[00:00:00] Speaker 04:
We have four cases this morning, all with the same appellant.

[00:00:09] Speaker 04:
Two involving one patent and two involving another.

[00:00:15] Speaker 04:
And they overlap a bit, and with all the

[00:00:24] Speaker 04:
issues that have been essentially decided, waived.

[00:00:28] Speaker 04:
We ask you to please be very clear on what it is that we do need to decide.

[00:00:34] Speaker 04:
So the first case is Genetics, cooperated with the Cisco Systems, 2022, 2234, Mr. Kinnaird.

[00:00:46] Speaker 01:
Thank you, Your Honor.

[00:00:47] Speaker 01:
Stephen Kinnair for Burnettics.

[00:00:49] Speaker 01:
On a prior appeal, this court held that the PTAB could only sustain the examiner's rejection of claim five of the 504 patent if it found that Lendenman Cell Directory Service, or CDS, uses a remote procedure call, or RPC.

[00:01:13] Speaker 01:
The board so found on remand

[00:01:16] Speaker 01:
But that finding lacks both substantial evidence and adequate explanation.

[00:01:21] Speaker 01:
And the board's fundamental error was failing to recognize that a CDS query and an RPC are two different types of communication, even though an RPC client can make both.

[00:01:38] Speaker 01:
And the reason that they're not the same is that a CDS query lacks the required element

[00:01:45] Speaker 01:
of binding between the client and target server.

[00:01:51] Speaker 01:
And instead, the CDS query is a precursor communication that enables an RPC by supplying the binding information.

[00:02:03] Speaker 01:
So Lendenman never describes a CDS query as an RPC because it cannot be.

[00:02:11] Speaker 01:
The board at Appendix 5 relied only on two sets of propositions from Lendenman.

[00:02:18] Speaker 01:
First, broad statements in Lendenman's introduction about system architecture.

[00:02:23] Speaker 01:
And second, statements that the RPC runtime, which is the operating system of an RPC client, can search for information on target servers in the directory service.

[00:02:40] Speaker 04:
Besides using a cryptographic technique.

[00:02:45] Speaker 04:
Isn't it correct that an RPC is a cryptographic technique?

[00:02:51] Speaker 01:
A cryptographic technique can be used in an RPC, but only after the client receives the binding information for the server.

[00:03:03] Speaker 01:
The binding information is a network address and certain other information.

[00:03:07] Speaker 01:
Because what the examiner relied on as the cryptographic technique is the challenge from the target server to the client to say whether or not that it can undo the encryption.

[00:03:23] Speaker 01:
So that can't happen before there's binding information that's supplied by the CDS.

[00:03:30] Speaker 01:
And, Your Honor, as far as the statements that the Board relied on, they rely, and you can find these at Appendix 4461, on statements in Lindenbend that, quote, data sharing is built upon RPC, and the directory service is, quote, based upon the data sharing model.

[00:03:49] Speaker 01:
But those are not categorical statements that every form of data sharing communication, including at CDS query, is RPC.

[00:03:58] Speaker 01:
And indeed, on the same page, Lendenman teaches that different mechanisms

[00:04:05] Speaker 01:
handle an RPC and a CDS query, and it says at 4461 that, quote, any machine that wishes to have access to the function provided by the CDS must also run the client program, CDS clerk,

[00:04:22] Speaker 01:
So every machine in the system, including an RPC runtime, has to look up in the same way using the client program.

[00:04:33] Speaker 02:
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is the board relied on statements from Lendenman that expressly talked about using something called RPC runtime.

[00:04:45] Speaker 02:
in order for a client to search for the binding information, the location of servers in the CDS server.

[00:04:55] Speaker 02:
And the board also cited two other parts of Lenderman, which showed that you do this using some kind of RPC commands.

[00:05:07] Speaker 02:
I mean, I'm not going to spell out what those specific commands are, but there's a couple different RPC commands.

[00:05:11] Speaker 02:
for a client to communicate with a CDS server in order to find these target servers.

[00:05:20] Speaker 02:
And I guess I didn't see your blue brief really reckon with those statements in Lendenman.

[00:05:28] Speaker 02:
and explain away why RPC runtime, these RPC commands that are being cited and relied upon by the board cannot be the use of RPC itself to communicate between the client and the CDS server.

[00:05:44] Speaker 01:
I think we did, Your Honor.

