UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`ARRIS GROUP, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`TQ DELTA, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,432,956
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF LANCE MCNALLY
`
`
`
`
`
`
` EX. 1002
`
`1
`
`

`
`
`
`Table of Contents
`I.
`Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4
`List of documents I considered in forming my opinions ...............................11
`II.
`III. Background and Qualifications ......................................................................12
`IV. Person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA) .....................................................15
`V. Relevant Legal Standards ...............................................................................17
`VI. The State of the Art ........................................................................................18
`A. Overview of Diagnostic and Testing Techniques .......................................19
`B. Overview of Link Protocols ........................................................................20
`C. Overview of Multicarrier Modulation Techniques .....................................21
`D. Historical Background and Implementations of Discrete Multi-Tone
`(DMT) ..................................................................................................................23
`E. Relative and Absolute Measurements - Signal Levels and Gains ..............25
`F.
`Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) .......................................27
`G. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 4,679,227 (‘227 Patent) ................................30
`H. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 4,438,511 (‘511 Patent) ................................30
`I. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,268 (’268 Patent) ................................31
`J. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 6,219,378 (‘378 Patent) ................................31
`K. Overview of TR-024 ...................................................................................32
`L. Overview of TR-004 ...................................................................................32
`VII. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 8,432,956 (‘956 Patent) ................................33
`VIII. Claims 1, 3, 5 and 7 of the ‘956 Patent are Obvious over U.S. Patent No.
`4,679,227 (“’227”) to Hughes-Hartogs in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,438,511
`(“’511”) to Baran and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,268 (“’268”) to
`Frankel 34
`
`2
`
`

`
`A. Claim 1 ........................................................................................................34
`B. Claim 3 ........................................................................................................37
`C. Claim 5 ........................................................................................................39
`D. Claim 7 ........................................................................................................40
`IX. Claims 2, 4, 6 and 8 of the ‘956 Patent is Obvious over U.S. Patent No.
`4,679,227 (“’227”) to Hughes-Hartogs in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,438,511
`(“’511”) to Baran in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,268 (“’268”) to Frankel and
`further in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,219,378 (“’378”) to Wu .................................41
`A. Claim 2 ........................................................................................................41
`B. Claim 4 ........................................................................................................42
`C. Claim 6 ........................................................................................................43
`D. Claim 8 ........................................................................................................44
`X. Claim 9 of the ‘956 Patent is Obvious over U.S. Patent No. 4,679,227
`(“’227”) to Hughes-Hartogs in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,438,511 (“’511”) to
`Baran in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,268 (“’268”) to Frankel and further in view
`of ADSL Forum TR-024 ..........................................................................................45
`A. Claim 9 ........................................................................................................45
`XI. Claim 10 of the ‘956 Patent is Obvious over U.S. Patent No. 4,679,227
`(“’227”) to Hughes-Hartogs in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,438,511 (“’511”) to
`Baran in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,268 (“’268”) to Frankel in view of ADSL
`Forum TR-024 and further in view of ADSL Forum TR-004 .................................52
`A. Claim 10 ......................................................................................................52
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`I.
`1.
`
`Introduction
`I am over the age of eighteen (18) and otherwise competent to make this
`
`declaration.
`
`2.
`
`I have been asked to provide assistance, if needed, to the Patent Trial and
`
`Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office in its
`
`consideration of the ‘956 Patent and the references that are cited in support
`
`of the petition for inter partes review of the ‘956 Patent. I am being
`
`compensated for my time at $105.00 per hour, which is not dependent upon
`
`the outcome of this inter partes review or any related litigation.
`
`3.
`
`I have been informed and understand that this Petition for inter partes
`
`review involves Claims 1-10 (collectively “the Challenged Claims”) of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,432,956 (the “‘956 Patent”). (Ex. 1001.)
`
`4.
`
`I have been informed and understand that the ‘956 Patent issued on April 30,
`
`2013, from U.S. Patent Application No. 13/476.310 filed on May 21, 2012,
`
`which was a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 12/779,660 (the
`
`“‘660 Application”) filed on May 13, 2010, now U.S. Patent 8,238,412,
`
`which is a continuation of U.S. Application No. 12/477,742, filed June 3,
`
`2009, not U.S. Patent 7,835,430, which is a continuation of U.S. Application
`
`No. 10/619,691, filed Jul. 16, 2003, now U.S. Patent 7,570,686, which is a
`
`continuation of U.S. Application No. 09/755,173, filed Jan. 8, 2001, now
`
`4
`
`

