Exhibit 1009
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 1 of 98 Page|D #: 15022
`
` Defendants and
`
`Zita-ffs—
`
`INTERDI(_5:,
`INC. 21 —e COl—
`
`GY
`
`(_.: l:_
`
`corporation,
`ware
`
`J-TRIAL—
`
`com-
`H‘—‘-‘ °°1E“"i°11.~
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00001
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 2 of 98 Page|D #: 15023
`
`corporation,
`
`Defendants and
`
`Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
`
`INTERDIGITAL COMl\/IUNICATIONS,
`INC., a Delaware corporation,
`TNTERDIGITAL TECHNOLOGY
`
`CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation,
`IPR LICENSING, lNC., a Delaware
`corporation, and INTERDIGITAL
`HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware corporation,
`
`Plaintiffs and Counterclaim
`
`Defendants,
`
`V.
`
`NOKIA CORPORATION, and NOKIA, INC.,
`
`Defendants and
`
`Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
`
`Civil Action No.: 1:13—cv—00010—RGA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEF
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00002
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 3 of 98 Page|D #: 15024
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`PLAINTIFFS’ INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. ..1
`
`DEFENDANTS’ INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. ..2
`
`AGREED—UPON CONSTRUCTIONS ......................................................................................... ..5
`
`DISPUTED CONSTRUCTIONS .................................................................................................. ..6
`
`1.
`
`’847 Patent: “carry[ing] no data/not providing data/does not include
`data”(claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10) ............................................................................................. ..6
`
`l.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................... ..6
`Defendants’ Answering Response ......................................................................... ..7
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ......................................... ..7
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ........................................................................................... ..8
`
`’966 and ’847 Patents: “code” (’966 claims 1, 5; ’847 claims 1-11) ................................. ..9
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................... ..9
`Defendants’ Answering Response ......................................................................... ..9
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..11
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..13
`
`’847 Patent: “code of a second type” (claim 8) ............................................................... ..l4
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..l4
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..15
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... .. 16
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..16
`
`’847 Patent: “access signal” (claims 6, 9, 11) .................................................................. ..17
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..17
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..18
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... .. 18
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..19
`
`’847 Patent: “associated with the same or different code” (claims 7, 10) ....................... ..20
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..20
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00003
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 4 of 98 Page|D #: 15025
`
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..20
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..2l
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..2l
`
`V1.
`
`’847 Patent: “first power level” (claims 7, 10) ................................................................ ..2l
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..21
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..22
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..23
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..23
`
`’847 Patent: “[re-]synchronize[d/ing] to the/a pilot signal” (claims 1, 2, 3, 4,
`5,6, 7, 8,9,10,1l) .......................................................................................................... ..23
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..23
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..24
`Plaintiff’ 5 Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..24
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..26
`
`’847 Patent: “circuit” (claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, ll) .......................................................... ..27
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..27
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..28
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..28
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..29
`
`a signal by said subscriber unit as part
`’847 Patent: “transmitting/transmit
`of the access procedure” (claims 7, 10) ........................................................................... ..29
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..29
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..29
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..30
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..30
`
`’847 Patent: “subsequently transrnit[ting], with respect to said first code a
`same or a different code, at increasing power levels” (claims 7, 10) .............................. ..3l
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..3l
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... .31
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..32
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..32
`
`XI.
`
`’847 Patent: “periodically” (claim 1) ............................................................................... ..33
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00004
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 5 of 98 Page|D #: 15026
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..33
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..33
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..33
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..34
`
`X11.
`
`’966 and ’847 Patents: “generated using [a same / a portion of a / a remainder
`of the] code” (’966 claim 1; ’847 claims 3, 5); “function of a same
`code”(’847 claim 6, 9, 11) ............................................................................................... ..34
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..34
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..35
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..35
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..36
`
`’966 and ’847 Patents: “successively transmits signals” (’966 claim 1; ’847
`claims 1, 2, 3, 5); “successively transmitted signals” (’966 claims 1, 8; ’847
`claim 5) ............................................................................................................................ ..36
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..36
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..37
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..38
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..38
`
`’151 Patent: “[a/the] same physical downlink control channel” (claims 1 and
`16) .................................................................................................................................... ..39
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..39
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..40
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..43
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..44
`
`’ 151 Patent: “utilizing the radio resources for the uplink shared channel or the
`downlink shared channel” (claims I and 16) ................................................................... ..45
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..45
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..46
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..47
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..48
`
`XVI.
