`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________
`
`HTC Corporation and
`HTC America, Inc.,
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`INVT SPE LLC,
`Patent Owner
`__________
`
`IPR Case No. IPR2018-01581
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`__________
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF ZHI DING, PH.D. IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 311 ET SEQ. AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ET SEQ.
`(CLAIM 8 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,848,439)
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 1
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1. My name is Zhi Ding. I have been retained as a technical expert on
`
`behalf of HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. to provide assistance in the
`
`above-captioned matter. I understand that HTC Corporation and HTC America,
`
`Inc. are the Petitioners in this proceeding. I have no financial interest in or
`
`affiliation with the Petitioners or the Patent Owner, which I understand is INVT
`
`SPE LLC. My compensation does not depend upon the outcome of, or my
`
`testimony in, this inter partes review proceeding or any litigation proceedings.
`
`2.
`
`I have reviewed each of the following documents, which I am
`
`informed are also identified in the Petition.
`
`EXHIBIT
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
`1001
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439 to She et al. (“the '439 Patent”)
`
`1002
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439 to She et al.
`
`1003
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,904,283 to Li et al. (“Li”)
`
`1004
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,221,680 to Vijayan et al. (“Vijayan”)
`
`1005
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,721,569 to Hashem et al. (“Hashem”)
`
`1006
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,596,604 to Cioffi et al. (“Cioffi”)
`
`1008
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Zhi Ding, Ph.D.
`
`1009
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,167,031 to Olofsson et al. (“Olofsson”)
`
`
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 2
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`3.
`
`I understand that the application leading to U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`
`(“the '439 Patent”) was U.S. Application No. 11/719,611 filed on May 17, 2007.
`
`This application was a national stage filing of PCT/JP2005/021246, filed on
`
`November 18, 2005. The PCT application claimed priority to Chinese Application
`
`No. 2004 1 0094967, filed on November 19, 2004, which I have been asked to treat
`
`as the effective filing or priority date of the '439 Patent.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
`
`4.
`
`I presently serve as a Professor in the Department of Electrical and
`
`Computer Engineering at the University of California, Davis. I have held this
`
`position since my appointment on July 1, 2000. I am also a private technical
`
`consultant on various technologies related to information systems. I have more
`
`than three decades of research experience on a wide range of topics related to data
`
`communications and signal processing.
`
`5.
`
`I earned my Bachelor of Science degree in 1982 in wireless
`
`engineering from the Nanjing Institute of Technology (later renamed as Southeast
`
`University) in Nanjing, China. I earn my Master of Science degree in 1987 in
`
`electrical engineering from the University of Toronto in Toronto, Canada. I earned
`
`my Ph.D. in 1990 in electrical engineering from Cornell University in Ithaca, New
`
`York.
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 3
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`6. My responsibilities as a Professor at University of California, Davis,
`
`include classroom instruction on various topics of communication systems and
`
`signal analysis, as well as mentoring undergraduate students and supervising
`
`graduate students in their research and development efforts on various topics
`
`related to digital communications. I have directly supervised such research and
`
`development works ranging from signal detection to wireless networking. As the
`
`chief academic advisor, I have also directly supervised the completion of over 20
`
`Masters theses and 25 Ph.D. dissertations on various topics related to digital
`
`communications. I have served full time as a faculty member at three major
`
`research universities in the United States over the past 28 years, including Auburn
`
`University from 1990 to 1998, University of Iowa from 1999 to 2000, and
`
`University of California, Davis, from 2000 to present.
`
`7.
`
`Since 1990, I have been selected as the principal investigator of
`
`multiple highly competitive federal and local research grants, including sixteen
`
`major research projects supported by the National Science Foundation and two
`
`research projects funded by the U.S. Army Research Office. These competitive
`
`research projects focused on developing more efficient and effective digital
`
`communication transceivers, networks, and signal processing tools. I have also
`
`participated in several large-scale projects supported by the Defense Advanced
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 4
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`Research Projects Agency (DARPA) with teams of researchers. I have applied for,
`
`and received support from, other federal, state, and industry sponsors.
`
`8.
