Paper No. 1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MICROSOFT CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`VIRTAMOVE, CORP.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case No. IPR2025-00849
`Patent No. 7,519,814
`____________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.1 et seq
`
`1618823546
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`II.
`III.
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES ....................................................................................... 7
`A.
`Real Party-In-Interest ........................................................................... 7
`B.
`Related Matters ..................................................................................... 7
`1.
`United States Patent & Trademark Office ................................. 7
`2.
`USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board ..................................... 7
`3.
`U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas ................. 8
`4.
`U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas ............... 9
`5.
`U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ....... 9
`C.
`Counsel and Service Information - § 42.8(b)(3) and (4) ...................... 9
`STANDING .................................................................................................. 10
`GROUNDS ................................................................................................... 10
`THE ’814 PATENT ...................................................................................... 10
`A.
`Specification ....................................................................................... 10
`B.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (“POSA”) ................................... 12
`C.
`Prosecution History ............................................................................ 13
`D.
`Challenged Claims ............................................................................. 13
`IV. CLAIM INTERPRETATION ...................................................................... 13
`V.
`GROUND 1: CLAIMS 1-4, 7-11, 14, AND 16-30 ARE
`UNPATENTABLE OVER BLASER-CALDER ......................................... 14
`A.
`Blaser (EX1005) ................................................................................. 14
`B.
`Calder (EX1006) ................................................................................ 16
`C.
`Blaser-Calder Combination ................................................................ 18
`D. Mapping to Challenged Claims .......................................................... 22
`1.
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 22
`a.
`[1PREA] ........................................................................ 23
`i.
`“1. In a system having a plurality of servers
`with operating systems that differ” ..................... 23
`
`1618823546
`
`– i –
`
`

`

`ii.
`
`iii.
`
`iv.
`
`“operating in disparate computing
`environments” ..................................................... 24
`“wherein each server includes a processor
`and an operating system” .................................... 25
`“[OS] including a kernel [and] a set of
`associated local system files compatible
`with the processor” .............................................. 26
`[1PREB] ......................................................................... 29
`i.
`“a method of providing at least some of the
`servers in the system with secure,
`executable, applications” ..................................... 29
`“[applications] related to a service” .................... 30
`“wherein the applications are executed in a
`secure environment” ............................................ 31
`“wherein the applications each include an
`object executable by at least some of the
`different operating systems for performing a
`task related to the service” .................................. 32
`[1A] ................................................................................ 34
`i.
`“storing in memory accessible to at least
`some of the servers a plurality of secure
`containers of application software” ..................... 34
`“each container comprising one or more of
`the executable applications” ................................ 41
`“and a set of associated system files required
`to execute the one or more applications” ............ 43
`“for use with a local kernel residing
`permanently on one of the servers” ..................... 44
`[1B] “wherein the set of associated system files are
`compatible with a local kernel of at least some of
`the plurality of different operating systems,” ................ 45
`[1C] “the containers of application software
`excluding a kernel,” ....................................................... 46
`
`ii.
`iii.
`
`iv.
`
`ii.
`
`iii.
`
`iv.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`1618823546
`
`– ii –
`
`

`

`f.
`
`g.
`
`[1D] “wherein some or all of the associated system
`files within a container stored in memory are
`utilized in place of the associated local system files
`that remain resident on the server,” ............................... 48
`[1E] “wherein said associated system files utilized
`in place of the associated local system files are
`copies or modified copies of the associated local
`system files that remain resident on the server,” ........... 49
`[1F] “and wherein the application software cannot
`be shared between the plurality of secure
`containers of application software,” .............................. 50
`[1G] “and wherein each of the containers has a
`unique root file system that is different from an
`operating system’s root file system.” ............................ 52
`Claim 2: “[C]laim 1, wherein each container has an
`execution file associated therewith for starting the one or
`more applications.” .................................................................. 55
`Claim 3: “[C]laim 2[’s]…execution file includes
`instructions related to an order in which executable
`applications within will be executed.” ..................................... 56
`Claim 4: “[C]laim 1…pre-identifying applications and
`system files required for association with the one or more
`containers prior to said storing step” [1A]. .............................. 57
`Claim 7: “[C]laim 2…modifying at least some of the
`system files to define container specific mount points
`associated with the container.” ................................................ 58
`Claim 8: “[C]laim 1[’s]…applications and associated
`system files are retrieved from a computer system having
`a plurality of secure containers.” ............................................. 59
`Claim 9: “[C]laim 2, wherein server information related
`to hardware resource usage including at least one of CPU
`memory, network bandwidth, and disk allocation is
`associated with at least some of the containers prior to
`the applications within the containers being executed.” .......... 59
`Claim 10: “[C]laim 2, wherein in operation when an
`application residing within a container is executed, said
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`1618823546
`
`– iii –
`
`

