Filed on behalf of TQ Delta, LLC
`By: Peter J. McAndrews
`Thomas J. Wimbiscus
`Scott P. McBride
`Christopher M. Scharff
`McAndrews, Held & Malloy, Ltd.
`500 W. Madison St., 34th Floor
`Chicago, IL 60661
`Tel: 312-775-8000
`Fax: 312-775-8100
`E-mail: pmcandrews@mcandrews-ip.com
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`DISH NETWORK L.L.C.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`
`TQ DELTA, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_____________
`
`Case IPR2016-01469
`Patent No. 9,094,268
`_____________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`
`
`I. 
`
`II. 
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 
`
`OVERVIEW OF U.S. PATENT No. 9,094,268 ............................................. 5 
`
`A.  Background of the Technology .............................................................. 5 
`
`B.  The ’268 Patent ....................................................................................... 8 
`
`III.  OVERVIEW OF THE CITED REFERENCES ............................................ 10 
`
`A.  Bowie .................................................................................................... 10 
`
`B.  Morelli .................................................................................................. 14 
`
`C.  The 1995 ADSL Standard .................................................................... 18 
`
`IV.  LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................... 21 
`
`V. 
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 21 
`
`A.  Legal Overview .................................................................................... 21 
`
`B. 
`
`Proposed Constructions ........................................................................ 23 
`
`1. 
`
`2. 
`
`3. 
`
`“Low Power Mode,” “Transceiver,” and “Data” ..................... 23 
`
`“Maintaining Synchronization” ................................................ 24 
`
`“Parameter Associated with the Full Power Mode” ................ 28 
`
`VI.  PETITIONER HAS FAILED TO SHOW THAT THE CLAIMS OF
`THE ’268 PATENT ARE UNPATENTABLE ............................................. 30 
`
`A.  Petitioner Has Failed To Establish That the Combination of
`Bowie, 1995 ADSL Standard, and Morelli Would “Receive[]
`Data During the Low Power Mode” or that “the Receiver
`Portion Remains in the Full Power Mode” While the
`Transmitter Enters Low Power Mode (All Claims) ............................ 30 
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`1.  Morelli Does Not Provide Enabling Disclosure of
`Keeping a Receiver in “Full Power Mode” During a
`Transmitter’s Sleep Mode, Much Less Any Disclosure
`that the Receiver “Receives Data” In Such a Mode ................. 31 
`
`
`
`2. 
`
`Bowie Teaches Away From Petitioner’s Proposed
`Combination with Morelli ......................................................... 35 
`
`B. 
`
`Petitioner Failed To Establish That Bowie, Morelli, and the 1995
`ADSL Standard Render Obvious “Maintaining
`Synchronization” During Low Power Mode (Claims 2, 12) ............... 39 
`
`1. 
`
`2. 
`
`3. 
`
`the Type of
`the References Teach
`None of
`Synchronization Required by the ‘268 Patent—Morelli’s
`“Synchronization Bits” In a Wireless Multi-Point System
`Are Not Compatible with Bowie or the 1995 ADSL
`Standard .................................................................................... 40 
`
`None of the Cited References Teach “Maintaining
`Synchronization” ....................................................................... 43 
`
`Petitioner Failed To Provide Any Non-Conclusory or
`Non-Hindsight Explanation as To Why or How A
`POSITA Would
`Have
`Combined Morelli’s
`Synchronization with the Bowie Device .................................. 46 
`
`4.  Modifying Bowie to Maintain Synchronization in the
`Low Power Mode As Petitioner Proposes Would Render
`Bowie Inoperable For Its Intended Use .................................... 47 
`
`C. 
`
`Petitioner Fails To Establish That “Storing, During the Low
`Power Mode, At Least One Parameter Associated With [a / the]
`Full Power Mode” Was Obvious Over Bowie and Morelli
`(Claims 4, 14) ...................................................................................... 49 
`
`1. 
`
`2. 
`
`Neither Bowie nor Morelli Disclose This Limitation ............... 50 
`
`Storing Parameters Associated with the Full Power Mode
`Parameters Would Have Been Useless and Incompatible
`in Bowie .................................................................................... 56 
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`
`3. 