`
`I have published over 170 peer-reviewed research articles in premier
`
`international journals, in addition to over 220 refereed technical articles at top
`
`international conferences on communications and information technologies. I also
`
`authored two books on communications technologies. My most recent book, co-
`
`authored with B.P. Lathi, is entitled, “Modern Digital and Analog Communication
`
`Systems,” 5th edition, and was published by the Oxford University Press in 2018.
`
`The 4th edition of this book (published in 2009) had been widely adopted as an
`
`introductory textbook to communication systems.
`
`9.
`
`In addition to the 400 published technical papers that have been cited
`
`over 10,000 times according to Google Scholar, I am also co-inventor of 3 issued
`
`U.S. patents on communication technologies.
`
`10.
`
`I am a member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
`
`(IEEE) and was elevated to the grade of Fellow in January 2003 for contributions
`
`made in signal processing for communication. The IEEE is the world’s largest
`
`professional society of engineers, with over 400,000 members in more than 160
`
`countries. The IEEE has led the development of many standards for modern
`
`digital communications and networking, most notably, the IEEE 802 series of
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 5
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`network standards. The IEEE Grade of Fellow is conferred by the Boards of
`
`Directors upon a person with an extraordinary record of accomplishments in any of
`
`the IEEE fields of interest. The total number selected in any one year does not
`
`exceed one-tenth of one percent of the total voting Institute membership.
`
`11.
`
`I have served the IEEE in the following capacities:
`
`• Chief Information Officer of the IEEE Communications Society from
`
`Jan. 2018 to present.
`
`• General Chair of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics,
`
`Speech, and Signal Processing, the flagship conference of the IEEE
`
`Signal Processing Society.
`
`• Chair of the Steering Committee for the IEEE Transactions on Wireless
`
`Communications from 2008 to 2010.
`
`• Distinguished Lecturer of the IEEE Communications Society from
`
`January 2008 to December 2009.
`
`• Technical Program Chair of the 2006 IEEE Globecom, one of two
`
`flagship annual IEEE Communication Society conferences.
`
`• Distinguished Lecturer of the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society from
`
`2004 to 2005.
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 6
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`• Associate Editor of the IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing from
`
`1994 to 1997 and from 2001 to 2004.
`
`• Member of the IEEE Statistical Signal and Array Processing for
`
`Communications Technical Committee from 1993 to 1998.
`
`• Member of the IEEE Signal Processing for Communications Technical
`
`Committee from 1998 to 2004.
`
`12.
`
`In 2012, I received the annual Wireless Communications Technical
`
`Committee Recognition Award from the IEEE Communications Society, a peer
`
`award given to a person with a high degree of visibility and contribution in the
`
`field of “Wireless and Mobile Communications Theory, Systems, and Networks.”
`
`13.
`
`I have also served as a technical consultant for the telecommunication
`
`industry. For example, in 1995 I consulted for Analog Devices, Inc., on the
`
`development of the first generation DOCSIS cable modem systems. I have also
`
`consulted for other companies, including Nortel Networks and NEC US
`
`Laboratories. I worked as a visiting faculty research fellow at NASA Glenn
`
`Research Center in 1992 and at U.S. Air Force Wright Laboratory in 1993. I have
`
`served on multiple review panels of the National Science Foundation to evaluate
`
`competitive research proposals in the field of communication. I have also
`
`reviewed a large number of research proposals at the request of the National
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 7
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada as an expert
`
`panelist from 2010 to 2013, and also at the request of the Research Grant Council
`
`(RGC) of Hong Kong as an external reviewer.
`
`14.
`
`I have served as an expert witness or consulting expert on a number of
`
`matters related to intellectual property, mostly in the arena of telecommunications,
`
`including cellular communications, Wi-Fi technologies, Bluetooth, and optical
`
`communications. For example, since 2007, I have been engaged to work on
`
`various litigations involving cellular, WiFi, and optical communication networks.
`
`15. Further experience and a complete list of my publications are
`
`presented in my curriculum vitae, which is being submitted with this declaration as
`
`Exhibit 1008.
