UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`HUAWEI DEVICE CO., LTD.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FUNDAMENTAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`___________________
`
`Case IPR2018-00465
`Patent No. 8,624,550
`___________________
`
`DECLARATION OF ROBERT BARANOWSKI IN SUPPORT OF
`PATENT OWNER PRELIMINARY RESPONSE
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 1
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3
`
`Summary of Opinions ....................................................................................................... 6
`
`III.
`
`USB 2.0 ........................................................................................................................... 10
`
`IV.
`
`USB Enumeration ........................................................................................................... 11
`
`V.
`
`SE1 Signaling.................................................................................................................. 22
`
`The USB Specification Teaches That The SE1 Condition Should Never
`A.
`Be Intentionally Generated on the USB.......................................................................... 23
`
`The USB Specification Teaches That The SE1 Condition Interrupts
`B.
`USB Communications .................................................................................................... 24
`
`The Prior Art References Cited By Petitioner Do Not Teach Generating
`C.
`An SE1 Condition On The USB Without Interrupting USB Communications
`Or To Enable Supplying Current Unrestricted ............................................................... 25
`
`The Expert Witness For Samsung, An Accused Infringer In District
`D.
`Court Litigation Involving The ’550 Patent, Testified That SE1 Signaling
`Terminates USB Communication ................................................................................... 30
`
`Petitioner Provides No Competent Evidence Supporting Its Conclusion
`E.
`That A POSITA Would Believe SE1 Signaling Is A “Logical Choice” ........................ 32
`
`VI.
`
`The Petition’s Theobald/USB2.0 Combination (Ground 1) ........................................... 34
`
`VII. The Petition’s Theobald/USB2.0/Shiga Combination (Ground 3) ................................. 37
`
`Motorola’s J3 Connector Communicates Data According To J3
`A.
`Protocol (The Three-Wire Bus Protocol) ........................................................................ 38
`
`The Petition Ignores Theobald’s Teaching To Follow Communication
`B.
`Protocol ........................................................................................................................... 41
`
`C.
`
`The Petition’s Proposed Combination Does Not Follow USB Protocol ............ 43
`
`Petitioner’s Arguments for Combining USB 2.0,Theobald, And Shiga
`D.
`Cannot Withstand Scrutiny ............................................................................................. 44
`
`VIII. The Petition’s Dougherty/Shiga Combination (Ground 5) ............................................. 46
`
`A.
`
`Dougherty’s System Requires Enumeration ....................................................... 46
`
`The Primary Function of Dougherty’s Docking Station Is Port
`1.
`Replication .......................................................................................................... 46
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 2
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`2.
`
`Dougherty’s System Requires Enumeration ........................................... 49
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Petitioner’s Proposed Modifications to Dougherty............................................. 51
`
`A POSITA Would Not Have Made The Proposed Modifications ...................... 52
`
`Dougherty’s laptop would not be able to send SE1 signaling
`1.
`pursuant to normal USB communication protocol ............................................. 52
`
`Petitioner’s proposals do not properly account for
`2.
`unintentionally-generated SE1 signals ................................................................ 54
`
`Petitioner’s modifications would disable the docking station’s
`3.
`primary functionality .......................................................................................... 56
`
`There were other known methods to enable docking station
`4.
`charging that would not interfere with normal USB communications ............... 59
`
`Petitioner’s proposed modifications do not work in Dougherty’s
`5.
`non-operational scenario ..................................................................................... 61
`
`D.
`
`Petitioner’s Rationale For Their Proposed Modifications Is Conclusory ........... 64
`
`- 2 -
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 3
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`1.
`
`My name is Robert Baranowski. I have been asked by Fundamental
`
`Innovation Systems International LLC (“Patent Owner”) to explain certain issues
`
`related to the technologies involved in U.S. 8,624,550, the technologies described
`
`in the cited references, the knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time of the invention, and other pertinent facts and opinions regarding IPR2018-
`
`00465. My qualifications are summarized below and are addressed more fully in
`
`my CV attached as Exhibit 2002.
`
`2.
`
`I am currently the President of Left Coast Engineering in Escondido,
`
`California, an engineering service company. My position includes consulting work
`
`on a variety of power electronics and wireless communications devices. Because
`
`most of the products my company works on are portable, we work with battery
`
`chargers almost every day.
