`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXPERT DECLARATION OF KEVIN C. ALMEROTH IN SUPPORT OF
`IRONSOURCE LTD.’S PETITION FOR POST-GRANT REVIEW OF CLAIMS 1-18 OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 10,782,951
`
` 
`
`
`
`ironSource Exhibit 1008
`
`

`

`
`
`Table of Contents
`Background ................................................................................................................................... 1
`The ’951 Patent ........................................................................................................................... 11
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ........................................................................................... 14
`Technology Background of the ‘951 Patent.............................................................................. 15
`U.S. Patent No. 10,353,686 to Pasha et al. ....................................................................... 17
`U.S. Published Patent Application 2010/0095294 to Yamada et. al. ............................... 21
`U.S. Published Patent Application US 2016/0142859 to Molinet et al. ........................... 21
`Claim Construction ..................................................................................................................... 21
`Summary of Invalidity Grounds................................................................................................ 24
`Anticipation by Pasha ................................................................................................................. 24
`Independent Claims 1, 12, and 17.............................................................................................. 25
`Dependent Claims 3-11, 14-16 and 18 ....................................................................................... 35
`Claim 3 ................................................................................................................ 35
`Claim 4 ................................................................................................................ 36
`Claim 5 ................................................................................................................ 37
`Claims 6 and 14 ................................................................................................... 38
`Claims 7 and 15 ................................................................................................... 39
`Claim 8 ................................................................................................................ 40
`Claim 9 ................................................................................................................ 41
`Claim 10 .............................................................................................................. 42
`Claims 11, 16, and 18 .......................................................................................... 42
`Obviousness in view of Pasha..................................................................................................... 43
`Claims 2 and 13 are obvious over Pasha ............................................................. 45
`Claim 4 is obvious over Pasha ............................................................................ 46
`Claim 5 is obvious over Pasha ............................................................................ 47
`Claims 6 and 14 are obvious over Pasha ............................................................. 47
`Claim 11, 16, and 18 are obvious over Pasha ..................................................... 49
`Obviousness in view of Pasha and Yamada .............................................................................. 50
`Obviousness in view Pasha and Molinet ................................................................................... 53
`
`i
`
`

`

`The Limitations set Forth in the Claims of the ‘951 Patent Recite Nothing More Than
`Conventional Hardware and Computer Functionality ........................................................... 55
`The Combination of the Elements ............................................................................................. 68
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`DECLARATION OF KEVIN C. ALMEROTH
`I Kevin, C. Almeroth, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`I am over 18 years of age and I am competent to express the opinions set forth herein.
`
`I am currently a Professor Emeritus in the Department of Computer Science at the
`
`Background
`
`University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB). While active at UCSB, I held faculty
`
`appointments and was a founding member of the Computer Engineering (CE) Program, 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.
`
`3.
`
`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
`
`and System Support for the Efficient, Scalable Delivery of Services in Interactive Multimedia
`
`System, minor in Telecommunications Public Policy) earned in June 1997. During my education,
`
`I have taken a wide variety of courses as demonstrated by my minor. My undergraduate degree
`
`also included a number of courses more typical of a degree in electrical engineering including
`
`digital logic, signal processing, and telecommunications theory.
`
`4.
`
`One of the major concentrations of my research has been the delivery of multimedia
`
`content and data between computing devices, including various network architectures. In my
`
`research, I have studied large-scale content delivery systems, and the use of servers located in a
`
`variety of geographic locations to provide scalable delivery to hundreds or thousands of users
`
`1
`
`

`

`simultaneously. I have also studied smaller-scale content delivery systems in which content is
`
`exchanged between individual computers and portable devices. My work has emphasized the
`
`exchange of content more efficiently across computer networks, including 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 networks.
`
`5.
`
`In 1992, the initial focus of my research was on 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 broadcast to
`
`multiple receivers simultaneously. This research has continually evolved and resulted in the
`
`development of 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.
`
`6.
`
`An important component of my research has been investigating the challenges of
`
`communicating multimedia content, including video, between computers and across networks
`
`including the Internet. Although the early Internet was used mostly for text-based, non-real time
`
`applications, the interest in sharing multimedia content, such as video, 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. One content-delivery method I have researched is the one-to-many
`
`2
`
`

