`
`
`
`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 IPR2018-00472
`Patent No. 8,232,766
`___________________
`
`CORRECTED DECLARATION OF ROBERT BARANOWSKI IN
`SUPPORT OF
`PATENT OWNER PRELIMINARY RESPONSE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop (cid:8220)PATENT BOARD(cid:8221)
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`10497703
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 1
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`I.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`V.
`
`Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3
`
`Summary of Opinions ................................................................................................... 6
`
`USB 2.0 ........................................................................................................................ 8
`
`USB Enumeration ....................................................................................................... 10
`
`SE1 Signaling ............................................................................................................. 21
`
`The USB Specification Teaches That The SE1 Condition Should Never
`A.
`Be Intentionally Generated on the USB ...................................................................... 22
`
`The USB Specification Teaches That The SE1 Condition Interrupts
`B.
`USB Communications ................................................................................................ 22
`
`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 Drawing Current Unrestricted ............................................................... 24
`
`The Expert Witness For Samsung, An Accused Infringer In District
`D.
`Court Litigation Involving The '766 Patent, Testified That SE1 Signaling
`Terminates USB Communication ............................................................................... 29
`
`Petitioner Provides No Competent Evidence Supporting Its Conclusion
`E.
`That A POSITA Would Believe SE1 Signaling Is A "Logical Choice" ....................... 31
`
`VI.
`
`The Petition(cid:8217)s USB 2.0/Theobald/Shiga Combination (Ground 1) .............................. 32
`
`Motorola(cid:8217)s J3 Connector Communicates Data According To J3
`A.
`Protocol (The Three-Wire Bus Protocol)..................................................................... 36
`
`The Petition Ignores Theobald(cid:8217)s Teaching To Follow Communication
`B.
`Protocol ...................................................................................................................... 39
`
`C.
`
`The Petition(cid:8217)s Proposed Combination Does Not Follow USB Protocol ........... 41
`
`Petitioner's Arguments for Combining USB 2.0,Theobald, And Shiga
`D.
`Cannot Withstand Scrutiny ......................................................................................... 42
`
`VII.
`
`The Petition(cid:8217)s USB 2.0/Theobald/Shiga/Matsumoto Combination (Ground 2) ............ 46
`
`VIII. The Petition's Dougherty/Shiga Combination (Ground 3) ........................................... 47
`
`A.
`
`Dougherty's System Requires Enumeration ..................................................... 47
`
`The Primary Function of Dougherty's Docking Station Is Port
`1.
`Replication ...................................................................................................... 47
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`- 1 -
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 2
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`2.
`
`Dougherty's System Requires Enumeration ......................................... 50
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Petitioner's Proposed Modifications to Dougherty ........................................... 52
`
`A POSITA Would Not Have Made The Proposed Modifications..................... 53
`
`Dougherty's laptop would not be able to send SE1 signaling
`1.
`pursuant to normal USB communication protocol ........................................... 53
`
`Petitioner's proposals do not properly account for
`2.
`unintentionally-generated SE1 signals ............................................................. 55
`
`Petitioner's modifications would disable the docking station's
`3.
`primary functionality ....................................................................................... 58
`
`There were other known methods to enable docking station
`4.
`charging that would not interfere with normal USB communications .............. 60
`
`Petitioner's proposed modifications do not work in Dougherty's
`5.
`non-operational scenario ................................................................................. 63
`
`D.
`
`Petitioner's Rationale For Their Proposed Modifications Is Conclusory ........... 65
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-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 ((cid:8220)Patent Owner(cid:8221)) to explain certain issues
`
`related to the technologies involved in U.S. 8,232,766, 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-
`
`00472. My qualifications are summarized below and are addressed more fully in
`
`my CV attached as Exhibit 2005.
`
`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 -
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-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. 8,232,766.
`
`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
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-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
`
`6,157,173
`
`6,046,574
`
`5,703,470
`5,613,229
`5,428,820
`
`6,813,608
`
`6,411,062
`
`6,370,401
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`
`6
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`17
`18
`
`
`I have been asked by Fundamental Innovation Systems International
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`7.
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 6
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`LLC to explain the technologies involved in U.S. 8,232,766 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 (cid:8217)766 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
`
`USB communications or other 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.
