EXHIBIT PP 

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 1 of 104 PageID #: 4568
Page 1 of 51

U.S. Patent No. 7,519,814 vs. HPE

Accused Instrumentalities: HPE products and services using secure containerized applications, including without limitation HPE’s Ezmeral Runtime 

Enterprise (including without limitation both Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise and Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise Essentials, in each case including when 

marketed, sold, and/or licensed as part of or associated with and HPE’s GreenLake branding, e.g. “HPE GreenLake for containers” which “is built 

on HPE Ezmeral Container Platform”), and all versions and variations thereof since the issuance of the asserted patent.

Each Accused Instrumentality infringes the claims in substantially the same way, and the evidence shown in this chart is similarly applicable to each 

Accused Instrumentality. Each claim limitation is literally infringed by each Accused Instrumentality. However, to the extent any claim limitation is 

not met literally, it is nonetheless met under the doctrine of equivalents because the differences between the claim limitation and each Accused 

Instrumentality would be insubstantial, and each Accused Instrumentality performs substantially the same function, in substantially the same way, to 

achieve the same result as the claimed invention. Notably, Defendant has not yet articulated which, if any, particular claim limitations it believes are 

not met by the Accused Instrumentalities.

Claim 1

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

[1pre] 1. In a system having a plurality of 

servers with operating systems that 

differ, operating in disparate computing 

environments, wherein each server 

includes a processor and an operating 

system including a kernel a set of 

associated local system files compatible 

with the processor, a method of providing 

at least some of the servers in the system 

with secure, executable, applications 

related to a service, wherein the 

applications are executed in a secure 

environment, wherein the applications 

each include an object executable by at 

least some of the different operating

systems for performing a task related to 

the service, the method comprising:

To the extent the preamble is limiting, HPE and/or its customer practices, through the Accused 

Instrumentalities, in a system having a plurality of servers with operating systems that differ, 

operating in disparate computing environments, wherein each server includes a processor and an 

operating system including a kernel a set of associated local system files compatible with the 

processor, a method of providing at least some of the servers in the system with secure, executable, 

applications related to a service, wherein the applications are executed in a secure environment, 

wherein the applications each include an object executable by at least some of the different operating 

systems for performing a task related to the service, as claimed.

For example, HPE Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise runs on individual servers, including HPE Synergy 

and HPE ProLiant servers, each of which runs an independent operating system, including for 

example RHEL or SLES running either on bare metal, through an on-premises virtualized 

infrastructure, through one or more cloud services, or through any other supported deployment. In an 

exemplary deployment, two or more servers use different operating systems. The servers operate in 

disparate computing environments, including because each server is a stand-alone computer and/or 

each server is unrelated to the other servers due to having independent hardware and, in some 

instances, independent software.

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 2 of 104 PageID #: 4569
Page 2 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

HPE requires that each server includes a processor with one or more cores available to the OS kernel. 

HPE further requires each server to have a supported operating system (SLES or RHEL/CentOS), 

which includes a kernel and associated local system files, including for example libraries such as 

libc/glibc, configuration files, etc. In the infringing system, at least two servers have different 

operating systems, for example SLES and RHEL/CentOS, or for another example different versions 

of SLES and/or RHEL/CentOS.

In at least some instances, HPE directly owns, operates, controls, and/or benefits from the claimed

system and/or method. In other instances, HPE’s customer makes and uses the system and/or method 

either by following HPE’s direction and control, including HPE’s documentation, or automatically 

through the ordinary and expected operation of HPE’s software, or a combination thereof.

See claim limitations below.

See also, e.g.:

https://www.hpe.com/psnow/doc/a50004264enw.pdf?jumpid=in_pdp-psnow-qs

https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-ezmeral-uncut/hpe-ezmeral-container-platform-is-now-hpeezmeral-runtime/ba-p/7151720

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/caas.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 3 of 104 PageID #: 4570
Page 3 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://www.hpe.com/psnow/doc/a50003599enw

https://www.hpe.com/psnow/doc/a50004264enw.pdf?jumpid=in_pdp-psnow-qs

https://www.hpe.com/psnow/doc/a50004264enw.pdf?jumpid=in_pdp-psnow-qs

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 4 of 104 PageID #: 4571
Page 4 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

https://docs.ezmeral.hpe.com/runtime-enterprise/56/home/about-hpe-ezmeral-containerpl/GEN_End_User_Software_Agreement.html

https://www.techtarget.com/searchdatacenter/definition/kernel

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 5 of 104 PageID #: 4572
Page 5 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

https://docs.ezmeral.hpe.com/runtime-enterprise/56/reference/universalconcepts/Controller_Gateway_and_Worker_Hosts.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 6 of 104 PageID #: 4573
Page 6 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.ezmeral.hpe.com/runtimeenterprise/56/reference/kubernetes/Kubernetes_Physical_Architecture.html#v52_k8s-kubernetesphysical-architecture__k8s-cluster-architecture

[1a] storing in memory accessible to at 

least some of the servers a plurality of 

secure containers of application software, 

each container comprising one or more of 

the executable applications and a set of 

associated system files required to 

execute the one or more applications, for 

use with a local kernel residing 

permanently on one of the servers; 

The method practiced by HPE and/or its customer through the Accused Instrumentalities includes a 

step of storing in memory accessible to at least some of the servers a plurality of secure containers of 

application software, each container comprising one or more of the executable applications and a set 

of associated system files required to execute the one or more applications, for use with a local kernel 

residing permanently on one of the servers.