`

`communication facility called “multicast,” first deployed as the Multicast Backbone, a virtual
`
`overlay network supporting one-to-many communication. Multicast is one technique that can be
`
`used on the Internet to provide streaming media support for complex applications like video-on-
`
`demand, distance learning, distributed collaboration, distributed games, and large-scale wireless
`
`communication. The delivery of media through multicast often involves using Internet
`
`infrastructure, devices and protocols, including protocols for routing and TCP/IP.
`
`7.
`
`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.
`
`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.
`
`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-
`
`3
`
`

`

`subject content. We also connected 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.
`
`10. 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.
`
`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 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 Bluetooth, Universal
`
`Plug and Play (UPnP) and Digital Living Network Alliance (DLNA).
`
`12.
`
`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. My work in wireless
`
`network spans the protocol stack from applications through to the encoding and exchange of data
`
`at the data link and physical layers.
`
`13.
`
`At the application layer, even before the large-scale “app stores” were available, my
`
`research looked at building, installing, and using apps for a variety of purposes, from network
`
`4
`
`

`

`monitoring to support for traditional computer-based applications (e.g., content retrieval) to new
`
`applications enabled by ubiquitous, mobile devices. For example, my research has looked at
`
`developing applications for virally exchanging and tracking “coupons” through “opportunistic
`
`contact” (i.e., communication with other devices coming into communication range with a user).
`
`In many of the courses I have taught there is a project component. Through these projects I have
`
`supervised numerous efforts to develop new “apps” for download and use across a variety of
`
`mobile platforms.
`
`14.
`
`Toward the middle of the protocol stack, my research also looked to build wireless
`
`infrastructure support to enable communication among a set of mobile devices unaided by any
`
`other kind of network infrastructure. These kinds of networks are useful either in challenged
`
`network environments (e.g., when a natural disaster has destroyed existing infrastructure) or
`
`when suitable support for network communication never existed. The deployment of such
`
`networks (or even the use of traditional network support) are critical to support services like
`
`disaster relief, catastrophic event coordination, and emergency services deployment.
`
`15.
`
`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. I have successfully used monitoring techniques to study wireless data link layer
`
`protocol operation and to improve performance by enhancing the operation of such protocols.
`
`For wireless protocols, this research includes functions like network acquisition and channel
`
`bonding.
`
`5
`
`

`

`16.
`
`Protecting networks, including their operation and content, has been an underlying theme
`
`of my research almost since the beginning of my research career. Starting in 2000, I have 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. Key aspects of the system included
`
`associating streams of packets and analyzing them for viruses and other malware. Once the grant
`
`was awarded, we spent several years developing and meeting the milestones of the project. A
`
`number of my students worked on related projects and published papers on topics ranging from
`
`intrusion detection to developing advanced techniques to be incorporated into firewalls. I have
`
`also used firewalls, including their associated malware detection features, in developing
`
`techniques for the classroom to ensure that students are not distracted by online content.
`
`17.
`
`Recent work ties some of the various threads of my past research together. I have
`
`investigated content delivery in online social networks and proposed reputation management
`
`systems in large-scale social networks and marketplaces. On the content delivery side, I have
`
`looked at issues of caching and cache placement, especially when content being shared and the
`
`cache has geographical relevance. We were able to show that effective caching strategies can
`
`greatly improve performance and reduce deployment costs. Our work on reputation systems
`
`showed that reputations have economic value, and as such, creates a motivation to manipulate
`
`reputations. In response, we developed a variety of solutions to protect the integrity of
`
`reputations in online social networks. The techniques we developed for content delivery and
`
`reputation management were particularly relevant in peer-to-peer communication and
`
`recommendations for downloadable “apps.”
`
`6
`
`

`

`18.
`
`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). The IETF is a large
`
`and open international community of network designers, operators, vendors, and researchers
`
`concerned with the evolution of the Internet architecture and the smooth operation of the
`
`Internet. I have been involved in various IETF groups 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 multicast in the IETF.
`
`Finally, I was the Chair of the Internet2 Multicast Working Group for seven years.
`
`19. My involvement in the research community extends to leadership positions for several
`
`academic 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 Network, ACM Computers in
`
`Entertainment, AACE Journal of Interactive Learning Research (JILR), and ACM Computer
`
`Communications Review. I have co-chaired a number of conferences and workshops including
`
`the IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), IEEE Conference on Sensor,
`
`Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON), International Conference on
`
`7
`
`

