UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Page 1
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,
` Petitioner,
` v.
` TQ DELTA, LLC,
` Patent Owner
`
` Case IPR2016-01020
` Patent No. 9,014,243
`
` DEPOSITION OF JOSE TELLADO, Ph.D.
` TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2017
` PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
`
`REPORTED BY: JANIS JENNINGS, CSR, CLR, CCRR
`NO. 118650
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`TQ Delta Exhibit 2002
`Cisco Systems, Inc. v. TQ Delta LLC
`IPR2016-01021
`
`1
`
`
`
`Page 1
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,
` Petitioner,
` v.
` TQ DELTA, LLC,
` Patent Owner
`
` Case IPR2016-01020
` Patent No. 9,014,243
`
` DEPOSITION OF JOSE TELLADO, Ph.D.
` TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2017
` PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
`
`REPORTED BY: JANIS JENNINGS, CSR, CLR, CCRR
`NO. 118650
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`TQ Delta Exhibit 2002
`Cisco Systems, Inc. v. TQ Delta LLC
`IPR2016-01021
`
`1
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 2
`
` CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,
` Petitioner,
` v.
` TQ DELTA, LLC,
` Patent Owner
`
` Case IPR2016-01021
` Patent No. 8,718,158
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`2
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOSE TELLADO, taken
`on behalf of the Patent Owner, at Haynes and Boone, LLP,
`525 University Avenue, Suite 400, Palo Alto, California,
`beginning at 9:05 a.m. on Tuesday, January 31, 2017,
`before Janis Jennings, Certified Shorthand Reporter
`No. 3942, CLR, CCRR.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`3
`
`
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`Page 4
`
`FOR PETITIONER CISCO SYSTEMS:
` HAYNES AND BOONE
` 2323 Victory Avenue
` Dallas, Texas 75219
` BY: JOHN EMERSON, ESQ.
` DINA BLIKSHTEYN, ESQ.
` THEODORE FOSTER, ESQ. (Telephonic appearance)
`
`FOR PETITIONER COMCAST, COX, TIME WARNER CABLE,
`VERIZON AND ARRIS:
` DUANE MORRIS
` 1075 Peachtree Street NE
` Atlanta, Georgia 30309
` BY: COREY MANLEY, ESQ.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`4
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`FOR PETITIONER DISH NETWORKS:
` (Telephonic Appearance)
` COOLEY
` One Freedom Square
` 11951 Freedom Drive
` Reston, VA 20190
` BY: STEPHEN McBRIDE, ESQ.
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER TQ DELTA, LLC:
` McANDREWS, HELD & MALLOY
` 500 West Madison Street
` Chicago, Illinois 60661
` BY: PETER McANDREWS, ESQ.
` ANDREW KARP, ESQ.
` RAJ CHIPLUNKAR, ESQ. (Telephonic appearance)
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
` MARCOS TZANNES
` MICHAEL TZANNES (Telephonic appearance)
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`5
`
`
`
` I N D E X
`
`Page 6
`
`WITNESS PAGE
`JOSE TELLADO, Ph.D.
`
` EXAMINATION BY MR. McANDREWS 8
` AFTERNOON SESSION 110
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`
`5 6
`
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`6
`
`
`
` E X H I B I T S
`
`Page 7
`
`NUMBER PAGE
`Exhibit CSCO-1011
` United States Patent Number 6,144,696 13
`
`Exhibit CSCO-1012 106
` United States Patent Number 6,625,219
`
`Exhibit CSCO-1017
` Excerpt ANSI T1.413; page 64 of 186 25
`
`Exhibit IPR2016-1020 CSCO-1009 15
` Declaration of Dr. Jose Tellado in
` Support of Petition for Inter Partes
` Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,014,243
`
`Exhibit IPR2016-1021 CSCO-1009 15
` Declaration of Dr. Jose Tellado in
` Support of Petition for Inter Partes
` Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,718,158
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`5
`
`6 7
`
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`7
`
`
`
`Page 8
`PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA; TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2017;
` 9:05 A.M.
