U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`
`In re Patent of:
`U.S. Patent No.:
`Issue Date:
`Appl. Serial No.:
`Filing Date:
`Title:
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Cameron et al.
`5,915,210
`Jun. 22, 1999
`08/899,476
`Jul. 24, 1997
`METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING MULTICARRIER
`SIMULCAST TRANSMISSION
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. APOSTOLOS K. KAKAES
`
`1.
`
`My name is Apostolos K. Kakaes of Vienna, Virginia. I understand that I am
`
`submitting a declaration offering technical opinions in connection with the above-referenced
`
`Inter Partes Review proceeding pending in the United States Patent and Trademark Office for
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210 (the “’210 patent”), and prior art references relating to its subject
`
`matter. My current curriculum vitae is attached and some highlights follow.
`
`2.
`
`I have over thirty (30) years of experience in electrical engineering and computer
`
`science and in fixed and mobile communications networks. I attended the University of
`
`Colorado from 1974 to 1980, during which, I earned a Bachelor of Science (B.S.) and a Master
`
`of Science (M.S.) in applied mathematics with a minor in electrical engineering. I attended the
`
`Polytechnic Institute of New York between 1982 and 1988, during which, I earned a Doctor of
`
`Philosophy (Ph.D.) in electrical engineering, with a thesis titled "Topological Properties and
`
`Design of Multihop Packet Radio Networks." While pursuing the Ph.D. degree, I held a joint
`
`appointment as Special Research Fellow and Adjunct Instructor at the Polytechnic Institute of
`
`New York between 1985 and 1986.
`
`3.
`
`Between 1982 and 1987, I worked at AT&T Bell Laboratories in Holmdel, New
`
`Jersey. While at AT&T Bell Laboratories, I worked on modeling, analysis, design, and
`
`performance evaluation of voice and data networks. I developed algorithms for DNHR
`
`(Dynamic, Non-Hierarchical Routing) used in the telephone network. I also worked on analysis
`
`Page 1 of 24
`
`
`1
`
`Petitioner Samsung - SAM1003
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`of advanced data services and formulation of long term plans for development of enhanced data
`
`services and network design tools to support such services.
`
`4.
`
`I was an Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at
`
`The George Washington University (GWU), Washington, D.C., between 1987 and 1994. During
`
`my association with GWU, I taught graduate courses in the area of communication engineering,
`
`including communication theory, coding theory, voice and data networking, and mobile
`
`communications. I also received several research awards/grants, including the prestigious NSF
`
`Research Initiation Award.
`
`5.
`
`In 1988, I founded Cosmos Communications Consulting Corporation ("Cosmos"),
`
`which is a private communications engineering consulting firm specializing in mobile
`
`communications, and I have been the President of the company since the founding. Since 1994, I
`
`have worked full-time at Cosmos. At Cosmos, among various activities, I have consulted on high
`
`level technology-related issues and trends to corporate entities, governmental agencies, and
`
`international organizations, such as the United Nations. I have provided technical consultancy to
`
`engineering firms, operators, and equipment vendors on issues related to existing or evolving
`
`technologies for mobile communications, and to the investment community on issues related to
`
`both fixed and wireless communications technologies. I have served as consultant on both civil
`
`and criminal legal cases, including several patent infringement cases both at the ITC and in
`
`district court. I also participated as a technical consultant in the analysis of large patent portfolios
`
`for the purposes of due diligence, sales, and merger and acquisition activities for some of the
`
`largest companies in the mobile communications space. These projects spanned a
`
`multidimensional spectrum of technologies in both fixed and mobile communications as they
`
`have evolved over the past thirty (30) years.
`
`Page 2 of 24
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`6.