`
`3.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering Degree from
`
`Villanova University in 1990, and a Master of Science in Electrical Engineering
`
`Degree from Villanova University in 1991.
`
`4.
`
`For the past 26 years, I have been involved in the design and
`
`development
`
`of
`
`electronic
`
`devices,
`
`and
`
`especially
`
`digital wireless
`
`telecommunications devices. My work has involved the design of integrated
`
`circuits that involve power management, battery charging and USB interface for
`- 3 -
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 4
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`telecommunications devices. While at Motorola from March 1992 to November
`
`1997, I worked on several telecommunications products that were battery powered
`
`and contained internal battery chargers and accessory connectors that brought
`
`external power into the device (sometimes referred to as J3). After Motorola, I
`
`worked for Sony Electronics from December 1997 to September 1999, also
`
`designing telecommunication devices that were battery powered. During the time I
`
`was working for Motorola and Sony, USB was starting to be looked at as a
`
`possible power source for the internal chargers for telecommunication devices. I
`
`was intimately involved in this field during the time of the U.S. 8,624,550.
`
`5.
`
`After graduating from Villanova I worked for two cellular handset
`
`manufacturers over the course of 8 years before founding the engineering product
`
`design company. For the handset manufacturers I performed product design work
`
`on various aspects of the cellular handsets, including power supplies, power
`
`distribution, battery chargers, battery monitoring, and applying a variety of
`
`techniques to reduce battery consumption, decrease battery charge times, and
`
`integrate into smaller and smaller spaces available in the cellular handsets.
`
`6.
`
`As part of my design work for these handset manufacturers, I was
`
`awarded several patents. Throughout my career, I have been the sole or co-
`
`inventor on 18 United States patents related to battery chargers, power regulator
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 5
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`circuits, wireless tracking systems, and other electronics-related devices and
`
`systems. I am also listed as an inventor on a large number of applications. The
`
`
`
`patents are listed below:
`
`Patent No. Title
`9,701,995
`Test cartridge for use in rapid analysis of biological samples
`9,701,994
`System for rapid analysis of biological samples
`9,023,640
`Device for rapid detection of infectious agents
`8,223,073
`Apparatus and method for a directional finder
`7,564,357 Wireless tracking system and method with optical tag
`removal detection
`7,486,648 Wireless extension of local area networks
`7,443,297 Wireless tracking system and method with optical tag
`removal detection
`7,336,182 Wireless tracking system and method with optical tag
`removal detection
`System and method for enhancing user experience in a
`wide-area facility having a distributed, bounded
`environment
`Interoperable am/fm headset wireless telephone device
`6,658,267
`6,473,630 Method and apparatus for powering a wireless headset used
`with a personal electronic device
`Quick release battery and clip for portable device and
`method of implementing same
`Storage case and method for a wireless headset with a
`microphone suspended between earpieces of the headset
`Circuit and method for sharing current between a portable
`device and a battery charger
`Battery dropout correction for battery monitoring in mobile
`unit
`Battery charger with power dissipation control
`Voltage and current mode power regulator
`Adaptive radio receiver controller method and apparatus
`
`6,046,574
`
`5,703,470
`5,613,229
`5,428,820
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`6,813,608
`
`6,411,062
`
`6,370,401
`
`6,157,173
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`
`6
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`17
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 6
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`7.
`
`I have been asked by Fundamental Innovation Systems International
`
`LLC to explain the technologies involved in U.S. 8,624,550 and the cited exhibits.
`
`8.
`
`For the purpose of this declaration, I apply the same skill level as
`
`proposed in the Petition, although I reserve the right to explain why this level is too
`
`high. I met the qualifications of a person having ordinary skill in the art (proposed
`
`in the Petition) at the time of the ’550 patent filing date. I am being compensated
`
`for my work on this case at a fixed, hourly rate, plus reimbursement for expenses.
`
`My compensation does not depend on the outcome of this case or any issue in it,
`
`and I have no interest in this proceeding.
`
`II.
`
`Summary of Opinions
`
`9.
