UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON
`Patent Owner
`__________________
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`__________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`_________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON
`Patent Owner
`__________________
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`__________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`C.
`
`2.
`
`Page
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`A.
`Summary of Argument .......................................................................... 1
`B.
`Summary of the ’600 Patent’s Disclosure of “Rank-Agnostic”
`Signaling. ............................................................................................... 6
`Summary of the Prosecution History of the ’600 Patent ...................... 8
`1.
`The Examiner Rejects the Claims over Jing and Novlan ........... 9
`2.
`Patent Applicants Amend the Claims on July 11, 2018 ........... 10
`D. Overview of the Cited Prior Art .......................................................... 11
`1.
`Novlan (Ex. 1005) Teaches Rank-Specific Codebook
`Subset Restriction (CSR) Signaling. ......................................... 11
`TS 36.213 v12.3.0 (Ex. 1006) Also Teaches Rank-
`Specific CSR Signaling. ............................................................ 15
`TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND ............................................................... 16
`A.
`Systems with multiple antennas .......................................................... 16
`B.
`Precoding ............................................................................................. 23
`C.
`Rank ..................................................................................................... 25
`D.
`Codebooks, Codebook Subset Restriction (CSR), and Bitmaps ......... 27
`III. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................... 29
`IV. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 29
`V.
`THE PETITION DOES NOT ESTABLISH BY A
`PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT ANY OF THE
`CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE .................................. 30
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`i
`
`
`
`A.
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`The Petition Fails to Establish that Novlan Discloses “codebook
`subset restriction signaling that, for each of one or more groups
`of precoders, jointly restricts the precoders in the group by
`restricting a certain component that the precoders have in
`common.” ............................................................................................ 30
`1.
`Novlan’s “General Subset Restriction” Methods Do Not
`Teach Jointly Restrict the Precoders in the Group by
`Restricting a Certain Component that the Precoders Have
`in Common. ............................................................................... 31
`Novlan’s “Sampling Based Subset Restriction” Methods
`Do Not Teach to Jointly Restrict Using νm. ............................. 34
`The Petition Fails to Establish that Novlan Discloses “wherein
`the codebook subset restriction signaling is rank-agnostic
`signaling that jointly restricts the precoders in a group without
`regard to the precoders’ transmission rank.” ....................................... 41
`1.
`Novlan’s Elevation-Based Restriction in [0054] does Not
`Disclose How to Signal a Codebook Subset Restriction. ......... 41
`Novlan Does Not Teach Rank-Agnostic Signaling in Any
`Embodiment. ............................................................................. 50
`The Petition’s Arguments Regarding Novlan are Flawed. ....... 52
`3.
`Petitioner’s Theory That νm is the Certain Component That the
`Precoders Have in Common And that Restricts Regardless of
`Rank Is Severely Flawed. .................................................................... 64
`VI. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 70
`
`
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`2.
`
`2.