`
`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).
`- 6 -
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 7
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`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 Ground 1 and Ground 2, Petitioner proposes replacing the J3
`
`connector in Theobald with a USB connector. Theobald expressly teaches
`
`signaling (cid:8220)according to(cid:8221) J3 protocol. Petitioner contends that a POSITA would
`
`have been motivated to make the Ground 1 combinations (cid:8220)in light of the benefit of
`
`using USB standard.(cid:8221) Pet. at 33. A POSITA would recognize that enumeration is
`
`the process for signaling identification information and 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 retain the benefits of the 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 cause the USB communication path to disconnect, thereby preventing
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 8
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`the proposed combination from receiving the benefits of the USB standard.1
`
`Matsumoto, the additional reference in Ground 2, does nothing to cure these
`
`deficiencies in Ground 1, as Matsumoto teaches signaling on USB power lines, not
`
`data lines; never discusses using abnormal signaling or violating USB data
`
`signaling protocol; and never discusses drawing current or power unrestricted by a
`
`limit of the USB specification.
`
`13. Similarly, in Ground 3, petitioner proposes replacing USB's
`
`enumeration process with an SE1 signal that is expressly prohibited under the USB
`
`protocol. However, detection of an SE1 signal was known by POSITAs to disable
`
`or interrupt the USB communication path. POSITAs knew that a device would
`
`then need to perform enumeration again in order to establish a communication path
`
`to transmit and receive data and enable the USB device's functionality.2 Petitioner
`
`fails to address that substituting SE1 would have disrupted the communication and
`
`operation of Dougherty's computer system.
`
`III. USB 2.0
`14. USB was designed to allow for port expansion where and plug-and-
`
`
`1 To be clear, this is in response to Petitioner(cid:8217)s attempt to implement the SE1 signal into
`Theobald(cid:8217)s and Dougherty(cid:8217)s power adapter. The (cid:8216)766 patent inventors developed specific
`techniques to address these issues.
`2 A (cid:8220)USB communication path(cid:8221) 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 (cid:8216)766
`patent.
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 9
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`play bidirectional communication channels. Ex. 1007-1 at 17. 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 path, (cid:8220)USB devices are required
`
`[(cid:8230)] at all times to display behavior consistent with defined USB device states.(cid:8221)
`
`Id. at 50.
`
`15. The USB specification explains that (cid:8220)[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.(cid:8221) Id. at 55.
`
`16. 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 45-47; Ex. 1007-4 at 46-48. A POSITA would understand that
`
`enumeration is the process for identifying and configuring attached devices
`
`according to the USB specification. See, supra, Section IV. 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 5-6; see, also, infra,
`
`§IV.B; see, also, 1007-1 at 52 ((cid:8220)[b]efore a function can be used, it must be
`
`configured by the host.(cid:8221)).
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 10
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`17. 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
`18. 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 48; Ex.
`
`1007-3 at 44, 47; Ex. 1007-4 at 46-47; Ex. 1007-5 at 21; Ex. 1007-6 at 8. This
`
`mechanism uses standard USB signaling and specifically bans the use of the SE1
`
`signal. Ex. 1007-2 at 81.
`
`19.
`
`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:
`
`When 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
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 11
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`changes necessary[.]
`Pet. at 7.
`
`20. 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(cid:8212)which involves "initial exchange of information
`
`that enables the host's device driver to communicate with the device"(cid:8212)is called
`
`enumeration. Ex. 2006 at 74.
`
`21. 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. 2014 at 76; Ex. 2006 at 96. In this state, the device may
`
`receive power from the USB hub(cid:8212)however, it may not draw more than 100 mA
`
`from VBUS until it is configured. Ex. 1007-4 at 45-46. 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. Id. at 45.
`
`22. Next, the hub detects the device by "monitor[ing] the voltages on the
`
`signal lines of each of its ports." Ex. 2014 at 76; Ex. 2006 at 96. In this step, the
`
`USB device sends a high voltage on either the D+ or D- line. Id. The USB hub
`
`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. 2014 at 76, 77; Ex. 2006 at
`- 11 -
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 12
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`96, 97 (detecting whether full-speed device supports high speed); Ex. 1007-4 at 47.
