Patent No. 9,282,396
`
` Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`Sony Corporation,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`One-E-Way, Inc.
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01639
`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Issue Date: March 8, 2016
`
`Title: Wireless Digital Audio Music System
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 9,282,396 UNDER
`35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.100 ET SEQ.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`Submitted Electronically via the Patent Review Processing System
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`II. 
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................................ v 
`APPENDIX OF EXHIBITS ............................................................................................... vii 
`I. 
`COMPLIANCE WITH PETITION REQUIREMENTS ................................... 1 
`A.  Notice of Real Parties in Interest ................................................................... 1 
`B.  Notice of Related Matters................................................................................ 1 
`C.  Notice of Lead and Backup Counsel and Service Information ................. 1 
`D.  Grounds for Standing ...................................................................................... 2 
`E. 
`Statement of Precise Relief Requested .......................................................... 2 
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND ................................................................................... 3 
`A. 
`Brief Description of the ’396 Patent .............................................................. 3 
`B. 
`Prosecution History of the ’396 Patent ......................................................... 6 
`C. 
`State of the Prior Art ........................................................................................ 7 
`1. 
`1998 Haartsen Paper ............................................................................. 7 
`2. 
`Patent No. 6,563,892 to Haartsen ...................................................... 9 
`3. 
`The 2000 Haartsen Paper ..................................................................10 
`4. 
`The Giannakis Paper ..........................................................................10 
`III.  THE CHALLENGED ’396 PATENT ..................................................................11 
`A. 
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ..............................................................11 
`B. 
`Claim Constructions .......................................................................................11 
`C. 
`Effective Filing Date of the Challenged Claims .........................................12 
`1. 
`The 2001 Application .........................................................................14 
`2. 
`The 2003 Application .........................................................................15 
`3. 
`The 2003 Application As Filed Does Not Support the ’396
`Patent Claims. ......................................................................................17 
`Applicant’s Amendments to the 2003 Application Cannot
`Establish a 2001 or 2003 Priority Date. ...........................................18 
`
`4. 
`
`i
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`5. 
`
`IV. 
`
`July 12, 2008 is the Earliest Priority Date to Which the ’396
`Claims Are Entitled. ............................................................................19 
`SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR PETITION ...........................................................20 
`A.  Ground 1: The ’892 Patent Anticipates Claims 1-17 of the ’396
`Patent. ...............................................................................................................20 
`1. 
`The ’892 Patent Is Prior Art to the ’396 Patent. ............................20 
`2. 
`Claims 1, 6, and 9 ................................................................................21 
`Claim 1: A portable wireless digital audio system for
`a) 
`digital transmission of an original audio signal
`representation from a portable audio source to a digital
`audio headphone, said audio signal representation
`representative of audio from said portable audio source,
`said portable wireless digital audio system comprising:.............. 21 
`Claim 1: a portable digital audio spread spectrum
`transmitter configured to couple to said portable audio
`source and transmitting a unique user code bit sequence
`with said original audio signal representation in packet
`format, said digital audio spread spectrum transmitter
`comprising: .................................................................................. 22 
`Claim 1: an encoder operative to encode said original audio
`signal representation to reduce intersymbol interference and
`lowering signal detection error of said audio signal
`representation respective to said digital audio headphone
`and said digital audio spread spectrum transmitter ...................... 23 
`Claim 1: a digital modulator configured for independent
`code division multiple access (CDMA) communication
`operation wherein said portable digital audio spread
`spectrum transmitter is in direct communication with said
`digital audio headphone, said digital audio headphone
`comprising: .................................................................................. 23 
`Claim 1: a direct conversion module configured to capture
`packets and the correct bit sequence embedded in the
`received spread spectrum signal and lowering signal
`detection error through reduced intersymbol interference
`coding respective of said digital audio headphone and said
`portable digital audio spread spectrum transmitter, the
`captured packets corresponding to the unique user code bit