`
`’l5 1 Patent: “channel assignment information” (claims 1, 8-16, 23-24) ........................ ..49
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..49
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..50
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..51
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00005
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 6 of 98 Page|D #: 15027
`
`4.
`
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..51
`
`XVII.
`
`’l51 Patent: “downlink control information” (claims 1, 3-6, 9, 16, 18-21, 24) .............. ..52
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..52
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..52
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..53
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..53
`
`XVIII. ’151 Patent: “radio resources” (claims 1, 10-14, 16) ....................................................... ..53
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..53
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..54
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..54
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..54
`
`XIX.
`
`’151 Patent: “shared channel” (claims 1, 9-14, 16) ......................................................... ..55
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..55
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..55
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..56
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..56
`
`XX.
`
`’151 Patent: “based on WTRU identity (ID)-masked cyclic redundancy check
`(CRC) parity bits” (claims 1, 16) ..................................................................................... ..57
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..57
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..57
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..57
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..58
`
`XXI.
`
`’151 Patent: “and to” (claim 16) ...................................................................................... ..58
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..58
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..59
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..59
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..60
`
`XXII.
`
`’244 Patent: “configured to” (claims 1, 4-6, 9-12, 15-21) ............................................... ..60
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..60
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..60
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..61
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..62
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00006
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 7 of 98 Page|D #: 15028
`
`XXIII. ’244 Patent: “configured to communicate with an IEEE 802.1 1 wireless local
`area networ ” (claim 1) ................................................................................................... ..62
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..62
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..63
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..64
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..65
`
`XXIV. ’244 Patent: “maintain a communication session with the cellular wireless
`
`network in an absence of the plurality of assigned physical channels” (claim
`1) ...................................................................................................................................... ..66
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..66
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..67
`Plaintiff’ 5 Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..69
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..70
`
`XXV.
`
`’244 Patent: “a [the] plurality of assigned physical channels” (claims 1, 5, 7,
`15, 21) .............................................................................................................................. ..71
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..71
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..72
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..73
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..73
`
`XXVI. ’244 Patent: “release” (claims 5, 21); “allocate”; “deallocate” (claim 15) ...................... ..74
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..74
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..75
`Plaintiff’ s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..77
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply ......................................................................................... ..8l
`
`’244 Patent: “a circuit configured to select the IEEE 802.11
`XXVII.
