UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________________
`
`LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES, II LLC,
`Patent Owner,
`
`____________________
`
`IPR2024-00124
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,325,140 B2
`____________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,325,140 B2
`
`1605282440
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`Page
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`I.
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED .................................. 1
`II.
`III. THE 140 PATENT ......................................................................................... 2
`A. Overview of the 140 Patent .................................................................. 2
`B. Overview of the 140 Patent’s File History ........................................... 3
`C.
`Priority Date of the 140 Patent ............................................................. 5
`D.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ...................................................... 7
`E.
`Claim Construction Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3) .......................... 8
`1.
`“said managed network element” (claim 1) ............................... 9
`2. Means-Plus-Function Terms (claims 1, 11, 13, 14 and 16) ....... 9
`3.
`Limitation [1.b]: “an out of band access connection
`means” ...................................................................................... 10
`a.
`Function: ........................................................................ 10
`b.
`Structure: ........................................................................ 10
`Limitation [1.c]: “virtual management interface
`connection means” ................................................................... 10
`a.
`Function: ........................................................................ 10
`b.
`Structure: ........................................................................ 11
`Claim 11: “protection means” .................................................. 11
`a.
`Function ......................................................................... 11
`b.
`Structure ......................................................................... 11
`Claim 13: “monitoring means for monitoring the status of
`at least one computer network component” ............................. 11
`a.
`Function ......................................................................... 11
`b.
`Structure ......................................................................... 12
`Limitation [14.b]: “a monitoring means for monitoring
`the status of the network power supply”. ................................. 12
`a.
`Function: ........................................................................ 12
`
`7.
`
`1605282440
`
`i
`
`

`

`8.
`
`9.
`
`Structure: ........................................................................ 12
`b.
`Limitation [14.c] “reporting means for reporting the
`status of the network power supply” ........................................ 12
`a.
`Function: ........................................................................ 12
`b.
`Structure: ........................................................................ 13
`Claim 16: “means for monitoring connection attempts
`made through the management access controller.” ................. 13
`a.
`Function: ........................................................................ 13
`b.
`Structure: ........................................................................ 13
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART REFERENCES .................................. 13
`A.
`EX1005 - Neufeld .............................................................................. 13
`B.
`EX1020 - IPMI ................................................................................... 17
`C.
`PRIOR ART STATUS ....................................................................... 19
`1.
`Patents ...................................................................................... 19
`2.
`Patent Publications ................................................................... 19
`3.
`Non-Patent Publications ........................................................... 20
`V. GROUND 1: NEUFELD RENDERS OBVIOUS CLAIMS 1-4, 6, 7,
`10, 11, 13, AND 16 ....................................................................................... 21
`A.
`Claim 1 ............................................................................................... 21
`1.
`[1.pre] ....................................................................................... 21
`2.
`[1.a] .......................................................................................... 25
`3.
`[1.b] .......................................................................................... 28
`4.
`[1.c] .......................................................................................... 32
`Claim 2 ............................................................................................... 34
`Claim 3 ............................................................................................... 36
`Claim 4 ............................................................................................... 37
`Claim 6 ............................................................................................... 38
`Claim 7 ............................................................................................... 39
`Claim 10 ............................................................................................. 40
`Claim 11 ............................................................................................. 40
`ii
`
`B.
`C.
`D.
`E.
`F.
`G.
`H.
`
`1605282440
`
`