`
`Protocols are meant to be followed. A POSITA would recognize the
`
`importance of adhering to USB protocol.
`
`10. USB enumeration is the process for identifying an accessory and
`
`managing power and current allocation to that accessory according to USB
`
`protocol. A POSITA would recognize that a device would be unable to perform
`
`device-specific USB functions until enumeration and configuration was complete.
`
`Petitioner fails to explain any benefit of employing an alternative signaling method
`
`such as an abnormal SE1 signal when enumeration would still be needed to enable
`
`USB communications and device functions.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 7
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`11. The USB specification defines SE1 as the condition where both the
`
`D+ and D- data lines are set to a high voltage condition (i.e. greater than .8 V).
`
`USB identifies the SE1 condition as an error condition that should never
`
`intentionally be generated on the USB. USB protocol establishes that the USB
`
`communication path is interrupted when an SE1 condition is detected on the USB.
`
`Thus, intentionally generating an SE1 on the USB bus is the opposite of signaling
`
`according to USB protocol.
`
`12.
`
`In Grounds 1-3, Petitioner proposes replacing the J3 connector in
`
`Theobald with a USB connector. Theobald expressly teaches signaling “according
`
`to” J3 protocol (or other suitable protocol). Petitioner contends that a POSITA
`
`would have been motivated to make the Ground 1 combinations because “USB 2.0
`
`was widely known and adopted by industry leaders[.]” Pet. at 28. But petitioner
`
`fails to provide competent evidence that a POSITA would think USB was a
`
`suitable replacement for a J3 connector. Furthermore, even if a POSITA attempted
`
`to replace J3 with USB in Theobald, Petitioner fails to explain why that person
`
`would supply current at a level that is prohibited by the USB specification, when
`
`neither Theobald nor any other reference cited in Grounds 1-3 propose supplying
`
`current unrestricted by any protocol.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 8
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`13.
`
` In Ground 3, Petitioner proposes combining Theobald with Shiga’s
`
`SE1 signal that is expressly prohibited under the USB protocol. A POSITA would
`
`recognize that enumeration is, among other things, the process for negotiating
`
`power/current allocation “according to” USB protocol that enables the benefits of
`
`using USB standard, including subsequent communications with connected
`
`devices. Yet Petitioner never explains why a POSITA seeking to replace the J3
`
`connector in Theobald with a USB connector seeking to obtain the benefits of the
`
`“widely known and adopted” USB standard would not adhere to USB protocol and
`
`perform enumeration. Further, a POSITA would have known that intentionally
`
`generating an SE1 on the USB bus, as proposed by Petitioner, is the opposite of
`
`signaling “according
`
`to” USB protocol and would
`
`interrupt
`
`the USB
`
`communication, thereby preventing the proposed combination from receiving the
`
`benefits of the USB standard.1
`
`14.
`
`In Grounds 4 and 5, Petitioner identifies a communication path that is
`
`not comprised within the identified adapter. However, all claims in the '550 patent
`
`require "an adapter comprising . . . . a USB communication path." In IPR2018-
`
`00110, the petition mapped Dougherty and the Dougherty/Shiga combination to
`
`
`1 To be clear, this is in response to Petitioner’s attempt to implement the SE1 signal into
`Theobald and Dougherty’s power adapter. The ’550 patent inventors developed specific
`techniques to address these issues.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 9
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`the '550 patent in the same manner proposed by Petitioner in Grounds 4 and 5 here.
`
`Compare Pet. at 48-56, with Ex. 2008 at 23-30, 33-39. The Board rejected this
`
`mapping because the identified communications path is not comprised within the
`
`identified adapter as required by the '550 claims. Ex. 2009, 9-12. The same
`
`conclusion applies in this case because the USB communication path identified by
`
`Petitioner is not part of the identified adapter.
`
`15. Further,
`
`in Ground 5, Petitioner proposes
`
`replacing USB’s
`
`enumeration process (as implemented in Dougherty’s “handshaking” protocol)
`
`with an SE1 signal that is expressly prohibited under the USB protocol. In fact,
`
`detection of an SE1 signal was known by POSITAs to disable or interrupt the USB
`
`communication. POSITAs knew that a device would then need to perform
`
`enumeration again in order to re-establish a connection to transmit and receive data
`
`and enable the USB device’s functionality.2 Petitioner fails to address that
`
`substituting SE1 in place of Dougherty’s standard USB handshaking would have
`
`disrupted the communication and operation of Dougherty’s docking station and
`
`attached computer system.
