Filed on behalf of Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., MediaTek Inc., and MediaTek
`USA, Inc.
`
`By: Lori A. Gordon
`
`Robert E. Sokohl
`
`Jeffrey T. Helvey
`
`Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox PLLC
`
`1100 New York Avenue, NW
`
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`Tel: (202) 371-2600
`
`Fax: (202) 371-2540
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,477,624
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1)) ............................................ 1
`I.
`Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)) ........................................ 2
`II.
`Identification of Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)) ................................ 2
`III.
`Statutory grounds for the challenge. ............................................................ 2
`A.
`Citation of Prior Art ..................................................................................... 2
`B.
`The ’624 Patent .......................................................................................... 3
`IV.
`Overview of the ’624 Patent ........................................................................ 3
`A.
`Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ............................................................... 6
`B.
`Claim Construction ...................................................................................... 6
`C.
`Grounds of Rejection ................................................................................. 9
`V.
`Ground 1: Gerten anticipates claims 5, 8, 17, and 20. ................................. 9
`A.
`1. Overview of Gerten ...................................................................................... 9
`2. Gerten anticipates claim 5. ......................................................................... 11
`3. Gerten anticipates claim 8. ......................................................................... 22
`4. Gerten anticipates independent claim 17 and dependent claim 20. ........... 25
`B.
`Ground 2: The combination of Gerten and Cuffaro renders claims 6, 7, 18,
`and 19 obvious. ..................................................................................................... 26
`1. Gerten/Cuffaro renders claims 6 and 18 obvious. ..................................... 26
`2. Gerten/Cuffaro renders claims 7 and 19 obvious. ..................................... 32
`C.
`Ground 3: The combination of Gendel and Haartsen renders claims 5, 7,
`8, 17, 19, and 20 obvious. ..................................................................................... 37
`1. Overview of Gendel ................................................................................... 37
`2. The combination of Gendel and Haartsen renders claim 5 obvious. ......... 38
`3. The combination of Gendel and Haartsen renders claim 8 obvious. ......... 48
`4. Gendel/Haartsen renders claims 17 and 20 obvious. ................................. 51
`5. Gendel/Haartsen renders claims 7 and 19 obvious. ................................... 53
`D.
`Ground 4: The combination of Gendel, Haartsen, and Sage renders claims
`6 and 18 obvious. .................................................................................................. 55
`1. Gendel/Haartsen/Sage discloses the hopping sequence limitations. ......... 55
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`2. Gendel/Haartsen/Sage discloses “the performance of the plurality of
`communications channels is based on channel performance data that is
`transmitted over one or more of the plurality of communications channels
`based on the hopping sequence according to the frequency hopping
`protocol” of claims 6 and 18. ..................................................................... 57
`Conclusion ................................................................................................ 60
`
`VI.
`
`ii
`
`

`

`
`
`Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., MediaTek Inc., and MediaTek USA, Inc.
`
`jointly petition for inter partes review of claims 5-8 and 17-20 of United States Pa-
`
`tent No. 7,477,624 to Gan, et al., titled “Approach for Managing the Use of Com-
`
`munications Channels Based on Performance” (hereinafter “the ʼ624 patent”). The
`
`ʼ624 patent is provided as Exhibit 1001.
`
`I. Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1))
`REAL PARTY IN INTEREST: The real parties-in-interest of Petitioners are
`
`Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., MediaTek Inc., and MediaTek USA, Inc.
`
`RELATED MATTERS: The ’624 Patent is involved in the following proceed-
`
`ings that may affect or be affected by a decision in this proceeding: Bandspeed,
`
`Inc. v. STMicroelectronics NV, et al., 1:14-cv-00437, Bandspeed, Inc. v. Broad-
`
`com Corporation, 1:14-cv-00433, Bandspeed, Inc. v. Texas Instruments Incorpo-
`
`rated, 1:14-cv-00438, Bandspeed, Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated, et al., 1:14-cv-
`
`00436, Bandspeed, Inc. v. Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., 1:14-cv-00434, and
`
`Bandspeed, Inc. v. MediaTek, Inc., et al., 1:14-cv-00435, all in the Western Dis-
`
`trict of Texas. Petitioners are also contemporaneously filing with this petition two
`
`other petitions for inter partes review of remaining claims of the ‘624 patent.