`

`Claim 13 ............................................................................................. 41
`I.
`Claim 16 ............................................................................................. 42
`J.
`VI. GROUND 2: NEUFELD IN VIEW OF SYVANNE RENDERS
`OBVIOUS CLAIMS 11 AND 12 ................................................................. 43
`VII. GROUND 3: NEUFELD IN VIEW OF FOWLER RENDERS
`OBVIOUS CLAIM 14 .................................................................................. 46
`A.
`Limitation [14.a] ................................................................................. 47
`B.
`Limitation [14.b] ................................................................................ 48
`C.
`Limitation [14.c] ................................................................................. 49
`VIII. GROUND 4: NEUFELD IN VIEW OF FOWLER RENDER
`OBVIOUS CLAIM 13 .................................................................................. 51
`IX. GROUND 5: IPMI IN COMBINATION WITH LAWRENCE
`RENDERS OBVIOUS CLAIMS 1-3, 6, 7, 10 AND 11 .............................. 52
`A.
`Introduction ........................................................................................ 52
`B.
`Claim 1 ............................................................................................... 55
`1.
`Limitation [1.pre] ..................................................................... 55
`2.
`Limitation [1.a] ........................................................................ 59
`3.
`Limitation [1.b] ........................................................................ 61
`4.
`Limitation [1.c] ........................................................................ 64
`Claim 2 ............................................................................................... 66
`C.
`Claim 3 ............................................................................................... 68
`D.
`Claim 6 ............................................................................................... 69
`E.
`Claim 7 ............................................................................................... 71
`F.
`Claim 10 ............................................................................................. 71
`G.
`Claim 11 ............................................................................................. 72
`H.
`X. GROUND 6: IPMI AND LAWRENCE IN COMBINATION WITH
`LEEDY RENDER OBVIOUS CLAIM 4 .................................................... 73
`XI. GROUND 7: IPMI AND LAWRENCE IN COMBINATION WITH
`SYVANNE RENDER OBVIOUS CLAIMS 11 AND 12 ........................... 75
`XII. GROUND 8: IPMI AND LAWRENCE IN COMBINATION WITH
`FOWLER RENDER OBVIOUS CLAIMS 13 AND 14 .............................. 76
`
`1605282440
`
`iii
`
`

`

`A.
`
`Claim 14 ............................................................................................. 77
`1.
`Limitation [14.a] ...................................................................... 77
`2.
`Limitation [14.b] ...................................................................... 78
`3.
`Limitation [14.c] ...................................................................... 79
`Claim 13 ............................................................................................. 80
`B.
`XIII. GROUND 9: IPMI IN COMBINATION WITH LAWRENCE AND
`RFC1492 RENDERS OBVIOUS CLAIM 16 .............................................. 80
`A.
`Claim 16 ............................................................................................. 80
`XIV. DISCRETIONARY DENIAL IS NOT WARRANTED .............................. 81
`A.
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a) Analysis ............................................................... 81
`B.
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d) Analysis .............................................................. 82
`XV. COMPLIANCE WITH FORMAL REQUIREMENTS ............................... 82
`A. Mandatory Notices Under 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.8(b)(1)-(4) ..................... 82
`1.
`Real Party-In-Interest ............................................................... 82
`2.
`Related Matters ........................................................................ 83
`3.
`Lead and Backup Counsel ....................................................... 83
`4.
`Service Information.................................................................. 83
`Proof of Service on the Patent Owner ................................................ 83
`B.
`Power of Attorney .............................................................................. 84
`C.
`Standing .............................................................................................. 84
`D.
`Fees ..................................................................................................... 84
`E.
`XVI. PRESERVATION OF RIGHTS ................................................................... 84
`XVII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 84
`
`1605282440
`
`iv
`
`

