UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION, MICROSOFT MOBILE INC., SAMSUNG
`ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. AND SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`FASTVDO LLC
`Patent Owner
`_________________
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`Issued: December 15, 1998
`Application No.: 08/633,896
`Filed: April 17, 1996
`Title: Error Resilient Method And Apparatus For Entropy Coding
`_________________
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`CLAIMS 1-3, 5-6, 12-14, 16-17, AND 28 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,850,482
`
`
`
`
`_________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION, MICROSOFT MOBILE INC., SAMSUNG
`ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. AND SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`FASTVDO LLC
`Patent Owner
`_________________
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`Issued: December 15, 1998
`Application No.: 08/633,896
`Filed: April 17, 1996
`Title: Error Resilient Method And Apparatus For Entropy Coding
`_________________
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`CLAIMS 1-3, 5-6, 12-14, 16-17, AND 28 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,850,482
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page(s)
`TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................... i
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................... vi
`LIST OF EXHIBITS .............................................................................................. viii
`I.
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`A. Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)) ............................................. 1
`
`Real Party-In-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)) .......................... 1
`
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)) ................................... 1
`
`Lead And Backup Counsel
`(37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)) And Service Information ..................... 2
`Proof Of Service (37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e) And 42.105(a)) ....................... 3
`B.
`Fee For Inter Partes Review (37 C.F.R. § 42.15(a)) ............................ 3
`C.
`D. Word Count Certification (37 C.F.R. § 42.24) ..................................... 3
`E.
`Grounds For Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)) .................................... 3
`CHALLENGE AND RELIEF REQUESTED (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)) ......... 4
`II.
`III. BACKGROUND AND STATE OF THE ART .............................................. 5
`A. Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art ............................................................. 5
`
`Entropy Coding Is Admitted Prior Art ....................................... 5
`
`Transforming Data Before Encoding Is Admitted Prior Art ...... 7
`
`Quantizing Transformed Data Before
`Entropy Encoding Is Admitted Prior Art .................................... 7
`Providing Unequal Error Protection (UEP) To
`Subsets Varying In Importance Is Admitted Prior Art ............... 8
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`V.
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`
`ii
`
`B.
`C.
`
`Dividing Code Words Into A Prefix
`And A Suffix Field Is Admitted Prior Art .................................. 9
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE 482 PATENT .............................................................. 9
`A.
`The 482 Patent Combines Known Techniques
`For Entropy Coding And Unequal Error Protection ............................. 9
`Procedural History Of The 482 Patent ................................................ 14
`B.
`Representative Claims ......................................................................... 15
`C.
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)) ................. 16
`A.
`Claims For Which Review Is
`Requested (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1)) ................................................. 16
`Statutory Grounds For Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(2)) ............ 17
`Claim Construction (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3)) .................................. 17
`
`Level Of Ordinary Skill In The Art .......................................... 18
`
`Terms That Appear In All Claims ............................................ 18
`a.
`“code word” .................................................................... 18
`b.
`“first portion of each code word” ................................... 19
`c.
`“[associated] second portion of each code word” .......... 20
`VI. SUMMARY OF THE PRIOR ART TO THE 482 PATENT ....................... 21
`A. Kato Combines Entropy Coding, Split
`Field Coding, And Unequal Error Protection ..................................... 22
`
`Kato Shows Combining Entropy Coding And Split Coding .... 23
`
`Kato’s Fourth Embodiment
`Shows Unequal Error Protection (UEP)
`For First And Second Code Word Portions .............................. 28
`Kato’s Third Embodiment Shows Encoding Data That Has
`Been Previously Transformed And Quantized ......................... 31
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`B. Wei Teaches Providing Different Transmission
`Channels (“Data Links”) For Data Of Different Importance .............. 33
`VII. EACH CHALLENGED CLAIM OF THE
`482 PATENT IS UNPATENTABLE OVER KATO
`(37 CFR § 42.104(b)(4), 37 CFR § 42.104(b)(5)) ......................................... 36
`A. Ground No. 1: Claims 1-3, 5, 12-14, 16 And 28 Are
`An Obvious Combination Of Kato’s Embodiments ........................... 38
` Motivation To Combine Kato’s Embodiments ......................... 38
`
`Claim 1 And Its Dependents Are Obvious Over Kato ............. 41
`a.
