Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 150, PageID.10728 Filed 06/13/23 Page 1 of 7
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`IN RE: NEO WIRELESS, LLC,
`PATENT LITIGATION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:22-MD-03034-TGB
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF ADDRESSING
`CLAIM TERMS IMPACTED BY IPR PROCEEDINGS
`
`Pursuant to the Court’s June 6, 2023 Order, Defendants1 submit this
`
`supplemental brief addressing three disputed claim terms impacted by two
`
`decisions of the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) instituting Inter
`
`Partes Review (“IPR”) after the claim construction briefing, which ended March
`
`30, 2023 (ECF No. 133).
`
`U.S. Patent 10,965,512
`(“at least one of the time slots”)
`
`In its May 2, 2023 Decision Granting Institution of IPR No. 2022-01539, the
`
`
`
`Board addressed Plaintiff’s proposal that the term “at least one of the time slots” be
`
`construed to mean “at least one of the same time slots.” ECF No. 145-2
`
`
`1 On June 6, 2023, Plaintiff and Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC filed a Joint
`Notice of Settlement and Request for Stay. ECF No. 147. Due to the settlement,
`Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC is not a party to this submission.
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`IN RE: NEO WIRELESS, LLC,
`PATENT LITIGATION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:22-MD-03034-TGB
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF ADDRESSING
`CLAIM TERMS IMPACTED BY IPR PROCEEDINGS
`
`Pursuant to the Court’s June 6, 2023 Order, Defendants1 submit this
`
`supplemental brief addressing three disputed claim terms impacted by two
`
`decisions of the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) instituting Inter
`
`Partes Review (“IPR”) after the claim construction briefing, which ended March
`
`30, 2023 (ECF No. 133).
`
`U.S. Patent 10,965,512
`(“at least one of the time slots”)
`
`In its May 2, 2023 Decision Granting Institution of IPR No. 2022-01539, the
`
`
`
`Board addressed Plaintiff’s proposal that the term “at least one of the time slots” be
`
`construed to mean “at least one of the same time slots.” ECF No. 145-2
`
`
`1 On June 6, 2023, Plaintiff and Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC filed a Joint
`Notice of Settlement and Request for Stay. ECF No. 147. Due to the settlement,
`Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC is not a party to this submission.
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 150, PageID.10729 Filed 06/13/23 Page 2 of 7
`
`(Institution Decision) at PageID.10506-07 (emphasis added). The Board held that
`
`Neo’s argument “does not make clear why claims 15 and 23 should be narrowed in
`
`that manner, when the plain language of the claims is broader.” Id., see also
`
`PageID.10508, 10544 (“[T]he plain language of the claims does not require
`
`transmitting the subcarriers in the same time slot.”). By injecting the word “same”
`
`into the claims, Neo effectively erases the “at least one” language. The claim
`
`language permits, for example, the first and second plurality of subcarriers to be
`
`received in “two” (which is “at least one”) time slots. The Plaintiff’s proposed
`
`“same time slots” construction, in contrast, does not permit this and is thus
`
`improper. See Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en
`
`banc) (“[T]he claims themselves provide substantial guidance as to the meaning of
`
`particular claim terms.”). The Board’s remarks confirm that the claim limitation
`
`should not be interpreted to include the narrowing “same” adjective that Plaintiff
`
`proposes.
`
`U.S. Patent 10,075,941
`(“the antenna transmission scheme comprising a transmission diversity
`scheme or a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) scheme” and “the
`corresponding subchannel configuration characterized by distributed
`subcarriers or localized subcarriers in the frequency domain”)
`
`In its May 5, 2023 Decision Granting Institution of IPR No. 2022-01537, the
`
`Board preliminarily construed the limitation “the antenna transmission scheme
`
`comprising a transmission diversity scheme or a multiple-input multiple-output
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 150, PageID.10730 Filed 06/13/23 Page 3 of 7
`
`(MIMO) scheme” to require “at a minimum, that [the] antenna transmission
`
`scheme indicated by the mobile station-specific transmission parameters is capable
`
`of supporting, as alternatives, a transmission diversity scheme and a MIMO
`
`scheme.” ECF 145-1 (Institution Decision) at PageID.10456-58 (emphasis added).
