LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`IPR2023-00319 (U.S. Patent No. 10,693,700)
`
`Patent Owner’s Demonstrative Exhibit
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`1
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 1 of 48
`
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`IPR2023-00319 (U.S. Patent No. 10,693,700)
`
`Patent Owner’s Demonstrative Exhibit
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`1
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 1 of 48
`
`
`
`Petition Hinges On Petitioner’s Challenge To Priority
`
`The ’700 patent states that it is a continuation of the ’777 patent (aka
`Barsoum). Ex. 1001 code (63). Petitioner challenges this claim to priority,
`arguing that features of the challenged claims do not have written
`description support in Barsoum. Pet. 2–19. Patent Owner disagrees. Prelim.
`Resp. 35–58. All three references (Barsoum, ATSC322, ATSC327) relied on
`by Petitioner are only prior art to the ’700 patent if the ’700 patent cannot
`claim priority to Barsoum.
`
`Paper No. 10 (Institution Decision) at 10
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 2 of 48
`
`
`
`Only Claims 5, 15, and 25 Are At Issue
`
`Ground
`
`Claims
`
`Prior Art Basis
`
`1A
`
`1B
`
`2-3, 12-13, 22-23
`
`5, 15, 25
`
`§103 – ’777 patent in view of
`ATSC322
`§103 – ’777 patent in view of
`ATSC327
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`3
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 3 of 48
`
`
`
`A Single Limitation Remains At Issue
`
`Claim 5
`5. The communication system of claim 1, wherein each of
`the plurality of different non-uniform multidimensional
`symbol constellations is capable of providing a greater
`parallel decoding capacity at a specific SNR than the
`other symbol constellations in the plurality of
`multidimensional symbol constellations at the same SNR.
`
`Ex. 1001 (’700 Patent), Claim 5
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 4 of 48
`
`
`
`PTAB Has Already Rejected Petitioner’s Argument
`
`Decision Denying Institution of IPR
`Claim 6 recites:
`
`The communication system of claim 1, wherein:
`
`the non uniform symbol constellation is selected from a plurality of unequally spaced
`symbol constellations; and
`
`each of the plurality of unequally spaced symbol constellations is characterized by the
`assignment of labels and spacing of the constellation points such that each of the
`plurality of unequally spaced symbol constellations is capable of providing greater par-
`allel decoding capacity when operated at a symbol constellation operating SNR than
`the other plurality of unequally spaced sym-bol constellations when operated at the
`same SNR.
`
`Ex. 1001, 15:51–62. Claims 16 and 27 are substantially similar. Id. at 18:49–59, 22:3–13.
`LG Electronics, Inc., v. Constellation Designs, LLC, IPR2023-00320, Paper No. 11 (Decision Denying Institution of IPR) at 4
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`5
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 5 of 48
`
`
`
`PTAB Has Already Rejected Petitioner’s Argument
`
`Decision Denying Institution of IPR
`We agree. Patent Owner correctly points to the specific examples of
`Figures 11b, 13b, 15b, and 17b as each showing a plurality of
`constellations, each optimized for a particular SNR that provide a greater
`parallel decoding capacity at that specific SNR than the other symbol
`constellations in the plurality. Id. at 75. More specifically, Figure 13b
`shows five constellations (i.e. a plurality), each optimized for a particular
`identified SNR that will perform better at that particular SNR than the
`other constellations which have not been optimized at that particular SNR.
`Id. at 76–77.
`
`For these reasons, we determine that Petitioner has not shown that
`
`claims 6, 16, and 27 lack written description support in Barsoum.
`
`LG Electronics, Inc., v. Constellation Designs, LLC, IPR2023-00320, Paper No. 11 (Decision Denying Institution of IPR) at 8-9
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 6 of 48
`
`
`
`Institution Decision Preliminarily Rejected Petitioner’s Argument
`
`7:26–29, 8:47–56). We agree. Patent Owner correctly points to the specific
`examples of Figures 11b, 13b, 15b, and 17b as each showing a plurality of
`constellations, each optimized for a particular SNR that provide a greater
`parallel decoding capacity at that specific SNR than the other symbol
`constellations in the plurality. Id. 56–58. More specifically, Figure 13b
`shows five constellations (i.e. a plurality), each optimized for a particular
`identified SNR that will perform better at that particular SNR than the other
`constellations, which have not been optimized at that particular SNR. Id. at
`57–58.