`
` JOSE TELLADO,
` The witness herein, was sworn and
` testified as follows:
`
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. Good morning.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. Could you please state your name and spell
`it for the record.
` A. Jose Tellado, J-o-s-e, T-e-l-l-a-d-o.
` Q. Do you have a middle initial or name?
` A. (Witness nods.)
` Q. What is your current residential address?
` A. 1759 Cherry Tree Lane, Mountain View,
`California 94040.
` Q. And who is your current employer?
` A. HPE.
` Q. What is the address of HPE?
` A. They have multiple addresses. I go to work
`at 3343 Scott Boulevard, Santa Clara.
` Q. Okay. Dr. Tellado, is it okay if I call you
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`6
`
`7 8
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`8
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 9
`
`that?
` A. Yes. Sure.
` Q. Okay. So, Dr. Tellado, have you had your
`deposition taken before?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you ever worked as an expert witness or
`a consultant prior to this matter?
` A. Yes.
` Q. About how many times?
` A. Once.
` Q. And when was that?
` A. It was late 2015.
` Q. And I'm not asking for any confidential
`information, I hope, but let me know. What did that
`matter involve? Was it a patent matter?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And who were the parties involved?
` A. Duane Morris was the -- the firm I was
`consulting for.
` Q. And do you know who the parties were
`involved? Was it related to a litigation?
` A. I was not given a lot of details of what it
`was related to. I was given patents to review and
`give my opinion and help find prior art.
` Q. Okay. And what was -- what was the subject
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`9
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 10
`
`matter of that engagement? Technical subject
`matter?
` A. It was '243 and '158, and a third patent. I
`don't remember the number.
` Q. Okay. And do you know if that was for an
`IPR matter or a litigation matter?
` A. I was not given details of what the real
`matter was. I think it was litigation, but I'm not
`sure. It was mostly, what do you think about this,
`what do you think about that. It was a few hours
`and it was brainstorming sessions and looking for
`prior art.
` MR. MANLEY: And I just caution not to
`reveal privileged information. I think you're
`entitled to certain broad subject matter that you
`have already explored, but I think more details,
`we're getting into privilege.
` MR. McANDREWS: Okay. Okay. Understood.
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. Did it relate generally to the same subject
`matter that you were addressing as part of the IPR
`matters that we're here to talk about today?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Did it involve review of patents that
`you understand to be owned by TQ Delta?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`10
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 11
`
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So you have not had your deposition
`taken before?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. Have you -- has your counsel
`explained to you generally how the process works in
`the deposition?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You understand that I'm going to ask you a
`series of questions and that subject to potential
`objections, you're supposed to be answering my
`questions?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And typically, despite the objection,
`you're going to be providing an answer, unless your
`attorney instructs you not to answer; correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. If I ask a question that you don't
`understand, please ask me to rephrase it, help me
`out, help me provide a clearer question for you.
` Do you understand?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Are there any reasons, for example,
`are you taking any medication that may impair your
`ability to testify truthfully and accurately today?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`11
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 12
`
` A. No.
` Q. And I don't expect to go all day, but I do
`expect us to go on for several hours. If you need a
`break, just let me know.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Okay. Otherwise, I'll try to break about
`every hour. Okay?
` A. (Witness nods.)
` Q. Do you understand that when I say "PAR," I'm
`referring to the acronym P-A-R that stands for
`peak-to-average power ratio?
` A. Yes.
` Q. I want to kind of agree on some language
`today so we understand each other and we have a
`clear record.
` Do you understand that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. One initial thing I should have said, and
`you're doing a fine job of it, but we need to have
`audible answers today. Nodding your head, and I'll
`try to make sure I get that out of you, is not
`really good for the court reporter to record so
`audible answers are going to be necessary.