`
`LEAD AND BACKUP COUNSEL: Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) and
`
`42.10(a), Petitioners appoint Lori A. Gordon (Reg. No. 50,633) as its lead coun-
`
`sel, Robert E. Sokohl (Reg. No. 36,013) as its back-up counsel, and Jeffrey T.
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`Helvey (Reg. No. 44,757) as its back-up counsel, all at the address: STERNE, KESS-
`
`LER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX, 1100 New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20005,
`
`phone number (202) 371-2600 and facsimile (202) 371-2540.
`
`SERVICE INFORMATION: Petitioners consent to electronic service by email at
`
`the email addresses: lgordon-PTAB@skgf.com, rsokohl-PTAB@skgf.com, and
`
`jhelvey-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`II. Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
`The undersigned, Marvell, MediaTek Inc., and MediaTek USA, Inc. certify
`
`that the ʼ624 patent is available for inter partes review. Marvell, MediaTek Inc.,
`
`and MediaTek USA, Inc. each certifies that it is not barred or estopped from re-
`
`questing this inter partes review on the grounds identified herein.
`
`III. Identification of Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))
`A. Statutory grounds for the challenge.
`Petitioners request review of claims 5-8 and 17-20 on four grounds:
`
`GROUND 1: Claims 5, 8, 17, and 20 are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) by
`
`Gerten. GROUND 2: Claims 6, 7, 18, and 19 are obvious over the combination of
`
`Gerten and Cuffaro. GROUND 3: Claims 5, 7, 8, 17, 19, and 20 are obvious over
`
`Gendel in view of Haartsen. GROUND 4: Claims 6 and 18 are obvious over Gen-
`
`del in view of Haartsen and Sage.
`
`B. Citation of Prior Art
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`Petitioners cite the following prior art references in support of the grounds of
`
`unpatentability: U.S. Patent No. 6,760,319 to Gerten, et al., provided as Exhibit
`
`1003, U.S. Patent No. 6,418,317 to Cuffaro, et al., provided as Exhibit 1004, U.S.
`
`Patent No. 7,280,580 to Haartsen, provided as Exhibit 1006, and U.S. Patent No.
`
`5,781,582 to Sage, et al., provided as Exhibit 1007, each qualifies as prior art un-
`
`der at least 35 U.S.C. §102(e) because each was filed prior to the earliest possible
`
`priority date of the ’624 patent (January 25, 2001).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,115,407 to Gendel, et al., provided as Exhibit 1005, quali-
`
`fies as prior art under at least 35 U.S.C. §102(a) because it issued on September 5,
`
`2000 prior to the earliest possible priority date of the ’624 patent.
`
`IV. The ’624 Patent
`A. Overview of the ’624 Patent
`The ’624 patent relates to “managing the use of communications channels
`
`based on channel performance.” (’624 patent, 1:46-
`
`48.) FIG. 2 (reproduced right) depicts a communi-
`
`cations network having a number of communica-
`
`tions devices labeled master 210, slave 220 and
`
`slave 230. Each of the communications devices in-
`
`cludes a memory, a processor that may execute in-
`
`structions stored in memory, and a transceiver that
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`is configured to transmit and receive communications with other devices of the
`
`communications network. (Id., 9:53-59.)
`
`To manage the communications channels, the system of the ’624 patent se-
`
`lects a first set of communications channels “based on the performance of the
`
`communications channels and channel selection criteria.” (Id., 4:11-13.) “For ex-
`
`ample, the selection criteria may be to select the good channels but not the bad
`
`channels.” (Id., 6:53-55.) At start-up of the communications network, the system
`
`selects an initial set of channels. (Id., 6:19-21.) The system then periodically se-
`
`lects sets of channels based on later performance of the communications channels.
`
`(Id., 4:14-16.)
`
`The ’624 patent describes various well-known techniques for measuring per-
`
`formance of communications channels. (See id., 10:19-14:59.) The disclosed tech-
`
`niques utilize special test packets (10:33-12:35), received signal strength indicators
`
`(RSSI) (12:37-13:2), cyclic redundancy checks (CRC) (13:50-14:6), and forward
`
`error correction (FEC) (14:19-41). The system classifies a communication channel
`
`based on channel performance and one or more classification criteria. (Id., 14:63-
`
`65.) “For example, a channel may be classified as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ based on the re-
`
`sults of the channel performance testing by applying one or more performance
`
`measurements to specified performance criteria.” (Id., 14:65-15:2.)