For example, HPE Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise stores application containers, sometimes called 

Docker containers, container images, Kubernetes containers, or Kubernetes pods, in persistent storage 

available to each node running the application. The terms “node” and “host” are both used to refer to 

the claimed server. The container might be in a format defined by the Open Container Initiative. This 

storage may be physically attached to the server or connected through any supported interconnect, 

including over a network. In addition to Each container includes the application software as well as , 

each container includes associated system files, including a Linux user space required to execute the 

application, for example libc/glibc and other shared libraries, configuration files, etc. necessary for 

the application. For example, the container includes a base OS image, provided by HPE or by a third 

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 7 of 104 PageID #: 4574
Page 7 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

party, such as a CentOS, RHEL, or Ubuntu base image. The container is compatible with the host 

kernel, for example because the container libraries are linked against the Linux kernel, and the 

supported host operating systems also use the Linux kernel, which has a stable binary interface.

The containers are secure containers as claimed. For example, the data within an individual container 

is insulated from the effects of other containers except to the extent the container is specifically 

configured to allow other containers to modify its data, for example using a shared volume.

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 8 of 104 PageID #: 4575
Page 8 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

https://www.hpe.com/psnow/doc/a50002075enw

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 9 of 104 PageID #: 4576
Page 9 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://www.hpe.com/psnow/doc/a50002075enw

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/

https://developer.hpe.com/blog/kubernetes-application-containers-managing-containers-and-clusterresour/

https://developer.hpe.com/blog/kubernetes-application-containers-managing-containers-and-clusterresour/

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/caas.html

https://www.docker.com/blog/the-10-most-common-questions-it-admins-ask-about-docker/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 10 of 104 PageID #: 4577
Page 10 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp55hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=reference/universal-concepts/Namespaces.html

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/containers.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 11 of 104 PageID #: 4578
Page 11 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 12 of 104 PageID #: 4579
Page 12 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 13 of 104 PageID #: 4580
Page 13 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 14 of 104 PageID #: 4581
Page 14 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/volumes/

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/container-environment/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 15 of 104 PageID #: 4582
Page 15 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/images/

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/volumes/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 16 of 104 PageID #: 4583
Page 16 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 17 of 104 PageID #: 4584
Page 17 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 18 of 104 PageID #: 4585
Page 18 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 19 of 104 PageID #: 4586
Page 19 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 20 of 104 PageID #: 4587
Page 20 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

https://docs.ezmeral.hpe.com/runtime-enterprise/56/reference/universalconcepts/Controller_Gateway_and_Worker_Hosts.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 21 of 104 PageID #: 4588
Page 21 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.ezmeral.hpe.com/runtimeenterprise/56/reference/kubernetes/Kubernetes_Physical_Architecture.html#v52_k8s-kubernetesphysical-architecture__k8s-cluster-architecture

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 22 of 104 PageID #: 4589
Page 22 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

[1b] wherein the set of associated system 

files are compatible with a local kernel of 

at least some of the plurality of different 

operating systems, 

In the method practiced by HPE and/or its customer through the Accused Instrumentalities, the set of 

associated system files are compatible with a local kernel of at least some of the plurality of different 

operating systems.

The associated system files in the container are compatible with the host kernel, for example because 

they are linked against the Linux kernel and the supported host operating systems also use the Linux 

kernel, which has a stable binary interface.

See discussion in element [1a] above. 

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/caas.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 23 of 104 PageID #: 4590
Page 23 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 24 of 104 PageID #: 4591
Page 24 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

[1c] the containers of application 

software excluding a kernel, 

In the method practiced by HPE and/or its customer through the Accused Instrumentalities, the 

containers of application software exclude a kernel.

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

https://www.docker.com/blog/the-10-most-common-questions-it-admins-ask-about-docker/

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/containers.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 25 of 104 PageID #: 4592
Page 25 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

[1d] wherein some or all of the associated 

system files within a container stored in 

memory are utilized in place of the 

associated local system files that remain 

resident on the server, 

In the method practiced by HPE and/or its customer through the Accused Instrumentalities, some or 

all of the associated system files within a container stored in memory are utilized in place of the 

associated local system files that remain resident on the server.

For example, each container will utilize its own associated local system files, including libraries such 

as libc/glibc and configuration files, not the corresponding associated local system files (e.g., libraries 

and configuration files of the host OS). As described above and below, in the Accused 

Instrumentalities the associated system files provide at least some of the same functionalities as the 

associated local system files. The host/node’s associated local system files remain resident on the 

host/node, for example for use by system processes or applications outside the container environment.

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

https://developer.hpe.com/blog/kubernetes-application-containers-managing-containers-and-clusterresour/

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/caas.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 26 of 104 PageID #: 4593
Page 26 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

[1e] wherein said associated system files 

utilized in place of the associated local 

system files are copies or modified 

copies of the associated local system files 

that remain resident on the server, 

In the method practiced by HPE and/or its customer through the Accused Instrumentalities, said 

associated system files utilized in place of the associated local system files are copies or modified 

copies of the associated local system files that remain resident on the server.

For example, in some cases the host OS and container will use one or more identical system files, for 

example when both the host and the container incorporate the same Linux distribution version, or 

when both host and container use the same version of libc. In the case where the associated system 

files are identical to the associated local system files, they are copies thereof. In other cases modified 

copies are used instead, for example when different versions of the same library, or configuration files 

with different parameters, are used by the host and container.

