.(cid:1)
`
`I understand that Limelight has taken the position that this term should be
`
`construed to mean “a sequence of characters that identifies a requested resource, such as all or
`
`part of a URL.” I further understand that Akamai and XO have taken the position that this term
`
`should be construed to mean “information in a request’s Uniform Resource Locator (“URL”),
`
`such as all or part of a URL” or, alternatively, that the claim term is indefinite. It is my opinion
`
`that Limelight’s position on this term is correct and that Akamai’s and XO’s is incorrect, for the
`
`reasons I explain in the following paragraphs.
`
`33.(cid:1)
`
`The term “Uniform Resource Indicator” would have been understood by one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time to mean a “sequence of characters that identifies a
`
`requested resource, such as all or part of a URL.” As an initial matter, I note that the
`
`specification of
`
`the 324 Patent uses
`
`the
`
`term “Uniform Resource Indicator (URI)”
`
`interchangeably with the term “Uniform Resource Identifier (URI).” See, e.g. Ex. 1 at 16:6-8
`
`(“The depicted portion of the process begins in block 416 where a uniform resource indicator
`
`(URI) is requested by the client 102.”); id. at 7:18-23 (“HTTP utilizes Uniform Resource
`
`Locators (URLs), Uniform Resource Names (URNs), and Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)
`
`to identify information . . . . Other embodiments use URIs, URNs, other identifiers, or other
`
`information.”). Based upon this contextual information, it is my opinion that one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art reading the claims and the specification of the 324 Patent would not have understood
`
`“uniform resource indicator” to have a different meaning from the term “uniform resource
`
`identifier.” This is also consistent with my understanding of how these two different phrasings
`
`are used in the field generally.
`
`11
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 15 of 84 PageID# 1939
`
`34.(cid:1)
`
`“Uniform Resource Identifier” or “URI” was a term well-understood in the art as
`
`of 2009, the application date of the 324 Patent. Although the term has been in use for longer,
`
`Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) were defined in a standard by 2005. Request for Comment
`
`(“RFC”) 3986, published with the Internet Engineering Task Force (“IETF”) standards
`
`organization, is titled Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax, and is available at
`
`https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt. RFC 3986 defines a “URI” as “a compact sequence of
`
`characters that identifies an abstract or physical resource.” Ex. 13 (RFC 3986).
`
`35.(cid:1)
`
`As RFC 3986 explains, a Uniform Resource Locator (“URL”), which is used for a
`
`web address, such as www.google.com, is one example of a Uniform Resource Identifier, but is
`
`not the only example:
`
`A URI can be further classified as a locator, a name, or both. The term “Uniform
`Resource Locator” (URL) refers to the subset of URIs that, in addition to
`identifying a resource, provide a means of locating the resource by describing its
`primary access mechanism (e.g., its network “location”). The term “Uniform
`Resource Name” (URN) has been used historically to refer to both URIs under the
`“urn” scheme [RFC2141], which are required to remain globally unique and
`persistent even when the resource ceases to exist or becomes unavailable, and to
`any other URI with the properties of a name.
`
`Id. (§1.1.3).
`
`36.(cid:1)
`
`One of ordinary skill in the art would understand Uniform Resource Indicator to
`
`be interchangeable with and have the same meaning as Uniform Resource Identifier. For
`
`example,
`
`I
`
`note
`
`that
`
`the Oxford
`
`Learner’s Dictionary,
`
`available
`
`at
`
`http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/ definition/english/uri, defines a “URI” as follows:
`
`uniform/universal resource indicator (a URL (= where the information is
`located on a computer system, such as the address of a website page) and/or a
`URN (= a standard way of identifying a book, film, journal, computer file, etc.))
`
`Ex. 19 (http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/uri). The fact that the
`
`Oxford Learner’s Dictionary defines the acronym “URI” using the term “indicator” rather than
`
`12
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-00720-JAG Document 91-11 Filed 05/27/16 Page 16 of 84 PageID# 1940
`
`“identifier”—and then goes on to give examples (URL and URN) that are identified in the
`
`standard’s definition of URI that I discuss above, confirms my own understanding that in
`
`common usage “indicator” and “identifier” are both used for the final “I” in “URI” and that they
`
`both have the same meaning in that context.
`
`37.(cid:1)
`
`I also note
`
`that Akamai personnel use Uniform Resource Indicator
`
`interchangeably with Uniform Resource Identifier. I believe this fact lends further support to my
`
`opinion regarding the proper construction of this term—and my view that it is a term readily
`
`understood by those in the art—because it reflects the fact that people actually working in the
`
`field know how to use the term and use it in a way consistent with my understanding. For
`
`example, I am aware that in a post from an Akamai-sponsored weblog states that: “Dynamic
`
`content has long been thought of as a web resource that can serve different content for the same
`
`URI (Uniform Resource Indicator).” Ex. 20 (https://blogs.akamai.com/2015/10/dynamic-page-
`
`caching-beyond-static-content.html). The author of the post is named Scott Esbrandt, who
`
`appears
`
`to
`
`be
`
`a
`
`Senior
`
`Technical
`
`Project Manager
`
`at
`
`Akamai
`
`(https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottesbrandt). In this example, it appears from the context of Mr.
`
`Esbrandt’s statement that he is talking about URIs in the same sense that is defined in the
`
`standard and I believe that one of ordinary skill in the art would c