[00:05:46] Speaker 02:
Can you show me where it did?

[00:05:47] Speaker 01:
Yes.

[00:05:51] Speaker 01:
We talked about where, and I'll try to find the exact pages, where it says that the CDS is involved in RPC.

[00:06:01] Speaker 01:
But it never says that the query itself.

[00:06:04] Speaker 02:
I did see you say the CDS server is involved in RPC, but I didn't see you actually tackle the statements that the board relied upon from London about RPC runtime and then those RPC commands.

[00:06:19] Speaker 01:
Well, I think we did in page 17, for example.

[00:06:23] Speaker 01:
We quoted the, and this is something that's repeated throughout Linden when we quoted in the middle of the page there, to establish the actual connection.

[00:06:34] Speaker 01:
The client needs a server binding handle, which it gets from the CDS.

[00:06:40] Speaker 01:
In that 4640, it says the client process needs a binding handle

[00:06:46] Speaker 01:
to execute an RPC call.

[00:06:49] Speaker 01:
And this goes to the fundamental concept of what a remote procedure call is.

[00:06:53] Speaker 01:
So the idea of a remote procedure call is that you're going to see this.

[00:06:58] Speaker 02:
My question is, why is RPC runtime not RPC?

[00:07:06] Speaker 01:
The RPC runtime is the operating system of an RPC client.

[00:07:12] Speaker 01:
And it does functions.

[00:07:13] Speaker 01:
other than simply issuing and executing the RPC call.

[00:07:18] Speaker 01:
And you can see this at appendix 463132, which is actually where the board got one of its

[00:07:27] Speaker 01:
So if you look there, 10.22, and it explains on 46.31 to 32, five different functions that the RPC runtime does.

[00:07:42] Speaker 01:
The first of these is the RPC.

[00:07:45] Speaker 01:
This is the communication operations.

[00:07:48] Speaker 01:
Once you have the binding information, where you do the data transfer between client and server.

[00:07:54] Speaker 01:
Separately, is bullet two, which is the directory service searches.

[00:07:58] Speaker 02:
I'm not going to try to learn lending them right now.

[00:08:01] Speaker 02:
I'm just trying to understand what your argument was in the blue brief.

[00:08:06] Speaker 02:
And what was it that you said in your brief that broke apart conceptually

[00:08:13] Speaker 02:
this thing called RPC runtime from RPC why RPC runtime can't be RPC and why it's unreasonable for the board to have relied on these citations and discussions of RPC runtime as well as the RPC commands because what the I'm looking for it in the blue brief.

[00:08:31] Speaker 01:
Okay What we argue

[00:08:50] Speaker 01:
We argued at 14 that the board simply pointed to several passages that demonstrate.

[00:08:56] Speaker 01:
This is page 14, are you?

[00:08:58] Speaker 01:
Did you say?

[00:08:59] Speaker 01:
Blue brief of 14 right okay, right and say and that the board did not consider other portions of lend a man to Demonstrate that it is only after the request the CBS has already been made that the art RPC is actually executed And so and we go on and talk about that more that's in the summary and then

[00:09:26] Speaker 01:
in seventeen we talk about here the things that the board said

[00:09:32] Speaker 01:
And we say that the CDS enables the RPC model to work, but that has nothing to do with whether Lendenman uses RPC when sending a query to Lendenman's CDS.

[00:09:48] Speaker 01:
And then we talk about, and I think this is important, at the very end there, that one of the board's things, what it said is, the RPC runtime can be used to store and search for the location of servers

[00:10:01] Speaker 01:
binding information, parentheses, in the directory service.

[00:10:06] Speaker 01:
So if an RPC, as we say above that in 17, where we said to establish the actual connection, the client needs is serving a server binding handle.

[00:10:19] Speaker 01:
Server binding information is maintained in CDS, as well in the in-paint map and the RPC runtime of the server machine.

[00:10:29] Speaker 01:
So what we're saying is that if you're searching for the server information, the target information, the binding information that you need to have an RPC call, and at 4626, 4638, 4640,

[00:10:51] Speaker 01:
Lenderman says you need that binding handle to do an RPC call.

[00:10:56] Speaker 01:
So it's just a prerequisite.

[00:10:58] Speaker 01:
And I think the court can see this probably most clearly.

[00:11:01] Speaker 01:
And we discussed this graphic in the briefs.

