First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`HUAWEI DEVICE CO., LTD.,
`Petitioner
`v.
`OPTIS CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`Case No. To Be Assigned
`Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FIRST DECLARATION OF DR. JONATHAN WELLS
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,102,833: CLAIMS 1-14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`I.
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`QUALIFICATIONS ....................................................................................... 2
`II.
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED ....................................................................... 6
`IV. SCOPE OF OPINIONS .................................................................................. 9
`V.
`LEGAL PRINCIPLES .................................................................................... 9
`VI. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART .......................................... 13
`VII. BACKGROUND TO THE TECHNOLOGY .............................................. 13
`A. Mobile Radio Communications ......................................................... 13
`B.
`Long Term Evolution ......................................................................... 16
`1.
`OFDMA and SC-FDMA .......................................................... 17
`2.
`LTE Uplink Signal Processing................................................. 23
`3.
`Reference Signals ..................................................................... 28
`Signal Processing Functionality ......................................................... 29
`1.
`Interleaving .............................................................................. 29
`2.
`Padding, Puncturing and Overwriting ..................................... 31
`VIII. SUMMARY OF THE ’833 PATENT .......................................................... 32
`A.
`Priority Date ....................................................................................... 32
`B.
`Overview of the ’833 Patent ............................................................... 33
`C.
`Prosecution History Summary of the ’833 Patent .............................. 45
`D.
`Challenged Claims ............................................................................. 46
`IX. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................... 46
`
`C.
`
`i
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`
`A.
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`“serially multiplexing first control signals and data signals . . .,
`wherein the first control signals are placed at a front part of the
`multiplexed signals and the data signals are placed at a rear part
`of the multiplexed signals” (Claim 1) ................................................ 47
`“mapping” / “mapped” (Claims 1, 8) ................................................. 47
`“mapping the multiplexed signals to” (Claims 1, 8) .......................... 48
`“mapping ACK/NACK control signals to” (Claims 1, 8) .................. 48
`“the ACK/NACK control signals overwrite some of the
`multiplexed signals mapped to the 2-dimensional resource
`matrix at step (b) from the last row of the specific columns”
`(Claims 1, 8) ....................................................................................... 48
`“serially multiplexing first control signals and data signals,
`wherein the first control signals are placed at a front part of the
`multiplexed signals and the data signals are placed at a rear part
`of the multiplexed signals” (Claim 8) ................................................ 48
`“single carrier frequency divisional multiple access (SC-
`FDMA) and subcarriers for each SC-FDMA symbol” (Claim 8) ...... 49
`THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS OF THE ’833 PATENT ARE
`TAUGHT BY THE PRIOR ART ................................................................. 49
`A.
`Prior Art .............................................................................................. 49
`1.
`Papasakellariou (Ex. 1006) ..................................................... 49
`2.
`Cho (Ex. 1010) ......................................................................... 68
`3. Motorola (Ex. 1011) ................................................................ 77
`Ground I: Claims 1-14 Are Obvious Over the Combination of
`Papasakellariou, Cho, and Motorola ................................................. 81
`1.
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 81
`2.
`Claim 2 ................................................................................... 133
`3.
`Claim 3 ................................................................................... 134
`
`B.
`C.
`D.
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`X.
`
`B.
`
`ii
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`4.
`Claim 4 ................................................................................... 137
`Claim 5 ................................................................................... 142
`5.
`Claim 6 ................................................................................... 143
`6.
`Claim 7 ................................................................................... 149
`7.
`Claim 8 ................................................................................... 150
`8.
`Claim 9 ................................................................................... 152
`9.
`10. Claim 10 ................................................................................. 152
`11. Claim 11 ................................................................................. 153
`12. Claim 12 ................................................................................. 153
`13. Claim 13 ................................................................................. 153
`14. Claim 14 ................................................................................. 154
`XI. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 154
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`I.
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1. My name is Jonathan Wells, and I have been retained as an expert on
`
`behalf of Huawei Device Co., Ltd. (“Huawei”), the Petitioner in the present
`
`proceeding. I am being compensated at my usual and customary hourly rate. I
`
`have no financial interest in, or affiliation with, the petitioner, real parties-in-
`
`interest, or the Patent Owner, which I understand to be Optis Cellular Technology,
`
`LLC. My compensation is not dependent upon the outcome of, or my testimony
`
`in, the present inter partes review or any related litigation proceedings.