`Kato Shows The Preamble ............................................. 41
`b.
`Kato Shows The “Generating A Plurality” Step ............ 41
`c.
`Kato Shows “Wherein Each Word Comprises…” ......... 42
`d.
`Kato Shows “Generating The First Portion” .................. 43
`e.
`Kato Shows “Generating The Second Portion” ............. 45
`f.
`Kato Shows “Providing Error Protection” ..................... 47
`g.
`Kato Shows The Added Features Of Claim 2 ................ 48
`h.
`Kato Shows Or Suggests
`The Added Features Of Claim 3 ..................................... 49
`Kato Shows Or Suggests
`The Added Features Of Claim 5 ..................................... 50
`Claim 12 And Its Dependents Are Obvious Over Kato ........... 52
`a.
`Kato Shows The Preamble ............................................. 52
`b.
`Kato Shows The “Transforming The Data” Step ........... 52
`c.
`Kato Shows The “Quantizing The Data” Step ............... 53
`d.
`Kato Shows “Encoding The Quantized Data” ............... 53
`
`i.
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`e.
`f.
`
`g.
`
`
`
`h.
`i.
`j.
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`Kato Shows “Which Have Respective …” .................... 54
`Kato Shows
`“Including Information Within The First Portion” ......... 54
`Kato Shows
`“Including Information Within The Second Portion” .... 55
`Kato Discloses “Providing Error Protection” ................. 55
`Kato Shows The Added Features Of Claim 13 .............. 55
`Kato Shows Or Suggests
`The Added Features Of Claim 14 ................................... 56
`Kato Shows Or Suggests
`The Added Features Of Claim 16 ................................... 56
`Claim 28 Is Also Obvious Over Kato ....................................... 56
`a.
`Kato Shows The Preamble ............................................. 57
`b.
`Kato Shows Or Suggests The
`“Partitioned Storage Medium” ....................................... 57
`Kato Shows “A Plurality Of Code Words” .................... 58
`Kato Shows Or Suggests Providing Unequal
`Error Protection For First And Second Portions ............ 58
`B. Ground No. 2: Claims 6 And 17
`Are Obvious Over Kato In View Of Wei ............................................ 59
` Motivation To Combine Kato With Wei .................................. 59
` Wei Shows The Added Features Of Claim 6 ............................ 62
` Wei Shows The Added Features Of Claim 17 .......................... 65
`VIII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 65
`
`
`
`k.
`
`c.
`d.
`
`iv
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH
`TYPE-VOLUME LIMITATION PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.24 .................... 1
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE IN
`COMPLIANCE WITH 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e)(4) ......................................................... 2
`
`v
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Page(s)
`
`Cases
`DyStar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick Co.,
`464 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2006)............................................................................ 38
`Leapfrog Enters. v. Fisher-Price,
`485 F.3d 1157 (Fed. Cir. 2007)............................................................................ 37
`Ortho-McNeil Pharm., Inc. v. Mylan Labs., Inc.,
`520 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2008)............................................................................ 37
`PAR Pharm., Inc. v. TWI Pharm., Inc.,
`773 F.3d 1186 (Fed. Cir. 2014)............................................................................ 38
`Perfect Web Tech. v. Infousa, Inc.,
`587 F.3d 1324 (Fed. Cir. 2009)............................................................................ 37
`Pfizer, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc.,
`480 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2007)............................................................................ 37
`Phillips v. AWH Corp.,
`415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005)............................................................................ 17
`Scanner Tech. Corp. v. ICOS Vision Sys.,
`528 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2008)............................................................................ 37
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 102 ............................................................................................. 4, 22, 33
`35 U.S.C. § 103 ............................................................................................. 4, 17, 37
`35 U.S.C. § 112 ........................................................................................................ 17
`35 U.S.C. § 311 ................................................................................................... 1, 16
`
`Rules