`
`
`2 A “USB communication path” exists even when it is idle, not used for transmitting
`normal USB data or disconnected from a USB host. This is expressly described in the ’550
`patent.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 10
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`III. USB 2.0
`
`16. USB was designed to allow for port expansion and plug-and-play
`
`bidirectional communication. Ex. 1007-1 at 293. The USB 2.0 protocol allows for
`
`up to 127 USB devices to be connected to a USB host (either directly or indirectly,
`
`through a hub). Ex. 1007-1 at 41. To ensure a robust USB and avoid interruption
`
`to the USB communication, “USB devices are required […] at all times to display
`
`behavior consistent with defined USB device states.” Id. at 50.
`
`17. The USB specification explains that “[t]he host controls all access to
`
`the USB. A USB device gains access to the bus only by being granted access by
`
`the host.” Id. at 55.
`
`18. USB defines a handshaking protocol called enumeration by which the
`
`host identifies, addresses and configures each peripheral device. Ex. 1007-1 at 48;
`
`1007-3 at 200-202, Ex. 1007-4 at 271-273. As discussed further in Section IV
`
`below, a POSITA would understand that enumeration is the process for identifying
`
`and configuring attached devices according to the USB specification. Before
`
`enumeration is complete and a device is configured, the device may only respond
`
`to standard requests, and thus none of the device-specific requests generally
`
`needed in order to operate a connected USB device are available. Ex. 2006 at 4-5;
`
`
`3 Petitioner has divided Exhibit 1007 (Universal Serial Bus Specification Revision 2.0)
`into volumes 1-9. Throughout this declaration, I refer to Exhibit 1007 by referencing the volume
`number. The page number will correspond to the stamped exhibit numbers for Exhibit 1007.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 11
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`see, also, infra, §IV; see, also, Ex. 1007-1 at 52 (“[b]efore a function can be used,
`
`it must be configured by the host.”).
`
`19. A POSITA would understand the advantages of adhering to the USB
`
`protocol. For example, a POSITA would understand that following USB protocol
`
`would allow for proper operation of any USB compatible device and reduce the
`
`risk of interrupting communication on the USB. Further, a POSITA would
`
`understand that disregarding the USB specification and transmitting an abnormal
`
`data signal would risk interrupting communications and undermining the
`
`robustness of the USB. A POSITA would also understand that USB devices are
`
`hot-swappable, and any interrupted communications could be confused with device
`
`disconnection.
`
`IV. USB Enumeration
`
`20. The USB specification defines and extensively discusses a reliable
`
`and well-tested mechanism for identifying what kind of devices are connected to a
`
`USB system: the USB enumeration mechanism. See, e.g., Ex. 1007-2 at 118; Ex.
`
`1007-3, 199, 202; Ex. 1007-4 at 271-272; Ex. 1007-5 at 316; Ex. 1007-6 at 368.
`
`This mechanism uses standard USB signaling and specifically bans the use of the
`
`SE1 signal. Ex. 1007-2 at 151.
`
`21.
`
`Indeed, the Petition acknowledges that enumeration is the process
`
`specified by USB to configure a USB device when it is attached to a powered port:
`- 11 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 12
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`[W]hen a USB device is attached to or removed from the USB, the host uses
`
`a process known as bus enumeration to identify and manage the device state
`
`
`
`changes necessary.
`
`Pet. at 9.
`
`22. When a USB device is plugged into a host’s USB port, the host and
`
`the device undergo a series of handshakes in order for the host to access the
`
`device’s functions. This process—which involves “initial exchange of information
`
`that enables the host’s device driver to communicate with the device”—is called
`
`enumeration. Ex. 2003 at 9.