`transceiver” (claim 4) ....................................................................................................... ..8l
`
`Plaintiffs’ Opening Position ................................................................................. ..8l
`Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................................................... ..8l
`Plaintiff’ 5 Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ....................................... ..82
`Defendants’ Sur-Reply......................................................................................... ..83
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00007
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 8 of 98 Page|D #: 15029
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`CASE S
`
`Absolute Software, Inc. v. Stealth Signal, Inc.,
`659 F.3d 1121 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ................................................................................... .. 69, 74
`
`Abtox, Inc. v. Exitron Corp.,
`122 F.3d 1019 (Fed. Cir. 1997) .......................................................................................... ..1
`
`Advanced Display Sys., Inc. v. Kent State Univ.,
`212 F.3d 1272 (Fed. Cir. 2000) ........................................................................................ .. 68
`
`AIA Eng ’g Ltd v. Magotteaux Int’l S/A,
`657 F.3d 1264 (Fed. Cir. 201 1) ........................................................................................ .. 83
`
`All Voice Computing PLC v. Nuance Commc’ns, Inc.,
`504 F.3d 1236 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ........................................................................................ .. 81
`
`Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc.,
`314 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2003) .......................................................................................... ..2
`
`Andersen Corp. v. Fiber Composites, LLC,
`474 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cit. 2007) ........................................................................................ .. 86
`
`Andersen Corp. v. Fiber Composites, LLC,
`474 F.3d 1361(Fed. Cir. 2007) ......................................................................................... .. 23
`
`Becton, Dickinson & Co. v. Tyco Healthcare Grp., LP,
`616 F.3d 1249 (Fed. Cir. 2010) ........................................................................................ .. 81
`
`Brocade Commc ’ns Sys., Inc. v. AJO Networks, Inc., No. C 10-3428 PSG,
`2013WL831528 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2013) ..................................................................... ..65
`
`CAE Screenlates v. Heinrich Fiedler GmbH,
`
`224 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2000) ........................................................................................ .. 80
`
`Cat Tech LLC v. TubeMaster, lnc.,
`
`528 F.3d 871 (Fed. Cir. 2011) .......................................................................................... .. 53
`
`CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Return Path, Inc.,
`
`654 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2013) ........................................................................................ .. 50
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00008
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 9 of 98 Page|D #: 15030
`
`Cent. Admixture Pharmacy Servs., Inc. v. Advanced Cardiac Solutions, P. C.,
`482 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2007) .......................................................................................... .. 2
`
`Chef/1m., Inc. v. Lamb— Weston, Inc.,
`358 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2004) ...................................................................................... .. 2, 7
`
`Curtiss— Wright Flow Control Corp. v. Velan, Inc.,
`438 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2006) ........................................................................................ .. 22
`
`Datamize, LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc.,
`417 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ........................................................................................ .. 50
`
`Elbex Video, Ltd v. Sensormatic Elecs. Corp.,
`508 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ......................................................................................... .. 74
`
`Fantasy Sports Properties, Inc. v. Sportsline. com, Inc.,
`287 F.3d 1108 (Fed. Cir. 2002) ......................................................................................... .. 65
`
`Flexsys Am. LP v. Kumlzo Tire U.S./1., Inc.,
`695 F. Supp. 2d 609 (N.D. Ohio 2010) ............................................................................ .. 12
`
`Honeywell Int’l, Inc. v. ITTIndus., Inc., 452 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2006) ...................... .. 52, 76
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Altera Corp.,
`CV 10-1065-LPS, 2013 WL 3913646 (D. Del. July 26, 2013) ........................................ .. 66
`
`InterDigital Commc ’ns .................................................................................................. .. 32, 38
`
`InterDigital Commc ’ns, LLC v. Int 7 Trade Comm ’n,
`690 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2012) .................................................................................... .. 6, 34
`
`InterDigital Commc ’ns, LLC v. Int 7 Trade Comm ’n,
`690 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2012). ................................................................................ ..passim
`
`InterDigital Commc ’ns, LLC v. ITC,
`690 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ............................................................................ .. 33, 37, 40
`
`Kumar v. Ovonic Battery Co.,
`351 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2003) ........................................................................................ .. 23
`
`Medtronic Inc. v. Boston Scientific Corp.,
`695 F.3d 1266 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ......................................................................................... .. 48
`
`Modine Mfg. Co. v. US Int ’l Trade Comm ’n,
`75 F.3d 1545 (Fed. Cir. 1996) .................................................................................... .. 50, 68
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00009
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 10 of 98 Page|D #: 15031
`
`Multiform Desiccants, Inc. V. Medzam, Ltd,
`133 F.3d 1473 (Fed. Cir. 1998). ....................................................................................... .. 70
`
`Nystrom v. TREX C0.,
`424 F.3d 1136 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ........................................................................................ .. 64
`
`02 Micro Int ’l Ltd V. Beyond Innovation Tech. Co.,
`521 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2008) ........................................................................................ .. 21
`
`On—Line Techs., Inc. V. Bodenseewerk Per/cin—Elmer GmbH,
`386 F.3d 1133 (Fed. Cir. 2004) ........................................................................................ .. 50
`
`Phillips V. A WH Corp.,
`415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ................................................................................. ..passim
`
`Rembrandt Data Techs., LP V. AOL, LLC,
`641 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2011) .................................................................................. .. 49, 51
`
`Retractable Technologies, Inc. V. Becton, Dickinson & Co.,
`653 F.3d 1296 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ........................................................................................ .. 67
`
`Riverbed Tech., Inc. V. Silver Peak Sys., Inc., C.A. No. ll-484-RGA,
`2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102589 (D. Del. July 23,2013) .................................................. .. 65
`
`Typhoon Touch Techs., Inc. v. Dell, Inc.,
`659 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ........................................................................................ .. 62
`
`Virginia Panel Corp. v. Mac Panel Co.,
`133 F.3d 860 (Fed. Cir. 1997) .......................................................................................... .. 15
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00010
`
`

`
`Case 1:13—cv—O0OO8—RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 11 of 98 Page|D #: 15032
`
`PLAINTIFFS’ EXPLANATION OF CITATIONS
`
`Citations to “ ’847 Patent” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,286,847.