`
`US. Pat. No. 6,658,052, which claims the benefit of and priority under 35
`
`USC §119(e) to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/224,308, filed August
`
`10, 2000 entitled “Characterization of transmission lines using broad band
`
`signals in a multi-carrier DSL system,” and US. Provisional Application No.
`
`60/174,865, filed January 7, 2000 entitled “Multicarrier Modulation System
`
`With Remote Diagnostic Transmission Mode.”
`
`5.
`
`For the purposes of my opinions expressed herein I will use January 7, 2000
`
`as the priority date of the subject matter of the Challenged Claims.
`
`6.
`
`I have been informed and further understand that, according to USPTO
`
`records, the ‘956 Patent is assigned to TQ Delta, LLC.
`
`7.
`
`Claims 1-10 of the ‘956 Patent are reproduced below.
`
`1. A transceiver capable of transmitting diagnostic information over a
`
`communication channel using multicarrier modulation comprising:
`
`a transmitter portion capable of transmitting a message,
`
`wherein the message comprises one or more data variables that
`
`represent the diagnostic information, wherein bits in the
`
`message are modulated onto DMT symbols using Quadrature
`
`Amplitude Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit per
`
`subchannel and wherein at least one data variable of the one or
`
`5
`
`

`
`more data variables comprises an array representing power
`
`level per subchannel information.
`
`2. The transceiver of claim 1, wherein the power level per subchannel
`
`information is based on a Reverb signal.
`
`3. A transceiver capable of receiving diagnostic information over a
`
`communication channel using multicarrier modulation comprising:
`
`a receiver portion capable of receiving a message, wherein the
`
`message comprises one or more data variables that represent
`
`the diagnostic information, wherein bits in the message were
`
`modulated onto DMT symbols using Quadrature Amplitude
`
`Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit per subchannel and
`
`wherein at least one data variable of the one or more data
`
`variables comprises an array representing power level per
`
`subchannel information.
`
`4. The transceiver of claim 3, wherein the power level per subchannel
`
`information is based on a Reverb signal.
`
`5. In a transceiver capable of transmitting diagnostic information
`
`over a communication channel using multicarrier modulation, a
`
`method comprising:
`
`6
`
`

`
`transmitting a message, wherein the message comprises one or
`
`more data variables that represent the diagnostic information,
`
`wherein bits in the message are modulated onto DMT symbols
`
`using Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) with more
`
`than 1 bit per subchannel and wherein at least one data
`
`variable of the one or more data variables comprises an array
`
`representing power level per subchannel information.
`
`6. The method of claim 5, wherein the power level per subchannel
`
`information is based on a Reverb signal.
`
`7. In a transceiver capable of receiving diagnostic information over a
`
`communication channel using multicarrier modulation, a method
`
`comprising:
`
`receiving a message, wherein the message comprises one or
`
`more data variables that represent the diagnostic information,
`
`wherein bits in the message were modulated onto DMT symbols
`
`using Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) with more
`
`than 1 bit per subchannel and wherein at least one data
`
`variable of the one or more data variables comprises an array
`
`representing power level per subchannel information.
`
`7
`
`

`
`8. The method of claim 7, wherein the power level per subchannel
`
`information is based on a Reverb signal.
`
`9. A communications system for DSL service comprising a first DSL
`
`transceiver capable of transmitting diagnostic information over a
`
`communication channel using multicarrier modulation and a second
`
`DSL transceiver capable of receiving the diagnostic information over
`
`the communication channel using multicarrier modulation
`
`comprising:
`
`a transmitter portion of the first transceiver capable of
`
`transmitting a message, wherein the message comprises one or
`
`more data variables that represent the diagnostic information,
`
`wherein bits in the message are modulated onto DMT symbols
`
`using Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) with more
`
`than 1 bit per subchannel and wherein at least one data
`
`variable of the one or more data variables comprises an array
`
`representing Signal to Noise ratio per subchannel during
`
`Showtime information; and
`
`a receiver portion of the second transceiver capable of
`
`receiving the message, wherein the message comprises the one
`
`or more data variables that represent the diagnostic
`
`8
`
`