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ..................................................................................................... 1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ........................................................................................... passim
`37 C.F.R. § 42.105 ..................................................................................................... 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.15 ....................................................................................................... 3
`37 C.F.R. § 42.24 ...................................................................................................3, 1
`37 C.F.R. § 42.6 .....................................................................................................3, 2
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8 .....................................................................................................1, 2
`
`
`
`vii
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`
`Ex. 1003
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`Ex. 1001 U.S. Pat. No. 5,850,482, “Error Resilient Method And Apparatus For
`Entropy Coding,” issued December 15, 1998 (“482 patent”)
`Ex. 1002 U.S. Pat. No. 5,392,037, “Method and Apparatus for Encoding and
`Decoding,” issued February 21, 1995 (“Kato”)
`File History for U.S. Pat. No. 5,850,482, Application No. 633,896
`(“482 file history”)
`Ex. 1004 U.S. Pat. No. 5,243,629, “Multi-Subcarrier Modulation For HDTV
`Transmission,” issued Sep. 7, 1993 (“Wei”)
`Ex. 1005 Declaration of Dr. Robert L. Stevenson (“Stevenson Dec.” or
`“Stevenson Declaration”)
`Ex. 1006 M. V. Wickerhauser, “High-Resolution Still Picture Compression,”
`Apr. 19, 1992
`Ex. 1007 R. C. Wood, “On Optimum Quantization,” IEEE Transactions on
`Information Theory, Vol. 15 (1969)
`E. R. Fiala and D. H. Greene, “Data Compression with Finite
`Windows,” Communications of the ACM, Vol. 32, No. 4 (1989)
`Plaintiff’s Preliminary Claim Constructions And Preliminary
`Identification Of Extrinsic Evidence, dated May 27, 2016
`Ex. 1010 Defendants’ Preliminary Claim Constructions And Identification Of
`Extrinsic Evidence, dated May 27, 2016
`Plaintiff’s First Amended Preliminary Claim Constructions And
`Preliminary Identification Of Extrinsic Evidence, dated June 1, 2016
`Ex. 1012
`Plaintiff’s Responsive Claim Constructions, dated June 10, 2016
`Ex. 1013 Defendants’ Responsive Claim Constructions And Identification Of
`Extrinsic Evidence, June 10, 2016
`
`Ex. 1008
`
`Ex. 1009
`
`Ex. 1011
`
`viii
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 311 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.100, Microsoft Mobile Inc.
`
`and Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”), and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
`
`and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (“Samsung,” collectively “Petitioners”)
`
`respectfully request inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482 (the “482
`
`patent”, or “the patent”). Petitioners assert that it is more likely than not that at
`
`least one of claims 1-3, 5-6, 12-14, 16-17, and 28 of the 482 patent (the
`
`“challenged claims”) is unpatentable on the grounds set forth herein.
`
`A. Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8 (b))
`
`Real Party-In-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8 (b)(1))
`Microsoft Mobile Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Samsung Electronics
`
`America, Inc., and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. are the sole real parties-in-
`
`interest.
`
`
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8 (b)(2))
`FastVDO LLC (“FastVDO”, or “Patent Owner”) asserted the 482 patent
`
`(provided as Ex. 1001) in suits filed June 2 and 3, 2015 in the U.S. District Court
`
`for the Eastern District of Texas, in case nos. 2:15-cv-00925 (the “925 case,”
`
`originally naming as defendants Nokia Inc. and Nokia Corp.) and 2:15-cv-00946
`
`(the “946 case,” naming, inter alia, the Samsung entities), respectively. Microsoft
`
`Mobile Inc. was later substituted into the 925 case. On January 29, 2016, the 925
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`case and the 946 case, along with cases against a number of other defendants were
`
`consolidated for pretrial issues, and assigned lead case no. 2:15-cv-00921.
`
`Subsequently, on February 11, 2016, the cases were transferred to the Southern
`
`District of California. Upon transfer, the case against Microsoft Mobile Inc. was
`
`assigned case no. 3:16-cv-00390 and the case against Samsung was assigned case
`
`no. 3:16-cv-00395. (Collectively, “the concurrent litigation”). The concurrent
`
`litigation was again consolidated with the cases against the other defendants,
`
`including (defendants in parenthesis):
`
` 3:16-cv-00385 (AT&T Mobility LLC, et al.) (LEAD CASE),
`
` 3:16-cv-00386 (LG Electronics, Inc., et al.),
`
` 3:16-cv-00389 (NEC Corporation, et al.) (dismissed Apr. 29, 2016),
`
` 3:16-cv-00394 (ZTE Corporation, et al.), and
`
` 3:16-cv-00396 (Huawei Technologies Co., et al.).