`
`During my work at Cosmos, I have provided expert advice and conducted
`
`extensive training for practicing engineers in the field in diverse networking technology areas,
`
`including Wireless Local Area Networks (LAN), Metropolitan Area Networks (MAN), and
`
`Personal Area Networks (PAN) technologies, paging networks, ad hoc networks, including IEEE
`
`802.11 (Wi-Fi), IEEE 802.16 (WiMAX), HIPERLAN, Bluetooth, Near Field Communications,
`
`IrDA (Infrared Data Association). My experience includes detailed in depth analysis of cellular
`
`networks operating with any of the available access technologies as standardized in various
`
`standards, broadly known as AMPS, GSM, GPRS, EDGE (EGPRS); North American TDMA
`
`and IS-136, iDEN, IS-95, UMTS, HSPA, and LTE. I have experience in the design and
`
`implementation of voice and data networking (circuit switching as well as all the evolving all IP-
`
`based technologies), traffic engineering, RF design, Quality of Service (QoS) and resource
`
`allocation, MAC protocols, as well as in the design of core networks, both user plane and control
`
`plane.
`
`7.
`
`Over the course of my career, I have authored and co-authored some thirty (30)
`
`publications on various aspects of fixed and mobile communications, as noted in my curriculum
`
`vita. I am a member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and actively
`
`involved in the Communications Society and the Information Theory Society of IEEE. Between
`
`1991 and 1992, I served as the Secretary of IEEE Communications Society National Capital
`
`Area Chapter. Between 1992 and 1993, I was the Vice-Chair of IEEE Communications Society
`
`National Capital Area Chapter. I was the Vice-Chair of the Communication Theory Technical
`
`Committee of the Communications Society of the IEEE for the 1993-1996 term, and Treasurer of
`
`the Communication Theory Technical Committee of the Communications Society of the IEEE
`
`for the 1996-1999 term.
`
`Page 3 of 24
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`8.
`
`I have served as a reviewer for the IEEE, book editors, other technical
`
`publications, and various National Science Foundation (NSF) Panels. I have organized technical
`
`sessions in technical conferences, including the IEEE International Conference on
`
`Communications (ICC) and IEEE Global Communications Conference (Globecom). I served as
`
`the Technical Program Chair for the Communication Theory Mini-Conference in 1992.
`
`9.
`
`I am familiar with the content of U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210 (the “’210 patent”). In
`
`addition, I have considered the various documents referenced in my declaration as well as
`
`additional background materials. For example, I have considered: (1) an English-language
`
`translation of German Patent Publication No. DE4102408 to Saalfrank (“Saalfrank”); (2)
`
`Yasuhisa Nakamura et al., 256 QAM Modem for Multicarrier 400 Mbit/s Digital Radio, 5 IEEE
`
`Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 329 (Apr. 1987) (“Nakamura”); and (3) Bernard
`
`Le Floch et al., Digital Sound Broadcasting to Mobile Receivers, 35 IEEE Transactions on
`
`Consumer Electronics 493 (Aug. 1989) (“Le Floch”). I have also reviewed the prosecution
`
`history of the ’210 patent and the claim construction orders from Mobile Telecommunications
`
`Technologies, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:13-cv-00886-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.);
`
`Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Sprint Nextel Corp., et al., Case No. 2:12-cv-
`
`00832-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.); Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Leap Wireless
`
`International, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:13-cv-00885-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.); and Mobile
`
`Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Clearwire Corp., et al., Case No. 2:12-cv-00308-
`
`JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.). I have also reviewed the January 22, 2015 Decision on Institution of Inter
`
`Partes Review of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Case IPR2014-01036.
`
`10.
