UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ERICSSON INC. and TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-01330
`Patent 8,310,993
`
`
`PETITIONERS’ DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ERICSSON INC. and TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-01330
`Patent 8,310,993
`
`
`PETITIONERS’ DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Case IPR2014-01330
`Patent 8,310,993
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e), I hereby certify that on November 13,
`
`2015
`
`the foregoing Petitioners’ Demonstrative Exhibits
`
`is being served
`
`electronically by agreement of the parties, by e-mail to the following counsel of
`
`record.
`
`MSpecht-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`LGordon-PTAB@skgf.com
`RHicks-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`JHietala@intven.com
`Tim@intven.com
`
`Michael D. Specht
`Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
`1100 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20005
`Phone: (202) 772-8756
`Fax: (202) 371-2540
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC
`
`Lori A Gordon
`Ross Hicks
`Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
`1100 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20005
`Phone: (202) 772-8862
`Fax: (202) 371-2540
`Back-Up Counsel for Patent Owner
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC
`
`James Hietala
`Tim Seeley
`Intellectual Ventures
`3150 139th Avenue S.E.
`Bellevue, WA 98005
`Phone: (425) 677-2973
`Fax: (425) 467-2350
`Back-Up Counsel for Patent Owner
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-01330
`Patent 8,310,993
`
`
`
`
`
`/Charles J. Rogers/
`Charles J. Rogers
`Reg. No. 38,286
`Conley Rose, P.C.
`1001 McKinney St., Suite 1800
`Houston, Texas 77002-6421
`Phone: (713) 238-8049
`Fax: (713) 238-8008
`E-mail: crogers@conleyrose.com
`Back-Up Counsel for Petitioners
`Ericsson Inc. and
`Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`ERICSSON INC. and
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2014-01330
`U.S. Patent No. 8,310,993
`
`Petitioners’ Demonstratives
`
`Before BRIAN J. McNAMARA, DAVID C. McCONE, and
`JASON J. CHUNG, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`1
`
`
`
`Instituted Claims/Grounds
`IPR2014‐01330
`
`References
`
`Basis
`
`Instituted
`Claims
`
`Ground 3
`
`Ground 4
`
`Sipola, Kakani &
`AAPA
`Sipola, Kakani,
`AAPA & Rinne
`
`§ 103(a)
`
`1, 2, 4-8 & 10-12
`
`§ 103(a)
`
`3 & 9
`
`2
`
`
`
`Overview of the ’993 Patent
`• The ’993 Patent relates to a wireless network
`allocating uplink resources for a user equipment
`(UE) to transmit an uplink acknowledgment (ACK)
`acknowledging receipt of transfer communication
`protocol (TCP) segments transmitted by the
`wireless network.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Background of the ’993 Patent – AAPA
`
`*Transport Communication Protocol (TCP)
`
`(Ex. 1001, 3: 26‐35)
`
`(Ex. 1001, 3: 50‐63)
`
`*PO does not dispute
`construing “transport
`communication protocol” to
`mean “transmission control
`protocol”
`
`4
`
`
`
`Background of the ’993 Patent – AAPA
`Problem: UE needs to request allocation of uplink (UL)
`resources from network to transmit ACK responsive to
`receiving TCP data
`
`(Ex. 1001, 3: 1‐19)
`
`5
`
`
`
`Background of the ’993 Patent – AAPA
`
`Ex. 1001, 4: 23‐42)
`
`6
`
`
`
`Embodiments of the ’993 Patent
`Proposed Solution: Network allocates UL resources for UE to
`transmit ACK in response to counting a predetermined
`number of TCP segments transmitted in downlink direction
`
`(Ex. 1001, Fig. 5)
`
`(Ex. 1001, 8: 30‐52)
`
`(Ex. 1001, 5: 4‐12)
`7
`
`
`
`Claim 1 of the ’993 Patent
`
`(pre) A wireless network comprising:
`a) a circuit located in the wireless network,
`b) wherein the circuit buffers segments of transfer communication protocol (TCP) data
`for downlink (DL) transmission;
`c) a transmitter arranged to transmit the buffered segments of TCP data to a user
`equipment (UE);
`d) the circuit is further configured to count a number of transmitted segments of TCP
`data;
`e) wherein the circuit is further configured, in response to the count exceeding a
`predetermined number,
`to transmit a message that indicates an allocation of uplink resources to transfer
`an uplink segment and the allocation of uplink resources is sufficient to have
`information indicating acknowledgment; and
`g) wherein the circuit is further configured to receive, in response to the uplink
`resources, the uplink segment which includes the information indicating
`acknowledgment of receipt of the transmitted segments of TCP data.