`
`Citations to “ ’966 Patent” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,190,966.
`
`Citations to “ ’ 151 Patent ” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,941,151.
`
`Citations to “ ’244 Patent” refer to U.S. Patent No. 8,380,244.
`
`Citations to “ ’010 Patent” refer to U.S. Patent No. 5,799,010.
`
`Citations to “ ’970 Patent” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,616,970
`
`Citations to “ ’049 App.” refer to U.S. Provision Application No. 60/523,049.
`
`Citations to “ ’ 151 PH” refer to the ’ 151 Prosecution History, attached hereto as EX. [16].
`
`Citations to “ ’244 PH” refer to the ’244 Prosecution History, attached hereto as Ex. [17].
`
`Citations to “6l3 ID” refer to the AL.I’s Opinion in ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-613,
`attached hereto as Ex. [20].
`
`Citations to “Dahlman” refer to Dahlman, et a1., 3G Evolution HSPA and LTE for Mobile
`Broadband (2007), attached hereto as Ex. [15].
`
`Emphasis is added throughout the brief unless otherwise noted.
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00011
`
`

`
`Case 1:13—cv—O0OO8—RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 12 of 98 Page|D #: 15033
`
`DEFENDANTS’ EXPLANATION OF CITATIONS
`
`“004 Patent” and “004 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,1 17,004.
`
`“O10 Patent” and “O10 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 5,799,010.
`
`“098 Application” and “098 App.” refer to U.S. Patent App. No. 12/615,098.
`
`“151 Patent” and “151 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,941,151.
`
`“151 Pat. Pros. Hist.” refers to the prosecution history of U.S. Patent App. No. 11/709,970.
`
`“151 Provisional,” “151 ProV.,” “049 Application,” and “049 App.” refer to U.S. Provisional
`App. No. 60/523,049.
`
`“244 Patent” and “244 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 8,380,244.
`
`“405 Patent” and “405 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,200,405.
`
`“405 Pat. Pros. Hist.” refers to the prosecution history of U.S. Patent App. No. 10/902,704.
`
`“S36 Patent” and “536 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 6,081,536.
`
`“847 Patent” and “847 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,286,847.
`
`“966 Patent” refers to U.S. Patent No. 7,190,966.
`
`“970 Patent” and “970 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,616,970.
`
`“Motorola 1250” refer to R1 -02- 1 250, TSG-RAN Working Group 1 #28-bis, Motorola,
`Uplink enhancements for dedicated transport channels, Espoo, Finland, Oct. 2002,
`NK868ITC009843144-NK868ITC009843147.
`
`“Siemens Reference” refers to R1-030004, TSG-RAN Working Group 1 #30, Siemens,
`Downlink Control Channel Configuration for Enhanced Uplink Dedicated Transport
`Channel, San Diego, USA, Jan. 2003, NK868lTC015910712-NK8681TC015910713.
`
`Emphasis is added throughout the brief unless otherwise noted.