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

https://medium.com/@swalperen3008/what-is-dockerize-and-dockerize-your-project-a-step-by-stepguide-899c48a34df6

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 27 of 104 PageID #: 4594
Page 27 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

[1f] and wherein the application software 

cannot be shared between the plurality of 

secure containers of application software,

In the method practiced by HPE and/or its customer through the Accused Instrumentalities, the 

application software cannot be shared between the plurality of secure containers of application 

software.

For example, each container has an isolated runtime environment that cannot be accessed by other 

containers, for example including a per-container writeable layer or other ephemeral per-container 

storage. For another example, when the plurality of secure containers each corresponds to a different 

container image, each container cannot access another container’s image and therefore application 

software.

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp55hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=reference/universal-concepts/Namespaces.html

https://developer.hpe.com/blog/kubernetes-application-containers-managing-containers-and-clusterresour/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 28 of 104 PageID #: 4595
Page 28 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 29 of 104 PageID #: 4596
Page 29 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 30 of 104 PageID #: 4597
Page 30 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 31 of 104 PageID #: 4598
Page 31 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

[1g] and wherein each of the containers 

has a unique root file system that is 

different from an operating system's root 

file system.

In the method practiced by HPE and/or its customer through the Accused Instrumentalities, each of 

the containers has a unique root file system that is different from an operating system's root file 

system.

For example, the container’s root file system comprises the image layer(s), an ephemeral writeable 

layer (e.g., in Docker terminology the container layer), and optionally one or more volumes. This root 

file system is distinct and isolated from the host operating system’s root file system.

See, e.g.:

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/containers.html

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 32 of 104 PageID #: 4599
Page 32 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 33 of 104 PageID #: 4600
Page 33 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 34 of 104 PageID #: 4601
Page 34 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 35 of 104 PageID #: 4602
Page 35 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/volumes/

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/container-environment/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 36 of 104 PageID #: 4603
Page 36 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/images/

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/volumes/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 37 of 104 PageID #: 4604
Page 37 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 38 of 104 PageID #: 4605
Page 38 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 39 of 104 PageID #: 4606
Page 39 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 40 of 104 PageID #: 4607
Page 40 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 41 of 104 PageID #: 4608
Page 41 of 51

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 42 of 104 PageID #: 4609
Page 42 of 51

Claim 2

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

2. A method as defined in claim 1, 

wherein each container has an execution 

file associated therewith for starting the 

one or more applications.

HPE and/or its customer practices, through the Accused Instrumentalities, a method as defined in 

claim 1, wherein each container has an execution file associated therewith for starting the one or more 

applications.

For example, a container image has an associated image configuration comprising information for 

starting the one or more applications. This can be an Open Containers Initiative image configuration. 

See, e.g.:

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 43 of 104 PageID #: 4610
Page 43 of 51

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 44 of 104 PageID #: 4611
Page 44 of 51

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 45 of 104 PageID #: 4612
Page 45 of 51

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 46 of 104 PageID #: 4613
Page 46 of 51

Claim 6

Claim 6 Accused Instrumentalities

6. A method as defined in claim 2, 

comprising the step of assigning a unique 

associated identity to each of a plurality 

of the containers, wherein the identity 

includes at least one of IP address, host 

name, and MAC address.

HPE and/or its customer practices, through the Accused Instrumentalities, a method as defined in 

claim 2, comprising the step of assigning a unique associated identity to each of a plurality of the 

containers, wherein the identity includes at least one of IP address, host name, and MAC address.

For example, Kubernetes containers have an associated hostname, which in the case of a singlecontainer Pod is the unique identity of that container. For another example, Kubernetes pods have an 

associated hostname, which is unique. For another example, a networked Kubernetes pod has an 

assigned IPv4 and/or IPv6 address. For another example, a Docker container has an IP address and a 

hostname.

See, e.g.:

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/container-environment/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 47 of 104 PageID #: 4614
Page 47 of 51

Claim 6 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/network/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 48 of 104 PageID #: 4615
Page 48 of 51

Claim 9

Claim 9 Accused Instrumentalities

9. A method as defined in claim 2, 

wherein server information related to 

hardware resource usage including at 

least one of CPU memory, network 

bandwidth, and disk allocation is 

associated with at least some of the 

containers prior to the applications within 

the containers being executed.

HPE and/or its customer practices, through the Accused Instrumentalities, a method as defined in 

claim 2, wherein server information related to hardware resource usage including at least one of CPU 

memory, network bandwidth, and disk allocation is associated with at least some of the containers 

prior to the applications within the containers being executed.

For example, Kubernetes tracks and limits resource usage, including CPU and memory resources. For 

another example, Docker tracks and limits resource usage, including CPU and memory resources.

See, e.g.:

Resource Management for Pods and Containers

When you specify a Pod, you can optionally specify how much of each resource 

a container needs. The most common resources to specify are CPU and memory 

(RAM); there are others.

When you specify the resource request for containers in a Pod, the kubescheduler uses this information to decide which node to place the Pod on. When 

you specify a resource limit for a container, the kubelet enforces those limits so 

that the running container is not allowed to use more of that resource than the 

limit you set. The kubelet also reserves at least the request amount of that system 

resource specifically for that container to use.

Requests and limits

If the node where a Pod is running has enough of a resource available, it's 

possible (and allowed) for a container to use more resource than its request for 

that resource specifies. However, a container is not allowed to use more than its 

resource limit.