`

`Communication Systems and Networks (COMSNETS), IFIP/IEEE International Conference on
`
`Management of Multimedia Networks and Services (MMNS), the International Workshop On
`
`Wireless Network Measurement (WiNMee), ACM Sigcomm Workshop on Challenged
`
`Networks (CHANTS), the Network Group Communication (NGC) workshop, and the Global
`
`Internet Symposium, and I have served on the program committees for numerous conferences.
`
`20.
`
`Furthermore, in the courses I taught at UCSB, a significant portion of my curriculum
`
`covered aspects of the Internet and network communication including the physical and data link
`
`layers of the Open System Interconnect (OSI) protocol stack, and standardized protocols for
`
`communicating across a variety of physical media such as cable systems, telephone lines,
`
`wireless, and high-speed Local Area Networks (LANs). The courses I have taught also cover
`
`most major topics in Internet communication, including data communication, multimedia
`
`encoding, and mobile application design. My research and courses have covered a range of
`
`physical infrastructures for delivering content over networks, including cable, Integrated
`
`Services Digital Network (ISDN), Ethernet, Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM), fiber, and
`
`Digital Subscriber Line (DSL). For a complete list of courses I have taught, see my curriculum
`
`vitae (CV).
`
`21.
`
`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
`
`8
`
`

`

`communication, and security. Applications for this emulation program included communication
`
`of a variety of multimedia-based services, including video conferencing and video-on-demand.
`
`22.
`
`In addition to having co-founded a technology company myself, I have worked for,
`
`consulted with, and collaborated with companies for nearly 30 years. These companies range
`
`from well-established companies to start-ups and include IBM, Hitachi Telecom, Turner
`
`Broadcasting System (TBS), Bell South, Digital Fountain, RealNetworks, Intel Research, Cisco
`
`Systems, and Lockheed Martin.
`
`23.
`
`I am a Member of the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) and a Fellow of the
`
`Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
`
`24.
`
`Additional details about my employment history, fields of expertise, courses taught, and
`
`publications are further included in my CV attached as Appendix A to this Report.
`
`25.
`
`Additional details about my employment history, fields of expertise, and publications are
`
`further included in my curriculum vitae, attached hereto as Attachment A. A list of publications
`
`and cases in which I have provided testimony in trial or by deposition over the last four years is
`
`also included in Attachment A.
`
`26.
`
`I have been retained by ironSource Ltd in connection with its petition for post-grant
`
`review of U.S. Patent No. 10,782,951 (“the ‘951 Patent”). Exh. 10011. I have over 30 years of
`
`experience in fields relevant to the ‘951 Patent.
`
`27.
`
`I am being compensated for my time at a rate of $700 per hour. No component of my
`
`compensation is contingent on my opinions expressed herein or on the outcome of this (or any
`
`other) proceeding.
`
` 
`1References to Exhibits “Exh. 10XX” are to Petitioner’s Exhibits.
`
`9
`
`