`
`23. The enumeration process involves a series of steps. First, when a user
`
`plugs the device in to the powered port of a USB hub, the device enters the
`
`“powered” state. Ex. 2003 at 11; Ex. 2006 at 9. In this state, the device may
`
`receive power from the USB hub—however, it may not draw more than 100 mA
`
`from VBUS until it is configured. Ex. 1007-4 at 270-271. Furthermore, the USB
`
`port to which the device is attached is disabled, and the USB device cannot
`
`respond to any requests from the USB bus until it receives a “reset” command
`
`from the bus. Ex. 1007-4 at 270.
`
`24. Next, the hub detects the device by “monitor[ing] the voltages on the
`
`signal lines of each of its ports.” Ex. 2003 at 11; Ex. 2006 at 9. In this step, the
`
`USB device sends a high voltage on either the D+ or D- line. Id. The USB hub
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 13
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`detects the voltage and determines that the device is either a full-speed device (if
`
`D+ is high) or a low-speed device (if D- is high). Ex. 2003 at 11, 12; Ex. 2006 at 9,
`
`10 (detecting whether full-speed device supports high speed); Ex. 1007-4 at 272.
`
`Upon detecting the device, the hub “continues to provide power but doesn’t
`
`transmit USB traffic to the device.” Ex. 2003 at 11. The host learns of the nature
`
`of the event, and of the attachment of the new device, by sending a
`
`“Get_Port_Status” request. Ex. 2003 at 11; Ex. 2006 at 9-10.
`
`25. Then, the host issues a port enable and reset command to the port,
`
`which puts the port into the “enabled” state. Ex. 1007-4 at 271; Ex. 2003 at 11;
`
`Ex. 2006 at 10. In an enabled state, the host can now signal the connected USB
`
`device with control packets.
`
`26. After the reset, the USB device enters the “default” state and can still
`
`draw no more than 100 mA from the VBUS line. Id. In this stage, the USB device
`
`uses the “default address” of 0 to receive control requests. Ex. 1007-4 at 271; Ex.
`
`2003 at 12; Ex. 2006 at 10.
`
`27. The USB host then reads the device’s device descriptor to determine
`
`the maximum data payload the USB device can use. Id. Maximum data payload
`
`refers to the maximum packet size. Id. Either before or after the USB host requests
`
`the device’s device descriptor to determine the maximum payload, the host assigns
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 14
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`a unique address to the USB device, such that it is in the “Address” state. Ex.
`
`1007-4 at 271; Ex. 2003 at 12-13; Ex. 2006 at 11.
`
`28. The host then “sends a Get_Descriptor” request to the new address to
`
`learn about the device’s abilities. Ex. 2003 at 13; Ex. 2006 at 11. The standard
`
`USB descriptors include the following fields (see Ex. 1007-4 at 290-291, Table 9-
`
`8):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 15
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`Table 9-8. Standard Device Descriptor
`
`Description
`
`
`
`oLengtn
`
`Size of this descriptor in bytes
`
`bDesen'ptorType
`
`DEVICE Descriptor Type
`
`USB Specification Release Number in
`Hiram-Coded Decimal (I.e., 2.10 lsQiGH).
`This field identifies the release of the USE
`
`Specification with which the device and its
`descriptors are compliant.
`
`oDevloeClass
`
`Class oode {assigned by the USE-IF).
`
`if this fldd is reset to Earn, eam If'IEEtI'fQCE
`
`within a configuration specifies its own
`otass information and the various
`
`interfaces operate independently.
`
`if this field is set to a value between 1 and
`
`FEH. the device supperts different class
`specifications on different interfaces and
`the interfaces may not operate
`independently. This value identifies the
`states definition used for the aggregate
`interfaces.
`
`if this field is set to FFH. the devioe class
`
`is send Lit-specific.
`
`
`
`5
`
`bDeirfGeSirthass
`
`Subclass
`
`Subclass code {assigned by the USB-iF).
`
`These codes are qualified by the 1melee of
`the bflevieeClass field.
`
`if the bDeviceCless field is reset to zero.
`this field must also be reset to zero.
`
`if the stile uieeCrass field is not set to FFH.
`
`all values are reserved for assig'iment by
`the USE-IF.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-15-
`- 15 -
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 16
`Huawei V FISI
`
`IPR2018-00465
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 16
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`29. The descriptor description above matches that listed in U.S. 5,884,086
`
`(“Amoni”), Table II. As noted by Amoni, the descriptors can include information
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 17
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`unique to a device, including its nonstandard voltage or current configurations.