`

`9.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`application has no access to system files or applications
`in other containers or to system files within the operating
`system during execution thereof.” ........................................... 61
`Claim 11: “[C]laim 2[’s]…containers include files stored
`in network file storage, and parameters forming
`descriptors of containers stored in a separate location.”.......... 63
`10. Claim 14 ................................................................................... 63
`a.
`[14PRE] “[C]laim 1…creating containers prior to
`said step of storing containers in memory” ................... 63
`[14A] “wherein containers are created by: a)
`running an instance of a service on a server;” ............... 64
`[14B] “b) determining which files are being used;
`and,” ............................................................................... 64
`[14C] “c) copying applications and associated
`system files to memory without overwriting the
`associated system files so as to provide a second
`instance of the applications and associated system
`files.” .............................................................................. 65
`11. Claim 16 ................................................................................... 66
`a.
`[16A] “[C]laim 1…creating containers prior to
`said step of storing containers in memory,” .................. 66
`[16B] “wherein a step of creating containers
`includes using a skeleton set of system files as a
`container starting point and installing applications
`into that set of files.” ...................................................... 66
`12. Claim 17 ................................................................................... 67
`a.
`[17A] “[C]laim 1…installing a service on a target
`server selected from one of the plurality of
`servers,” ......................................................................... 67
`[17B]: “…using a graphical user interface [GUI],
`associating a unique icon representing a service
`with an unique icon representing a server for
`hosting applications related to the service and for
`executing the service, so as to cause the
`
`b.
`
`b.
`
`1618823546
`
`– iv –
`
`

`

`applications to be distributed to, and installed on
`the target server.” ........................................................... 68
`13. Claim 18: Claim 17’s “target server and” GUI “are at
`remote locations.” .................................................................... 69
`14. Claim 19: Claim 18’s GUI “is installed on a computing
`platform, and wherein the computing platform is a
`different computing platform than the target server.” ............. 69
`15. Claim 20: “Claim 19,” where [17B]’s “associating” step
`“includes…relatively moving the unique icon
`representing the service to the unique icon representing a
`server.” ..................................................................................... 70
`16. Claim 21: “[C]laim 20…starting a distributed software
`application.” ............................................................................. 70
`17. Claim 22: “[C]laims 20…updating a console on the
`selected target server with information indicating that the
`service is resident on the selected target server.” .................... 71
`18. Claim 23: “[C]laim 17…testing to determine if the
`selected target server is a valid computing platform, prior
`to causing the applications to be distributed to, and
`installed on the target server.” ................................................. 71
`19. Claim 24: “[C]laim 17…creating a user account for the
`service.” .................................................................................... 71
`20. Claim 25: “[C]laim…installing files specific to the
`selected application on the selected server.” ........................... 72
`21. Claim 26: “[C]laim 17…setting file access permissions to
`allow a user to access the one of the applications to be
`distributed.” .............................................................................. 72
`22. Claim 27 ................................................................................... 72
`a.
`[27A] “[C]laim 1…de-installing a service from a
`server, comprising:” ....................................................... 72
`[27B] “displaying the icon representing the
`service; [and] displaying the icon representing the
`server on which the service is installed; and” ............... 73
`[27C] “utilizing the icon representing the service
`and the icon representing the server to initiating
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`1618823546
`
`– v –
`
`

