UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Microsoft Corporation, Dell Inc., and Dell Technologies Inc.,
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`Ozmo Licensing LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,599,814
`Filing Date: July 27, 2012
`Issue Date: December 3, 2013
`
`Title: Apparatus and Method for Integrating Short-Range Wireless Personal Area
`Networks for a Wireless Local Area Network Infrastructure
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. ZHI DING
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,599,814
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 1
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... I
`LIST OF EXHIBITS .............................................................................................. IV
`I.
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`A.
`SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS .......... 1
`II. MATERIALS REVIEWED ........................................................................... 6
`III. RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARD .............................................................. 6
`IV.
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS ........................................................................ 10
`V.
`SUMMARY OF THE 814 PATENT ........................................................... 11
`A.
`Overview ............................................................................................ 11
`B.
`Prosecution History ............................................................................ 12
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART .......................................... 12
`VI.
`VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................... 13
`A.
`“wireless personal area network (WPAN)” ....................................... 13
`VIII. GROUND 1: CLAIMS 1, 3, 5-7, 913 ARE OBVIOUS OVER
`SUGAR, SHIN AND BLUETOOTH ........................................................... 14
`A.
`Sugar (EX1004) .................................................................................. 14
`B.
`Shin (EX1005) .................................................................................... 15
`C.
`Bluetooth Specification (EX1006) ..................................................... 15
`D.
`Combination Rationale ....................................................................... 16
`E.
`Analysis .............................................................................................. 18
`1.
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 18
`2.
`Claim 3 ..................................................................................... 32
`3.
`Claim 5 ..................................................................................... 33
`4.
`Claim 6 ..................................................................................... 34
`5.
`Claim 7 ..................................................................................... 35
`6.
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 36
`7.
`Claim 10 ................................................................................... 36
`8.
`Claim 11 ................................................................................... 37
`
`i
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 2
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`X.
`
`9.
`Claim 12 ................................................................................... 37
`10. Claim 13 ................................................................................... 37
`IX. GROUND 2: CLAIM 2 IS OBVIOUS OVER SUGAR,
`BLUETOOTH, SHIN AND CROMER ....................................................... 38
`A.
`Cromer (EX1022) ............................................................................... 38
`B.
`Combination Rationale ....................................................................... 38
`C.
`Claim 2 ............................................................................................... 40
`GROUND 3: CLAIMS 1, 3-4, 7-13 ARE OBVIOUS OVER THE
`COMBINATION OF GIAIMO AND SINIVAARA ................................... 42
`A.
`Sinivaara ............................................................................................. 42
`B.
`Giaimo ................................................................................................ 42
`C.
`Combination Rationale ....................................................................... 43
`D.
`Analysis .............................................................................................. 46
`1.
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 46
`2.
`Claim 3 ..................................................................................... 62
`3.
`Claim 4 ..................................................................................... 64
`4.
`Claim 7 ..................................................................................... 65
`5.
`Claim 8 ..................................................................................... 65
`6.
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 66
`7.
`Claim 10 ................................................................................... 66
`8.
`Claim 11 ................................................................................... 67
`9.
`Claim 12 ................................................................................... 67
`10. Claim 13 ................................................................................... 67
`XI. GROUND 4: CLAIMS 1 AND 4 ARE OBVIOUS OVER
`GUREVICH, HANSEN, AND 802.11/B/G. ................................................ 68
`A.
`Hansen (EX1009) Overview .............................................................. 68
`B.
`Gurevich (EX1010) Overview ........................................................... 68
`C.
`IEEE 802.11/b/g Overview ................................................................ 68
`1.
`IEEE 802.11-1999 (EX1017) Overview .................................. 69
`2.
`IEEE 802.11b-1999 (EX1018) Overview ................................ 69
`
`ii
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 3
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`D.
`
`3.
`IEEE 802.11g-2003 (EX1019) Overview ................................ 70
`Rationale for Combining Hansen, Gurevich, and IEEE 802.11-
`1999, 802.11b and 802.11g. ............................................................... 70
`1.
`Rationale for Combining IEEE 802.11-1999, 802.11b
`and 802.11g (collectively, 802.11/b/g). ................................... 70
`Rationale for Combining Hansen, Gurevich, and
`802.11/b/g. ............................................................................... 71
`Analysis .............................................................................................. 75
`1.
