`
`In the Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,356,122
`
`Trial No.: IPR2015-00148
`
`Issued: March 12, 2002
`
`Filed: August 4, 1999
`
`Inventors: Piyush Sevalia, et al.
`
`Assignee: PLL Technologies, Inc.
`
`Title: CLOCK SYNTHESIZER WITH PROGRAMMABLE INPUT- OUTPUT
`
`PHASE RELATIONSHIP
`
`DECLARATION OF DONALD ALPERT, Ph.D., UNDER 37 C.F.R.§ 1.68,
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER’S REPLY TO PATENT OWNER’S
`RESPONSE
`
`I, Dr. Donald Alpert, do hereby declare:
`
`1.
`
`I am making this declaration in support of Petitioner’s Reply to Patent
`
`Owner’s Response at the request of Xilinx, Inc. (“Xilinx”) in the matter of the
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,356,122 (“the ‘122 patent”), Case
`
`No. IPR2015-00148.
`
`2.
`
`I previously submitted a declaration in this matter. [Ex. 1010] In that
`
`Declaration, I provided my opinions concerning the patentability of certain claims
`
`of the ‘122 patent in consideration of the prior art references of Exhibits 1003 –
`
`1009. Of these references, U.S. Patent No. 4,611,230 (“Nienaber”) (Ex. 1003) and
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,446,867 (“Young”) (Ex. 1004) are discussed below.
`
`QUALCOMM EXHIBIT 2004
`Apple v. Qualcomm
`IPR2018-01249
`Page 1
`
`
`
`3.
`
`In preparing this Declaration, I have been asked to review Patent
`
`Owner’s Response (Paper 14) and the Declaration of Dr. John P. Hayes (Ex. 2002),
`
`prepared on behalf of the Patent Owner. In preparing this Declaration, I also
`
`considered the following materials:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Institution Decision (Paper 8);
`
`Exhibits 2001- 2012, submitted by the Patent Owner;
`
`Patent Owner Preliminary Response (Paper 6);
`
`IEEE Standard Glossary of Computer Hardware Terminology, IEEE
`•
`Std 610.10-1994 (Ex. 1013);
`
`McCharles, R.H. and Hodges, D., “Charge circuits for analog LSI,” in
`•
`IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, vol. 25, no.7, Jul 1978, pp. 490-
`497 (Ex. 1015);
`
`•
`
`•
`
`U.S. Patent No. 3,691,297 to Merrell, et al. (Ex. 1016);
`
`U.S. Patent No. 3,426,344 to Clark (Ex. 1017);
`
`IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical & Electronics Terms (6th ed.
`•
`1996) (selected pages) (Ex. 1018);
`
`Transcript of November 20, 2015 Deposition of John Hayes
`•
`(Ex. 1019);
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,654,657 to Pearce (Ex. 1020);
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,706,004 to Yeung (Ex. 1021);
`
`U.S. Patent No. 2,931,024 to Slack (Ex. 1023);
`
`Wilcox, Milton, “A Highly Stable Integrated Sync System,” in IEEE
`•
`Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. CE-24, no.3, Aug. 1978, pp.
`284-290 (Ex. 1024);
`
`Doyle, N.; Hamaoui, H.; Nichols, J., “Some Applications of Digital
`•
`Techniques in TV Receivers,” in IEEE Transactions on Broadcast and
`2
`
`Page 2
`
`
`
`Television Receivers, vol. BTR-18, no.4, Nov. 1972, pp. 245-249
`(Ex. 1025); and
`
`•
`
`4.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,409,665 to Tubbs (Ex. 1026).
`
`In this Declaration, I document certain issues where I disagree with
`
`the opinions expressed in Patent Owner’s Response or Dr. Hayes’ Declaration.
`
`My silence in this Declaration about any other issue in no way means that I agree
`
`with opinions on that issue expressed in Patent Owner’s Response or Dr. Hayes’
`
`Declaration.
`
`5.
`
`In my previous declaration [Ex. 1010], I provided a summary of my
`
`professional background and qualifications, relevant
`
`legal standards, and
`
`summaries of the ‘122 patent and the references of Exhibits 1003 through 1009.
`
`I.
`
`Claim Construction for “clock”
`
`6.