`
`Additionally, the Board preliminarily construed the limitation “the corresponding
`
`subchannel configuration characterized by distributed subcarriers or localized
`
`subcarriers in the frequency domain” to require “at a minimum, that the mobile
`
`station-specific transmission parameters that are capable of indicating, as
`
`alternatives, both distributed subcarriers and localized subcarriers in the frequency
`
`domain as subchannel configurations.” Id. at PageID.10455, 10458 (emphasis
`
`added). Furthermore, the Board stated that “each of the recited antenna
`
`transmission schemes (i.e., a transmission diversity scheme and a MIMO scheme)
`
`must be capable of supporting, as alternatives, both distributed subcarriers and
`
`localized subcarriers in the frequency domain as subchannel configurations.” Id. at
`
`PageID.10458 (emphasis added).
`
`Since Neo and the Defendants disagree whether the claimed transmission
`
`parameters must “alternatively indicate” an antenna transmission scheme and a
`
`subchannel configuration, respectively, the Board’s constructions are directly
`
`relevant to the disputed constructions before this Court. Furthermore, the Board’s
`
`preliminary constructions support this Court construing the claim limitations in
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 150, PageID.10731 Filed 06/13/23 Page 4 of 7
`
`accordance with Defendants’ proposals, which explicitly contain “alternatively
`
`indicate[s]” language, as opposed to Neo’s proposals, which do not provide for the
`
`alternative indication.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Date: June 13, 2023
`
`
`
`/s/ Joseph A. Herriges_____________
`Joseph A. Herriges, MN Bar No.
`390350
`Conrad A. Gosen, MN Bar No.
`0395381
`James Huguenin-Love, MN Bar No.
`0398706
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`60 South Sixth Street, Suite 3200
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`Telephone: (612) 335-5070
`Facsimile: (612) 288-9696
`herriges@fr.com, gosen@fr.com,
`huguein-love@fr.com
`
`Michael J. McKeon, DC Bar No.
`459780
`Christian Chu, DC Bar No. 483948
`Jared Hartzman, DC Bar No. 1034255
`Joshua Carrigan, VA Bar No. 96911
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1000 Maine Avenue SW, Suite 1000
`Washington, DC 20024
`Telephone: (202) 783-5070
`Facsimile: (202) 783-2331
`mckeon@fr.com, chu@fr.com,
`hartzman@fr.com, carrigan@fr.com
`
`
`J. Michael Huget (P39150)
`
`/s/ Thomas H. Reger II
`Thomas H. Reger II
`Texas Bar No. 24032992
`reger@fr.com
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1717 Main Street, Suite 5000
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Telephone: (214) 747-5070
`
`Lawrence Jarvis
`Georgia Bar No. 102116
`jarvis@fr.com
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1180 Peachtree Street NE, 21st Floor
`Atlanta, Georgia 30309
`Telephone: (404) 892-5005
`Facsimile: (404) 892-5002
`
`Elizabeth G.H. Ranks
`Massachusetts Bar No. 693679
`ranks@fr.com
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1 Marina Park Drive
`Boston, Massachusetts 02210
`Telephone: (617) 542-5070
`Facsimile: (617) 542-8906
`
`J. Michael Huget (P39150)
`Sarah E. Waidelich (P80225)
`HONIGMAN LLP
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 150, PageID.10732 Filed 06/13/23 Page 5 of 7
`
`Sarah E. Waidelich (P80225)
`HONIGMAN LLP
`315 East Eisenhower Prkwy., Ste. 100
`Ann Arbor, MI 48108
`Tel: (734) 418-4254
`Fax: (734) 418-4255
`mhuget@honigman.com,
`swaidelich@honigman.com
`
`Counsel for Defendants General
`Motors Company and General Motors
`LLC
`
`
`
`/s/ Frank C. Cimino, Jr.___________
`Frank C. Cimino, Jr.
`Megan S. Woodworth
`Jonathan L. Falkler
`Robert C. Tapparo
`VENABLE LLP
`600 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20001
`(202) 344-4569
`FCCimino@Venable.com
`MSWoodworth@Venable.com
`JLFalkler@Venable.com
`RCTapparo@Venable.com
`
`Patrick G. Seyferth (P47575)
`Susan M. McKeever (P73533)
`BUSH SEYFERTH PLLC
`100 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 400
`Troy, MI 48084
`(248) 822-7800
`seyferth@bsplaw.com
`mckeever@bsplaw.com
`
`Attorneys for FCA US LLC
`
`315 East Eisenhower Prkwy., Ste. 100
`Ann Arbor, MI 48108
`Tel: (734) 418-4254
`mhuget@honigman.com
`swaidelich@honigman.com
`
`Counsel for Defendant Tesla, Inc.
