`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`CRADLEPOINT, INC., DELL INC., HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
`SIERRA WIRELESS, INC., TCL COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
`HOLDINGS LIMITED, TCT MOBILE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, TCT
`MOBILE, INC., TCT MOBILE (US) INC., TCT MOBILE (US)
`HOLDINGS INC., THALES DIS AIS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH,
`ZTE CORPORATION, AND ZTE (USA) INC.
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`3G LICENSING S.A.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case No. IPR2021-00584
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF CRAIG BISHOP IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,551,625
`
`
`
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`
`Page
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Introduction ................................................................................................. 1
`
`II.
`
`Qualifications............................................................................................... 2
`
`III.
`
`Public Availability of 3GPP Technical Specifications and Other Documents
`..................................................................................................................... 7
`
`A.
`
`Prominence and Purpose of 3GPP ...................................................... 7
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`3GPP’s Policy and Practice of Making Documents Public ................12
`
`3GPP Structure and Standards Development Process........................13
`
`D.
`
`Types of 3GPP Documents ...............................................................16
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`Distribution over the 3GPP Listserv ..................................................21
`
`The 3GPP Public File Repository .....................................................28
`
`IV. Exhibit 1004 (Meeting45) ...........................................................................29
`
`V.
`
`Exhibit 1005 (Meeting39) ...........................................................................37
`
`VI. Exhibit 1007 (Meeting45bis) ......................................................................38
`
`VII. Conclusion ..................................................................................................41
`
`VIII. Declaration .................................................................................................43
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`I, Craig Bishop, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained as an independent expert witness on behalf of
`
`Petitioners related to Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`(“the ’625 patent”).
`
`2.
`
`I am being compensated for my work in this matter at my accustomed
`
`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.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have reviewed Exhibits 1004,
`
`1005, and 1007, each of which is a type of material that experts in my field would
`
`reasonably rely upon when forming their opinions.
`
`4.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed within this Declaration, I have
`
`considered:
`
`1)
`
`Exhibits 1004, 1005, and 1007; and
`
`2) My own academic background, knowledge, and professional
`
`experiences in the field of wireless communications and 3GPP
`
`standards-development, as described below.
`
`1
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`5.
`
`Although I have attempted to organize the information presented in this
`
`Declaration into helpful sections and/or divisions, my opinions are supported by the
`
`information in the Declaration in its entirety.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`
`6. My complete qualifications and professional experience are described
`
`in my curriculum vitae, a copy of which has been attached as Appendix 1. The
`
`following is a summary of my relevant qualifications and professional experience.
`
`7.
`
`I earned my Bachelor of Electronic Engineering degree with Honors
`
`from Polytechnic of Central London in 1989. In 2005, I earned my MSC in
`
`Computer 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 particular in Technical
`
`Committee Radio Equipment and Systems (TC RES2) 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 300 113, ETS 300 219
`
`and ETS 300 390. I participated as the only TC RES2 delegate on behalf of the UK
`
`Radiocommunications Agency, generating proposals
`
`in support of UK
`
`2
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`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 Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM)/ General
`
`Packet Radio Service (GPRS), Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
`
`(UMTS), and Long-Term Evolution (LTE)/ Evolved Packet System (EPS) systems.
`
`Initially, I participated in ETSI Special Mobile Group (SMG) committees SMG1,
`
`SMG2, SMG4, SMG5, SMG9 and relevant UMTS related sub-committees working
`
`on the air interface radio access network protocols, service, and terminal aspects of
`
`UMTS and GSM/GPRS until 1999. I was specifically involved in the ETSI SMG2
`
`meetings leading up to selection of Wideband Code Division Multiple Access
`
`(WCDMA) as the radio access technology for the Frequency Division Duplex mode
`
`of UMTS.