[00:11:04] Speaker 01:
I'm not sure if it's in the reply brief or the blue brief offhand.

[00:11:09] Speaker 01:
But if you would turn to 46, 43, to 44,

[00:11:20] Speaker 01:
and you see what are the steps to do RPC call routing.

[00:11:26] Speaker 01:
The first is looking up a binding in CDS, right?

[00:11:30] Speaker 01:
And so that's where you send a request to the local CDS client, which is the one that will check its cache.

[00:11:38] Speaker 01:
This is described in section two, by the way, a completely different section from 10 on RPC.

[00:11:45] Speaker 01:
So the CDS client, clerk rather,

[00:11:50] Speaker 01:
check its cache, and if it's not there, it sends a standard DNS query to the CDS server to get the name information.

[00:12:00] Speaker 01:
This is all because you need the binding handle, right?

[00:12:04] Speaker 01:
And what you usually get, as Leninman explains, is a partial binding handle.

[00:12:08] Speaker 01:
And then step two is the client will select a binding handle and issues the RPC call.

[00:12:16] Speaker 01:
You don't even issue the RPC call until you have a binding handle.

[00:12:22] Speaker 01:
And then step three is once you have the fully bound handle, because you need the endpoint,

[00:12:27] Speaker 01:
The client's RPC runtime then directly calls the server process listening to the endpoint.

[00:12:34] Speaker 01:
That's the execution of the RPC call.

[00:12:37] Speaker 01:
And that is what is essential to the concept of a remote procedure call.

[00:12:42] Speaker 01:
So what a remote procedure call does, as Leninman explains, is it simulates the target's local procedure call.

[00:12:51] Speaker 01:
But instead of the target calling on the local procedures, the routine, and its direct address space, the remote client does that.

[00:13:00] Speaker 01:
And it can only do that if the remote client binds to the target.

[00:13:07] Speaker 01:
And that's why the query, which is only function is to get the binding information, cannot be an RPC.

[00:13:17] Speaker 04:
You earned your rebuttal time.

[00:13:19] Speaker 04:
You can save it.

[00:13:19] Speaker 01:
I'll save it.

[00:13:19] Speaker 01:
Thank you, Your Honor.

[00:13:22] Speaker 00:
May it please the Court, Adam Erickson for Cisco.

[00:13:38] Speaker 00:
The board found the client and the CDS communicate through RPC, and that finding is supported by substantial evidence.

[00:13:45] Speaker 00:
They cited to multiple passages of Lendenman that show that that communication is performed through RPC.

[00:13:51] Speaker 00:
Just to name a few, they cite to Appendix 4461, which is Lendenman page 9, which says the CDS is based upon the data sharing model, which is built upon RPC.

[00:14:03] Speaker 00:
They similarly cite to Appendix 4631, which is page 178 of Lendenman,

[00:14:08] Speaker 00:
which says the client's RPC runtime can be used to search for the location of servers in the CDS.

[00:14:15] Speaker 00:
And the board explained that each of these passages, as well as a host of others, show that quote, Lendenman uses the RPC mode of communication between the user and the CDS.

[00:14:26] Speaker 00:
And again, these passages are more than enough to satisfy the substantial evidence standard of review.

[00:14:32] Speaker 00:
However, Renettix's argument, in its briefs at least, cite to a single passage of Lendenman, which is Appendix 4643.

[00:14:40] Speaker 00:
And they argue that this contradicts all of the passages cited by the board.

[00:14:46] Speaker 00:
It would be inappropriate for this court to reverse or remand for at least two reasons.

[00:14:50] Speaker 00:
And that is, even if Renettix's interpretation of Lendenman were correct,

[00:14:54] Speaker 00:
The possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence does not preclude an agency's finding from being supported by substantial evidence.

[00:15:02] Speaker 00:
And second, Renettix's interpretation of the passage it cites is not actually correct and is not supported by Lindenman.

[00:15:09] Speaker 00:
For these reasons, Cisco asks this court to affirm.

[00:15:11] Speaker 00:
And I welcome any questions from the court.

[00:15:13] Speaker 03:
I wanted to engage with Mr. Kinnaird's argument that the RPC doesn't come into effect until after the first stage.

[00:15:25] Speaker 00:
Sure, so this is again, this is based on Appendix 4643.

[00:15:31] Speaker 00:
And there are three steps involved in communicating between the application client host and the application server host.