`

`INDEX OF EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`1001
`U.S. Patent No. 8,474,016
`1002
`U.S. Patent No. 7,325,140
`1003
`Declaration of Dr. Sigurd Meldal for IPR2024-00109
`1004
`File History for U.S. Pat. App. No. 10/969,561
`1005
`U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2003/0226015 (“Neufeld”)
`1006
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,085,385 (“Frantz”)
`1007
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0097503 (“Huckins”)
`1008
`“PCI-to-PCI Bridge Architecture Specification”, Rev. 1.1 (“PCI
`Bridge Spec”)
`“Datasheet PCF8584 I2C-bus controller” (“PCF8584”)
`U.S. Pat. App. No. 09/438,253 downloaded from USPTO
`website (“Emerson”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,219,708 (“Martenson”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,651,137 (“MacWilliams”)
`“RFC1492: An Access Control Protocol, Sometimes called
`TACACS” (“RFC1492”)
`“RFC2865: Remote Authentication Dial In User Service
`(RADIUS)” (“RFC2865”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,260,555 (“Rossman”)
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0097590 (“Syvanne”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,383,577 (“Hrastar”)
`“RFC1157: A Simple Management Network Management
`Protocol (SNMP)” (“RFC1157”)
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary (5th ed. 2002)
`“IPMI – Intelligent Platform Management Interface Specification
`V1.5” (Rev. 1.1 dated 2/20/2002) (“IPMI”)
`“RFC3414: User-based Security Model (USM) for version 3 of
`the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv3)”
`(“RFC3414”)
`“IP Filter Based Firewalls HOWTO” (“IPFILTER”)
`“IPMI – Intelligent Platform Management Interface Specification
`V2.0” (Draft dated 9/15/2003) (“IPMIv2.0”)
`Reserved
`U.S. Patent No. 7,055,148 (“Marsh”)
`Reserved
`U.S. Patent No. 6,286,074
`
`1009
`1010
`
`1011
`1012
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`1016
`1017
`1018
`
`1019
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`1023
`
`1024
`1025
`1026
`1027
`
`1605282440
`
`v
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. Description
`1028
`U.S. Patent No. 6,973,517
`1029
`U.S. Patent No. 6,189,096
`1030
`U.S. Patent No. 7,469,298
`1031
`U.S. Patent No. 6,272,537
`1032
`IETF Bibtex listing for RFC 3414
`1033
`IETF Bibtex listing for RFC 1157
`1034
`IETF Bibtex listing for RFC 2865
`1035
`IETF Bibtex listing for RFC 1492
`1036
`U.S. Patent No. 7,496,950
`1037
`“DSP0114 Alert Standard Format (ASF) Specification
`(“DSP0114”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,263,716
`Declaration of Nathaniel E. Frank-White
`WO 01/31849 A1 (“Fowler”)
`Reserved
`District Court Claim Construction Order dated 5/28/24
`U.S. Patent No. 7,269,639 (“Lawrence”)
`U.S. Patent No. 8,605,624 (“Desai”)
`WO 2004/015764 (“Leedy”)
`Declaration of Dr. Sigurd Meldal for IPR2024-00124
`U.S. Patent Application No. 10/461,827
`
`1038
`1039
`1040
`1041
`1042
`1043
`1044
`1045
`1046
`1047
`
`1605282440
`
`vi
`
`

`

`CLAIMS
`[1.pre] A remote device management communication system for securely
`controlling access to management applications and communications to and from
`said management applications on network devices in a distributed computer
`network that includes one or more network services, one or more secure
`management access controllers, and one or more managed network devices, the
`remote device management system comprising:
`[1.a] at least one secure management access controller connected to one or more
`data bus of said managed network device for the communication of device
`management data;
`[1.b] an out-of-band access connection means for connecting said one or more
`network services or remote users with said secure management access controller
`for management of said network device; and
`[1.c] at least one virtual management interface connection means for connecting
`said one or more network services or remote users with said secure management
`access controller; wherein said virtual management interface connection means
`provides logical separation of management data from user data and utilizes user
`interfaces of said managed network element for connecting said one or more
`network services or remote users with said secure management access controller.
`[2] The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one secure management access
`controller includes a flash chip, non-volatile random access memory and random
`access memory.
`[3] The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one secure management access
`controller is embedded in the network device to be managed.
`[4] The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one secure management access
`controller accesses a flash chip, non-volatile random access memory and random
`access memory embedded in a main processor on the network device.
`[5] The system of claim 1 wherein the network device includes a card reader and
`the at least one secure management access controller is embedded in a card
`capable of being read by the card reader.
`[6] The system of claim 1 wherein the out-of-band access connection means
`comprises: a communication system; and a secure management access controller
`interface device.
`[7] The system of claim 6 wherein the communication system is selected from
`the group consisting of a Public Switched Telephone Network, a broadband
`connection and a Virtual Private Network and the interface device is selected
`
`1605282440
`
`vii
`
`