`
`“Channel testing and classification may be performed by a master” (e.g.,
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`master 210) “or other participants, such as slaves” (e.g., slaves 220 or 230). (Id.,
`
`16:42-43.) “In addition, channel testing and classifications from multiple partici-
`
`pants may be combined and/or weighted to determine an overall, or final, classifi-
`
`cation for the channels of interest.” (Id., 16:43-46.) The ’624 patent describes one
`
`technique for a “‘referendum’ approach” involving voting by participants. (Id.,
`
`16:47-49.) In the exemplary voting technique, a participant has a “‘vote’ on wheth-
`
`er to use the channel or not.” (Id., 16:65-66.) For example, a vote may indicate that
`
`the participant prefers not to use the channel (e.g., participant finds channel “bad”)
`
`or a vote may indicate that the participant prefers to use the channel (e.g., partici-
`
`pant finds channel “good”). (Id., 16:66-17:4.) A certain number of total votes “is
`
`required for the channel to be judged ‘good’ and therefore available for use by the
`
`FH communications system.” (Id., 17:5-7.) “Not every participant needs to have
`
`input for each channel under consideration.” (Id., 17:29-30.) As explained in the
`
`’624 patent, participants “may collect and combine the channel performance in-
`
`formation, or votes, to determine the final channel classifications.” (Id., 17:30-34.)
`
`In embodiments, the devices of the ’624 patent communicate using a fre-
`
`quency hopping (FH) protocol such as used in Bluetooth communications. The
`
`’624 patent explains that a FH protocol “uses a frequency hopping signal transmis-
`
`sion technique in which information or data is transmitted over a set of frequencies
`
`in a communications frequency band.” (Id., 2:5-9.) These frequencies are often re-
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`ferred to as channels. (Id., 2:19-20.) A FH protocol utilizes a hopping sequence,
`
`which is “[t]he order in which the communications network hops among the set of
`
`frequencies.” (Id., 2:11-13.) For example, “[t]he FH system transmits data on one
`
`channel, hops to the next channel in the hopping sequence to transmit more data,
`
`and continues by transmitting data on subsequent channels in the hopping se-
`
`quence.” (Id., 2:20-24.) “The use of an FH protocol helps to reduce problems with
`
`interference from other communications systems and other interference sources.”
`
`(Id., 2:25-27.)
`
`B. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`One of ordinary skill in the art would have a B.S. degree in Electrical and/or
`
`Computer Eng., or an equivalent field, as well as at least 3-5 years of academic or
`
`industry experience in the wireless communications field. (Ding Decl.1, ¶¶14-16.)
`
`C. Claim Construction
`Except for the exemplary terms set forth below, construed under the broad-
`
`est reasonable interpretation standard, the terms are to be given their plain and or-
`
`dinary meaning as understood by one of ordinary skill in the art and consistent
`
`with the disclosure. Petitioners reserve the right to present different constructions
`
`in the District Court where a different claim construction standard applies. Further,
`
`Petitioners proposed constructions below for the means plus functions elements at-
`
`
`1 The Declaration of Dr. Zhi Ding is provided as Exhibit 1002.
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`tempt to identify structure corresponding to the elements. By proposing construc-
`
`tions for the purpose of this inter partes review proceeding, Petitioners are not rep-
`
`resenting that the specification of the ’624 patent discloses sufficient structure for
`
`those claim limitations to satisfy the requirements of 35 U.S.C. §112.
`
`1. “vote” [claims 7 and 19]: The term “vote” is not explicitly defined in the
`
`specification. However, a “vote” is a common term meaning an expression of a
`
`choice (an indication). (Am. Her. Dict., 2nd Col. Ed., Exh. 1008, p. 1356.) There-
`
`fore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard, “vote[s] to use the par-
`
`ticular communications channel” means at least an indication whether to use (or
`
`not to use) the communications channel or an indication whether the communica-
`
`tion channel is good or bad. (See, e.g., ’624 patent, 16:66-17:4.)