`
`In Ex. 2002 at Section VII.A, Dr. Hayes documents his opinion that
`
`the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “clock” for the ‘122 patent is a
`
`“periodic signal used for synchronization in a digital system.” [Ex. 2002 par. 42]
`
`The basis for Dr. Hayes’ opinion starts with citations to definitions for the term
`
`“clock” that appear in in the IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and
`
`Electronics Terms (“IEEE Standard Dictionary”), including “a periodic signal used
`
`for synchronization.” [Ex. 2002 par. 40, citing Ex. 2007 at p. 163] In my opinion,
`
`this IEEE Standard Dictionary definition is consistent with the broadest
`
`3
`
`Page 3
`
`
`
`reasonable interpretation of the term, as well as with the Board’s
`
`interpretation of “a periodic timing control signal” [Paper 8 at p. 9].
`
`A clock is not limited to digital systems.
`
`7.
`
`In Ex. 2002 at par. 42, Dr. Hayes contends that the interpretation for
`
`clock should be further limited beyond the IEEE Standard Dictionary’s definition
`
`to digital systems only: “[a] periodic signal used for synchronization in a digital
`
`system.” The basis documented for this opinion includes two contentions: (1) the
`
`IEEE Standard Dictionary limits the cited definition of “clock” to digital computer
`
`systems, and (2) the term “clock” has no recognized meaning in connection with
`
`analog circuits. These contentions are wrong for at least the reasons explained
`
`below. Similarly, I disagree with Patent Owner’s contention that goes beyond the
`
`scope of Dr. Hayes’ declaration: “the IEEE Dictionary demonstrates that a ‘clock’
`
`signal is inherently for digital systems.” [Paper 14 at. p. 12, emphasis added]
`
`8.
`
`Dr. Hayes asserts that the IEEE Standard Dictionary definition for
`
`“clock” should be limited to digital systems because the cited definition relates to
`
`the field of computers.
`
`4
`
`Page 4
`
`
`
`
`
`[Ex. 2002 at par. 42]
`
`9.
`
`This assertion is incorrect at least because the definitions from the
`
`“computer” category are not limited to digital systems. Rather, the “computer”
`
`category includes definitions for numerous analog and mixed signal terms. For
`
`example, the “computer” category includes the following definitions for “analog,”
`
`“analog computer,” “hybrid circuit,” and “operational amplifier”:
`
`[Ex. 1018 p. 9]
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`Page 5
`
`
`
`analog computer (1) (A) (general) An automatic computing
`device that operates in terms of continuousvariation of some
`physical quantities, such as electrical voltages and currents,
`- mechanical shaft rotations, or displacements, and that is used
`primarily to solve differential equations. The equations gov-
`erning the variation ofthe physical quantities have the same
`or very nearly the same form as the mathematical equations
`. under investigation and therefore yield a solution analogous
`to the desired solution of the problem. Results are measured
`on meters, dials, oscillograph recorders, or oscilloscopes. See
`also, simulator. (B) (direct current) An analog computer in
`which computer. variables are represented by the instanta-
`neous values of voltages. (C) (alternating current) An an-
`alog computer in whichelectrical signals are in the form of
`amplitude modulated suppressed carrier signals where the ab-
`solute value of a computervariable is represented by the am-
`plitude of the carrier and the sign of a computer variable is
`represented by the phase (0° or 180°) of the carrier relative to
`the reference alternating-current signal.
`(C) 165-1977w
`(2) A computer that processes analog data. Synonym: elec-
`tronic analog computer. Contrast: digital computer; hybrid
`computer. See also, ac analog computer; dc analog computer.
`(C) 610.10-1994
`
`~
`
`[Ex. 1018 p. 9]
`[Ex. 1018 p. 9]
`
`hybrid circuit (A) A circuit, usually in the form of a module
`or substrate, that is made up of discrete components and in-
`tegrated circuits. Contrast. monolithic integrated circuit.
`(B) A circuit that uses a combination of digital and analog
`, modes of operation, or techniques.