`

`CLAIMS
`from the group consisting of an analog modem, a broadband modem, an Ethernet
`interface, a cellular interface and a card slot for accepting interface cards.
`[8] The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one network communication
`means is selected from the group consisting of a local area network, a serial
`interface and a network connection.
`[9] The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one network communication
`means supports at least one protocol selected from the group consisting of
`Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, Simple Network Management
`Protocol, Telnet, Trivial File Transfer Protocol, File Transfer Protocol, Hypertext
`Transfer Protocol, Hypertext Transfer Protocol over Secure Socket Layer and
`Secure Shell.
`[10] The system of claim 1 wherein user and management communications are
`transmitted to the at least one secure management access controller and the at
`least one controller further comprises a virtual management interface for
`separating the user communications from the management communications.
`[11] The system of claim 10 wherein the virtual management interface includes a
`protection means for protecting the management data.
`[12] The system of claim 10 wherein the virtual management interface includes a
`secure transmission tunnel to protect management communications and a
`firewall to protect the at least one management access controller from
`unauthorized access.
`[13] The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one the management access
`controller includes a monitoring means for monitoring the status of at least one
`computer network component and a network interface for reporting a status of
`the at least one computer network component to a network management station.
`[14.a] The system of claim 1 further comprising: a network power supply;
`[14.b] a monitoring means for monitoring the status of the network power
`supply; and
`[14.c] a reporting means for reporting the status of the network power supply.
`]15] The system of claim 1 further comprising an independent power supply for
`supplying power to the management access controller.
`[16] The system of claim 1 further comprising a means for monitoring
`connection attempts made through the management access controller.
`
`1605282440
`
`viii
`
`

`

`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,325,140 (“the 140 patent,” EX1002) should never have
`
`been allowed by the examiner. The independent claim of the 140 patent is directed
`
`to the concept of providing in-band and out-of-band connections to a secure
`
`management access controller on a network device in order to allow an
`
`administrator to manage the network device remotely. These concepts were all
`
`well-known in the art as the 140 patent acknowledges. EX1002, 2:1-3:67.
`
`Allowance of the 140 patent was obtained by amending the independent claim to
`
`include low-level implementation details including a requirement for bus-based
`
`communication of management data, and a virtual management interface
`
`connection that logically separates management data from user data for the in-band
`
`connection. These implementation details were also well-known; the prior art
`
`patents and documents discussed herein disclose all of these concepts. The
`
`challenged claims of the 140 Patent should be found unpatentable in view of this
`
`prior art, which was not considered by the examiner.
`
`II.
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`In accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 311, Petitioner requests cancelation of
`
`claims 1-4, 6, 7, 10-14 and 16 of the 140 patent in view of the following grounds:
`
`Ground
`1
`
`Claims
`1-4, 6, 7, 10, 11,
`13 and 16
`
`Basis
`§103
`
`1605282440
`
`Prior Art
`
`Neufeld
`
`1
`
`

`

`Ground
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`
`Basis
`Claims
`§103
`11, 12
`§103
`14
`§103
`13
`1-3, 6, 7, 10, 11 §103
`4
`§103
`11, 12
`§103
`13, 14
`§103
`16
`§103
`
`Prior Art
`Neufeld and Syvanne
`Neufeld and Fowler
`Neufeld and Fowler
`IPMI and Lawrence
`IPMI, Lawrence and Leedy
`IPMI, Lawrence, and Syvanne
`IPMI, Lawrence and Fowler
`IPMI, Lawrence and RFC1492
`
`III. THE 140 PATENT
`
`A.
`
`Overview of the 140 Patent
`
`The 140 patent was filed on October 20, 2004, and issued on January 29,
`
`2008. The 140 patent relates to remote management of network devices, e.g.,
`
`routers, in a secure manner. EX1002, 1:19-45 and 2:1-7. The 140 patent discloses
`
`including in a managed network device a “remote management access controller,”
`
`which is referred to as a “SMACC” (“Secure Management Access Control for
`
`Computer Chipset”) in some embodiments, that can be accessed by a remote
`
`administrator at a remote management center for the exchange of management
`
`communications to manage the network device. EX1002, 5:47-6:2. The 140 patent
`
`also discloses separating user traffic from device management traffic, logically
`
`and/or physically, both in the managed network device and while the management
`
`communications are in transit to the remote management access controller.
`
`EX1002, 4:12-14; 6:5-8. The remote management access controller has two types
`2
`
`1605282440
`
`