`
`2. My opinions are based on my years of education, research and
`
`experience, as well as my investigation and study of relevant materials. The
`
`materials that I studied for this declaration include all exhibits of the petition.
`
`3.
`
`I may rely upon my knowledge and experience, the materials set forth
`
`in Section III below, and/or additional materials to rebut arguments raised by the
`
`Patent Owner. Further, I may also consider additional documents and information
`
`in forming any opinions, including documents that may not yet have been provided
`
`to me.
`
`4. My analysis of the materials produced in this litigation is ongoing and
`
`I will continue to review any new material as it is provided. This Declaration
`
`represents only those opinions I have formed to date. I reserve the right to revise,
`
`1
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`supplement, and/or amend my opinions stated herein based on new information
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`and on my continuing analysis of the materials already provided.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`I am an expert in the field of wireless communications. I have
`5.
`
`studied, taught, practiced, and researched this field for thirty years. I summarize in
`
`this section my educational background, work experience, and other relevant
`
`qualifications. My curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit 1009.
`
`6.
`
`I earned my Bachelor of Science degrees in Physics and Physical
`
`Electronics with First Class Honors from the University of Bath in 1987. In 1991,
`
`I earned my Ph.D. in Microwave Physics from the University of Bath. I earned my
`
`Masters of Business Administration with distinction in 1998 from Massey
`
`University in New Zealand.
`
`7.
`
`From 1990 to 1992, I worked at the University of Bath as a
`
`Postdoctoral Research Officer. During this time, I researched and developed novel
`
`integrated semiconductor devices, including developing software models to predict
`
`the performance of these and other devices. I also taught undergraduate classes
`
`and ran laboratory sessions.
`
`8.
`
`From 1993 to 1994, I was a Senior Design Engineer at Matra Marconi
`
`Space, where I developed integrated electronic components and space-qualified
`
`sub-systems for two satellite payloads.
`
`2
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`9.
`
`From 1994 to 1998, I was employed by MAS Technology (now Aviat
`
`Networks) in Wellington, New Zealand; first as a Senior Design Engineer before
`
`being promoted to Engineering Group Manager. During this time, I was
`
`responsible for hardware development for three families of telecommunication
`
`equipment and sustaining development for a family of satellite ground station
`
`terminals. I personally designed a wide range of RF devices, and was responsible
`
`for the company’s European regulatory approvals.
`
`10. From 1998 to 2000, I was with Adaptive Broadband (now GE Digital
`
`Energy) in Rochester, NY, first as an Engineering Group Leader, and then as
`
`Director of Wideband Products. In this latter role, I had full profit and loss
`
`responsibility for the Terrestrial Infrastructure Group, where I also oversaw the
`
`development of a family of digital radios and associated switching and
`
`multiplexing equipment.
`
`11. From 2000 to 2004, I was Director of Product Development at Stratex
`
`Networks (now Aviat Networks) in San Jose, CA. At Stratex Networks I was
`
`responsible for global product development of a portfolio of high-end digital
`
`microwave radios primarily for cellular applications. I led a development team of
`
`35 engineers, and provided technical leadership of Stratex’s flagship Eclipse
`
`product.
`
`3
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`12. From 2005 to 2007, I was Director of Product Management and
`
`Global Regulatory Affairs at GigaBeam Corporation in Herndon, VA. At
`
`GigaBeam, I was responsible for overall product strategy for a novel, industry-
`
`transforming wireless communication product. During this time, I had
`
`responsibility for establishing a global regulatory framework for this new product,
`
`which included developing Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”),
`
`European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations
`
`(“CEPT”), and European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI”)
`
`standards to cover the specification and regulation of the system. I participated in
`
`multiple standard setting meetings, including ETSI meetings, where I personally
`
`submitted technical contributions, attended technical meetings, and contributed
`
`input to technical specifications. I also personally met multiple times with over a
`
`dozen different international regulatory bodies to help setup wireless regulations
`
`within their countries.