`
`The non-dismissed cases remain pending in the Southern District of California.
`
`
`
`Lead And Backup Counsel
`(37 C.F.R. § 42.8 (b)(3)) And Service Information
`Lead Counsel is: Derrick W. Toddy, derrick.toddy@klarquist.com, Reg. No.
`
`74,591. Backup Counsel are: John D. Vandenberg,
`
`john.vandenberg@klarquist.com, Reg. No. 31,312; and Garth A. Winn,
`
`garth.winn@klarquist.com, Reg. No. 33,220. All counsel are of KLARQUIST
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`SPARKMAN, LLP, 121 SW Salmon Street, Suite 1600, Portland, Oregon, 97204;
`
`Tel: 503-595-5300; Fax: 503-595-5301. Petitioners consent to electronic service.
`
`B.
`Proof Of Service (37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6 (e) And 42.105(a))
`Proof of service of this Petition is provided in the attached Certificate of
`
`Service.
`
`C.
`Fee For Inter Partes Review (37 C.F.R. § 42.15 (a))
`The Director is hereby authorized to charge deposit account no. 02-4550 for
`
`the fee specified by 37 C.F.R. § 42.15, along with any additional fees required.
`
`D. Word Count Certification (37 C.F.R. § 42.24)
`Certification of the compliance with the word count limit set forth in 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.24(a)(1)(i) is provided in the attached Certificate of Compliance with
`
`Type-Volume Limits.
`
`E. Grounds For Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
`Petitioners certify that the 482 patent is available for inter partes review, and
`
`that Petitioners are not barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review
`
`challenging the patent claims on the grounds identified in this Petition.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`II. CHALLENGE AND RELIEF REQUESTED (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))
`Petitioners request inter partes review of claims 1-3, 5-6, 12-14, 16-17, and
`
`28 of the 482 patent, and request that the challenged claims be cancelled as
`
`unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
`
`Petitioners rely on the following prior art as part of their Sec. 103 challenge
`
`combinations, as well as other background prior art:
`
`1.
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 5,392,037, “Method and Apparatus for Encoding and
`
`Decoding” (“Kato”), (provided as Ex. 1002), which was issued February 21, 1995
`
`and is prior art under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(a) and (b); and
`
`2.
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 5,243,629, “Multi-Subcarrier Modulation For HDTV
`
`Transmission” (“Wei”), (provided as Ex. 1004), which was issued Sep. 7, 1993 and
`
`is prior art under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(a) and (b).
`
`This Petition is supported by the Declaration of Dr. Robert L. Stevenson
`
`(“Stevenson Dec.” or “Stevenson Declaration,” Ex. 1005).
`
`Additional prior art cited throughout this Petition, including admitted prior
`
`art, is presented as evidence of the state of the art. A list of evidence relied on in
`
`this petition is set forth in the LIST OF EXHIBITS on pg. viii.
`
`The remaining information regarding Petitioner’s “Identification of
`
`Challenge” under 37 CFR § 42.104(b) is specifically set forth beginning at Section
`
`V, below.
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`
`III. BACKGROUND AND STATE OF THE ART
`The 482 patent relates to methods and apparatus for compression using
`
`entropy encoding on quantized data. In particular the 482 patent uses unequal
`
`levels of error coding for different subsets of a larger quantized data set. The
`
`background of the 482 patent admits that compression techniques such as
`
`transform-based compression were known to those skilled in the art, as were
`
`quantization techniques, entropy coding and decoding. The background also
`
`admits that using “Unequal Error Protection (UEP)” was also known to those of
`
`skill in the art. Nonetheless, the 482 patent claims the combination of these
`
`techniques into its claimed methods and its corresponding computer readable
`
`memory for performing those methods. Stevenson Dec., ¶ 24.
`
`The claims were allowed under pre-KSR rules after the patent owner made
`
`amendments to all independent claims in response to the first Office action. In
`
`view of the previously uncited art relied on in this Petition, however, the claims are
`
`unpatentable and should be cancelled.