`
`16. Based on my above-described near 3 decades of experience in
`
`communications technologies, and the acceptance of my publications and
`
`professional recognition by societies in my field, I believe that I am qualified to be
`
`an expert in wireless communication systems, communication networks, and signal
`
`processing.
`
`LEGAL STANDARDS AND BACKGROUND
`
`17.
`
`I have been informed by counsel of several legal standards that govern
`
`my analysis, including those discussed below. For example, a proper validity
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 8
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`analysis includes resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art,
`
`determining the scope and content of the prior art, and ascertaining the differences
`
`between the claimed invention and the prior art. I address all of these factors in my
`
`declaration below.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`18.
`
`I have been advised that the claims of a patent are reviewed from the
`
`perspective of a hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`alleged invention. The “art” is the field of technology to which a patent is related.
`
`I understand that the purpose of using the viewpoint of a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art (POSITA) is for objectivity.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`19.
`
`It is my understanding that terms should be given their broadest
`
`reasonable construction in an inter partes review proceeding. Under this standard,
`
`the terms should be given their ordinary and customary meaning to a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art, unless the patent teaches a different meaning in the
`
`specification.
`
`20.
`
`I understand that the appropriate context in which to read a claim term
`
`includes both the specification and the claim language itself.
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 9
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`Validity
`
`21.
`
`I understand that the Petitioners bear the burden of proving the
`
`instituted grounds of invalidity by a preponderance of the evidence. I understand
`
`that “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
`
`existence or non-existence of specific material facts. Here, I understand that
`
`Petitioners have argued that the claims at issue are rendered obvious by certain
`
`prior-art references.
`
`23.
`
`I have been informed that a reference may qualify as prior art to a
`
`patent if the reference 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. I have also been informed that a reference may qualify as
`
`prior art to a patent if the invention was patented or described in a printed
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 10
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`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 of the patent. 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.
`
`24.
`
`I have further been informed that a reference may qualify as prior art
`
`to a patent if the invention was described in a published application for a patent
`
`filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant of the challenged
`
`patent.
`
`Obviousness
`
`25.
`
`I understand that a patent claim may be found unpatentable as obvious
`
`if the Petitioners establish by a preponderance of the evidence that, as of the
`
`priority date, the subject matter of the claim, considered as a whole, would have
`
`been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the field of the technology (the
`
`“art”) to which the claimed subject matter belongs.
`
`26.
`
`I understand that the analysis of whether a claim is obvious depends
`
`upon a number of factual inquiries, for example, (1) the scope and content of the
`
`prior art; (2) the differences between the claimed subject matter and the prior art;
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 11
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`(3) the level of ordinary skill in the art; and (4) objective evidence of non-
`
`obviousness.
`
`27.
`
`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.
`
`28. Relatedly, I understand that it might be appropriate to consider
`
`whether there is evidence of a “teaching, suggestion, or motivation” to combine the
`
`teachings in the prior art, the nature of the problem, or the knowledge of a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`29.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a prior-art reference
`
`inherently discloses a limitation if the reference must necessarily function in
`
`accordance with, or include, the limitation in the context of the patented
`
`technology.
`
`30.
`
`I understand that one indicator of non-obviousness is when prior art
`
`“teaches away” from combining certain known elements. For example, a prior art
`
`reference teaches away from the patent’s particular combination if it leads in a
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 12
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`different direction or discourages that combination, recommends steps that would
`
`not likely lead to the patent’s result, or otherwise indicates that a seemingly
`
`inoperative device would be produced.
`
`31.
`
`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.
`
`STATE OF THE ART AT THE TIME THE ’439 PATENT WAS FILED
`
`Cellular Networks
`
`32. The ’493 Patent generally concerns technologies related to wireless
`
`cellular telephones and operating such phones within a cellular network. A cellular
`
`network is a wireless communication infrastructure that provides voice and data
`
`services to subscribing cellular phones, also known as mobile terminals or user
`
`equipment (“UE”).
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 13
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`
`
`33.