`
`f)
`
`*PO only disputes obviousness of claim elements d) – f)
`
`8
`
`
`
`“Count”
`• Patent Owner’s Construction: “the successive increase
`or decrease of a cumulative total of the number of
`times an event occurs.” (POR at 11 (citing Ex. 2003,
`Webster’s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, p.
`133).)
`
`• Petitioners’ Construction: “the count is of a number of
`sent segments of TCP data in the downlink.”
`(Petitioners’ Reply to POR at 5 (quoting Ex. 1004,
`Patentee’s Response to Office Action, p. 14, ll. 16‐17).)
`
`(Wells Dep., 60: 19‐22)
`
`(Wells Dep., 57: 8‐15)
`
`9
`
`
`
`Overview of Prior Art
`Kakani: Eliminates need for UE to request resources to send ACK by
`allocating UL resources based on amount of TCP data transmitted in DL
`direction
`
`(Ex. 1008, ¶ 58)
`
`Sipola: Demonstrates reason to detect/count DL data such that UE
`sends ACK responsive to network counting/detecting a predetermined
`number of packets transmitted to UE
`
`(Ex. 1007, 6:60‐64)
`
`(Ex. 1007, 50‐57)
`
`10
`
`
`
`Overview of Prior Art
`AAPA: Provides motivation for network to timely allocate UL
`resources so that UE sends “an ACK…for at least every second
`full‐sized segment.” Ex. 1001, 3:53‐54 (quoting RFC 1122).
`
`(Ex. 1001, 3:50‐63)
`
`11
`
`
`
`Element d) “the circuit is further configured to count
`a number of transmitted segments of TCP data”
`• Sipola: “The present invention is a method for scheduling of
`plural packet data flows transmitted via a single transmission
`resource, …the method comprising…detecting that a certain
`number of packet data has been transmitted via the
`transmission resource.” Ex. 1007, 4:18‐28 (emphasis added).
`• Board: “Sipola teaches a network entity (e.g., circuit) that
`knows/detects that four blocks are transmitted (e.g., counting
`four blocks) and includes a poll request for an
`acknowledgement with the fourth transmitted block (Pet. 34–
`35; Ex. 1007, 8:6–9, claim 13), which teaches the claimed
`limitation “the circuit is further configured to count a number
`of transmitted segments of TCP data,’ as recited in claim 1(d).”
`Institution Decision (“ID”) at 13.
`
`12
`
`
`
`Inconsistencies between PO & PO’s Expert
`
`Patent Owner
`
`(POR at 20)
`
`Patent Owner’s
`Expert
`
`(Wells Dep. at 133:9‐12)
`
`13
`
`
`
`PO’s Expert confirms that Sipola’s network
`detects number of downlink segments transmitted
`
`(Ex. 1007, 12:27‐38)
`
`(Wells Dep. at 158:5‐20)
`
`PO
`
`(Wells Dep. at 184:19‐23)
`
`14
`
`(Wells Dep. at 134:16‐24)
`
`
`
`PO does not present sufficient reasons to
`alter Board’s decision regarding element d)
`
`(ID at 15)
`
`15
`
`
`
`Element e) “the circuit is further configured, in response
`to the count exceeding a predetermined number”
`Patent Owner: “none of the prior art recites the required ‘in response
`to’ feature.” POR at 14.
`
`Sipola: “the method comprising the steps of: allocating one of the plural
`data flows to the single transmission resource for transmission, the data
`flow comprising a number of packet data, first detecting that a certain
`number of packet data has been transmitted via the transmission
`resource, and in response thereto, generating an acknowledgment
`message including the acknowledgment status of each of the number of
`data packets.” Ex. 1007, 4:24‐31 (emphasis added).