[00:15:39] Speaker 00:
Step one is looking up a binding in the CDS.

[00:15:44] Speaker 00:
So as opposing counsel explained,

[00:15:47] Speaker 00:
First, the application client host needs an address of the server it intends to contact, and it receives that address at step one.

[00:15:57] Speaker 00:
But the issue with Vernetix's argument is that

[00:16:01] Speaker 00:
They fail to acknowledge that appendix 4643, this page here, is not the only place that step one is described.

[00:16:08] Speaker 00:
So even though step one here doesn't necessarily say either way that this is completed through RPC, doesn't mention RPC, doesn't say it's not performed through RPC,

[00:16:19] Speaker 00:
Again, there are multiple other passages in Lendenman that describe that same step.

[00:16:23] Speaker 03:
What's the best passage that you have that specifically addresses this point of the sequencing of events?

[00:16:32] Speaker 00:
Sure.

[00:16:32] Speaker 00:
So again, referring to appendix 4631, which is on Lendenman 178, it says the client's RPC runtime is used to search the location of servers in the CDS.

[00:16:45] Speaker 00:
Another one is appendix 40.

[00:16:47] Speaker 03:
Where exactly on 4631 are you?

[00:16:50] Speaker 03:
The bottom?

[00:16:50] Speaker 00:
Sure.

[00:16:53] Speaker 00:
The bottom bullet?

[00:16:53] Speaker 00:
Yes, that's the very bottom.

[00:16:54] Speaker 00:
It says the RPC.

[00:16:55] Speaker 00:
The last bullet?

[00:16:56] Speaker 00:
Yes, that's correct.

[00:16:57] Speaker 00:
I see.

[00:16:58] Speaker 00:
And in that same section it says, so that was the first sentence, the RPC runtime can be used to store and search for the location of servers in the CDS.

[00:17:08] Speaker 00:
And the next sentence says the CDS can be accessed through DCE RPC.

[00:17:13] Speaker 00:
And so it's clear from these passages as well as others that that step one is performed through RPC.

[00:17:20] Speaker 03:
And what are the other passages that you would cite for that?

[00:17:24] Speaker 00:
So there's also Appendix 4627 on page 175 of Lindenman.

[00:17:33] Speaker 00:
And this is the second paragraph, kind of in the middle.

[00:17:36] Speaker 00:
It says, the RPC runtime performs such tasks as controlling communications between clients and servers, or finding servers for clients on request.

[00:17:46] Speaker 00:
And finding servers for clients on request, that is step one, which opposing counsel refers to on appendix 4643.

[00:17:55] Speaker 00:
So again, just because step one, as described on that specific page, doesn't say RPC one way or the other, it doesn't change the fact that there are multiple other descriptions in Lindemann that say that it is performed through RPC.

[00:18:08] Speaker 00:
And we can keep going.

[00:18:09] Speaker 02:
What's the difference between RPC runtime and RPC?

[00:18:13] Speaker 02:
I guess maybe in your view there isn't one, but could you explain why that is so?

[00:18:18] Speaker 02:
I take it, maybe the blue brief didn't really express this in any detail, but I think the gist of their argument is RPC is the remote procedure call that happens between the client and the target.

[00:18:34] Speaker 02:
RPC runtime is something that is not the remote procedure call itself, but it's perhaps some kind of software that you use

[00:18:48] Speaker 02:
to eventually set up an RPC.

[00:18:52] Speaker 02:
They don't quite say it like that, but can you explain how I should think of what is RPC runtime, rather beyond just invoking the acronym RPC?

[00:19:03] Speaker 00:
The RPC runtime is a particular component of the application client host, and it does a number of things.

[00:19:10] Speaker 00:
But I would refer this court to Appendix 46-44, which this is again the same summary of RPC call routing that Renettix references as its primary argument.

[00:19:22] Speaker 00:
And at step three, which is executing the RPC,

[00:19:27] Speaker 00:
The only thing that seems to imply that step three is performed through RPC, which I think both parties agree that step three does involve RPC, says with the fully bound handle, the client's RPC runtime then directly calls the server process.

[00:19:44] Speaker 00:
So it seems to be the fact that the client's RPC runtime is the thing that is making the call that makes the communication through RPC.

[00:19:51] Speaker 00:
And again, the board, the standard as to what constitutes sufficient explanation from the board is that the board's reasoning must be reasonably discerned.