`
`A. Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art
`
`Entropy Coding Is Admitted Prior Art
`There were a number of entropy coding techniques that were already well-
`
`known prior to the 482 patent application. As noted in the 482 patent, prior art
`
`entropy coding uses variable length coding to reduce the number of bits used to
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`represent a data set. It accomplishes this by using variable length code words to
`
`represent symbols, with shorter code words for the most commonly occurring
`
`symbols. The most common entropy coding techniques are Huffman coding and
`
`arithmetic coding, with the main difference being that Huffman codes use an
`
`integer number of bits, while arithmetic codes can produce fractional numbers of
`
`bits. Stevenson Dec., ¶ 25.
`
`The patent acknowledges that all of this was already known to those of skill
`
`in the art:
`
`As known to those skilled in the art, entropy coding reduces the
`number of bits required to represent a data set by using variable
`length coding in a manner which exploits the statistical probabilities
`of various symbols in the data set. For example, entropy coding
`assigns shorter code words to those symbols which occur frequently,
`while longer code words are assigned to those symbols which occur
`less frequently. A number of different entropy coding approaches
`have been developed including Huffman coding which represents
`the data symbols using code words that each have a length
`consisting of an integer number of bits, and arithmetic coding which
`is capable of producing code words whose length is a fractional
`number of bits. Entropy coding is completely reversible so that no
`additional distortion is introduced beyond that due to the quantization
`process.
`
`482 patent, 4:36-50 (emphases added). See Stevenson Dec., ¶¶ 25-26.
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`
`Transforming Data Before Encoding Is Admitted Prior Art
`There were a number of known examples of transforming data before
`
`encoding prior to the 482 application, as the 482 patent states:
`
`A common approach to image compression, called transform-based
`compression or transform coding, involves three primary steps,
`namely, a transform step, a quantization step, and an encoding step.
`See, for example, an article entitled “High-Resolution Still Picture
`Compression” by M. V. Wickerhauser dated Apr. 19, 1992…
`Accordingly, a number of image transforms have been developed,
`including the Fourier transform, the discrete cosine transform and the
`wavelet transform.
`
`482 patent, 2:11-25 (emphasis added). See Stevenson Dec., ¶ 27. See also Ex.
`
`1006, M. V. Wickerhauser, “High-Resolution Still Picture Compression,” dated
`
`Apr. 19, 1992.
`
` Quantizing Transformed Data Before
`Entropy Encoding Is Admitted Prior Art
`Additionally, quantizing transformed data, including quantizing such data
`
`for subsequent entropy coding, was also well known, as the 482 patent also
`
`acknowledges:
`
`As known to those skilled in the art, a variety of factors contribute to
`the choice of the actual quantization intervals, such as the desired
`compression ratio, the statistical distribution of the coefficient values,
`the manner in which the quantized coefficient values will be encoded,
`
`7
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`and the distortion metric used to measure image degradation. When
`the quantized coefficients will be entropy-coded, mean squared error
`can be (approximately) minimized by using uniform quantization
`intervals. See R. C. Wood, “On Optimum Quantization”, IEEE
`Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 15, pp. 248-52 (1969).
`
`482 patent, 3:36-46 (emphases added). See Stevenson Dec., ¶ 28. See also Ex.
`
`1007, R. C. Wood, “On Optimum Quantization,” IEEE Transactions on
`
`Information Theory, Vol. 15 (1969).
`
`
`
`Providing Unequal Error Protection (UEP) To
`Subsets Varying In Importance Is Admitted Prior Art
`Also, the idea of applying unequal error protection (UEP) to subsets of data
`
`having unequal importance was also already well-known:
`
`As known to those skilled in the art, one variant of channel coding
`uses an approach called Unequal Error Protection (UEP) which
`separates a data set into several subsets and provides different levels
`of error protection for each subset by varying the amount of
`redundancy for each subset. The rationale for UEP is that different
`subsets of a data set may vary in importance. The most important
`data may require correction of virtually all bit errors, whereas some
`higher level of bit errors may be acceptable in less important data.