`
`2. means plus function limitations
`
`The ’624 patent explains the “invention is related to the use of computer sys-
`
`tem 700 for implementing the techniques described herein. According to one
`
`embodiment of the invention, those techniques are performed by computer system
`
`700 in response to processor 704 executing one or more sequences of one or more
`
`instructions contained in main memory 706.” (’624 patent, 25:13-18.) Thus, pro-
`
`cessor 704 executing the instructions associated with the corresponding function is
`
`the structure for the means plus function limitations listed below. The function of
`
`the claim limitation is highlighted.
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`means for selecting, based upon performance of a
`plurality of communications channels at a first time, a
`first set of two or more communications channels from
`the plurality of communications channels [5A], [17A]
`means for causing the first set of two or more com-
`munications channels to be used for communications be-
`tween a pair of participants [5B], [17C]
`means for selecting, based upon performance of the
`plurality of communications channels at a second time
`that is later than the first time, a second set of two or
`more communications channels from the plurality of
`communications channels [5C], [17D]
`means for causing the second set of two or more
`communications channels to be used for communications
`between the pair of participants instead of the first set of
`two or more communications channels [5D], [17F]
`means for, after selecting the first set of two or more
`communications channels, causing the first set of two or
`more communications channels to be loaded into a regis-
`ter of each participant of the pair of participants [8],
`[17B]
`means for, after selecting the second set of two or
`more communications channels, causing the second set of
`two or more communications channels to be loaded into
`the register of each participant of the pair of participants
`[8], [17E]
`means for selecting, based upon the performance of
`the plurality of communications channels at the first time
`and channel selection criteria, the first set of two or more
`communications channels from the plurality of communi-
`cations channels” [7], [19]
`means for selecting, based upon the performance of
`the plurality of communications channels at the second
`time and the channel selection criteria, the second set of
`two or more communications channels from the plurality
`of communications channels [7], [19]
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`8:8-17.
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`8:18-38.
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`8:49-64.
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`8:65-9:16.
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`19:25-20:67.
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`19:25-20:67.
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`8:8-17
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`8:49-64.
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`means for performing the hopping sequence based
`on [a] frequency hopping protocol [6], [18]
`
`FIG. 7; 25:13-18;
`2:5-13.
`
`
`
`Claims 5 and 20 include the additional means plus function claim limitation:
`
`“means [for] the first participant to communicate with a third participant over
`
`the default set of two or more communications channels while communicating
`
`with the second participant over the first set of two or more communications
`
`channels and while communicating with the second participant over the sec-
`
`ond set of two or more communications channels”([5G], [20]). The highlighted
`
`function of this limitation (communicating with a third participant over the default
`
`set of two or more communications channels while communicating with the second
`
`participant over the first set of two or more communications channels and while
`
`communicating with the second participant over the second set of two or more
`
`communications channels) is performed by transceiver 216. (See ’624 patent, FIG.
`
`2; 9:54-59.)
`
`V. Grounds of Rejection
`A. Ground 1: Gerten anticipates claims 5, 8, 17, and 20.
`1. Overview of Gerten
`Gerten is directed “to a system and method for removing channels in a fre-
`
`quency hopping scheme having strong interference or interferers in a wireless
`
`communication system.” (Gerten, 2:34-37.) FIG. 1 of Gerten (reproduced below)
`
`depicts a network having three piconets 10, 12, and 14. (Id., 3:8-12.) As shown in
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`FIG. 1, the first piconet 10 has a plurality of
`
`mobile units 20 including a master mobile
`
`unit and a slave mobile unit. (Id., 3:27-31.)
`
`The master mobile unit in Gerten is a de-
`
`vice “whose clock and hopping sequence
`
`are employed to synchronize other devices
`
`in the piconet--devices in a piconet that are not the master are typically slaves.”
`
`(Id., 3:22-26.)
`
`Mobile device 20 of Gerten, depicted below in FIG. 2, includes transceiver
`
`32, frequency synthesizer 60 having memory 62, and central control system 30 that
`
`can include “a processor or the like that
`
`is programmed to control and operate
`
`various components within the mobile
`
`communication unit 20 in order to carry
`
`out various functions.” (Id., 3:44-48.)