`
`10. Beginning in 1998, I worked as a Principal Standards Engineer on the
`
`3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) on UMTS. I have been involved with
`
`3GPP since its inception. I attended the inaugural 3GPP Technical Specification
`
`Gropu (TSG) meetings held in December 1998, and I began attending Working
`
`3
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`Group (WG) meetings in 1999. Specifically, I regularly attended Radio Access
`
`Network (RAN) WG1, Services & System Aspects (SA) WG1, Terminals (T) WG2,
`
`but also other Working Groups and Technical Specification Group TSG plenary
`
`meetings covering similar technical aspects as in my previous work in ETSI. As
`
`examples, RAN WG1 was, and is, a Working Group responsible for the specification
`
`of the physical layer of the latest wireless cellular standards, and RAN WG2 was,
`
`and is, a Working Group responsible for signaling protocol layers 2 and 3 residing
`
`just above the physical layer. As part of this work, 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 of interest to Samsung, and where necessary, prepare additional input
`
`to the meeting based on said review.
`
`11. Beginning in 2000, I acted as project manager and then as system
`
`engineering manager at Samsung, providing technical requirements for the team
`
`working on Samsung’s UMTS modem development. This involved scrutiny of
`
`ongoing standardization work, particularly in RAN WG1, RAN WG2, and TSG
`
`Core Network (CN) WG1, from which I would download, and assess the impact of,
`
`contributions on Samsung’s development projects, ensuring that Samsung’s
`
`development team was kept informed about the latest developments as layers 2 and
`
`3 of the UMTS standard were stabilized.
`
`4
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`12. During this period, 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
`
`Regulation (ATSR) at Samsung. In addition to my managerial duties which included
`
`responsibility for standards, research, and regulatory engineers including three
`
`standards engineers who were regularly attending 3GPP RAN WG2 and Core
`
`Network and Terminals (CT) WG1 Working Groups, I personally continued to work
`
`on 3GPP standardization issues. From 2005 until 2008, I regularly attended and
`
`participated in SA WG2 meetings, mainly focusing on IP Multimedia Subsystem
`
`(IMS) including voice over IMS but also looking at wider Evolved Packet System
`
`(EPS) related issues. From 2008 until 2011, I regularly attended and participated in
`
`SA WG1 meetings. 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 as preparation for each meeting, I would download and
`
`review documents from other 3GPP members, identifying those of interest to
`
`Samsung and, where necessary, preparing additional contributions on behalf of
`
`5
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`Samsung. The work required a sound working knowledge of the broader 3GPP
`
`system to ensure effective management of the ATSR team, effective participation in
`
`meeting discussions, expert assessment of third-party standards contributions, and
`
`provision of implementation guidance to Samsung developers.
`
`14. From 2006 until I stopped attending SA WG1 meetings in 2011, I
`
`authored and presented over 100 contributions to SA WG2 and SA WG1 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 ETSI on which
`
`I served for a term of 3 years until November 2014.
`
`16. Since leaving Samsung in January 2013, I have become a member of
`
`ETSI, 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 and publication practices.
`
`17. Through my extensive work on 3GPP standardization issues, I have
`
`become very familiar with 3GPP’s practices relating to making final specifications,
`
`draft standards, and standards-related contributions publicly available, including in
`
`the 1999–2011 timeframe when I was attending or monitoring various 3GPP
`
`Working Groups.
`
`6
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`18. For the purposes of my analysis in this Declaration, I have been
`
`informed by counsel that a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) in the field
`
`of the ’625 patent in approximately March 2005 would have had a bachelor’s degree
`
`in electrical engineering or a similar discipline, with at least three years of relevant
`
`industry or research experience (or additional education). The relevant experience
`
`would include a working understanding of the development of new and then-existing
`
`wireless cellular communications standards. I was a POSITA in March 2005 based
`
`on my education and experience, which are described above and in my attached CV.
`
`III. PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF 3GPP TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
`AND OTHER DOCUMENTS
`
`19. Based on my years of experience working in various capacities in 3GPP
`
`and on 3GPP technical specifications issues, I am familiar with the regular business
`
`practices of the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) relating to technical
`
`documents including specifications, draft standards and proposals, and standards-
`
`related technical contributions—including the business practices through which
`
`3GPP makes these documents public.
`
`A.
`
`20.