`
`(Ex. 1007, 6:60‐64)
`
`16
`
`
`
`Petition
`
`(Pet. at 21)
`
`(Pet. at 40)
`
`17
`
`
`
`PO’s Expert
`
`P0’s Expert
`
`Page 158
`
`Jonathan Wells, Ph. D.
`Q. Well what is it detecting‘?
`MR. PIC KARD: Objection, form.
`Scope.
`in Column 8 ot'Sipola in the paragraph
`THE WITNESS: So, in this Claim [3
`starting around Line 4.
`of Sipola, it is detecting this particular
`And in that paragraph, it talks
`about the network entity knows that a
`element we are talking about, a first
`number ofblocks have been transmitted
`detector, it is detecting that the number
`of packet data has been transmitted via the _
`transmission resource.
`BY MR. ROGERS:
`
`.|m4mm@|.ros4
`
`Jonathan Wells, Ph.D.
`THE WITNESS:
`
`is disclosed back
`
`BY MR. |{O('iI:'|?.S:
`
`Q. What is the purpose ofthe poll‘?
`A. That is disclosed in the same
`
`ara ra h in Column 8.
`
`MR. PIC lLA|?.D: Same objections.
`THE WITNESS: So, again, in Claim [3
`of Sipola, that detector is detecting a
`number ofpacket data that has been
`transmitted
`
`BY MR. |{OG|:'|{S:
`.
`
`MR. PIC K_A|?.D: Objection, form.
`Scope.
`
`Q. Would you characterize that poll
`acknowledged sequence to be part ofan
`acknowledgment procedure‘?
`MR. PICKARD: Objection, foundation.
`THE WITNESS: Well, certainly when
`it, the network is sending data including a
`poll, which is a request for an
`acknowledgment, then that is part ofa, I
`mean, generally that would be regarded as a
`
`18
`
`
`
`PO does not present sufficient reasons to
`alter Board’s decision regarding element e)
`
`(ID at 14)
`
`19
`
`
`
`Element f) “to transmit a message that indicates an
`allocation of uplink resources to transfer an uplink segment
`and the allocation of uplink resources is sufficient to have
`information indicating acknowledgment”
`Patent Owner RE: Prior Art “Request & Allocate” Systems
`
`(POR at 4)
`
`(POR at 10)
`
`20
`
`
`
`Problems in “request‐and‐allocate” systems
`were known well before the ’993 Patent
`
`Kakani
`
`21
`
`
`
`Kakani eliminates need to request UL resources
`
`“using the knowledge of
`the uplink traffic at the
`network side enables
`better allocation of radio
`resources.” (Ex. 1008, ¶
`10)
`
`22
`
`
`
`The ’993 Patent
`“The inventive concept described in
`FIG. 5 commences with a full‐sized
`TCP data segment arriving at a DL
`buffer within the network 510. The
`network determines that an ACK is
`likely to be generated by the
`receiving UE in response to the
`transmitted TCP data segment,” so
`“[i]t is therefore possible to…allocate
`UL resources accordingly.” Ex. 1001,
`8:30‐39 (emphasis added).
`
`“for every data segment sent in the
`downlink an acknowledgement packet can
`be expected in the uplink. Thus the amount
`of data in the uplink is the amount required
`to transmit an acknowledgement signal, and
`this allows the uplink resources to be
`estimated and appropriately allocated to
`the MS.” Ex. 1008, ¶ 33 (emphasis added).
`
`“Thus in the embodiment of interactive TCP
`data transfer, use is made of the balance of
`the data in both directions in order to
`estimate the traffic in the uplink. Upon
`transmission of a data packet in the
`downlink, the network can estimate that a
`similar sized data packet and an
`acknowledgement will be transmitted in the
`uplink. The network can allocate uplink
`resources accordingly.” Ex. 1008 ¶ 40
`(emphasis added).
`Kakani
`
`23
`
`
`
`The ’993 Patent vs. Kakani
`• The ’993 Patent: “This approach eliminates the need
`for the receiver to request uplink resources to send
`an acknowledgment because the system has
`allocated the necessary resources based on the prior
`transmission.” POR at 8‐9 (emphasis added).
