Patent Owner’s Demonstrative
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`
`IPR2018-01555 and -01581
`January 8, 2019
`Oral Hearing
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit—Not Evidence
`
`1
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`
`IPR2018-01555 and -01581
`January 8, 2019
`Oral Hearing
`
`Demonstrative Exhibit—Not Evidence
`
`1
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`
`m. United States Patent
`4'54: ”mumumum10mm“! .\|I()'\
`
`mm. mm: No"
`H‘I Dale uf PMHII:
`
`US 7.
`
`8.439 B2
`[Jet-.120")
`
`{'10) Patent No.:
`('45) Date of Patent:
`
`US 7,848,439 B2
`Dec. 7, 2010
`
`{12'} United States Patent
`She et a].
`
`11c Imus. n
`
`COMMUNICATION APPARATUS,
`COMMUNICATION SYSTEMPLXND
`CUB-1M LINK TA'I‘IIIJN M I'l'l'llfll)
`
`Inventors: Xianming She, I'iEi‘ijl1g{:[_I-'NI]; Jifeng Li,
`Kanngawa {JP}
`
`_
`_
`.
`Asmgnee Panasonic (Torpnratiun,(]sa 1I:__J|-’_:I
`
`'
`
`'
`
`"
`
`'-
`'-
`
`"
`
`-'
`
`.
`
`'3
`
`'
`
`Suzuki
`Kwak cl 3].
`HWMS
`Filankcnfil‘nipet a].
`
`3?5.-'29s
`
`3T5.-"Efil
`
`FOREIGN PATENT DU‘CUL'IE-NTS
`
`2
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`
`SUBBAND
`
`ONE CODING AND
`MODULATING BLOCK
`
`7
`SUBBAND N “/
`SUBBAND Nil
`
`adaptivity in this case refers to adaptivity at two domains of
`time domain and frequency domain. Currently. as an adaptive
`configuration. AME in Ot-‘DM is divided into two. AME
`based on subcarriers and Ali/K" based on subbands. 'l'he AMt'T.
`
`the related. art.
`
`based on subcarriers referred to here refers to carrying out
`transmission using a modulation method. and a coding
`method that are ditterent per OFDM subcarrier taking each
`subcarrier as a minimum unit ol" adaptivity. However. AMC
`based on subcarriers is very difficult to be implemented, and.
`in addition. has the problem that feedback overhead is too
`large. Typically, it is dillicult to implement anAMC method
`based on subcarriers in an actual system. As another adaptive
`configuration in OFDM, a subband configuration using inde-
`pendent coding. namely. a subhand adaptive method ol5 the
`related art is, relatively, typically used.
`
`SUBBAND 8
`SUBBAND 7
`SUBBAND 6
`SUBBAND 5
`SUBBAND 4
`SUBBAND 3
`SUBBAND 2
`SUBBAND 1
`
`OFDM
`SYMBOL
`
`PRIOR ART
`
`FIG.2
`
`FIG. 2 shows subhand adaptive modulation and coding ol
`
`Ex. 1001 (’439 Patent) at Fig. 2, 2:1-17.
`
`3
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`
`SUBBAND
`
`SUBBAND GROUP
`
`SUBBAND N
`SUBBANDNI
`SUBBAND N2 gagggwwfifig
`SUBBAND N-3_\figfikfi
`
`_
`
`. SUBBAND GROUP
`
`SUBBA-ND s WMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIllltllllllllll
`SUBBAND 7
`|||||||||||||||\\\\\\\\\\\
`o'vvwro'vo'ro‘o‘o’o‘o4“NW
`SUBBAND 5
`31:331‘3’3‘3’3‘3a’3a“:
`SUBBAND 5 \m“
`SUBBAND 4 WWIIHIHlllllllllllllllllllllll
`3323223 3
`lg!!!!!!!,l,l.lll§\\\>\/\,m
`"’
`SUEBAND 1 mun...”