`
`In a cellular network, the network coverage area is divided into many
`
`cells that typically take the shape of a hexagon. Each cell is served by a base
`
`station (BS), which directly communicates with the mobile terminals or user
`
`equipment (UE) within the cell. In the basic cellular mode, each mobile terminal
`
`communicates directly only with the base station. The signal flow from the base
`
`station to the mobile terminal is known as the downlink (or forwardlink). The
`
`signal flow from the mobile terminal to the base station is known as the uplink (or
`
`reverselink).
`
`34.
`
`In general, many subscriber mobile terminals are served within each
`
`cell by the cell’s base station in both the uplink and downlink directions. To serve
`
`many mobile terminals simultaneously without detrimental mutual interferences,
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 14
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`the mobile terminals must follow a strict channel sharing process known as
`
`multiple channel access or “multiple accesses.”
`
`35. The best known multiple access schemes are frequency division
`
`multiple access (FDMA), in which each mobile terminal has its own access
`
`frequency band, time division multiple access (TDMA), in which each mobile
`
`terminal has a unique access time slot, and code division multiple access (CDMA),
`
`in which each mobile terminal has a unique access code. Before the priority date
`
`of the '439 Patent, CDMA was the predominant technology in 3G cellular wireless
`
`standards and included two major families: UMTS and CDMA2000. In 4th
`
`generation (4G) LTE networks, another multiple access technology known as
`
`OFDMA (orthogonal frequency division multiple access) was proposed that would
`
`jointly apply TDMA and FDMA.
`
`
`
`Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM)
`
`36. There are many ways for a wireless link to use an allocated amount of
`
`bandwidth to transmit and receive data signals. Orthogonal Frequency Division
`
`Multiplexing (OFDM) was one way to transmit data that existed before the priority
`
`date of the '439 Patent. In general, OFDM is a way to modulate digital data on
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 15
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`multiple carrier frequencies in a wireless network for high-speed data transmission
`
`between a base station (BS) and a user equipment (UE).
`
`37. With OFDM, a transmitter (such as a base station or a mobile
`
`terminal) can divide its allocated frequency band into a number of orthogonal
`
`(non-overlapping) subcarriers to transmit data-bearing signals in each time slot.
`
`As shown in Figure 1 of the '439 Patent (labeled “prior art”), the signal bandwidth
`
`can be divided into hundreds of orthogonal subcarriers along the frequency axis
`
`and a number of OFDM symbol intervals along the time axis. In each subcarrier
`
`for each OFDM symbol interval, the BS can transmit a data symbol to a UE.
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 16
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`Channel Conditions and “Adaptive Modulation and Coding”
`
`38. The BS may modulate each subcarrier with data using a specific
`
`modulation scheme combined with a specific coding scheme. The modulation and
`
`coding schemes are chosen based on channel conditions, which can be affected by
`
`phenomena such as interference and fading due to multipath propagation. When
`
`the channel quality is high, higher-rate modulation and higher-rate coding can be
`
`applied to achieve a higher data rate while maintaining a sufficiently low bit error
`
`rate (BER). When the channel quality is poor, lower-rate modulation and coding
`
`must be applied to reduce the data rate and maintain a sufficiently low bit error
`
`rate.
`
`39.
`
`In general, the signals transmitted on different subcarriers will pass
`
`through physical propagation channels to reach the intended receiver unit (mobile
`
`terminal or base station). Because of pathloss, multipath effect, Doppler effect, co-
`
`channel interferences, and noise, the transmitted signal quality will degrade by the
`
`time it reaches the receiver. Because the channel conditions on different
`
`subcarriers might vary, signal qualities due to channel degradation might also vary
`
`across the multiple subcarriers in OFDM. This phenomenon is known as
`
`frequency selective fading and leads to a lower achievable data rate (channel
`
`capacity) for a given channel bandwidth. This frequency selective fading problem
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 17
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`was well known before the priority date of the '439 Patent. It was also well known
`
`before the priority date of the '439 Patent that one effective counter-measure
`
`against frequency selective fading is to adjust the modulation and coding for each
`
`subcarrier in response to the channel quality.
`
`40.