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 75
`2.
`Claim 4 ..................................................................................... 92
`XII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 93
`
`2.
`
`E.
`
`iii
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 4
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 8,599,814 (“the 814 patent”)
`Declaration of Dr. Zhi Ding
`Prosecution history of the 814 patent
`U.S. Patent Pub. 2002/0061031 A1 (“Sugar”)
`U.S. Patent Pub. 2004/0071123 A1 (“Shin”)
`Specification of the Bluetooth System, Version 1.1, February 22,
`2001 (“Bluetooth Specification”)
`WO2005/006659 (“Sinivaara”)
`U.S. Patent Pub. 2004/0090924 (“Giaimo”)
`U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2005/0180368 (“Hansen”)
`U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2005/0174962 (“Gurevich”)
`WDTX District Court Trial Times
`US2006/0227753 (“Vleugels I”)
`Joint Claim Construction Statement
`Excerpts from the File History of 14/990,203
`Markman Order in the Acer Litigation
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,045,290
`802.11-1999
`802.11b-1999
`802.11g-2003
`DMI 2.0s Specification
`802.15.1-2002
`U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2005/0165909 (“Cromer”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,340,015
`
`Exhibit No.
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`1011
`1012
`1013
`1014
`1015
`1016
`1017
`1018
`1019
`1020
`1021
`1022
`1023
`
`iv
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 5
`
`

`

`I, Dr. Zhi Ding, hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`I have been retained by Petitioners at my normal hourly rate of $850
`
`per hour. No part of my compensation is dependent upon the outcome of the
`
`petition for inter partes review or the specifics of my testimony.
`
`A.
`2.
`
`SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`I presently hold the title of Distinguished Professor in the Department
`
`of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of California, Davis. Since
`
`my appointment on July 1, 2020, I have held the position of professor for the past
`
`22 years and have served as a faculty member at several US universities for over 30
`
`years. I am also a private technical consultant on various technologies related to
`
`information systems. I have more than three decades of research experience on a
`
`wide range of topics related to data communications and signal processing.
`
`3.
`
`I earned my Bachelor of Science degree in 1982 in wireless engineering
`
`from the Nanjing Institute of Technology (later renamed as Southeast University) in
`
`Nanjing, China. I earned my Master of Science degree in 1987 in electrical
`
`engineering from the University of Toronto in Toronto, Canada. I earned my Ph.D.
`
`in 1990 in electrical engineering from Cornell University in Ithaca, New York.
`
`4.
`
`My responsibilities as a Professor at University of California, Davis,
`
`include classroom instruction on various topics of communication systems and
`
`1
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 6
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`signal analysis, as well as mentoring undergraduate students and supervising
`
`graduate students in their research and development efforts on various topics related
`
`to digital communications. I have directly supervised such research and development
`
`works ranging from signal detection to wireless networking. As the chief academic
`
`advisor, I have also directly supervised the completion of over 20 Masters theses and
`
`30 Ph.D. dissertations on various topics related to digital communications. I have
`
`served full time as a faculty member at three major research universities in the
`
`United States over the past 30 years, including Auburn University from 1990 to
`
`1998, University of Iowa from 1999 to 2000, and University of California, Davis,
`
`from 2000 to present.
`
`5.
`
`Since 1990, I have been selected as the principal investigator of
`
`multiple highly competitive federal and local research grants, including more than
`
`twenty major research projects supported by the National Science Foundation and
`
`two research projects funded by the U.S. Army Research Office. These competitive
`
`research projects focused on developing more efficient and effective digital
`
`communication transceivers, networks, and signal processing tools. I have also
`
`participated in several large-scale projects supported by the Defense Advanced
`
`Research Projects Agency (DARPA) with teams of researchers. I have applied for,
`
`and received support from, other federal, state, and industry sponsors.
`
`6.
`
`I have published over 210 peer-reviewed research articles in premier
`
`2
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 7
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`international journals, in addition to over 240 refereed technical articles at top
`
`international conferences on communications and information technologies.
`
`According to Google Scholar, my published works have been cited by over 13,000
`
`times by peers. I also authored two books on communications technologies. My most
`
`recent book, coauthored with B.P. Lathi, is entitled, “Modern Digital and Analog
`
`Communication Systems,” 5th edition, and was published by the Oxford University
`
`Press in 2018. The 4th edition of this book (published in 2009) had been widely
`
`adopted as an introductory textbook to communication systems. In addition to the
`
`over 450 published technical papers that have been cited over 15,000 times
`
`according to Google Scholar, I am also co-inventor of 4 issued U.S. patents on
`
`communication technologies.