`sequence; ...................................................................................... 24 
`Claim 1: a digital demodulator configured for independent
`CDMA communication operation ................................................ 25 
`
`b) 
`
`c) 
`
`d) 
`
`e) 
`
`f) 
`
`ii
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`g) 
`
`h) 
`
`i) 
`j) 
`
`Claim 1: a decoder operative to decode the applied reduced
`intersymbol interference coding of said original audio
`signal representation; ................................................................... 26 
`Claim 1: a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) generating an
`audio output of said original audio signal representation;
`and ................................................................................................ 26 
`Claim 1: a module adapted to reproduce said audio output, ........ 26 
`Claim 1: wherein each user has their headphone configured
`to communicate with their own separate digital audio
`spread spectrum transmitter, said audio having been
`wirelessly transmitted from said portable audio source
`through the digital audio spread spectrum transmitter
`configured to communicate with the headphone such that
`signals not originating from said portable digital audio
`spread spectrum transmitter are inaudible while operating
`in the portable wireless digital audio spread spectrum
`transmitter spectrum. .................................................................... 27 
`Claims 2, 14, and 16 ............................................................................28 
`Claim 2: A wireless digital audio headphone comprising: a
`a) 
`portable digital audio headphone spread spectrum receiver
`configured to receive a unique user code bit sequence and
`an audio signal representation in the form of packets, said
`audio signal representation representative of audio from a
`portable audio player coupled to a mobile digital audio
`spread spectrum transmitter, said digital audio headphone
`spread spectrum receiver capable of mobile operation and
`in direct communication with the mobile digital audio
`spread spectrum transmitter; ........................................................ 28 
`Claim 2: a direct conversion module configured to capture
`packets and the correct bit sequence within the packets and
`lowering signal detection error through reduced
`intersymbol interference coding of said audio signal
`representation respective to said headphone spread
`spectrum receiver and said mobile digital audio spread
`spectrum transmitter, said packets embedded in the
`received spread spectrum signal, the captured packets
`corresponding to the unique user code; ....................................... 29 
`Claim 2: a digital demodulator configured for independent
`CDMA communication operation; .............................................. 30 
`Claim 2: a decoder operative to decode reduced
`intersymbol interference coding of said audio signal
`representation; .............................................................................. 30 
`
`3. 
`
`b) 
`
`c) 
`
`d) 
`
`iii
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`e) 
`
`f) 
`
`g) 
`
`Claim 2: a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) generating an
`audio output of said audio signal representation; and .................. 31 
`Claim 2: a module adapted to reproduce said audio output
`in response to the unique user code bit sequence being
`recognized .................................................................................... 31 
`Claim 2: wherein each user has their spread spectrum
`headphone receiver configured to communicate with their
`own separate spread spectrum transmitter, said audio
`having been wirelessly transmitted and reproduced such
`that signals not originating from the mobile digital audio
`spread spectrum transmitter, configured to communicate
`with the headphone receiver, are inaudible while operating
`in the mobile wireless digital audio spread spectrum
`transmitter spectrum. .................................................................... 31 
`Claims 3, 7, 10, and 12 ........................................................................33 
`Claim 3: The portable wireless digital audio system of
`a) 
`Claim 1, wherein said portable digital audio spread
`spectrum transmitter comprising a differential phase shift
`keying (DPSK) implementation and a digital modulator
`implementation for spread spectrum transmission. ..................... 33 
`Claims 4, 5, 8, 11, 13, 15, and 17 ......................................................33 
`Claim 4: The portable wireless digital audio system of
`a) 
`Claim 1, wherein said digital audio headphone comprising
`a differential phase shift keying (DPSK) implementation
`and a digital demodulator implementation for spread
`spectrum reception. ...................................................................... 33 
`B.  Ground 2: Claims 1-17 of the ’396 Patent Are Obvious over the
`Combination of the ’892 Patent with the Giannakis Paper .....................34 
`1. 
`The Giannakis Paper Is Prior Art to the ’396 Patent. ...................34 
`2. 
`Motivation to Combine ......................................................................35 
`3. 
`Claims 1, 6, and 9 ................................................................................35 
`4. 
`Claims 2, 14, and 16 ............................................................................36 
`5. 
`Dependent Claims ...............................................................................36 
`THE GROUNDS ARE NOT REDUNDANT ...................................................37 
`V. 
`VI.  CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................37 
`VII.  APPENDIX: ABRIDGED CLAIM CHARTS ....................................................39 
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ...........................................................................................76 
`
`4. 
`
`5. 