`
`ii
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
` Page(s)
`
`Federal Cases
`Abiomed, Inc. v. Maquet Cardiovascular, LLC,
`IPR2017-01204, -01205 ...................................................................................... 65
`In re Enhanced Security Research, LLC,
`739 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2014) .................................................................. 4, 5, 35
`In re Fine,
`837 F.2d 1071, 5 U.S.P.Q.2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988) ............................................ 5
`Intelligent Bio-Sys., Inc. v. Illumina Cambridge Ltd.,
`821 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2016) .................................................................... 69, 70
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
`127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007) ........................................................................ 5, 30, 65, 70
`Nidec Motor Corp. v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co.,
`868 F.3d 1013, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2017) ................................................................ 29
`Vivid Techs., Inc. v. Am. Sci. & Eng'g, Inc.,
`200 F.3d 795 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ............................................................................ 29
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 10,193,600 (“the ’600 Patent”)
`
`Exhibit
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`1016
`
`1017
`
`2001
`
`2002
`2003
`2004
`
`Certified File History of U.S. Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`Declaration of Dr. Apostolos K. Kakaes for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 10,193,600
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Apostolos K. Kakaes
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0016549 (“Novlan”)
`3GPP TS 36.213, v12.3.0 (“36.213”)
`3GPP TS 36.213, v10.1.0
`U.S. Patent No. 8,891,676
`Declaration of Friedhelm Rodermund in Support of Petition for Inter
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,193,600
`U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/103,101 (“the ’600
`Patent Provisional”)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0163687 (“Jing”)
`U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/670,936 (the “Novlan
`Provisional”)
`Dahlman et al., 4G – LTE / LTE-Advanced for Mobile Broadband
`(Academic Press 2011) (“Dahlman”)
`Declaration of James L. Mullins in Support of Petition for Inter Partes
`Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,193,600
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0051091
`Sesia, et al., LTE - The UMTS Long Term Evolution From Theory
`to Practice (Wiley 2d. ed. 2011) (“Sesia”)
`Declaration of Jacob Robert Munford in Support of Petition for Inter
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,193,600
`Declaration Of Dr. Muriel Médard, Sc.D In Support Of Patent Owner’s
`Preliminary Response (May 22, 2022)
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Muriel Médard
`Deposition Transcript of Dr. Apostolos K. Kakaes (Nov. 11, 2022)
`Supplemental Declaration of Dr. Muriel Médard, Sc.D In Support Of
`Patent Owner’s Response (November 30, 2022)
`
`ii
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Patent Owner Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (“Ericsson”) submits this
`
`Patent Owner Response to the Petition for Inter Partes Review (“Petition” or “Pet.”)
`
`of claims 1-28 (“Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 10,193,600 (“the ’600
`
`Patent”) (Ex. 1001).
`
`A.
`
`Summary of Argument
`
`The Petition raises a single ground, arguing that all Challenged Claims would
`
`be obvious over “Novlan, or alternatively Novlan in view of 36.213.” Pet. at 2. See
`
`Novlan (Ex. 1005); (Ex. 1006). The Petition’s single obviousness ground fails to
`
`show that each and every element is disclosed by Novlan or 36.213, and it should be
`
`rejected for improperly relying on hindsight to propose modifications not disclosed,
`
`taught, or suggested by the prior art.
`
`Novlan and an earlier version of 36.213 (Ex. 1007) were considered during
`
`the prosecution, and the Examiner found that the following limitation was not taught
`
`by Novlan or 36.213: “the codebook subset restriction signaling is rank-agnostic
`
`signaling that jointly restricts the precoders in a group without regard to the
`
`precoders’ transmission rank.” The Institution Decision finds that the Examiner may
`
`have overlooked paragraph 54 of Novlan in allowing the claims, which the Board
`
`preliminarily found teaches a “rank-agnostic restriction.” Dec. 13. The Board,
`
`however, “encourage[d] the parties to address this issue further in future briefing.”
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`This Patent Owner response further addresses the teachings of Novlan’s paragraph
`
`54 vis-à-vis “rank-agnostic restriction” and presents two additional flaws in the
`
`Petition’s proposed Ground that were not previously addressed in Patent Owner’s
`
`Preliminary Response.
`
`First, Patent Owner submits that paragraph 54 fails to teach the relevant
`
`aspects of the Challenged Claims (i.e., “rank-agnostic signaling”), and that
`
`paragraph does not justify departing from the prosecution Examiner’s reasoned
`
`findings. Ex. 2004, ¶¶8-10. Even if paragraph 54 teaches a “rank-agnostic
`
`restriction” (Patent Owner contends it does not), such a teaching is insufficient to
`
`disclose the invention claimed by the ’600 Patent because the claims of the ’600
`
`Patent require more than a rank-agnostic restriction in the abstract. Ex. 2004, ¶11.
