`
`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
`
`