PTAB

IPR2015-01009

Apple Inc v. VirnetX Inc

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: System and Method Employing an Agile Network Protocol for Secure Communications Using Secure Domain Names
  • Brief Description: The ’643 patent discloses systems and methods for establishing an encrypted communication link between two devices. The invention focuses on enabling a secure communication mode transparently to the user, without requiring entry of cryptographic information, by constructing a domain name for a target device, querying a server to resolve it, and using the resulting network address to initiate the secure link.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Anticipation over Windows Resource Kit - Claims 1-9, 12, 14, 17-24, 27, and 29 are anticipated by Windows Resource Kit under 35 U.S.C. §102.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Windows Resource Kit (Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional Resource Kit).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Windows Resource Kit, a comprehensive technical guide for the Windows 2000 operating system, inherently discloses every limitation of the challenged claims. It teaches enabling a secure communication mode via IP Security (IPSec) policies, which a user can select from a dialog window without entering any cryptographic information. The system then establishes an encrypted link based on a determination that the policy has been enabled. The guide further details the standard process of using the Windows 2000 DNS resolver to construct a fully qualified domain name from an identifier (a host name) by appending a pre-configured DNS suffix. This constructed domain name is then used to send a query to a DNS server, which returns a network IP address. Finally, Windows Resource Kit describes initiating the IPSec connection using the received IP address and encrypted communication link resources (e.g., public keys) received from the remote server during security negotiations.

Ground 2: Obviousness over Windows Resource Kit, IE5 Kit, and Elgamal - Claims 1, 13, 15-17, 28, and 30-32 are obvious over Windows Resource Kit in view of IE5 Resource Kit and Elgamal under 35 U.S.C. §103.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Windows Resource Kit (Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional Resource Kit), IE5 Resource Kit (Microsoft Internet Explorer 5 Resource Kit), and Elgamal (Patent 5,657,390).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner asserted that even if Windows Resource Kit does not anticipate all claims, the combination with IE5 Resource Kit and Elgamal renders them obvious. Windows Resource Kit provides the foundational Windows 2000 operating system with its DNS and networking functionality. Elgamal teaches the specifics of the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) protocol, including how clicking a secure hyperlink initiates a handshake process to establish an encrypted session without user-entered cryptographic data. IE5 Resource Kit describes the features of Internet Explorer 5—the browser included with Windows 2000—and its implementation of SSL. This combination teaches the core method of the independent claims. For dependent claims, IE5 Resource Kit teaches displaying a "visible indication" (a lock icon) upon establishing a secure connection (claims 15, 31) and describes how navigating to a secure "https://" address triggers the establishment of the link (claims 16, 32).
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine these references to implement standard secure web browsing. Windows Resource Kit expressly states that Windows 2000 includes Internet Explorer 5 (IE5). A POSITA seeking to understand and configure IE5's security features, such as SSL, would naturally consult the IE5 Resource Kit. Because IE5 Resource Kit identifies SSL as the protocol used, a POSITA would further consult a reference like Elgamal for a comprehensive description of the SSL protocol's functionality.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have had a high expectation of success, as the combination involves implementing a well-known security standard (SSL) on a standard web browser (IE5) and operating system (Windows 2000) using their official technical documentation.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

  • Petitioner argued for the broadest reasonable construction for several key terms to encompass the teachings of the prior art.
  • "encrypted communication link": Proposed as "a transmission path that restricts access to data, addresses, or other information on the path at least by using encryption." This construction was asserted to be consistent with the specification and constructions of similar terms in related patents.
  • "constructing a domain name": Proposed as "any technique for creating a representation of a domain name." Petitioner contended this broad interpretation aligns with the plain and ordinary meaning and encompasses the patent's example of replacing a top-level domain.

5. Key Technical Contentions (Beyond Claim Construction)

  • Petitioner contended that the effective filing date for the challenged claims is no earlier than April 26, 2000. It argued that the key limitation of "enabling a secure communication mode without a user entering any cryptographic information" was first disclosed in a continuation-in-part application filed on that date. This assertion is critical as it establishes that the asserted prior art references, including Windows Resource Kit (published February 2, 2000), pre-date the invention.

6. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requested institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-9, 12-24, and 27-32 of the ’643 patent as unpatentable.