UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`BLACKBERRY CORP.,
`
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC 2017 LLC,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,167,487
`
`DECLARATION OF CRAIG BISHOP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BLACKBERRY 1006
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`BLACKBERRY CORP.,
`
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC 2017 LLC,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,167,487
`
`DECLARATION OF CRAIG BISHOP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BLACKBERRY 1006
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`
`
`I, Craig Bishop, declare the following:
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained as an independent expert witness on behalf of
`
`BlackBerry Corp. (“Petitioner”) related to the Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 7,167,487 (“the ’487 patent”).
`
`2.
`
`I am being compensated for my work in this matter at my normal consulting
`
`hourly rate. I am also being reimbursed for reasonable and customary expenses
`
`associated with my work and testimony in this investigation. My compensation is
`
`not contingent on the results of my study, the substance of my opinions, or the
`
`outcome of this matter.
`
`3.
`
`I have no financial interest in the ’487 patent and have had no contact with
`
`the named inventor of said patent. Neither have I reviewed the ’487 patent in
`
`detail, nor do I have any personal interest in the outcome of this IPR.
`
`4.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have reviewed the referenced
`
`materials below, each of which is the sort of material that experts in my field
`
`would reasonably rely upon when forming their opinions:
`
`•
`
`
`
`R2-010182, Corrections to logical channel priorities in MAC
`
`protocol, Mitsubishi Electric Telecom (Trium R&D),
`
`
`
`
`
`contribution to 3GPP TSG RAN WG2 #18 (EX-1008)
`
`•
`
`3GPP TS 25.321 V3.6.0 (2000-12) Technical Specification, 3rd
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access
`
`Network; MAC protocol specification (Release 1999) (Ex. EX-1007)
`
`•
`
`3GPP TS 25.302 V3.6.0 (2000-09) Technical Specification, 3rd
`
`Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access
`
`Network; Services provided by the physical layer (Release 1999) (EX-1009)
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Craig Bishop, Curriculum Vitae (Appendix A).
`
`3GPP FAQs, available at: http://www.3gpp.org/about-3gpp/3gpp-faqs
`
`(Appendix B).
`
`•
`
`Archive web page “Information for 3GPP Delegates” available at
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20010113004500/http://www.3gpp.org:80/Meet
`
`ings/3gpp_delegate.htm (Appendix C)
`
`•
`
`Invite to RAN WG2 #18, available at:
`
`http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_ran/WG2_RL2/TSGR2_18/Invitation/
`
`(Appendix D)
`
`•
`
`Archive of 3GPP email lists available at:
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20010330204214/http://list.3gpp.org:80/
`
`(Appendix E)
`
`•
`
`Archive of 3GPP file server available at:
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20010531183258/http://www.3gpp.org:80/ftp/ts
`
`g_ran/WG2_RL2/TSGR2_18/Docs/Zips/ (Appendix F)
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`R2-0100xx, CR xx to 25.321: Corrections to logical channel priorities
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`
`
`•
`
`in MAC protocol, Mitsubishi Electric Telecom (Trium R&D), draft
`
`contribution to 3GPP TSG RAN WG2 #18, available at:
`
`https://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?A3=ind0101&L=3GPP_TSG_RAN_WG2
`
`&E=base64&P=4527685&B=--------------
`
`1621E3A210341BD5181BFCA7&T=application%2Fx-zip-
`
`compressed;%20name=%22R2-0100xx.zip%22&N=R2-0100xx.zip
`
`(Appendix G)
`
`•
`
`R2-010255, Approved Report of the 18th TSG-RAN WG2 meeting
`
`(Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 15 - 19 January 2001), available at:
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20010519152648/http://www.3gpp.org:80/ftp/ts
`
`g_ran/WG2_RL2/TSGR2_18/Report/ (Appendix H)
`
`5.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed in this declaration, I have considered: the
`
`documents listed above; the reference materials cited herein; and my own
`
`academic background and professional experiences as outlined below.
`
`II.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS
`
`6. My complete qualifications and professional experience are described in my
`
`curriculum vitae, a copy of which is attached as Appendix A. The following is a
`
`summary of my relevant qualifications and professional experience.
`
`7.
