Haas Decl.
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`ERICSSON INC. AND TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET
`LM ERICSSON (“Ericsson”),
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC (“IV”),
`Patent Owner
`___________________
`
`Patent 7,787,431
`
`Title: METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MULTI-CARRIER
`COMMUNICATIONS WITH VARIABLE CHANNEL BANDWIDTH
`_____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF ZYGMUNT J. HAAS, PH.D.
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.68
`
`I, Zygmunt Haas, do hereby declare:
`
`1.
`
`I am making this declaration at the request of Ericsson Inc. and
`
`Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (“Ericsson”) in the matter of the Inter Partes
`
`Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,787,431 (“the ’431 patent”) to Xiaodong Li, et al.
`
`2.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have studied:
`
`(1) The ’431 Patent, ERIC-1001;
`
`(2) U.S. Patent No. 6,904,283 (“Li”), ERIC-1002;
`
`
`
`–1–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012
`Ericsson v IV
`Page 1 of 126
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`ERICSSON INC. AND TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET
`LM ERICSSON (“Ericsson”),
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC (“IV”),
`Patent Owner
`___________________
`
`Patent 7,787,431
`
`Title: METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MULTI-CARRIER
`COMMUNICATIONS WITH VARIABLE CHANNEL BANDWIDTH
`_____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF ZYGMUNT J. HAAS, PH.D.
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.68
`
`I, Zygmunt Haas, do hereby declare:
`
`1.
`
`I am making this declaration at the request of Ericsson Inc. and
`
`Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (“Ericsson”) in the matter of the Inter Partes
`
`Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,787,431 (“the ’431 patent”) to Xiaodong Li, et al.
`
`2.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have studied:
`
`(1) The ’431 Patent, ERIC-1001;
`
`(2) U.S. Patent No. 6,904,283 (“Li”), ERIC-1002;
`
`
`
`–1–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012
`Ericsson v IV
`Page 1 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`(3) U.S. Patent No. 7,782,750 (“Yamaura”), ERIC-1003;
`
`(4) U.S. Patent No. 7,426,175 (“Zhuang”), ERIC-1004;
`
`(5) U.S. Patent Publication 2002/0181509 (“Mody”), ERIC-1005;
`
`(6)
`
`S. Nobilet, et al., “Spreading Sequences for Uplink and Downlink
`
`MC-CDMA Systems: PAPR and MAI Minimization”, European
`
`Transactions on Communications, pp. 465-473, vol. 13, no. 5,
`
`September-October 2002 (“Nobilet”), ERIC-1006;
`
`(7) TR101146v3.0.0, “Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
`
`(UMTS); UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access (UTRA); Concept
`
`evaluation (UMTS 30.06 version 3.0.0)”, December 1997 (“Beta”),
`
`ERIC-1007;
`
`(8) B. Popovic, “Spreading Sequences for Multicarrier CDMA Systems”,
`
`IEEE Trans. Comm., pp. 918-926, vol. 47, no. 6, June 1999
`
`(“Popovic”), ERIC-1008;
`
`(9) R. van Nee and R. Prasad, OFDM for Wireless Multimedia
`
`Communications, Artech House, pp. 119-154, 2000, ERIC-1009.
`
`(10) Curriculum Vitae of Expert, ERIC-1011.
`
`3.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed below, I have considered:
`
`(1) The documents listed above, and
`
`(2) My knowledge and experience based upon my work in this area as
`
`
`
`–2–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 2 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`
`described below.
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`4.
`
`I am familiar with the technology at issue. I am also aware of the
`
`state of the art at the time the application resulting in the ’431 patent was filed. The
`
`earliest priority date is May 1, 2004. Based on the technologies disclosed in the
`
`’431 patent, I believe that one of ordinary skill in the art would include someone
`
`who has a B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering,
`
`Computer Science, or equivalent training, as well as three to five years of
`
`experience in the field of digital communication systems, such as wireless
`
`cellular communication systems and networks. Unless otherwise stated, when I
`
`provide my understanding and analysis below, it is consistent with the level of
`
`one of ordinary skill in these technologies at and around the priority date of the
`
`’431 patent.
`
`I.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS
`
`5.