`For these reasons, we preliminarily determine that Petitioner has not
`shown that claims 5, 15, and 25 lack written description support in Barsoum.
`
`Paper No. 10 (Institution Decision) at 15
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`7
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 7 of 48
`
`
`
`PTAB’s Previous Decisions Rejecting
`Petitioner’s Arguments Were Correct
`
`Petitioner’s Rejected Original Petition Theories
`
`Petitioner’s New, Untimely, and Incorrect Reply Brief
`Theories
`
`1
`
`2
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`8
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 8 of 48
`
`
`
`PTAB’s Previous Decisions Rejecting
`Petitioner’s Arguments Were Correct
`
`Petitioner’s Rejected Original Petition Theories
`
`Petitioner’s New, Untimely, and Incorrect Reply Brief
`Theories
`
`1
`
`2
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 9 of 48
`
`
`
`Original Petition Theories
`
`Claim 5
`
`5. The communication system of claim 1, wherein
`each of the plurality of different non-uniform
`multidimensional symbol constellations is capable
`of providing a greater parallel decoding capacity at
`a specific SNR than the other symbol constellations
`in the plurality of multidimensional symbol
`constellations at the same SNR.
`
`Ex. 1001 (’700 Patent), Claim 5
`
`Petition for IPR
`This limitation defines a very specific
`relative relationship between two groupings
`of non-uniform spaced constellations that is
`not supported by the ’777 Patent
`specification. LGE-1003, ¶[73]. In
`particular, claim 5 recites an observation of
`a relative relationship between a first group
`of non-uniform multidimensional symbol
`constellations3 to a second group of other
`symbol constellations4 when the two groups
`are operated at the same SNR. LGE1003,
`¶[73].
`
`Paper No. 3 (Petition for IPR) at 13-14
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`10
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 10 of 48
`
`
`
`Original Petition Theories
`
`Petition for IPR
`dmin, the written description of the ’777 patent explains
`how to optimize a nonuniform constellation so that it
`can be capable of having a greater capacity such as a
`greater parallel decoding capacity. LGE1015, 6:13-22;
`LGE1003, ¶[77].
`
`Turning to claim 5, the Barsoum Patents fail to
`disclose that each of the plurality of different non-
`uniform multidimensional symbol constellations have
`been optimized to be capable of having greater parallel
`decoding capacity. LGE1003, ¶[78]. Indeed, neither the
`language of claim 5 nor the language of parent claim 1
`indicate that each of the plurality of different non-
`uniform multidimensional symbol constellations have
`been optimized for parallel decoding capacity.
`
`Paper No. 3 (Petition for IPR) at 16
`
`Claim 5
`
`5. The communication system of claim 1, wherein
`each of the plurality of different non-uniform
`multidimensional symbol constellations is capable
`of providing a greater parallel decoding capacity at
`a specific SNR than the other symbol constellations
`in the plurality of multidimensional symbol
`constellations at the same SNR.
`
`Ex. 1001 (’700 Patent), Claim 5
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 11 of 48
`
`
`
`Institution Decision Correctly Rejected Petitioner’s Argument
`
`Decision Granting Institution of IPR
`
`Patent Owner disagrees, arguing that the teachings related to optimizing a
`constellation for capacity at a first SNR also teach that other constellations optimized for a
`different SNR will not provide the same benefits at the first SNR. Prelim. Resp. 55–56
`(citing Ex. 1015, 4:62–5:11, 7:26–29, 8:47–56). We agree. Patent Owner correctly points to
`the specific examples of Figures 11b, 13b, 15b, and 17b as each showing a plurality of
`constellations, each optimized for a particular SNR that provide a greater parallel decoding
`capacity at that specific SNR than the other symbol constellations in the plurality. Id. 56–58.
`More specifically, Figure 13b shows five constellations (i.e. a plurality), each optimized for
`a particular identified SNR that will perform better at that particular SNR than the other
`constellations, which have not been optimized at that particular SNR. Id. at 57–58.
`
`For these reasons, we preliminarily determine that Petitioner has not shown that
`claims 5, 15, and 25 lack written description support in Barsoum.
