Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 1 of 98 PageID #: 15022
`
`[N THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`Civil Action No.: 1:13-cv-00008-RGA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Civil Action No.: l :13-cv—00009-RGA
`
`JURY TRIAL DENIANDED
`
`INTERDIGITAL COMIVIUNICATIONS,
`
`INC, a Delaware corporation,
`INTERDIGITAL TECHNOLOGY
`
`CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation,
`IPR LICENSING, INC ., a Delaware
`corporation, and INTERDIGITAL
`HOLDINGS, ]NC., a. Delaware cmporation,
`
`Plaintiffs and Counterclaini
`
`Defendants,
`
`V.
`
`HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD, a
`Chinese corporation, FUTUREWEI
`TECHNOLOGIES, INC. DIE/A HUAWEI
`
`TECHNOLOGIES (USA), a Texas
`corporation, and HUAWEI DEVICE USA,
`INC, a Texas corporation,
`
`Defendants and
`
`Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
`
`INTERDIGITAL CONIMUNICATIONS,
`INC. a Delaware corporation,
`INTERDIGITAL TECHNOLOGY
`
`CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation,
`IPR LICENSING, INC, a Delaware
`
`corporation, and INTERDIGITAL
`HOLDINGS, INC, 3 Delaware celporation,
`
`Plaintiffs and Counterclainl
`
`Defendants,
`
`V.
`
`ZTE CORPORATION, a Chinese corporation,
`and ZTE USA) INC ., a New JerseV
`
`
`
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00001
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008—RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 2 of 98 PageID #: 15023
`
`corporation,
`
`Defendants and
`
`Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
`
`INTERDIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS,
`INC, a Delaware corporation,
`INTERDIGITAL TECHNOLOGY
`
`CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation,
`IPR LICENSING, INC., 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
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00002
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 3 of 98 PageID #: 15024
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`PLAINTIFFS” INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
`
`DEFENDANTS’ INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 2
`
`AGREED—UPON CONSTRUCTIONS ........................................................................................... 5
`
`DISPUTED CONSTRUCTIONS .................................................................................................... 6
`
`I.
`
`”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
`
`II.
`
`”966 and ”847 Patents: “code” (”966 claims 1, 5; ”847 claims 1—1 1) ................................... 9
`
`l.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ..................................................................................... 9
`Defendants” Answering Response ........................................................................... 9
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 11
`Defendants” Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 13
`
`III.
`
`”847 Patent: “code of a second type” (claim 8) ................................................................. 14
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 14
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 15
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 16
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 16
`
`IV.
`
`”847 Patent: “access signal” (claims 6, 9, 11) .................................................................... 17
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 17
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 18
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 18
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 19
`
`V.
`
`”847 Patent: “associated with the same or different code” (claims 7, 10) .........................20
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 20
`
`i
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00003
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 4 of 98 PageID #: 15025
`
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Defendants” Answering Response .........................................................................20
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response .........................................21
`Defendants’ Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 21
`
`VI.
`
`”847 Patent: “first power level” (claims 7, 10) ..................................................................21
`
`l.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 21
`Defendants” Answering Response .........................................................................22
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 23
`Defendants” Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 23
`
`VII.
`
`”847 Patent: “[re-]synchronize[d/ing] to the/a pilot signal” (claims 1, 2, 3, 4,
`5,6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11) ............................................................................................................23
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 23
`Defendants” Answering Response .........................................................................24
`Plaintiff” s Reply to Defendants” Answering Response .........................................24
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 26
`
`Vlll.
`
`”847 Patent: “circuit” (claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11) ............................................................27
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 27
`Defendants” Answering Response .........................................................................28
`Plaintiff” 5 Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 28
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 29
`
`IX.
`
`a signal by said subscriber unit as part
`”847 Patent: “transmitting/transmit
`of the access procedure” (claims 7, 10) ............................................................................. 29
`
`l.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 29
`Defendants” Answering Response .........................................................................29
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 30
`Defendants” Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 30
`
`”847 Patent: “subsequently transmit[ting], with respect to said first code a
`same or a different code, at increasing power levels” (claims 7, 10) ................................ 31
`
`l.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 31
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 31
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 32
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 32
`
`X1.
`
`”847 Patent: “periodically” (claim 1) ................................................................................. 33
`
`ii
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00004
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 5 of 98 PageID #: 15026
`
`I.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 33
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 33
`Plaintiff s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ......................................... 33
`Defendants’ Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 34
`
`XII.
`
`’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” 5 Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ......................................... 35
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 36
`
`XIII.
`
`”966 and ”847 Patents: “successively transmits signals” (”966 claim I; ”847
`claims 1, 2, 3, 5); “successively transmitted signals” (”966 claims I, 8; ”847
`claim 5) .............................................................................................................................. 36
`
`l.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 36
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 37
`Plaintiff” s Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ......................................... 38
`Defendants’ Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 38
`
`XIV.
`
`’15] 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
`
`XV.
`
`’ 151 Patent: “utilizing the radio resources for the uplink shared channel or the
`downlink shared channel” (claims 1 and I6) .....................................................................45
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ...................................................................................45
`Defendants’ Answering Response .........................................................................46
`Plaintiff” 5 Reply to Defendants” Answering Response .........................................47
`Defendants” Sur—Reply ...........................................................................................48
`
`XVI.
