Docker Inc v. Intellectual Ventures II LLC

Prosecution History analysis

Examiner Search analysis

Invalidity Framework analysis

Petition

Petition analysis

## 1. Case Identification
- Case Number: [IPR2025-00840](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-00840)
- Patent #: [8,332,844](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/patent/8332844)
- Filed: May 1, 2025
- Petitioner(s): [Docker Inc](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/docker-inc).
- Patent Owner(s): [Intellectual Ventures II LLC](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/intellectual-ventures-ii-llc)
- Challenged Claims: 1-27

## 2. Patent Overview
- Title: Root Image Caching and Indexing for Block-Level Distributed Application Management
- Brief Description: The [’844](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/patent/8332844) patent relates to a block-level “branching store file system” that provides unique application environments to multiple compute nodes. The system uses a shared, read-only "root image" and node-specific "leaf images" that store only the changes made by each node, which are then merged to create a cohesive file system view for the user.

## 3. Grounds for Unpatentability

#### Ground 1: Obviousness over Menage - Claims 1-13 are obvious over Menage
  - **Prior Art Relied Upon:** [Menage](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) (Patent [6,618,736](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004))
  - **Core Argument for this Ground:**
    - **Prior Art Mapping:** Petitioner argued that [Menage](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) discloses all limitations of the "caching" claims (1-13). [Menage](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) teaches a system for creating file systems for multiple virtual private servers (equivalent to "compute nodes") running on a single host. It uses a set of "shared storage units" containing common data like applications and utilities (a "root image") and a set of "private storage units" for each virtual server to store subsequent changes (a "leaf image"). A "system call wrapper" in [Menage](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) intercepts read/write requests, directing writes to the private storage and reading from either the private or shared storage as appropriate, which Petitioner contended is functionally identical to the merging process of the [’844](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/patent/8332844) patent. [Menage](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) also explicitly taught that the shared storage units can be cached for high-speed access.
    - **Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds):** As this ground relies on a single reference, the motivation was inherent in [Menage's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) own teachings to solve the problem of efficiently providing separate file systems without extensive copying and wasted storage space.
    - **Key Aspects:** Petitioner asserted that the key limitation added during prosecution—that leaf images contain *only* changes and not unchanged blocks from the root image—is explicitly taught by [Menage's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) system, where unchanged data is always read from the shared storage, not copied to the private storage.

#### Ground 2: Obviousness over Menage in view of Murphy - Claims 14-27 are obvious over Menage in view of Murphy
  - **Prior Art Relied Upon:** [Menage](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) (Patent [6,618,736](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004)), [Murphy](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005) (Patent [7,395,324](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005))
  - **Core Argument for this Ground:**
    - **Prior Art Mapping:** This ground addressed the "indexing" claims (14-27). Petitioner asserted [Menage](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) provides the foundational root/leaf storage architecture as detailed in Ground 1. [Murphy](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005), which was not considered during prosecution, supplied the missing teaching of indexing a root image and sharing the results. [Murphy](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005) described a system for centrally managing computers where a "file administration program" can create an "index" of an "image file" (a root image) stored on a server. This index, containing file listings and locations, could then be downloaded by client computers to aid in system configuration and maintenance.
    - **Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds):** A person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would combine [Murphy's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005) indexing with [Menage's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) storage system to gain the well-known benefit of more efficient file searching and location. The combination was presented as applying a known technique (indexing) to a similar system ([Menage's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) shared file system) to yield predictable results.
    - **Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds):** A POSITA would have a reasonable expectation of success because both references described systems where multiple clients ([Menage's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004) "virtual processes," [Murphy's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005) "client computers") share a base file system, making the application of [Murphy's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005) indexing straightforward.

#### Ground 3: Obviousness over Birse in view of Rothman - Claims 1-13 are obvious over Birse in view of Rothman
  - **Prior Art Relied Upon:** [Birse](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1006) (Patent [7,089,300](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1006)), [Rothman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1007) (Patent [7,398,382](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1007))
  - **Core Argument for this Ground:**
    - **Prior Art Mapping:** This ground provided an alternative basis for the unpatentability of the "caching" claims (1-13). Petitioner argued that [Birse](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1006), like [Menage](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1004), taught a root/leaf architecture in the context of a net-booted environment. [Birse](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1006) described an NC server providing a "protected read-only, master copy of the operating system software" (a "root image") to multiple NC clients. Client-specific changes and preferences were stored in "shadow volumes" (leaf images) that contained "only those portions of the operating system that have been modified." [Rothman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1007) supplied the explicit teaching of caching, describing a system where boot images are cached at network devices proximate to clients to reduce network traffic and improve boot efficiency.
    - **Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds):** A POSITA would be motivated to incorporate [Rothman's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1007) caching techniques into [Birse's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1006) net-boot system to achieve the known benefit of faster access to frequently requested data from the master operating system.
    - **Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds):** Success would be expected because caching is a ubiquitous technique, and both references addressed the common problem of efficiently delivering a boot image over a network to multiple clients.

- **Additional Grounds:** Petitioner asserted an additional obviousness challenge for claims 14-27 over [Birse](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1006) in view of [Murphy](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005), which applied [Murphy's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1005) indexing teachings to the net-booted system of [Birse](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/docs/ptab/IPR2025-00840/1006) in a manner analogous to Ground 2.

## 4. Arguments Regarding Discretionary Denial
- The petition identified a co-pending IPR (IPR2025-00931) and several related district court litigations involving the [’844](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/patent/8332844) patent, but did not present explicit arguments as to why discretionary denial would be inappropriate.

## 5. Relief Requested
- Petitioner requested institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-27 of Patent [8,332,844](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/patent/8332844) as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103.

Docker targets root image caching patent with multiple obviousness grounds. Menage & Murphy art cited against all 27 claims on file systems.