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 49 of 104 PageID #: 4616
Page 49 of 51

Claim 9 Accused Instrumentalities

For example, if you set a memory request of 256 MiB for a container, and that 

container is in a Pod scheduled to a Node with 8GiB of memory and no other 

Pods, then the container can try to use more RAM.

If you set a memory limit of 4GiB for that container, the kubelet (and container 

runtime) enforce the limit. The runtime prevents the container from using more 

than the configured resource limit. For example: when a process in the container 

tries to consume more than the allowed amount of memory, the system kernel 

terminates the process that attempted the allocation, with an out of memory 

(OOM) error.

Limits can be implemented either reactively (the system intervenes once it sees a 

violation) or by enforcement (the system prevents the container from ever 

exceeding the limit). Different runtimes can have different ways to implement the 

same restrictions.

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/configuration/manage-resources-containers/

Runtime options with Memory, CPUs, and GPUs

By default, a container has no resource constraints and can use as much of a given 

resource as the host's kernel scheduler allows. Docker provides ways to control how 

much memory, or CPU a container can use, setting runtime configuration flags of 

the docker run command. This section provides details on when you should set such 

limits and the possible implications of setting them.

Limit a container's access to memory

Docker can enforce hard or soft memory limits.

• Hard limits lets the container use no more than a fixed amount of memory.

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 50 of 104 PageID #: 4617
Page 50 of 51

Claim 9 Accused Instrumentalities

• Soft limits lets the container use as much memory as it needs unless certain 

conditions are met, such as when the kernel detects low memory or contention on 

the host machine.

https://docs.docker.com/config/containers/resource_constraints/

Claim 10

Claim 10 Accused Instrumentalities

10. A method as defined in claim 2, 

wherein in operation when an application 

residing within a container is executed, 

said application has no access to system 

files or applications in other containers or 

to system files within the operating 

system during execution thereof.

HPE and/or its customer practices, through the Accused Instrumentalities, a method as defined in 

claim 2, wherein in operation when an application residing within a container is executed, said 

application has no access to system files or applications in other containers or to system files within 

the operating system during execution thereof.

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_Definitions.html

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp55hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=reference/universal-concepts/Namespaces.html

https://developer.hpe.com/blog/kubernetes-application-containers-managing-containers-and-clusterresour/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 51 of 104 PageID #: 4618
Page 51 of 51

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 52 of 104 PageID #: 4619
Page 1 of 44

U.S. Patent No. 7,784,058 vs. HPE

Accused Instrumentalities: HPE products and services using user mode critical system elements as shared libraries, including without limitation 

HPE’s Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise (including without limitation both Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise and Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise Essentials, in 

each case including when marketed, sold, and/or licensed as part of or associated with HPE’s GreenLake branding, e.g. “HPE GreenLake for 

containers” which “is built on HPE Ezmeral Container Platform”) and HPE GreenLake, and all versions and variations thereof since the issuance of 

the asserted patent.

Each Accused Instrumentality infringes the claims in substantially the same way, and the evidence shown in this chart is similarly applicable to each 

Accused Instrumentality. Each claim limitation is literally infringed by each Accused Instrumentality. However, to the extent any claim limitation is 

not met literally, it is nonetheless met under the doctrine of equivalents because the differences between the claim limitation and each Accused 

Instrumentality would be insubstantial, and each Accused Instrumentality performs substantially the same function, in substantially the same way, to 

achieve the same result as the claimed invention. Notably, Defendant has not yet articulated which, if any, particular claim limitations it believes are 

not met by the Accused Instrumentalities.

Claim 1

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

[1pre] 1. A computing system for 

executing a plurality of software 

applications comprising:

To the extent the preamble is limiting, each Accused Instrumentality comprises or constitutes a

computing system for executing a plurality of software applications as claimed.

See claim limitations below.

See also, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&page=home/about-hpeezmeral-container-pl/Welcome.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 53 of 104 PageID #: 4620
Page 2 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00097165en_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=GUID-6B6676DB-AF5F-4555-B6AB-D2C11A89F320.html

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

[1a] a) a processor; Each Accused Instrumentality comprises a processor.

For example, each node/host contains at least one CPU.

See, e.g.:

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 54 of 104 PageID #: 4621
Page 3 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_End_User_Software_Agreement.html

[1b] b) an operating system having an 

operating system kernel having OS 

critical system elements (OSCSEs) for 

running in kernel mode using said 

processor; and,

Each Accused Instrumentality comprises an operating system having an operating system kernel 

having OS critical system elements (OSCSEs) for running in kernel mode using said processor.

For example, the OSCSEs include kernel-mode functions similar to the functionalities provided by 

user-space libraries such as glibc. These are implemented in kernel-space to handle tasks such as

(without limitation) memory management (kmalloc(), kfree(), etc,) at kernel level.

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00097165en_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=GUID-6B6676DB-AF5F-4555-B6AB-D2C11A89F320.html

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=home/about-hpe-ezmeral-container-pl/GEN_End_User_Software_Agreement.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 55 of 104 PageID #: 4622
Page 4 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00ecp54hen_us&page=home/about-hpeezmeral-container-pl/GEN_OS_Support.html

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 56 of 104 PageID #: 4623
Page 5 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://www.techtarget.com/searchdatacenter/definition/kernel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glibc

[1c] c) a shared library having shared 

library critical system elements 

(SLCSEs) stored therein for use by the 

plurality of software applications in user 

mode and

Each Accused Instrumentality comprises a shared library having shared library critical system 

elements (SLCSEs) stored therein for use by the plurality of software applications in user mode.