`

`28.
`
`I have reviewed the ‘951 Patent (Exh. 1001), as well as its prosecution history (Exh.
`
`1002). In forming my opinions, I have also reviewed and considered the following exhibits:
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,782,951 (Issued September 22, 2020), Instant
`Installation of Apps (“’951 Patent”)
`
`Prosecution history of the ’951 Patent
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,353,686 to Pasha et al.
`
`U.S. Published Patent Application No. 2010/0095294 to Yamada et al.
`
`U.S. Published Patent Application No. 2016/0142859 to Molinet et al.
`
`“App Store Data (2021) - Business of Apps,” by David Curry,
`businessofapps.com available at https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-
`stores/ (May 13, 2021)
`
`“A Brief History of Deep Linking,” by Chris Maddern, TechCrunch
`available at https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/12/a-brief-history-of-deep-
`linking/#:~:text=Deep, (June 12, 2015)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,296,641 to Sogani et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,940,400 to Shapira et al.
`
`“Android vs. iOS Development: Background Processing,” by
`Matthew Casey available at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/android-
`vs-ios-development-background-processing-matthew-casey/ (June
`27, 2016)
`
`1012
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,671,367 to Matthews et al.
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,732,827 to Zhukov et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,800,609 to Liao
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,266,811 to Nabahi
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,131,192 to Slivka et al.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Exhibit
`
`1017
`
`
`
`Description
`
`“Using Java Reflect,” by Glen McCluskey, available at
`https://www.oracle.com/technical-
`resources/articles/java/javareflection.html (Jan. 1998)
`
`The ’951 Patent
`
`29.
`
`The ’951 Patent is entitled “Instant Installation of Apps.” The ’951 Patent asserts that it
`
`provides a “solution to the problem of enabling users easy download of new software
`
`applications onto their devices while maintaining interactions with their current application.”
`
`Exh. 1001, col. 1, line 66 to col. 2, line 2. The ‘951 Patent further suggests that “[t]his solution is
`
`an improvement of the state current art, in which an additional connection must be established
`
`and maintained between the device and the app store in order to enable installation of the new
`
`app.” Exh. 1001, col. 2, lines 11-14.
`
`30.
`
`The “background” section of the ’951 Patent describes conventional Internet
`
`“advertisement campaigns which encourage users to buy and install apps on their devices.” Exh.
`
`1001, col. 1 lines 15-16. In this regard, it is noted that “[t]ypically, when a user viewing the ad is
`
`interested in installing a new app, the user clicks on a link. After the link is clicked, the device
`
`connects to an app store from which the new app may be downloaded.” The ‘951 Patent suggests
`
`that this routing to an app store may lead to poor ad conversion and fraud. Exh. 1001, col. 1 lines
`
`15-41.
`
`31.
`
`The ’951 Patent implements the disclosed methods as software on a conventional mobile
`
`device. Figure 1, shown below, depicts “a device [100] for running software applications, [in
`
`which] installation client 140 is used to install a new app onto the device without going through
`
`an app store.” Exh. 1001, col. 9 lines 17-23.
`
`11
`
`

`

`
`
`32.
`
`The components of device 100 are generic computer components, which are conventional
`
`in any computing device, e.g., a processor 110 and a non-transitory memory 120 for storing code
`
`instructions to be executed by processor 110, and a conventional network interface 150 which is
`
`used by the device when it communicates with external elements (such as the content provider)
`
`over a network. Exh. 1001, col. 9 lines 29-35. The device 100 further includes an installation
`
`client 140, which is defined as an “application running on the device and having the role of
`
`downloading and installing software applications on the device (e.g. installing an app on a
`
`mobile phone).” Exh. 1001, col. 2 lines 64-67.
`
`33.
`
`The method of downloading an app is generally shown in the flow chart of Figure 6.
`
`12
`
`

`

`
`
`34.
`
`This flow chart is described in Col. 13, lines 48-63 with little elaboration on this method
`
`beyond the captions in the flowchart found in blocks 610, 620, 630, 640, 650, and 660. When
`
`the user is running a first app on device 100, the current app displays a link (e.g. an ad containing
`
`a clickable link) to download a new app. When the user selects the link to download the new app
`
`(step 610), the device determines if the installation client 140 is available (step 620). If so, it is
`
`invoked to run in the background (step 630). The installation client 140 automatically downloads
`
`an installation file for the new app (e.g. an Android ® APK file) (step 640) which is then used to
`
`install the new app on the device (step 650). If at step 620, the installation client 140 is not
`
`available, the user is redirected to the app store in step 660. Exh. 1001, col. 9 lines 36-54.
`
`35.
`
`The installation client 140 is described in the schematic of Figure 7 “as several modules
`
`performing separate functions.” Exh. 1001, col. 14 lines 6-8.
`
`13
`
`