` Do you understand that?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`12
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 13
` Q. Okay. So when I say "PAR" today, it's going
`to be referring to a peak-to-average power ratio.
` Do you understand that?
` A. Yes.
` MR. McANDREWS: Okay. So let me mark as the
`first exhibit here. Let me have 1011.
` MR. KARP: So 1011.
` MR. McANDREWS: Yes.
` All right. So I'm going to mark an exhibit
`that is labeled, it bears the exhibit number
`CSCO1011. I believe that this is Exhibit 1011 in
`both matters, so I don't think it's necessary to
`indicate which matter this belongs to. And when I
`say "which matter," just for the record, I'm
`referencing the fact that some of these exhibits may
`be applicable in both IPR 2016-01020 and/or IPR
`2016-01021. This one, I believe, is applicable to
`both so I don't think it's necessary to mark it.
` (Exhibit 1011 marked for identification.)
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. Dr. Tellado, are you familiar with
`Exhibit 1011?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And can we refer to that as the Shively
`patent or Shively reference today?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`13
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 14
`
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Can you tell me, does the Shively
`reference include any discussion of PAR?
` A. I don't remember seeing it.
` Q. Okay. Does Shively include any explanation
`that it's spreading invention causes an increase in
`PAR?
` A. I don't remember seeing that.
` Q. Does Shively explain anywhere that its
`spreading invention would cause a PAR problem?
` A. I don't remember seeing that.
` Q. Okay. So the Shively reference itself does
`not indicate that its invention creates any issue
`with PAR; right?
` A. I didn't see it.
` Q. And when I say "spreading invention," do you
`understand generally what I'm referring to?
` A. Yes. Replicating a bit multiple times on
`multiple carriers which will increase PAR.
` Q. We're going to talk about that in a little
`more detail in a second here.
` MR. McANDREWS: So let's mark the next
`exhibit here. Actually, I'm going to mark two
`exhibits. So the first exhibit I'm going to mark is
`the declaration of Jose Tellado in matter Number
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`14
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 15
`IPR2016-01020. And it has, the exhibit number from
`that matter is 1009. But we have this -- do you
`have an exhibit sticker we can add to this, to add
`the 1020.
` DEPOSITION REPORTER: Let's go off the
`record.
` (Off the record.)
` MR. McANDREWS: So back to the exhibits I'm
`marking. So to Exhibit CSCO-1009 in matter
`IPR2016-1020, I've added an exhibit sticker that
`indicates that matter number. I've done the same --
`and that's the IPR that involves patent
`No. 9,014,243.
` Also labeled CSCO-1009, but in the other
`matter IPR2016-1021, I've added an exhibit sticker
`to indicate that matter number.
` (Exhibit IPR2016-1020 CSCO-1009 and
` Exhibit IPR2016-1021 CSCO-1009 marked for
` identification.)
` MR. McANDREWS: I'll place those in front of
`the witness.
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. Okay. So do you recognize Exhibit 2016-1020
`CSCO-1009?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`15
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 16
`
` Q. And what is it?
` A. This is my declaration.
` Q. And that's your declaration directed to the
`'243 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And do you recognize
`Exhibit IPR2016-1021 CSCO-1009?
` A. This is my second declaration.
` Q. And that addresses the '158 patent; correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So I'd like you to refer to paragraph
`63 of -- and for the most part, we're going to be
`referring to the declaration directed to the '243
`patent, but -- and to the extent that it matters, we
`may have to refer to the other one, but largely,
`your opinions are similar, so...
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. Can you take a look at paragraph 63.
` A. Yes.
` (Audio interruption.)
` MR. McANDREWS: Who just joined?
` MR. FOSTER: This is Theo Foster from
`Haynes and Boone for the petitioner.
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. So in paragraph 63, you referred to a
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`16
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 17
`
`"increased peak-to-average power ratio."