For example, the shared library with SLCSEs include the runtime environment, system tools, and 

dependencies, such as the glibc library and other libraries that replicate OSCSEs, included in the 

container image (including without limitation in a base image that is included within the container 

image).

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00097165en_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=GUID-6B6676DB-AF5F-4555-B6AB-D2C11A89F320.html

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/container-platform.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 57 of 104 PageID #: 4624
Page 6 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/

https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-blog-uk-ireland-middle-east/containerization-the-next-generationof-virtualization/ba-p/7154442

https://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/definition/container-containerization-or-containerbased-virtualization

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 58 of 104 PageID #: 4625
Page 7 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 59 of 104 PageID #: 4626
Page 8 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 60 of 104 PageID #: 4627
Page 9 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 61 of 104 PageID #: 4628
Page 10 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/volumes/

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/container-environment/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 62 of 104 PageID #: 4629
Page 11 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/images/

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/volumes/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 63 of 104 PageID #: 4630
Page 12 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 64 of 104 PageID #: 4631
Page 13 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 65 of 104 PageID #: 4632
Page 14 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 66 of 104 PageID #: 4633
Page 15 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 67 of 104 PageID #: 4634
Page 16 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glibc

[1d] i) wherein some of the SLCSEs 

stored in the shared library are functional 

replicas of OSCSEs and are accessible to 

some of the plurality of software 

applications and when one of the 

In each Accused Instrumentality, some of the SLCSEs stored in the shared library are functional 

replicas of OSCSEs and are accessible to some of the plurality of software applications and when one 

of the SLCSEs is accessed by one or more of the plurality of software applications it forms a part of 

the one or more of the plurality of software applications.

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 68 of 104 PageID #: 4635
Page 17 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

SLCSEs is accessed by one or more of 

the plurality of software applications it 

forms a part of the one or more of the 

plurality of software applications,

For example, a base image serves as a self-contained unit that encompasses all the necessary 

components for an application to run, including the application code, runtime environment, system 

tools, and dependencies (i.e., SLCSEs). The images are based on existing Linux distributions, such as 

Debian and Ubuntu, including essential system elements (i.e., functional replicas of OSCSEs). Each 

container image is based on a specific base image, which contains the application code, and 

dependencies, including system libraries or shared library critical system elements (SLCSEs). The 

base image forms a part of the container image according to the “layer” model described in the 

documentation below. When the container runs the image, it creates a runtime instance of that 

container image. In turn, when one or more applications executes within the container runtime 

environment, it dynamically links to the SLCSEs stored in the runtime environment, which thereby 

become a part of the application(s).

See, e.g.:

https://docs.ezmeral.hpe.com/runtime-enterprise/55/app-workbench-5-1/custom-baseimages/AWB51_About_Custom_Base_Images.html

https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-blog-uk-ireland-middle-east/containerization-the-next-generationof-virtualization/ba-p/7154442

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 69 of 104 PageID #: 4636
Page 18 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://hub.docker.com/search?image_filter=official&type=image&q=

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 70 of 104 PageID #: 4637
Page 19 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/

https://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/definition/Docker-image

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 71 of 104 PageID #: 4638
Page 20 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 72 of 104 PageID #: 4639
Page 21 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 73 of 104 PageID #: 4640
Page 22 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 74 of 104 PageID #: 4641
Page 23 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/volumes/

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/container-environment/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 75 of 104 PageID #: 4642
Page 24 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/images/

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/volumes/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 76 of 104 PageID #: 4643
Page 25 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 77 of 104 PageID #: 4644
Page 26 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/spec.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 78 of 104 PageID #: 4645
Page 27 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 79 of 104 PageID #: 4646
Page 28 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://github.com/opencontainers/imagespec/blob/a6af2b480dcfc001ba975f44de53001c873cb0ef/config.md

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/docker.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 80 of 104 PageID #: 4647
Page 29 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/ld.so.8.html

[1e] ii) wherein an instance of a SLCSE 

provided to at least a first of the plurality 

of software applications from the shared 

library is run in a context of said at least 

first of the plurality of software 

applications without being shared with 

other of the plurality of software 

applications and where at least a second 

of the plurality of software applications 

running under the operating system have 

use of a unique instance of a 

corresponding critical system element for 

performing same function, and

In each Accused Instrumentality, an instance of a SLCSE provided to at least a first of the plurality of 

software applications from the shared library is run in a context of said at least first of the plurality of 

software applications without being shared with other of the plurality of software applications and 

where at least a second of the plurality of software applications running under the operating system 

have use of a unique instance of a corresponding critical system element for performing same 

function.

When a Docker or Kubernetes image is used to create a container, it creates a separate and isolated 

instance of a runtime environment which is independent of other containers running on the same host. 

Each container has its own instance of base images and its own data. The containers run in isolation, 

ensuring that the SLCSEs stored in the shared library are accessible to the software applications 

running in their respective containers. The image includes essential system files, libraries, and 

dependencies required to run the software application within the container. The containers can share 

common dependencies and components using layered images. This means that multiple containers 

utilize the same base image to create an instance. When an instance of SLCSE is provided from the 

base image (i.e., from the shared library) to an individual container including application software, it 

operates in isolation and runs its own instance of the software application without sharing resources 

or critical system elements with other containers. This ensures that each container has its own isolated 

context. Docker or Kubernetes containers can share common dependencies and components using 

layered images. This means that multiple containers can utilize the same base image. Therefore, each 

container, containing the application software running under the operating system, utilizes a unique 

instance of the corresponding critical system element to execute the respective application software 

for performing a same or a different function.