`

`
`
`36. With respect to the claimed subject matter, the most relevant of these enumerated
`
`functions is the Download & Installation client 720 which “downloads and installs the new app
`
`when the instant install link is selected (for example by downloading the respective APK file
`
`from external storage (such as a content delivery network or cloud storage such as Amazon Web
`
`Services) and installing the new app using the downloaded APK file).” Exh. 1001, col. 14 lines
`
`26-32.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`37.
`
`I understand that the teaching of the prior art is viewed through the eyes of a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art (“POSIA”) at the time claimed invention was made. To assess the level
`
`of ordinary skill in the art, I understand one can consider the types of problems encountered in
`
`the art, the prior solutions to those problems found in the prior art references, the rapidity with
`
`which innovations are made, the sophistication of the technology, and the level of education of
`
`active workers in the field. My opinion as to what constitutes a POSIA is set forth below.
`
`38.
`
`The ’951 Patent is directed to the field of installing software applications on devices,
`
`such as installing apps on mobile devices. Exh. 1001, 1:6-9. The processes described in the ’951
`
`14
`
`

`

`Patent were well known as of the February 23, 2018 priority date of the ’951 Patent, required
`
`only modest skill using various programming languages, such as Java, HTML, C (or C++) and
`
`the like as well as familiarity with operating systems such as Google’s Android operating system
`
`and Apple’s iOS to conceive and implement.
`
`39.
`
`In my opinion, POSIA would be qualified to perform work on the subject matter
`
`described and claimed in the ’951 Patent through a combination of formal education in computer
`
`programming, computer science or similar discipline and/or work experience, such as two or
`
`more years of computer programming experience. Formal education of a POSIA in this field
`
`may range widely from certificate programs specifically directed to creating apps for mobile
`
`devices to advanced degrees up to and including a PhD in computer science or a related field
`
`such as computer engineering. Although my qualifications place me at the high end of the range
`
`of qualifications for a POSIA, I was a POSIA in the field of the ‘951 Patent as of February 23,
`
`2018 and am undertaking my analysis and opinions rendered herein through the lens of such a
`
`POSIA.
`
`Technology Background of the ‘951 Patent
`
`40.
`
`As of the February 23, 2018, which I understand is the priority date of the ‘951 Patent,
`
`there was a substantial body of technology in use, and literature in the field of “installing
`
`software applications on devices and, more specifically, but not exclusively, to installing apps on
`
`mobile devices.” Exh. 1001, col. 1, lines 5-9. Indeed, as the ‘951 Patent concedes, “[t]he use of
`
`apps on mobile devices such as cell phones was very widespread. Users frequently install new
`
`apps on their devices, providing the devices with new functionality such as access to new
`
`services, online shopping, gaming and more.” Id. at 1:10-14. The Apple App Store and Google
`
`Play Store for instance, were both introduced nearly a decade before the priority date of the ‘951
`
`15
`
`

`

`Patent and by 2017, there were more than 3 million apps available in each of these ecosystems.
`
`See Exh. 1006.
`
`41.
`
`In addition to the ubiquitous practice of downloading apps onto mobile phones and
`
`tablets, it was well known that app installation is a subset of the larger field of downloading
`
`software and other content to a computer over a network. While the App Store and Google Play
`
`Store are specific marketplaces for downloading software applications, the methods used to
`
`download software to a personal computer that were widely used since the 1990’s are
`
`fundamentally no different than those used to download software applications.
`
`42.
`
`The concept of downloading software as a background task was also widely known and
`
`practiced in the field long prior to February 2018. For example, commercial software packages,
`
`such as Windows 95 allowed upgrades of the software to be downloaded and installed as a
`
`background task while allowing the user to perform other tasks in the foreground since at least
`
`the 90s. Exh. 1015, col. 15, lines 11-17 (“It has been found that during a typical Silent install
`
`associated with the InstallShield(R) program, the installation is often considered “too silent” for
`
`the user. It has been found that the optional display of a minimal progress indicator or Silent
`
`Notification Icon is desirable, so that users may have some indicator of the events taking place in
`
`the background.”) Exh. 1016, col. 5, line 17 to 36 (“The present invention is directed toward a
`
`method for installing a Software product.”), col. 7, lines 38-42 (“The Shell program module is
`
`preferably executed in a multitasking operating System, and those skilled in the art will
`
`appreciate that a multitasking operating System allows a program module to run in either the
`
`foreground or the background.”) Moreover, the use of background tasks is integral to JAVA
`
`programming language and the Android operat