`
`I am a Professor and Distinguished Chair in Computer Science at the
`
`University of Texas at Dallas. I am also Professor Emeritus at the School of
`
`Electrical and Computer Engineering at Cornell University. In addition, I provide
`
`technical consulting services in intellectual property matters, during which I have
`
`written expert reports and provided deposition and trial testimony involving
`
`wireless communication technologies.
`
`6.
`
`My academic credentials include a Bachelor of Science Degree
`
`
`
`–3–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 3 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`in Electrical Engineering, summa cum laude, from Technion (IIT), Israel, in
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`1979 and a Master of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering, summa cum
`
`laude, from Tel-Aviv University, Israel, in 1985. I subsequently authored the
`
`thesis titled “Packet Switching in Fiber-Optic Networks” as part of earning
`
`my Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Stanford University in 1988.
`
`7.
`
`My professional background and technical qualifications are stated
`
`above and are also reflected in my Curriculum Vitae, which is attached as ERIC-
`
`1011. I am being compensated at a rate of $375.00 per hour, with reimbursement
`
`for actual expenses, for my work related to this Petition for Inter Partes Review.
`
`My compensation is not dependent on and in no way affects the substance of my
`
`statements in this Declaration.
`
`8.
`
`I have worked or consulted for about 35 years in the field of Electrical
`
`Engineering. My primary focus has been on communication and networking
`
`systems, with an emphasis on wireless communication networks. I have authored
`
`and co-authored numerous technical papers and book chapters related to wireless
`
`communication networks. I hold eighteen patents in the fields of high-speed
`
`networking, wireless networks, and optical switching.
`
`9.
`
`My employment history following my graduation from Stanford
`
`University began at the Network Research Department of AT&T Bell
`
`Laboratories in 1988. At AT&T Bell Laboratories, I pursued research on
`
`
`
`–4–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 4 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`wireless communications, mobility management, fast protocols, optical
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`networks, and optical switching. During my tenure at AT&T, I also worked
`
`for the AT&T Wireless Center of Excellence, where I investigated various
`
`aspects of wireless and mobile networks.
`
`10.
`
`Since 1995, I have been a Professor at the faculty of the School
`
`of Electrical & Computer Engineering at Cornell University. At Cornell, I
`
`headed the Wireless Networks Lab, which is an internationally recognized
`
`research group with extensive contributions
`
`in
`
`the area of wireless
`
`communication systems and networks. In 2013, I retired from Cornell with
`
`the title of Emeritus professor and joined the Computer Science Department
`
`at the University of Texas at Dallas with the title of Professor and
`
`Distinguished Chair in Computer Science. At Cornell and at the University
`
`of Texas, I have taught dozens of courses related to computer networking and
`
`wireless communications. I have also served on various committees for the
`
`benefit of the scientific community.
`
`11.
`
`I am a member of a number of professional societies, including the
`
`Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) and the Association for
`
`Computing Machinery (ACM). In 2007, I was elevated to an IEEE Fellow. I have
`
`been responsible for organizing several workshops, and delivering numerous
`
`tutorials at major IEEE and ACM conferences. I have served as editor of several
`
`
`
`–5–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 5 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`publications
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`including
`
`the IEEE Transactions on Networking,
`
`the IEEE
`
`Transactions on Wireless Communications, the IEEE Communications Magazine,
`
`the Springer “Wireless Networks” journal, the Elsevier “Ad Hoc Networks”
`
`journal, the “Journal of High Speed Networks,” and the Wiley “Wireless
`
`Communications and Mobile Computing” journal. I have also been a guest editor
`
`of IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications issues on “Gigabit
`
`Networks,” “Mobile Computing Networks,” and “Ad-Hoc Networks.” Finally, I
`
`have served as the Chair of the IEEE Technical Committee on Personal
`
`Communications (TCPC).
`
`12.