`

`of connections over which management communications can be exchanged with
`
`the remote management center: an in-band connection and an out-of-band
`
`connection. EX1002, 6:12-24; 11:60-12:4. On the in-band connection,
`
`management traffic is commingled with user traffic and a Virtual Management
`
`Interface (VMI) employs virtual private network (VPN) technology to provide
`
`logical separation of the management traffic from user data traffic. 6:24-33; 12:4-
`
`21. The out-of-band connection includes a SMACC Network Enabled
`
`Management Interface, which provides a dedicated, physically separate interface
`
`for the management network connection. EX1002, 12:22-36.
`
`B.
`
`Overview of the 140 Patent’s File History
`
`The examiner rejected independent claims over prior art referred to as
`
`Nessett. EX1004, 88 (11/2/06 Rejection at 2). In response, the applicant amended
`
`the claims substantially by introducing new limitations requiring a (1) “controller
`
`connected to one or more data bus for the communication of device management
`
`data” (emphasis added) (2) “an out-of-band access . . . for management of said
`
`network,” and (3) “virtual management interface connection means” that connects
`
`to the secure management access controller and provides logical separation of
`
`management data from user data. EX1004, 104 (4/3/07 Response at 2). The
`
`applicant asserted that the data bus-based connection between a secure
`
`management access controller and a network device was supported by ¶¶ 0019 and
`
`1605282440
`
`3
`
`

`

`0056 and Figure 28 in the specification of the 140 patent application. EX1004, 108
`
`(4/3/07 Response at 6). Although not explicitly stated, the “data bus-based
`
`connection between the secure management access controller is presumably the
`
`“SMACCI Bus” in Figure 28 below, which connects the SMACC Processor to the
`
`network device via the Bus Controller and the System PCI Bus.
`
`The applicant argued that Nessett does not teach or suggest a data bus
`
`connection between a secure management access controller and the managed
`
`device, or the communication of device management data over such a connection,
`
`1605282440
`
`4
`
`

`

`as recited by the amended independent claims. EX1004, 108 (4/3/07 Response at
`
`6). Independent claim 1 and all dependent claims 2-16 were allowed in response to
`
`these amendments and arguments. EX1004, 141 (9/6/07 NOA at 2).
`
`C.
`
`Priority Date of the 140 Patent
`
`The 140 patent is not entitled to any priority date earlier than 10/21/2003,
`
`which is the filing date of Provisional App. No. 60/512,777 to which the 140 patent
`
`claims priority. EX1002, 1.
`
`The 140 patent also claims priority as a continuation-in-part of U.S. Pat.
`
`App. No. 10/461,827 (the “827 application”) filed 6/13/2003 (EX1047). However,
`
`no claim of the 140 patent is entitled to that priority. The claims of the 140 patent
`
`all require “at least one secure management access controller connected to one or
`
`more data bus of said managed network device for the communication of device
`
`management data.” EX1002, 22:40-44 (the “Bus Limitation”). The 140 patent
`
`illustrates a direct connection between a SMACC and both a system bus and a
`
`CPU bus of a network device as shown in, for example, Fig. 1 below.
`
`1605282440
`
`5
`
`

`

`In view of this disclosure in Fig. 1, the scope of the Bus Limitation of claim 1 is
`
`broad enough to include direct connections of the SMACC to at least two busses of
`
`the managed network device regardless of whether the Bus Limitation is limited to
`
`direct connections to the busses.
`
`The 827 application, however, fails to disclose any direct connection of a
`
`“secure management access controller” to any bus of a managed network device,
`
`let alone a direct connection to two data busses of a managed network device as
`
`would be required to support the full scope of the Bus Limitation. In fact, the 827
`
`application does not even mention the word “bus.” EX1047, passim. This is not
`
`1605282440
`
`6
`
`