`
`Prominence and Purpose of 3GPP
`
`3GPP was inaugurated in December 1998 to produce Technical
`
`Specifications and Technical Reports for the 3G mobile system called Universal
`
`Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS). Appendix 2 at 2–3 (3GPP
`
`Partnership Project Description); Appendix 3 at 4 (About 3GPP Home); Appendix
`
`7
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`4 at 15 (GSM for UMTS). A number of standards organizations agreed to cooperate
`
`to produce a “complete set of globally applicable Technical Specifications” that
`
`would then be transposed into standards by the relevant standardization bodies (also
`
`known as “Organizational Partners”). Appendix 2 at 3, 5.
`
`21.
`
`3GPP is a global initiative partnership made up of organizational
`
`partners, market representation partners, and individual members. Appendix 5 at 6–
`
`7 (3GPP Working Procedures, 2002); Appendix 6 at 13; Appendix 2 at 10. Today,
`
`3GPP unites seven telecommunications standard development organizations
`
`(“Organizational Partners”) from around the world: the Association of Radio
`
`Industries and Businesses (ARIB) and the Telecommunication Technology
`
`Committee (TTC) from Japan, the China Communications Standards Association
`
`(CCSA) from China, the Telecommunications Standards Development Society,
`
`India (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.1 These Organizational Partners are regional standards organizations that
`
`have the authority to define, publish, and set standards for their respective regions.
`
`
`
` 1 The specific organizational partners that make up 3GPP have changed over time.
`
`8
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`Appendix 2 at 12. 3GPP also includes “Market Representation Partners” that
`
`represent various industry perspectives and offer market advice. Appendix 5 at 7–8
`
`(3GPP Working Procedures, 2002, “Market Representation Partnership”); Appendix
`
`2 at 14; Appendix 4 at 15. Additionally, 3GPP includes individual member
`
`companies (“Individual Members”) that participate in 3GPP through their
`
`membership in a 3GPP Organizational Partner. Appendix 5 at 8 (3GPP Working
`
`Procedures, 2002, “Individual Membership”); Appendix 4 at 15. As an example of
`
`how prominent 3GPP was in the industry, by January 2000, there were 284
`
`companies participating as Individual Members. Appendix 4 at 18; Appendix 6 at
`
`14 (textbook noting there were 297 Individual members by 2006). In fact, 350
`
`delegates attended the first 3GPP Technical Meeting in December 1998. Appendix
`
`4 at 6.
`
`22. As noted in paragraph 20, a primary goal of 3GPP is to provide an
`
`environment to produce technical specifications and technical reports that define and
`
`standardize technologies covering cellular telecommunications networks, including
`
`User Equipment or Mobile Device (UE) technologies, Radio Access Network
`
`(RAN) technologies, Core Network (CN) technologies, and service and system
`
`capabilities—including work on codecs, security, and quality of service. The
`
`specifications also provide hooks for interworking with non-3GPP networks
`
`including but not limited to Wi-Fi networks.
`
`9
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`23. Given the prominence of 3GPP in the wireless communication industry,
`
`beginning in 1998 and continuing through today, interested POSITAs were tracking
`
`the developments of the latest 3GPP specifications and other submissions to ensure
`
`that the standards reflected their employers’ technology visions, included their
`
`technological solutions and features, and that the products and services developed
`
`by their companies were consistent with the standards being developed. In other
`
`words, it is my opinion that a POSITA would have to be familiar with 3GPP and the
`
`specification-related documents produced as part of the 3GPP process in order to
`
`properly perform his or her job. Without access to and knowledge of the 3GPP
`
`documentation, including for example the substantive contents of 3GPP technical
`
`specifications, an engineer could not develop products that were interoperable with
`
`the worldwide 3G (and later 4G) standards. Because 3GPP documents were an
`
`important aspect of a POSITA’s professional experience, textbooks and articles
`
`about cellular communications commonly directed readers to the 3GPP website for
`
`information regarding standards development. Appendix 4 at 23 (directing readers
`
`to the 3GPP website at the conclusion of the chapter on the success of 3GPP in the
`
`standards development process). As a POSITA myself, I would regularly visit the
`
`3GPP website for the latest developments in 3G standards setting and refer
`
`colleagues involved in the development of 3G devices to the 3GPP website as a
`
`valuable reference.