`
`I earned my Bachelor of Electronic Engineering degree with Honours from
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`Polytechnic of Central London in 1989. In 2005, I earned my MSC in Computer
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`Science with Distinction from the University of Kent.
`
`8.
`
`After graduating with my first degree, I worked as an operations engineer at
`
`the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) for 4 years, then as a civil servant at
`
`the UK Radiocommunications Agency until 1996, during which time I became
`
`involved in telecommunications standardization in the European
`
`Telecommunication Standards Institute (“ETSI”), working in Technical Committee
`
`Radio Equipment and Systems group 2 (TC RES 2) concerned with the
`
`standardization of Private Mobile Radio (PMR). From 1994 through 1996, I acted
`
`as Rapporteur for voice and data related PMR standards ETS 300 086, ETS 300
`
`113, ETS 300 219 and ETS 300 390. During this time period between 1994 and
`
`1996, I participated as the only TC RES 2 delegate on behalf of the UK
`
`Radiocommunications Agency, generating proposals in support of UK
`
`administration and business requirements, downloading and reviewing other
`
`meeting input documents, and proposing changes as necessary to ensure input
`
`documents and the resulting specifications were in line with said requirements.
`
`9.
`
`In 1996, I joined Samsung Electronic Research Institute as a Senior
`
`Standards Engineer where I worked for 16 years, eventually becoming Director of
`
`Standards and Industry Affairs in 2011. My work at Samsung mainly focused on
`
`the standardization of the service requirements, architectures, protocols, and radio
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`transmission technologies for the GSM/GPRS, UMTS, and LTE/EPS mobile
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`telecommunications systems. Initially, I participated in ETSI Special Mobile
`
`Group (SMG) committees SMGI, SMG2, SMG4, SMG5, SMG9 and relevant
`
`UMTS related sub-committees until 1999, working on the air interface radio access
`
`network protocols, services, and terminal aspects of UMTS and GSM/GPRS. I
`
`was specifically involved in the ETSI SMG2 meetings leading up to selection of
`
`WCDMA as the radio access technology for the Frequency Division Duplex mode
`
`of UMTS.
`
`10. From 1998, I worked as a Principal Standards Engineer on the 3rd
`
`Generation Partnership (3GPP) on UMTS, attending Radio Access Network
`
`committees RAN1 and RAN2, SA1 (Services Aspects), T2 (Terminals), and other
`
`working groups and Technical Specification Group (TSG) plenary meetings
`
`covering the same technical aspects as in my previous work in ETSI. As an
`
`example, RAN2 was in 2000 the working group responsible for radio signalling
`
`protocol layers 2 and 3 of 3GPP UMTS mobile telecommunication access network.
`
`It remains the working group responsible for the radio signalling protocol layers 2
`
`and 3 of the LTE, LTE-Adv, and 5G mobile communications access network. As
`
`part of my work in 3GPP committees, I would prepare meeting contributions in
`
`support of Samsung’s research and development activities. Also, by way of
`
`preparation for each meeting, I would download all contributions and review those
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`of interest to Samsung, and where necessary, prepare additional input to the
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`meeting based on said review.
`
`11. From 2000, I acted as project manager and then as manager of the Systems
`
`Engineering group providing technical requirements for the team working on
`
`Samsung’s UMTS modem development. This involved scrutiny of ongoing
`
`standardization work, particularly that of 3GPP RAN2 and 3GPP Core Networks
`
`Working Group 1 (CN1 – responsible for layer 3 Non-Access Stratum signalling
`
`between the terminal and the core network of the mobile communications system)
`
`from which I would download and assess the impact of meeting contributions on
`
`the protocol stack of the development project, ensuring that the development team
`
`was kept informed about the latest developments as layers 2 and 3 of the UMTS
`
`standard were stabilized.
`
`12. During the period 1998 through 2004, in addition to authoring and
`
`presenting technical contributions for the 3GPP standard, and producing technical
`
`requirements for the radio modem, I acted as rapporteur for 3GPP Technical
`
`Reports covering User Equipment (“UE”) capability requirements (3GPP TR
`
`21.904) from 1999-2000, and the Evolution of the 3GPP System (3GPP TR
`
`21.902) in 2003 (the first Study Item to consider the 3GPP system beyond UMTS
`
`towards LTE/EPS).