`
`482 patent, 5:34-46 (emphasis added). See Stevenson Dec., ¶ 29.
`
`8
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`Dividing Code Words Into A Prefix
`And A Suffix Field Is Admitted Prior Art
`Finally, the 482 patent further acknowledges that splitting a code word into
`
`
`
`prefix and suffix fields was known in the art:
`
`As known to those skilled in the art, a variety of proposed codes can
`be separated into a prefix and suffix fields as described above. See,
`for example, E. R. Fiala and D. H. Greene, “Data Compression with
`Finite Windows,” Communications of the ACM, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp.
`490-505 (1989).
`
`482 patent, 16:28-32 (emphasis added). See Stevenson Dec., ¶ 30. See also Ex.
`
`1008, E. R. Fiala and D. H. Greene, “Data Compression with Finite Windows,”
`
`Communications of the ACM, Vol. 32, No. 4 (1989).
`
`The patent goes on to state that “the proposed codes have not previously
`
`been separated in order to provide error resiliency as provided by the method and
`
`apparatus of the present invention.” 482 patent, 16:33-35. As shown below in the
`
`discussion of the Kato prior art, this is simply not the case. See Stevenson Dec., ¶¶
`
`30-31.
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE 482 PATENT
`A. The 482 Patent Combines Known Techniques
`For Entropy Coding And Unequal Error Protection
`In the preferred embodiment, the 482 patent discusses employing known
`
`techniques for transforming and quantizing image data. This is done to provide
`
`9
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`fewer unique coefficients to represent the data before encoding, storing and/or
`
`transmitting the resulting quantized data using the techniques described below.
`
`See, generally, 482 patent, 9:30 – 13:3; Stevenson Dec., ¶ 32.
`
`A block diagram purporting to show an encoder implementing the claimed
`
`combination of an entropy encoder with unequal error protection is illustrated in
`
`Figure 2 of the 482 patent (see portion of Fig. 2, below):
`
`
`
`Figure 2 includes steps for entropy encoding: a) “quantized coefficients using split
`
`field coding” (35) and b) “run length values” (37), and applying unequal error
`
`protection to the encoded data (38), wherein, e.g., “encoded run lengths” and
`
`“prefix fields” have “higher error protection” and “suffix fields” have “lower … or
`
`no error protection.” See Stevenson Dec., ¶ 33.
`
`10
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`The 482 patent describes “split field coding” as the generation of a code
`
`word that includes a first portion (which the patent calls a “prefix field”) and a
`
`second portion (which the patent calls a “suffix field”).
`
`According to the present invention, an entropy encoder 16 and, more
`preferably, code word generating means 26 generates a plurality of
`code words which are representative of the quantized significant
`coefficients. Accordingly, the plurality of code words effectively
`represent the quantized image data. Each code word includes at least
`a first portion (hereinafter termed a “prefix field”) and an
`associated second portion (hereinafter termed a “suffix field”).
`
`Id., 13:36-43 (emphases added). See Stevenson Dec., ¶¶ 32-34.
`
`These prefix fields contain information “representative of a predetermined
`
`characteristic” of their corresponding suffix fields, including information
`
`representative of the length of the corresponding suffix field, e.g., the number of
`
`bits for the suffix field:
`
`Consequently, even though the suffix fields are not error protected or
`are only provided with a relatively low level of error protection, the
`method and apparatus of the present invention can correctly
`determine the length of the suffix field of a code word even if there
`should be of [sic] one or more bit errors within the said suffix field,
`provided that the associated prefix field is decoded correctly, i.e.,
`without the occurrence of a bit error.
`
`11
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`482 patent, 7:18-25 (emphases added); see generally, id., Abstract; 7:8-10,
`
`15-17; 13:56-63; and 15:47-57. See Stevenson Dec., ¶ 35.