`
`10
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`24. My personal experience at Samsung confirms 3GPP’s prominence in
`
`the wireless industry. Engineers and managers at Samsung who were responsible
`
`for developing 3G modem software (and who were not attending 3GPP meetings or
`
`involved with 3GPP in any direct way) regularly asked me to which version of a
`
`given 3GPP specification they should be developing their products. Similarly,
`
`managers at Samsung would ask me when specific 3GPP releases would be ready
`
`and what would be included in those releases. A significant part of my role at
`
`Samsung was to ensure that Samsung’s development engineers were made aware of
`
`changes and proposals made in the 3GPP development process that would likely
`
`impact their work—and to discuss the implications of those changes or proposals
`
`with them. Such communication became so regular that around 2003 we began
`
`holding regular feedback sessions between those of us involved with 3GPP and the
`
`development engineers who were not involved with 3GPP work. I also maintained
`
`an internal company database that tracked changes that had been approved by 3GPP,
`
`to help the various development groups at Samsung stay informed as to changes that
`
`would impact their development work. The database contained summaries of
`
`changes introduced (and by whom), a brief assessment on the potential impact of the
`
`change, and the time and date information, including from which version the change
`
`was introduced. The database also included links to relevant 3GPP documents so
`
`that engineers could access the documents directly. In short, the technical work of
`
`11
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`3GPP was at the forefront of development at Samsung, even for engineers who were
`
`not directly involved with creating or contributing to the 3GPP process.
`
`B.
`
`25.
`
`3GPP’s Policy and Practice of Making Documents Public
`
`3GPP’s policy was to make 3GPP documents available to the public,
`
`including to interested POSITAs. The free availability of 3GPP documents to any
`
`interested member of the public was widely recognized in the industry. As an
`
`example of the prominence of 3GPP and its place in the wireless standards industry,
`
`I note that textbooks directed readers to the 3GPP website for information about
`
`relevant standards. Making the documents available to the public was intended to
`
`help foster discussion and collaboration among 3GPP Working Group members, as
`
`well as among other interested POSITAs. Appendix 4 at 23 (directing readers to the
`
`3GPP website).
`
`26. Because the purpose of 3GPP was worldwide adoption of a common
`
`standard, no restrictions on distribution or discussion were placed on 3GPP
`
`documents. For example, I personally recall sharing documents with colleagues who
`
`were not involved in the 3GPP process, and the internal company database I created
`
`at Samsung, discussed in paragraph 24, included links to 3GPP documents so that
`
`others (including individuals not involved with 3GPP) could access those documents
`
`directly. This type of document sharing—providing documents to those outside
`
`3GPP to foster technical development—has always been accepted and encouraged
`
`12
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`by 3GPP. Appendix 7, at 10 #7.3 (“No password is needed to access any information
`
`on the 3GPP Web site, all information is openly published.”).
`
`C.
`
`3GPP Structure and Standards Development Process
`
`27. Within 3GPP, responsibility for producing specifications was delegated
`
`to the Technical Specification Groups (TSGs). Appendix 5 at 11–12 (3GPP
`
`Working Procedures, 2002, “TSG tasks”). Each TSG is further divided into a
`
`number of Working Groups (WGs). Appendix 2 at 31 (3GPP Partnership Project
`
`Description); Appendix 4 at 16, 25, 39. Appendix 6 at 14; see also Appendix 5 at
`
`22 (3GPP Working Procedures, 2002, defining “Working Group”). Two of the
`
`TSGs were (and still are in 2021) called: TSG Radio Access Networks (RAN) and
`
`TSG Service & Systems Aspects (SA). Two other TSGs, TSG Core Networks (CN)
`
`and TSG Terminals (T), were amalgamated under Core Network and Terminals (CT)
`
`following the closure of TSG T in 2005, with responsibility for terminal test
`
`specifications being moved to a RAN working group (RAN WG5). A fifth TSG,
`
`GSM EDGE Radio Access Networks (GERAN), was responsible for evolution of
`
`the GSM radio technology until it closed in 2016 and its work was transferred to a
`
`RAN working group responsible for legacy systems (RAN WG6), which itself
`
`closed in July 2020.