`

`the de-installation of the selected service from the
`server on which it was installed.” .................................. 73
`23. Claim 28: “[C]laim 27…separating icon representing the
`service from the icon representing the server.” ....................... 73
`24. Claim 29: “[C]laim 27…testing whether the selected
`server is a valid computing platform for de-installation of
`the service.” .............................................................................. 74
`25. Claim 30: “[C]laim 27…copying data file changes
`specific to the service back to a storage medium from
`which the data file changes originated prior to
`installation.” ............................................................................. 74
`VI. GROUND 2: CLAIMS 5-6, 12-13, 15, AND 31-34 ARE
`UNPATATENTBALE OVER BLASER-CALDER-SCHMIDT ................ 75
`A.
`Schmidt-449 (EX1007) ...................................................................... 75
`B.
`Blaser-Calder-Schmidt ....................................................................... 76
`C. Mapping to Challenged Claims .......................................................... 77
`1.
`Claim 5: “[C]laim 2…modifying at least some of the
`associated system files in plural containers to provide an
`association with a container specific identity assigned to
`a particular container.” ............................................................. 77
`Claim 6: “[C]laim 2…assigning a unique associated
`identity to each of a plurality of the containers, wherein
`the identity includes at least one of IP address, host
`name, and MAC address.” ....................................................... 78
`Claim 12 ................................................................................... 78
`Claim 13 ................................................................................... 79
`Claim 15 ................................................................................... 80
`a.
`[15A] “[C]laim 14…assigning an identity to the
`containers including at least one of a unique IP
`address, a unique Mac address and an estimated
`resource allocation;” ...................................................... 80
`[15B] “installing the container on a server; and,” ......... 80
`[15C] “testing the applications and files within the
`container.” ...................................................................... 80
`
`2.
`
`3.
`4.
`5.
`
`b.
`c.
`
`1618823546
`
`– vi –
`
`

`

`6.
`
`7.
`8.
`
`Claim 31 ................................................................................... 81
`a.
`Previously Addressed Limitations ................................. 81
`b.
`[31I] “a run time module for monitoring system
`calls from applications associated with one or
`more containers and for providing control of the
`one or more applications.” ............................................. 81
`Claim 32 ................................................................................... 83
`Claim 33: “[C]laim 32[’s]…run time module includes an
`intercepting module associated with the…containers for
`intercepting system calls from any of the…containers and
`for providing values alternate to values the kernel would
`have assigned in response to the system calls, so that the
`containers can run independently of one another without
`contention, in a secure manner, the values corresponding
`to at least one of” [31C]’s unique identifiers. .......................... 83
`Claim 34 ................................................................................... 84
`a.
`[34A]: “[C]laim 31[’s]…run time module
`performs: monitoring resource usage of
`applications executing;” ................................................ 84
`[34B]: “intercepting system calls to kernel mode,
`made by the at least one respective application
`within a container, from user mode to kernel
`mode;” ............................................................................ 84
`[34C]: “comparing the monitored resource
`usage…with the resource limits; and, forwarding
`the system calls to a kernel on the basis of the
`comparison….” .............................................................. 84
`VII. DISCRETIONARY DENIAL IS UNWARRANTED ................................. 85
`VIII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 85
`IX. APPENDIX: CLAIM LISTING ................................................................... 87
`
`9.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`1618823546
`
`– vii –
`
`

`

`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`CASES
`Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc.,
`IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (Mar. 20, 2020) ........................................................ 76
`BMW of North America, LLC v. Michigan Motor Techs., LLC,
`IPR2023-01224, Paper 15, 11 (Feb. 15, 2024) ................................................... 77
`Google LLC v. Security First Innovations, LLC,
`IPR2024-00215, Paper 15, 6 (May 23, 2024) ....................................................... 5
`Markforged Inc. v. Continuous Composites Inc.,
`IPR2022-00679, Paper 7, 32-33 (Oct. 25, 2022) ................................................ 77
`PLR Worldwide Sales Ltd. v. Flip Phone Games, Inc.,
`IPR2024-00209, Paper 9, 39 (May 10, 2024) ..................................................... 15
`Protect Animals With Satellites LLC v. OnPoint Sys., LLC,
`IPR2021-01483, Paper 11, 14-15 (Mar. 4, 2022) ............................................... 77
`Sand Revolution II, LLC v. Cont’lIntermodal Group-Trucking,
`IPR2019-01393, Paper 24, 7 (June 16, 2020) ..................................................... 76
`REGULATIONS
`37 C.F.R. §42.100(b) ................................................................................................. 4
`37 C.F.R. §42.104(a) .................................................................................................. 1
`37 C.F.R. §42.104(b)(3) ............................................................................................. 5
`STATUTES
`35 U.S.C. §102(b) ...................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. §102(e) ...................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. §103 ........................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. §282(b) ...................................................................................................... 4
`35 U.S.C. §314(a) .................................................................................................... 76
`
`1618823546
`
`– viii –
`
`

