PTAB

IPR2021-00969

Cloudflare Inc v. Sable IP LLC

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: System and Method for Network Tunneling Utilizing Micro-Flow State Information
  • Brief Description: The ’932 patent discloses a network tunneling system, such as a Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) network, that uses flow-specific state information to route data packets. The system utilizes routers comprising an ingress linecard, a "flow block" containing state information for a specific micro-flow, and an "aggregate flow block" that stores tunnel-specific information and statistics for the selected network tunnel.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 1, 2, and 6-16 are obvious over Nomura and Forslöw

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Nomura (Application # 2001/0019554) and Forslöw (Patent 6,973,057).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Nomura taught the core elements of the claimed method. Nomura disclosed a label switch network that performs traffic engineering by creating flow-specific entries (the claimed "flow block") in an "IP flow identifying table." These entries contained flow state information and a tunnel identifier ("L2 path identifier") for selecting a network tunnel. Nomura also disclosed collecting network utilization statistics and storing path status information in an "L2 Path Status Management Table," which Petitioner equated to the claimed "aggregate flow block" that stores statistics. Petitioner contended that while Nomura disclosed using this aggregate table, it did not explicitly detail the process for indexing into it. Forslöw was introduced to supply this missing detail, as it taught using a label (a tunnel identifier) as an index into an MPLS forwarding table to retrieve tunnel-specific information, such as an outgoing label and interface.
    • Motivation to Combine: A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine Nomura and Forslöw because both references address improving efficiency in label switch networks. A POSITA implementing Nomura's system, which suggests referring to a status management table, would naturally look to prior art like Forslöw for efficient and conventional methods of storing and indexing forwarding information using path identifiers.
    • Expectation of Success: The combination was asserted to be routine and predictable, as it involved implementing Forslöw's well-known forwarding table structure within Nomura's analogous network system to achieve improved efficiency.

Ground 2: Claims 3-5 and 17-32 are obvious over Nomura, Forslöw, and Reeves

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Nomura (Application # 2001/0019554), Forslöw (Patent 6,973,057), and Reeves (Patent 7,260,083).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground built upon the combination of Nomura and Forslöw to argue obviousness of claims requiring specific hardware components. Petitioner asserted that while Nomura and Forslöw disclosed the system and logic for network tunneling, they lacked detailed descriptions of the underlying router hardware. Reeves was introduced to provide these conventional hardware details. Reeves disclosed a dual-function ATM switch and IP router with a standard architecture, including specific "ingress line cards" for receiving data traffic and "egress line cards" with output ports for transmitting data traffic. Petitioner argued that implementing the logical system of Nomura/Forslöw on the well-known router hardware disclosed by Reeves would render the hardware-centric claims obvious. For example, receiving a data packet "at a particular ingress linecard" (claim 3) or "determining a particular output port on a specific egress linecard" (claim 17) was directly taught by Reeves's router architecture.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA building the network system taught by Nomura and Forslöw would have been motivated to look to the prior art for a suitable hardware implementation. Reeves described an efficient and conventional router configuration for an MPLS network, making it an obvious and logical choice to provide the physical components, such as linecards and ports, necessary to realize the claimed system.
    • Expectation of Success: Integrating the system of Nomura and Forslöw with the standard router hardware from Reeves would have been a routine task for a POSITA, leading to the predictable result of a functional label-switched router with ingress and egress processing capabilities.

4. Arguments Regarding Discretionary Denial

  • Petitioner argued that discretionary denial under Fintiv would be inappropriate. The petition was filed shortly after the initiation of co-pending district court litigation, meaning the court case was in its earliest stages with no trial date set and minimal investment by the parties. Petitioner also asserted it would stipulate not to pursue the same invalidity grounds in the district court if the inter partes review (IPR) was instituted, thereby eliminating concerns of duplicative efforts and inconsistent outcomes.

5. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of IPR and cancellation of claims 1-32 of the ’932 patent as unpatentable.