`
`Counsel has informed me that I should consider these materials through the lens
`
`of one of ordinary skill in the art related to the ’210 patent at the time of the invention, and I have
`
`Page 4 of 24
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`done so during my review of these materials. I believe one of ordinary skill as of November 12,
`
`1992 (the priority date of the ’210 patent) would have at least a B.S. degree in electrical
`
`engineering, computer science, computer engineering, or equivalent education. This person
`
`would also need to have at least two years of experience in the design and configuration of
`
`wireless paging systems, or other two-way wireless communications systems and be familiar
`
`with the operation and functionality of multicarrier transmissions. I base this on my own
`
`personal experience, extensive training that I provided for those in the industry as well as my
`
`knowledge of colleagues and other professionals at the time. With this in mind, for purposes of
`
`this analysis, references that I make to the views of a person of ordinary skill are intended to
`
`relate the views of that person as of November 12, 1992 or earlier, whether stated with respect to
`
`the present or past tense.
`
`11.
`
`Counsel has advised me that, during Inter Partes Review, claims of an expired
`
`patent are generally given their ordinary and customary meaning as understood by a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art in question at the effective filing date of the patent. Counsel has also
`
`informed me that this may yield interpretations that are broader than, or different from, the
`
`interpretation applied during a District Court proceeding, such as the pending MTel litigation.
`
`12.
`
`I have no financial interest in either party or in the outcome of this proceeding. I
`
`am being compensated for my work as an expert on an hourly basis. My compensation is not
`
`dependent on the outcome of these proceedings or the content of my opinions.
`
`13. My findings, as explained below, are based on my study, experience, and
`
`background in the fields discussed above, informed by my education in applied mathematics and
`
`electrical engineering, and my experience in the design and analysis of fixed and mobile
`
`communications systems.
`
`Page 5 of 24
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`14.
`
`This declaration is organized as follows:
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`Brief Overview of the ’210 Patent (Page 6)
`
`Saalfrank and Combinations Based on Saalfrank (Page 7)
`
`Conclusion (Page 19)
`
`III.
`
`Brief Overview of the ’210 Patent
`
`The ’210 patent is generally directed to a “method and system for providing
`
`I.
`
`15.
`
`multicarrier simulcast transmission.” Ex. SAM1001, Title. The ’210 patent includes 19 claims,
`
`of which claims 1, 10, and 19 are independent.
`
`16.
`
`The ’210 patent acknowledges that simulcast technology existed in the prior art.
`
`See generally Ex. SAM1001, 1:19 to 4:40. The ’210 patent describes that “[s]imulcast
`
`technology in communication systems was originally developed to extend transmitter coverage
`
`beyond that which could be obtained from a single transmitter.” Ex. SAM1001, 1:47-49. The
`
`’210 patent goes on to note that “simulcasting has evolved into a technique capable of providing
`
`continuous coverage to a large area.” Ex. SAM1001, 1:49-51. In simulcast systems, multiple
`
`transmitters operate on substantially the same frequencies and transmit the same information and
`
`are positioned to cover extended areas. See Ex. SAM1001, 1:52-55. In order to extend coverage
`
`areas, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have understood that these multiple
`
`simulcast transmitters, each of which defines a transmission zone, are necessarily and always
`
`geographically separated.
`
`17.
`
`Independent claims 1, 10, and 19 add to the ’210 patent’s description of these
`
`prior art simulcast systems by reciting the use of multicarrier modulated signals. See Ex.
`
`SAM1001, 33:47-62, 34:45-64, 36:7-23.
`
`18.
`
`In particular, claims 1, 10, and 19 recite a first plurality of carrier signals within
`
`the desired frequency band and a second plurality of carrier signals transmit in simulcast with the
`
`Page 6 of 24
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`first plurality of carrier signals. See id. According to claims 1, 10, and 19, each of the first
`
`plurality of carrier signals represents a portion of an information signal substantially not
`
`represented by others of the first plurality of carrier signals, and the second plurality of carrier
`
`signals correspond to and represent substantially the same information as a respective carrier
`
`signal of the first plurality of carrier signals.. See id.
`
`19.
`
`As will be described in the following sections, however, simulcast transmission of
`
`multicarrier modulated signals was well known in the art well before November 12, 1992.
`
`II.
`
`Saalfrank and Combinations Based on Saalfrank
`
`A.