`
`V:
`
`_
`
`___
`
`-
`
`»
`
`OFDM SYMBOL
`
`,2
`
`The object of the present invention is therefore to provide
`f
`t, H._
`‘
`,1
`,
`,
`communlcation apparatus, a communication system and a
`communication method capable of increasmg spectrum uti-
`lization rate ot'a system and particularly increasing spectrum
`utilization rate based on high-speed fading and channel esti-
`ination error‘ reducing the degree of difficulty of adaptivity,
`and reducing the feedback overhead compared with subband
`'
`"
`‘
`‘
`adaptive methods ol the related art by eonlbimng all of the
`.
`.
`.
`subbands on a frequency domain of a subcarrier communica-
`tion system based. on a fixed. rule to as to give several subband.
`‘
`n
`I
`-
`gro ups, and then selecting modulatlon and eodlng parameters
`for use during joint coding with respect to each subband
`group.
`
`DISCLOSURE OF THE INVENTION
`
`_
`Problems to be Solved by the Invention
`
`._
`
`Ex. 1001 (’439 Patent) at Fig. 9, 5:32-44.
`
`4
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`
`SUBBAND GROUP
`SUBBAND GROUP
`3V
`[of
`
`DISCLOSURE OF THE INVENTION
`
`Problems to be Solved by the Invention
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SUBBAND
`
`SUBBAND N
`SUBBAND N-t
`SUBBAND N72
`SUBBAND N-3
`
`SUBBAND 8
`SUBBAND 7
`SUBBAND 6
`SUBBAND 5
`SUBBAND 4
`SUBBAND 3
`SUBBAND 2
`SUBBAND 1
`
`group.
`
`The object of the present invention is therefore to provide
`communication apparatus, a eonnnunieation system and a
`communication method capable of increasing spectrum uti-
`lization rate ot'a system and particularly increasing spectrum
`utilization rate based on high-speed fading and channel esti-
`mation error‘ reducing the degree of difficulty of adaptivity,
`and reducing the feedback overhead compared with subband
`adaptive methods of the related art by combining all of the
`subbands on a frequency domain of a subcarrier communica-
`tion system based. on a fixed. rule to as to give several subband.
`gro ups, and then selecting modulation and coding parameters
`for use during joint coding with respect to each subband
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DFDM SYMBOL
`
`Ex. 1001 (’439 Patent) at Fig. 8, 5:32-44.
`
`5
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439, Claim 1
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439, Claim 1
`
`"union claimed is‘
`
`tion.
`
`Ex. 1001 (’439
`Patent) at 12:64-
`13:27.
`
`6
`
`rrics out a channel
`
`a parameter deciding section that decides modulation
`parameters and coding parameters per subband group
`comprised of a plurality of the subbands, based on a
`result of the channel estimation per subband;
`a parameter information transmission section that trans-
`mits. to a communicating party, parameter information
`indicating the modulation parameters and the coding
`parameters decided at the parameter deciding section;
`a receiving section that receives a signal containing data
`modulated and encoded on a per subband. group basis at
`the communicating party using the modulation param-
`eters and the coding parameters of the parameter infor-
`mation transmitted at the parameter information trans-
`mission section;
`a data obtaining section that demodulates and decodes the
`received signal received at the receiving section on a per
`subband group basis using the modulation parameters
`and the coding parameters decided at the parameter
`deciding section, and obtains the data contained in the
`received signal; and
`a pattern storage section that stores in advance patterns for
`selecting subbands constituting the subband groups
`wherein the parameter deciding section decides the
`modulation parameters and the coding parameters per
`subband group comprised of the subbands selected
`based on the patterns stored in the pattern storage sec-
`
`e Imam
`”TC Em“ Pa
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439, Claim 1
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439, Claim 1
`
`The invention claimed is‘
`
`1. A L immuniealiol
`a channel
`‘ imatin
`estimation .er s11
`
`«1 pp
`
`.
`
`'
`
`.
`
`-
`
`-
`
`.
`
`out a channel
`
`section that decides
`
`tion.