`
`13.
`
`In 2005, I became Head of Advanced Technologies, Standards and
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`Regulation (ATSR) at Samsung. In addition to my managerial duties which
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`included responsibility for three standards engineers attending RAN2, and CT1
`
`working groups, I continued to work on 3GPP standardization issues. From
`
`2005until 2008 I worked in SA2, and from 2008 until 2011 in SA1. I also attended
`
`SA plenary meetings from 2008 until I left Samsung in 2013. As well as
`
`generating contributions in support of Samsung's research and development in
`
`preparation for each meeting, I would download and review documents from other
`
`3GPP members, identifying, and where necessary preparing, additional
`
`contributions on those of interest to Samsung. The work required a sound working
`
`knowledge of the broader 3GPP system to ensure effective management of the
`
`ATSR 3GPP standards team, effective participation in meeting discussions,
`
`assessment of third- party contributions, and provision of implementation guidance
`
`to Samsung developers.
`
`14. From 2006 until the time I stopped attending SA1 meetings in 2011, I
`
`authored and presented over 100 contributions to SA2 and SA1 meetings at 3GPP
`
`and appeared as an author/co-author on 18 patent applications related to User
`
`Equipment operation in the IMS and the 3GPP Core Network.
`
`15.
`
`In 2011, I became Director of Standards and Industry Affairs at Samsung,
`
`and in November of that year I was elected to the Board of the ETSI on which I
`
`served for a term of 3 years until November 2014.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`16. After leaving Samsung, I formed my own consulting company which is a
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`full ETSI member, and as part of various projects undertaken, I have continued to
`
`regularly access the 3GPP and ETSI document servers, and to keep abreast of
`
`3GPP and ETSI document handling practices.
`
`17. Through my extensive work on 3GPP standardization issues, I have become
`
`very familiar with 3GPP’s practices relating to making draft standards and
`
`standards contributions publicly available, including in the 2000 - 2001 timeframe.
`
`III. PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF 3GPP STANDARDS PROPOSALS
`
`AND OTHER DOCUMENTS
`
`18.
`
`3GPP is a global initiative partnership that unites seven 3GPP
`
`Organizational Partners from Asia, Europe and North America, the Association of
`
`Radio Industries and Businesses (ARIB) and Telecommunication Technology
`
`Committee (TTC) from Japan, the China Communications Standards Association
`
`(CCSA) from China, the Telecommunications Standards Development Society
`
`(TSDSI) from India, the Telecommunications Technology Association (TTA) from
`
`Korea, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), and the
`
`Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) from the United
`
`States. The remainder of my declaration focuses on activities in the 2000 - 2001
`
`timeframe, prior to May 21, 2001, unless stated otherwise.
`
`19. The main goal of 3GPP is to provide its members with an environment to
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`produce specifications and reports that define technologies covering cellular
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`telecommunications networks, including the User Equipment (UE), Radio Access
`
`Network (RAN) technologies, Core Network (CN) technologies, service and
`
`system aspects which themselves include work on codecs, security, and quality of
`
`service. The specifications/reports also provide hooks for interworking with non-
`
`3GPP networks including, but not limited to, Wi-Fi networks.
`
`20. The technical specifications developed by 3GPP were, and remain,
`
`contribution-driven by the 3GPP member companies and the many individual
`
`participants from these companies. In the 2000-2001 timeframe, there were at
`
`least dozens of companies that were members of 3GPP. At the time of the
`
`documents referenced in this declaration, 3GPP comprised five Technical
`
`Specification Groups (TSGs). Two of those were (and still are in 2018)
`
`responsible for UMTS and LTE: Radio Access Networks (RAN) and Service &
`
`Systems Aspects (SA). The activities of two others: Core Networks (CN) &
`
`Terminals (T) were later amalgamated under Core Network and Terminals (CT)
`
`TSG following the closure of TSG T in 2005, with responsibility for test
`
`specifications being moved to TSG RAN WG3. The fifth, GSM EDGE Radio
`
`Access Networks (GERAN), was responsible for evolution of the GSM radio
`
`technology until its closure in 2016, when the work was transferred to a RAN
`
`working group (RAN6 – which now also has responsibility for UTRAN as a legacy
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`mobile communications radio access network system). The Working Groups
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`within the TSGs met regularly and had quarterly plenary meetings where member
`
`companies’ Change Requests (CRs), draft specifications/reports, and other
`
`documents that had been agreed by the working groups were presented for formal
`
`approval.