`
`Saalfrank
`
`20.
`
`Saalfrank describes “a procedure for use in common-wave radio broadcasting.”
`
`Ex. SAM1015, Abstract. Specifically, Saalfrank describes the “common-wave radio operation of
`
`transmitter stations participating within the scope of a nationwide radio program.” Ex.
`
`SAM1015, col. 1, ¶ 4. In each region of such a network, “all transmitter stations simultaneously
`
`emit transmission signals with the same modulation content on the very same transmission
`
`frequency and/or the same carrier frequencies.” Id. In other words, all of the transmitters in any
`
`given region operate in simulcast with each, transmitting the same information at the same time.
`
`21.
`
`In the system described by Saalfrank, a “COFDM-method (Coded Orthogonal
`
`Frequency Division Multiplex) is provided as the transmission procedure, by which within a
`
`region, e.g., the transmission area of a statewide radio station, utilizing a carrier frequency –
`
`bandwidth of e.g., 1.5 MHz, simultaneously approx. 5…6 stereo programs can be broadcasted.”
`
`Id. (emphasis added). COFDM is one type of multi-carrier modulation. Specifically, “[w]ithin
`
`the channel bandwidth available here a plurality of individual carriers (e.g., 448 carrier
`
`frequencies equidistantly spaced over the frequency axis) is impinged with a 4-DPSK-
`
`modulation (DPSK – Differential Phase Shift Keying).” Id. (emphasis added).
`
`Page 7 of 24
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`22.
`
`Differential Phase Shift Keying (DPSK) is a specific method by which a
`
`transmitter modulates (i.e., “impinges”) a particular carrier frequency with the data of one of the
`
`stereo programs. See, e.g., Ex. SAM1015, p. 3. I note the use of the word “impinge,” by
`
`Saalfrank in the above quotation regarding 4-DPSK-modulation, where Saalfrank describes its
`
`carrier signals being “impinged with a 4-DPSK-modulation.” Informed by an understanding of
`
`4-DPSK modulation that is mentioned within this sentence, and accounting for the greater
`
`context of the Saalfrank paper and with an appreciation that the Saalfrank reference is a
`
`translation of a document originally written in German, this description of carrier signals being
`
`“impinged with a 4-DPSK-modulation” would have been readily understood by those of skill at
`
`the time of the ’210 Patent filing to have referenced the process by which a carrier signal is
`
`modulated with data using the 4-DPSK-modulation technique. In fact, proof of this interpretation
`
`of the term “impinge” is found in the corresponding US patent application that claims priority to
`
`Saalfrank and matured into U.S. Patent No. 5,544,198. See Ex. SAM1015, p. 1, [30] (claiming
`
`priority to German Application 41 02 408). The text of the ’198 patent that corresponds to the
`
`quote from Saalfrank that describes the carrier signals as being “impinged with a 4-DPSK-
`
`modulation” reads as follows: “Within the available channel bandwidth, a plurality of individual
`
`carriers (for example, 448 carrier frequencies equidistant on the frequency axis) are generated
`
`with a 4-DPSK (differential phase shift keying) modulation.” Ex. SAM1015, 1:48-51 (emphasis
`
`added).
`
`23.