`
`information, wherein the bits in the message were modulated
`
`onto the DMT symbols using Quadrature Amplitude
`
`Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit per subchannel and
`
`wherein the at least one data variable of the one or more data
`
`variables comprises the array representing Signal to Noise
`
`ratio per subchannel during Showtime information.
`
`10. The system of claim 9, wherein the DSL service is for internet
`
`access.
`
`8.
`
`In preparing this Declaration, I have reviewed the ‘956 Patent and
`
`considered each of the documents cited herein, in light of general knowledge
`
`in the art as of January 7, 2000. In formulating my opinions, I have relied
`
`upon my experience in the relevant art. I have also considered the viewpoint
`
`of a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSA”) of a diagnostic link using
`
`multicarrier modulation messaging as of January 7, 2000. As described in
`
`detail below, I offer the following opinions in this Declaration:
`
`a. A POSA would have found the invention of Claims 1, 3, 5, and 7
`
`of the ‘956 Patent to be obvious in view of the combination of US
`
`Patent 4,679,227 (“’227 Patent”, Ex. 1004), US Patent 4,438,511
`
`(“‘511 Patent,” Ex. 1005), and US 5,838,268 (“‘268 Patent”, Ex.
`
`1006). The patents combined teach each element of Claims 1, 3, 5,
`
`9
`
`

`
`and 7 to a POSA. To the extent that the patent owner may attempt
`
`to distinguish one or more elements of Claims 1, 3, 5, and 7 from
`
`the teachings by the patents combined, a POSA would have found
`
`such distinctions to be obvious.
`
`b. A POSA would have found the invention of Claims 2, 4, 6, and 8
`
`of the ‘956 Patent to be obvious in view of the combination of US
`
`Patent 4,679,227 (“’227 Patent”, Ex. 1004), US Patent 4,438,511
`
`(“‘511 Patent,” Ex. 1005), US 5,838,268 (“‘268 Patent”, Ex.
`
`1006), and US 6,219,378 (‘378 Patent, Ex. 1008). The patents
`
`combined teach each element of Claims 2, 4, 6, and 8 to a POSA.
`
`To the extent that the patent owner may attempt to distinguish one
`
`or more elements of Claims 2, 4, 6, and 8 from the teachings by
`
`the patents combined, a POSA would have found such distinctions
`
`to be obvious.
`
`c. A POSA would have found the invention of Claim 9 of the ‘956
`
`Patent to be obvious in view of the combination of US Patent
`
`4,679,227 (“’227 Patent”, Ex. 1004), US Patent 4,438,511 (“‘511
`
`Patent,” Ex. 1005), US 5,838,268 (“‘268 Patent”, Ex. 1006), and
`
`ADSL Forum Technical Report TR-024 (Ex. 1011). The patents
`
`combined with the TR-024 reference teach each element of Claim
`
`10
`
`

`
`9 to a POSA. To the extent that the patent owner may attempt to
`
`distinguish one or more elements of Claim 9 from the teachings by
`
`the patents combined with TR-024 reference, a POSA would have
`
`found such distinctions to be obvious.
`
`d. A POSA would have found the invention of Claim 10 of the ‘956
`
`Patent to be obvious in view of the combination of US Patent
`
`4,679,227 (“’227 Patent”, Ex. 1004), US Patent 4,438,511 (“‘511
`
`Patent,” Ex. 1005), US 5,838,268 (“‘268 Patent”, Ex. 1006),
`
`ADSL Forum Technical Report TR-024 (Ex. 1011), and ADSL
`
`Forum Technical Report TR-004 (Ex. 1010). The patents
`
`combined with TR-024 and TR-004 teach each element of Claim
`
`10 to a POSA. To the extent that the patent owner may attempt to
`
`distinguish one or more elements of Claim 10 from the teachings
`
`by the patents combined with TR-024 and with TR-004, a POSA
`
`would have found such distinctions to be obvious.
`
`II.
`9.
`
`List of documents I considered in forming my opinions
`In formulating my opinions, I have considered the following documents:
`
`Ex.
`No.
`1001 U.S. Patent No. 8,432,956 to Krinsky
`
`Brief Description
`
`1003 Curriculum Vitae of Lance McNally
`
`11
`
`