`

`35 U.S.C. §325(d) .................................................................................................... 77
`OTHER AUTHORITIES
`Director’s Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials, 5 (June 21, 2022) ..... 76, 77
`
`1618823546
`
`– ix –
`
`

`

`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`
`1009
`
`APPENDIX LISTING OF EXHIBITS
`Exhibit Description
`1001
`U.S. Patent No. 7,519,814 (“’814 patent”)
`1002
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,519,814
`1003
`Declaration of Samrat Bhattacharjee, Ph.D. (“Bhattacharjee”), (EX.
`1003 from IPR-2025-00487)
`Curriculum Vitae of Samrat Bhattacharjee, Ph.D.
`U.S. Patent No. 7,117,495 (“Blaser”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020066022 (“Calder”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,931,449 (“Schmidt-449”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020095479 (“Schmidt-
`479”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020133529 (“Schmidt-
`529”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020124072 (“Tormasov”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20010009425
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20010018708
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20010047472
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20010056572
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20010029605
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020023158
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020052727
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020143795
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020156612
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020156877
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020174215
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020188718
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020194394
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020194488
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030009408
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030014381
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030014466
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030018717
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030023839
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030041173
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030093688
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030097464
`U.S. Patent No. 6,467,052
`
`1010
`1011
`1012
`1013
`1014
`1015
`1016
`1017
`1018
`1019
`1020
`1021
`1022
`1023
`1024
`1025
`1026
`1027
`1028
`1029
`1030
`1031
`1032
`1033
`
`1618823546
`
`– 1 –
`
`

`

`Exhibit Description
`1034
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030140179
`1035
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030154221
`1036
`U.S. Patent No. 7,159,184
`1037
`U.S. Patent No. 7,103,745
`1038
`U.S. Patent No. 6,263,440
`1039
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20040190534
`1040
`U.S. Patent No. 7,356,771
`1041
`U.S. Patent No. 5,903,753
`1042
`U.S. Patent No. 4,685,125
`1043
`U.S. Patent No. 5,406,644
`1044
`U.S. Patent No. 5,421,009
`1045
`U.S. Patent No. 5,568,630
`1046
`U.S. Patent No. 5,640,562
`1047
`U.S. Patent No. 5,657,221
`1048
`U.S. Patent No. 5,675,831
`1049
`U.S. Patent No. 5,742,829
`1050
`U.S. Patent No. 4,742,450
`1051
`U.S. Patent No. 5,761,669
`1052
`U.S. Patent No. 5,784,555
`1053
`U.S. Patent No. 5,835,765
`1054
`U.S. Patent No. 6,044,465
`1055
`U.S. Patent No. 6,122,744
`1056
`U.S. Patent No. 6,195,650
`1057
`U.S. Patent No. 6,321,323
`1058
`U.S. Patent No. 6,363,409
`1059
`U.S. Patent No. 6,453,470
`1060
`U.S. Patent No. 6,567,767
`1061
`U.S. Patent No. 6,732,359
`1062
`U.S. Patent No. 6,874,148
`1063
`U.S. Patent No. 6,985,937
`1064
`U.S. Patent No. 7,140,015
`1065
`U.S. Patent No. 7,185,192
`1066
`U.S. Patent No. 7,454,440
`1067
`U.S. Patent No. 8,209,680
`1068
`U.S. Patent No. 5,926,636
`1069
`U.S. Patent No. 5,218,530
`1070
`U.S. Patent No. 6,134,593
`1071
`U.S. Patent No. 6,918,038
`
`1618823546
`
`– 2 –
`
`