`somone
`Ps
`(C) 610,10-1994
`[Ex. 1018 p. 12]
`[Ex. 1018 p. 12]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`Page 6
`
`Page 6
`
`
`
`[Ex. 1018 pp. 14-15]
`
`
`
`10. The “computer” category of the IEEE Dictionary includes definitions
`
`for numerous other analog and mixed signal terms. [See, e.g., Ex. 1018 at 8 (“ac
`
`analog computer”), 10 (“dc analog computer”), 11 (“gain integrator”), 12 (“hybrid
`
`computer”), and 13 (“integrating amplifier”)]
`
`11. At deposition, Dr. Hayes stated that “it’s possible there are terms
`
`among what I suspect are thousands of terms that might appear under the C
`
`category that are possibly analog or mixed signal.” [Ex. 1019, 31:20-32:10]
`
`
`
`7
`
`Page 7
`
`
`
`Dr. Hayes is correct – there are many analog and mixed signal terms included in
`
`the “C” category of the IEEE Dictionary. Dr. Hayes’ argument that all of the
`
`definitions in the “C” category are related to digital systems is erroneous.
`
`12. Further, as shown in the definitions reproduced above, many of the
`
`definitions in the “C” category are from the IEEE Standard 610.10-94, which has
`
`the title IEEE Standard Glossary of Computer Hardware Terminology. The
`
`definitions of this standard relate to computer hardware, as the title indicates, but
`
`the definitions are not limited to digital systems, as shown by the definitions
`
`reproduced above. Specifically, the overview of IEEE Standard 610.10-94
`
`describes the Standard’s scope as follows: “This glossary defines terms pertaining
`
`to computer hardware. It includes terms from the following areas[,]” where the
`
`areas include “general circuit concepts” and “analog computer concepts.”
`
`[Ex. 1013 p. 7]
`
`13. Consequently, Dr. Hayes and Patent Owner’s argument fails to
`
`recognize the breadth of the “C” category of the IEEE Dictionary. Not all
`
`definitions in the “C” category are related to digital systems (e.g., the category
`
`includes a definition for “analog computer,” as noted above). At least in light of
`
`the computer category’s breadth, it is improper to read the phrase “in a digital
`
`system” into the definition of “clock,” as proposed by Dr. Hayes and Patent
`
`Owner.
`
`
`
`8
`
`Page 8
`
`
`
`Dr. Hayes’ testimony that clock signals are used only in digital systems
`is erroneous.
`
`14. Dr. Hayes has stated that there is no such thing as an “analog clock
`
`signal” and that clock signals are only used in digital systems. [ Ex. 1019, 26:8-9;
`
`Ex. 2002 pars. 39-46.] Dr. Hayes is incorrect. For example, Exs. 1020 and 1021,
`
`U.S. Patent Nos. 5,654,657 and 5,706,004, respectively, both disclose analog clock
`
`signals. U. S. Patent 5,654,657 [Ex. 1020], titled “Accurate Alignment Of Clocks
`
`In Mixed-Signal Tester” and issued on August 5, 1997, discloses techniques for
`
`synthesizing an analog clock signal used in a tester for mixed-signal integrated
`
`circuits (ICs). A mixed-signal IC has both digital and analog subsystems, and is
`
`commonly tested using a tester that controls the device’s inputs and observes the
`
`device’s outputs according to deterministic, reproducible patterns. Such testing
`
`practice allows the digital subsystem to be tested synchronously with a digital
`
`clock input, but requires an analog clock signal to be aligned with the digital clock.
`
`The analog subsystem is tested with the analog clock signal. [Ex. 1020 at 4:7-9
`
`(“[Analog] [c]lock signal generator 200 provides a clock signal for use in a first
`
`analog channel . . . .”)]
`
`9
`
`Page 9
`
`
`
`
`
`[Ex. 1020 at Abstract, emphasis added]
`
`15. Similarly, U. S. Patent No. 5,706,004 [Ex. 1021], which was issued on
`
`January 6, 1998, discloses techniques for reducing noise coupling between analog
`
`and digital circuits in a mixed-signal integrated circuit. More specifically, the
`
`patent discloses gating off a digital clock1 during periods when an analog clock
`
`signal triggers the sampling of analog signals.
`
`
`1 Dr. Hayes attempts to introduce an additional requirement that a clock signal
`cannot be gated: “…and it is generally considered a poor design practice to process
`a clock signal, as passing a clock signal through a logic gate creates a propagation
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`
`
`
`[Ex. 1021 at Abstract, emphasis added; see also 1:13-31, 2:44-65]
`
`[Ex. 1021 Fig. 1, emphasis added]
`
`16. As described above, Exs. 1020 and 1021 both disclose analog clock
`
`signals. Dr. Hayes’ assertion that analog clock signals do not exist is erroneous.