`
`t"
`
`mation transmitted at the parameter information trans-
`mission section;
`a data obtaining section that demodulates and decodes the
`received signal received at the receiving section on a per
`subband group basis using the modulation parameters
`and the coding parameters decided at the parameter
`deciding section, and obtains the data contained in the
`received signal; and
`a pattern storage section that stores in advance patterns for
`selecting subbands constituting the subband groups
`wherein the parameter deciding section decides the
`modulation parameters and the coding parameters per
`snbband group comprised of the subbands selected
`based on the patterns stored in the pattern storage sec-
`
`Ex. 1001 (’439
`Patent) at 13:1-4.
`
`7
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439, Claim 8
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439, Claim 8
`
`wherein the parameter deciding aecticn decides the ceding
`parameters in such a 1n nner that a number cf infcrma-
`
`.‘ Iru
`
`! neceirrd m Ill:re(
`anr' n
`.HhJiil.> im
`
`Ex. 1001 (’439 Patent) at 14:21-26.
`
`in
`
`nu mun \r
`
`8
`
`
`
`Petitioners’ Multi-Reference Combinations
`
`Li
`
`Vijayan
`
`Hashem
`
`Cioffi
`
`UE proposes
`“best
`perform[ing]”
`subcarriers for
`further “base
`station” final
`selection
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding. Tr.)
`at 55:2-7, 62:13-
`63:14, 75:24-76:7,
`98:10-99:13.
`
`“Base station
`allocat[ion]”
`without
`“channel
`estimation”
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding. Tr.)
`at 109:14-22, 139:6-
`22.
`
`“Acceptable or
`unacceptable”
`subcarriers
`without
`“subband
`groups”
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding. Tr.)
`at 142:17-143:2.
`
`“Fixed” “wired
`system” without
`subband groups
`(Claim 8)
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding. Tr.)
`at 177:5-9, 178:24-
`179:3.
`
`6
`
`9
`
`
`
`Petitioners’ Multi-Reference Combinations
`
`“A prior art reference must be considered in its
`entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that
`would lead away from the claimed invention.”
`MPEP § 2141 (citing W.L. Gore & Assoc., Inc. v.
`Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1552-53 (Fed. Cir.
`1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984)).
`
`10
`
`
`
`Li vs. Vijayan:
`Performance-Based Granularity
`
`11
`
`
`
`Li: UE Proposal + BS Selection Based on Performance
`
`“Subcarrier”
`
`“Cluster”
`
`“Cluster Group”
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 3:18-45.
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 5:46-61, 6:18-29
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 12:1-29.
`
`12
`
`
`
`Li: Selection Based on Performance
`
`“Subcarrier”
`
`“Cluster”
`
`“Cluster Group”
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 3:18-45.
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 5:46-61, 6:18-29
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 12:1-29.
`
`13
`
`
`
`Li: Subcarrier Level
`
`Li: Subcarrier Level
`
`For downlink channels, each subscriber first measures the
`channel and interference information for all the subcarriers
`
`and then selects multiple subcarriers with good performance
`(e.g._, a high signal--to-interference plus noise ratio (SINR))
`
`this informationin subcarricr allocation to reduce inter-cell
`interference.
`
`In one embodiment, the selection by the base station of
`the channels to allocate, based on the feedback, results in the
`
`portion of subcarriers In case of pioviding information on
`only a portion of the subcarriers a subscriber may provide
`a list of subcarriers ordered starting with those subcarrieis
`which the subscriber desires to use,usually because their
`
`selection of coding/modulation rates. Such codingf
`
`(“TI-[El It'll-l
`
`fill-l EEC
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 3:18-45.
`
`14
`
`
`
`Li: Cluster Level
`
`Li: Cluster Level
`
`Next, each subscriber continueusl monitors the reee _ti011
`
`
`
`63C-
`
`ll'l 0111131011 01']
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 5:46-61, 6:18-29
`
`loading) relativ
`lion on these e
`
`predefined up '
`For example, S
`
`IIlC asured p arameters.
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`Li: Cluster Group Level
`Li: Cluster Group Level
`
`
`
`
`
`After receiving the pilot signal from the base station, a
`subscriber sends back the channel information on one or
`
`In one embodiment,
`
`
`
`
`
`more cluster groups, simultaneously or sequentially. In one
`embodiment, only the information on some of the groups is
`sent back to the base station. Many criteria can be used to
`1
`-
`l
`-
`I
`C".