`
`The Challenged Claims require “rank-agnostic signaling” and the mere disclosure
`
`of a “rank-agnostic restriction,” without more, fails to disclose “the codebook subset
`
`restriction signaling is rank-agnostic signaling that jointly restricts the precoders in
`
`a group without regard to the precoders’ transmission rank.”1 Ex. 2001 ¶¶33-34; Ex.
`
`2004 ¶¶12-14. The Petition relies heavily on [0054] of Novlan for the suggestion
`
`that Novlan teaches a restriction based on elevation angle rather than on rank. Pet.
`
`27. But this paragraph is silent on rank; it merely suggests that the UE should be
`
`
`1 Unless otherwise noted, all emphasis is added by Patent Owner.
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`restricted to searching “only over those precoders that correspond to the relevant
`
`spatial domain;” and says nothing of how that restriction is to be signaled to the UE.
`
`Id. And there is no evidence that Novlan was suggesting that a restriction “to the
`
`relevant spatial domain” ignores rank when it comes to signaling the restriction to
`
`the UE. All the evidence is to the contrary; every single embodiment of Novlan relies
`
`on rank-specific signaling of the restriction to the UE as will be discussed herein.
`
`Ex. 2004 ¶¶14-15.
`
`Accordingly, even if [0054] of Novlan taught a restriction that was rank-
`
`agnostic (it does not), Novlan fails to disclose any method for signaling such a
`
`restriction in a rank-agnostic fashion. Id.; Ex. 2001 (Médard Decl.) ¶19. Novlan and
`
`TS 36.213, whether alone or in combination with one another, do not teach rank-
`
`agnostic signaling, and the codebook subset restrictions do not restrict precoders in
`
`a group without regard to the precoders’ transmission rank. Ex. 2004 ¶15. The
`
`Petition does not dispute that all the disclosed signaling methods of Novlan do not
`
`restrict across multiple ranks; the Petition instead suggests a novel modification that
`
`would require signaling a certain component of the 3GPP 36.213 precoder, νm, to
`
`restrict precoders across multiple ranks. Pet. 26-28. However, as explained herein
`
`and supported by expert testimony, it would not be obvious to do so. The only
`
`suggestion in the record of such a signaling method is found in the teachings of the
`
`’600 Patent.
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`Second, because Novlan and 36.213 only teach signaling restrictions that
`
`identify specific precoders (or groups of precoders) to restrict, the Petition also fails
`
`to establish that Novlan discloses “codebook subset restriction signaling that, for
`
`each of one or more groups of precoders, jointly restricts the precoders in the group
`
`by restricting a certain component that the precoders have in common.” Ex. 2004
`
`¶¶17-38. Novlan and 36.213 both signal restrictions using bitmaps of restricted
`
`precoders (or groups of precoders as suggested in Novlan’s Table 1), and contain no
`
`suggestion to use νm for CSR signaling. Ex. 2004 ¶¶23, 33-36. The Petition’s
`
`obviousness rationale for this limitation is based on the observation that each of
`
`36.213’s restricted codebooks may have a common component (νm) across Rank 1
`
`and 2; and, with the benefit of hindsight reasoning, theorizes that it would have been
`
`obvious to modify Novlan to signal a νm to restrict multiple codebooks. Ex. 1003 at
`
`29-36. But this teaching runs counter to the methods for signaling CSR actually
`
`taught by both references. Ex. 2004 ¶38. The POSITA would have been motivated
`
`to use the known CSR techniques taught by Novlan and 36.213. Ex. 2004 ¶39.
`
`Third, the proposed combination is improper because it requires numerous
`
`hindsight modifications to Novlan, including combining mutually exclusive
`
`embodiments of Novlan and modifying Novlan in ways not taught by the prior art.
`
`Ex. 2004 ¶¶39-52. In re Enhanced Security Research, LLC, 739 F.3d 1347, 1355
`
`(Fed. Cir. 2014) (the factfinder cannot “stitch together an obviousness finding from
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`discrete portions of prior art references without considering the references as a
`
`whole.”). None of these modifications are taught by the prior art. Id.
