`Elastic N.V. et al. v. Guada Technologies LLC
`
`IPR2021-00875
`U.S. Patent No. 7,231,379
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`July 26, 2022
`
`
`
`Grounds of Challenge
`
`Ground
`
`Challenge
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`§103: Wesemann
`§103: Wesemann, Rajaraman
`§103: Fratkina
`§102: Fratkina, Rajaraman
`
`Claims
`
`1, 2, 7
`3-6
`1, 2, 7
`3-6
`
`Reasonable
`Likelihood at
`Institution?
`Yes
`Yes
`Yes
`Yes
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`
`
`Representative Claim 1
`
`1. A method performed in a system having multiple navigable
`nodes interconnected in a hierarchical arrangement
`comprising:
`at a first node, receiving an input from a user of the
`system, the input containing at least one word
`identifiable with at least one keyword from among
`multiple keywords,
`identifying at least one node, other than the first node,
`that is not directly connected to the first node but is
`associated with the at least one keyword, and
`jumping to the at least one node.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`3
`
`
`
`No New Issues Post-Institution
`
`• Patent Owner’s response merely restated arguments from
`preliminary response
`• No evidence submitted post-institution
`• No Patent Owner evidence at all
`• No Patent Owner surreply
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`
`
`Claim Construction
`
`Term
`
`“node”
`
`“vertex”
`
`“keyword”
`
`“verbal description”
`
`Undisputed Construction
`A specific choice or option in a
`hierarchy
`A specific choice or option in a
`hierarchy that can be represented
`in a graph
`One or more words or pieces of
`information, such as a specific
`data pattern, that is associated
`with the at least one node or
`vertex
`A set of words relating to the
`subject matter whether presented
`audibly or in written form
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`5
`
`-Pet., 13-16; Reply 2
`
`
`
`Term
`
`“jumping”
`
`Claim Construction
`
`Undisputed Construction
`A direct traversal from one node
`or vertex to another node or
`vertex that is not directly
`connected to it (i.e., without
`traversal through any intervening
`nodes or vertices or to a node or
`vertex whose only least common
`ancestor with that node or vertex
`is the root node or vertex).
`
`“Jumping” does not require that
`the system jump between nodes.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`-Pet., 15; Reply 2, 11
`
`
`
`Grounds 1 & 2: Wesemann
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`-Pet., 16-17
`
`7
`
`
`
`Grounds 1 & 2: Wesemann
`
`POPR/POR:
`“Having advanced no new argument—
`and in fact advancing the same exact
`failed argument down to the very
`letter—there is no reason for the
`Board to reconsider its previous
`[Bloomreach] ruling rejecting Grounds
`1 and 2.”
`
`-POPR, 7; POR, 7
`
`“The Board is not bound by any
`findings made in its institution
`decision.”
`
`-Trivascular, Inc. v. Samuels, 812 F.3d 1056, 1068
`(Fed. Cir. 2016).
`
`“Patent Owner does not
`specifically argue that Wesemann
`fails to teach or suggest this
`[“jumping”] limitation. Instead,
`Patent Owner generally argues
`that … the Board should reject
`Ground 1 for the same reasons
`that the Board concluded the
`petition in IPR2019-01304 had
`failed to show a reasonable
`likelihood of prevailing.”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`-D.I., 13
`
`-Reply 5-9
`
`8
`
`
`
`Grounds 1 & 2: Wesemann
`
`-Pet., 28-29 (annotated Wesseman Fig. 6)
`
`-Pet., 17
`
`-See also EX1007 (Smyth) ¶¶51, 55-56, 62, Pet., 16-19; Reply 3-5
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`
`
`Grounds 3 & 4: Fratkina
`
`-EX1006, 27:38-43, 34:40-45, Fig. 10; see also Pet., 52, 57-58
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`10
`
`
`
`Grounds 3 & 4: Fratkina
`
`Patent Owner’s attempt to distinguish Fratkina:
`
`-POR, 6
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`
`
`Grounds 3 & 4: Fratkina
`
`Neither claims nor specification exclude an intermediate verification step.
`
`-EX1001, claim 1
`
`-EX1001, 12:50-56
`
`-EX1001, 10:45-55
`
`-See also Reply, 12-13
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`
`
`Grounds 3 & 4: Fratkina
`
`Fratkina does not require an intermediate verification step.
`
`“[A] reference need not state a
`feature’s absence in order to
`disclose a negative limitation.”
`
`-AC Techs. S.A. v. Amazon.com, Inc.,
`912 F.3d 1358, 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2019).
`
`-EX1006, 34:1-3
`
`-EX1006, 37:31-63
`
`-See also Pet., 57-58; Reply, 15-16
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`13
`
`
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