`.I
`I
`1
`'
`
`
`
`
`
`Upon receiving the feedback
`subscriber, the cluster allocalor at
`
`threshold. By transmitting the SINR of all the clusters in the
`group sequentially, only the group index, instead of all the
`cluster indie-es, needs to be transmitted. Thus, the feedback
`for each rou Ienerall r contains two t
`es of information:
`
`information from the
`
`portion of the base station.
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 12:1-29.
`
`may be performer] by an allocation in a media access control
`
`16
`
`
`
`Li: Clusters Selected Based on Performance
`
`Q.
`
`. . . So I’m asking you if there is any
`embodiment in Li where that’s not the
`goal, where the subscriber is feeding back
`subcarriers or clusters, suggesting them
`not based on performance?
`
`A.
`
`Is there any embodiment in Li, I don’t
`recall. I don’t believe so.”
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 86:8-15.
`
`17
`
`
`
`Li: Clusters Selected Based on Performance
`
`Q.
`
`Again, Li's goal here is to select clusters, groups of subcarriers,
`with the best performance, for instance, high SINR and low traffic
`loading relative to other clusters, right?
`
`A.
`
`Yes. . . .
`
`Li describes that each subscriber would measure the
`subcarrier clusters, evaluate their SINR for good performance
`or not, and send back that information to the base station
`which clusters they would prefer to use based on the
`measured parameter.
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 55:2-7, 55:18-23.
`
`18
`
`
`
`Li: Final Selection by Base Station
`
`Q. So if there’s a cluster in a group that is not available -
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`-- the base station is not going to select that cluster
`and it’s not going to assign that cluster, right?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 98:10-99:13.
`
`19
`
`
`
`Li: Different AMC For Each Cluster
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 7:66-8:5.
`
`20
`
`
`
`Li: Different AMC For Each Cluster
`
`Q. Right. And what Li does say is report on a cluster
`basis so that you can have different ones, right?
`
`A. You can have different modulation and coding
`rates.
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 71:11-15.
`
`21
`
`
`
`Vijayan: Same AMC For Entire Cluster Group
`
`Petitioners’ Reply at 20.
`
`22
`
`
`
`Vijayan: Same AMC For Entire Cluster Group
`
`Ex. 1004 (Vijayan) at Fig. 7A, 10:7-20.
`
`23
`
`
`
`Vijayan: Same AMC For Entire Cluster Group
`
`Q. Okay. And looking at these
`rectangles in Figure 7, what you
`are using Vijayan for is a single
`modulation and coding scheme
`for each rectangle; is that right?
`
`A.
`Yes.
`Ex. 1004 (Vijayan) at Fig. 7A; Ex. 2103
`(Ding Tr.) at 135:22-136:1.
`
`24
`
`
`
`Li vs. Vijayan:
`Frequency Diversity
`
`Rid-1616
`
`. «.904 23.! I“
`
`l nlml in!“ Pumlr
`up." « .u
`
`nu..- M:
`. p... “. rm...
`
`WM. um
`H mm
`MH..H....‘\.»E
`\|-.. Wu.
`.H ‘ \
`
`mmym
`
`.
`
`umuw
`
`was to:
`
`|PRZU1B.DMT7
`Ample Inc ex1oo4 Page 1
`mm:mmm_unwm
`RXJEIbnflal
`
`-
`
`\c'
`
`25
`
`
`
`Li: Diverse Cluster Groups
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at Fig. 6, 11:46-61.
`
`26
`
`
`
`Li: Diverse Cluster Groups
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Got it. So when we're doing group-based cluster allocation here, we're
`separating the clusters out farther than whatever that channel
`coherence bandwidth is, right?
`
`Yes. Typical value it says of a channel coherence bandwidth is
`about a hundred kilohertz.
`
`Right. And so would that also result in frequency-diverse clusters?
`
`One effect of that is that when you space the clusters beyond a
`coherence bandwidth, it is more likely to be frequency diversed.
`And if you put them within the coherence bandwidth, it may be
`less likely to be frequency diverse.