`
`ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`Exhibit 1009-00012
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 13 of 98 Page|D #: 15034
`
`PLAINTIFFS’ INTRODUCTION
`
`Plaintiffs lnterDigital Communications, 1nc.,
`
`lnterDigital Technology Corporation, IPR
`
`Licensing, Inc., and InterDigital Holdings, Inc. (collectively “InterDigital”) invest in and develop
`
`new technologies, including wireless technologies for advanced voice and data communications.
`
`lnterDigital has been and is at the forefront of several fundamental inventions in wireless modem
`
`design, air interface technology, and end-to-end system architecture that are the core of mobile
`
`devices, networks, and services used by billions of users around the world today.
`
`As part of those efforts, lnterDigital has been a wireless pioneer and major contributor to the
`
`definition of standards for 2G, 3G, and 4G technologies. In addition to internal engineering
`
`efforts,
`
`InterDigital has established research and development
`
`relationships with other
`
`technology leaders and collaborates with a wide range of companies across the wireless
`
`ecosystem on integrating its advanced technologies into products and services for field testing
`
`and commercial deployment.
`
`The four patents at issue here represent innovations in wireless communications technology
`
`that benefit manufacturers, retailers, and consumers of products used in wireless communication.
`
`But instead of licensing InterDigital’s advanced technology, Defendants enjoy the benefits of, but
`
`refuse to compensate lnterDigital for, its innovation.
`
`To avoid paying for the technology they practice, Defendants have proposed exotic and
`
`erroneous constructions that depart from the language of the claims. In contrast, lnterDigital
`
`proposes constructions that hew close to the claim language because it is the claim language that
`
`“frames and ultimately resolves all issues of claim interpretation.” A btox, Inc. v. Exitron Corp.,
`
`122 F.3d 1019, 1023 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
`
`For example, while lnterDigital seeks a plain language construction for the simple three-
`
`word English claim term: “first power level.” Defendants seek a wholesale revision of the term,
`
`asking this Court to rewrite it: “a power level lower than the minimum power level required for
`
`communicating with the base station.” Nothing in the words “first power level” include the
`77
`66
`
`concepts of “lower than minimums,
`
`communication,” or “base stations.” See Amgen, Inc. v.
`
`

`
`Case 1:13—cv—00OO8—RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 14 of 98 Page|D #: 15035
`
`Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 314 F.3d 1313, 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (“It is improper for a court
`
`to add extraneous limitations to a claim, that is limitations added wholly apart from any need to
`
`interpret what the patentee meant by particular words or phrases in the claim”) Moreover,
`
`Defendants’ construction eliminates the idea or concept of “first.” See Chef Am., Inc. v. Lamb-
`
`Weston, Inc., 358 F.3d 1371, 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (“[C]ourts may not redraft claims”).
`
`The example of “first power level” is typical of the different approaches of the parties to
`
`claim construction. Rather than simply construing the words of the terms in dispute, Defendants
`
`seek to add limitations that are not written in the claims. See Phillips v. AWH Corp, 415 F.3d
`
`1303, 13 12 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc) (holding that “if we once begin to include elements not
`
`mentioned in the claim, in order to limit such claim
`
`we should never know where to stop.”
`
`(internal quotations omitted)).
`
`lnterDigital proposes that instead of amending or redrafting the claims, the Court should
`
`construe them as written because “[c]laims mean precisely what they say.” Cent. Admixture
`
`Pharmacy Servs., Inc. v. Advanced Cardiac Solutions, PC, 482 F.3d 1347, 1355 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2007).
`
`DEFENDANTS’ INTRODUCTION
`
`lnterDigital’s proposed constructions span several patents but share a common flaw: they
`
`ignore what the inventors actually disclosed and told the Patent Office. As a result, lnterDigital’s
`
`constructions broadly and unreasonably cover technologies far removed from what the inventors
`
`originally disclosed and claimed as
`
`their
`
`invention. By contrast, Defendants’ proposed
`
`constructions define
`
`t