`
`In general, Phase Shift Keying uses a finite number of phases of a carrier
`
`waveform to represent binary digits, also referred to as bits. See, e.g., Ex. SAM1015, p. 3. In
`
`particular, each phase of the carrier represents a unique pattern of bits. See id. Examples include
`
`binary phase shift keying (BPSK) in which each of two phases is used to represent a bit having
`
`Page 8 of 24
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`the value of 1 or 0. Equally well known is quadrature phase shift keying (QPSK) in which each
`
`phase represents two bits, i.e., ‘00’, ‘01’, ‘10’, and ‘11’). See id. A given implementation of
`
`phase shift keying modulation can be differential or not. See id. In standard, non-differential
`
`phase shift keying, the current phase of a carrier is determined based on the current value of the
`
`bit(s). See id. In this case, it is assumed that a reference phase is known to both a transmitter and
`
`a receiver, something that can cause a challenging problem. A well-known way to overcome this
`
`problem is to use what are known as differential schemes. See id. In such a scheme, rather than
`
`determining the absolute value of the phase of the carrier to be used, what is determined is the
`
`amount by which the current phase, whatever it might be, is increased depending on the values of
`
`the bits. See id. Thus, for example, in 4-DPSK, the bits sequence 00, 01, 11, and 10, could be
`
`represented by an increase in the phase, relative to the current phase, by 0 degrees, 90 degrees,
`
`180 degrees, and 270 degrees respectively.
`
`24.
`
`Accordingly, Saalfrank’s description of “a plurality of individual carriers . . .
`
`[being] impinged with a 4-DPSK-modulation” reveal’s disclosure by Saalfrank of each carrier
`
`signal within the channel bandwidth being modulated between four possible phases based on the
`
`data representing the portion of the stereo program currently being transmitted via that particular
`
`carrier signal. In other words, each of Saalfrank’s transmitters utilizes a particular type of
`
`multicarrier modulation (i.e., using 4-DPSK-modulation) in order to generate and transmit
`
`signals representing the information contained in stereo radio programs. These radio programs
`
`are a form of audio messages.
`
`25.
`
`Saalfrank summarizes the overall operation of its simulcast system with regard to
`
`FIG. 1a:
`
`within a statewide transmission region (e.g., 448) carrier frequencies are
`transmitted simultaneously with equidistant frequency distances Δf in a
`
`Page 9 of 24
`
`
`9
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`frequency range with the bandwidth B. The individual carriers are each
`modulated with one part of the digital data, with the modulation content of the
`individual carries [sic] being identical for all transmitter stations of the
`transmission region.
`Ex. SAM1015, col. 2, ¶ 9 (emphasis added). An annotated version of FIG. 1a is reproduced
`
`below to aid understanding.
`
`26.
`
`As evident from annotated Fig. 1a of Saalfrank, that reference describes a
`
`
`
`
`
`plurality of transmitters that each simultaneously transmit a plurality of carrier signals (e.g., the
`
`448 equidistant carrier frequencies) within the desired frequency band (B). See Ex. SAM1015,
`
`col. 2,¶ 9. Moreover, Saalfrank describes that each of the transmitted plurality of carrier signals
`
`represents a portion of the information signal substantially not represented by others of the
`
`plurality of carrier signals (i.e., “individual carriers are each modulated with one part of the
`
`digital data”). See Ex. SAM1015, col. 2, ¶ 9. In other words, the digital data that represents the
`
`multiple stereo radio programs is split into multiple “parts” and each different “part” is used to
`
`Page 10 of 24
`
`
`10
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`modulate one of the multiple carrier signals. See id. The following annotated version of FIG. 1a
`
`illustrates the signals transmitted by each of Saalfrank’s individual transmitter.
`
`27. Moreover, Saalfrank describes that “the modulation content of the individual
`
`
`
`
`
`carries [sic] [is] identical for all transmitter stations of the transmission region.” Ex. SAM1015,
`
`col. 2,¶ 9. In other words, each of the plurality of transmitters (i.e., at least a first and a second
`
`transmitter) in a region of Saalfrank’s system transmits the same set of carrier signals illustrated
`
`in the previous annotation of FIG. 1a. Thus, at least a first and a second transmitter in a region of
`
`Saalfrank’s system transmits carrier signals corresponding to and representing substantially the
`
`same information as the carrier signals transmitted by the other transmitters in the same region.
`
`Indeed, Saalfrank teaches that, “[i]n order to ensure a flawless common-wave operation within a
`
`transmission region it is mandatory that all carrier frequencies used for transmitting programs or
`
`Page 11 of 24
`
`
`11
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`data are impinged with respectively identical modulation content.” Ex. SAM1015, col. 3, ¶ 3.