`
`Bowie Would Have Led A POSITA Away From Storing
`Parameters Associated with the Full Power Mode to
`Resume Full Power Mode Faster .............................................. 58 
`
`VII.  CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 60 
`
`iii
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 2014
`
`
`Exhibit 2012 Declaration of Douglas A. Chrissan, Ph.D. for Inter Partes Review
`No. IPR2016-01469
`
`Exhibit 2013 May 3, 2017 Deposition Transcript of Hoarty (IPR2016-01469)
`
`IEEE 100 The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms,
`Seventh Edition
`
`Exhibit 2015 Curriculum Vitae of Douglas A. Chrissan, Ph.D.
`
`Exhibit 2016 Merriam Webster Dictionary (10th ed. 2001) at p. 700
`
`Exhibit 2017 Dictionary of Networking, Third Ed. (1999) at p. 360
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`
`
`In its Petition, Dish Network L.L.C. (“Dish” or “Petitioner”) primarily
`
`asserted invalidity theories that were so technologically strained that Dish could
`
`point to no support for them other than its expert’s bare “say so.” Dish’s first two
`
`proposed invalidity Grounds were based on a theory that U.S. Pat. No. 5,956,323
`
`to Bowie (“Bowie”) discloses all or most of the features of the claimed low power
`
`mode for a transceiver, where the transceiver’s receiver remains at full power
`
`and/or continues to receive data during the low power mode. According to Dish,
`
`even though Bowie expressly states that its receiver is turned off during low power
`
`mode, Bowie still satisfies the ’268 patent claims because it has a very different
`
`dataless signal “detector” that operates during low power mode. The Board
`
`correctly rejected Dish’s arguments in this regard, finding no basis for them.
`
`The Board, however, found enough to institute review based on Dish’s third-
`
`and fourth-tier arguments—alleged obviousness of claims 1, 2, 11, and 12 in view
`
`of Bowie, U.S. Pat. No. 6,236,674 to Morelli (“Morelli”), and the ANSI T1.413-
`
`1995 (“the 1995 ADSL Standard”) (Ground 3) and alleged obviousness of claims
`
`4, 14, 16, and 18 in view of Bowie and Morelli (Ground 4). In each of those
`
`Grounds, Petitioner argued that Morelli alternatively provides disclosure of certain
`
`claim limitations.
`
` Petitioner’s back-up Grounds, however, are based on
`
`fundamental mischaracterizations of the references.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`#1: Petitioner incorrectly alleges that Morelli teaches keeping a receiver in
`
`“active” mode during a transceiver’s low power mode to “receive[] data during
`
`the low power mode” (claims 1, 2, 4) or to “remain[] in the full power mode”
`
`(claims 11, 12, 14, 16, 18). In fact, the entire point of Morelli is the exact opposite.
`
`Morelli discloses a method for having both its transmitter and receiver enter “sleep
`
`mode” in order to maximize power savings, while still knowing when to resume
`
`full power mode. Petitioner hangs its theory on a single “catch-all” boilerplate
`
`sentence in Morelli stating that either its transmitter or receiver could alternatively
`
`be kept “active” at all times. Morelli, however, provides no enabling disclosure of
`
`such an embodiment beyond that single sentence. And it certainly does not
`
`disclose that its receiver necessarily continues to receive data in that embodiment
`
`as required by claims 1, 2, 4, and 18.
`
`#2: Petitioner then goes on to incorrectly allege that it would have been
`
`obvious, in view of Morelli’s boilerplate sentence, to similarly keep Bowie’s
`
`receiver in “active mode” in order to continue to receive data and resume the
`
`transceiver’s overall full power mode faster. But in reality, a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art (“POSITA”) would have been led away from doing so in Bowie for
`
`several reasons. Foremost, keeping Bowie’s receiver active would defeat the point
`
`of Bowie’s low power mode in the first place—Bowie specifically teaches away
`
`from keeping a receiver active during low power mode because the receiver is one
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`of the significant contributors to power consumption. Keeping Bowie’s receiver
`
`active would in fact render Bowie unsuitable for its intended purpose.