`
`I have
`
`received multiple awards
`
`in
`
`the
`
`field of wireless
`
`communications and networks. In 2012, I received the IEEE ComSoc WTC
`
`Recognition Award, which recognizes individuals for outstanding technical
`
`contributions in the field for their service to the scientific and engineering
`
`communities.” Also in 2012, I received the “Best Paper Award for co-authoring
`
`“Collaborating with Correlation for Energy Efficient WSN” directed at Wireless
`
`Sensor Networking. I previously received the “Best Paper Award” for co-authoring
`
`“Optimal Resource Allocation for UWB Wireless Ad Hoc Networks” directed at
`
`personal indoor and mobile radio communications. Finally, in 2003, I received the
`
`“Highly Commended Paper Award” for co-authoring “Performance Evaluation of
`
`the Modified IEEE 802.11 MAC for Multi-Channel Multi-Hop Ad Hoc Network,”
`
`
`
`–6–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 6 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`directed at advanced information networking and applications.
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`13. A copy of my curriculum vitae is attached as ERIC-1011.
`
`Additional information regarding my education, technical experience and
`
`publications, including a list of the US patents of which I am an inventor/co-
`
`inventor, is included therein.
`
`II. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`14.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether the
`
`claims of the ’431 patent are anticipated or would have been obvious to a person
`
`having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention of the patent, in
`
`light of the prior art.
`
`Anticipation
`
`15.
`
`It is my understanding that, to anticipate a claim under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`102, a reference must teach every element of the claim.
`
`Obviousness
`
`16.
`
`It is my understanding that a claimed invention is unpatentable under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 if the differences between the invention and the prior art are such
`
`that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention
`
`was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the subject matter
`
`pertains. I also understand that the obviousness analysis takes into account factual
`
`inquiries including the level of ordinary skill in the art, the scope and content of the
`
`
`
`–7–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 7 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`prior art, and the differences between the prior art and the claimed subject matter.
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`17.
`
`I have been informed that the Supreme Court has recognized several
`
`rationales for combining references or modifying a reference to show obviousness
`
`of claimed subject matter. I understand some of these rationales include the
`
`following: combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield
`
`predictable results; simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain
`
`predictable results; use of a known technique to improve a similar device (method,
`
`or product) in the same way; applying a known technique to a known device
`
`(method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results; choosing
`
`from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable
`
`expectation of success; and some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art
`
`that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to
`
`combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
`
`III. FINDINGS
`
`18.
`
`The findings below are based on my understandings of the art related
`
`to the ’431 patent, as well as what I think one of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`understand, at the time period at and prior to May 1, 2004.
`
`Background Of ’431 Patent
`
`19.
`
`The ’431 patent relates to multi-carrier communication systems, such
`
`as systems that employ orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM). See
`
`
`
`–8–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 8 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`ERIC-1001, 1:43-47 and 2:36-38. “A basic structure of a multi-carrier signal in the
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`frequency domain is made up of subcarriers and, illustrated in FIG. 3, which shows
`
`three types of subcarriers as follow:
`
`1. Data subcarriers, which carry information data;
`
`2. Pilot subcarriers, whose phases and amplitudes are predetermined and
`
`made known to all receivers, and which are used for assisting system
`
`functions such as estimation of system parameters; and
`
`3. Silent subcarriers, which have no energy and are used as guard bands and
`
`DC carriers.”
`
`ERIC-1001, 3:23-34. Fig. 3 is reproduced below.
`
`
`
`–9–
`
`
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 9 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`20.
`
`Fig. 3 is admitted to be prior art. Note that in Fig. 3 subcarriers are
`
`grouped as various subchannels, so utilizing groups of subcarriers (as subchannels),
`
`wherein each group includes a plurality of subcarriers, is admitted prior art. The
`
`’431 patent describes a rationale for the subcarrier groupings to be that “[t]he data
`
`subcarriers can be arranged into groups called subchannels to support scalability
`
`and multiple-access.” Id., 3:33-34.
`
`21.
`
`The ’431 patent further relates to “a variable bandwidth system.”
`
`ERIC-1001, 4:18. “In some embodiments, the variable channel bandwidth is
`
`realized by adjusting the number of usable subcarriers.” Id., 4:25-26. In one
`
`embodiment, “[t]he variable channel bandwidth is realized by adjusting the number
`
`of usable subcarriers, whose spacing is set constant.” Id., 4:41-42. According to
`
`the equations in Fig. 2, which is admitted prior art, bandwidth is proportional to the
`
`number of subcarriers. See id., Fig. 2 (number of usable subcarriers is shown
`
`proportional to effective bandwidth Beff).