`
`21.
`
`In the ordinary course of 3GPP’s regularly conducted business activities and
`
`pursuant to its standard business practices, the working groups created and still
`
`create incremental versions of draft specifications (e.g., V0.2.1, V.1.0.0, V1.1.0
`
`etc.) until such time that the specification is first approved by the relevant TSG
`
`plenary meeting. As explained in the “Foreword” section of all 3GPP deliverables,
`
`the version format x.y.z is as follows: x = 0 for draft versions, x = 1 when the
`
`deliverable is presented to TSG for information, x = 2 when the deliverable is
`
`presented to TSG for approval, and x = 3 or greater when the TSG has approved
`
`the deliverable and it is placed under ‘change control’. For approved deliverables,
`
`x = 3 corresponds to Release 99, and x = 4 onwards correspond to the 3GPP release
`
`number, e.g. x = 5 identifies the deliverable as being for release 5. The second
`
`digit y is incremented for all changes of substance, i.e. technical enhancements,
`
`corrections, updates, etc, and the third digit z is incremented when editorial only
`
`changes have been incorporated in the document. After a Technical Specification
`
`has been placed under ‘change control’ it can be modified only by formal Change
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`Requests (CRs) submitted to and agreed by Working Group meetings, and then
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`formally approved by TSG plenary. All versions including available draft versions
`
`are made available on the file server which is accessible from the 3GPP
`
`specifications page.
`
`22. Also, in the ordinary course of 3GPP’s regularly conducted business
`
`activities, and pursuant to its standard business practices, all draft technical
`
`specifications, proposals, reports, and other temporary documents to be discussed
`
`or considered in relation to 3GPP’s telecommunications standards activities were,
`
`in 2000-2001, and still are, assigned a document number. Each Technical
`
`Specification Group or Working Group adopts a structured numbering system for
`
`the documents associated with their meetings, and those systems typically follow a
`
`consistent numbering system as shown in the following example: xminnzzzz. The
`
`numbering system comprises six logical elements: (1) x: a single letter
`
`corresponding to the TSG; where in 2000-2001 x was one of R (Radio Access
`
`Network), N (Core Network), S (Service and System Aspects), T (Terminals), or
`
`G (GSM/EDGE Radio Access Network); (2) m A single character corresponding
`
`to the Working Group identity (typically 1, 2, 3, etc.) or, in the case of the TSG
`
`itself, the letter “P”; (3) i: Normally the hyphen character “-“, although it may take
`
`on other values depending on the nature of the meeting at which the document is
`
`presented, e.g. the identity of a subgroup, or an “h” to indicate an ad hoc meeting;
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`(4) nn: two digits to indicate the year, i.e. 99, 00, 01, etc.; and (5) zzzz: A unique
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`number of the document. Thus, the document number R2-010001 would be the
`
`document allocated the 1st unique number in TSG RAN WG2 in 2001, R2-010002
`
`the 2nd, and so on. In addition to its document number and title, it was, and still is,
`
`standard business practice in 3GPP to list on the face of each contribution
`
`document, the date, location, and meeting number of the meeting where the
`
`document is to be discussed. This information is recorded on the first page of the
`
`document by one of the document’s authors or editors at or near the time the
`
`document is created or presented to 3GPP.
`
`23. Prior to each meeting, members of the working group prepared technical
`
`documents (“TDocs,” also referred to as “contributions”). For example, TDocs
`
`were prepared to identify, discuss, and/or propose a new feature or change(s) to an
`
`existing feature or to identify a technical issue for discussion. According to the
`
`3GPP FAQs (available at http://www.3gpp.org/about-3gpp/3gpp-faqs and attached
`
`as Appendix B), “any bona fide representative of any 3GPP Individual Member ...