`
`7.
`
`I am a member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
`
`(IEEE) and was elevated to the grade of Fellow in January 2003 for contributions
`
`made in signal processing for communication. The IEEE is the world’s largest
`
`professional society of engineers, with over 400,000 members in more than 160
`
`countries. The IEEE has led the development of many standards for modern digital
`
`communications and networking, most notably, the IEEE 802 series of network
`
`standards. The IEEE Grade of Fellow is conferred by the Boards of Directors upon
`
`a person with an extraordinary record of accomplishments in any of the IEEE fields
`
`of interest. The total number selected in any one year does not exceed one-tenth of
`
`3
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 8
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`one percent of the total voting Institute membership.
`
`8.
`
`I have served the IEEE in the following capacities:
`
` Chief Information Officer of the IEEE Communications Society from
`
`Jan. 2018 to present.
`
` Chief Marketing Officer of the IEEE Communications Society from
`
`Jan. 2020 to present.
`
` General Chair of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics,
`
`Speech, and Signal Processing, the flagship conference of the IEEE
`
`Signal Processing Society.
`
` Chair of the Steering Committee for the IEEE Transactions on Wireless
`
`Communications from 2008 to 2010.
`
` Distinguished Lecturer of the IEEE Communications Society from
`
`January 2008 to December 2009.
`
` Technical Program Chair of the 2006 IEEE Globecom, one of two
`
`flagship annual IEEE Communication Society conferences.
`
` Distinguished Lecturer of the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society from
`
`2004 to 2005.
`
` Associate Editor of the IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing from
`
`1994 to 1997 and from 2001 to 2004.
`
`4
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 9
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
` Member of the IEEE Statistical Signal and Array Processing for
`
`Communications Technical Committee from 1993 to 1998.
`
` Member of the IEEE Signal Processing for Communications Technical
`
`Committee from 1998 to 2004.
`
`9.
`
`In 2012, I received the Wireless Communications Technical Committee
`
`Recognition Award from the IEEE Communications Society, an award given to a
`
`person with a high degree of visibility and contribution in the field of “Wireless and
`
`Mobile Communications Theory, Systems, and Networks.” I received the 2020
`
`Education Award from the IEEE Communications Society. According to the
`
`Society, this award “recognizes distinguished and significant contributions to
`
`education within the Society’s technical scope.”
`
`10.
`
`I have served as a technical consultant for the telecommunication
`
`industry. For example, in 1995 I consulted for Analog Devices, Inc., on the
`
`development of the first generation DOCSIS cable modem systems. I have also
`
`consulted for other companies, including Nortel Networks and NEC US
`
`Laboratories. I worked as a visiting faculty research fellow at NASA Glenn Research
`
`Center in 1992 and at U.S. Air Force Wright Laboratory in 1993. I have served on
`
`multiple review panels of the National Science Foundation to evaluate competitive
`
`research proposals in the field of communication. I have also reviewed a large
`
`number of research proposals at the request of the National Science and Engineering
`
`5
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 10
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`Research Council (NSERC) of Canada as an expert panelist from 2010 to 2013, and
`
`also at the request of the Research Grant Council (RGC) of Hong Kong as an external
`
`reviewer. I have also served as an expert witness or consulting expert on a number
`
`of matters
`
`related
`
`to
`
`intellectual property, mostly
`
`in
`
`the arena of
`
`telecommunications, including cellular communications, Wi-Fi technologies,
`
`Bluetooth, and optical communications. For example, since 2007, I have been
`
`engaged to work on various litigations involving cellular, WiFi, Bluetooth, and
`
`optical communication networks.
`
`11. A current copy of my curriculum vitae, attached hereto as Appendix A,
`
`provides further information concerning my experience and qualifications and
`
`includes a list of the matters on which I have serves as an expert witness.
`
`II. MATERIALS REVIEWED
`12.
`In preparing this declaration, I have reviewed and/or considered at least
`
`the documents cited in the List of Exhibits prepended hereto, and the documents
`
`referenced in this declaration. I have also reviewed the entire prosecution history of
`
`the 814 patent and its parent application, US2006/0227753 (“Vleugels I”).