See, e.g.:

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 81 of 104 PageID #: 4648
Page 30 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00097165en_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=GUID-6B6676DB-AF5F-4555-B6AB-D2C11A89F320.html

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 82 of 104 PageID #: 4649
Page 31 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

https://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/definition/Docker-image

[1f] iii) wherein a SLCSE related to a 

predetermined function is provided to the 

first of the plurality of software 

applications for running a first instance 

of the SLCSE, and wherein a SLCSE for 

performing a same function is provided 

to the second of the plurality of software 

applications for running a second 

instance of the SLCSE simultaneously.

In each Accused Instrumentality, a SLCSE related to a predetermined function is provided to the first 

of the plurality of software applications for running a first instance of the SLCSE, and wherein a 

SLCSE for performing a same function is provided to the second of the plurality of software 

applications for running a second instance of the SLCSE simultaneously.

For example, in Docker or Kubernetes containers, each container operates independently, and a base 

image includes essential system files, libraries, and dependencies (i.e., SLCSEs) required to run the 

software application within the container. Based on information and belief, each element, such as 

system files, libraries, and dependencies (i.e., SLCSE) is associated with an execution of a 

predetermined function related to the application. When an image is used to create a container in the 

Accused Instrumentality, an instance of the SLCSE is provided to a software application. Therefore, 

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 83 of 104 PageID #: 4650
Page 32 of 44

Claim 1 Accused Instrumentalities

different instances of the SLCSE are provided to different applications for performing either a same 

or a different function, simultaneously.

See, e.g.:

https://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/definition/Docker-image, Last accessed on June 14, 

2023 

https://docs.docker.com/get-started/overview/

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 84 of 104 PageID #: 4651
Page 33 of 44

Claim 2

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

2. A computing system as defined in 

claim 1, wherein in operation, multiple 

instances of an SLCSE stored in the 

shared library run simultaneously within 

the operating system.

Each Accused Instrumentality comprises or constitutes a computing system as defined in claim 1, 

wherein in operation, multiple instances of an SLCSE stored in the shared library run simultaneously 

within the operating system.

For example, an individual host/node runs multiple containers and/or pods simultaneously, each of 

which has an instance of an SLCSE. When the multiple containers and/or pods run simultaneously, 

the multiple instances of the SLCSE stored in the shared library run simultaneously.

See, e.g.:

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 85 of 104 PageID #: 4652
Page 34 of 44

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/architecture/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 86 of 104 PageID #: 4653
Page 35 of 44

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 87 of 104 PageID #: 4654
Page 36 of 44

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/kube-scheduler/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 88 of 104 PageID #: 4655
Page 37 of 44

Claim 2 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/run/

Claim 3

Claim 3 Accused Instrumentalities

3. A computing system according to 

claim 1 wherein OSCSEs corresponding 

to and capable of performing the same 

function as SLCSEs remain in the 

operating system kernel.

Each Accused Instrumentality comprises or constitutes a computing system according to claim 1 

wherein OSCSEs corresponding to and capable of performing the same function as SLCSEs remain in 

the operating system kernel.

For example, both Docker and Kubernetes systems preserve the host kernel substantially unchanged; 

therefore the OSCSEs corresponding to the SLCSEs remain in the operating system kernel.

See, e.g.:

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=a00097165en_us&docLocale=en_US&page

=GUID-6B6676DB-AF5F-4555-B6AB-D2C11A89F320.html

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/container-platform.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 89 of 104 PageID #: 4656
Page 38 of 44

Claim 3 Accused Instrumentalities

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/

https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-blog-uk-ireland-middle-east/containerization-the-next-generationof-virtualization/ba-p/7154442

https://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/definition/container-containerization-or-containerbased-virtualization

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 90 of 104 PageID #: 4657
Page 39 of 44

Claim 3 Accused Instrumentalities

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 91 of 104 PageID #: 4658
Page 40 of 44

Claim 3 Accused Instrumentalities

https://h50146.www5.hpe.com/products/software/oe/linux/mainstream/support/whitepaper/pdfs/4AA

6-2761ENW.pdf

Claim 4

Claim 4 Accused Instrumentalities

4. A computing system according to 

claim 1 wherein the one or more SLCSEs 

provided to one of the plurality of 

software applications having exclusive 

use thereof, use system calls to access 

services in the operating system kernel.

Each Accused Instrumentality comprises or constitutes a computing system according to claim 1 

wherein the one or more SLCSEs provided to one of the plurality of software applications having 

exclusive use thereof, use system calls to access services in the operating system kernel.

For example, the SLCSEs in a container use system calls to access services in the operating system 

kernel. For example, the glibc library (or other similar library) in the container uses system calls to 

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 92 of 104 PageID #: 4659
Page 41 of 44

Claim 4 Accused Instrumentalities

interface with the host Linux kernel. In general, system calls can be observed using a tool such as 

strace.

See, e.g.:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glibc

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 93 of 104 PageID #: 4660
Page 42 of 44

Claim 4 Accused Instrumentalities

https://www.berops.com/blog/a-different-method-to-debug-kubernetes-pods

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 94 of 104 PageID #: 4661
Page 43 of 44

Claim 18

Claim 18 Accused Instrumentalities

18. A computer system as defined in 

claim 2 wherein SLCSEs are not copies 

of OSCSEs.