` Do you see that? It's in the first sentence
`there.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And you believe this increased
`peak-to-average power ratio is caused by Shively's
`spreading technique; correct?
` A. Shively has many spreading techniques, and
`some of them, that's correct.
` Q. Okay. So, again, you're referring to an
`increase in the PAR; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Did you attempt to quantify the alleged
`increase in PAR?
` A. It is a function of multiple variables. I
`didn't quantify it, but it increases and it's a
`function of multiple variables.
` Q. Okay. So you did not -- so you did not
`quantify the increase in PAR?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. Would you know how to quantify the
`increase in PAR?
` A. Yes.
` Q. But you didn't do that for purposes of your
`opinion?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`17
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 18
`
` A. No.
` Q. So you say the PAR increases. With was --
`with respect to what is the PAR allegedly
`increasing?
` A. Relative to a purely random input.
` Q. And how is a purely random input, how is
`that idea related to a Gaussian distribution, if at
`all?
` A. So if the tones go -- if the currents are
`going into the modulator are random or pseudorandom,
`the output distribution will be close to Gaussian,
`approximately a Gaussian. It is also a function of
`distributions of input, the number of tones, but
`it's approximately Gaussian.
` Q. As part of forming your opinions, did you
`consider how much PAR would have to be increased in
`order to be considered a problem that needed
`solving?
` A. No. But Shively has an algorithm that has a
`loop and you could keep increasing the number of
`bits that you replicate and the PAR will keep
`increasing.
` Q. So you suggested the PAR could keep
`increasing, but in forming your opinion, did you
`consider at what point as the PAR increases that it
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`18
`
`
`
`Page 19
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`becomes a problem?
` A. The problem is proportional to how many
`times you replicate each bit and how many bits you
`replicate. And it will -- it's a function of that.
` Q. So I understand you're saying that the PAR
`is increasing, but at what point does the PAR become
`a problem?
` A. When it's larger than normal, it's a
`problem.
` Q. But don't all systems have some PAR?
` A. Yeah. Multicarrier systems have PAR
`problems, yes.
` Q. But they have a PAR, though?
` A. They have -- all system --
` Q. They operate with a PAR?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And isn't it true that multicarrier systems
`operate with an acceptable level of PAR?
` A. Multicarrier systems have high PAR which
`makes building the transmitter complicated and the
`worse you make it, the harder it is to make a
`transmitter.
` Q. The worse you make what?
` A. The PAR. The higher the PAR, the harder it
`is to build a transmitter, so it's better to make it
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`19
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 20
`
`lower.
` Q. Okay. So let me ask you about this. So in
`your declaration in paragraph 64, and again, this is
`the declaration, it's Exhibit 1009, it's in
`IPR2016-1020, in paragraph 64 you say, "Having
`phase-aligned subcarriers causes a high
`peak-to-average power ratio."
` So again, you have this word "high," did you
`attempt to quantify what you characterize as a high
`PAR value?
` A. The sentence says, "Having phase aligned
`subcarriers," it doesn't say if it's 10, 20 or 100.
`It's plural. So it's a function of how much that
`plural is and I didn't quantify.
` Q. What I'm trying to figure out is -- you're
`right.
` So you didn't quantify what the PAR value
`was; correct?
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. And you didn't put a number on what you
`would consider to be a high peak-to-average power
`ratio?
` A. I didn't quantify, no.
` Q. Can you tell me what would be considered a
`high to peak-to-average power ratio?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`20
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 21
` A. Multicarrier systems already have a high
`peak-to-average ratio. Why do you want to make it
`even higher?
` Q. Higher than what? Let's take talk about
`what a typical -- what does a typical multicarrier
`transceiver have. What is the PAR value that a
`typical multicarrier transceiver has?
` A. So it's a function of how many carriers you
`have and how much distortion you want to set. It
`depends on how many bits you want to load in each
`tone. It's a function of a lot of variables. Each
`multicarrier system is different.