`
`Additionally, a POSITA would not make such a modification to Bowie because it
`
`is contrary to Bowie’s stated goals. Bowie discloses a transceiver that performs re-
`
`initialization upon coming out of low power mode for the sake of insuring reliable
`
`transmission parameters upon the resumption of data transmission. In contrast, the
`
`inventions of the ’268 patent do not re-initialize upon coming out of low power
`
`mode for the sake of a speedy resumption of data transmission (but at the risk of
`
`using parameters that will result in errored transmissions).
`
`#3: In addressing claims 2 and 12, Petitioner illogically cobbles together
`
`Bowie, Morelli’s catch-all sentence regarding keeping a receiver “active,” and
`
`Morelli’s
`
`separate disclosure
`
`that
`
`incoming data packets will have
`
`“synchronization bits,” to purportedly satisfy the requirement in those claims of
`
`“maintaining synchronization” during low power mode. But critically, Morelli’s
`
`synchronization bits would not even work for that purpose—they are for
`
`synchronization tied to individual data packets in a wireless network, which is a
`
`completely different type of synchronization.
`
`#4: Yet another problem with Petitioner’s obviousness theory for claims 2
`
`and 12
`
`is
`
`that none of
`
`the
`
`references actually disclose maintaining
`
`synchronization—Morelli only discloses re-initializing synchronization. Petitioner
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`attempts to add this missing claim element to Bowie and Morelli out of thin air,
`
`something that is legally impermissible. And even if were possible to use
`
`Morelli’s synchronization bits to maintain synchronization, making such a
`
`combination or modification to Bowie would render Bowie even further unsuitable
`
`for its intended purpose of reducing power consumption.
`
`#5: Lastly, with respect to claims 4 and 14, Petitioner’s argument that
`
`Bowie discloses “storing, in the low power mode at least one parameter associated
`
`with the full power mode” has no technological basis in fact. Bowie specifically
`
`discloses storing only “loop characteristics.” Such loop characteristics do not
`
`encompass all conceivable transmission or initialization parameters as Petitioner
`
`wrongly argues (ignoring the word “loop”)—loop characteristics are narrowly
`
`directed to physical properties of the communication loop, which are normally
`
`exchanged during a very early phase of modem initialization. Loop characteristics
`
`are not “parameter[s] associated with the full power mode” because they are
`
`independent of any power mode. Indeed, because of how Bowie operated, storing
`
`parameters associated with the full power mode would have been useless and
`
`would not have worked.
`
`As such, while the Board accepted as true several unsupported factual
`
`statements by Petitioner and its expert for purposes of institution, those statements
`
`are incorrect and contradicted by the asserted references themselves. The Board
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`did not have the benefit of a complete record with respect to how a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) would have understood the teachings of the
`
`cited references. Patent Owner respectfully submits that the additional details and
`
`technical explanations from Dr. Douglas Chrissan, an expert in DSL technology,
`
`along with further legal support, show that a POSITA would not have found the
`
`claims of the ’268 patent obvious under the instituted Grounds. Patent Owner
`
`respectfully requests that the Board issue a Final Written Decision upholding the
`
`patentability of claims 1, 2, 4, 11, 12, 14, 16, and 18 of the ’268 patent.
`
`II. OVERVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,094,268
`The ’268 patent, entitled “Multicarrier Transmission System with Low
`
`Power Sleep Mode and Rapid-On Capability,” issued on July 28, 2015, to Patent
`
`Owner TQ Delta, LLC. The inventions of the ’268 patent represented a significant
`
`improvement in the field of multicarrier transmission systems and multicarrier
`
`transceivers. In particular, the ’268 patent teaches a transceiver that saves energy
`
`by operating in a low power mode, but that can go rapidly from the low power
`
`mode back to a full power mode, without needing to reinitialize the transceiver,
`
`when it is needed to transmit or receive data. See Ex. 2012 at ¶ 15.
`
`A. Background of the Technology
`Multicarrier transmission systems provide high speed data links between
`
`communication points. See Ex. 1001 at 1:42–43; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 16. A digital
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`subscriber loop (“DSL”) system is an exemplary multicarrier transmission system
`
`that is used to provide high-speed data communication over the same local
`
`subscriber loop that is used to provide telephone service to a subscriber. See Ex.