Each Accused Instrumentality comprises or constitutes a computer system as defined in claim 2 

wherein SLCSEs are not copies of OSCSEs.

For example, in a typical case the SLCSEs come from a Linux distribution independent of the host 

operating system, and thus are not identical to the OSCSEs. For another example, the SLCSEs are 

provided to the computer system through a separate process than the process by which the OSCSEs 

are provided to the computer system, and thus are not copied from the OSCSEs.

See, e.g.:

https://docs.ezmeral.hpe.com/runtime-enterprise/55/app-workbench-5-1/custom-baseimages/AWB51_About_Custom_Base_Images.html

https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-blog-uk-ireland-middle-east/containerization-the-next-generationof-virtualization/ba-p/7154442

https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/containers/

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 95 of 104 PageID #: 4662
Page 44 of 44

Claim 18 Accused Instrumentalities

ttps://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/definition/Docker-image

https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/

https://www.hpe.com/us/en/what-is/docker.html

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 96 of 104 PageID #: 4663
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

VIRTAMOVE, CORP.,

Plaintiff,

v.

HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE 

COMPANY,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:24-cv-00093-JRG-RSP

PLAINTIFF VIRTAMOVE, CORP.’S CORRECTED SUPPLEMENTAL 

PRELIMINARY DISCLOSURE

OF ASSERTED CLAIMS AND INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS 

I. Patent Rule 3-1: Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions

Pursuant to Patent Rule 3-1, Plaintiff VirtaMove, Corp. submits the following Preliminary 

Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions. This disclosure is based on the 

information available to VirtaMove as of the date of this disclosure, and VirtaMove reserves the 

right to amend this disclosure to the full extent permitted, consistent with the Court’s Rules and 

Orders.

A. Patent Rule 3-1(a): Asserted Claims

VirtaMove asserts that Defendant Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (“Defendant” or 

“HPE”) infringes the following claims (collectively, “Asserted Claims”):

(1) U.S. Patent No. 7,519,814 (“the ’814 patent”), claims 1, 2, 6, 9, and 10; and

(2) U.S. Patent No. 7,784,058 (“the ’058 patent”), claims 1–4 and 18.

This Supplemental Preliminary Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement 

Contentions includes the This Corrected Preliminary Disclosure of Asserted Claims and 

Infringement Contentions previously served. The Corrected Preliminary Disclosure of Asserted 

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 97 of 104 PageID #: 4664
2

Claims and Infringement Contentions correctly reflecteds, consistent with the Complaint (Dkt. 1) 

and First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 40), that the only independent claims that are asserted in this 

case are independent claim 1 of the ’814 patent and independent claim 1 of the ’058 patent. 

Independent Claim 31 of the ’814 patent is not, was not, and will not be asserted in this case. 

Otherwise, this the Corrected Preliminary Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement 

Contentions is was identical to the previously served Preliminary Disclosure of Asserted Claims 

and Infringement Contentions. 

B. Patent Rule 3-1(b): Accused Instrumentalities of which VirtaMove is aware

VirtaMove asserts that the Asserted Claims are infringed by the various instrumentalities

used, made, sold, offered for sale, or imported into the United States by Defendant, including 

certain (a) HPE products and services using secure containerized applications, including without 

limitation Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise (including without limitation both Ezmeral Runtime 

Enterprise and Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise Essentials, in each case including when marketed, 

sold, and/or licensed as part of or associated with HPE’s GreenLake branding, e.g. “HPE 

GreenLake for containers” which “is built on HPE Ezmeral Container Platform”) and HPE 

GreenLake, and all versions and variations thereof since the issuance of the ’814 patent; and (b) 

HPE products and services using user mode critical system elements as shared libraries, including 

without limitation Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise (including without limitation both Ezmeral 

Runtime Enterprise and Ezmeral Runtime Enterprise Essentials, in each case including when 

marketed, sold, and/or licensed as part of or associated with HPE’s GreenLake branding, e.g. “HPE 

GreenLake for containers” which “is built on HPE Ezmeral Container Platform”)and HPE 

GreenLake, and all versions and variations thereof since the issuance of the ’058 patent (“Accused 

Instrumentalities”). Defendant’s Accused Instrumentalities of which VirtaMove is presently aware

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 98 of 104 PageID #: 4665
3

are described in more detail in the accompanying preliminary infringement contention charts.

VirtaMove reserves the right to accuse additional products from Defendant to the extent 

VirtaMove becomes aware of additional products during the discovery process. Unless otherwise 

stated, VirtaMove’s assertions of infringement apply to all variations, versions, and applications 

of each of the Accused Instrumentalities, on information and belief, that different variations, 

versions, and applications of each of the Accused Instrumentalities are substantially the same for 

purposes of infringement of the Asserted Claims.

C. Patent Rule 3-1(c): Claim Charts

VirtaMove’s analysis of Defendant’s products is based upon limited information that is 

publicly available, and based on VirtaMove’s own investigation prior to any discovery in these 

actions. Specifically, VirtaMove’s analysis is based on certain limited resources that evidence 

certain products made, sold, used, or imported into the United States by Defendant.

VirtaMove reserves the right to amend or supplement these disclosures for any of the 

following reasons:

(1) Defendant and/or third parties provide evidence relating to the Accused 

Instrumentalities;

(2) VirtaMove’s position on infringement of specific claims may depend on the claim 

constructions adopted by the Court, which has not yet occuredoccurred; and

(3) VirtaMove’s investigation and analysis of Defendant’s Accused Instrumentalities is 

based upon public information and VirtaMove’s own investigations. VirtaMove 

reserves the right to amend these contentions based upon discovery of non-public 

information that VirtaMove anticipates receiving during discovery.