`
`• Kakani: “The network therefore allocates resources
`to the MS based on the resources required for the
`previous block of data.” Ex. 1008, ¶ 31 (emphasis
`added). “Thus the amount of data in the uplink is the
`amount required to transmit an acknowledgement
`signal.” Id. at ¶ 33.
`
`24
`
`
`
`Rebuttal Against PO’s Arguments regarding element f)
`Patent Owner:
`•
`“Kakani does not disclose element 1(f), transmitting a message that indicates an
`allocation of uplink resources, and Petitioners have not demonstrated that Sipola
`or AAPA disclose this element.” POR at 17.
`Petitioners:
`• Patent Owner admits “that ‘[o]nly after receiving a message allocating UL
`resources from the network can UE 305 transmit the ACK message.’ (POR at 5
`(emphasis added).) Thus, it would have been readily apparent to a POSA that
`Kakani’s network would transmit a message that ‘allocates radio resources to the
`mobile station to enable uplink data transmission’ of the acknowledgement
`signal.” Petitioners’ Reply at 14 (quoting Ex. 1008, ¶ 43).
`Similarly, “AAPA admits that ‘the network 310 transmits a message to the UE 305
`allocating UL resources [so] the UE 305 is able to implement the data transfer [of]
`an ‘ACK’ message.’ To be sure, Patent Owner’s own expert confirms that before an
`ACK can be sent, “there necessarily must have been an allocation of uplink
`resources provided from the network to the UE prior to the UE transmitting the
`acknowledge message.’” Petitioners’ Reply at 13‐14 (quoting Ex. 1014, Wells Dep.
`25
`53:11‐15).
`
`•
`
`
`
`PO does not present sufficient reasons to
`alter Board’s decision regarding element f)
`
`(ID at 14)
`
`26
`
`
`
`Additional Rebuttal Arguments
`
`Patent Owner:
`•
`“The asserted art teaches acknowledgement procedures that are premised on whether
`downlink segments are received, which necessitated a separate allocation request for
`uplink acknowledgement resources. But the ‘993 Patent claims acknowledgement
`procedures that focus entirely on the number of TCP segments that are transmitted,
`eliminating the need for a separate allocation request for uplink acknowledgement
`resources.” POR at 13.
`Petitioners:
`•
`“Kakani recognizes that ‘continuous signaling between the MS and the network to
`indicate the resource request consumes a good proportion of the available bandwidth.’
`(Ex. 1008, ¶ 4.) Like the ’993 Patent, Kakani eliminates the resource request message by
`allocating uplink resources based on ‘the network[’s] knowledge of the amount of data
`to be sent by the MS.’” Petitioners’ Reply at 12 (quoting Ex. 1008, ¶ 6).
`“Kakani aims to eliminate the need to request resources by ‘estimating the traffic in the
`uplink, and allocating resources based on the step of estimating.’ (Ex. 1008, Abstract.)
`For instance, ‘in a bulk data transfer using TCP knowledge of the amount of data in the
`uplink is derived from the downlink. . . . Knowledge of the uplink data estimate can be
`used to allocate radio resources in the uplink which result in better radio throughput.’”
`Petitioners’ Reply at 17‐18 (quoting Ex. 1008 at ¶ 58).
`27
`
`•
`
`
`
`Additional Rebuttal Arguments
`
`(POR at 1)
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Petitioners
`
`(Petitioners’ Reply at 15)
`
`28
`
`
`
`Additional Rebuttal Arguments
`
`(POR at 25)
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Petitioners
`Primary Reference = Kakani:
`
`(POR at 25)
`
`Secondary Reference = Sipola:
`
`29
`
`
`
`Motivation to combine Kakani, Sipola, and AAPA
`
`(Ex. 1008 at ¶ 58)
`
`(Petitioners’ Reply at 12)
`
`30
`
`
`
`Motivation to combine Kakani, Sipola, and AAPA
`
`(Petitioners’ Reply at 12)
`
`(Petitioners’ Reply at 13)
`
`31
`
`
`
`Claims 2‐4, 5‐8 and 10‐12 of the ’993 Patent
`
`(Petitioners’ Reply at 19)
`
`32
`
`
`
`Ground 4: Claims 3 and 9 of the ’993 Patent are
`obvious over Kakani in view of Sipola, AAPA and Rinne
`
`3. The wireless network of claim 1 wherein the circuit is further
`configured to transmit an allocation of downlink resources and an
`allocation of uplink resources at a substantially a same time and
`wherein the allocation of uplink resources is at a time interval
`delayed with respect to the allocation of downlink resources.