`
`Ex.
`No.
`
`Brief Description
`
`1004 US Patent 4,679,227, “Ensemble modem structure for imperfect
`transmission media” to Dirk Hughes-Hartogs (“’227”)
`1005 US Patent 4,438,511, “Packetized Ensemble Modem” to Paul Baran
`(“’511”)
`1006 US Patent 5,838,268, “Apparatus and methods for modulation and
`demodulation of data” to Liron Frenkel (“’268”)
`1008 US Patent 6,219,378, “Digital subscriber line modem initialization” to
`Wu (“‘378”)
`
`1010 Technical Report TR-004, “Network Migration” by Asymmetric
`Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) Forum, published in Dec. 1997
`1011 Technical Report TR-024, “DMT Line Code Specific MIB” by
`Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line Forum, published in June 1999
`1017 T1E1.4/93-088, “Recommended Procedures for Exchange of DMT
`Loading Information in ADSL,” available on CD-ROM at the back of
`Starr-Cioffi-Silverman on Dec. 29, 1998.
`
`
`III.
`10.
`
`Background and Qualifications
`I am an expert in the field of electrical communication protocols, which
`
`include diagnostic modes using various modulation techniques. Throughout
`
`the remainder of this Declaration, I will refer to the field of electrical
`
`communication protocols as the “relevant field” or the “relevant art”. In
`
`formulating my opinions, I have relied upon my training, knowledge, and
`
`experience in the relevant art. A copy of my current curriculum vitae is
`
`12
`
`

`
`provided as (Ex. 1003), and it provides a comprehensive description of my
`
`academic and employment history.
`
`11. My qualifications are stated more fully in my curriculum vita, which is
`
`attached to this declaration. A brief summary of my qualifications follows:
`
`12.
`
`I am currently a principal of Harbor Falls, Inc., a consulting firm
`
`specializing in computer, data networking and telecommunication technical
`
`expertise applied to patents. Previously, I served as Vice President of
`
`Engineering at OPVISTA, Inc.; Director of Engineering at Bay/Nortel
`
`Networks, Inc., in the area of data and telecommunication systems; and
`
`Director of Engineering at Honeywell, Inc./Honeywell Ericsson, Inc./Zenith
`
`Data Systems, Inc., in the area of computer server, data and
`
`telecommunication systems.
`
`13. At Honeywell Ericsson, Inc., I was involved in developing switching
`
`software for least cost routing and integrated service digital network (ISDN)
`
`hardware interfaces for Ericsson private branch exchange (PBX) and class 5
`
`central office switch products.
`
`14. At Honeywell/Zenith Data Systems, Inc., I served several positions. Initially,
`
`I was a senior staff analyst for telecommunications with responsibilities that
`
`included being the corporate representative on the T1S1 American National
`
`Standard Institute (ANSI) committee in the definition of telecommunications
`
`13
`
`

`
`services, architecture, and signaling. Additionally, I was one of the key
`
`architects in the definition, implementation, and deployment of the first
`
`nationwide Electronic Funds Transfer Point-of-Sale network, for which I
`
`received the highest divisional achievement award. Prior to leaving
`
`Honeywell/Zenith Data Systems, Inc., I was responsible for the design and
`
`development of Intel processor based servers. The servers were built to order
`
`with pre-loaded operating systems (e.g., Windows NT Server, Netware and
`
`SCO UNIX).
`
`15. As part of Bay/Nortel Networks, I also held numerous positions including
`
`development responsibility of DOCSIS CMTS(Cable Modem Termination
`
`System)/CM(Cable Modem), Network Processor and router products. I was
`
`selected as the Design Authority for Network Processor Units that were used
`
`corporate-wide for the implementation of ATM/IP routers and Ethernet-
`
`based switches.
`
`16. At Opvista Inc., I lead the engineering organization in the devolvement of
`
`Optical networking equipment.
`
`17.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from Purdue
`
`University in 1979 and a Master in Business Administration from the
`
`University of Dallas in 1985.
`
`14
`
`