`
`13.
`
`I have been Managing Partner of AJIS Consulting since 2007. As an
`
`independent consultant, I provide expertise on various aspects of wireless
`
`communications, including, but not limited to, cellular technologies, wireless
`
`devices, network infrastructure, and wireless rules and regulations. In that
`
`capacity, I have undertaken multiple projects consulting on these topics, as well as
`
`analyzing patents and commercial equipment, for a variety of clients in the
`
`4
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`communications industry. I have conducted a number of technical workshops on
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`various aspects of wireless technology, including cellular networks, mm-wave
`
`radios, security sensors, and short-range radios. I have also helped public
`
`companies, private entities, and startups with product development and marketing
`
`strategies for wireless products, as well as preparing technical submissions for
`
`standards setting meetings.
`
`14.
`
`I have written multiple books, industry reports and journal and
`
`conference papers, most of which focus on wireless communications systems. For
`
`example, I am the author of “Multi-Gigabit Microwave and Millimeter-Wave
`
`Wireless Communications” (Artech House, 2010). I have authored four
`
`comprehensive industry reports on cellular connectivity for Mobile Experts. I have
`
`lectured as part of undergraduate programs at UC Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon
`
`University, and University of Bath, and have given over two dozen lectures and
`
`conference presentations on topics germane to wireless communications.
`
`15.
`
`I am a named inventor on the following issued patents and published
`
`patent applications:
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 7,623,829: Transceiver power detection and control
`architecture;
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 7,236,745: Transceiver power detection architecture;
`
`•
`
`International Publication No. WO 2004/080035: Transceiver power
`detection architecture;
`
`5
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`• European Patent Publication No. EP 1599952 A2: Transceiver power
`detection architecture; and
`
`• Chinese Published Patent Application No. CN 1757186A: Transceiver
`power detection architecture.
`I have been a member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic
`
`16.
`
`Engineers (“IEEE”) since 1995 and a Senior Member of IEEE since 1999. I am
`
`also a Member of the IEEE Communications Society and the IEEE Microwave
`
`Theory and Techniques Society. I was a reviewer for the U.S. Government’s
`
`Broadband Technology Opportunity Program and the Broadband Initiatives
`
`Program, both part of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. I have
`
`been a Chair or Co-Chair of numerous technology workshops and symposia related
`
`to wireless communications technology. I have also been a member of ETSI and
`
`the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (“3GPP”).
`
`17.
`
`If asked, I will testify regarding my qualifications, background and
`
`experience in the field of wireless communications.
`
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`In preparing this Declaration, I have reviewed and relied upon the
`18.
`
`following list of materials:
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833 (the “’833 patent”)
`
`File History for the ’833 Patent
`
`6
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`1003
`
`File History for U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/972,244
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`File History for U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/987,427
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0304467 (“Papasakellariou
`
`Publication”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,331,328 (“Papasakellariou”)
`
`U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/942,843 (“Papasakellariou
`
`Provisional”)
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2006/0262871 (“Cho”)
`
`Motorola, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #50, R1-073361, “Uplink
`
`channel interleaving”
`
`File History for U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/988,433
`
`Claim Construction Order, Optis Wireless Tech., LLC and
`
`PanOptis Patent Mgmt., LLC v. Huawei Techs. Co. Ltd., et al.,
`
`Case No. 2:17-cv-123 JRG-RSP, Dkt. #114 (E.D. Tex. filed Jan.