`

`1077
`
`1078
`
`1079
`
`1080
`
`1081
`
`1082
`
`1083
`
`1084
`1085
`1086
`1087
`
`Exhibit Description
`1072
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20040034623
`1073
`U.S. Patent No. 7,461,148
`1074
`U.S. Patent No. 7,136,800
`1075
`PCT Application Publication No. WO2002056156
`1076
`Kamp et al., “Jails: Confining the omnipotent root,” Proceedings of
`the 2nd International SANE Conference (Vol. 43, p. 116) (2000)
`Prevelakis et al., “Sandboxing Applications,” USENIX Annual
`Technical Conference, FREENIX Track (pp. 119-126) (2001)
`Plaintiff VirtaMove Corp.’s Supplemental Preliminary Disclosure of
`Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions, in VirtaMove, Corp. v.
`Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Sept. 06, 2024)
`Chart re: ’814 Patent accompanying Plaintiff VirtaMove Corp.’s
`Supplemental Preliminary Disclosure of Asserted Claims and
`Infringement Contentions, in VirtaMove, Corp. v. Google LLC, 7:24-
`cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Sept. 6, 2024)
`First Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement Against Google
`LLC in VirtaMove, Corp. v. Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG
`(W.D. Tex.) (May 21, 2024)
`Scheduling Order in VirtaMove, Corp. v. Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-
`DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (June 17, 2024) (ECF 34)
`Federal Court Management Statistics-Profiles, U.S. District Courts-
`Combined Civil and Criminal (September 2024)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020095500 (“Schmidt-
`500”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20050169073
`U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/533,388
`U.S. Patent No. 5,412,808
`Order Granting Defendant Google LLC’s Motion to Transfer Venue to
`the Northern District of California in VirtaMove, Corp. v. Google
`LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Jan. 22, 2025)
`Microsoft’s Computer Dictionary (5th ed. 2002) (excerpt)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,381,742
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20030035430
`U.S. Patent No. 6,477,624
`U.S. Patent No. 5,931,947
`U.S. Patent No. 6,148,335
`U.S. Patent No. 6,944,790
`U.S. Patent No. 6,014,135
`
`1088
`1089
`1090
`1091
`1092
`1093
`1094
`1095
`
`1618823546
`
`– 3 –
`
`

`

`1101
`
`1102
`
`1103
`
`1104
`
`1105
`
`1106
`
`1107
`1108
`1109
`1110
`
`Exhibit Description
`1096
`U.S. Patent No. 6,282,660
`1097
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20040153709
`1098
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20050050389
`1099
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20040225952
`1100
`Google LLC’s Proposed Claim Terms for Construction in VirtaMove,
`Corp. v. Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Oct. 1,
`2024)
`Plaintiff’s Disclosure of Proposed Claim Constructions in VirtaMove,
`Corp. v. Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Oct. 1,
`2024)
`Google LLC’s Opening Claim Construction Brief in VirtaMove, Corp.
`v. Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Oct. 24, 2024)
`Plaintiff’s Responsive Claim Construction Brief in VirtaMove, Corp.
`v. Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Nov. 12, 2024)
`Google LLC’s Reply Claim Construction Brief in VirtaMove, Corp. v.
`Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Nov. 26, 2024)
`Plaintiff’s Sur-Reply Claim Construction Brief in VirtaMove, Corp. v.
`Google LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Dec. 13, 2024)
`Joint Claim Construction Statement in VirtaMove, Corp. v. Google
`LLC, 7:24-cv-00033-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.) (Dec. 18, 2024)
`U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/502,619
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20050188268
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020140743
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020143906 (“Tormasov-
`906”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,076,633 (“Tormasov-633”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20060089950 (“Tormasov-
`950”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,222,132 (“Tormasov-132”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020147815 (“Tormasov-
`815”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,209,973 (“Tormasov-973”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020138629 (“Schmidt-
`629”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,944,860 (“Schmidt-860”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020174265 (“Schmidt-
`265”)
`
`1111
`1112
`
`1113
`1114
`
`1115
`1116
`
`1117
`1118
`
`1618823546
`
`– 4 –
`
`