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 77:25-78:14.
`
`27
`
`
`
`Vijayan: Compact Coherence Rectangles
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Okay. I think we talked earlier kind of the
`rectangle shown in Figure 7A, those are
`determined based on four factors, four
`criteria, right? At least four?
`
`We discussed at least four criterions
`earlier, yes. I believe those were in
`Column 2.
`
`And one of the criteria relates to
`compactness or packing efficiency; is
`that right?
`
`Yes.
`A.
`Ex. 1004 (Vijayan) at Fig. 7A; Ex. 2103 (Ding
`Tr.) at 134:16-25.
`
`28
`
`
`
`Li vs. Vijayan:
`No Motivation to Combine
`
`Rid-1616
`
`. «.904 23.! I“
`
`l nlml in!“ Pumlr
`up." « .u
`
`nu..- M:
`. p... “. rm...
`
`WM. um
`H mm
`MH..H....‘\.»E
`\|-.. Wu.
`.H ‘ \
`
`mmym
`
`.
`
`umuw
`
`was to:
`
`|PRZU1B.DMT7
`Ample Inc ex1oo4 Page 1
`mm:mmm_unwm
`RXJEIbnflal
`
`-
`
`\c'
`
`29
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine: Incompatibility
`
`Petitioners’ Reply at 25.
`
`30
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine: Incompatibility
`
`Moreover, Li also teaches that base station, based on the reports for
`each cluster group, is -- may also choose clusters from different
`groups which again teaches that he wants to use these specific
`cluster-based modulation coding parameters reporting, or SINR, if
`he -- if he assigned or if -- let me put it this way: If someone wanted
`to redesign Li's embodiment, then it would kill his objectives.
`For example, this second embodiment where he combines clusters
`from different groups would be sort of noneffective and even first --
`first embodiment where you use the whole cluster group is again not
`achieving frequency diversity.
`
`Ex. 1017 (Vojcic Tr.) at 57:7-21.
`
`31
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine: Incompatibility
`
`Q. All right. So if you did that, you know, in the tradeoff that
`we've talked about, you would be potentially trying to use
`some subcarriers that were too noisy to actually use?
`
`A.
`
`That's not too noisy, but it's less – it’s given a subcarrier or –
`let’s talk about cluster in the context of Li. That there will be
`clusters that were assigned modulation and coding that wasn't
`the best -- that's not a best match. It could be a little bit too
`aggressive, maybe a little bit too -- too loose. So you didn’t
`pack enough information in there.
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding. Tr.) at 181:23-182:9.
`
`32
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine: Overhead
`
`Petitioners’ Reply at 20.
`
`33
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine: Reply Exhibits
`
`34
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine: Overhead
`
`That's -- given that everything else is working fine in terms of
`maximizing capacity, then, yes, using single modulation and coding
`scheme would reduce overhead signaling. But that's relatively small
`compared now to data transmission where you use much more
`resources. And by suboptimally using joint modulation and coding
`scheme, let's say with the average, as you suggested, or according to
`the average SINR or extremes that I discussed in paragraph 52, you
`would now own a much larger part of the bandwidth where you
`transmit data, which is typically orders of magnitude more system
`capacity than for feedback signaling, that you would significantly
`reduce system utilization there, which really overwhelms that
`small saving for feedback signaling.
`
`Ex. 1017 (Vojcic Tr.) at 64:24-65:22.
`
`35
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine: Overhead
`Q. Okay. So the difference is for one clustered group in Figure 7,
`you've eliminated two group IDs. You just need one group ID
`instead of three, right?
`No, we eliminated the cluster IDs, not the group IDs.
`A.
`Q. Right. You've eliminated two numbers. A cluster ID is just a
`number, I would assume?
`Correct.
`A.
`Q. Okay. You've eliminated two cluster IDs. If I'm talking about
`reducing overhead, you had three numbers in Figure 5, you
`reduced it to one number in Figure 7?
`Yes.
`
`A.
`
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Depo. Tr.) at 88:3-89:15.
`
`36
`
`
`
`Li / Vijayan vs. Hashem
`
`sax-161?