`
`18, 2018)
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0185159 (“Seo”)
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2006/0098568 (“Oh”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,421,527 (“DeMartin”)
`
`WIPO Publication No. 2007/081145 (“Kwak”)
`
`7
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`1018
`
`Second Amended Complaint, Optis Wireless Tech., LLC and
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`PanOptis Patent Mgmt., LLC v. Huawei Techs. Co. Ltd., et al.,
`
`Case No. 2:17-cv-123 JRG-RSP, Dkt. #22 (E.D. Tex. filed March
`
`21, 2017)
`
`Declaration of Xiaoan Fan
`
`File History for U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/942,843
`
`(“Papasakellariou Provisional”)
`
`Second Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`EP Patent Publication No. 1793639
`
`“3GPP – LTE” webpage, available at
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`http://www.3gpp.org/technologies/keywords-acronyms/98-lte
`
`1024
`
`3GPP TS 36.211 v2.0.0 (2007-09), Technical Specification Group
`
`Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio
`
`Access (E-UTRA); Physical Channels and Modulation (Release 8)
`
`1025
`
`3GPP TS 36.212 v2.0.0 (2007-09), 3rd Generation Partnership
`
`Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network;
`
`Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA);
`
`Multiplexing and channel coding (Release 8)
`
`1026
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,732,316 (“Tong”)
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`IV. SCOPE OF OPINIONS
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether claims 1-
`19.
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`14 of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833 (the “’833 patent”) would have been obvious to a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the alleged invention, over the
`
`combination of U.S. Patent No. 8,331,328 (“Papasakellariou”), U.S. Patent
`
`Application Publication No. 2006/0262871 (“Cho”), and 3GPP contribution
`
`document R1-073361 (“Motorola”).
`
`V. LEGAL PRINCIPLES
`20. Several legal standards have been explained to me that I should
`
`consider as part of my analysis.
`
`21.
`
`I understand that the Petitioner Huawei bears the burden of proving
`
`the instituted grounds of unpatentability by a preponderance of the evidence. I
`
`understand that a “preponderance” means “more likely than not.” I understand that
`
`general and conclusory assertions, without underlying factual evidence, may not
`
`support a conclusion that something is “more likely than not.”
`
`22. Rather, the preponderance of the evidence standard requires that a
`
`reasonable finder of fact be convinced that the existence of a specific material fact
`
`is more probable than the non-existence of that fact. The preponderance of the
`
`evidence standard does not support speculation regarding specific facts, and is
`
`instead focused on whether the evidence more likely than not demonstrates the
`
`9
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`existence or non-existence of specific material facts. For Huawei’s Petition, I
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`understand that Huawei has argued that the claims at obvious in view of certain
`
`prior art references.
`
`23.
`
`I have been informed that a reference may qualify as prior art if it was
`
`known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed
`
`publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention by the patent holder.
`
`24.
`
`I have also been informed that a reference may qualify as prior art if
`
`the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign
`
`country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year before the
`
`effective filing date.
`
`25. For a printed publication to qualify as prior art, I understand that the
`
`Petitioner must demonstrate that the publication was disseminated or otherwise
`
`sufficiently accessible to the public.
`
`26.
`
`It is my understanding that information in prior art documents may be
`
`considered part of the general knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`(“POSITA”).
`
`27. For a U.S. patent to rely on the filing date of a provisional patent
`
`application to which the U.S. patent claims priority, I understand that the subject
`
`matter of the provisional patent must be carried forward into the U.S. patent’s
`
`10
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`disclosure, and the provisional patent must provide written description support to
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`one or more claims of the issued U.S. patent.
`
`28.
`
`It is my understanding that there are two ways in which prior art may
`
`render a patent claim unpatentable. First, the prior art can be shown to “anticipate”
`
`the claim. Second, the prior art can be shown to have made the claim “obvious” to
`
`a POSITA.
`
`29.
`
`It is my understanding that a patent claim is unpatentable as being
`
`obvious in view of prior art if the differences between the subject matter sought to
`
`be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have
`
`been obvious, at the time the alleged invention was made, to a POSITA to which
`
`said subject matter pertains. I further understand that an obviousness analysis
`
`takes into consideration factual inquiries such as the level of ordinary skill in the
`
`art, the scope and content of the prior art, and the differences between the prior art
`
`and the patent claim.
`
`30.
`
`I understand that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized several
`
`rationales for combining references and for modifying a reference as part of an
`
`obviousness analysis. These rationales include combining prior art elements
`
`according to known methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of a
`
`known element for another to obtain predictable results, a predictable use of prior
`
`art elements in accordance with their established functions, applying a known
`
`11
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`technique to improve a known device (or process) and yield predictable results,
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`and Choosing from a finite number of known predictable solutions with a
`
`reasonable expectation of success. It is further my understanding that an
`
`obviousness analysis takes into consideration whether the prior art provides a
`
`teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine teachings of multiple prior art
`
`references to arrive at the patent claim.