`
`Upon detecting the device, the hub "continues to provide power but doesn't
`
`transmit USB traffic to the device." Ex. 2014 at 76. 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. 2014 at 76; Ex. 2006 at 96.
`
`23. 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 46; Ex. 2014 at 76; Ex.
`
`2006 at 97. In an enabled state, the host can now signal the connected USB device
`
`with control packets.
`
`24. 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 46; Ex.
`
`2014 at 77; Ex. 2006 at 97.
`
`25. 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
`
`a unique address to the USB device, such that it is in the "Address" state. Ex.
`
`1007-4 at 46; Ex. 2014 at 77-78; Ex. 2006 at 98.
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 13
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`26. The host then "sends a Get_Descriptor" request to the new address to
`
`learn about the device's abilities. Ex. 2014 at 78; Ex. 2006 at 98. The standard USB
`
`descriptors include the following fields (see Ex. 1007-4 at 65-66, Table 9-8):
`
`
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 14
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 15
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`27. 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
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 16
`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.
`
`28. The host continues to learn about the device "by requesting the one or
`
`more configuration descriptors specified in the device descriptor." Ex. 2014 at 78.
`
`The configuration descriptor has the following fields (Ex. 1007-4 at 68-69, 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 9.6.7 of USB 2.0. Ex. 2018 at 7:37-44.
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 17
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 18
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 18 -
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 19
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`29. The host then reads the "configuration" information from the device,
`
`which contains information about the device's capabilities. Ex. 1007-4 at 46.; Ex.
`
`2014 at 77; Ex. 2006 at 98-99. Finally, the host assigns a configuration value to the
`
`USB device, which puts the device into the "configured" state. Ex. 1007-4 at 47;
`
`Ex. 2014 at 79; Ex. 2006 at 99-100. 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 53-54 (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. 2014
`
`at 37 (application communications began after enumeration); Ex. 2006 at 41
`
`(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 47; Ex. 2014 at 79; Ex. 2006 at 99-100.
`
`30. Either shortly before, or shortly after, the USB device enters the
`
`"configured" state, the host assigns and loads a device driver. See Ex. 2014 at 78-
`
`79; Ex. 2006 at 99. 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
`
`at 46-47), the process of loading the device driver is closely related to enumeration
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 19 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 20
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`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. 2014 at 78-79 ("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 99 (same); see also Ex. 1007-5 at 16-18 (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.
`
`31. 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 47. The USB device may now also
`
`draw power over the VBUS line according to the configuration information set by
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 20 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 21
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`the USB host. Id.
`
`32. 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. 2014 at 79-80; Ex. 2006 at 100.
`
`V.
`
`SE1 Signaling
`33. 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
`
`81.
`
`34.
`
`It is possible to use an SE1 signal without interfering with USB
`
`signaling, as established by the '766 patent. Petitioner provides no evidence that
`
`the prior art ever contemplated sending an SE1 signal without interrupting data
`
`communications prior to the '766 patent.
`
`35. Petitioner and the Levy declaration contend that "POSITAs would
`
`have also known that the SE1 state would be a logical choice for conveying
`
`information about a device without interfering with USB signaling." Pet. at 35
`
`(citing Ex. 1005, mirror image Levy declaration, at ¶153); see also Pet. at 7, 34,
`
`63.
`
`36. However, petitioner provides no explanation how or why a POSITA
`
`would have sent an SE1 signal for "conveying information about a device without
`
`interfering with USB signaling." See, Id. As discussed below, Petitioner's
`- 21 -
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 22
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`conclusion that SE1 offers a "logical choice for conveying 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.
`
`37.
`
`I disagree with Petitioner's conclusions for several reasons, including
`
`the following.
`
`A. The USB Specification Teaches That The SE1 Condition Should
`Never Be Intentionally Generated on the USB
`38. First, as the petition acknowledges numerous times, "the USB 2.0
`
`specification indicates that the Single-Ended (SE) 1 signal (i.e., when both the D+
`
`and D- data lines are at a high voltage level) must never be intentionally generated
`
`within USB." Pet. at 2 (emphasis added) (citing USB 2.0, 123, 148) ("USB drivers
`
`must never 'intentionally' generate an SE1 on the bus."); see, also, Pet. at 7, 20, 22,
`
`23, 47, 51, 52. A POSITA designing an accessory for USB would follow the USB
`
`specification, and would not believe SE1 provides a "logical choice" for signaling
`
`because USB explicitly prohibits this exact thing. If an application involves USB
`
`communication, it should not employ the SE1 signal.