`
`22. According to the ’431 patent, “[t]o facilitate the user terminals to
`
`operate in a variable bandwidth (VB) environment, specific signaling and control
`
`methods are required. Radio control and operation signaling is realized through the
`
`use of a core-band (CB).” Id., 4:64-67. The core band is used to transmit control
`
`signals: “[i]n one embodiment relevant or essential radio control signals such as
`
`preambles, ranging signals, bandwidth request, and/or bandwidth allocation are
`
`
`
`–10–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 10 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`transmitted within the CB. In addition to the essential control channels, a set of data
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`channels and their related dedicated control channels are placed within the CB to
`
`maintain basic radio operation.” Id., 5:8-13.
`
`23.
`
`Furthermore, “[i]n another embodiment, a preamble, called an
`
`essential, or primary preamble (EP), is designed to only occupy the CB, as depicted
`
`in FIG. 8. The EP alone is sufficient for the basic radio operation. The EP can be
`
`either a direct sequence in the time domain with its frequency response confined
`
`within the CB, or an OFDM symbol corresponding to a particular pattern in the
`
`frequency domain within the CB. In either case, an EP sequence may possess some
`
`or all of the following properties:
`
`1. Its autocorrelation exhibits a relatively large ratio between the correlation
`
`peak and sidelobe levels.
`
`2. Its cross-correlation coefficient with another EP sequence is significantly
`
`small with respect to the power of the EP sequences.
`
`3. Its peak-to-average ratio is relatively small.
`
`4. The number of EP sequences that exhibit the above three properties is
`
`relatively large.”1
`
`
`1 While the specification states that the EP (or primary preamble) may possess
`“some or all” of the enumerated properties, as discussed further below the claims
`require the primary preamble to possess all of these properties.
`
`
`
`–11–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 11 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`Id., 5:19-35 (emphasis added). A portion of Fig. 8 of the ’431 patent is reproduced
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`below (color annotation added):
`
`Note that the primary preamble occupies the core-band.
`
`
`
`24.
`
`Independent claim 1 of the ’431 patent is exemplary and recites:
`
`1. In a variable bandwidth wireless communication system
`communicating under multiple different communication schemes that each
`have a different bandwidth, a process performed by a base station of
`generating an information bearing signal for wireless transmission, the
`process comprising:
`[Part 1 – variable bandwidth]
`utilizing by the base station a number of subcarriers to construct a
`variable bandwidth wireless channel;
`utilizing by the base station groups of subcarriers, wherein each group
`includes a plurality of subcarriers;
`maintaining a fixed spacing between adjacent subcarriers;
`adding or subtracting, by the base station, groups of subcarriers to
`scale the variable bandwidth wireless channel and achieve an operating
`channel bandwidth; and
`[Part 2 – core-band]
`wherein a core-band, including a plurality of subcarrier groups,
`substantially centered at an operating center frequency of the different
`communication schemes, is utilized by the base station as a broadcast
`channel carrying radio control and operation signalling, where the core-band
`
`
`
`–12–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 12 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`is substantially not wider than a smallest possible operating channel
`bandwidth of the system; and
`[Part 3 – properties of primary preamble]
`wherein the information bearing signal has a primary preamble
`sufficient for basic radio operation and wherein:
`the primary preamble is a direct sequence in the time domain with a
`frequency content confined within the core-band, or is an orthogonal
`frequency-divisional multiplexing (OFDM) symbol corresponding to a
`particular frequency pattern within the core-band; and
`wherein properties of the primary preamble comprise:
`an autocorrelation having a large correlation peak with respect to
`sidelobes;
`a cross-correlation with other primary preambles having a small cross-
`correlation coefficient with respect to power of other primary preambles;
`and
`
`a small peak-to-average ratio; and
`wherein a large number of primary preamble sequences exhibit the
`properties.
`
`
`(Brackets added.)
`
`
`25. As shown above, although claim 1 is lengthy, it can conceptually be
`
`divided into three parts: (1) part 1 relates to variable bandwidth in a multi-carrier
`
`system; (2) part 2 relates to aspects of a core band; and (3) part 3 relates to
`
`mathematical properties of a primary preamble, which uses the core-band.
`
`26.