`
`The Petition is devoid of any explanation for why the POSITA would be
`
`motivated to make the proposed modifications and fails to present any evidence of
`
`a reasonable expectation of success or predictable results. The Petition’s
`
`modifications are not obvious at least because they would require a fundamental
`
`change to the principle of operation of Novlan and 36.213, and fail to meet the
`
`standards set for an obviousness rejection. Ex. 2004 ¶52; see KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex
`
`Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1741 (2007) (A rejection for obviousness must include
`
`“some articulated reasoning with some rational underpinning to support the legal
`
`conclusion.” ). And, because there is no teaching or suggestion in either reference to
`
`signal particular values of νm to restrict precoders regardless of rank, the Petition’s
`
`obviousness Ground is nothing more than an exercise in improper hindsight
`
`reasoning using the ’600 Patent claims as a roadmap. Ex. 2004 ¶39; KSR Int’l Co. v.
`
`Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1742 (2007) (“A factfinder should be aware, of course,
`
`of the distortion caused by hindsight bias and must be cautious of arguments reliant
`
`upon ex post reasoning.”).
`
`The Petition’s invitation for the Board to apply hindsight to modify Novlan in
`
`a way not suggested by the prior art should be rejected. In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071,
`
`1075, 5 U.S.P.Q.2d 1596, 1600 (Fed. Cir. 1988). For these and for reasons stated in
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`more detail below, the Board should find the Challenged Claims patentable over
`
`Novlan and reject the Ground presented in the petition.
`
`B.
`
`Summary of the ’600 Patent’s Disclosure of “Rank-Agnostic”
`Signaling.
`
`The ’600 Patent describes a novel system and method for codebook subset
`
`restriction (CSR) for multiple input multiple output (MIMO) systems including
`
`signaling the CSR using a rank-agnostic signaling. Ex. 1001. The patent recognizes
`
`that signaling of the CSR can become prohibitive (e.g., requiring too many bits in
`
`the bitmap) for large codebooks or many users requiring frequent updates.
`
`Signaling a codebook subset restriction in the conventional way by
`means of a bitmap with one bit for every precoder can thus impose a
`large overhead, especially if the codebook subset restriction (CSR) is
`frequently updated or if there are many users served by the cell which
`each has to receive the CSR.
`
`Ex. 1001 at 2:49-54. The patent provides a more efficient way to communicate the
`
`CSR, especially in cases where the CSR is large and needs to be frequently updated.
`
`Ex. 2001 ¶64.
`
`The ’600 Patent achieves these benefits by “jointly restricting” a group of
`
`precoders by “restricting a certain component that the precoders have in common.”
`
`Ex. 1001 at 2:64-65. The restriction of a certain component that the precoders have
`
`in common permits the restriction to be “rank-agnostic;” that is, because the
`
`signaling restricts a component of the precoder (rather than identifying specific
`
`precoders to restrict), the restriction applies to all precoders with the certain
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`component regardless of a particular precoder’s rank. Id. For example, the ’600
`
`Patent discloses that a “beam precoder is the beamforming vector used to transmit
`
`on multiple different layers.” Ex. 1001 at 14:58-59. The patent explains:
`
`Irrespective of the particular way a beam precoder is defined, though,
`one or more embodiments herein jointly restrict a group of precoders
`W that have a certain beam precoder in common, by restricting that
`beam precoder. That is, in some embodiments, codebook subset
`restriction (CSR) may be signaled based on the set of possible beam
`precoders b, instead of CSR signaled on the set of possible (total)
`precoders W. In some such embodiments, the device 14 shall assume
`that a precoder W is restricted if one or more of the beam precoders b0,
`b1, . . . , bL−1 of each layer are restricted.