`
`18.
`
`I’m a co-inventor on ten U.S. Patents: 4,831,634 (Modem backplane
`
`interconnections); 4,879,716 (Resilient Data Communication Systems);
`
`4,999,787 (Hot extraction and insertion of logic boards in an on-line
`
`communication system); 5,517,648 and 5,522,069 (Symmetric
`
`multiprocessing system with unified environment and distributed system
`
`functions); 5,809,340 (Adaptively generating timing signals for access to
`
`various memory devices based on stored profiles); 5,956,522 (Symmetric
`
`multiprocessing system with unified environment and distributed system
`
`functions); 6,098,131 (Network apparatus with removable electronic
`
`module); 6,125,436 (Symmetric multiprocessing system with unified
`
`environment and distributed system functions wherein bus operations related
`
`storage spaces are mapped into a single system address space); and
`
`6,311,286 (Symmetric multiprocessing system with unified environment and
`
`distributed system functions.
`
`19.
`
`I have severed as a technical consultant in a number of patent related legal
`
`matters, and am familiar with terms of art.
`
`IV.
`20.
`
`Person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA)
`I am familiar with the knowledge and capabilities of one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art. For example, my work as a practicing engineer and engineering
`
`manager during that period allowed me to become personally familiar with
`
`15
`
`

`
`the level of skill of individuals and the general state of the art. Unless
`
`otherwise stated, my testimony below refers to the knowledge of one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art as of 2000, the period that includes the earliest
`
`effective priority date of the Challenged Claims.
`
`21.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a Person of Ordinary Skill in the
`
`Art (“POSA”) is a hypothetical person who is presumed to be aware of all
`
`pertinent prior art, thinks along conventional wisdom in the art, and is a
`
`person of ordinary creativity. With respect to the ‘956 Patent, in my opinion,
`
`a POSA would have had education and/or experience in the field of
`
`electronics, specifically messaging and modulations techniques, and
`
`knowledge of the scientific literature concerning the same. Within the field
`
`of electronic messaging, a POSA would have had education and/or
`
`experience in a variety of modulation techniques, and knowledge of the
`
`scientific literature concerning the same.
`
`22. The education and experience levels may vary between persons of ordinary
`
`skill, with some persons holding a basic Bachelor’s of Electrical
`
`Engineering, Computer Science, or equivalent degree, but with more than
`
`three years of relevant work experience, or others holding more advanced
`
`degrees—e.g., Masters or Ph.D.—but having fewer years of experience.
`
`16
`
`

`
`23. A person of ordinary skill in the field often works as part of a
`
`multidisciplinary team and draws upon not only his or her own skills, but
`
`also takes advantage of certain specialized skills of others in the team, to
`
`solve a given problem.
`
`V.
`24.
`
`Relevant Legal Standards
`I understand that a patent claim in an inter partes review is given its
`
`broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification of the patent, as
`
`would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`claimed invention. I understand that claims should be construed consistent
`
`with the patent itself as well as the prosecution history. I understand that a
`
`patentee can explicitly set a definition for a specific term for purposes of the
`
`patent. I understand that words of the claims should be given their plain
`
`meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification.
`
`25.
`
`I understand that a claim may be held invalid as obvious to one of ordinary
`
`skill at the time of the invention on the basis of a combination of one or
`
`more prior art references. Situations in which teachings of two or more
`
`references may be combined include: (1) the elements are combined
`
`according to known methods to yield predicable results; (2) one known
`
`element is simply substituted for another to obtain predictable results; (3) a
`
`known technique is applied in the same way used to improve a similar
`
`17
`
`

`
`subject; (4) a known technique is applied to subject matter ready for
`
`improvement to yield predictable results; (5) the solution is one of a finite
`
`number of identified, predictable solutions, and there is a reasonable
`
`expectation of success; (6) known work in one field is varied for use in the
`
`same field or in a different field based on design incentives or other market
`
`forces, and the variations are predictable; and (7) the references include a
`
`teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine. Objective evidence, such as
`
`commercial success of the invention, long felt but unresolved need, failure
`
`of others, copying, industry acceptance, and praise may show that an
`
`invention appearing to be obvious in light of the prior art was in fact not
`
`obvious. I understand that obviousness analysis must focus on the
`
`knowledge and skill of one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to avoid improper hindsight. I understand that a prior art reference
`
`must be considered in its entirety, including portions that would lead away
`
`from a claimed invention.
`
`The State of the Art
`VI.
`26. The ‘956 Patent is directed towards a diagnostic/test mode function in a
`
`communication system. In communication systems, a device (e.g., modem,
`
`networked computer, etc.) is usually provided with various methods to
`
`troubleshoot issues during the initiation and operation of the device’s
`
`18
`
`