[00:20:03] Speaker 00:
And this court has said that this court upholds a decision of less than ideal clarity if the agency's path may be reasonably discerned.

[00:20:11] Speaker 00:
Given the multiple passages that the board cited, I would argue that

[00:20:16] Speaker 00:
the board's decision was of ideal clarity, but even if it isn't, under the substantial evidence standards, the agency's path here can be reasonably discerned.

[00:20:26] Speaker 02:
Is there still some pending litigation out there on this expired patent?

[00:20:32] Speaker 00:
I'm not familiar with that.

[00:20:36] Speaker 00:
It is expired, and so

[00:20:40] Speaker 00:
However, we're within that six-year window of it being asserted, and so that's why Cisco is here to address this.

[00:20:51] Speaker 00:
If there are no additional questions from the court, I'll just reiterate that the board's explanations constitute substantial evidence and mere disagreement in the interpretation of the prior art.

[00:21:03] Speaker 00:
That's a question of the scope and content of the prior art that's clearly reviewed for substantial evidence.

[00:21:08] Speaker 00:
The board cited substantial evidence here, and for these reasons, we ask the court to affirm.

[00:21:13] Speaker 00:
And I'll yield the rest of my time.

[00:21:15] Speaker 00:
Thank you.

[00:21:16] Speaker 04:
No one ever loses points for not using up all their time.

[00:21:26] Speaker 01:
The fundamental problem with my brother's argument is that it conflates the RPC runtime, which is the operating system, with an RPC call.

[00:21:37] Speaker 01:
Now, to call attention to 2208, which is the actual right of appeal notice,

[00:21:42] Speaker 01:
And what they are saying is the Lenderman rejections explain a query is made by a RPC.

[00:21:48] Speaker 01:
Moreover, RPC calls rely upon a well-known authentication algorithm.

[00:21:54] Speaker 01:
This is the server challenge.

[00:21:56] Speaker 01:
So in order to authenticate the query, the call itself has to be an RPC.

[00:22:02] Speaker 01:
The query has to be an RPC.

[00:22:04] Speaker 01:
And at 4631, which explains the RPC runtime, it describes that every RPC client and RPC server is linked with a copy of the RPC runtime.

[00:22:18] Speaker 01:
It's a program.

[00:22:19] Speaker 01:
It's an operating system.

[00:22:21] Speaker 01:
It says it performs multiple tasks.

[00:22:23] Speaker 01:
It lists five of them.

[00:22:25] Speaker 01:
One of them is searching the directory service.

[00:22:27] Speaker 01:
Another one is the RPC.

[00:22:29] Speaker 01:
That's the first bullet.

[00:22:31] Speaker 01:
So the other thing I think my brother fails to address at all are the statements at 4638, 4640, and 4626, where Lenderman says that an RPC requires the binding handle.

[00:22:50] Speaker 01:
in order to execute an RPC call.

[00:22:52] Speaker 01:
And you only get that after the CDS query is completed.

[00:22:58] Speaker 01:
So I think that it's just a fundamental contradiction.

[00:23:02] Speaker 01:
Those arguments were made before the board.

[00:23:04] Speaker 01:
They were made on appeal here, Your Honor.

[00:23:06] Speaker 01:
And they can't have substantial evidence if there's a fundamental contradiction between what they found.

[00:23:12] Speaker 01:
And indeed, the very statement here on 4631 that says the RPC runtime can be used to search for the location of servers, finding information in the directory service CDS.

[00:23:25] Speaker 01:
The board relied on that.

[00:23:27] Speaker 01:
But that's telling you exactly what my point is.

[00:23:30] Speaker 01:
that the CDS query is an antecedent precursor communication that gets the binding information that allows the RPC code.

[00:23:39] Speaker 02:
Is there any pending litigation on this patent?

[00:23:41] Speaker 01:
There is not, Your Honor.

[00:23:43] Speaker 01:
There was a district court litigation, but that was found to be Jamal and non-infringement a couple of years ago.

[00:23:50] Speaker 01:
There is no pending litigation.

[00:23:52] Speaker 01:
But as my colleague pointed out, there's still a statute of limitations, so we still have a property right to defend.

[00:24:01] Speaker 01:
I see I've exhausted my time.

[00:24:04] Speaker 01:
Thank you.

[00:24:05] Speaker 04:
Thank you, counsel.

[00:24:06] Speaker 04:
The case is submitted.