`
`The “frequency synthesizer component
`
`60 cooperates with the central control system 30 and a device clock 64 to provide
`
`frequency hopping for the mobile communication unit 20.” (Id., 3:65-4:1.)
`
`In operation, a master mobile unit in the piconet determines “which channels
`
`have [the] strongest interference.” (Id., 4:50-51.) For example, the master mobile
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`unit may employ “signal strength measurements on N number of channels (N be-
`
`ing an integer) of the frequency hopping scheme to determine M number of chan-
`
`nels (M being an integer less than or equal to N) to avoid.” (Id., 2:37-41.) The mas-
`
`ter mobile unit communicates the channels to be avoided (the bad channels) to a
`
`remote device. (Id., 2:41-47.) The master and remote mobile units then modify
`
`their respective hopping sequences and begin transmitting data at the modified
`
`hopping sequence with the remaining N-M good channels. (Id., 2:47-52.) The mas-
`
`ter mobile unit “periodically updates the channels to be avoided.” (Id., 4:58-59.)
`
`When a subsequent update occurs, the master mobile unit again communicates the
`
`channels to be avoided to a remote device and they both modify their respective
`
`hopping sequences again. (Id., 4:62-65.)
`
`2. Gerten anticipates claim 5.
`a) Gerten discloses “[a] communications apparatus” [5P].
` As illustrated above in FIG. 1, a piconet of Gerten is “a collection[] of de-
`
`vices that can be connected via Bluetooth technology.” (Gerten, 3:8-12.) The mas-
`
`ter mobile unit of the piconet is a “communication apparatus.” (Id., 3:27-31.)
`
`b) Gerten discloses “means for selecting, based upon performance of a
`plurality of communications channels at a first time, a first set of
`two or more communications channels from the plurality of com-
`munications channels”[5A].
`
`Central control system 30 of the master mobile unit in Gerten includes a
`
`processor to cause the master mobile unit to perform functions: “a central control
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`system 30 is responsible for controlling general operations of the mobile commu-
`
`nication unit 20. The central control system 30 can include a processor or the like
`
`that is programmed to control and operate various components within the mobile
`
`communication unit 20 in order to carry out various functions.” (Gerten, 3:40-48.)
`
`One of the functions controlled and operated by the processor is the channel identi-
`
`fication algorithm of Gerten: “The identification algorithm can use hardware (e.g.,
`
`measurement power component 66) and software (e.g., residing in central con-
`
`trol system 30) to read signal strength of channels and determine which channels
`
`to avoid.” (Gerten, 5:20-24, emphasis added.) It is well-known that software in-
`
`cludes “instructions.” (Ding Decl., ¶42.)
`
`Central control system 30 of Gerten also includes a memory: “The memory
`
`component 62 may include a plurality of register banks for storing synthesizer
`
`codes that are employed to facilitate frequency hopping. Alternatively, the register
`
`banks may reside in the central control system 30 (e.g., in a memory compo-
`
`nent, onboard registers or memory in a processor or in separate register com-
`
`ponents).” (Gerten, 4:1-6, emphasis added.) In order for the software that resides in
`
`central control system 30 to be used for channel identification, the set of instruc-
`
`tions making up the software is necessarily stored in a memory and processed by
`
`the processor. (Ding Decl., ¶43.) Gerten recognized that these details were well-
`
`understood and need not be spelled out: “The manner in which the processor can
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`be programmed to carry out the functions relating to the present invention will be
`
`readily apparent to those having ordinary skill in the art based on the description
`
`provided herein.” (Gerten, 3:48-52, emphasis added.)
`
`The processor in central control system 30 of Gerten, executing the instruc-
`
`tions for performing the channel identification algorithm, provides the same func-
`
`tionality to and is structurally the same as the “means for selecting” of claim [5A].
`
`As part of the channel identification algorithm performed by the processor,
`
`Gerten “select[s] . . . a first set of two or more communications channels from the
`
`plurality of communications channels” “based upon performance of a plurality of
`
`communications channels”: “the master device performs a channel scan at comple-
`
`tion of its last transmission (step 120) [“at a first time”] and determines which
`
`channels have strongest interference.” (Gerten, 4:47-51.) For example, the master
`
`mobile unit of Gerten performs signal strength measurements on N channels in a
`
`frequency hopping scheme (“the plurality of communications channels”) to deter-
`
`mine each channel’s performance. (Id., 2:37-41.) Based on this performance data,
`
`the master mobile unit determines “M number of channels (M being an integer less
`
`than or equal to N) to avoid.” (Id.) The system of Gerten then “modif[ies] the fre-
`
`quency hopping scheme to avoid transmission over the M channels.” (Id., 2:41-42.)