`
`In cellular systems, the channel conditions vary over time because of
`
`UE mobility. To compensate against time-varying channel conditions, a cellular
`
`UE periodically estimates the downlink channel quality of its subcarriers. A
`
`modulation and coding combination can then be chosen for each subcarrier or a
`
`group of subcarriers based upon the estimated channel conditions, often known as
`
`the channel state information (or CSI). Adjusting modulation and coding in
`
`response to channel quality is known as adaptive modulation and coding (AMC).
`
`AMC was mainstream technology before the priority date of the '439 Patent.
`
`OVERVIEW OF THE ’439 PATENT
`
`Prior-Art Systems Alleged in the '439 Patent
`
`41.
`
`To execute AMC on a subcarrier-by-subcarrier basis during downlink,
`
`channel information for hundreds or thousands of subcarriers needs to be sent from
`
`the mobile terminals to the base station. It was well known to people of ordinary
`
`skill in the art, before the priority date of the '439 Patent, that AMC of subcarrier
`
`granularity required too much feedback signaling overhead. It was also recognized
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-16-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 18
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`by people of ordinary skill in the art, before the priority date of the '439 Patent, that
`
`neighboring subcarriers typically experience similar channel conditions.
`
`42.
`
`In its background, the '439 Patent acknowledges that, to reduce the
`
`feedback overhead, multiple subcarriers can be bundled into subbands—groups of
`
`multiple subcarriers in neighboring positions in the frequency domain—and that
`
`this was done in the prior art. Ex. 1001, 2:12-31, 4:56-60. With AMC applied on
`
`subband basis, a joint (i.e., common) modulation parameter and a joint (i.e.,
`
`common) coding parameter can be applied to all of the subcarriers in a particular
`
`subband. With less-granular CSI needing to be sent back from the UE to the base
`
`station, the uplink spectral efficiency (i.e., spectrum utilization rate) for CSI
`
`feedback can be improved. Such AMC based on subbands was typically used
`
`before the priority date of the '439 Patent.
`
`43. Figure 2 of the '439 Patent, labeled “prior art,” helps explain AMC
`
`based on subbands. In Figure 2, all of the subcarriers along the frequency
`
`(vertical) axis are bundled into subbands 1 through N. A joint (common)
`
`modulation parameter and a joint (common) coding parameter are then applied to
`
`all of the subcarriers in each subband, as shown by the classification numbers in
`
`each coding and modulating block. Each classification number denotes a specific
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-17-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 19
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`coding parameter and a specific modulation parameter, given in Table 1 of the
`
`“Background Art” section of the '439 Patent. Ex. 1001, 2:12-49.
`
`FIG. 2 of ‘439 Patent
`
`
`
`44. Figures 3 and 4 of the '439 Patent show an alleged prior-art system
`
`implementing AMC based on subbands. As shown in Figures 4A and 4B, each
`
`subband has a modulation parameter M and a coding parameter C, which are
`
`applied to all of the subcarriers in the subband. Ex. 1001, 2:50-4:60.
`
`45. On the downlink receiving side (the mobile terminal) shown in
`
`Figures 3B and 4B of the '439 Patent, a subband AMC parameter section 318
`
`analyzes the condition of the OFDM subbands based on channel characteristics
`
`received from a channel estimation section 319. The subband AMC parameter
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-18-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 20
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`section 318 also selects subband modulation parameters MN and coding parameters
`
`CN to be sent back to the transmission side (the base station) via a feedback path
`
`implemented by an uplink transmission section 320. These subband modulation
`
`parameters MN and coding parameters CN are also stored by the receiving side in a
`
`parameter storage section 410 so that the receiving side can later use them to
`
`demodulate and decode the serial data stream sent by the transmission side (at BS).
`
`Ex. 1001, 3:14-61, 4:29-55.
`
`46. On the transmission side (the BS) shown in Figures 3A and 4A of the
`
`'439 Patent, an AMC control section 308 controls an AMC section 301 using the
`
`subband modulation parameters MN and the subband coding parameters CN
`
`obtained from the receiving side (the UE) via a parameter reception/extraction
`
`section 307. The result is a serial data stream 404 in which each subband k from 1
`
`through N has its own modulation and coding. Ex. 1001, 2:61-3:13, 4:1-28.