`
`communication with another device. Typically there are many link protocols
`
`and modulation techniques that handle such functions. Often times the
`
`implementation may vary, but the underlying motivation and functions
`
`remain the same; that is, to ensure robust and reliable communications.
`
`Overview of Diagnostic and Testing Techniques
`A.
`27. Electrical communications equipment can provide for a variety of diagnostic
`
`and testing methods for real-time troubleshooting. Diagnostics and/or testing
`
`can operate during initial connection or during normal usage. Standards
`
`bodies can define required diagnostic modes, or a device can provide for a
`
`proprietary implementation. In the nomenclature of electronic
`
`communications devices, “diagnostic mode” is synonymous with a “test
`
`mode” or “troubleshooting mode.” It should be understood that a device
`
`need not enter a dedicated “mode” to record diagnostic metrics used to
`
`improve signal quality, increase bandwidth, or perform another desired
`
`device function, though if the diagnostics to be performed require exclusive
`
`use of one or more resources within a communications device, a diagnostics
`
`mode may operate exclusive of normal operation. Furthermore,
`
`troubleshooting can be performed automatically in response to a condition,
`
`schedules, or spontaneously initiated on an ad hoc basis.
`
`19
`
`

`
`Overview of Link Protocols
`B.
`28. Modem link protocols are a fundamental tier of abstraction for modern
`
`electrical communication devices. Protocols can either be defined and
`
`implemented based on a standard or a proprietary protocol. Among the
`
`typical functions of link layer protocols include: data link control, error
`
`control, and signal conversation. The following rudimentary figure displays
`
`functionality commonly provided by a link protocol operating between two
`
`modems:
`
`
`
`29. Link Protocols also allow the multiplexing of user data with control data and
`
`may use one or more bits in frames to identify or tag different types of data.
`
`Different types of data also might be identified in other ways such as but not
`
`limited to the location within a flow of traffic. With a link protocol, data
`
`from multiple source processes (such as, but not limited to, user data and
`
`20
`
`

`
`control data) can be multiplexed together for transmission over a link. In the
`
`case of modems which operate synchronously and/or asynchronously, the
`
`signal conversion function provides a method of communication of the link.
`
`Then functionality in a receiver can use the identifier, tag, or other method to
`
`separate out the multiplexed data (such as user and control) for delivery to
`
`different destination processes. These functions at the level between
`
`modems are often generally categorized as data link control. A diagnostic
`
`mode or test mode is also often categorized under the data link control.
`
`Diagnostic modes can also function to carry remote commands through
`
`messages between local and remote modems.
`
`30. Examples of common voice frequency modem link protocols include
`
`Microcom Networking Protocol (MNP) and V.42 (LAPM) from ITU
`
`(formerly known as CCITT). In other cases, a proprietary implementation
`
`can be used, such as Packetized Ensemble Protocol (PEP). Differences
`
`between link protocols typically include specific supported functions and
`
`implementation details.
`
`Overview of Multicarrier Modulation Techniques
`C.
`31. Modulation is generally encoding of information, often digital data, into an
`
`analog signal. Demodulation is the recovery of information from the analog
`
`signal. In the context of a simple MODEM (MOdulator/DEModulator), the
`
`21
`
`

`
`encoding process occurs prior to transmission across a wired or wireless
`
`connection by the transmitting modem and is reversed by a receiving
`
`modem.
`
`32. Modern modulation techniques can include numerous schemes and
`
`techniques to increase bandwidth and reduce errors during communication.
`
`A modulation technique employing more than one carrier frequency
`
`contemporaneously in parallel generally is referred to as a multicarrier
`
`modulation technique.
`
`33.
`
`In my opinion, once multicarrier modulation techniques were developed, a
`
`POSA would have found it obvious to use more carriers and a wider
`
`bandwidth with more available spectrum in a multicarrier system.
`
`34.
`
`In addition, some modulation schemes used the voice-frequency (VF)
`
`channel with characteristics well-known to those familiar with the analog
`
`telephone network, using frequencies around 300 Hz to 3,400 Hz, although
`
`this band is often identified less accurately as 0 to 4 KHz. Other techniques,
`
`such as ADSL, use a broader spectrum, generally above the VF band in
`
`ranges generally from 25 – 1,100 KHz. Moreover, VDSL uses an even
`
`broader spectrum, beginning around 25 KHz and going to about 12 MHz. In
`
`my opinion, a POSA would have found it obvious to increase the broadness
`
`22
`
`