`
`1001 at 1:42–52; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 16. In a DSL system, the overall communication
`
`bandwidth of the communication channel between the subscriber and the central
`
`office is divided into a number of separate sub-channels or carriers, e.g., 256 sub-
`
`channels. See Ex. 1001 at 1:53–60; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 16. A transceiver divides data to
`
`be transmitted into groups of bits, allocates each group of bits to a sub-channel,
`
`and modulates each group of bits onto its respective sub-channel. See Ex. 1001 at
`
`2:1–4; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 16.
`
`Prior to exchanging data over the channel, the DSL transceivers first go
`
`through an initialization process. See Ex. 1001 at 3:11–13; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 17. The
`
`initialization process includes several distinct phases. The first phase involves
`
`synchronizing the timing references of the transceivers. The transceivers
`
`synchronize their timing by exchanging information to synchronize and “lock” the
`
`timing of their respective clocks. Ex. 2012 at ¶ 18. This is called “timing
`
`synchronization” or “clock synchronization.” Id.
`
`After timing synchronization, the initialization process goes into its next
`
`phase, during which the transceivers determine characteristics of the wire loop
`
`connecting the transceivers, i.e., loop characteristics. Ex. 2012 at ¶¶ 19, 61.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`Attenuation is an example of a loop characteristic. Id. at ¶ 19; Ex. 2013 at 23:19-
`
`
`
`24, 35:20-36:2. Attenuation is the reduction in signal power a signal experiences
`
`as it travels across the wire from the originating transceiver to the destination
`
`transceiver. Ex. 2012 at ¶ 19. Attenuation is a function of different physical
`
`characteristics of the wire loop, such as the length, diameter, and composition. Id.
`
`Loop background noise is another example of a loop characteristic. Id.
`
`Once the loop characteristics are determined, initialization continues with a
`
`sub-channel characterization and analysis phase.
`
` During this phase, the
`
`transceivers determine equalization settings and echo canceller settings and
`
`measure signal to noise ratios (“SNR”) on a sub-channel basis. Id. at ¶ 20. SNR is
`
`a function of loop characteristics such as line noise levels and attenuation. Id.
`
`In
`
`the
`
`last phase of
`
`initialization,
`
`the sub-channel characterization
`
`information, including SNR, is used to determine transmission parameters that are
`
`used for data transmission. See id.; Ex. 1001 at 3:10-20. Examples of
`
`transmission parameters include transmission and reception data rates, fine gain
`
`parameters, and bit allocation parameters. Transmission parameters are specific to
`
`and conform to the communication protocol used for data transmission. See Ex.
`
`2012 at ¶¶ 62, 93. The transceivers then go through the step of exchanging the
`
`transmission parameters. Id. at ¶ 20.
`
`When initialization has finished, the transceivers can start exchanging data
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`using the transmission parameters. Id. at ¶ 21.
`
`
`
`The ’268 Patent
`
`B.
`The ’268 Patent recognizes that prior art multicarrier transceivers were
`
`commonly maintained in the “on” state because of their complexity and because
`
`they had to remain ready to immediately transmit or receive data. See Ex. 1001 at
`
`2:60–63; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 22. In this “on” state, both the transmitter and receiver
`
`portion of a prior art transceiver remained fully functional at all times. As a result,
`
`the multicarrier transceivers wasted a significant amount of power and had short
`
`life spans. See Ex. 1001 at 2:63–68; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 22. Although low power modes
`
`(in which data communications are temporarily suspended) were known in the
`
`prior art, they were unsatisfactory because, after exiting the low power mode, the
`
`transceivers still had to go through the lengthy re-initialization process to
`
`determine parameters necessary for full data transmission. See Ex. 1001 at 3:27–
`
`29; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 22. The initialization process could take, for example, “tens of
`
`seconds.”
`
` This was unacceptable because users
`
`typically desired near-
`
`instantaneous response for data communications. See Ex. 1001 at 3:27–29; Ex.
`
`2012 at ¶¶ 21-22. This inability to rapidly return to full power mode meant that the
`
`prior multicarrier transceivers were always kept “on” even in the absence of data
`
`communications, resulting in high power consumption.