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`Paper No. 10 (Institution Decision) at 15
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 12 of 48
`
`
`
`PTAB’s Previous Decisions Rejecting
`Petitioner’s Arguments Were Correct
`
`Petitioner’s Rejected Original Petition Theories
`
`Petitioner’s New, Untimely, and Incorrect Reply Brief
`Theories
`
`1
`
`2
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`13
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 13 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Abandoned Its Original Petition Theories
`
`After the Institution and Disclaimer, Petitioner's Reply:
`
` DOES NOT mention either theory
`
` DOES NOT cite to original Hochwald Petition Declaration
`
` DOES NOT address or rely on any Barsoum passages addressed
`and relied on in the Petition
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`14
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 14 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s New Untimely Reply Theory
`
`Petition
`
`dmin, the written description of the ’777 patent explains how to optimize a
`nonuniform constellation so that it can be capable of having a greater capacity
`such as a greater parallel decoding capacity. LGE1015, 6:13-22; LGE1003, ¶[77].
`Paper No. 3 (Petition for IPR) at 16
`
`Claim
`Claim 5 is not supported by the written description of the ’777 patent because
`“[n]ot all” of the plurality of different non-uniform multidimensional symbol
`constellations are capable of providing a greater parallel decoding capacity at a
`specific SNR than the other symbol constellations in the plurality of
`multidimensional symbol constellations recited by claim 5. Thus, claim 5 is not
`entitled to the priority date of the ’777 patent. LGE1003, ¶[79].
`Paper No. 3 (Petition for IPR) at 17
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`15
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 15 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s New Untimely Reply Theory Is Baseless
`Petitioner’s new theory requires it to prove all three of the following:
`
`1. Optimization:
`that although the claims do not mention or describe “optimizing”, the alleged
`missing optimization is an element of claims 5, 15, and 25
`
`2. Barsoum’s First Approach:
`that such optimization is not disclosed by Barsoum’s disclosed first approach,
`“optimizing a multidimensional QAM constellation [by] directly optimiz[ing] over
`each degree of freedom” (Paper No. 13 (Petitioner’s Reply) at 2)
`
`3. Barsoum’s Second Approach:
`that such optimization is not disclosed by Barsoum’s disclosed second approach,
`which “is to first optimize a PAM constellation, then apply that PAM constellation
`to both of the in-phase and quadrature components” (Paper No. 13 (Petitioner’s
`Reply) at 2-3)
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`16
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 16 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Has Not
`Established That “optimizing”
`is an Element of Claims 5, 15, and 25
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`17
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 17 of 48
`
`
`
`Claims Do Not Require “optimizing”
`
`Claim 5
`5. The communication system of claim 1, wherein each of
`the plurality of different non-uniform multidimensional
`symbol constellations is capable of providing a greater
`parallel decoding capacity at a specific SNR than the
`other symbol constellations in the plurality of
`multidimensional symbol constellations at the same SNR.
`
`Ex. 1001 (’700 Patent), Claim 5
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`18
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 18 of 48
`
`
`
`Optimizing Cannot Be Read Into The Claims
`
`There is a “heavy presumption” that claims should be construed according
`to its ordinary meaning.
`
`E.g., Starhome GmbH v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 743 F.3d 849, 857 (Fed. Cir. 2014);
`Hill-Rom Servs., Inc. v. Stryker Corp., 755 F.3d 1367, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
`
`Because of this presumption, claims may be construed contrary to their
`ordinary meaning only by proving a clear and unequivocal special
`definition or disavowal.
`
`E.g., Aventis Pharma S.A. v. Hospira, Inc., 675 F.3d 1324, 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2012);
`Hill-Rom, 755 F.3d at 1371; Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1315-16 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc).
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`19
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 19 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Never Argued or Established
`The Required Special Definition or Disavowal
`
`Petition
`
`Petitioner Reply
`
`Paper No. 3 (Petition for IPR) at 28
`
`See generally Paper No. 13 (Petitioner's Reply)
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`20
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 20 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Has Not Established Lack of Priority
`
`Petitioner cannot establish lack of priority and unpatentability because ….
`
`its new theory hinges on an incorrect and unsupported claim construction
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`21
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 21 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Failed To Establish
`Lack Of Priority In Light of
`Barsoum’s First Disclosed Approach
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`22
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 22 of 48
`
`
`
`Barsoum’s First Approach
`
`’777 Patent
`
`12. As I explained in my prior declaration, “optimization requires choosing
`an objective function (such as a system’s capacity) and then repeatedly
`(iteratively)
`changing variables (such as constellation locations and labels) until an
`optimized
`solution for the objective function is achieved.” (EX2001 at 53).