`

`1120
`
`1121
`
`1122
`
`1123
`1124
`1125
`1126
`1127
`1128
`1129
`1130
`1131
`1132
`1133
`
`1134
`
`1135
`
`1136
`
`Exhibit Description
`1119
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020116659 (“Tormasov-
`659”)
`Bach, Maurice. 1987. Design of the Unix Operating System by Marice
`J Bach, 1 edition (Feb. 27, 1987) Prentice Hall; ISBN: 0132017997.
`Crowley, Charles. 1997. Operating Systems: a design-oriented
`approach. Irwin. 1997. ISBN 0-256-15151-2.
`Eckel, George and Chris Hare. 1995. Building a Linux Internet Server,
`Chris Hare”, G. Eckel, New Riders Publishing; ISBN: 1562055259.
`RESERVED
`RESERVED
`RESERVED
`RESERVED
`U.S. Patent No. 6,854,009
`U.S. Patent No. 7,080,356
`U.S. Patent No. 5,870,539
`U.S. Patent No. 6,883,028
`U.S. Patent No. 7,209,959
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20020065835
`The Wayback Machine archive of USENIX Association – Home Page
`(2001-11-14)
`The Wayback Machine archive of USENIX – Publications –
`Proceedings (2001-11-15)
`The Wayback Machine archive of USENIX – 2001 USENIX Annual
`Technical Conference (2001-11-11)
`The Wayback Machine archive of USENIX – 2001 USENIX Annual
`Technical Conference (2001-11-11)
`The Wayback Machine archive of 2001 FREENIX Track Technical
`Program – Abstract (2002-01-12)
`The Wayback Machine archive of “Sandboxing Applications” (2003-
`03-29)
`The Wayback Machine archive of “Sandboxing Applications” (2004-
`01-J9
`The Wayback Machine archive of PDF of “Sandboxing Applications”
`(2004-01-19)
`The Wayback Machine archive of NLUUG: UNIX User Group – The
`Netherlands (2001-07-22)
`The Wayback Machine archive of NLUUG: Previous Events (2001-
`08-03)
`
`1137
`
`1138
`
`1139
`
`1140
`
`1141
`
`1142
`
`1618823546
`
`– 5 –
`
`

`

`1144
`
`1145
`
`Exhibit Description
`1143
`The Wayback Machine archive of Second International SANE
`Conference (2001-08-12)
`The Wayback Machine archive of Second International SANE
`Conference (2001-06-20)
`The Wayback Machine archive of “Jails: Confining the omnipotent
`root.” (2000-09-02)
`The Wayback Machine archive of Linux Journal (1999-05-08)
`Plaintiff VirtaMove Corp.’s Preliminary Disclosure of Asserted
`Claims and Infringement Contentions, in VirtaMove, Corp. v.
`Microsoft Corp., 7:24-cv-00338 (W.D. Tex.) (Mar. 28, 2025)
`
`1146
`1147
`
`1618823546
`
`– 6 –
`
`

`

`MANDATORY NOTICES
`Real Party-In-Interest
`A.
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) is the Real Party-in-Interest.
`
`B.
`
`Related Matters
`1.
`United States Patent & Trademark Office
`The application from which U.S. Patent No. 7,519,814 issued claims priority
`
`to two provisional applications: No. 60/502,619, filed September 15, 2003 and No.
`
`60/512,103, filed October 20, 2003.
`
`The following U.S. patent applications claim the benefit of priority to U.S.
`
`Patent 7,519,814:
`
`(i) U.S. Patent Application 11/432,843 (U.S. Patent No. 7,757,291), filed
`
`May 12, 2006;
`
`(ii) U.S. Patent Application 11/380,285 (U.S. Patent No. 7,774,762), filed
`
`April 26, 2006;
`
`(iii) U.S. Patent Application 12/075,842 filed March 13, 2008.
`
`USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`2.
`Concurrently with the present petition, Petitioner is filing IPR2025-00850,
`
`IPR2025-00851, and IPR2025-00852, also challenging U.S. Patent No. 7,519,814
`
`(“the ’814 patent”).
`
`Petitioner is also filing IPR2025-00853, IPR2025-00854, and IPR2025-
`
`00855 challenging U.S. Patent No. 7,784,058 (“the ’058 patent”), which is also
`
`1618823546
`
`– 7 –
`
`