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`The inventions of the ’268 patent provide a low power mode that improves
`
`the operation of multicarrier transceivers. The inventions allow the multicarrier
`
`transceiver to enter a low power mode (and thus save power) while maintaining a
`
`framework that enabled rapid return to full data communication capability. See
`
`Ex. 1001 at 10:6–12:49. The inventive framework for rapid-on capability includes
`
`maintaining synchronization between first and second transceivers by transmitting
`
`or receiving a synchronization signal while in the low power mode, reducing
`
`power consumption of at least one portion of a transmitter, and/or storing, while in
`
`the low power mode, parameters used for full power mode data transmission (such
`
`as fine gain or bit allocation parameters). See Ex. 2012 at ¶ 23.
`
`Storing parameters associated with full-power mode and maintaining
`
`synchronization in the low power mode allows the claimed multicarrier transceiver
`
`to rapidly emerge from the low power mode and resume full data transmission
`
`immediately without the necessity of performing time-consuming steps to re-
`
`initialize the transceivers. Id. at 10:6–12:49; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 23.
`
`Thus, the claims of the ’268 patent address the deficiencies of prior art
`
`transceivers that implement a low power mode by eliminating the need for a
`
`constant “on” mode while still providing the desired near-instantaneous response.
`
`As discussed below, none of Bowie, Morelli, and the 1995 ADSL Standard teaches
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`or suggests the novel systems and methods of the ’268 patent, and, in fact, those
`
`references disclose systems that operate very differently.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE CITED REFERENCES
`A. Bowie
`Bowie relates to a power conservation method for an asymmetric digital
`
`subscriber line (“ADSL”) system that transmits wide-bandwidth modulated data
`
`over a two-wire loop using high frequency carrier signals. Ex. 1004 at 1:4-8, 1:23-
`
`25; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 25. Bowie’s system differs significantly from the inventive
`
`system of the ’268 patent because, among other things, it shuts down all the data
`
`receiving, data transmission, and signal processing circuitry in its disclosed low
`
`power mode, requires initialization after coming out of a low power mode, does
`
`not store bit allocation or fine gain parameters in a low power mode, and does not
`
`maintain synchronization in the low power mode.
`
`As shown below, the Bowie system uses ADSL units (e.g., modems) that are
`
`connected by a wire loop 120. Each ADSL unit includes signal processing
`
`electronics 111, data transmit circuitry 112, data receive circuitry 113, and a
`
`resume signal detector 115 (which can be “a 16kHz AC signal detector 115 that
`
`employs conventional frequency detection techniques”). See Ex. 1004 at 5:52-55;
`
`Ex. 2012 at ¶ 25.
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`
`
`
`Bowie explains that, prior to data being sent between two ADSL units over
`
`the loop, loop characteristics, such as “loop loss,” (i.e., attenuation) must be
`
`determined and exchanged. See Ex. 1004 at 4:64-5:3. Bowie describes this
`
`exchange of loop characteristics as “handshaking.” See id. at 5:3-5; Ex. 2012 at ¶
`
`26.
`
`Bowie further teaches that when an ADSL unit receives a shut-down signal,
`
`it enters a low power mode in which the signal processing, data transmit, and data
`
`receive circuitry all shut down; only the resume signal detector remains
`
`operational. See Ex. 1004 at 5:17-28. In the low power mode, the loop in Bowie is
`
`“in an inactive state.” Id. at 5:28-29; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 27. As Bowie explains,
`
`shutting down the transmitting, receiving, and signal processing circuitry, i.e., most
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`of the transceiver’s circuitry, saves a significant amount of power – up to five watts
`
`per loop. See Ex. 1005 at 2:1-6. Bowie further teaches that, upon entering the low
`
`power mode, the ADSL units may “store[] in memory 117 characteristics of the
`
`loop 220 that were determined by . . . handshaking.” Ex. 1004 at 5:17-28. Such
`
`loop characteristics would include things like attenuation, i.e., “loop loss.” Ex.
`
`2012 at ¶¶ 19, 28. Importantly, and unlike the inventions of the ’268 patent, Bowie
`
`does not teach storing parameters associated with a full power mode, e.g., bit
`
`allocation or fine gain parameters, in the low power mode. Id. at ¶ 28.