` Q. Okay. And each multicarrier system
`inherently accepts a certain amount of PAR within
`its system design constraints; correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` A. Every transmitter designer will have some
`constraints.
` Q. So it is true that a PAR of some value
`exists for all multicarrier communication systems;
`right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And there's a certain PAR value that
`would be considered acceptable in a given system;
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`21
`
`
`
`Page 22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`right?
` A. As a function of the system design, yes.
` Q. Okay. And, in fact, the amplifiers in
`D-to-A converters in a given system are designed to
`accommodate a PAR up to a certain amount; correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And a PAR only becomes a problem if
`it causes clipping; right?
` A. That's one of the problems.
` Q. Okay. And what's clipping?
` A. Clipping is when the modulated signal gets
`distorted by some -- some path.
` Q. And why does that happen in a typical
`multicarrier system? Why would clipping occur?
` A. Because you design your transceiver such
`that it could not handle the highest PAR [verbatim]
`signals and sometimes the signal coming out of your
`transmitter is distorted.
` MR. EMERSON: So is that highest "PAR"
`signals or highest "power" signals?
` THE WITNESS: Highest instantaneous power.
`Since the average is known, the power in the peak is
`the variable. The peak power or the PAR or the
`instantaneous power.
`/ / /
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`22
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. Okay. So is it true that in a typical
`multicarrier system that PAR would only be
`considered a problem when clipping occurs at a
`greater rate than what is deemed acceptable by the
`system designers?
` A. Can you repeat the question.
` Q. Sure. Is it true that in a typical
`multicarrier system, PAR is only considered a
`problem when clipping occurs at a greater rate than
`what is deemed acceptable by the system designers?
` A. Can you repeat the question.
` MR. McANDREWS: Can you read that back,
`please.
` (Record read as follows:
` "Q. Is it true that in a typical
` multicarrier system, PAR is only
` considered a problem when clipping occurs
` at a greater rate than what is deemed
` acceptable by the system designers?")
` THE WITNESS: That's one reason.
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. Okay. Let's explore that reason to some
`extent here. So isn't it true that Shively is
`addressing a DMT 80 ADSL system?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`23
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 24
`
` A. Can you repeat the question.
` Q. Right. Isn't it true that Shively is
`addressing a DMT 80 ADSL system?
` A. He's addressing multicarrier transmission
`systems. What you said is an example of a
`multicarrier transmission system.
` Q. So he uses as an example an ADSL system
`design pursuant to the T1.413-1995 standard;
`correct?
` A. In the background, I see him listing that as
`an example of a system that has a power
`spectral-density mask.
` Q. Right.
` So his "Background" section is discussing an
`ADSL system pursuant to the T1.413 standard; right?
` A. That's an example that he describes.
` Q. Okay. And are you familiar with the fact
`that ADL systems of that type made pursuant to the
`T1.413 standard are designed to tolerate a certain
`clipping rate?
` A. So the clipping rates you could tolerate is
`a function of what bit error rate do you want to
`handle, how many bits you want to load per carrier,
`and each standard would have its requirements, and
`this is one example.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`24
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 25
` MR. EMERSON: Hey, can everyone on the phone
`hear fine? I can move the speaker if you can't.
` MR. FOSTER: It sounds good to me.
` MR. EMERSON: Okay.
` THE WITNESS: This is connected?
` MR. EMERSON: No, that's hers.
` THE WITNESS: You've got the best spot.
` (Exhibit 1017 marked for identification.)
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. I'm going to hand you what's previously been
`marked as CSCO-1017 and I'm not certain which matter
`that is, Exhibit 1017, and I'll confirm at a break.
`I think it may be 1017 in both matters. And I'll
`represent to you that Exhibit CSCO-1017 that I
`handed you is actually an excerpt of the full
`exhibit that was put into the record by Cisco.
` Can you tell me what that exhibit is?