`

`surprising because the 827 application is primarily directed toward a stand-alone
`
`“secure remote management appliance” without any direct connection to a bus of a
`
`network device. EX1047, ¶[36]. This is in direct contrast to the 140 patent, which
`
`is primarily directed toward the embedded SMACC concept illustrated above in
`
`Fig. 1 of the 140 patent. While the 827 application indicates in ¶[36] that the
`
`disclosure is not limited to the “preferred exemplary embodiment” of a stand-alone
`
`device, the 827 application does not provide any detail about how other
`
`embodiments would be implemented other than to state that the features of the
`
`“preferred exemplary device . . . also can be combined with other hardware and
`
`software features such as being integrated with a modem or with the console of a
`
`device.” EX1047, ¶[36]. That disclosure does not provide written description
`
`support or enablement for the full scope of the Bus Limitation which includes an
`
`embedded SMACC directly connected to two busses of a managed network device
`
`as discussed above. Accordingly, no claim of the 140 patent – all of which include
`
`the Bus Limitation – is entitled to priority to the 827 application.
`
`D.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) at the time of the alleged
`
`invention of the 140 patent would have had a Bachelors’ degree in electrical or
`
`computer engineering or a comparable field of study, plus approximately two to
`
`three years of professional experience in the field of computer and/or network
`
`1605282440
`
`7
`
`

`

`design and security or other relevant industry experience. Additional graduate
`
`education could substitute for professional experience, and significant experience
`
`in the field could substitute for formal education. EX1046, ¶54.
`
`E.
`
`Claim Construction Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3)
`
`The Challenged Claims are interpreted using the same claim construction
`
`standard that is used to construe the claim in a civil action in federal district court.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). Certain claim terms below have been construed in
`
`accordance with the district court’s claim construction (EX1042) in the Related
`
`Litigation (defined below in Section XIV.A). All terms of 140 patent not
`
`specifically addressed below should be construed according to their plain and
`
`ordinary meanings.
`
`Petitioner does not contend that its proposed constructions are complete
`
`constructions of these limitations or the claims for any other purpose, including for
`
`issues that have been raised in the related litigation. Because the prior art asserted
`
`herein discloses the preferred embodiment within the indisputable scope of the
`
`claims, the Board need not construe the outer bounds of the claims as part of these
`
`proceedings. The district court may have to address outer bounds of the claims in
`
`addressing infringement. See, e.g., Nidec Motor Corp. v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean
`
`Motor Co., 868 F.3d 1013, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (citing Vivid Techs., Inc. v. Am.
`
`Sci. & Eng’g, Inc., 200 F.3d 795, 803 (Fed. Cir. 1999)) (providing that only those
`
`1605282440
`
`8
`
`

`

`terms that are in controversy need be construed, and only to the extent necessary to
`
`resolve the controversy).
`
`1.
`
`“said managed network element” (claim 1)
`
`For the purposes of this IPR, this term should be construed to mean “said
`
`managed network device.” EX1046, ¶58.1
`
`2. Means-Plus-Function Terms (claims 1, 11, 13, 14 and 16)
`
`For the purposes of this IPR, Petitioner adopts the district court’s
`
`construction of the following means-plus-function terms in the Related Litigation.
`
`The scope of a means-plus-function claim term is limited to the structures,
`
`materials and acts that perform the identical claimed function or functions and that
`
`are identical or equivalent to those disclosed in the specification.
`
`1 Petitioner may take the position in the parallel district court case that the lack of
`
`antecedent basis renders this term indefinite. The construction provided in this
`
`Petition satisfies Petitioner’s obligation under 47 C.F.R. § 42.100(b)(3). IPR2022-
`
`00980, Paper 14, 11-12 (PTAB, 12/5/22) (“[N]or are we persuaded that
`
`Petitioner’s position that this term is indefinite . . . in a parallel district court
`
`proceeding, is fatal to its Petition.”).
`
`1605282440
`
`9
`
`