`
`Upon receipt of a “resume signal” at the resume signal detector 115, the
`
`Bowie unit “returns the signal processing 111, transmitting 112, and receiving 113
`
`circuitry to full power mode.” Id. at 5:60-62; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 29. The stored “loop
`
`transmission characteristics . . . are retrieved from memory 117 and used to enable
`
`data transmission to resume quickly by reducing the time needed to determine loop
`
`transmission characteristics.”1 Ex. 1004 at 5:62-66; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 29. In this way,
`
`Bowie teaches using the stored loop characteristics as a starting point for
`
`
`1 Bowie uses the terms “loop characteristics,” “electronic characteristics of the
`
`particular wire loop,” “loop transmission characteristics,” and “loop characteristic
`
`parameters” interchangeably. Ex. 1004 at 5:1-3, 5:23-25, 5:62-66, 6:25-33; Ex.
`
`2012 at ¶ 26.
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`determining the transmission parameters that are necessary for returning to full
`
`data transmission after coming out of the low power mode. Ex. 2012 at ¶ 29; Ex.
`
`1005 at Fig. 3 (step 306), 6:26-42 (describing additional handshaking after coming
`
`out of low power mode).
`
`According to Bowie, the additional handshaking (i.e., reinitialization) that
`
`occurs before returning to full data transmission includes a re-determination of
`
`loop characteristics to account for changes in loop characteristics that occurred
`
`while the system was in the low power mode. See Ex. 2012 at ¶ 30; Ex. 1004 at
`
`5:66-6:1 (“After resumption of full power mode, additional handshaking between
`
`ADSL units 232 and 242 may occur.”); id. at 6:37-41 (“Handshaking information
`
`may be required [after coming out of low power mode] where . . . loop
`
`characteristics have changed due, for example, to temperature-dependent changes
`
`in
`
`loop resistance.”); Ex. 2013 at 52:20-19.
`
` Re-determining
`
`the
`
`loop
`
`characteristics after coming out of low power mode is required to ensure “reliable
`
`data communication between the units.” Ex. 1004 at 6:36-37; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 30.
`
`Accordingly, in contrast to the inventions of the ’268 patent, Bowie teaches
`
`that re-initialization (i.e., re-determining the loop characteristics and exchanging
`
`handshaking information) must occur when the transceiver comes out of the low
`
`power mode. See Ex. 1004 at 5:62-6:2, 6:35-43; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 31.
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`Bowie also differs from the inventions of the ’268 patent in that it does not
`
`transmit or receive a synchronization signal when in the low power mode. Ex.
`
`2012 at ¶ 33. Indeed, Bowie cannot transmit or receive a synchronization signal to
`
`maintain synchronization when in the low power mode because all of the
`
`transceiver circuitry except for the resume signal detector is shut off in a low
`
`power mode in order to save power. See Ex. 1004 at 5:25-28.
`
`B. Morelli
`Morelli discloses a multicarrier transmission system that differs significantly
`
`from both the inventions of the ’268 patent and Bowie. Whereas Bowie and the
`
`’268 patent disclose point-to-point, wired ADSL systems, Morelli, relates to a
`
`different technology—mobile devices in a wireless network. See Ex. 1005 at 1:11-
`
`15. That is a multi-point technology. See id. at 1:16-30 (wireless mobile
`
`transceivers which communicate with a network), 1:34-36 (“The mobile terminals
`
`communicate through one of several base stations interconnected to the network.”
`
`Morelli’s system is illustrated below:
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`
`
`
`In Morelli, a mobile device (e.g., a mobile phone, hand-held scanning unit,
`
`mobile terminal, etc.) must be able to receive transmissions from multiple different
`
`“base stations.” Id. at 1:11-36, Fig. 10, 5:17-39. In such an environment,
`
`implementation of any low power mode involves considerations very different
`
`from those faced in point-to-point systems like the preferred embodiment of the
`
`’268 patent and Bowie.
`
`In order to enter and exit low power mode (referred to in Morelli as “sleep
`
`mode”), Morelli uses a Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI). See Ex. 1005 at
`
`Abstract; see also 3:35-59, 7:32-37, 8:32-53. During periods when any incoming
`
`signal is below a pre-determined threshold level, Morelli keeps “digital circuitry
`
`associated with the back-end circuitry of the receiver system” disabled. See id. If
`
`the RSSI signal “rises above the threshold level, the digital circuitry of the receiver
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`is enabled.” Id. at Abstract. Importantly, the receiver does not “receive” the data
`
`signal at this point—the back-end circuitry of the receiver only determines that
`
`data is “available to be received.” See id. at Abstract, 8:40-43, 8:60-9:3.