`
`of the spectrum band from a VF channel to ADSL, VDSL, or any other
`
`ranges for application of multicarrier modulation techniques.
`
`D.
`
`35.
`
`Historical Background and Implementations of Discrete Multi-
`Tone (DMT)
`In a narrow and specific case, discrete multitone (DMT) is a method of
`
`dividing an Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) signal so that the
`
`usable frequency range is separated into 256 frequency bands (or channels)
`
`of 4.3125 KHz each. DMT generally is implemented using the fast Fourier
`
`transform (FFT) algorithm (or variants thereof) for modulation and
`
`demodulation.
`
`36. DMT was formally adopted by committee T1E1.4 as the standardized line
`
`code for ADSL in ANSI T1.413-1995. Although competing single carrier
`
`techniques of CAP (Carrierless Amplitude/Phase Modulation) and single-
`
`carrier QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation) were proposed, DMT-
`
`based ADSL (and VDSL) modems out-performed single-carrier CAP and
`
`QAM in Bellcore testing. In the early 1990s various telcos were looking for
`
`cheaper and faster digital line solutions than the then adopted four-wire
`
`Alternate Mark Inversion (AMI) T1 line and the two-wire 2-Binary-1-
`
`Quatenary (2B1Q) Basic Rate ISDN U-Interface. One of these new digital
`
`line development projects was known as High-Rate Digital Subscriber Line
`
`23
`
`

`
`(HDSL), and various individuals, companies and research universities
`
`submitted proposals for the modulation or line code for HDSL.
`
`37.
`
`In particular, professor John Cioffi of Stanford University and some of his
`
`Ph.D. students submitted proposals to T1E1.4 to use Discrete Multi-Tone
`
`(DMT) modulation for the yet unstandardized HDSL transmission line
`
`format to more cost effectively provide symmetric T1 service. John Cioffi
`
`and his students had been consulting with Telebit Corp. and particularly
`
`Telebit engineer, John Bingham. T1E1.4 ultimately adopted a line code for
`
`HDSL that was similar to the 2B1Q line code of Basic Rate ISDN instead of
`
`multicarrier DMT. However, T1E1.4 next began a project to develop
`
`technologies capable of asymmetrically providing downstream compressed
`
`video to home users over the standard single-pair telco subscriber loop. The
`
`DMT ideas were one of the possible candidates for this new asymmetric
`
`service, which became known as ADSL, and DMT also was considered in a
`
`strategy of moving fiber optic lines closer to subscribers without completely
`
`replacing the twisted pair telephone cables to each home, which became
`
`known as Very high Rate Digital Subscriber Line (VDSL or VHDSL).
`
`38. Soon after committee T1E1.4 began serious deliberations to develop and
`
`select standards for ADSL, John Cioffi formed Amati Communications
`
`Corp. to develop DMT communications devices, and he soon hired some of
`
`24
`
`

`
`his Ph.D. students and also John Bingham from Telebit to work for Amati.
`
`Many Amati employees including John Cioffi, John Bingham, and others
`
`contributed many technical papers and proposals to committee T1E1.4, and
`
`some of these documents have express citations back to the older voice-
`
`frequency modem technology of Telebit, for which John Bingham had
`
`worked and John Cioffi had consulted. After several years and long
`
`deliberation and disputes, the DMT ideas from Amati and others were
`
`adopted for the US and worldwide ADSL and VDSL standards.
`
`Relative and Absolute Measurements - Signal Levels and Gains
`E.
`39. Signal levels often are expressed with reference to an absolute, physically-
`
`defined measure such as 0.1 watt or 50 milliamps. Gains commonly refer to
`
`the increa