`
`can present a technical contribution - for example, a Change Request - to any
`
`3GPP TSG or WG meeting.” (Appendix B, p. 7). This was also the practice
`
`during 2000-2001. Each TDoc was uploaded to a public file server for public
`
`viewing prior to the meeting listed on the TDoc that indicates the meeting in which
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`the TDoc was intended to be discussed.
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`24. The documents were assigned a number by the meeting secretary according
`
`to the convention described above and then uploaded to a public file server in an
`
`area allocated to the particular working group, where they became publicly
`
`available. (Appendix B, p. 8). The documents were publicly available
`
`immediately upon upload. (Id.). Specifically, “TDoc numbers start to be allocated
`
`some weeks before a 3GPP meeting, and the authors then create [the TDocs] and
`
`they or the group’s secretary uploads them to the public file server as soon as
`
`possible.” (Id., emphasis added). The public would have been made aware of
`
`meeting dates and times on 3GPP’s website and could download and access the
`
`contribution documents and other documents offered for discussion as soon as they
`
`were uploaded to 3GPP’s server. “No password is needed to access any
`
`information on the 3GPP Web site, all information is openly published.” (Id.
`
`emphasis added). This was also the practice during 2000-2001.
`
`25. This practice is confirmed from that time of my experience, e.g., by the
`
`archived 3GPP web page Information for 3GPP Delegates (Appendix C) which
`
`states in answer to the question “Where can I download documents for an
`
`upcoming meeting?”: “Each meeting invitation will contain details of where the
`
`documents are stored for the meeting. It is advisable for delegates attending a
`
`meeting to download the documents available prior to the meeting from the ftp
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`server and onto their personal computers.” It is also confirmed by the invitation to
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`the RAN WG2 #18 meeting, which is dated December 5, 2000, and which states
`
`“Documents for the meeting should be delivered by e-mail to … [the meeting
`
`secretary] by 12 January 2001. After acceptance and number allocation the
`
`documents will be uploaded on the server in the FTP directory at:
`
`ftp://ftp.3gpp.org/TSG_RAN/WG2_RL2/TSGR2_18/”. (Appendix D, p. 1)
`
`26. The public file server provides at least two mechanisms to determine when
`
`the document was uploaded and thus made publicly available. First, when a
`
`document was uploaded, the file server automatically assigned the document a
`
`time stamp, an accurate and automatically computer-generated electronic record of
`
`when the document was uploaded, as part of the regular business practices of
`
`3GPP. “[T]he time stamp of the Zip file [of the TDoc] can be relied upon to
`
`indicate when the upload occurred.” (Appendix B, p. 9). Second, “[t]he zip file
`
`for a TDoc typically contains a Word file which has its own date/time-stamp,
`
`which puts an absolute limit on the earliest moment that the TDoc could have
`
`become available in that form.” (Appendix B, p. 8). The time stamp of the
`
`document contained in a zip file is an accurate electronic record of when the
`
`document was last modified.
`
`27.
`
`In addition, in some working groups, including RAN2 in 2000-2001, the
`
`submitter would send the document via email to the TSG or WG using an email
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`reflector, so that it would be immediately available to interested parties and could
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`be subsequently uploaded to the publicly accessible server by the working group
`
`secretary. The email reflector efficiently acted as an email alias that distributed
`
`emails, e.g., having attached TDocs, to all the subscribers to the email list. There
`
`were hundreds of subscribers to the RAN2 email reflector. The people that
`
`subscribed were typically engineers, like me, who were interested in following
`
`and/or participating in 3GPP standards development and/or who were interested in
`
`keeping abreast of new ideas being submitted in TDocs. The subscriber list
`
`typically included all those persons who planned to attend an upcoming meeting
`
`where a TDoc may be discussed. The typical practice among people who were to
`
`attend an upcoming meeting was to review and form opinions about the ideas in
`
`TDocs and their potential impact on the standard and on the user and the network
`
`equipment. The email reflector for RAN2 provided an efficient way for
`
`contributors to quickly and efficiently disseminate TDocs and provided a forum for
`
`email discussion about TDocs where desired.
`
`28. Attached as Appendix E is a link to a 3GPP webpage dated March 30, 2001
`
`(https://web.archive.org/web/20010330204214/http://list.3gpp.org:80/), archived at
`
`the Internet Archive, that lists the number of subscribers to the RAN_WG2
`
`(RAN2) email list as “1060 subscribers.” (Emphasis in original.) This web
`
`archive is consistent with my recollection that there were several hundreds of
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`subscribers to the RAN2 email reflector in 2000-2001.