`
`iv
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`Cases 
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Page(s)
`
`Anascape, Ltd. v. Nintendo of Am., Inc.,
`601 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2010) ............................................................................. 14, 17, 18
`
`Callaway Golf Co. v. Acushnet Co.,
`576 F. 3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2009) ........................................................................................... 9
`
`Cook Biotech Inc. v. Acell, Inc.,
`460 F.3d 1365 (Fed.Cir.2006) ............................................................................................ 14
`
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee,
`579 U.S. __ (2016) ............................................................................................................... 12
`
`Ex Parte MacLeod,
`2003 WL 25277951 (Bd.Pat.App. & Interf. 2003) .................................................. 14, 19
`
`In re De Seversky,
`474 F.2d 671 (CCPA 1973) ......................................................................................... 14, 18
`
`In re NTP, Inc.,
`654 F.3d 1268 (Fed. Cir. 2011) .......................................................................................... 13
`
`Lockwood v. Am. Airlines,
`107 F.3d 1565 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ............................................................................. 13, 17, 19
`
`Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Faulding, Inc.,
`230 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2000) .......................................................................................... 17
`
`Research Corp. Techs. v. Microsoft Corp.,
`627 F.3d 859 (Fed. Cir. 2010) ............................................................................................ 13
`
`Zenon Environmental, Inc. v. U.S. Filter Corp.,
`506 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ................................................................................... 13, 14
`
`Statutes 
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102 .............................................................................................................. 2, 20, 34
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 ................................................................................................................ 2, 7, 15
`
`v
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112 .................................................................................................................. 13, 17
`
`35 U.S.C. § 120 ......................................................................................................................... 13
`
`35 U.S.C. § 132 .................................................................................................................. 14, 19
`
`35 U.S.C. § 318(b).................................................................................................................... 37
`
`Other Authorities 
`
`MPEP § 201.06(c)(IV) .................................................................................................... 14, 18
`
`MPEP § 2163.05 ............................................................................................................... 17, 18
`
`Rules 
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8 .......................................................................................................................... 1
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(a) ................................................................................................................... 1
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) .............................................................................................................. 11
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ................................................................................................................. 2
`
`vi
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`APPENDIX OF EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit
`1001
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 9,282,396, Wireless Digital Audio Music System (“the ’396
`patent”)
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`File history of U.S. Application No. 13/775,754, filed February
`25, 2013 (“the 2013 application”)
`
`File history of U.S. Application No. 10/027,391, filed December
`21, 2001 (“the 2001 application”)
`
`Excerpts from the file history of U.S. Application No.
`12/144,729, filed July 12, 2008 (“the 2008 application”)
`
`File history of U.S. Application No. 10/648,012, filed August
`26, 2003 (“the 2003 application”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,563,892 (“the ’892 patent” or “Haartsen”)
`
`J. Haartsen, “Bluetooth—The universal radio interface for ad
`hoc, wireless connectivity,” Ericsson Review, Oct. 1998 (“the
`1998 paper”)
`
`J.Haartsen, “The Bluetooth Radio System,” IEEE Personal
`Communications Journal, Feb. 2000
`
`G.B.Giannakis, A.Stamoulis, Z.Wang, and P.A.Anghel, “Load-
`Adaptive MUI/ISI-Resilient Generalized Multi-Carrier CDMA
`with Linear and DF Receivers,” European Transactions on
`Telecommunications J., Vol. 11, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2000
`(“Giannakis”)
`
`Comparison of the 2003 application as-filed with the 2001
`application as-filed
`
`Comparison of the issued 2003 application with the 2003
`application as-filed
`
`Comparison of the 2013 application as-filed with the 2008
`application as-filed
`
`vii
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`
`
`Declaration of J. Moring
`
`Order No. 12 from In re Certain Consumer Elecs. and Display Devices
`with Graphics Processing and Graphics Processing Units Therein [sic,
`proper title of the Investigation is In re Certain Wireless Headsets],
`Inv. No. 337-TA-943 (July 24, 2015)
`
`Exemplary OEW claim charts from the ITC Complaint
`
`Excerpts from the file history of U.S. App. No. 13/356,949,
`filed January 24, 2012 (“the 2012 application”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,530,929
`
`viii
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
` Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`Petitioner Sony Corporation hereby seeks inter partes review of claims 1-17 of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,282,396 (“the ’396 patent”) (Ex. 1001).
`
`I.
`
`COMPLIANCE WITH PETITION REQUIREMENTS
`A. Notice of Real Parties in Interest
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1), notice is hereby given that the above-
`
`identified Petitioner, together with Sony Corporation of America, Sony Electronics
`
`Inc., Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., Sony Mobile Communications Inc.,
`
`and Sony Mobile Communications AB, are the real parties-in-interest (“RPI”) in this
`
`petition.
`
`B. Notice of Related Matters
`
`In re Certain Wireless Headsets, Inv. No. 337-TA-943 (“the ITC action”), pending
`
`before the U.S. International Trade Commission, may affect or be affected by a
`
`decision in this proceeding. The ’396 patent claims priority to U.S. Patent Nos.