`
`For example, such information can be encoded by “assign[ing] a vendor specific
`
`Device Class . . . and designat[ing] a unique device sub-class assignment with
`
`unique encoded voltage and power requirements.” Ex. 1018 at 7:16-19.
`
`Alternatively, the information can be encoded with “a Product String Index
`
`[iProduct] pointing to a string containing voltage and current requirements.” Id. at
`
`7:27-29.
`
`30. The host continues to learn about the device “by requesting the one or
`
`more configuration descriptors specified in the device descriptor.” Ex. 2003 at 13.
`
`The configuration descriptor has the following fields (Ex. 1007-4 at 293-294,
`
`Table 9-10). As Amoni noted, the iConfiguration field can also be used to encode
`
`a device’s nonstandard voltage or current configuration, e.g., with the index
`
`“point[ing] to the location of a text string of UNICODE format” as specified in
`
`section 9.6.3 of USB 2.0. Ex. 1018 at 7:37-44; Ex. 1007-4 at 292-294.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 18
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`Table 9-10. Standard Configuration Descriptor
`
`-M Size of this descriptor in bytes
`n bLength
`— bDescn'ptorType -- CONFIGURATION Descriptor Type
`
`
`
`wTotaILength
`
`bNumlnterfaces
`
`bConfigurationValue
`
`1
`
`iConflguration
`
`Total length of data returned for this
`configuration.
`Includes the combined length
`of all descriptors (configuration. Interface.
`endpoint. and class- or vendor-specific)
`returned for this configuration.
`
`Number of Interfaces supported by this
`configuration
`
`Value to use as an argument to the
`SetContigurationO request to select this
`configuration
`
`Index of string descriptor describing this
`configuration
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`—18—
`- 18 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 19
`Huawei V FISI
`
`IPR2018-00465
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 19
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`Table 9-10. Standard Configuration Descriptor (Continued)
`
`m“m_-
`
`bmAttnbutes
`
`Bitmap
`
`Configuration characteristics
`
`
`
`Reserved (set to one)
`D7:
`Self-powered
`06:
`Remote Wakeup
`05:
`D4...0; Reserved (reset to zero)
`
`D7 is reserved and must be set to one for
`historical reasons.
`
`A device configuration that uses power from
`the bus and a local source reports a non-zero
`value in bMaxPowerto indicate the amount of
`
`bus power required and sets DS. The actual
`power source at runtime may be determined
`using the GetStatus(DEVlCE) request (see
`Section 9.4.5).
`
`If a device configuration supports remote
`
`wakeup. DS is set to one. bMaxPower
`
`Maximum power consumption of the USB
`device from the bus In thls spectflc
`configuration when the device is fully
`operational. Expressed in 2 mA units
`(i.e.. 50 = 100 mA).
`
`Note: A device configuration reports whether
`the configuration is bus-powered or self-
`powered. Device status reports whether the
`device is currently self-powered.
`It a device is
`disconnected from its external power source. it
`updates device status to indicate that it is no
`longer self-powered.
`
`A device may not increase its power draw
`
`from the bus. when it loses its external power
`source. beyond the amount reported by its
`configuration.
`
`it a device can continue to operate when
`disconnected from its external power source, it
`continues to do so.
`If the device cannot
`
`continue to operate. it fails operations it can
`no longer support. The USB System Software
`may determine the cause of the failure by
`checking the status and noting the loss of the
`device's power source.
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 20
`Huawei V FISI
`
`IPR2018-00465
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-19-
`- 19 -
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 20
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`31. The host then reads the “configuration” information from the device,
`
`which contains information about the device’s capabilities. Ex. 1007-4 at 271; Ex.