`
`The 482 patent states that, as a result of this split field coding, even if the
`
`suffix fields are provided with a “lower level of error protection” (see, e.g., 482
`
`patent, 7:30-40), the effect of any errors in a given suffix field will be minimized,
`
`and will not carry forward to other code words (assuming that the prefix field with
`
`which that suffix field is associated is decoded correctly):
`
`Consequently, if the prefix field of a code word is decoded correctly,
`that is, without the occurrence of bit error, the method and apparatus
`of the present invention can correctly determine the length of the
`associated suffix field and can also correctly determine the range of
`coefficient values to be represented by the associated suffix field. As
`a result, the associated suffix field will exhibit resilience to errors in
`two respects. First, one or more bit errors within the associated
`suffix field shall not result in a loss of code word synchronization
`but, instead, the effects of those bit errors shall be isolated to that
`single code word. Second, the misdecoded coefficient value resulting
`from one or more bit errors within the associated suffix field shall
`be constrained to that contiguous range of coefficient values
`represented by the prefix field which corresponds to the range of the
`associated superbin.
`Id., 15:61-16:9 (emphases added). See Stevenson Dec., ¶ 36.
`
`12
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`The 482 patent further describes an embodiment in which unequal error
`
`protection can be provided by storing the prefix fields using a higher level of error
`
`protection than is used (if any is used) for the suffix fields:
`
`[T]he run length code words and the prefix fields of the quantized
`coefficient code words can be stored in a first data block 66 defined
`by a storage medium 18, such as a magnetic disk storage which is
`error protected as shown in FIG. 6. In addition, the respective suffix
`fields of the quantized coefficient code words can be stored in a
`second data block 68 defined by a storage medium which includes a
`reduced level of error protection or no error protection.
`
`482 patent, 17:15-23 (emphasis added). See Stevenson Dec., ¶ 37.
`
`The 482 patent also describes an embodiment in which unequal error
`
`protection is provided by transmitting prefix fields over a first data link that is error
`
`protected, and by transmitting the suffix fields over a second data link that is not
`
`(or that is protected “to a lesser degree”):
`
`[T]he error resilient method and apparatus of the present invention can
`include a transmitter 20 which transmits the respective run length
`code words and the prefix fields of the quantized coefficient code
`words via a first data link 22 which is error protected, and which
`transmits the respective suffix fields of the quantized coefficient code
`words via a second data link 24 which is not error protected or is
`error protected to a lesser degree than the first data link.
`
`Id., 17:28-35 (emphases added).
`
`13
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`Thus, the 482 patent combines what it acknowledges are known techniques
`
`for entropy coding quantized image data (482 patent, 4:36-39) with known
`
`“unequal error protection techniques” (id., 6:35-36) by using another known
`
`technique which the patent refers to as “split field coding” (id. at 13:50).
`
`According to the patent, this “isolates the effects of a bit error to a single code
`
`word” (id., 6:38-39). However, this combination of admittedly prior art techniques
`
`was, itself, taught in the Kato reference, which forms the primary basis for this
`
`Petition. See Stevenson Dec., ¶¶ 38-39.
`
`B.
`Procedural History Of The 482 Patent
`The application that issued as the 482 patent was filed April 17, 1996. The
`
`claims were amended in response to the first Office action to “more clearly define
`
`the invention,” and to “further patentably distinguish the claimed invention over
`
`the cited reference.” Ex. 1003, 482 file history, Jan. 23, 1998 Amendment, pp.
`
`413-414.1 In the amendments, applicants added additional steps to the method and
`
`CRM claims, independent claims 1, 12, and 28. The amendments to claim 1 are
`
`exemplary, wherein applicants added the underlined language:
`
`
`1 Citations to page numbers for this exhibit, Exhibit 1003, are to the page
`
`numbers added at the bottom of the pages in the format Page X of Y, and not to the
`
`original page numbers from the various documents in the file history.
`
`14
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01179
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,482
`wherein said first portion generating step comprises the step of
`including information within the first portion that is representative of
`a predetermined characteristic of the associated second portion.
`
`Id., p. 410.
`
`The claims were subsequently allowed without further explanation in a
`
`Notice of Allowance dated March 30, 1998. Id., Notice of Allowance, p. 425.
`
`C. Representative Claims
`The 482 patent contains five independent claims, three of which are
`
`challenged here.
`
`Independent claim 1 is representative:
`
`1. An error resilient method of encoding data comprising the
`steps of:
`generating a plurality of code words representative of
`respective portions of the data, wherein each code word
`comprises a first portion and an associated second portion,
`and wherein said code word generating step c
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