`
`31.
`
`I have also been informed that the claimed invention must be
`
`considered as a whole in analyzing obviousness or non-obviousness. In
`
`determining the differences between the prior art and the claims, the question
`
`under the obviousness inquiry is not whether the differences themselves would
`
`have been obvious, but whether the claimed invention as a whole would have been
`
`obvious.
`
`32. Relatedly, I understand that it may be appropriate to consider whether
`
`there is evidence of a “teaching, suggestion, or motivation” to combine the prior art
`
`teachings in the prior art, the nature of the problem or the knowledge of a POSITA.
`
`33.
`
`I further understand that certain objective indicia can be important
`
`evidence regarding whether a patent is obvious or nonobvious, including the
`
`existence of a long-felt but unsolved need, unexpected results, commercial success,
`
`copying, and industry acceptance or praise. Evidence of such objective indicia
`
`must be considered when present.
`
`12
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`VI. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`34. For the ’833 patent, a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`the alleged invention (“POSITA”) would be someone with a working knowledge
`
`of wireless networking. The person would have gained this knowledge through an
`
`undergraduate Bachelor of Science degree in Electronic Engineering or a related
`
`field, and approximately two years of education, training or experience in the
`
`design, development, and/or testing of cellular networks . This description is
`
`approximate, and a higher level of education or skill might make up for less
`
`experience, and vice-versa.
`
`VII. BACKGROUND TO THE TECHNOLOGY
`A. Mobile Radio Communications
`In a radio communication system, data is transmitted from one place
`35.
`
`to another wirelessly using a radio transmitter and a radio receiver. In a mobile
`
`communication system, a user can move around and still send and receive data
`
`without being disconnected. Such a mobile communication system would consist
`
`of a base station, which transmits signals to (and receives signals from), devices
`
`within an area surrounding the base station. This area of coverage is known as a
`
`cell. As a user moves around the cell, the user remains connected to the base
`
`station and can receive signals from (and transmit signals to) the base station. As a
`
`user moves outside the cell and into the coverage area of an adjacent base station,
`
`13
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`any ongoing connections are seamlessly transferred to the adjacent base station,
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`which then continues the communication with the user. This is known as hand
`
`over or hand off.
`
`36.
`
`In such a mobile communications system, the base station
`
`communicates with the user device in a bi-directional manner; the base station
`
`sends signals to the user device, and the user devices sends signal to the base
`
`station. These two transmissions can occur simultaneously. The signals
`
`transmitted from the base station down to the user device are called “downlink”
`
`signals, and signals from the user device up to the base station are “uplink” signals.
`
`This is depicted below.
`
`
`
`37. Both the downlink and uplink carry “user data signals.” For example,
`
`when in user is engaged in a voice call on a mobile phone, the base station sends
`
`user data signals corresponding to voice information on the downlink to the user
`
`device (e.g., the user on the mobile phone is able to listen to talk during the phone
`
`14
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`call), and the user device also sends user data signals corresponding to voice
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`information on the uplink to the base station (e.g., the same user is able to talk back
`
`on the phone call). Another example would be a downlink carrying user data
`
`signals corresponding to digital information (e.g., a user device receiving a text
`
`message or email, or downloading or streaming a video to the user’s smartphone).
`
`Additionally, uplink signals can also carry user data signals (e.g., a user can send
`
`emails or upload photos to a social media site). In all these situations, the data
`
`signals received or sent are known as “user data signals” or more simply “data
`
`signals.”
`
`38.
`
`In order to send such user data signals, the base stations and user
`
`devices need to send additional signaling between the devices, so that the two can
`
`synchronize together and share information about the user data signals so that they
`
`can be properly received and decoded. Such information is known as “control
`
`signals.” An example of a downlink control signal would be information about
`
`how the transmitted data signal is encoded. This would be sent so that the user
`
`device will then know how to decode the received information. An example of an
`
`uplink control signal would be an acknowledgement sent by the user device back
`
`to the base station to confirm that it has properly received the transmitted data
`
`signal. Such acknowledgements can be a positive acknowledgment (known as an
`
`15
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`ACK) if the data signal was properly received, or a negative acknowledgement
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`(NACK) if there was some problem receiving the data signal.