`
`7,865,258 and 8,131,391, which One-E-Way, Inc. (“OEW”) is asserting are infringed
`
`by Petitioner’s Bluetooth headsets in the ITC action. See Ex. 1015 (exemplary OEW
`
`claim charts from the ITC Complaint). Another petition for inter partes review of the
`
`’396 patent on different grounds has been filed simultaneously herewith as IPR2016-
`
`01638.
`
`C. Notice of Lead and Backup Counsel and Service Information
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.8(b)(3), (b)(4), and 42.10(a), Petitioner designates
`
`the following lead and backup counsel:
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`Lead Counsel:
`John Flock (Reg. No. 39,670)
`Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
`One Broadway,
`New York, NY 10004
`Telephone: (212) 425-7200
`Fax: (212) 425-5288
`Email: jflock@kenyon.com
`
`
`D. Grounds for Standing
`
`Backup Counsel:
`Paul T. Qualey (Reg. No. 45,027)
`Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
`1500 K Street N.W. Ste. 700
`Washington, DC 20005
`Telephone: (202) 220-4200
`Fax: (202) 220-4201
`Email: pqualey@kenyon.com
`
`Petitioner certifies under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) that the ’396 patent is available
`
`for inter partes review, and that Petitioner and the RPIs are not barred or estopped
`
`from requesting inter partes review challenging the patent claims on the grounds
`
`identified in this petition.
`
`E.
`
`Statement of Precise Relief Requested
`
`Petitioner respectfully requests that claims 1-17 of the ’396 patent be cancelled
`
`based on the following grounds of unpatentability, explained in detail below:
`
`Ground 1: Claims 1-17 are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 by U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,563,892 to Haartsen (Ex. 1006).
`
`Ground 2: Claims 1-17 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the ’892 patent (Ex.
`
`1006) in combination with G.B.Giannakis, A.Stamoulis, Z.Wang, and
`
`P.A.Anghel, “Load-Adaptive MUI/ISI-Resilient Generalized Multi-
`
`Carrier CDMA with Linear and DF Receivers,” European Transactions on
`
`Telecommunications J., Vol. 11, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2000 (Ex. 1009).
`
`2
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`II.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`A. Brief Description of the ’396 Patent
`
`The ’396 patent issued on March 8, 2016 from U.S. Patent Application Serial
`
`No. 13/775,754 (“the ’754 application”) filed on February 25, 2013 and is assigned on
`
`its face to OEW. It generally relates to a wireless digital audio system having a
`
`portable audio source with a digital audio transmitter and an audio receiver operatively
`
`coupled to a headphone set, which is configured for digital wireless communication
`
`with the audio transmitter.
`
`Figure 1, reproduced below, depicts an exemplary embodiment of the
`
`invention. The music audio source 80 is connected to a battery powered wireless
`
`transmitter 20, which transmits audio wirelessly using an antenna 24 to a receiving
`
`antenna 52 of a battery-powered headphone receiver 50. The receiver 50 may utilize
`
`fuzzy logic detection to optimize reception of the received user code; the speakers 75
`
`in headphones 55 are used for listening to the spread spectrum-demodulated and
`
`decoded communication signal. Ex. 1001 at 2:36-3:3.
`
`3
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`Figures 2 and 3, reproduced below, depict block diagrams of an audio
`
`transmitter portion and an audio receiver portion of the wireless digital audio system
`
`of Figure 1. The transmitter portion shown in Figure 2 digitizes the audio signal from
`
`the audio source 80 using an analog to digital converter (ADC) 32. The digitized
`
`signal is further processed downstream by an encoder 36, then by a digital low pass
`
`filter, and a modulator 42 modulates the signal to be transmitted. To reduce the
`
`effects of channel noise, a channel encoder 38 is used. For further noise immunity, a
`
`spread spectrum differential phase shift key (DPSK) module 48 is utilized. The unique
`
`user code generated by the code generator 44 is specifically associated with one
`
`wireless digital audio system user. The spread spectrum modulated signal transmitted
`
`by the antenna 24 is received by the antenna 52 shown in Figure 3, and then
`
`4
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`processed by spread spectrum direct conversion receiver or module 56 with a receiver
`
`code generator 60 that contains the same unique code. A block de-interleaver 64
`
`decodes the bits of the digital signal encoded in the block interleaver 40, a Viterbi
`
`decoder 66 is used to decode the bits encoded by the channel encoder 38, and a
`
`source decoder 68 decodes the coding applied by the encoder 36. Finally, a digital-to-
`
`analog converter (DAC) 70 is used to transform the digital signal to an analog audio
`
`signal, which is then processed by a power amplifier 74 optimized for powering the
`
`headphone speakers 75. Ex. 1001 at 2:52-3:39, 4:25-36.