`
`Gerten explains that M could be four. (Id., 4:24-37.) Accordingly, “(N-M) chan-
`
`nels” are selected to use for frequency hopping for interference avoidance. (Id.,
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`2:51-52, emphasis on the plural s added.) Therefore, the resulting set of channels
`
`(N-M) is a “first set of two or more communications channels from the plurality of
`
`communications channels.” (Ding Decl., ¶45.)
`
`c) Gerten discloses “means for causing the first set of two or more
`communications channels to be used for communications between a
`pair of participants” [5B].
`
`After the master mobile unit of Gerten selects the first set of two or more
`
`communications channels, the master mobile unit communicates the M channels to
`
`be avoided “to wireless units involved in the communication system, so that the
`
`members of the wireless communication system can frequency hop together over
`
`the modified frequency hopping scheme,” using namely the (N-M) channels. (Ger-
`
`ten, 2:43-47, emphasis added.) Once the wireless mobile units “modify their re-
`
`spective hopping sequences . . . [then i]n step 170, the master device and the re-
`
`mote device begin transmitting data at the modified hopping sequences,” using
`
`namely the (N-M) channels. (Id., 4:54-58.) Accordingly, in Gerten, the master
`
`mobile unit causes “the first set of two or more communications channels to be
`
`used for communications between a pair of participants” by communicating the M
`
`channels to be avoided to the wireless mobile units involved in the communication
`
`system and by modifying its hopping sequence to use the (N-M) channels.
`
`As discussed above, the processor in the central control system 30 of the
`
`master mobile unit “control[s] and operate[s] various components within the mo-
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`bile communication unit 20 in order to carry out various functions described here-
`
`in.” (Id., 3:40-52, FIG. 2.) One of the functions performed by the master mobile
`
`unit is communicating the M channels to be avoided to the wireless units involved
`
`in the communication system and modifying the master mobile unit’s hopping se-
`
`quence as described above and shown in steps 140-160 in FIG. 3. The processor in
`
`the central control system 30 programmed to perform this three-step function pro-
`
`vides the same functionality to and is structurally the same as the “means for caus-
`
`ing” of claim [5B].
`
`d) Gerten discloses “means for selecting, based upon performance of
`the plurality of communications channels at a second time that is
`later than the first time, a second set of two or more communica-
`tions channels from the plurality of communications channels”
`[5C].
`
`After establishing a modified hopping sequence “at a first time”, the master
`
`unit of Gerten “periodically updates the channels to be avoided.” (Gerten, 4:58-59,
`
`emphasis added.) When a subsequent update occurs (“at a second time that is later
`
`than the first time”), the processor in central control system 30 of the master mo-
`
`bile unit repeats the channel identification algorithm including the interference
`
`signal strength measurements described above: the master mobile unit determines
`
`[M2] number of channels ([M2] being an integer less than or equal to N) to avoid.
`
`(Id., 2:37-52; see also id., 9:64-10:2.) The system of Gerten then “modif[ies] the
`
`frequency hopping scheme to avoid transmission over the [M2] channels.” (Id.,
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`

`2:41-42.) The resulting set of channels (N-M2) is the “second set of two or more
`
`communications channels from the plurality of communications channels.” (Ding
`
`Decl., ¶48.)
`
`By performing the channel identification algorithm, the processor in the cen-
`
`tral control system 30 of Gerten provides the same functionality to and is structur-
`
`ally the same as the “means for selecting” of claim [5C].
`
`e) Gerten discloses “means for causing the second set of two or more
`communications channels to be used for communications between
`the pair of participants instead of the first set of two or more com-
`munications channels” [5D].