`
`
`
`
`delay that skews the clock, causing the clocks signals before and after the gate to
`have a phase difference. An old adage of digital design is ‘never gate a clock.’”
`[Ex. 2002 par. 62] I disagree with the contention that a clock cannot be gated;
`U. S. Patent 5,706,004 expressly refutes this contention by disclosing “a gated
`digital clock signal.” [Ex. 1021 at Abstract, 2:17-18, 5:4]
`
`
`
`11
`
`Page 11
`
`
`
`II. Claim Construction for “programmable delay circuit”
`17.
`In Ex. 2002 at Section VII.B, Dr. Hayes documents his opinion that
`
`the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “programmable delay circuit” for
`
`the ‘122 patent requires a “memory” for accepting data and/or instructions for
`
`programming the programmable delay circuit. [Ex. 2002 pars. 47-53] I disagree
`
`with Dr. Hayes for the reasons stated below.
`
`The ‘122 patent does not require a “memory” for configuring or
`adjusting a programmable delay circuit.
`18. As acknowledged by Dr. Hayes at deposition [Ex. 1019, 34:3-10], the
`
`word “memory” does not appear anywhere in the claims of the ‘122 patent.
`
`Further, the specification of the ‘122 patent also does not require a memory for
`
`configuring or adjusting a programmable delay circuit. To the contrary, the ‘122
`
`patent expressly describes programmable delay circuits that are configured or
`
`adjusted without the use of a memory. I described this in my previous declaration,
`
`Ex. 1010, at paragraphs 33 and 43. As detailed in these paragraphs, the
`
`specification of the ‘122 patent discloses that delay times of a programmable delay
`
`circuit can be set by various means that do not require a memory, including
`
`blowing fuses and changing a metal mask. For example, a fuse or metal mask can
`
`be used to configure the programmable delay circuit during manufacture by
`
`hardwiring circuit inputs to a logic 0 or 1. Dr. Hayes agrees that a metal mask is
`
`not a memory device. [Ex. 1019, 38:22-23]
`12
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`
`
`19. Based on the above, it is my opinion that Dr. Hayes’ proposed
`
`narrowing of the term “programmable delay circuit” is not supported by the ‘122
`
`patent.
`
`A memory is not “inherently necessary” to accept data and/or
`instructions for configuring a programmable delay circuit.
`20. Dr. Hayes cites the IEEE Dictionary’s definition of “programmable”
`
`and concludes that based on this definition, the term should be defined as “capable
`
`of accepting data and/or instructions to alter a device’s state to perform specific
`
`task(s) or to alter its basic function.” [Ex. 2002 par. 48] Not content with this
`
`definition, Dr. Hayes states that “[t]he IEEE definition refers to the capability of
`
`‘accepting’ data and/or instructions (IEEE Dictionary at 826), and a memory is
`
`inherently necessary to accept the data and/or instructions.” [Ex. 2002 par. 49]
`
`21. Dr. Hayes’ statement that “a memory is inherently necessary to accept
`
`the data and/or instructions” is erroneous. As explained above, the ‘122 patent
`
`describes that a delay time of a programmable delay circuit can be configured or
`
`adjusted by various means that do not require a memory, such as via the one-time
`
`programming techniques of blowing fuses and changing a metal mask. [Ex. 1001,
`
`4:37-45.] Such configuration techniques are examples where data, namely the
`
`associated configuration information, is accepted by the programmable delay
`
`circuit to alter its delay time, with no memory being required to accept the data.
`
`
`
`13
`
`Page 13
`
`
`
`Furthermore, as described below (see Section IV), one-time programming without
`
`the use of a memory is also disclosed in the Young reference (Ex. 1004), which is
`
`intrinsic evidence cited during the ‘122 patent’s prosecution.
`
`22. Based on the above, a person having ordinary skill in the art would
`
`understand that a “programmable delay circuit” does not require a “memory.”
`
`III. Nienaber Discloses a Hybrid System That Uses a Digital Clock Signal
`for Timing Control
`
`23.