`
`Ex. 1001 at 15:32-41. The ’600 Patent explains how the joint restriction of a group
`
`of precoders can be “rank-agnostic,” by restricting a certain component of precoders
`
`“irrespective of their transmission rank.” Ex. 1001 at 13:27-32. The patent also
`
`explains that rank-agnostic restriction signaling occurs when “the signaling jointly
`
`restricts the group of precoders regardless of the precoders’ transmission rank (i.e.,
`
`regardless of which rank-specific codebook they belong to).” Id. at 17:9-16; see also
`
`23:1-2. Among other examples, the ’600 Patent provides that uses rank-agnostic
`
`signaling to jointly restrict precoders across all ranks when a restricted component
`
`(such as beam precoders b0) are restricted. Id. at 17:9-21; Ex. 2001 ¶65.
`
`When “signaling CSR based on beam precoders,” an advantage of the ’600
`
`Patent is reducing signal overhead because “one does not need to signal a separate
`
`CSR for precoders with different rank (precoders with different rank are restricted
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`with the same CSR).” Ex. 1001 at 17:21-25; see id. at 18:46-54 (further examples of
`
`rank-agnostic signaling). The independent claims of the ’600 Patent further clarify
`
`that the CSR signaling “jointly restricts the precoders in a group without regard to
`
`the precoders’ transmission rank.” Ex. 2001 ¶65.
`
`The ’600 Patent reduces the overhead of restriction signaling by using rank-
`
`agnostic signaling, which makes use of assumptions and predictions about which
`
`precoders are more likely to be restricted in order to communicate the codebook
`
`subset restrictions. Ex. 1001 at 6:49-57; see also id. at 6:58-64 (identifying a
`
`reference configuration and based on that, communicating codebook subset
`
`restrictions by estimating or predicting future conditions); id. at 7:58-8:6 (based on
`
`assumption of which configuration will “have the highest probability of being
`
`signaled”). Ex. 2001 ¶66.
`
`C.
`
`Summary of the Prosecution History of the ’600 Patent
`
`The ’600 Patent was filed on June 17, 2016 as Application No. 15/105,648.
`
`Also on June 17, 2016, applicants filed a preliminary amendment that canceled
`
`claims 1-38 and introduced claims 39-70. Ex. 1002 at 75-82. Claims 39-40 are
`
`copied below:
`
`39. (New) A method implemented by a network node for signaling to a
`wireless communication device which precoders in a codebook are
`restricted from being used, the method characterized by:
`
`generating codebook subset restriction signaling that, for each of one
`or more groups of precoders, jointly restricts the precoders in the group
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`by restricting a certain component that the precoders in the group have
`in common; and
`
`sending the generated signaling from the network node to the wireless
`communication device.
`
`40. (New) The method of claim 39, wherein the codebook subset
`restriction signaling is rank-agnostic signaling that jointly restricts
`the precoders in a group without regard to the precoders’
`transmission rank.
`
`Ex. 1002 at 75-77 (6/17/2016 Claims). Similar dependent claims were used in other
`
`sets of claims.
`
`
`
`The Examiner Rejects the Claims over Jing and Novlan
`
`On April 13, 2018, the USPTO Examiner rejected application claims 39, 41-
`
`42, and other claims as anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0163687 to
`
`Jing (Ex. 1011). Ex. 1002 (’600 Patent File History, 4/13/2018 Office Action) at
`
`310-315. Notably, the Examiner held that Jing discloses “jointly restricts the
`
`precoders in the group by restricting a certain component that the precoders in the
`
`group have in common,” and did not rely on Novlan for this limitation. Ex. 1002
`
`(’600 Patent File History, 4/13/2018 Office Action) at 312-314 (relying on Novlan
`
`as teaching a “beam precoder” and for “beamforming”).