`
`Moreover, Saalfrank describes that a “network” of transmitters installed within each region. See
`
`Ex. SAM1015, col. 2, ¶ 1. Such a “network” of transmitters is necessarily spatially separated
`
`throughout the region to the provide proper coverage contemplated by Saalfrank. See, e.g., Ex.
`
`SAM1015, FIG. 2, 7:40-53. The following diagram based on FIG. 1a illustrates these points.
`
`28.
`
`Though Saalfrank does not include a system diagram illustrating the transmitters
`
`
`
`used in its broadcasting system, one of ordinary skill in the art would have readily identified
`
`relevant structures (transmitters) from Saalfrank’s description. The structure described by
`
`Saalfrank is the same as the structure used to depict transmitters in FIG. 13 of the ’210 patent. In
`
`particular, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood Saalfrank to describe a data
`
`input, control logic, a plurality of modulators, a combiner, a power amplifier, and an antenna, as
`
`detailed below.
`
`Page 12 of 24
`
`
`12
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`29. With regard to data input, Saalfrank contemplates “approx. 5…6 stereo programs
`
`[that] can be broadcasted (in addition to data related to or independent from said programs).” Ex.
`
`SAM1015, col. 1, ¶ 4. The stereo programs and additional data are data input to Saalfrank’s
`
`transmitters.
`
`30.
`
`Each of Saalfrank’s transmitter stations includes control logic. In particular,
`
`Saalfrank transmitters utilize “DPSK-modulation (DPSK – Differential Phase Shift Keying).”
`
`Ex. SAM1015, col. 1, ¶ 4. This modulation technique includes “scrambling the digital program
`
`data within the sequence and the allocation to individual carrier frequencies.” Ex. SAM1015, col.
`
`1, ¶ 4. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the ’210 patent filing would readily have
`
`appreciated that such phase shifting and data scrambling rely upon control logic.
`
`31.
`
`As described by Saalfrank, each of the transmitter stations includes more than one
`
`modulator to simultaneously modulate the plurality of carriers. In particular, Saalfrank describes
`
`that “[t]he individual carriers are each modulated with one part of the digital data, with the
`
`modulation content of the individual carries [sic] being identical for all transmitter stations of the
`
`transmission region.” Ex. SAM1015, col. 2, ¶ 9. Moreover, Saalfrank describes that certain
`
`disadvantages of adding carrier frequencies “can be avoided when one or more of these
`
`additional carriers are modulated with a particular identification signal.” Ex. SAM1015, col. 3, ¶
`
`5. Through these descriptions, Saalfrank reveals that its transmitters individually modulate the
`
`carrier signals, which requires multiple modulators.
`
`32.
`
`One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that in order to transmit
`
`multiple modulated carriers (e.g., 448 carrier signals contemplated by Saalfrank), each of the
`
`several modulated carrier frequencies would have been combined by Saalfrank into a single
`
`output signal. See Ex. SAM1015, col. 1, ¶ 4; see also Ex. SAM1020, FIG. 5A.
`
`Page 13 of 24
`
`
`13
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`33.
`
`In order to have employed Saalfrank for its stated purpose of creating a
`
`transmission network, one of ordinary skill would have readily appreciated the need for a power
`
`amplifier in Saalfrank’s transmitter to amplify the combined signal before it is emitted by the
`
`antenna. To this point, one goal of Saalfrank’s stated goals for the radio network is to cover
`
`“several states.” See Ex. SAM1015, col. 1, ¶ 6. In order to transmit to such a large geographic
`
`area, a power amplifier is necessary at each transmitter station. See, e.g., Ex. SAM1020, FIG.
`
`5A.
`
`34.