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`23
`
`Ex. 1015 (’777 Patent) at 12:38-48
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 23 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s New Argument On Barsoum’s First Approach
`
`Petitioner’s argument that Barsoum’s First Approach does not
`adequately disclose optimizing parallel decoding capacity should not
`prevail because:
` The claims require “greater” PDC, not optimized PDC, and Petitioner
`failed to allege or establish that Barsoum’s First Approach does not
`describe and result in “greater” PDC
`
` Even if claims required optimized, Petitioner does not dispute that the
`First Approach discloses optimizing PDC
`
` Petitioner’s complaint that Barsoum does not provide details
`concerning the First Approach is irrelevant and baseless
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Paper No. 14 (Patent Owner Sur-Reply) at 13-17
`24
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 24 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s First Approach Argument Is Irrelevant
`
` No argument that this approach fails to disclose “greater parallel decoding capacity”
`
` Argument that this approach does not adequately describe optimizing parallel decoding
`capacity is irrelevant
`
`Claim 5
`
`5. The communication system of claim 1, wherein
`each of the plurality of different non-uniform
`multidimensional symbol constellations is capable
`of providing a greater parallel decoding capacity at
`a specific SNR than the other symbol constellations
`in the plurality of multidimensional symbol
`constellations at the same SNR.
`
`Ex. 1001 (’700 Patent), Claim 5
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`25
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 25 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s First Approach Argument Concerns Only a Lack of “details”
`
` Petition ignored this first
`approach
` Petitioner’s Reply devotes
`less than a page to this
`(fatal) disclosure:
`
`Petitioner’s Reply
`
`12. As I explained in my prior declaration, “optimization requires
`choosing
`an objective function (such as a system’s capacity) and then
`repeatedly (iteratively)
`changing variables (such as constellation locations and labels) until
`an optimized
`solution for the objective function is achieved.” (EX2001 at 53).
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`26
`
`Paper No. 13 (Petitioner's Reply) at 3
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 26 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s First Approach Argument Concedes
`It Discloses The Allegedly Missing Optimization
`
` Petitioner does not argue (much less establish) that Barsoum’s first
`approach fails to describe optimizing a multi-dimensional QAMs
`
`12. As I explained in my prior declaration, “optimization requires choosing
`an objective function (such as a system’s capacity) and then repeatedly
`(iteratively)
`changing variables (such as constellation locations and labels) until an
`optimized
`solution for the objective function is achieved.” (EX2001 at 53).
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`Ex. 1015 (’777 Patent) at 12:38-48
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`27
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 27 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Complaint That The First Approach Lacks “details” Is Irrelevant
` Petitioner cites no precedent or reasons requiring such details
`
` Precedent does not require such details:
`
`Thus, we have explained, “written description is about whether the skilled
`reader of the patent disclosure can recognize that what was claimed
`corresponds to what was described; it is not about whether the patentee has
`proven to the skilled reader that the invention works, or how to make it
`work, which is an enablement issue.” Alcon Research Ltd. v. Barr Labs.,
`Inc., 745 F.3d 1180, 1191 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`28
`
`Centrak, INC. v. Sonitor Technologies, INC., 915 F.3d 1360, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 28 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Complaint That The First Approach Lacks “details” Is Baseless
`
`Barsoum (’777 Patent, Ex. 1015) provides details concerning:
` A flow diagram for an exemplary optimization process (Figure 5; 7:10-8:23)
`
` Using unconstrained or constrained non-linear optimization (8:34-37)
`
` Possible objective functions for optimization (8:37-40, 49-56)
`
` Varying point locations (8:41-42, 49-56)
`
` Running the optimization process iteratively (8:49-56)
`
` Various possible optimization constraints (2:37-41, 2:56-3:8, 8:19-29, 8:58-9:2)
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`29
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 29 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Only Specific Complaint
`Concerning An Alleged Missing Detail Is Baseless
`
`Petitioner’s Reply
`
`’777 Patent
`
`12. As I explained in my prior declaration, “optimization
`requires choosing
`an objective function (such as a system’s capacity) and then
`repeatedly (iteratively)
`changing variables (such as constellation locations and
`labels) until an optimized
`solution for the objective function is achieved.” (EX2001 at
`53).