`
`In Ex. 2002 at Section VIII.A, Dr. Hayes documents his opinion that
`
`the vertical sync signal disclosed by Nienaber is not a “clock” because (1) the
`
`vertical sync signal for an NTSC television receiver disclosed by Nienaber is used
`
`in a purely analog system, not a digital system [Ex. 2002, par. 54, stating that
`
`Nienaber discloses an “analog television,” and par. 57, stating that Nienaber’s
`
`disclosed computer monitors are “analog CRT (cathode ray tube) devices”], (2) the
`
`vertical sync signal for a computer monitor functions the same as in a television
`
`receiver, and (3) vertical sync signals must be processed, whereas clock signals are
`
`not typically processed. [Ex. 2002 par. 54, 57, 61, and 62] Notably, Dr. Hayes
`
`agrees
`
`that Nienaber’s vertical sync signal
`
`is periodic and used
`
`for
`
`synchronization, as the signal’s name implies. [Ex. 2002 par. 61, stating “[T]he
`
`incoming vertical sync signal [of Nienaber] is a periodic signal used for
`
`synchronization or timing control . . . .”] Dr. Hayes’ objection depends entirely on
`
`14
`
`Page 14
`
`
`
`his contention that the claim construction for “clock” should be limited to digital
`
`systems; as explained above, I disagree that the claim construction of “clock”
`
`should be limited to digital systems.
`
`24. As noted above, Dr. Hayes argues that Nienaber is a purely analog
`
`system, and that therefore, it cannot disclose the claimed clock signals. [Ex. 2002,
`
`par. 54, stating that Nienaber discloses an “analog television,” and par. 57, stating
`
`that Nienaber’s disclosed computer monitors are “analog CRT (cathode ray tube)
`
`devices”] But even assuming that purely analog systems do not use clock signals, as
`
`Dr. Hayes contends, such a contention would be irrelevant because Nienaber does
`
`not disclose a purely analog system. Rather, Nienaber discloses a hybrid system
`
`(i.e., mixed signal system) that utilizes a digital clock signal for timing control. This
`
`is explained below.
`
`Dr. Hayes’ characterization of Nienaber’s system as purely analog is
`erroneous.
`
`25. Dr. Hayes’ assertion that televisions were at least predominantly, if
`
`not entirely, analog devices in the mid 1980’s is incorrect. From the time of early
`
`television receivers in the 1940’s-1950’s until the mid 1980’s, much analog
`
`circuitry had been replaced or augmented with digital technology, for example to
`
`display text on-screen for channel numbers, closed-captioning, and teletext. By the
`
`early-1970’s, the transition from analog to digital circuit techniques was underway,
`
`
`
`15
`
`Page 15
`
`
`
`as explained in Ex. 1025, the paper “Some Applications Of Digital Techniques in
`
`TV Receivers” published in the IEEE Transactions on Broadcast and Television
`
`Receivers in 1972. Digital techniques for television receivers were economical,
`
`technically feasible, and necessary to meet regulatory requirements.
`
`“Until comparatively recently the concept of using digital methods in
`consumer equipment was dismissed as impractical, unnecessary and
`prohibitively expensive. New developments
`in
`semiconductor
`technology, transmission systems and FCC regulations have brought
`about a situation where digital techniques are now not only
`economically and technically feasible but also necessary. Some of the
`factors involved include the availability of complex MOS LSI {Large
`Scale Integration) devices, the National Bureau of Standards time
`code transmission system and the UHF tuning parity regulations. This
`paper will endeavor to discuss these factors and how they may affect
`future TV receiver design.” [Ex. 1025 at p. 245]
`
`26. More specifically, it was known to use digital vertical sync circuits for
`
`both television receivers and computer monitors with analog CRTs (cathode ray
`
`tubes), as explained below. Thus, a person having ordinary skill in the art would
`
`have understood that by the early 1980’s, television receivers and computer
`
`monitors were not entirely analog systems, but instead were hybrid systems that
`
`commonly deployed a combination of digital and analog circuits.
`
`27. The IEEE Standard Dictionary [Ex. 1018 at 12] defines “hybrid
`
`circuit” as follows:
`
`
`
`16
`
`Page 16
`
`
`
`hybrid circuit – A circuit that uses a combination of digital and
`analog components, modes of operation, or techniques. (C) 610.10-
`1994
`
`28. At deposition, Dr. Hayes stated that the terms “hybrid circuit” and
`
`“mixed signal circuit” can be used interchangeably. [Ex. 1019, 27:25-28:11] I
`
`agree with this statement.