`

`3.
`
`Limitation [1.b]: “an out of band access connection means”
`
`a.
`
`Function:
`
`As recited in claim 1, the function performed by this claim element is
`
`“connecting said one or more network services or remote users with said secure
`
`management access controller for management of said network device”. EX1042,
`
`2.
`
`b.
`
`Structure:
`
`As determined by the district court in the Related Litigation, the
`
`corresponding structure is one or more of the following networks: a Public
`
`Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) (2:45-57, 3:2-4, 12:37-61), an Integrated
`
`Services Digital Network (ISDN) (2:45-57), a cellular network (6:14-21, 7:60-62,
`
`12:37-61), an Ethernet network (12:37-61), a wireless network, and/or a Digital
`
`Subscriber Line (DSL) (12:37-61, 15:55-60), where the one or more networks use
`
`one or more of the following protocols: SNMP, TFTP, FTP, DNS, SysLog, Telnet,
`
`SSH, HTTP, HTTPs, point to point IP, and/or XML (8:30-38). EX1042, 2-3.
`
`4.
`
`Limitation [1.c]: “virtual management interface connection
`means”
`
`a.
`
`Function:
`
`As recited in claim 1, the functions performed by this claim element are (i)
`
`“connecting said one or more network services or remote users with said secure
`
`management access controller”; (ii) “provides logical separation of management
`
`1605282440
`
`10
`
`

`

`data from user data,” and (iii) “utilizes user interfaces of said managed network
`
`element for connecting said one or more network services or remote users with
`
`said secure management access controller.” EX1042, 3.
`
`b.
`
`Structure:
`
`As determined by the district court in the Related Litigation, the
`
`corresponding structure is a virtual private network (VPN) (6:22-44, 6:63-7:5,
`
`12:5-21). EX1042, 3.
`
`5.
`
`Claim 11: “protection means”
`
`a.
`
`Function
`
`As recited in claim 11, the function performed by this claim element is
`
`“protecting the management data.” EX1042, 4.
`
`b.
`
`Structure
`
`The corresponding structures include a firewall (EX1002, 3:49-60), a virtual
`
`private network (VPN) (EX1002, 3:49-60), or a combination of a firewall, VPN,
`
`and authentication and authorization applications (EX1002, 6:22-7:6). EX1042, 4.
`
`6.
`
`Claim 13: “monitoring means for monitoring the status of
`at least one computer network component”
`
`a.
`
`Function
`
`As recited in claim 13, the function performed by this claim element is
`
`“monitoring the status of at least one computer network component.” EX1042, 5.
`
`1605282440
`
`11
`
`

`

`b.
`
`Structure
`
`The corresponding structure a processor performing an algorithm to monitor
`
`network components for loss of connectivity by testing the network connection
`
`(7:25-44, 17:50-18:4, 18:20-32, 21:13-65, FIGS. 15-16), or an uninterruptable
`
`power supply (UPS) that monitors network components for loss of external power
`
`(11:25-46, 18:33-51, 20:36-47, FIGS. 2 and 17). EX1042, 5.
`
`7.
`
`Limitation [14.b]: “a monitoring means for monitoring the
`status of the network power supply”.
`
`a.
`
`Function:
`
`As recited in claim 14, the function performed by this claim element is
`
`“monitoring the status of the network power supply.” EX1042, 5.
`
`b.
`
`Structure:
`
`The corresponding structure for performing the above-stated function is an
`
`uninterruptable power supply (UPS) that monitors network components for loss of
`
`power (11:25-46, 18:33-51, 20:36-47, FIGS. 2 and 17). EX1042, 5.
`
`8.
`
`Limitation [14.c] “reporting means for reporting the status
`of the network power supply”
`
`a.
`
`Function:
`
`As recited in claim 14, the function performed by this claim element is
`
`“reporting the status of the network power supply.” EX1042, 6.
`
`1605282440
`
`12
`
`

`

`b.
`
`Structure:
`
`The