`
`Paper No. 13 (Petitioner's Reply) at 3
`
`Ex. 1015 (’777 Patent) at 12:38-48
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`30
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 30 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Complaints Are Contradicted By Its Own Petition
`
`Petition
`In addition, a POSITA would have understood the ’777
`patent as explaining that operations can be performed on a
`non-uniform constellation so that the non-uniform
`constellation can be optimized for joint capacity
`optimization or parallel decoding optimization in order to
`have greater capacity. LGE1015 6:13-22; LGE1003, ¶[77].
`Thus, though some non-uniform constellations do not have
`a greater capacity than other constellations maximized for
`dmin, the written description of the ’777 patent explains how
`to optimize a nonuniform constellation so that it can be
`capable of having a greater capacity such as a greater
`parallel decoding capacity. LGE1015, 6:13-22; LGE1003,
`¶[77].
`Paper No. 3 (Petition for IPR) at 16
`
`Petition
`Indeed, the ’777 patent explains that “it is
`12. As I explained in my prior declaration,
`possible to take direct advantage in the
`“optimization requires choosing
`optimization step of the additional degree of
`an objective function (such as a system’s capacity)
`freedom presented by an extra spatial
`and then repeatedly (iteratively)
`dimension.” LGE1015, 12:39-42.
`changing variables (such as constellation locations
`and labels) until an optimized
`solution for the objective function is achieved.”
`(EX2001 at 53).
`
`Paper No. 3 (Petition for IPR) at 52
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`31
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 31 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Has Not Established Lack of Priority
`
`Petitioner cannot establish lack of priority and unpatentability because ….
`
`its new theory hinges on its irrelevant and unproven assertion that
`Barsoum’s first approach does not adequately describe
`optimizing a non-uniform multi-dimensional constellation
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`32
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 32 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Failed To Establish
`Lack Of Priority In Light of
`Barsoum’s Second Disclosed Approach
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`33
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 33 of 48
`
`
`
`Barsoum’s Second Approach
`
`’777 Patent
`Geometrically Shaped QAM Constellations
`
`Quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) constellations can be constructed by orthogonalizing PAM constellations into QAM
`inphase and quadrature components. Constellations constructed in this way can be attractive in many applications because they
`have low-complexity demappers.
`
`In FIG. 21 we provide an example of a Quadrature Amplitude Modulation constellation constructed from a Pulse Amplitude
`Modulation constellation. The illustrated embodiment was constructed using a PAM-8 constellation optimized for PD capacity at
`user bit rate per dimension of 1.5 bits (corresponds to an SNR of 9.0 dB) (see FIG. 13b ). The label-point pairs in this PAM-8
`constellafion are {(000, −1.72), (001, −0.81), (010, 1.72), (011, −0.62), (100, 0.62), (101, 0.02), (110, 0.81), (111, −0.02)}.
`Examination of FIG. 21 shows that the QAM constellation construction is achieved by replicating a complete set of PAM-8 points
`in the quadrature dimension for each of the 8 PAM-8 points in the in-phase dimension. Labeling is achieved by assigning the
`PAM-8 labels to the LSB range on the in-phase dimension and to the MSB range on the quadrature dimension. The resulting 8×8
`outer product forms a highly structured QAM-64 for which very low-complexity de-mappers can be constructed. Due to the
`orthogonality of the in-phase and quadrature components the capacity characteristics of the resulting QAM-64 constellation are
`identical to that of the PAM-8 constellation on a per-dimension basis.
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`34
`
`Ex. 1015 (’777 Patent) at 12:11-37
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 34 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s New Argument On Barsoum’s Second Approach
`
`Petitioner’s argument that Barsoum’s Second Approach does not
`optimize parallel decoding capacity should not prevail because:
` The claims require “greater” PDC, not optimized PDC, and Petitioner
`failed to allege or establish that Barsoum’s Second Approach does not
`describe and result in “greater” PDC
`
` Even if claims required optimized, the Second Approach results in
`“optimized” PDC under the only “optimized” definition before the Board
`
` Petitioner’s argument is based on a misreading of Fuentes, a new
`untimely reference first submitted with its Reply
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Paper No. 14 (Patent Owner Sur-Reply) at 17-27
`35
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 35 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Second Approach Argument Is Irrelevant
`
` No argument that this approach fails to disclose “greater parallel decoding capacity”
`
` Argument that this approach does not describe optimizing parallel decoding capacity is
`irrelevant
`
`Claim 5
`
`5. The communication system of claim 1, wherein
`each of the plurality of different non-uniform
`multidimensional symbol constellations is capable
`of providing a greater parallel decoding capacity at
`a specific SNR than the other symbol constellations
`in the plurality of multidimensional symbol
`constellations at the same SNR.