`
`29. Nienaber discloses that the preferred embodiment for his invention is
`
`in conjunction with a computer monitor, and that the invention can also be used
`
`with a standard television receiver for a vertical sync signal that has been separated
`
`from the composite video signal.
`
`“Although it is envisioned that the present invention may be utilized in
`a preferred environment with a video monitor in conjunction with
`computers or other non-standard television applications, the present
`invention may be readily used in any circuitry for which a separate
`vertical sync signal may be supplied or derived. For example, in a
`standard television receiver, the vertical sync signal may be separated
`and supplied
`to
`the circuitry of
`the preferred embodiment.”
`[Ex. 1003, 3:34-42]
`
`30. Nienaber discloses that the incoming vertical sync signal is input 10 to
`
`the circuit shown in Fig. 1. A typical waveform for the incoming vertical sync
`
`signal is shown in Fig. 2, labeled IA and IIA. [Nienaber Fig. 1, Fig. 2, 3:8-11,
`
`4:24-30, 4:57-61] At deposition, Dr. Hayes stated that the incoming vertical sync
`17
`
`
`
`Page 17
`
`
`
`signal shown in Nienaber’s Fig. 2 is a digital signal [Ex. 1019, 42:8-16], and I
`
`agree with this. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the
`
`incoming vertical sync signal disclosed by Nienaber is a digital signal at least
`
`because the waveform of Fig. 2 shows that the signal takes on discrete values.
`
`This is the true for applications in either a computer monitor or standard television.
`
`Similarly, the output signal (22 labeled ID and IID) and internal signals (14 labeled
`
`IB and IIB, 28 labeled IC and IIC) are digital signals, and thus Nienaber’s circuit
`
`uses digital techniques to process digital signals. [Nienaber 4:24-5:18]
`
`[Nienaber Fig. 1]
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`Page 18
`
`
`
`
`
`[Nienaber Fig. 2]
`
`31. Computer monitors were known to use digital vertical sync signals at
`
`least 15 years before the filing date of Nienaber. For example, U.S. Patent No.
`
`3,426,344, which was issued to Clark in 1969 and assigned to RCA, discloses a
`
`digital vertical sync signal (V. SYNC.) that is a periodic signal used for
`
`synchronization or timing control in a computer monitor. [Ex. 1017] Sync
`
`Generator 36 outputs the digital V. SYNC. signal, as well as a SYNC signal that
`
`controls analog vertical deflection circuit 42 to position the CRT beam on the
`
`screen. [Ex. 1017, Fig. 3, 5:4-24, 6:28-57] Thus, U.S. Patent No. 3,426,344
`
`discloses a computer monitor with hybrid circuitry, combining digital and analog
`
`techniques, where a digital vertical sync signal is used for synchronization or
`
`timing control.
`
`
`
`19
`
`Page 19
`
`
`
`32. By the early 1980’s, display monitors attached to personal computers,
`
`such as IBM PCs, commonly received a separate digital vertical sync directly from
`
`the computer’s graphics adapter. [Ex. 2011, 71:4-72:5] Nienaber discloses that the
`
`vertical sync signal for computer monitors depends on the computer manufacturer’s
`
`specifications and that his circuit is compatible with various systems, both computer
`
`monitors and television receivers. [Ex. 1003 1:29-35, 1:48-51]
`
`33. At deposition, Dr. Hayes stated that computer monitors in the mid-
`
`1980s used digital vertical sync signals. [Ex. 1019, 44:6-9] I agree with this
`
`statement, as shown by the discussion above.
`
`34. Similarly, by the early 1980’s, television receivers were known to use
`
`a digital vertical sync signal. For example, Ex. 1016, U.S. Patent No. 3,691,297,
`
`published in September 1972 and assigned to Zenith Radio Corporation, describes
`
`known benefits of digital vertical synchronization systems in television receivers,
`
`including improved noise immunity and elimination of the external vertical hold
`
`control, such as a user-adjustable knob for a potentiometer in older televisions.