`
`Fully aware of Novlan, the Examiner found that neither Jing nor Novlan
`
`disclosed claim 40 (i.e., each failed to disclose “rank-agnostic signaling”). The
`
`Examiner stated that claim 40 is “objected to as being dependent upon a rejected
`
`base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.” Ex. 1002 at 314 (’600
`
`Patent File History, 4/13/2018 Office Action).
`
`
`
`Patent Applicants Amend the Claims on July 11, 2018
`
`On July 11, 2018, the patent applicants responded to the Examiner’s office
`
`action. The applicants amended each of the independent claims to bring in the
`
`limitations of claim 40, which recited “the codebook subset restriction signaling is
`
`rank-agnostic signaling that jointly restricts the precoders in a group without regard
`
`to the precoders’ transmission rank.” Ex. 1002 at 343-351 (’600 Patent File History,
`
`4/13/2018 Office Action). As a result of this amendment, the Examiner allowed the
`
`claims. Ex. 1002 at 358-359.
`
`By allowing the claims over the Novlan and other references that the
`
`Examiner had actually reviewed and applied in earlier rejections, the Examiner
`
`correctly found that Novlan did not disclose “rank-agnostic signaling” or the
`
`“without regard to the precoders’ transmission rank” limitations during prosecution.
`
`There is no evidence that the Examiner overlooked [0054] of Novlan, and as
`
`explained in detail in this Patent Owner Response, nothing about [0054] justifies a
`
`different conclusion than the one reached by the Examiner.
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`D. Overview of the Cited Prior Art
`
`
`Novlan (Ex. 1005) Teaches Rank-Specific Codebook Subset
`Restriction (CSR) Signaling.
`
`Novlan discloses various methods for codebook subset restriction (CSR)
`
`signaling, which are designed to address a special case of transmit antenna
`
`configuration, in which the transmit antennas are arranged in two-dimensional (2-
`
`D) grid. Ex. 1005 Title, ¶[0002]. Novlan’s selection of which precoders to restrict
`
`is based on the observation that certain UEs may be located at an elevation angle
`
`that makes certain precoders irrelevant. Ex. 2004 ¶9. Critically, however, each of
`
`Novlan’s descriptions regarding how each CSR is actually signaled is specific to
`
`each precoder and its respective rank. Ex. 1005 ¶¶ [0055]-[0065]; Ex. 2001 ¶¶33-
`
`34, 46; Ex. 2004 at ¶14; Ex. 2003 (Kakaes Dep.) at 101:16-103:5; 134:18-135:5
`
`(conceding that the embodiments of [0077] and [0102] are rank-specific ways to
`
`signal a restriction).
`
`Novlan is directed to restricting precoders designed for 2-D antenna arrays as
`
`shown in the Figures reproduced below.
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`
`
`400
`
`ra
`
`
`
`
`FIG. 4
`
`404
`
`CONTROLLER
`
`
`
`-12-
`-12-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`
`Ex. 1005 at Figs. 4-5. In the 2-D antenna arrays of Novlan, the antenna elements
`
`arranged in columns are referred to as “vertical elements” (with the total number
`
`being Nv) and in rows referred to as “horizontal elements” (with the total number
`
`being NH). Novlan defines a parameter “N” as the total number of antennas. Ex. 1005
`
`(Novlan) ¶[0038]; Ex. 2001 ¶76.
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`Novlan provides an example of an array with 64 antennas (8 × 8 array), and
`
`Novlan deconstructs a precoder (V) by rank into vertical and horizontal components
`
`
`
`(this is the representation of a matrix that is 64 by 64 but reduced according to its
`
`using a Kronecker product ⨂: 𝑉(cid:2874)(cid:2872)(cid:3400)(cid:3041)(cid:3404)𝑉(cid:2876)(cid:3400)(cid:3041)(cid:3023)⨂ 𝑉(cid:2876)(cid:3400)(cid:3041)(cid:3009)
`Ex. 1005 ¶[0043]. In the above equation from Novlan, 𝑉 is of dimension 64 by n
`rank), the vertical portion of the precoding matrix 𝑉(cid:3023)is of dimension 8 × n, and the
`horizontal portion of the precoding matrix 𝑉(cid:3009) is of dimension 8 × n. In Novlan, “n
`to the precoding matrix 𝑉(cid:3023)as “Vertical PMI,” or “V-PMI.” Ex. 1005 ¶¶[0054],
`
`is the rank of transmission.” Ex. 1005 ¶[0042]-¶[0043]; Ex. 2001 ¶77. Novlan refers
`
`[0064].