`
`The features of claim 1, as well as the other claims at issue, were well-
`
`known in the art prior to the priority date of the ’431 Patent. In particular,
`
`references disclosing the described communication systems and networks that
`
`support use of variable bandwidths, a core-band, and preambles that use a core-
`
`band were available to those of ordinary skill in the art before the priority date of
`
`the ’431 patent.
`
`
`
`–13–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 13 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`Meaning of Certain Terms of the ’431 Patent
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`27.
`
`It is my understanding that in order to properly evaluate the ’431 patent,
`
`the terms of the claims must be defined. It is my understanding that the claims are to be
`
`given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. It is my
`
`further understanding that claim terms are given their ordinary and accustomed meaning
`
`as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, unless the inventor, as a
`
`lexicographer, has set forth a special meaning for a term. The discussion of the claim
`
`terms below is my opinion regarding each of the referenced terms, as defined in
`
`accordance with the broadest reasonable construction standard, and based on the
`
`understanding of a person of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`28.
`
`The ’431 patent uses the term “bandwidth” in the abstract, the claims, and
`
`the detailed description. However, the ’431 patent does not set forth a special
`
`meaning for the above term. As such, this term should be given its broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the
`
`specification and the term’s ordinary and accustomed meaning. The ’431 patent
`
`uses the term “bandwidth” to refer to a frequency range a system occupies or uses.
`
`See supra ¶ 21-22. For example, Fig. 6 of the ’431 patent “illustrates the signal
`
`structure in the frequency domain” for a specific embodiment. ERIC-1001, 4:36-
`
`67. “The variable channel bandwidth is realized by adjusting the number of usable
`
`subcarriers, whose spacing is set constant.” Id., 4:41-42. Fig. 6 of the ’431 patent
`
`
`
`–14–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 14 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`is reproduced below for reference. As shown below, Fig. 6 illustrates various
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`bandwidths (measured as a frequency range, e.g., 5 MHz or 10 MHz) and numbers
`
`of subcarriers corresponding to the bandwidth.
`
`
`
`Thus, under the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the ’431 patent
`
`specification and the ordinary and accustomed meaning, one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art would understand that “bandwidth” means a frequency range that a component,
`
`circuit, or system passes or uses.
`
`29.
`
`The ’431 patent uses the term “core-band” in the claims and the detailed
`
`description. The ’431 patent sets forth a special meaning for core-band as follows: “[a]
`
`core-band, substantially centered at the operating center frequency, is defined as a
`
`frequency segment that is not greater than the smallest operating channel bandwidth
`
`among all the possible spectral bands that the receiver is designed to operate with.”
`
`
`
`–15–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 15 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`ERIC-1001, 4:67-5:4 (emphasis added). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`in view of the ’431 patent specification one of ordinary skill in the art would understand
`
`that “core-band” means a frequency segment that is not greater than the smallest
`
`operating channel bandwidth among all the possible spectral bands that a receiver is
`
`designed to operate with.
`
`30.
`
`The ’431 patent uses the term “primary preamble” in the claims and
`
`the detailed description. The term “primary preamble” is not known as a term of art
`
`in the field. Rather, the ’431 patent uses the term in a special way. The term
`
`“preamble” by itself, on the other hand, denotes a signal near the beginning of a
`
`transmission, such as a frame or slot. For example, “[t]he downlink transmission in
`
`each frame begins with a downlink preamble”, and “[s]imilarly, uplink transmission
`
`can begin with an uplink preamble, which can be the first or more of the OFDM
`
`symbols in the first uplink (UL) slot”. ERIC-1001, 3:51-52 and 56-58. Yamaura
`
`and Zhuang, as examples, use the term “preamble” in the same manner as the ’431
`
`patent. See, e.g., infra, ¶¶ 43 and 53. Fig. 4 of the ’431 patent is admitted prior art
`
`and “shows a basic structure of a multi-carrier signal in the time domain, generally
`
`made up of time frames, time slots, and OFDM symbols.” Id., 2:13-15.
`
`
`
`–16–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 16 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`For example, a preamble would be transmitted at the beginning of an illustrated frame or
`
`time slot in Fig. 4. Thus, the term “preamble” refers to a signal near the beginning of
`
`a transmission, such as the beginning of a frame or time slot.