`
`lnlml in!“ Pumlr
`“I“... ‘e .u
`
`nu..- \-\:
`u»... u. n.
`
`.
`
`Rid-1616
`
`Ill [1|
`I».
`ml
`
`l'llilul Hum-I. l’ulunl
`Mm“.
`
`I'm“: h.
`
`.
`
`..
`
`In... l_‘-WIKI
`...
`..
`
`Km '51»: rcj'
`
`IF’fl/lflfl cm;
`Mr» IN. 1-):
`Pour '
`.
`r '.'.-'\c'-."
`
`um
`.m.n- \-
`
`37
`
`
`
`Hashem
`
`.w. Unilud 5
`Ha
`'I
`.3‘
`
`[us Patenl
`
`..-.. mum: wuu uumu wan-nun n
`nn)\1~\'.~l'\:\|<
`
`RX-161T
`
`\
`IHIIIHIHHNHIIHIIIII!‘HIIIII
`
`Elll‘lfl‘fi‘fllil‘fllll
`5,72: 5r.» In
`Apr, LL ZIJIH
`
`ENI.'\IL\|
`H-h. :..-
`HIIIHH"
`
`-
`
`IF-cIVJN'H'
`
`3 L'luiu“. 4- ill'nwilln slum.
`
`
`
`ulxlunu
`Iwunmn .
`
`m
`
`|Pfi2015-1 555
`HTC EX1OUS. Page =
`RESPONDENTSJNv7009563
`RX7101T 0001
`
`RECEIVE
`SIGNAL
`g9
`
`SEPARATE SIGNAL
`mm CDMPIJNENTS
`g
`
`SELECT FIRST
`SUBVCABRIER
`£5
`
`MEASURE Sfl
`fl
`
`HJGHEH THAN
`THRESHBLD?
`
`TDTAL-TDTAUSH;
`cuum-cnumn;
`ADJUST BITMASK
`
`SELECT NEXT SUB-
`CIIRHIER
`94
`
`MDHE
`SUB-CARRIERS?
`g
`
`AVERAGE SII-fl
`9!:
`C Di] NT
`
`TRANSMIT MERAG£
`5" AND BITMASK
`g
`
`38
`
`
`
`Hashem: Bitmask
`
`Ex. 1005 (Hashem) at Fig. 2, 4:49-65.
`
`39
`
`
`
`Li / Vijayan / Hashem: Significant Overhead
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`. . . Hashem -- first of all, Hashem increases the feedback
`requirements by -- significantly increases feedback
`requirements by using feedback mask, mask of available
`and nonavailable subcarriers. . . .
`
`So Hashem teaches that signaling overhead can be reduced
`if the UE or subscriber decides the modulation and coding
`parameters instead of the base station; correct?
`
`I think I already answered that. Yes, it does -- it does
`teach that, but it's a minor reduction compared to major
`increase in overhead that it does with bit mask reporting.
`Ex. 1017 (Vojcic Tr.) at 88:2-6, 89:12-19.
`
`40
`
`
`
`Li / Hashem: Incompatible
`
`Ding re: Li
`
`Ding re: Hashem
`
`Q. Now, everything we've discussed in
`Li up to this point --
`
`A. Okay.
`
`Q. -- up to Column 11 have been
`situations where the subscriber
`suggests either subcarriers or
`clusters to the base station, and
`then the base station decides which
`of those it will use, right?
`
`I think it's very clear to state -- it is
`stated here that instead of having the
`remote station reporting some
`information and then let the base
`station decide on the Link Mode, and
`then let the base station tell the
`remote unit what Link Mode to use,
`you can save one trip by allowing
`the remote station to decide on
`Link Mode directly.
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 74:13-21, 161:7-19.
`
`A. Yes.
`
`41
`
`
`
`Vijayan / Hashem: Incompatible
`
`Ding re: Vijayan
`
`Ding re: Hashem
`
`Q.
`
`Okay. I think we talked earlier
`kind of the rectangle shown in
`Figure 7A, those are determined
`based on four factors, four
`criteria, right? At least four?