`
`2003 at 12; Ex. 2006 at 11-12. Finally, the host assigns a configuration value to the
`
`USB device, which puts the device into the “configured” state. Ex. 1007-4 at 272;
`
`Ex. 2003 at 14; Ex. 2006 at 12-13. Before this step, since the host does not yet
`
`know what additional functionality the device can support, the host will only issue
`
`standard device requests, and hence the device will only respond to standard device
`
`requests. See Ex. 1007-4 at 278-279 (describing the various standard device
`
`requests and noting that “USB devices must respond to standard device requests,
`
`even if the device has not yet been assigned an address or has not been
`
`configured”); Ex. 2003 at 6
`
`(application communications began after
`
`enumeration); Ex. 2006 at 5 (same). After it is configured, however, the device can
`
`participate in additional USB communications, and draw an amount of power
`
`across the VBUS according to its configuration. Ex. 1007-4 at 272; Ex. 2003 at 14;
`
`Ex. 2006 at 12-13.
`
`32. Either shortly before, or shortly after, the USB device enters the
`
`“configured” state, the host assigns and loads a device driver. See Ex. 2003 at 14-
`
`15; Ex. 2006 at 12. While the USB 2.0 specification does not explicitly describe
`
`loading the device driver as being part of the enumeration process (see Ex. 1007-4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 20 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 21
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`at 271-272), the process of loading the device driver is closely related to
`
`enumeration and depends on information obtained during the enumeration process,
`
`particularly when dealing with a host with a large operating system, such as the
`
`Windows operating system. See Ex. 2003 at 13-14 (“In selecting a driver,
`
`Windows tries to match the Vendor and Product IDs, Release Number, and or class
`
`information retrieved from the device with the information stored in the system’s
`
`INF files.”); Ex. 2006 at 12 (same); see also Ex. 1007-5 at 311-313 (during device
`
`configuration, “[t]he configuring software first reads the device descriptor, then
`
`requests the description for each possible configuration. It may use the information
`
`provided to load a particular client, such as a device driver, which initially interacts
`
`with the device. The configuring software, perhaps with input from that device
`
`driver, chooses a configuration for the device.”). Thus, regardless of whether
`
`loading a driver is explicitly part of enumeration, loading the driver cannot occur
`
`in the absence of enumeration.
`
`33. Shortly after the enumeration process has been completed, the device
`
`has transitioned from being unrecognized by the USB host, to being identified,
`
`configured, and ready for operation. This configuration is critical to normal
`
`operation of the USB device, because “[a] USB device must be configured before
`
`its function(s) may be used.” Ex. 1007-4 at 272. The USB device may now also
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 21 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 22
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`draw power over the VBUS line according to the configuration information set by
`
`
`
`the USB host. Id.
`
`34. When a hub instead of a device is connected to a host, the host also
`
`undergoes enumeration with the hub (as well as any devices attached to the hub)
`
`using the same procedures as described above. Ex. 2003 at 14-15; Ex. 2006 at 13.
`
`V.
`
`SE1 Signaling
`
`35. The USB specification defines SE1 as “a state in which both the D+
`
`and D- lines are at a voltage above VOSE1 (min), which is 0.8 V.” Ex. 1007-2 at
`
`151.
`
`36.
`
`It is possible to use an SE1 signal without interfering with USB
`
`signaling, as established by the ’550 patent. Petitioner provides no evidence that
`
`the prior art ever contemplated sending an SE1 signal without interrupting data
`
`communications prior to the ’550 patent.
`
`37. Petitioner and Dr. Levy contend that “[a] POSITA at the time of the
`
`alleged invention of the ’550 patent would have understood that the SE1 condition
`
`would be a logical choice for signaling information about a device without
`
`interfering with USB signaling..” Pet. at 12 (citing Ex. 1005, mirror image Levy
`
`declaration, at ¶64); see also Pet. at 46-47, 65.
`
`38. However, Petitioner provides no explanation how or why a POSITA
`
`would have sent an SE1 signal for “signaling information about a device without
`- 22 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2001-p 23
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`interfering with USB signaling.” See, Id. As discussed below, Petitioner’s
`
`conclusion that SE1 offers a “logical choice for signaling information about a
`
`device without interfering with USB signaling” directly contradicts the knowledge
`
`of a POSITA. In fact, a POSITA would have known that SE1 signaling would
`
`interrupt USB communications and prevent a device from performing its USB
`
`functions, as the SE1 would cause a disconnect of the USB port and a repeat of
`
`enumeration.
`
`39. The Petition and supporting declaratio