Attached and incorporated herein in their entirety, are charts identifying where each 

element of the Asserted Claims are found in the Accused Instrumentalities.

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 99 of 104 PageID #: 4666
4

Unless otherwise indicated, the information provided that corresponds to each claim 

element is considered to indicate that each claim element is found within each of the different 

variations, versions, and applications of each of the respective Accused Instrumentalities described 

above.

D. Patent Rule 3-1(d): Literal Infringement / Doctrine of Equivalents

With respect to the patents at issue, each element of each Asserted Claim is considered to 

be literally present. VirtaMove also contends that each Asserted Claim is infringed or has been 

infringed under the doctrine of equivalents in Defendant’s Accused Instrumentalities. VirtaMove 

also contends that Defendant both directly and indirectly infringes the Asserted Claims. For 

example, the Accused Instrumentalities are provided by the Defendant to customers, who are 

actively encouraged and instructed (for example, through Defendant’s online instructions on its 

website and instructions, manual, or user guides that are provided with the Accused 

Instrumentalities) by Defendant to use the Accused Instrumentalities in ways that directly infringe 

the Asserted Claims. Defendant therefore specifically intends for and induces its customers to 

infringe the Asserted Claims under Section 271(b) through the customers’ normal and customary 

use of the Accused Instrumentalities. In addition, Defendant is contributorily infringing the 

Asserted Claims under Section 271(c) and/or Section 271(f) by selling, offering for sale, or 

importing the Accused Instrumentalities into the United States, which constitute a material part of 

the inventions claimed in the Asserted Claims, are especially made or adapted to infringe the 

Asserted Claims, and are otherwise not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for 

non-infringing use.

E. Patent Rule 3-1(e): Priority Dates

The Asserted Claims of the ’814 patent are entitled to a priority date at least as early as 

September 15, 2003, the filing date of provisional application No. 60/502,619. 

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 100 of 104 PageID #: 4667
5

The Asserted Claims of the ’058 patent are entitled to a priority date at least as early as 

September 22, 2003, the filing date of provisional application No. 60/504,213. 

A diligent search continues for additional responsive information and VirtaMove reserves 

the right to supplement this response.

F. Patent Rule 3-1(f): Identification of Instrumentalities Practicing the Claimed 

Invention

At this time, VirtaMove does not identify any of its instrumentalities as practicing the 

Asserted Claims. A diligent search continues for additional responsive information and VirtaMove 

reserves the right to supplement this response.

II. Patent Rule 3-2: Document Production Accompanying Disclosure

Pursuant to Patent Rule 3-2, VirtaMove previously submitted the following Document 

Production Accompanying Disclosure, along with an identification of the categories to which each 

of the documents corresponds.

F. Patent Rule 3-2(a) documents:

VirtaMove is presently unaware of any documents sufficient to evidence any discussion 

with, disclosure to, or other manner of providing to a third party, or sale of or offer to sell, the 

inventions recited in the Asserted Claims of the Asserted Patents prior to the application dates or 

priority dates for the Asserted Patents. A diligent search continues for such documents and 

VirtaMove reserves the right to supplement this response. 

G. Patent Rule 3-2(b) documents:

VirtaMove identifies the following non-privileged documents as related to evidencing 

conception and reduction to practice of each claimed invention of the Asserted Patents: 

VM_HPE_0000865–VM_HPE_0000880. A diligent search continues for additional documents 

and VirtaMove reserves the right to supplement this response.

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 101 of 104 PageID #: 4668
6

H. Patent Rule 3-2(c) documents:

VirtaMove identifies the following documents as being the file histories for the Asserted 

Patents: VM_HPE_0000001–VM_HPE_0000864.

Dated: July 1September 6, 2024 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Reza Mirzaie

Reza Mirzaie

CA State Bar No. 246953

Marc A. Fenster

CA State Bar No. 181067

Neil A. Rubin

CA State Bar No. 250761

Amy E. Hayden

CA State Bar No. 287026

Jacob R. Buczko

CA State Bar No. 269408

James S. Tsuei

CA State Bar No. 285530

James A. Milkey

CA State Bar No. 281283

Christian W. Conkle

CA State Bar No. 306374

Jonathan Ma

CA State Bar No. 312773

Daniel Kolko (CA SBN 341680)

RUSS AUGUST & KABAT

12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90025

Telephone: 310-826-7474

Email: rmirzaie@raklaw.com

Email: mfenster@raklaw.com

Email: nrubin@raklaw.com

Email: ahayden@raklaw.com

Email: jbuczko@raklaw.com

Email: jtsuei@raklaw.com

Email: jmilkey@raklaw.com

Email: cconkle@raklaw.com

Email: jma@raklaw.com

Email: dkolko@raklaw.com

Qi (Peter) Tong

4925 Greenville Ave., Suite 200

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 102 of 104 PageID #: 4669
7

Dallas, TX 75206

Email: ptong@raklaw.com

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

VIRTAMOVE, CORP.

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 103 of 104 PageID #: 4670
8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that this document is being served upon counsel of record for Defendants

on July 1September 6, 2024 via e-mail.

/s/ Reza Mirzaie

 Reza Mirzaie

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-2 Filed 10/23/24 Page 104 of 104 PageID #: 4671