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`29. Submitters were on notice that uploading a document and its distribution via
`
`the email exploder resulted in public disclosure. “This distribution on the group’s
`
`email exploder is important, because once that happens, the document is
`
`effectively in the public domain, since membership of the exploder is open to all
`
`and is (almost) unpoliced.” (Appendix B, p. 8). The documents can be
`
`disseminated without restrictions, and in fact, “no restriction has ever been placed
`
`on how meeting participants dispose of the documents subsequent to their
`
`distribution before, during, or after the meeting.” (Appendix B, p. 4).
`
`30. The emails were archived in a public archive (available at
`
`http://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?INDEX), which provides further mechanisms to
`
`determine when a document was made publicly available. The archived email
`
`contains a computer-generated date stamp indicating when the email was sent and
`
`thereby when any attached document became public. The date stamp on the email
`
`was and is an accurate and automatically computer-generated electronic record of
`
`when the email was sent and was created as part of the regular business practices
`
`of 3GPP. (“Searching the group’s email exploder archive
`
`(http://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?INDEX) on or about the suspected production
`
`date gleaned from the file date/time-stamp may well reveal the message in which
`
`the TDoc was first distributed, or perhaps the message by which the group’s
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`secretary announced that it was available on the server.” (Appendix B, p. 9).
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`Furthermore, when the attachment is a zip file, the document(s) within the zip file
`
`may have a date stamp, which is an accurate electronic record of when the
`
`document was last modified and may provide further verification of the upload
`
`date.
`
`IV. R2-010182: CORRECTIONS TO LOGICAL CHANNEL
`
`PRIORITIES IN MAC PROTOCOL
`
`31. R2-010182 is a technical contribution submitted to 3GPP TSG RAN WG2.
`
`It follows the naming convention (“xminnzzzz”) described in the preceding
`
`section. Accordingly, “R2” indicates that the contribution was submitted to RAN
`
`WG2, “01” indicates the year (2001) that this technical contribution was submitted,
`
`and “0182” is the unique number that was assigned to this contribution document
`
`by the working group secretary. It is titled “Corrections to logical channel
`
`priorities in MAC protocol”. Accordingly, when asked to access this document, I
`
`navigated to the 3GPP website at http://www.3gpp.org, selected “Specification
`
`Groups” from the menu bar, and then selected “TSG RAN” from the dropdown. I
`
`then selected “RAN2 – Radio layer 2 and Radio layer 3 RR” and the “Documents”
`
`link to access the public file server where documents for the TSG-RAN Working
`
`Group 2 are stored.
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`
`
`32. R2-010182 states that it was prepared for “3GPP TSG [RAN] WG2 Meeting
`
`#18” which took place in “Edinburgh, Scotland” from “17th [sic]-19th January
`
`2001”. Accordingly, at the file server website, I selected the link “TSGR2_18,”
`
`which corresponds to the RAN2 meeting #18 held in Edinburgh in January 2001,
`
`and selected the link “Docs,” where documents for the meeting are stored and then
`
`“Zips” to show the links from which the documents can be downloaded.
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`
`
`33. A true and correct copy (with added red highlighting) of the relevant portion
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`of the Documents directory listing produced by the file server website is provided
`
`below.
`
`
`
`Available at: http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_ran/WG2_RL2/TSGR2_18/Docs/Zips/
`
`34. The availability of the document on the server at that time is confirmed by
`
`the archived copy of the RAN2 document archive from May 2001 (Appendix F).
`
`35. The Docs directory index stated that R2-010182 was uploaded on
`
`“1/23/2001”. I selected the link for “R2-010182.zip” and downloaded a zip file of
`
`the same name. The zip file contained a Microsoft Word document, “R2-
`
`010182.doc”, with a date stamp of “1/16/2001”, one week before the zip file was
`
`uploaded. A true and correct copy of the document within the zip file (R2-
`
`010182.doc) is provided as EX-1008. I understand these date stamps to mean that
`
`R2-010182.zip was uploaded to 3GPP’s publicly available website on January 23,
`
`2001, and that any member of the public could have downloaded the zip file,
`
`extracted the Word document enclosed, and viewed the contents of the Word
`
`document without restriction on January 23, 2001 and thereafter. I have no reason
`
`to believe these date stamps are inaccurate. I have therefore determined that EX-
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`
`
`1008 was publicly available on the file server no later than January 23, 2001.