`
`[Ex. 1016, 1:12-51]
`
`35. Ex. 1016 also discloses a hybrid circuit with a digital vertical sync
`
`signal used to control digital circuits and the analog CRT retrace. For example, the
`
`digital vertical sync signal (38z of Fig. 2) controls timing of the up/down binary
`
`counter 80 and also controls timing of the vertical scanning generator 25, which
`20
`
`
`
`Page 20
`
`
`
`outputs analog signals to control the vertical deflection yoke 27b. [See Ex. 1016,
`
`4:9-18 and 7:6-9]
`
`[Ex. 1016 Fig. 1]
`
`
`
`In turn, a locally generated vertical synchronization system 24 is
`coupled to the output of clock pulse generator 23 thereby developing
`locally generated vertical synchronization pulses from the clock pulse
`train. The locally generated vertical synchronization pulses are then
`coupled to a vertical scanning generator 25 wherein appropriate
`scanning signals are developed for application to the appropriate
`deflection yoke 27b positioned about the image reproducer 18.
`[Ex. 1016, 4:9-18]
`
`
`
`21
`
`Page 21
`
`
`
`[Ex. 1016 Fig. 2]
`
`36.
`
`For another example, Milton Wilcox published a paper in the IEEE
`
`Transactions on Consumer Electronics in August 1978, which described the
`
`National Semiconductor Corporation LM1880 horizontal/vertical sync system
`
`chip. [See Ex. 1024] The chip includes a digital circuit that counts horizontal sync
`
`pulses to generate a digital vertical sync signal, as well as an analog circuit that
`
`uses an RC delay to generate the vertical retrace signal. [See Ex. 1024 at pp. 286,
`
`289, and Figs. 7 and 10]
`
`37.
`
`Thus, digital vertical sync circuits were widely available by the early
`
`1980s, including proprietary circuits for television manufacturers, such as RCA
`
`22
`
`Page 22
`
`
`
`and Zenith, and from chip vendors, like National Semiconductor. These circuits
`
`generated digital vertical sync signals that were used in televisions at this time.
`
`38. At deposition, Dr. Hayes stated that televisions in the mid-1980s used
`
`digital vertical sync signals. [Ex. 1019, 43:7-9] I agree with this statement, as
`
`shown by the discussion above.
`
`39. Based on the above, a person having ordinary skill in the art would
`
`have understood that by the early 1980’s, television receivers and computer
`
`monitors, such as those described by Nienaber, were not entirely analog systems,
`
`but instead were hybrid systems that commonly deployed a combination of digital
`
`and analog circuits. These hybrid systems used digital vertical sync signals, as
`
`acknowledged by Dr. Hayes [Ex. 1019, 43:7-9 and 44:6-9] and as shown in Fig. 2
`
`of Nienaber. [See Ex. 1019, 42:8-16, Dr. Hayes referring to incoming vertical
`
`sync signal shown in Nienaber’s Fig. 2 and stating “The figure shows a digital
`
`signal.”] Dr. Hayes’ characterization of Nienaber’s system as purely analog is
`
`erroneous.
`
`
`
`23
`
`Page 23
`
`
`
`Hybrid systems commonly use clock signals for timing control.
`
`40. Hybrid systems commonly use clock signals for timing control.2 For
`
`example, the paper “Charge Circuits for Analog LSI,” [Ex. 1015] describes general
`
`usage of clock signals in a variety of hybrid circuits and provides explanations for
`
`specific circuits.
`
`“Problems in analog LSI can be reduced by using the clocked analog
`circuits discussed here,” [Ex. 1015 p. 490, emphasis added]
`
`“In this circuit, as in all other circuits, we will assume a two-phase
`nonoverlapping clock, and that positive voltage, switch closure, and
`logic one are all equivalent.” [Ex. 1015 p. 490, emphasis added]
`
`“Charge circuits are clocked quasi-static1 analog circuits which use
`the clock as a reference for time-dependent functions.” [Ex. 1015 p.
`491, emphasis added]
`
`1Quasi-static means that the transient behavior of the circuit during
`any clock cycle has no effect on the behavior of the circuit during
`subsequent cycles.” [Ex. 1015 p. 491, emphasis added]
`
`“Charge circuits minimize some problems that have limited the size of
`analog integrated circuits. RC time constants are eliminated by using
`a clock as a time reference.” [Ex. 1015 p. 496, emphasis added]
`
`2 At deposition, Dr. Hayes stated that the terms “hybrid circuit” and “mixed signal
`circuit” can be used interchangeably. [Ex. 1019, 27:25-28:11] I agree with this
`statement.