`
`In other words, each of Morelli’s mobile devices determines, on its own,
`
`when to enter and exit sleep mode based on whether data is available to be
`
`received. If a threshold signal level is incoming, then Morelli’s mobile device
`
`resumes full power mode to receive and process those incoming “data packets.”
`
`Morelli states that “[t]he data packet 45 includes, in order, a synchronization field
`
`46 including synchronizing bits for synchronizing the receiver 16 . . . .” Ex. 1005
`
`at 9:1-3. This is shown in Figure 2 of Morelli, below:
`
`
`
`Morelli’s synchronization scheme, which uses synchronization bits in each
`
`data packet to synchronize the receiver with the incoming transmission, is wholly
`
`different from the synchronization scheme of the ’268 patent. See Ex. 2012 at ¶
`
`37. Because synchronization is established upon receipt of an incoming packet,
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`synchronization never needs to be maintained. Id. This type of synchronization is
`
`necessary for Morelli’s multi-point environment in which mobile devices may
`
`receive transmissions from multiple different base stations with different clock
`
`timing. Id. It would serve no useful purpose in Morelli for a mobile device to
`
`maintain synchronization with any particular base station. Id. In contrast, in
`
`ADSL—once modems are initialized, synchronization occurs independent of the
`
`user data. Id. For example, if no user data is being received, synchronization is
`
`still maintained while the modems are in full power mode. Id.
`
`Moreover, unlike the claimed transceivers of the ’268 patent, Morelli does
`
`not disclose storing, in a low power mode, any parameters associated with a full
`
`power mode, such as fine gain or bit allocation parameters. See Ex. 2012 at ¶ 38.
`
`It would serve no useful purpose to save parameters associated with a full power
`
`mode in Morelli at least because its devices must communicate with multiple
`
`different devices and channel conditions will change as the mobile devices move
`
`with respect to the base stations.
`
`The whole purpose of Morelli is directed to a way to power down its
`
`receiver during sleep mode, and not just the transmitter, and yet still be able to
`
`quickly resume full power mode when data is ready to be received. See Ex. 1005
`
`at 3:35-5:50, 21:48-50 (“Furthermore, in the preferred embodiment, the transmitter
`
`12 and receiver 16 of the transceiver are both capable of being placed in a sleep
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`mode to reduce power consumption.”), claims 1-43 (“a receiver portion for
`
`receiving information, the receiver portion being switchable between a low power
`
`consumption mode and an active mode”); see also Ex. 2012 at ¶ 35. Morelli
`
`solved this problem with its RSSI signal. See id.
`
`At the very end of Morelli’s specification, it does include a vague boilerplate
`
`sentence that “[n]evertheless, it is equally possible to have either the transmitter 12
`
`or the receiver 16 be designed to enter a sleep mode as described herein while the
`
`other is always in an active mode.” Ex. 1005 at 21:51-54. In doing so, however,
`
`Morelli is essentially just saying that one could choose to not use his advantageous
`
`power savings method in a transceiver. See Ex. 2012 at ¶ 68. If the receiver is
`
`kept active, however, that does not mean that it will continue to receive data or
`
`maintain synchronization while the rest of the transceiver is in low power mode—
`
`it just means that Morelli’s receiver is left on at all times, even when it is not
`
`needed or receiving any data. See id. Morelli does not state any reason or
`
`advantage for doing so. See id. As such, this single sentence appears to have been
`
`added merely as an attorney-conceived “catch-all” at the end of the Morelli patent.
`
`C. The 1995 ADSL Standard
`The 1995 ADSL Standard discloses electrical characteristics of ADSL
`
`signals appearing at a network interface and the requirements for transmission
`
`between a network and customer installation. Ex. 1006 at 1; Ex. 2012 at ¶ 39.
`
`
`
`18
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Response
`IPR2016-01469 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,094,268)
`
`
`Importantly, the 1995 ADSL Standard teaches that, in the context of ADSL
`
`transceiver initialization, bit allocation and fine gain parameters are di