`
`28. The TSGs and WGs held “ordinary” meetings to conduct regular
`
`business, and “ad hoc” meetings that were called to address one or more particular
`
`13
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`topics. TSG and WG ordinary meetings followed an incrementing number
`
`sequence, and if an additional meeting was required between two ordinary meetings,
`
`the numbering sequence was preserved by adding the ‘bis’ suffix to the previous
`
`ordinary meeting number. The TSGs held quarterly plenary meetings2 where
`
`members’ contributions, draft specifications/reports, and other documents that had
`
`been agreed upon by the Working Groups were presented for discussion and
`
`approval. Appendix 5 at 18 (3GPP Working Procedures, “Deliverable types,”
`
`stating that Technical Specifications and Technical Reports are “drawn up by the
`
`TSGs” and are approved by TSGs). Once a Technical Specification was, or Change
`
`Requests creating a new version of a Technical Specification were, formally
`
`approved by TSG plenary, the latest version of said Technical Specification would
`
`be created by the Mobile Competence Centre (MCC) and uploaded to the file server.
`
`Appendix 7 at 8 (#4.15). In that way, the conclusion of 3GPP TSG plenary meetings
`
`serves as notice that new versions of specifications incorporating Change Requests
`
`approved by the TSG meeting will shortly be made available on the public 3GPP
`
`server.
`
`
`
` 2 Except in 1999 when 5 meetings were held.
`
`14
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`29. As part of the standards development process, delegates could submit
`
`contributions on behalf of the Individual Members. Members had an incentive to
`
`stay updated on 3GPP developments because those members usually wanted to
`
`contribute to the standard and to make suggestions as to what technology and/or
`
`features should (or should not) be included. Delegates also attended 3GPP meetings
`
`to keep their employers abreast of developments related to the standards that would
`
`ultimately apply to those companies and the products those companies produce.
`
`3GPP members around the world—and the interested POSITAs employed by
`
`them—would have been motivated to stay up to date regarding 3GPP developments
`
`to ensure their products, networks, and research programs remained consistent and
`
`relevant to with the specifications being developed. In light of this need to follow
`
`the standards development process, delegates often distributed 3GPP-related
`
`documents far beyond the attendees at 3GPP meetings, to other individuals at their
`
`respective companies. This was certainly my experience at Samsung, as I described
`
`in paragraphs 24–26.
`
`30. Following each 3GPP meeting, the secretary would distribute the
`
`meeting minutes via the corresponding email exploder list with a request for
`
`comments. This reminded subscribers that the meeting had taken place, informed
`
`non-attending subscribers of the work items and documents that had been treated (or
`
`not) and the schedule for future work / meetings, and provided a written record of
`
`15
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`any technology proposals, working assumptions, and / or work items that had been
`
`were agreed (or not). The meeting report for a group would be formally approved
`
`at the subsequent meeting to form the meeting report. Upon approval, the meeting
`
`report would usually then also be made available on the 3GPP ftp server. The
`
`secretary would also update the TDoc list to include documents that were created at
`
`the meeting and would normally ensure that all documents from the meeting were
`
`uploaded to the 3GPP file server.
`
`31. Although attendance at 3GPP meetings was generally limited to 3GPP
`
`members, the public, including interested POSITAs, would have been made aware
`
`of Working Group meeting dates and times on 3GPP’s website and via 3GPP
`
`Working Group email lists. Appendix 8 (RAN WG2 Meetings Page); Appendix 9
`
`(RAN WG2 Email List, Nov. 2004). For example, POSITAs would have been aware
`
`of the meeting information pages for each TSG Working Group.