`
` The first set of two or more communications channel are used until the mas-
`
`ter unit subsequently updates the channels to be avoided. (Ding Decl., ¶50.) When
`
`a subsequent update occurs (“at a second time”), the master unit repeats the chan-
`
`nel identification algorithm described above and communicates the new M2 chan-
`
`nels to avoid to wireless units involved in the communication system. (Id.) The
`
`mobile units “modify their respective hopping sequences…[then i]n step 170, the
`
`master device and the remote device begin transmitting data at the modified hop-
`
`ping sequences,” using namely the (N-M2) channels. (Gerten, 4:54-58.) According-
`
`ly, in Gerten, the master mobile unit causes “the second set of two or more com-
`
`munications channels to be used for communications between the pair of partici-
`
`pants instead of the first set of two or more communications channels” by com-
`
`municating the new M2 channels to be avoided to the wireless units involved in the
`
`- 16 -
`
`

`

`communication system and by modifying its hopping sequence.
`
`As discussed above, the processor in central control system 30 of the master
`
`mobile unit “control[s] and operate[s] various components within the mobile
`
`communication unit 20 in order to carry out various functions described herein.”
`
`(Id., 3:40-52, FIG. 2.) One of the functions performed by the master mobile unit is
`
`communicating the M2 channels to be avoided to the wireless units involved in the
`
`communication system and modifying the master mobile unit’s hopping sequence
`
`as described above and shown in steps 140-160 in FIG. 3. The processor in the
`
`central control system 30 programmed to perform this three-step function provides
`
`the same functionality to and is structurally the same as the “means for selecting”
`
`of claim [5D].
`
`f) Gerten discloses “wherein at each hop in a hopping sequence based
`on a frequency hopping protocol, only one communications channel
`of the second set of two or more communications channels is used
`for communications between the pair of participants” [5E].
`
`One of the functions performed in Gerten is to communicate using a FH
`
`scheme:
`
`The present invention employs signal strength measurements on N
`number of channels (N being an integer) of the frequency hopping
`scheme to determine M number of channels (M being an integer less than
`or equal to N) to avoid. The system and/or method then modify the fre-
`quency hopping scheme to avoid transmission over the M channels. The
`M channels to avoid can be communicated to wireless units involved in
`
`- 17 -
`
`

`

`the communication system, so that the members of the wireless commu-
`nication system can frequency hop together over the modified frequency
`hopping scheme. (Id., 2:37-47.)
`
`Gerten describes an example using Bluetooth FH. (Id., 4:66-9:21.) As rec-
`
`ognized by Gerten, the existing Bluetooth standard used “a frequency hopping pro-
`
`tocol.”4 (Id., 1:13-15; 1:39-55; see also, Ding Decl., ¶53.)
`
`As discussed above relative to claim [5D], the master mobile unit of Gerten
`
`communicates with another communication device over “a second set of two or
`
`more communication channels.” And, Gerten describes the performance of a “hop-
`
`ping sequence” “based on a frequency hopping protocol.” In a hopping sequence
`
`based on a FH protocol such as used in Bluetooth, only one communications chan-
`
`nel is used for communications between a first device and a second device at each
`
`hop. (Ding Decl., ¶54.) The ’624 patent, in the Background section, acknowledges
`
`that these limitations were known aspects of conventional FH systems: “The FH
`
`system transmits data on one channel, hops to the next channel in the hopping
`
`sequence to transmit more data, and continues by transmitting data on subsequent
`
`
`4 The Background defines a FH protocol as “an approach for wireless com-
`
`munications in a communications network that uses a frequency hopping signal
`
`transmission technique in which information or data is transmitted over a set of
`
`frequencies in a communications frequency band.” (’624 Patent , 2:5-9.)
`
`- 18 -
`
`

`

`channels in the hopping sequence.” (’624 patent, 2:20-24, emphasis added.)
`
`Gerten confirms these limitations were well-known, explaining that “Blue-
`
`tooth radio modules attempt to avoid interference from other signals by hopping to
`
`a new frequency after transmitting or receiving a packet as compared to other sys-
`
`tems operating at the same frequency band.” (Gerten, 1:36-43, emphasis added.)
`
`Hopping to a new frequency [singular] for transmission or reception of the next
`
`packet is the use of “only one communications channel” for communications.
`
` Thus, Gerten discloses “at each hop in a hopping sequence based on a fre-
`