`
`A. We discussed at least four
`criterions earlier, yes. I
`believe those were in Column
`2.
`
`I think it's very clear to state -- it is
`stated here that instead of having the
`remote station reporting some
`information and then let the base
`station decide on the Link Mode, and
`then let the base station tell the
`remote unit what Link Mode to use,
`you can save one trip by allowing
`the remote station to decide on
`Link Mode directly.
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 134:16-25, 161:7-19.
`
`42
`
`
`
`Li / Vijayan / Hashem: Significant Overhead
`Q.
`And that's because for every subcarrier, the wireless device or
`the user equipment has to report something back to the base
`station for that subcarrier, right?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`If it's reported per subcarrier basis, yes.
`
`That's why the feedback overhead is too large because you
`need some data for say the signal-to-noise ratio for every
`subcarrier?
`
`Correct. And also in addition, it is not a single mobile
`terminal that needs to send such feedback, it is a collection
`of terminals that needs to evaluate their channel conditions.
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 15:14-16:2.
`
`43
`
`
`
`Li / Vijayan / Hashem: No Overhead Savings
`
`Q. Okay. And can you point me to anywhere in Hashem where it
`says don't signal the identity of acceptable groups of
`subcarriers?
`
`A. My response to the question is I think you have to -- it's
`very -- it's a easier job to say where it does as opposed
`to ask me to say where it doesn't say. I mean if
`something is not there, I don't know how to show that
`something is not there. It's not there, it's not there.
`Ex. 2103 (Ding Tr.) at 159:9-18
`
`44
`
`
`
`Li / Vijayan / Hashem vs. Cioffi (Claim 8)
`
`linilrd Slum}. Pun-III
`u...
`.1 .u
`
`IIIIIII!I _ IIIIIII
`. mm
`l' mum-hull:
`. n....r|u....
`\l. n
`.m
`
`RX-‘GI?
`
`lml
`'Ilniled Slums
`um « A!
`:'<| >11YIF~II:II um I mm
`uuw alu\>hlL5l\~Ju|IAu:uIll
`
`5-.
`
`n...“
`IIHI IIIQIIIIIHIIZIIIIII
`l..
`lawn 5...»:
`ssflmu
`.. ma. «mun:
`II". II. um
`mm: ,; “rm.“
`
`I) u".1...“
`
`ax 1mm).-
`
`..-_-..\.-.u-.:_ -.,m a»
`but Ieurmu'
`
`n . u.. mum. um.
`
`45
`
`
`
`Cioffi: Fixed ADSL
`
`Cioffi: Fixed ADSL
`
`United Slams Patent
`Ciolfl (:1 al.
`[:4; allelt‘mkum ntnnllu'rmx
`mum‘s-sit“ n'u’nr m n: um M r
`
`am:
`
`IllumlmllnIllltggrlllgogitgldrmllrmmummll
`|!:1
`Pam-u Nun-her;
`5.596.604
`Dalr nt'l'amnt:
`Jan. '11. 19'”
`0mm I-t. HI K'Jmoxs
`
`[57]
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`phone line.
`
`Atransmission system using multicanier modulation applies
`FECC (forward error correcting code) coding and codeword
`interleaving differently to input signals from a plurality of
`different data channels to produce encoded data signals
`having different reliabilities and difierent coding delays. Bits
`of encoded data signals having relatively less delay are
`allocated to carriers that are subject
`to relatively more
`attenuation andfor channel noise, and hence that are allo-
`cated fewer bits for transmission in each symbol period, to
`reduce the effects of impulse noise. The data channels can
`comprise video, data, and control channels transmitted on an
`ADSL (asymmetric digital subscriber line) two-wire tele-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Il-‘FQ-lJlS-‘Ehfii
`HTC EXIDDB. Page ‘-
`
`46
`
`
`
`Cioffi: Fixed ADSL vs. Li
`
`Cioffi: Fixed ADSL vs. Li
`
`a DCEIJDI] llfilflg . E CD E-I'E-I'ICE- C’-
`
`fflrmance
`
`Ex. 1003 (Li) at 15:42:-47.
`
`47
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