`
`31.
`
`The term “primary preamble” describes “a preamble … designed to
`
`only occupy the CB [core band]”. Id., 5:19-20. This feature of the core-band also
`
`appears in various independent claims. For example, claim 1 states: “the primary
`
`preamble is a direct sequence in the time domain with a frequency content confined
`
`within the core-band, or is an orthogonal frequency-divisional multiplexing
`
`
`
`–17–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 17 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`(OFDM) symbol corresponding to a particular frequency pattern within the core-
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`band” (emphasis added). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of
`
`the ’431 patent specification one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that
`
`“primary preamble” means a signal transmitted near the beginning of a
`
`transmission, such as a frame or a time slot, and occupying only the core band.
`
`32.
`
`The ’431 patent uses the term “peak-to-average ratio” in the claims and
`
`the detailed description. The term “peak-to-average ratio,” without further clarification,
`
`does not identify the metric or signal characteristic used to form the ratio. This term,
`
`however, is understood as referring to a metric that is of general concern in OFDM
`
`systems – that is, the peak-to-average power ratio. A large ratio of peak power to
`
`average power has disadvantages, such as “an increased complexity of digital-to-analog
`
`converters and a reduced efficiency of the RF [radio frequency] power amplifier.” See
`
`ERIC-1009, p. 3. Thus, reduction of the peak-to-average power ratio has been studied
`
`extensively for OFDM systems. See id., pp. 4-38. The term for the metric is shortened
`
`in the ’431 patent from the more typical peak-to-average power ratio (see, e.g., id., p. 3;
`
`see also ERIC-1005, ¶47 ) to “peak-to-average ratio.” Under the broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation in view of the ’431 patent specification and the ordinary and accustomed
`
`meaning, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that “peak-to-average ratio”
`
`means peak-to-average power ratio.
`
`Summary of the State of the Prior Art
`
`
`
`–18–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 18 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`33. As discussed above, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a B.S.
`
`degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, Computer Science, or
`
`equivalent training, as well as three to five years of experience in the field of
`
`digital communication systems, such as wireless cellular communication systems
`
`and networks. Such a person would be familiar with various well-known
`
`communication methodologies, protocols, and techniques (“techniques”), such as
`
`OFDM. Also, one of ordinary skill in the art would know how to apply these
`
`different techniques to different communication systems and networks. Each
`
`technique is associated with known advantages and disadvantages, such as speed,
`
`power consumption, and cost, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`know how to choose between the different methodologies, protocols, and
`
`techniques to balance the various goals of the communication systems and
`
`networks under consideration.
`
`34.
`
`I have reviewed the reference referred to as Li (ERIC-1002). Li
`
`“relates to the field of wireless communications; more particularly, the invention
`
`relates to multi-cell, multi-subscriber wireless systems using orthogonal frequency
`
`division multiplexing (OFDM).” ERIC-1002, 1:11-14. Li explains that “[i]n
`
`OFDM, a wide bandwidth is divided into multiple narrow-band subcarriers, which
`
`are arranged to be orthogonal with each other.” Id., 1:19-21. The subcarriers are
`
`divided into clusters. For example, “FIG. 1A illustrates multiple subcarriers, such
`
`
`
`–19–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 19 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`as subcarrier 101, and cluster 102. A cluster, such as cluster 102, is defined as a
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`logical unit that contains at least one physical subcarrier, as shown in FIG. 1A. A
`
`cluster can contain consecutive or disjoint subcarriers. The mapping between a
`
`cluster and its subcarriers can be fixed or reconfigurable. In the latter case, the base
`
`station informs the subscribers when the clusters are redefined. In one embodiment,
`
`the frequency spectrum includes 512 subcarriers and each cluster includes four
`
`consecutive subcarriers, thereby resulting in 128 clusters.” Id., 5:18-27. In Li’s
`
`Fig. 1A, for example (reproduced below), four consecutive subcarriers form a
`
`cluster.