`
`Ex. 1001 (’700 Patent), Claim 5
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`36
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 36 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Never Disputed That Barsoum’s Second Approach
`Optimizes Under The Only “optimize” Definition Before The Board
`Under the only definition before the Board, “optimization” requires:
`
`• Choosing an objective function (such as a system’s capacity)
`
`• Repeatedly (iteratively) changing variables such as constellation
`locations and labels
`
`• Until an optimized solution for the objective function is achieved
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Paper No. 14 (Patent Owner Sur-Reply) at 18
`37
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 37 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Never Disputed That Barsoum’s Second Approach
`Optimizes Under The Only “optimize” Definition Before The Board
`The only definition before the Board:
`
`Declaration Of Giuseppe Caire
`
`53. In general, optimization requires choosing an objective function
`12. As I explained in my prior declaration, “optimization requires choosing
`(such as a system’s capacity) and then repeatedly (iteratively) changing
`an objective function (such as a system’s capacity) and then repeatedly (iteratively)
`changing variables (such as constellation locations and labels) until an optimized
`variables (such as constellation locations and labels) until an optimized
`solution for the objective function is achieved.” (EX2001 at 53).
`solution for the objective function is achieved. (EX2008 at 20).
`
`Ex. 2001 (Caire Declaration) ¶53
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`38
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 38 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Never Disputed That Barsoum’s Second Approach
`Optimizes Under The Only “optimize” Definition Before The Board
`
`As described in the ’700 Patent (Ex. 1001), an “optimized solution”
`can be a constellation that results in :
`
` A given capacity (2:51-55)
`
` An improved and maximized capacity (3:4-12)
`
` Converged performances, i.e., additional iterations of the process do not
`result in a meaningful performance improvement (8:12-29)
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Paper No. 14 (Patent Owner Sur-Reply) at 18-19
`39
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 39 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Never Disputed That Barsoum’s Second Approach
`Optimizes Under The Only “optimize” Definition Before The Board
`
`No dispute that Barsoum’s Second Approach results in
`“optimization” under this definition:
`
`• an objective function is chosen (capacity)
`
`• variables are changed (locations in a first dimension)
`
`• an optimized solution for the objective function is achieved (the
`resulting QAM achieves improved capacity because of the varied
`location in the first dimension)
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Paper No. 14 (Patent Owner Sur-Reply) at 18-20
`40
`
`Constellation Exhibit 2026
`LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC
`IPR2023-00319
`Page 40 of 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner Never Disputed That Barsoum’s Second Approach
`Optimizes Under The Only “optimize” Definition Before The Board
`Barsoum describes that its Second Approach results in QAMs with
`improved capacity characteristics:
`
`Geometrically Shaped QAM Constellations
`
`Quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) constellations can be constructed by orthogonalizing PAM constellations into QAM inphase and
`quadrature components. Constellations constructed in this way can be attractive in many applications because they have low-complexity
`demappers.
`
`In FIG. 21 we provide an example of a Quadrature Amplitude Modulation constellation constructed from a Pulse Amplitude Modulation
`constellation. The illustrated embodiment was constructed using a PAM-8 constellation optimized for PD capacity at user bit rate per
`dimension of 1.5 bits (corresponds to an SNR of 9.0 dB) (see FIG. 13b ). The label-point pairs in this PAM-8 constellation are {(000, −1.72),
`(001, −0.81), (010, 1.72), (011, −0.62), (100, 0.62), (101, 0.02), (110, 0.81), (111, −0.02)}. Examinafion of FIG. 21 shows that the QAM
`constellation construction is achieved by replicating a complete set of PAM-8 points in the quadrature dimension for each of the 8 PAM-8
`points in the in-phase dimension. Labeling is achieved by assigning the PAM-8 labels to the LSB range on the in-phase dimension and to
`the MSB range on the quadrature dimension. The resulting 8×8 outer product forms a highly structured QAM-64 for which very low-
`complexity de-mappers can be constructed. Due to the orthogonality of the in-phase and quadrature components the capacity
`characteristics of the resulting QAM-64 constellation are identical to that of the PAM-8 constellation on a per-dimension basis.
`
`CONSTELLATION DESIGNS, LLC.
`
`PATENT OWNER’
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