`

`asserted in VirtaMove, Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., Case No. 7:24-cv-00338, listed
`
`below.
`
`Other proceedings filed against the ’814 or ’058 patents include:
`
`(i) International Business Machines Corp. v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-
`
`00591;
`
`(ii) International Business Machines Corp. v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-
`
`00599;
`
`(iii) Google LLC v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-00487;
`
`(vi) Google LLC v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-00488;
`
`(v) Google LLC v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-00489;
`
`(vi) Google LLC v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-00488;
`
`(vii) Amazon.com, Inc. v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-00563;
`
`(viii) Amazon.com, Inc. v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-00566;
`
`(ix) Amazon.com, Inc. v. VirtaMove, Corp., IPR2025-00561.
`
`U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
`3.
`(i) VirtaMove, Corp. v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, Case No.
`
`2:24-cv-00093;
`
`(ii) VirtaMove, Corp. v. International Business Machines Corporation, Case
`
`No. 2:24-cv-00064.
`
`1618823546
`
`– 8 –
`
`

`

`U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
`4.
`(i) VirtaMove, Corp. v. Google LLC, Case No. 7:24-cv-00033;
`
`(ii) VirtaMove, Corp. v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al, Case No. 7:24-cv-00030
`
`(pending transfer to Northern District of California per Order dated February 19,
`
`2025, see Docket Entry No. 94);
`
`(iii) VirtaMove, Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., Case No. 7:24-cv-00338; and
`
`(iv) VirtaMove, Corp. v. Oracle Corp., Case No. 7:24-cv-00339.
`
`U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
`5.
`(i) Red Hat, Inc. v. VirtaMove, Corp., Case No. 5:24-cv-04740;
`
`(ii) VirtaMove, Corp. v. Google LLC, Case No. 5:25-cv-00860.
`
`C.
`
`Counsel and Service Information - § 42.8(b)(3) and (4)
`
`Lead Counsel
`Backup Counsel
`
`James M. Heintz, Reg. No. 41,828
`Robert Williams (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`Zachary Loney (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`Meera Midha (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`Service Information E-mail: DLA-MicroIPR-VirtaM@us.dlapiper.com
`
`Post and hand delivery: DLA Piper LLP (US)
`One Fountain Square
`11911 Freedom Drive, Suite 300
`Reston, VA 20190-5602
`
`Telephone: 703 773 4000
`Facsimile: 703 773 5000
`
`A power of attorney is submitted with the Petition. Counsel for Petitioner
`
`consents to service of all documents via electronic mail.
`
`1618823546
`
`– 9 –
`
`

`

`Petitioner requests inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-34 of the
`
`’814 patent (EX1001). This Petition is substantively identical to the Petition in
`
`IPR2025-00487, and a motion for joinder with that proceeding is being filed
`
`concurrently herewith.
`
`I.
`
`STANDING
`Petitioner certifies that the ’814 patent is available for inter partes review
`
`and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped from requesting inter partes review of
`
`the challenged claims. 37 C.F.R. §42.104(a).
`
`II. GROUNDS
`
`Ground Number and Reference(s)
`1 Blaser-Calder
`2 Blaser-Calder-Schmidt
`
`Claims
`1-4, 7-11, 14, 16-30
`5-6, 12-13, 15, 31-34
`
`Basis
`§103
`§103
`
`Each reference above is prior art under (at least) pre-AIA §102(e) to the ’814
`
`patent’s earliest alleged priority date; Calder is also prior art under §102(b).
`
`These references were not of record during prosecution of the ’814 patent.
`
`EX1003 (“Bhattacharjee”), [0029]-[0031], [0001]-[0014].
`
`III. THE ’814 PATENT
`A.
`Specification
`Computer Operating Systems (“OSs”) typically provide system files (like
`
`configuration files and libraries) used by applications. EX1001, 2:52-3:19.
`
`Configuration files identify, e.g., the computer’s IP address, available font(s), etc.
`
`1618823546
`
`– 10 –
`
`

`

`Libraries provide pre-existing code for common functions (e.g., opening files).
`
`Problems can arise, however, when one application hogs shared computing
`
`“r