` A. This is a two-page version of the ANSI
`T1.413 195 [verbatim], ANSI standard.
` Q. Okay. And can you turn to the second page
`of that document, and it's page 64168. And can you
`tell me --
` A. Can you say that again.
` Q. So it's page 64168 at the bottom.
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`25
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 26
` Q. Okay. And in section 6.11.1, do you see
`that it is referencing a maximum clipping rate?
` A. Do I see 6.11.1?
` Q. Yes.
` A. Is that the question?
` Q. Yes.
` A. I see it.
` Q. And it says:
` "The maximum output signal of the
` transmitter shall be such that the
` probability of the signal being clipped
` is no greater than 10 to the minus 7."
` Do you see that?
` A. I see that.
` Q. Okay. So from that, would you understand
`that the T1.413 ADSL standard allows clipping up to
`a rate of 10 to the minus 7?
` A. No greater than 10 to the minus 7, so this
`is the lowest performing transmitter you can build
`to meet the standard, this is the lowest quality you
`can build. You can build better than this.
` Q. Okay. But 10 to the minus 7 is considered
`an acceptable clipping rate?
` A. To be complying to the standard, this is the
`worst you could do.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`26
`
`
`
`Page 27
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Q. Okay. And do you understand why it
`allows clipping at a rate of approximately 10 to
`the minus 7?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And why is that?
` A. Because this is related to what is a target
`bit error rate and it's related to how many bits you
`load in certain subcarriers.
` Q. Okay. Is it also related to how many bit
`errors can be corrected through forward error
`correction?
` A. Yes. But again, this is an example of a
`multicarrier transmission system. There's many
`other variance. This is just an example that was
`popular in '95, 1995.
` Q. Okay. So according to the T1.413 standard
`though, there would be no PAR problem, per se, if
`the probability of clipping is 10 to the minus 7 or
`less; right?
` A. Can you repeat the question.
` Q. So according to the T1.413 standard, there
`would be no PAR problem if the probability of
`clipping is 10 to the minus 7 or less; right?
` A. There is a PAR problem.
` Q. What do you mean, "There is a PAR problem"?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`27
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 28
` A. You have a PAR problem that is making a
`clip at a probability of 10 to minus 7. There is
`the PAR problem that makes the transceiver clip with
`the probability of 10 to the minus 7.
` Q. But pursuant to the standard, it's an
`acceptable clipping rate?
` A. If you increase the PAR, you have to
`transmit lower power to meet this requirement.
` Q. And what do you mean by that?
` A. If you make the PAR worse, you have to
`transmit less power to keep the transmitter from
`clipping any greater than 10 to the minus 7.
` Q. But I think you just said this, but you
`could solve that problem if you were transmitting
`less power as well?
` A. That means you get less bits across.
` Q. Okay.
` A. If your peak power increases, you have to
`transmit less power, meaning less bits across so you
`don't clip more than 10 to the minus 7.
` Q. Right. But if you're sending fewer bits
`across and sending -- and therefore, sending
`potentially less power, that would also solve the
`PAR problem; correct? If you had a high PAR, that
`would reduce the PAR; right?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`28
`
`
`
`Page 29
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. Can you repeat the question.
` Q. If you are sending fewer bits across and
`therefore you're sending lower power, that would be
`one way to reduce any issue with the high PAR;
`correct?
` A. There is high PAR. You're making a more
`inefficient transmitter that's sending less bits to
`meet the standard.
` Q. But if other system constraints forced you
`to send fewer bits and therefore lower power, that
`would also reduce any issue with high PAR; correct?
` A. Shively is trying to replicate bits to get
`it across a noisy channel and now we're going to
`reduce the number of bits because of the PAR
`increase. Shively is trying to increase the number
`of bits you get across a channel. Because of PAR
`increase, you're going to have to drop the average
`power which means you're going to get less bits
`across.
` Q. Okay. But if you're sending fewer bits
`because of other system constraints --
` A. Like PAR.