`
`Finally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that an antenna
`
`transmits signals wirelessly. See, e.g., Ex. SAM1020, FIG. 5A. Thus, when Saalfrank describes
`
`“wireless transmission” (see Ex. SAM1015, col. 4, claim 1), one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`would understand the transmitter performing the transmission to include an antenna. In fact,
`
`Saalfrank notes the use of antennas in the mobile receivers of digital radio transmission systems.
`
`See Ex. SAM1015, col. 1, ¶ 2. The transmitter stations in such a digital radio transmission
`
`system would necessarily use corresponding antennas. See, e.g., Ex. SAM1020, FIG. 5A.
`
`B.
`
`Combination of Saalfrank and Nakamura
`
`35.
`
`As described above, Saalfrank does not feature a system diagram illustrating the
`
`transmitters used in its broadcasting system. Nonetheless, the transmitters described by Saalfrank
`
`are the same as the transmitters shown in FIG. 13 of the ’210 patent. Moreover, even if Saalfrank
`
`did not describe a transmitter like the one shown in either of FIGS. 13 or 14 of the ’210 patent,
`
`which it does, common-wave transmitters like those illustrated in FIGS. 13 and 14 of the ’210
`
`patent were well known in the art at the time of filing. For example, Nakamura describes one
`
`example of a common-wave transmitter that is the same as the transmitters illustrated in FIG. 14
`
`of the ’210 patent. It would have been obvious to implement the broadcast system and method
`
`Page 14 of 24
`
`
`14
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`described by Saalfrank using any multicarrier transmitter capable of the described transmissions.
`
`One such multicarrier transmitter is described by Nakamura.
`
`36.
`
`In particular, Saalfrank does not require a particular type of transmitter to
`
`implement its described common-wave transmission system. Notably, Saalfrank focuses its
`
`description of the transmitters used in its common-wave system on the function of those
`
`transmitters (e.g., “individual carriers . . . [being] impinged with a 4-DPSK-modulation”) and not
`
`on their structure. See generally Ex. SAM1015, col. 1, ¶¶ 4-6. From this, one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art would have understood that any transmitter capable of performing the functions described
`
`by Saalfrank would be compatible with Saalfrank’s common-wave transmission network.
`
`37.
`
`The transmitter described by Nakamura is capable of transmitting, with a plurality
`
`of carrier signals, an amount of data that is comparable to the amount transmitted by Saalfrank’s
`
`transmitters. As such, Nakamura’s transmitter is an example of a particular type of transmitter
`
`that one of ordinary skill in the art would have employed in Saalfrank’s common-wave
`
`transmission network.
`
`38.
`
`In particular, Saalfrank describes transmitting its 5 to 6 stereo radio programs by
`
`modulating 448 carrier signals using 4-DPSK-modulation. See Ex. SAM1015, col. 1, ¶ 4.
`
`However, Saalfrank does not describe a specific duration for transmitting each modulated data
`
`symbol (i.e., symbol rate). Therefore, determining the throughput required of a transmitter to
`
`broadcast “5…6 nationwide programs additionally 6 to 18 local programs,” as proposed by
`
`Saalfrank, is not a straightforward calculation based only on the disclosure of Saalfrank. See Ex.
`
`SAM1015, col. 2, ¶ 1.
`
`39.
`
`However, Le Floch, a paper from which Saalfrank largely draws its description
`
`for the operation of its transmitters and capability of its common-wave system (see Ex.
`
`Page 15 of 24
`
`
`15
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`SAM1015, col. 1, ¶ 5), describes transmitters in a very similar configuration (i.e., COFDM using
`
`4-DPSK- modulation to transmit radio programs). See Ex. SAM1018, p. 10, §8.1. Le Floch
`
`describes a system capable of transmitting “16 stereophonic programmes, each with a rate of 336
`
`kbit/s.” Ex. SAM1018, p. 10, § 8.1. In other words, 16 stereophonic programs require a total
`
`throughput of 5.376 Mbit/s. Accordingly, a transmitter in Saalfrank’s system would ideally be
`
`capable of transmitting at least 5.376 Mbit/s.