`
`B.
`
`The USB Specification Teaches That The SE1 Condition
`Interrupts USB Communications
`39. Second, the USB specification explains that an SE1 signal would
`- 22 -
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 23
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`interfere with communications on the USB. As one example, the USB
`
`Specification states that all USB receivers comprise a receiver state machine that
`
`follows USB protocol. USB stipulates that all compliant USB receivers interrupt
`
`communication on the USB if they receive an SE1 signal:3
`
`11.6.3.3 ReceivingJ
`This state is entered from a nonHS state except the Suspend state if the
`receiver detects an SJ (or Idle) or SE1 condition on the bus or while the
`Transmitter is in the Active state.
`This is a timed state with an interval of 3 ms. The timer is reset each time
`this state is entered.
`The timer only advances if the Transmitter is in the Inactive state.
`Ex. 1007-5 at 53.
`
`40. USB also stipulates that a USB hub must disable the USB port when
`
`SE1 signaling is observed to avoid "errors that are very difficult to isolate and
`
`correct":
`
`Each port is required to have a timer used for detecting disconnect when a
`full-/low-speed device is attached to the port. This timer is used to constantly
`monitor the port's single-ended receivers to detect a disconnect event. The
`reason for constant monitoring is that a noise event on the bus can cause the
`attached device to detect a reset condition on the bus after 2.5 (cid:956)s of SE0 or
`SE1 on the bus. If the hub does not place the port in the disconnect state
`
`
`3 It is still possible to be a USB 2.0 device or component even if all portions of the
`specification are not satisfied.
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 23 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 24
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`before the device resets, then the device can be at the Default Address state
`with the port enabled. This can cause errors that are very difficult to isolate
`and correct.
`Ex. 1007-5 at 49.
`
`41. The Petition does not address whether this interruption would
`
`interfere with typical USB signaling, nor whether this concern would affect a
`
`POSITA(cid:8217)s motivation to perform the combination proposed in the Petition.
`
`C. The Prior Art References Cited By Petitioner Do Not Teach
`Generating An SE1 Condition On The USB Without Interrupting
`USB Communications Or To Enable Drawing Current
`Unrestricted
`42. Third, Petitioner cites several references4 for the proposition that
`
`"POSITAs would have understood that the SE1 state could be used in a variety of
`
`contexts." Pet. at 8. But Petitioner does not, and cannot, assert that any of these
`
`references are used in the particular context at issue: signaling identification
`
`information to trigger current draw at above the USB limit.
`
`43. Notably, in Shiga and Petitioner's other references allegedly reflecting
`
`the state of the art regarding the use of SE1 signaling, SE1 was never contemplated
`
`to trigger current or power draw in excess of a USB limit. Shiga and Zyskowski,
`
`for example, concern waking up a power supply; Casebolt and Cypress concern
`
`4 Petitioner cites to Ex. 1009 ("Shiga"), Ex. 1012 ("Zyskowski"), Ex. 1013
`("Casebolt"), Ex. 1014 ("Cypress"), and Ex. 1015 ("Kerai") as prior art references
`relating to SE1.
`
`10497703.2 07
`
`
`
`
`- 24 -
`
`
`
`FISI Ex 2016-p 25
`Huawei v FISI
`IPR2018-00465
`
`

`

`
`
`identifying a non-USB device so D+ and D- lines can be disconnected; and Kerai
`
`draws current even when the data condition is normal as long as one data line is
`
`driven high. See Ex. 1009 at 6:8-15; Ex. 1012 at [0017], [0019]; Ex. 1013 at 7:40-
`
`46; Ex. 1014 at 24; Ex. 1015 at 5:43-48. Petitioner never alleges, or points to any
`
`disclosure in these references that suggests SE1 signaling can be used to enable
`
`"drawing current unrestricted by a USB specification limit."
`
`44. Further, none