` Q. -- because of other system constraints, if
`you're sending fewer bits because of other system
`constraints and therefore you're sending less power,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`29
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 30
`that would also reduce any issue you might have with
`PAR; correct?
` A. Repeat the question.
` MR. McANDREWS: Can you read that back.
` (Record read as follows:
` "Q. Because of other system constraints,
` if you're sending fewer bits because of
` other system constraints and therefore
` you're sending less power, that would also
` reduce any issue you might have with PAR;
` correct?")
` THE WITNESS: Can you ask the question
`again. It's a very long question.
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. Okay. So earlier you said something about
`if you reduce the power because --
` A. The average power.
` Q. -- if you reduce the average power because
`you're sending fewer bits, right, that would bring
`down any -- that would bring down the power; right?
`And therefore --
` A. The average power.
` Q. The average power.
` And therefore, it would reduce problems you
`might have with the high PAR?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`30
`
`
`
`Page 31
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. Can you ask the question again.
` MR. EMERSON: And let me just interject.
`Make sure you let him finish his question and then
`start your answer. Okay? It's just hard for her to
`take it down.
`BY MR. McANDREWS:
` Q. Okay. So --
` A. Go ahead.
` Q. So if due to system constraints or
`parameters of the operation of the system you are
`reducing the number of bits you are sending and
`therefore reducing the amount of power, the average
`power, that would also reduce what might otherwise
`be a high PAR?
` A. No.
` Q. Why not?
` A. You still have high PAR. You're just
`dropping your average power so the peak power
`doesn't distort. You have high PAR, meaning the
`peak versus the average is high. You just drop them
`both.
` Q. Okay. And maybe that's the disconnect.
` I'm talking about a problem with PAR. And
`when I say "problem with PAR," I'm referencing
`something that takes you beyond the acceptable
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`31
`
`
`
`Page 32
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`clipping rate. Okay?
` So with that definition of "problem" in
`mind, does reducing the number of bits sent and
`therefore the average power reduce any problem with
`PAR that would be -- that would cause additional
`clipping?
` A. If you reduce your average transmit power,
`even if the PAR is bad, you could back off the
`average, you back off the peak, you will not clip,
`you get less bits across, and you can still transmit
`less bits, but that defeats the purpose of Shively.
` Q. Okay.
` A. Shively is trying to get more bits across,
`not less bits.
` Q. Okay. So how many downstream carriers are
`there in an ADSL transmitter designed pursuant to
`the T.413 standard?
` A. 256, I believe.
` Q. Okay. So a system designed pursuant to
`T.413 which is required to have a clipping rate of
`10 to the minus 7, is designed for that clipping
`rate when using 256 carriers for transmission;
`correct?
` A. 256 is the maximum number of carriers. You
`could use less.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`32
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 33
` Q. Okay. But the 10 to the minus 7 is -- we're
`trying to set up a worst-case scenario; right? It's
`under the worst conditions, it's supposed to clip at
`a rate of 10 to the minus 7; right?
` A. I mentioned that 256 carriers is the maximum
`number of carriers.
` Q. Okay. So 256 is the maximum number of
`carriers?
` A. For bad loops, you may be transmitting a lot
`less than that.
` Q. Okay. Right.
` So what would happen to the clipping rate if
`the transmitter is only actually transmitting on,
`say, half the carriers, 128 carriers?
` A. The clipping rate is a function of your
`average power and your PAR, and...
` Q. Okay. And so what would happen to the
`clipping rate --
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. -- if only 128 carriers are being used as
`opposed to the full 256?
` A. It's a function of how much power you put in
`each one of those 128 carriers.
` Q. Right. So let's assume that we're in the
`same system.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`33
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 34
`
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. We're in a T.413 system designed to transmit
`over 256 carriers. Okay?
` A. Uh-huh. (Witness nods.)
` Q.
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