`
`The ’396 patent issued from the seventh application in a chain as shown below.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`B.
`
`Prosecution History of the ’396 Patent
`
`As filed, the application that issued as the ’396 patent had two claims. Ex. 1002
`
`at 0015-16. Except for the claims, the originally filed specification is substantially
`
`identical to the originally filed specification of U.S. Application No. 12/144,729 (“the
`
`2008 application”), which issued as U.S. Patent No. 7,684,885. Compare Ex. 1002 at
`
`0020-26 with Ex. 1004 at 0006-11. On February 25, 2015, in a non-final office action,
`
`6
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`the PTO rejected both filed claims as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), and for non-
`
`statutory double patenting. Ex. 1002 at 0035-45. On May 14, 2015, in a response to
`
`the office action, the applicant amended the two pending claims. Id. at 0338-43. On
`
`October 14, 2015, the applicant again amended the claims1 and added fifteen new
`
`claims in a “secondary response” to the February office action. Id. at 0347-57. The
`
`applicant subsequently filed a terminal disclaimer with respect to the pending and
`
`issued applications in the patent family. Id. at 0362-64. On January 15, 2016, the PTO
`
`issued a Notice of Allowance without any rejections of the new or “amended” claims.
`
`Id. at 0370-74. The ’396 patent issued on March 8, 2016.2
`
`C.
`
`State of the Prior Art
`1.
`
`1998 Haartsen Paper
`
`Prior to December 2001, telecommunication companies were developing
`
`digital wireless communication systems. For example, an article written by J.Haartsen
`
`in 1998, “Bluetooth—The universal radio interface for ad hoc, wireless connectivity,”
`
`provides a detailed overview of the recently developed Bluetooth technology. It
`
`describes Bluetooth as “a universal radio interface in the 2.45 GHz frequency band
`
`that enables portable electronic devices to connect and communicate wirelessly via
`
`1 This amendment deleted and replaced the entire text of claims 1 and 2.
`2 The ’396 patent presently does not include a priority claim. The applicant filed a
`Renewed Request for Petition for Unintentional Delayed Claim of Priority on August
`3, 2016. Ex. 1002 at 0452-53. The priority date arguments in this petition are
`unrelated to the issue addressed in applicant’s petition.
`
`7
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`short-range, ad hoc networks.” Ex. 1007 at 110. Bluetooth “eliminates the need for
`
`wires, cables and connectors for and between cordless or mobile phones, modems,
`
`headsets, PDAs, computers, printers, projectors, local networks, and so on.” Id. The
`
`article envisions “a cheap, power-efficient radio chip that is small enough to fit inside
`
`any electronic device or machine and that provides local connectivity.” Id. at 109.
`
`Among the examples given by the paper for applications of Bluetooth is “[t]he
`
`ultimate headset—a cordless headset keeps your hands free … Connect a headset to
`
`your mobile PC or to any wired connection and free your hands for more important
`
`tasks at the office or in your car.” Id. at 112.
`
`The 1998 paper also describes technical details of Bluetooth systems. For
`
`example, the paper states (1) that “Bluetooth radios use frequency-hop (FH) spread
`
`spectrum, since this technology better supports low-cost, low-power radio
`
`implementations”; (2) that the frequency hopping sequence “is determined by the
`
`identity of the piconet master”; (3) that “[e]very piconet has a unique set of master
`
`parameters which create a unique channel”; and (4) that “[i]f a hop channel is
`
`temporarily shared by independent piconets, packets can be distinguished by the
`
`access codes that precede them—access codes are unique for each piconet.” Id. at
`
`112, 113, 117. Additionally, it teaches that “[i]nterference can be avoided” by use of
`
`an adaptive frequency hopping technique. Id. at 112.
`
`8
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`2.