`
`39. At the time of the filing of the ’833 patent, the concept of sending data
`
`signals and control signals on an uplink in a mobile communication system was
`
`well known. For example, as disclosed in the Discussion of the Related Art
`
`section, the ’833 patent concedes: “A user equipment (UE) of a mobile
`
`communication system transmits various signals through an uplink. Uplink signals
`
`transmitted by the user equipment can be segmented into data signals and control
`
`signals. Also, examples of the control signals transmitted to the uplink include
`
`uplink ACK/NACK signals for HARQ [(hybrid automatic repeat request)]
`
`communication, channel quality indicator (CQI) information, and preceding matrix
`
`index (PMI).” Ex. 1001, 1:26-32.
`
`Long Term Evolution
`B.
`40. Long Term Evolution (LTE) is the name given to the radio part of the
`
`fourth generation (4G) mobile communication network widely deployed in the US
`
`today. In relevant part, an LTE network consists of base stations (known as an
`
`eNodeB or eNB) and multiple user devices (known as a User Equipment or UE).
`
`16
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`The responsibility for managing the development and maintenance of LTE resides
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`with a group called 3GPP (Third Generation Partnership Project).1
`
`41. The radio transmission between an eNodeB base station and a UE in
`
`LTE uses a multicarrier transmission scheme known based on a technique known
`
`as OFDM (orthogonal frequency division multiplexing). In most previous radio
`
`systems, a single radio wave (known as a carrier) was used to carry the uplink
`
`and/or downlink signal between the eNodeB and/or UE. Such systems are known
`
`as single carrier systems. In LTE, a multicarrier system was chosen. Here radio
`
`transmission occurs using a multitude of closely spaced carriers. These carriers are
`
`known as “subcarriers” and are chosen with a particular property called
`
`orthogonality that means that the subcarriers do not interfere with one another.
`
`1. OFDMA and SC-FDMA
`In LTE, the uplink and downlink are both based on OFDM, but each
`
`42.
`
`is implemented differently. This is shown pictorially below.2 For the downlink, a
`
`technique called OFDMA (orthogonal frequency division multiple access) is used.
`
`In OFDMA the subcarriers can be shared between multiple users. OFDMA has a
`
`
`1 Although 3GPP contains the acronym 3G, the group is also responsible for 4G/LTE
`specifications. This is because 3GPP was formed in 1998 to develop the original 3G
`specification. Since that time, their responsibility has grown to develop the 4G/LTE
`specifications and also future 5G specifications. However, 3GPP retains its original name,
`including the 3G acronym.
`2 See Ex. 1023 (available at http://www.3gpp.org/technologies/keywords-acronyms/98-lte).
`
`17
`
`

`

`First Declaration of Dr. Jonathan Wells
`
`
`number of performance advantages. However, a major downside of OFDMA is
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,102,833
`
`
`
`
`that to transmit OFDMA signals, high performance amplifiers are required,
`
`meaning expensive transmitters with high power consumption.3 The use of such
`
`amplifiers at a base station is acceptable, but would be impractical in a UE. For
`
`this reason, a different solution was selected for the uplink. Here a technique
`
`called SC-FDMA (Single Carrier – Frequency Division Multiple Access) is used.
`
`In SC-FDMA, information to be transmitted is not assigned directly to each
`
`subcarrier independently, as it is in OFDMA. Instead, an additional signal
`
`processing step is taken to assign information to be transmitted to a group of
`
`subcarriers, whereby each subcarrier within the group of subcarrier carries a
`
`combination of all the information to be transmitted. A DFT (Discrete Fourier
`
`Transform) element is used for this purpose, which is why SC-FDMA is also
`
`known as DFT-spread OFDMA.4 Because of this dependence, each group of
`
`subcarriers behaves as if it were a single carrier. As such, the SC-FDMA uplink
`
`used in LTE can be transmitted by a UE without the need for a high performa