`
`
`/s/ Deirdre M. Wells_______________
`Susan M. McKeever
`Justin B. Weiner
`Bush Seyferth PLLC
`100 West Big Beaver Road, Suite 400
`Troy, MI 48084
`(248) 822-7851
`mckeever@bsplaw.com
`weiner@bsplaw.com
`
`Daniel E. Yonan
`Deirdre M. Wells
`Ryan C. Richardson
`William H. Milliken
`Anna G. Phillips
`Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox
`P.L.L.C
`1100 New York Avenue NW
`Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20005
`(202) 371-2600
`dyonan@sternekessler.com
`dwells@sternekessler.com
`rrichardson@sternekessler.com
`wmilliken@sternekessler.com
`aphillips@sternekessler.com
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 150, PageID.10733 Filed 06/13/23 Page 6 of 7
`
`
`
`/s/ Peter J. Brennan______________
`Reginald J. Hill (IL Bar #6225173)
`Peter J. Brennan (IL Bar #6190873)
`JENNER & BLOCK LLP
`353 N. Clark St.
`Chicago, IL 60654
`Telephone: (312) 222-9350
`rhill@jenner.com
`pbrennan@jenner.com
`
`Counsel for Defendants
`NISSAN NORTH AMERICA INC.
`AND NISSAN MOTOR
`ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
`a/k/a NISSAN MOTOR
`ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC
`
`Counsel for Defendants Volkswagen
`Group of America, Inc. and
`Volkswagen Group of America
`Chattanooga Operations, Inc.2
`
`
`/s/ John T. Johnson_______________
`John T. Johnson (New York Bar
`No.2589182)
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`7 Times Square, 20th Floor
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: (212) 765-5070
`Facsimile: (212) 258-2291
`E-mail: jjohnson@fr.com
`
`Ruffin B. Cordell (New York Bar
`No.2589182)
`Benjamin J Christoff
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1000 Maine Avenue, S.W., Suite 1000
`Washington, D.C. 20024
`Telephone: (202) 783-5070
`Facsimile: (202) 783-2331
`E-mail: Cordell@fr.com
`
`Thomas Branigan (P41774)
`Matin Fallahi (P84524)
`Bowman and Brooke LLP
`41000 Woodard Avenue, 200 East
`Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304
`Telephone: (248) 205-3300
`Facsimile: (248) 205-3399
`thomas.branigan@bowmanandbrooke.c
`om
`
`
`2 Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. and Volkswagen Group of America
`Chattanooga Operations, Inc. do not take a position on the claim constructions, but
`agreed to be bound by and will not challenge the Court’s claim constructions. See
`Dkt. 120 (Notice of Stipulation Regarding Claim Construction).
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 150, PageID.10734 Filed 06/13/23 Page 7 of 7
`
`matin.fallahi@browmanandbrook.com
`
`Counsel for Defendants
`AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR
`CO., INC. AND HONDA
`DEVELOPMENT &
`MANUFACTURING OF
`AMERICA, LLC
`
`s/ John S. LeRoy________________
`John S. LeRoy (P61964)
`Christopher C. Smith (P73936)
`BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.
`1000 Town Center, 22nd Floor
`Southfield, MI 48075
`Telephone: (248) 358-4400
`jleroy@brookskushman.com
`csmith@brookskushman.com
`
`Counsel for Defendant Ford Motor
`Company
`
`
`
`/s/ Paul R. Steadman_______________
`Paul R. Steadman (IL Bar No.
`6238160)
`Matthew Satchwell (IL Bar No.
`6290672)
`Shuzo Maruyama (IL Bar No.
`6313434)
`DLA PIPER LLP (US)
`444 West Lake Street, Suite 900
`Chicago, IL 60606-0089
`Tel: 312.368.2135
`Fax: 312.251.2850
`paul.steadman@us.dlapiper.com
`matthew.satchwell@us.dlapiper.com
`shuzo.maruyama@us.dlapiper.com
`
`Brian Erickson (TX Bar No. 24012594)
`DLA PIPER LLP (US)
`303 Colorado Street, Suite 3000
`Austin, Texas 78701-4653
`Tel: 512.457.7059
`Fax: 512.721.2263
`brian.erickson@us.dlapiper.com
`
`Counsel for Defendants Toyota Motor
`Corporation, Toyota Motor North
`America, Inc., Toyota Motor Sales,
`U.S.A., Inc. and Toyota Motor
`Engineering & Manufacturing North
`America, Inc. and Toyota Motor
`Credit Corporation
`
`7
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