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`36. As document R2-010182 was prepared for a RAN2 working group meeting,
`
`I know that the submitter at that time would probably have sent to the 3GPP RAN2
`
`email exploder an email containing at least a draft version of the document prior to
`
`the meeting. Accordingly, I navigated to the 3GPP web site at
`
`http://www.3gpp.org, then selected “Specification Groups” from the menu bar, and
`
`then selected “email lists” from the dropdown.
`
`
`
`
`
`23
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`
`
`37. On the resulting page, next to “See all 3GPP email exploder lists at,” I
`
`selected “list.3gpp.org,” which took me to the web site
`
`https://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?INDEX. From there, I selected the link “[Next]”
`
`and “3GPP_TSG_RAN_WG2,” which corresponds to TSG-RAN Working Group
`
`2. I then selected “January 2001,” which is where emails relating to meeting #18
`
`from January 15-19, 2001 are stored.
`
`
`
`
`
`24
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`
`
`25
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`
`
`
`
`38. The source company for R2-010182 is given as “Mitsubishi Electric
`
`Telecom (Trium R&D)” so I selected the link “Mitsubishi Electric Telecom
`
`
`
`26
`
`
`
`
`
`contribution for TFC selection”. This took me to a web page containing an email
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`with the same subject, an excerpt of which is shown below:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`27
`
`
`
`
`
`39. The email states that it was sent on “Thu, 11 Jan 2001,” which is 12 days
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`before EX-1008 (R2-010182) was uploaded to the public file server. The email
`
`states, “Please find enclose Mitsubishi Electric Telecom contributions for TFC
`
`selection for release 4 to be presented during ran#18”. The web page displaying
`
`the email provided links to download the email attachments, and I selected “R2-
`
`0100xx.zip.” This downloaded a file of the same name. The zip file contained a
`
`Microsoft Word document, “R2-0100xx.doc,” with a date stamp of “1/11/2001,”
`
`five days before that of the Microsoft Word file downloaded from the public file
`
`server, and 12 days before EX-1008 (R2-010182) was uploaded to the public file
`
`server. I have no reason to believe these date stamps are inaccurate. A true and
`
`correct copy of the Word document is provided as Appendix G.
`
`40. After detailed comparison, I determined that EX-1008 and the document R2-
`
`0100xx in Appendix G, are substantively identical (there are only minor editorial
`
`and no technical differences between the documents). From this, I concluded that
`
`the technical content of EX-1008 was publicly distributed via email exploder on
`
`January 11, 2001, a process that the 3GPP recognizes as placing the document “in
`
`the public domain, since membership is open to all” and “no restriction has ever
`
`been placed on how meeting participants dispose of the documents.” (Appendix B,
`
`pp. 8, 4). The email and content of EX-1008 were also publicly available via the
`
`web page that contained the email on this date. Furthermore, the email providing a
`
`
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`draft version of the document is consistent with the Documents directory index
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`Inter Partes Review of 7,167,487
`
`
`indication that EX-1008 was publicly available on the 3GPP public file server no
`
`later than January 23, 2001.
`
`41. According to the 3GPP website at:
`
`https://webapp.etsi.org/3GPPRegistration/fViewPart.asp?mid=20671, RAN WG2
`
`Meeting #18 was attended by 95 individuals (out of 108 registered participants).
`
`The approved meeting report from RAN WG2 #18 (Appendix H) (dated February
`
`19, 2001 and approved at RAN WG 2 #19) shows that whilst there was no Work
`
`Item assigned for R2-010182, it was nevertheless discussed by the meeting with
`
`the following outcome: “Decision: The document was noted. An e-mail
`
`discussion would be held the prime purpose of which would be to identify the
`
`requirements for the algorithm…”. This indicates the availability and
`
`dissemination of the document to RAN2 #18 meeting
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