`
`Patent No. 6,563,892 to Haartsen
`
`About a year after his first publication, on June 15, 1999, Mr. Haartsen and
`
`P.Dent filed U.S. Patent Application No. 09/332,955, which issued on May 13, 2003
`
`as the ’892 patent entitled “Method and System for Detection of Binary Information
`
`in the Presence of Slowly Varying Disturbances.” Ex. 1006. The ’892 patent
`
`incorporates by reference the 1998 paper for “details regarding the Bluetooth
`
`technology.” Ex. 1006 at 2:23-29; Ex. 1013, ¶11. Thus, the disclosure of the 1998
`
`paper is included in the ’892 patent and they are considered a single reference for
`
`invalidity determinations. See, e.g., Callaway Golf Co. v. Acushnet Co., 576 F. 3d 1331,
`
`1346 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
`
`The ’892 patent discloses ways of improving a receiver in the face of low-
`
`frequency disturbances. “Although channel effects are a dominant disturbance in
`
`conventional cellular systems, in other types of systems the dominant disturbance to
`
`transmitted signals may arise from other sources.” Ex. 1006 at 2:14-17. The sole
`
`example of “other types of systems” in which such problems may arise is a Bluetooth
`
`system.
`
`The “disturbances” to which the ’892 patent refers include “DC offset in
`
`homodyne receivers,” among others. Id. at 2:36-45. A “homodyne” (direct
`
`conversion) receiver mixes an incoming radio-frequency signal with an oscillator
`
`having the same frequency to produce a baseband signal. Ex. 1013 ¶33; see also Ex.
`
`1017 at 1:30-36. The ’892 patent discloses “several methods for performing DC offset
`
`9
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`suppression.” Ex. 1006 at 2:46-47. The invention of the ’892 patent is “described as
`
`useful in systems employing the Bluetooth technology, e.g., having operating
`
`characteristics such as frequency hopped CDMA, low transmit power, etc.” Id. at
`
`4:13-16. According to the ‘892 patent, a solution to the DC offset problem (and other
`
`slowly varying disturbances) is “to abandon the threshold technique, and instead use
`
`the difference Δ between the two possible symbols.” Id. at 5:12-15. “A known
`
`technique that uses the difference between two adjacent symbols is differential
`
`keying,” which includes “DPSK” and “DFSK.” Id. at 5:25-35.
`
`3.
`
`The 2000 Haartsen Paper
`
`In February 2000, Mr. Haartsen published another article in IEEE Personal
`
`Communications Journal, entitled “The Bluetooth Radio System.” The article
`
`describes the radio system behind the Bluetooth concept, its design challenges, the
`
`critical system characteristics and the design choices. See Ex. 1008 at 0004.
`
`4.
`
`The Giannakis Paper
`
`The Giannakis paper was submitted to the Journal of European Transactions
`
`on Telecommunications in May 2000, and published in its November-December issue
`
`(Ex. 1009). It discusses existing and novel ways to “mitigate intersymbol interference
`
`(ISI).” Ex. 1009 at 0004. Specifically, Giannakis proposes to “design block FIR
`
`transmitters and decision feedback (DF) receivers based on an inner-code/outer-code
`
`principle, which guarantees MUI/ISI-elimination regardless of the frequency-selective
`
`physical channel” “[t]o improve the bit error rate (BER) performance of existing
`
`10
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396
`
`Petition Requesting Inter Partes Review
`
`schemes.” Id. The Giannakis-proposed “scheme guarantees symbol recovery
`
`regardless of the possibly unknown FIR channel by achieving deterministic MUI
`
`elimination and ISI suppression.” Id. at 527 (emphasis added). The paper proposes the
`
`“MUI/ISI-resilient inner-code/outer-code design” and discusses “how the proper
`
`choice of the inner code Θm guarantees the ISI removal and symbol recovery.” Id. at
`
`528-32. Giannakis specifically refers to using this scheme in Bluetooth-like networking
`
`systems. Id. at 531.
`
`III. THE CHALLENGED ’396 PATENT
`A.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art of the ’396 patent has a Bachelor of Science
`
`degree in electrical engineering or a related field, and approximately two years of
`
`experience in the design or implementation of wireless communications systems, or
`
`the equivalent. Alternatively, a person of ordinary skill in the art has approximately six
`
`years of experience in the design or implementation of wireless communications
`
`systems, or the equivalent.3
`
`B.
`
`Claim Constructions
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b), in inter partes review, claims receive the
`
`“broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification.” See Cuozzo Speed Techs.,
`
`
`3 This is the level of skill proposed by Petitioner and adopted by the Administrative
`Law Judge (“ALJ”) in the ITC action. Ex. 1014 at 7-9.
`
`11
`
`

`
`Patent No. 9,282,396