`
`47. Thus, in subband-based AMC of the alleged prior art acknowledged in
`
`the '439 Patent, each UE estimates the channel conditions for its downlink
`
`subbands, determines the subband AMC parameters, and feeds parameters back to
`
`the BS on a subband-by-subband basis. The BS then modulates and encodes each
`
`downlink subband to achieve an acceptable bit error rate. The '439 Patent
`
`acknowledges that such an alleged prior-art system using subband-level coding and
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-19-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 21
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`modulation reduces the difficulty of implementation and the feedback overhead of
`
`the system compared to AMC based on subbcarriers. Ex. 1001, 4:56-60.
`
`The Purported Improvement of the ’439 Patent
`
`48. The '439 Patent alleges that prior-art systems implementing AMC
`
`based on subbands still required too much feedback overhead and thus still suffer
`
`from low uplink spectrum utilization rate and difficulty of adaptivity. In particular,
`
`the ’439 Patent identifies a problem of “increasing spectrum utilization rate based
`
`on high-speed fading and channel estimation error, reducing the degree of
`
`difficulty of adaptivity, and reducing the feedback overhead compared with
`
`subband adaptive methods of the related art.” Ex. 1001, 5:35-39.
`
`49. The '439 Patent purportedly solves this problem by taking the
`
`subbands of the prior art, which were bundles of subcarriers, and further
`
`combining these subbands into “subband groups,” which are groups of subbands.
`
`Ex. 1001, 5:40-44. The '439 Patent then has a communication apparatus select a
`
`joint modulation parameter and a joint coding parameter for each subband group,
`
`instead of selecting a modulation parameter and a coding parameter for each
`
`subband as was done in the alleged prior art. Ex. 1001, 5:42-44.
`
`50. For example, as an alleged solution to the problems identified in the
`
`prior art, the '439 Patent describes a system implementing AMC performed on
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-20-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 22
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`subband groups in Figures 5A-6B. The system of Figures 5A-6B is mostly the
`
`same as the alleged prior-art system of Figures 3A-4B of the '439 Patent. In
`
`Figures 5A-6B, however, the units for implementing AMC are subband groups
`
`rather than subbands. In particular, as shown in Figures 6A and 6B of the '439
`
`Patent, each subband group has a modulation parameter M and a coding parameter
`
`C, which are equally applied to all of the subbands within the subband group. Ex.
`
`1001, 7:48-9:7.
`
`51. Regarding the alleged solution, Figures 5B and 6B of the '439 Patent
`
`show the receiving side of the communication system (e.g., a mobile terminal),
`
`where a subband AMC parameter section 504 analyzes the performance of the
`
`OFDM subbands based on channel characteristics received from a channel
`
`estimation section 319. The subband AMC parameter section 504 also selects
`
`subband group modulation parameters Mk and coding parameters Ck to be sent to
`
`the transmission side (the BS) via a feedback path implemented by a parameter
`
`transmission section 320 on uplink. These subband modulation parameters Mk and
`
`coding parameters Ck are also stored by the receiving side (i.e. UE) in a parameter
`
`storage section 410 so that the UE can later use them to demodulate and decode the
`
`serial data stream sent by the transmission side (the BS). Ex. 1001, 7:60-8:15,
`
`8:29-36, 8:57-9:7.
`
`SMRH:487566821.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-21-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-1581
`HTC EX1007, Page 23
`
`
`
`Ding Declaration re Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,848,439
`(IPR2018-01581)
`
`
`
`52. On the downlink transmission side (e.g., a base station) shown in
`
`Figures 5A and 6A of the '439 Patent, an adaptive transmission control section 501
`
`controls an AMC section 301 using the subband group modulation parameters Mk
`
`and the subband group coding parameters Ck that it received on uplink from the
`
`feedback message sent by the downlink receiving UE via a parameter
`
`reception/extraction section 307. The result is a serial data stream 603 in which
`
`each subband group 1 through K has its own modulation and coding. Ex. 1001,
`
`8:16-28, 8:41-56.
`
`53.
`
`In the '439 Patent, the OFDM s
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