`
`
`
`35. A base station can assign a subscriber one or more clusters of
`
`subcarriers. At a later time, a number of clusters can be increased, thereby
`
`increasing bandwidth (i.e., the bandwidth is variable). For example, “[i]n one
`
`embodiment, the base station allocates all the clusters to be used by a subscriber at
`
`once. In an alternative embodiment, the base station first allocates multiple clusters,
`
`referred to herein as the basic clusters, to establish a data link between the base
`
`
`
`–20–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 20 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`station and the subscriber. The base station then subsequently allocates more
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`clusters, referred to herein as the auxiliary clusters, to the subscriber to increase
`
`the communication bandwidth. Higher priorities can be given to the assignment of
`
`basic clusters and lower priorities may be given to that of auxiliary clusters. For
`
`example, the base station first ensures the assignment of the basic clusters to the
`
`subscribers and then tries to satisfy further requests on the auxiliary clusters from
`
`the subscribers. Alternatively, the base station may assign auxiliary clusters to one
`
`or more subscribers before allocating basic clusters to other subscribers. For
`
`example, a base station may allocate basic and auxiliary clusters to one subscriber
`
`before allocating any clusters to other subscribers. In one embodiment, the base
`
`station allocates basic clusters to a new subscriber and then determines if there are
`
`any other subscribers requesting clusters. If not, then the base station allocates the
`
`auxiliary clusters to that new subscriber.” Id., 6:41-62 (emphasis added).
`
`36.
`
`Li discloses that a variable bandwidth OFDM system can use
`
`orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA). “Orthogonal frequency
`
`division multiple access (OFDMA) is another method for multiple access, using the
`
`basic format of OFDM. In OFDMA, multiple subscribers simultaneously use
`
`different subcarriers, in a fashion similar to frequency division multiple access
`
`(FDMA).” Id., 1:33-38. “The techniques disclosed herein are described using
`
`OFDMA (clusters) as an example.” Id., 3:5-6. Further, “[a] method and apparatus
`
`
`
`–21–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 21 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`for subcarrier selection for systems is described. In one embodiment, a method for
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`subcarrier selection for a system employing orthogonal frequency division multiple
`
`access (OFDMA) comprises partitioning subcarriers into groups of at least one
`
`cluster of subcarriers, receiving an indication of a selection by the subscriber of one
`
`or more groups in the groups, and allocating at least one cluster in the one or more
`
`groups of clusters selected by the subcarrier for use in communication with the
`
`subscriber.” Id., 2:13-22.
`
`37.
`
`Li discloses a base station for performing cluster allocation. “FIG. 13
`
`is a block diagram of one embodiment of a base station. Referring to FIG. 13,
`
`cluster allocation and load scheduling controller 1301 (cluster allocator) collects all
`
`the necessary information, including the downlink/uplink SINR of clusters specified
`
`for each subscriber (e.g., via SINR/rate indices signals 1313 received from OFDM
`
`transceiver 1305) and user data, queue fullness/traffic load (e.g., via user data buffer
`
`information 1311 from multi-user data buffer 1302). Using this information,
`
`controller 1301 makes the decision on cluster allocation and load scheduling for
`
`each user, and stores the decision information in a memory (not shown). Controller
`
`1301 informs the subscribers about the decisions through control signal channels
`
`(e.g., control signal/cluster allocation 1312 via OFDM transceiver 1305). Controller
`
`1301 updates the decisions during retraining.” Id., 11:17-31. Li’s Fig. 13 is
`
`reproduced below.
`
`
`
`–22–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 22 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`
`
`38.
`
`I have reviewed the reference referred to as Yamaura (ERIC-1003).
`
`Yamaura “relates to a radio communication method, a radio communication system,
`
`[and] a radio communication base station … particularly suitable for radio
`
`transmission based on OFDM modulation (Orthogonal Frequency Division
`
`Multiplexing).” ERIC-1003, 1:10-18. Furthermore, “[t]he present invention was
`
`completed to reduce loads in a base station or a terminal station when control
`
`signals are transmitted from a base station to a terminal station in the radio
`
`
`
`–23–
`
`
`
`ERIC-1012 / Page 23 of 126
`
`
`
`Haas Decl.
`
`communication system of the type mentioned above.” Id., 5:64-67.
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. 7,787,431
`
`39. Yamaura points out that in conventional OFDM systems “the signal to
`
`call a terminal station from a base station is transmitted, with all information placed
`
`on subcarriers in the transmission band, and the ca
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