`
`40.
`
`Nakamura describes a transmitter that modulates 4 carrier signals using 256
`
`Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM). See Ex. SAM1019, p. 1, § 2(A). QAM is a
`
`modulation technique that relies upon varying both amplitude and phase. See, e.g., Ex.
`
`SAM1021, 1:17 to 2:40. Nakamura describes a 256 QAM transmitter that is capable of
`
`transmitting at up to 400 Mbit/s. See Ex. SAM1019, Abstract. This throughput is much greater
`
`than the 5.376 Mbit/s to transmit 16 stereophonic programs, leaving plenty of bandwidth for
`
`addition programs and control signals. Therefore, though the transmitter described by Nakamura
`
`relies upon a more complex form a modulation (i.e., 256-QAM vs. 4-DPSK), Nakamura’s
`
`transmitter would be capable of transmitting at least the amount of data to that described as being
`
`transmitted by Saalfrank’s transmitters.
`
`41.
`
`Notably, the transmitter described by Nakamura is the same as the transmitter
`
`illustrated in FIG. 14 of the ’210 patent. Below is an annotated version of Nakamura’s
`
`transmitter presented and annotated to enable a visual comparison with the transmitter illustrated
`
`in FIG. 14 to emphasize the similarity.
`
`Page 16 of 24
`
`
`16
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`
`
`
`
`42.
`
`Though FIG. 1 of Nakamura doesn’t overtly reflect control logic or an antenna,
`
`
`
`
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art would have readily appreciated the existence of each contextually
`
`and from reading Nakamura’s written description. For example, Nakarmua describes the use of
`
`various control signals, which would necessarily be issued by some form of control logic. See,
`
`Page 17 of 24
`
`
`17
`
`

`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,915,210
`
`e.g., Ex. SAM1019, p. 331, § III(B)(1) (describing a “VCO control signal” and a “VCXO control
`
`signal”). Nakamura also discloses that the modulator outputs an “IF out” signal at 400 Mbps. See
`
`Ex. SAM1019, FIG. 1. IF stands for “Intermediate Frequency” (a common acronym for those of
`
`ordinary skill). A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that since Nakamura also
`
`describes that its modem is for use in a “digital microwave radio system” (see Ex. SAM1019,
`
`Abstract), the IF out signal would be up-converted to a Radio Frequency (RF) signal which
`
`necessarily relies upon an antenna for transmission. See, e.g., Ex. SAM1020, FIG. 5A (showing a
`
`QAM transmitter connected to an antenna), 1:43-45. Therefore, Nakamura necessarily relies on
`
`having an antenna in order to transmit the radio signals. See id. Therefore, the multicarrier
`
`modem described by Nakamura includes all of the elements arranged in the manner shown in
`
`FIG. 14 of the ’210 patent. Moreover, to the extent that Nakamura were not found to disclose
`
`control logic or an antenna, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to
`
`include these elements in Nakamura’s transmitter, as they were commonly found in similar
`
`transmitters. See id.
`
`43.
`
`One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the transmitter
`
`described by Narakmura could be used in the system and method described by Saalfrank without
`
`substantial alteration of either Saalfrank’s overall common-wave transmission system or
`
`Nakamura’s transmitter. In particular, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have distributed
`
`a plurality of Nakamura’s transmitters in the regional configuration described by Saalfrank and
`
`input the “5…6 nationwide programs” and “6 to 18 local programs” to these transmitters for
`
`transmission to the vehicles described by Saalfrank. See Ex. SAM1015, col. 2, ¶¶ 1-2. The
`
`consistent input of these programs to Nakamura’s transmitters, as provided for by Saalfrank’s
`
`system (see Ex. SAM1015, col. 2, ¶ 2),