`
`According to Novlan, the “growing use of . . . advanced antenna systems in
`
`multi-user (MU) multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) communication systems”
`
`motivated Novlan’s method of “codebook sampling” (i.e., CSR). Ex. 1005 ¶[0003]-
`
`¶[0004]. Novlan allegedly invents “an indication of a restricted subset M” of
`
`precoders, with M “less than a total number” of precoders “N in a codebook.” Id.
`
`¶[0004], Claim 1.
`
`Novlan goes on to describe several methods of codebook selection restriction,
`
`all of which are rank-dependent as will be described in more detail herein. Ex. 2001
`
`¶¶33-34; Ex. 2004 at ¶14; Ex. 1005 at ¶¶[0064], [0077], [0100]-[0102]. Novlan also
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`consistently describes that its codebook restrictions are made using bitmaps to
`
`identify precoding matrix identifiers (PMIs); its restriction signaling does not restrict
`
`a certain component that the precoders in the group have in common nor discloses
`
`any signaling to restrict precoders regardless of rank. Ex. 2004 at ¶17; Ex. 1005
`
`¶[0064]; ¶[0077]; ¶[0100]-¶[0103] (defining “ν” as “equal to the associated RI
`
`value”). Novlan teaches that each bit that signals codebook subset restriction is
`
`associated with a specific rank, and the signaling does not restrict precoders in a
`
`group without regard to the precoders’ transmission rank. Ex. 2001 ¶87.
`
`
`
`TS 36.213 v12.3.0 (Ex. 1006) Also Teaches Rank-Specific
`CSR Signaling.
`
`In an attempt to fill the gaps in Novlan, Petitioner relies on 3GPP TS 36.213
`
`v12.3.0 (2014-09), entitled “Physical layer procedures (Release 12).” Ex. 1006
`
`(“36.213”). In particular, the Petition relies on Section 7.2.4 of TS 36.213. Pet. at
`
`19-20, 29, 31, 40-41. Section 7.2.4 of TS 36.213 is entitled “Precoding Matrix
`
`Indicator (PMI) definition.” Ex. 1006 at 95. Notably, this section does not describe
`
`how to signal a CSR according to 3GPP; this section describes how a base station
`
`“relies on UEs reporting precoding matrix indicator (PMI).” Id.; Ex. 2003 at 48:24-
`
`50:13. And the section of 36.213 that does discuss signaling CSRs does so by
`
`indicating whether particular precoders are restricted. Ex. 1006 at 62; Ex. 2003 at
`
`53:7-54:8. 36.213 does not disclose rank-agnostic signaling, and restriction and
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`signaling is not made without regard to the precoders’ transmission rank. Ex. 2001
`
`¶91.
`
`II. TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND
`
`Patent Owner’s expert, Dr. Muriel Médard, an MIT Professor who has
`
`extensively researched wireless communications, provides a background of rank and
`
`other technology related to the ’600 Patent. The technology includes: (A) systems
`
`with multiple antennas, and how signals transmitted from one antenna affects signals
`
`transmitted from other antennas; (B) precoding as a mathematical technique to focus
`
`antenna signals; (C) how matrix “rank” is used to characterize and understand the
`
`multiple antennas; and (D) codebooks and restricting the available precoders. Ex.
`
`2001 ¶¶33-65.
`
`A.