`
`9. The method of claim 7 wherein further comprising:
`transmitting, by the network, an allocation of downlink resources
`and an allocation of uplink resources at a substantially a same
`time and wherein the allocation of uplink resources is at a time
`interval delayed with respect to the allocation of downlink
`resources.
`
`33
`
`
`
`Claim 3
`3(a) The wireless network
`of claim 1 wherein the
`circuit is further configured
`to transmit an allocation of
`downlink resources and an
`allocation of uplink
`resources at a substantially
`a same time
`
`3(b) and wherein the
`allocation of uplink
`resources is at a time
`interval delayed with
`respect to the allocation of
`downlink resources.
`
`Rinne (Ex. 1011)
`“[A] piece of allocation information associated with a set of downlink
`transmission resources may specify allocation of that set of downlink
`transmission resources and allocation of a set of uplink transmission resources.”
`(Ex. 1011, col. 7, ll. 5‐8)
`
`“Uplink allocation information may be transmitted together with downlink
`allocation information.” (Ex. 1011, col. 32, ll. 32‐33 (emphasis added))
`
`“It is furthermore appreciated that there may be a timing offset between a set
`of downlink transmission resources (for example, a downlink frame having a
`specific frame number) and a corresponding set of uplink transmission
`resources (for example, an uplink frame having the same frame number). Such a
`timing offset does not have impact to the allocation and/or acknowledgement
`schemes described above.” (Ex. 1011, col. 32, ll. 40‐46 (emphasis added))
`
`“It is appreciated that a communication device needs time to process allocation
`information and, if uplink transmission resources have been allocated to the
`communications device, to process data and send data in the uplink direction
`using the allocated uplink transmission resources. A piece of allocation
`information transmitted in the downlink direction and indicating allocation of
`uplink transmission resources should thus refer to uplink transmission resources
`occurring after a long enough time interval.” (Ex. 1011, col. 13, ll. 43‐51
`(emphasis added))
`
`34
`
`
`
`Petitioners argue that
`
`‘Mr. Lanning also
`
`confirms it would have been obvious that,
`
`while these uplink and downlink allocations
`
`occur at substantially the same time,
`
`a
`
`temporal offset may be applied between the
`
`allocations (e.g.,
`
`time interval delayed) to
`
`account for processing time.
`
`(Ex. 1002,
`
`‘I1
`
`159)’ (Pet., p. 48.) Here,
`
`paragraph
`
`159
`
`of Lanning’s declaration
`
`quotes
`
`a
`
`rationale from Rinne without
`
`explaining why one of ordinary skill
`
`in the
`
`art would look to Rinne using the disclosure
`
`of Kakani,
`
`failing to make
`
`a
`
`sufficient
`
`showing of obyiousness
`
`in view of
`
`the
`
`Patent
`Owner
`
`35
`
`
`
`Rinne
`
`(Ex. 1001, 2:42‐44)
`
`(Ex. 1001, 20:1‐4)
`
`Kakani
`
`(Ex. 1001, 20:25‐31)
`
`36
`
`
`
`Kakani
`
`Rinne
`
`Seeks “to improve the management of
`the uplink resources from the
`network” (Ex. 1008, ¶ 20), e.g., such
`that “radio resources may be used
`optimally.” Ex. 1008, ¶ 10.
`
`Teaches “allocating transmission
`resources in a more efficient way” (Ex.
`1011, 1:51‐52), e.g., “resource
`allocator should take care that all the
`allocations of a given uplink frame are
`optimal.” Ex. 1011, 28:29‐30.
`
`37
`
`
`
`PO does not present sufficient reasons to
`alter Board’s decision regarding Ground 4
`
`Petitioners’
`Expert
`
`Board
`
`(ID at 18)
`
`38
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