`
`D. Types of 3GPP Documents
`
`32. The technical specifications and reports developed by 3GPP were, and
`
`are, driven by the technical contributions of 3GPP members. As part of that
`
`development process, various types of documents were produced. As relevant to
`
`this proceeding, the 3GPP process involved the consideration of temporary
`
`16
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`documents3 (“TDocs,” also referred to as “technical contributions,” or “member
`
`contributions”), resulting in the production of technical specifications.
`
`33. As I noted in paragraphs 20 and 22, a primary purpose of 3GPP is to
`
`prepare, approve, and maintain globally applicable Technical Specifications and
`
`Technical Reports. Appendix 5 at 6 (3GPP Working Procedures, “Purpose”). A
`
`“Technical Specification,” as defined by 3GPP, is “[a] 3GPP output document
`
`containing normative provisions approved by a Technical Specification Group.”
`
`Appendix 5 at 22. 3GPP would (and still does) periodically freeze a complete set of
`
`standards (referred to as a “Release”4), and each set would include new
`
`
`
` 3 The term “temporary” is used to designate documents that are submitted to and
`
`dealt with by 3GPP TSGs and WGs in the process of elaborating the standards, but
`
`do not constitute permanent 3GPP deliverables such as Technical Specifications and
`
`Reports. Temporary documents are permanently archived by and freely available
`
`from 3GPP once they have been submitted.
`
` 4 This is denominated by the major version field (see paragraph 38). E.g., v4.x.x
`
`versions are part of release 4, v8.x.x versions are part of release 8. The exception to
`
`the matching major version field number and the release number is v3.x.x versions,
`
`17
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`specifications. Appendix 6 at 14. 3GPP would also publish draft specifications.
`
`These would usually be included as part of the next Release. Appendix 6 at 14.
`
`34.
`
`It was widely known that Technical Specifications (and Technical
`
`Reports) were publicly available on 3GPP’s website. It was also well known that
`
`the latest version of a given specification that was under change control would be
`
`made available following each TSG Plenary meeting responsible for that
`
`specification, and that TSG Plenary meetings usually occur four times per year.
`
`Appendix 7 at 8 (#4.15).
`
`35. Technical specifications, and revisions of technical specifications,
`
`could be easily accessed from the 3GPP website. In 2004, the specifications page
`
`could be reached from the 3GPP website’s home page by clicking “Specifications.”
`
`Appendix 10 at 1. The Specifications page provided a direct link to the
`
`specifications area in the 3GPP website’s file repository and also a link to the
`
`Specification numbering page. Appendix 10 at 1.
`
`36. Additionally, the 3GPP specifications followed a clear numbering
`
`scheme to help the public, including interested POSITAs, identify the subject matter
`
`
`
`which are part of Release 99 (rather than release 3, to be consistent with the GSM
`
`release designation).
`
`18
`
`Cradlepoint, Inc., et al., Ex. 1021
`
`
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,551,625
`
`of each specification. Appendix 11 at 1. As described on the 3GPP Specification
`
`numbering page, all 3G and GSM specifications had a specification number of 4 or
`
`5 digits,5 where the first two digits defined the series. Appendix 11 at 1. The
`
`Numbering Scheme webpage included a table showing the subject matter
`
`corresponding to each series. Appendix 11 at 1. For example, the “25 series” of
`
`specifications is directed to “Radio aspects” while the “22 series” is focused on
`
`“Service aspects (‘stage 1’).” Appendix 11 at 1. An interested POSITA could also
`
`narrow down the relevant specifications based on whether the specification applied
`
`to only 3G or to both GSM and 3G (GSM specifications were transferred from ETSI
`
`to 3GPP in July 2000). For a specification in the 21–35 series, this could be
`
`determined based on the third digit of the specification number, where a “0” would
`
`indicate that the specification applied to both systems. Appendix 11 at 1.
`
`37. The specifications were stored on the 3GPP website’s file repository as
`
`zipped files, where the filenames followed the structure: SM[-P[-Q]]-V.zip. This
`
`format corresponded to the numbering scheme discussed in paragraph 36. “S”
`
`represented the series number; “M” represented the mantissa (the part after the series
`
`
`
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