`
`Systems with multiple antennas
`
`The ’600 Patent in the “Background” section explains that multiple antennas
`
`have been used in various communications protocols (such as 3G / 4G Long Term
`
`Evolution, or LTE). Such systems have been referred to as MIMO (Multiple In,
`
`Multiple Out) and used to boost capacity and coverage of the wireless system. See,
`
`e.g., Ex. 1001 at 1:22-29. In MIMO systems, data to be sent is divided into multiple
`
`data streams, the data streams are then transmitted in parallel over the air, and signal
`
`processing at the receiver is used to recover the data. Id. at 1:25-29. The ’600 Patent
`
`-16-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`teaches methods for “adapting the transmission to the current channel conditions” in
`
`order to improve signal quality and bandwidth. Id. at 1:29-31; Ex. 2001 ¶35.
`
`Transmit antennas have regions of propagation of the electromagnetic energy
`
`they transmit, generally termed lobes. Figure A below is a modified version of
`
`Figure 4 of Novlan (Ex. 1005), modified to show a receiving antenna and to draw
`
`exemplary lobes from one antenna in a two-dimensional transmit array. The primary
`
`lobe is oriented toward the receiver, and a smaller lobe can be seen at the back of the
`
`antenna, pointing away from the receiver.
`
`FIGURE A
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005 at Fig. 4 (modified). The shapes of the lobes are dictated by the shape of
`
`the antennas and the electromagnetic properties of the frequencies at which they
`
`operate. Ex. 2001 ¶¶35-37.
`
`-17-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`As shown in Figure A, a transmit signal from one transmit antenna is received
`
`at multiple receive antennas. Likewise, a given antenna at the receiver will receive
`
`signals from multiple transmit antennas. The signals from different transmit
`
`antennas overlap, as show in Figure B, which can create interference that affects
`
`performance of the wireless network.
`
`FIGURE B
`
`.
`
`Ex. 1005 at Fig. 4 (modified); Ex. 2001 ¶38.
`
`The effect of interference can be represented schematically in the figure
`
`below, in which transmit-side antennas are presented on the left (X) and receive-side
`
`antennas are presented on the right (Y).
`
`-18-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`Figure C
`
`
`
`Each antenna i at the transmitter sends an input signal Xi. Each receive antenna j at
`
`the receiver receives an output signal Yj. At the receiver, the antenna j receives the
`
`combined, additive effect of the transmissions from the total number of transmit
`
`antennas (X1 + X2 + … Xi + … + XNT). The signals overlap, which can create
`
`interference and can reduce performance of the wireless network. Ex. 2001 ¶39.
`
`In an actual system, the signals from the multiple transmit antennas will not
`
`be received identically for a given receive antenna. There will be different weighting
`
`coefficients, depending on the relative positions of transmit and receive antennas,
`
`and the characteristics of the medium over which the electromagnetic propagation
`
`from the sender to the receiver is taking place (e.g., channel conditions).
`
`-19-
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00464
`Patent No. 10,193,600
`
`Ex. 2001 ¶40.
`
`Figure D
`
`The channel conditions are not the same between all paths. For example, the
`
`distance may be different between the antenna pairs, or there could be obstructions.
`
`As a result, the effect of the signal Xi transmitted by antenna i at receiver j is weighted
`
`by a factor hi,j. Given that there can be multiple transmit antennas, mathematically,
`
`the formula for any one particular receive antenna (j) would read:
`
`𝑌(cid:3037)(cid:3404)𝑋(cid:2869) ℎ(cid:2869),(cid:3037)(cid:3397)𝑋(cid:2870) ℎ(cid:2870),(cid:3037)(cid:3397)⋯(cid:3397)𝑋(cid:3036) ℎ(cid:3036),(cid:3037)(cid:3397)⋯(cid:3397) 𝑋(cid:3015)(cid:3269) ℎ(cid:3015)(cid:3269),(cid:3037).
`
`T
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