`
`”15] 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
`
`iii
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00005
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 6 of 98 PageID #: 15027
`
`4.
`
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 51
`
`XVII.
`
`”151 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” 5 Reply to Defendants’ Answering Response ......................................... 53
`Defendants” Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 53
`
`XVIII. ”151 Patent: “radio resources” (claims 1, 10-14, 16) ......................................................... 53
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 53
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 54
`Plaintiff” s Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 54
`Defendants” Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 54
`
`XIX.
`
`”15] Patent: “shared channel” (claims 1, 9—14, 16) ........................................................... 55
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 55
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 55
`Plaintiffs 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
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 57
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 57
`Plaintiffs 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” 5 Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 59
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 60
`
`XXII. ”244 Patent: “configured to”” (claims 1, 4-6, 9-12, 15-21) ................................................. 60
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 60
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 60
`Plaintiff” 5 Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 61
`Defendants” Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 62
`
`iV
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00006
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 7 of 98 PageID #: 15028
`
`XXIII. ”244 Patent: “configured to communicate with an IEEE 802.1 1 wireless local
`area networ ”” (claim 1) ..................................................................................................... 62
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 62
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 63
`Plaintiff” 5 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
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`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
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 74
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 75
`Plaintiff” 5 Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 77
`Defendants” Sur—Reply ........................................................................................... 81
`
`”244 Patent: “a circuit configured to select the IEEE 802.11
`XXVII.
`transceiver” (claim 4) ......................................................................................................... 81
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs” Opening Position ................................................................................... 81
`Defendants” Answering Response ......................................................................... 81
`Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants” Answering Response ......................................... 82
`Defendants” Sur—Reply........................................................................................... 83
`
`V
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00007
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 8 of 98 PageID #: 15029
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`CASES
`
`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,
`2013 WL 831528 (ND. Ca1. Jan. 10, 2013) ....................................................................... 65
`
`CAE Screenlates v. Heinrich Fiedler GmbH,
`
`224 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2000) .......................................................................................... 80
`
`Cat Tech LLC v. Tube/Master, Inc,
`
`528 F.3d 871 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ............................................................................................ 53
`
`CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Return Path, Inc.,
`
`654 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2013) .......................................................................................... 50
`
`Vi
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00008
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 9 of 98 PageID #: 15030
`
`Cent. Admixture Pharmacy Servs., Inc. v. Advanced Cardiac Solutions, P. C.,
`482 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ............................................................................................ 2
`
`ChefAm, 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.A., Inc,
`695 F. Supp. 2d 609 (ND. 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 ’1 Trade Comm ’n,
`690 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ...................................................................................... 6, 34
`
`InterDigital Commc ’ns, LLC v. Int ’1 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 7 Trade Comm ’n,
`75 F.3d 1545 (Fed. Cir. 1996) ...................................................................................... 50, 68
`
`V11
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00009
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 10 of 98 PagelD #: 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 Perkin-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., CA. No. ll-484-RGA,
`2013 US. 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
`
`Viii
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00010
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 11 of 98 PageID #: 15032
`
`PLAINTIFFS’ EXPLANATION OF CITATIONS
`
`Citations to “ ’847 Patent” refer to US. Patent No. 7,286,847.
`
`Citations to “ ’966 Patent” refer to US Patent No. 7,190,966.
`
`Citations to “ ’ 151 Patent ” refer to US. Patent No. 7,941,151.
`
`Citations to “ ’244 Patent” refer to US. Patent No. 8,380,244.
`
`Citations to “ ’010 Patent” refer to US Patent No. 5,799,010.
`
`Citations to “ ’970 Patent” refer to US. Patent No. 7,616,970
`
`Citations to “ ’049 App.” refer to US. 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 “613 ID” refer to the ALJ’s Opinion in ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-6l3,
`attached hereto as EX. [20].
`
`Citations to “Dahlman” refer to Dahlman, et al., 3G Evolution HSPA and LTE for Mobile
`Broadband (2007), attached hereto as EX. [15].
`
`Emphasis is added throughout the brief unless otherwise noted.
`
`ix
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00011
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008-RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 12 of 98 PageID #: 15033
`
`DEFENDANTS’ EXPLANATION OF CITATIONS
`
`“004 Patent” and “004 Pat.” refer to U.S. Patent No. 7,1 17,004.
`
`“010 Patent” and “010 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.
`
`“15] 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.
`
`“536 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 R1-02-1250, 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, NK8681TC015910712-NK8681TC015910713.
`
`Emphasis is added throughout the brief unless otherwise noted.
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00012
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008—RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 13 of 98 PageID #: 15034
`
`PLAINTIFFS’ INTRODUCTION
`
`Plaintiffs InterDigital Communications,
`
`Inc.,
`
`InterDigital 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.
`
`InterDigital 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, InterDigital 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 InterDigital 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, InterDigital
`
`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 InterDigital 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
`99
`‘6
`
`concepts of “lower than minimums,
`
`communication,” or “base stations.” See Amgen, Inc. v.
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`Exhibit 1009-00013
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00008—RGA Document 154 Filed 11/21/13 Page 14 of 98 PageID #: 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 redraf