`
`
`
`24
`
`Page 24
`
`
`
`41.
`
`“Charge Circuits for Analog LSI” at Fig. 1 (reproduced below), shows
`
`a hybrid circuit with two capacitors (C1 and C2) and switches (S1 and S2) that are
`
`controlled by a two-phase non-overlapping clock (Φ1 and Φ2). The digital clock
`
`signal provides periodic timing control by opening and closing switches S1 and S2
`
`based on the state, i.e., phase, of the clock. “The two switches of the filter are
`
`connected to the clock phases as shown so that in each clock cycle a charge of
`
`(Vin – Vout)*C2 is transferred from C1 to C2.” [Ex. 1015 p. 490] This hybrid
`
`circuit combines analog components (e.g., capacitors and switches) with digital
`
`control (clock signal phases) to function like a purely analog RC low-pass filter.
`
`[Ex. 1015 p. 490]
`
`
`
`
`
`25
`
`Page 25
`
`
`
`42.
`
`“Charge Circuits for Analog LSI” describes additional examples of
`
`hybrid circuits that use clock signals for timing control, including a clocked analog
`
`inverter and delay element, an analog shift register, D/A and A/D converters,
`
`analog filters, and analog arithmetic circuits: “By combining one sum and delay
`
`stage with analog storage and digital logic, any analog function can be performed.”
`
`[Ex. 1015 p. 494, Figs. 3, 4, 6, 8-11]
`
`43. Additional examples of hybrid systems using clock signals for timing
`
`control are shown in Exs. 1020 and 1021, as discussed above in Section I.
`
`44. Further, hybrid circuits that perform analog-to-digital conversion
`
`under timing control of a digital clock were know at least four decades before the
`
`‘122 patent was filed. For example, U.S. Patent No. 2,931,024 [Ex.1023], which
`
`was filed in 1957, describes a hybrid analog-to-digital converter that comprises
`
`analog circuits (e.g., comparison amplifier 272, current switch 126, voltage
`
`regulator 258, and clamp 260) and digital circuits (e.g., converter control flip-flop
`
`54, sequencing flip-flops 1-8, and subtract pulse gate 72) under control of a digital
`
`clock (64). [Ex. 1023 Fig. 1-2, 6:9-36, 7:30-58, 7:60-8:3, 4:69-5:5, 3:23-35, 5:28-
`
`6:2, 5:12-26]
`
`45. Based at least on the references described above, a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art would understand that clocks are used in hybrid systems
`
`(i.e., mixed signal systems) for timing control. The person having ordinary skill in
`26
`
`
`
`Page 26
`
`
`
`the art would know this at least based on that person’s training (e.g., circuit design
`
`classes) and experience (e.g., using analog-to-digital converters).
`
`Nienaber’s incoming vertical sync signal and output signal are periodic
`digital signals used for timing control in a hybrid system and thus
`disclose “clocks.”
`
`46. Nienaber’s incoming vertical sync signal and output signal (labeled 22
`
`in Nienaber’s Fig. 1) are digital, periodic signals used for synchronization or
`
`timing control of a vertical retrace function in a hybrid system or a mixed signal
`
`system. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand these signals
`
`to be clock signals.
`
`Dr. Hayes’ statement that clock signals are not processed is incorrect.
`
`47.
`
`Dr. Hayes argues that Nienaber’s vertical sync signal is not a clock
`
`because “clock signals are not typically processed” and “it is generally considered
`
`a poor design practice to process a clock signal.” [Ex. 2002 par. 62] As explained
`
`above in Section I, this contention is an attempt to place a further claim
`
`construction limitation on “clock,” namely that a “clock” cannot be “processed,”
`
`such as by gating the clock. Such a limitation has no support in the intrinsic
`
`evidence or the IEEE Standard Dictionary definition for “clock” upon which
`
`Dr. Hayes relies for his claim construction analysis. U. S. Patent 5,706,004,
`
`Ex, 1021, cited above in Section I, provides an example of a gated clock that
`
`refutes Dr. Hayes’ contention. Furthermore, I disagree with Dr. Hayes’ contention