`
`III. RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARD
`13.
`I am not an attorney. For the purposes of this declaration, I have been
`
`informed about certain aspects of the law that are relevant to forming my opinions.
`
`My understanding of the law is as follows.
`
`6
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 11
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`14.
`
`Petitioners’ counsel has informed me that a patent claim may be
`
`“anticipated” if each element of that claim is present either explicitly or inherently
`
`in a single prior art reference, and that the elements should be arranged in the
`
`reference as in the claim. Petitioner’s counsel has informed me that for a claimed
`
`limitation to be inherently present, the prior art reference need not expressly disclose
`
`the limitation, so long as the claimed limitation necessarily flows from a disclosure
`
`in the reference.
`
`15.
`
`Petitioners’ counsel has informed me that a patent claim can be
`
`considered to have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`the claimed invention. This means that, even if all of the requirements of a claim
`
`are not found in a single prior art reference, the claim is not patentable if the
`
`differences between the prior art and the subject matter in the claim would have been
`
`obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention.
`
`16.
`
`Petitioners’ counsel has informed me that a determination of whether a
`
`claim would have been obvious should be based upon several factors, including,
`
`among others: (i) the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed
`
`invention; (ii) the scope and content of the prior art; (iii) what differences, if any,
`
`existed between the subject matter of the claimed invention and the prior art; and
`
`(iv) secondary considerations of non-obviousness.
`
`17.
`
`In determining the scope and content of the prior art, I have been
`
`7
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 12
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`informed that a reference may be considered appropriate prior art if it falls within
`
`the field of the invention’s endeavor. In addition, a reference is prior art if it
`
`reasonably pertinent to the particular problem(s) with which the inventor was
`
`involved. For example, I understand that a reference is reasonably pertinent if it
`
`logically would have commended itself to an inventor’s attention in considering his
`
`problem. Further, if a reference relates to the same problem as the claimed invention,
`
`that supports use of the reference as prior art in an obviousness analysis.
`
`18.
`
`Petitioners’ counsel has informed me that a single reference can render
`
`a patent claim obvious if any differences between that reference and the claims
`
`would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. Alternatively, the
`
`teachings of two or more references may be combined in the same way as disclosed
`
`in the claims, if such a combination would have been obvious to one having ordinary
`
`skill in the art. In determining whether a combination based on either a single
`
`reference or multiple references would have been obvious, it is appropriate to
`
`consider, among other factors:
`
`a.
`
`whether the teachings of the prior art references disclose known
`
`concepts combined in familiar ways, and when combined,
`
`would yield predictable results;
`
`b.
`
`whether a person of ordinary skill in the art could implement a
`
`predictable variation, and would see the benefit of doing so;
`
`8
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 13
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`c.
`
`whether the claimed elements represent one of a limited number
`
`of known design choices, and would have a reasonable
`
`expectation of success by those skilled in the art;
`
`d.
`
`whether a person of ordinary skill would have recognized a
`
`reason to combine known elements in the manner described in
`
`the claim;
`
`e.
`
`whether there is some teaching or suggestion in the prior art to
`
`make the modification or combination of elements claimed in
`
`the patent; and/or
`
`f.
`
`whether the innovation applies a known technique that had been
`
`used to improve a similar device or method in a similar way.
`
`19.
`
`I have been advised that a POSITA is a hypothetical person who is
`
`capable of understanding the scientific and engineering principles applicable to the
`
`relevant art of the claimed subject matter. I understand that a POSITA is presumed
`
`to have known the relevant prior art at the time of the alleged invention. Petitioner’s
`
`counsel has further informed me that in considering obviousness, I should keep in
`
`mind that a person of ordinary skill in the art has ordinary creativity and is not an
`
`automaton. In addition, Petitioners’ counsel has also informed me that in considering
`
`obviousness, it is improper to determine obviousness using the benefit of hindsight
`
`derived from the patent being considered.
`
`9
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 14
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`20.
`
`I have been informed and understand that claims are generally given
`
`their ordinary and customary meaning as understood by a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art (“POSITA”) at the time of the alleged invention, in light of the patent
`
`specification and prosecution history. Such an individual is considered to possess
`
`ordinary skills and knowledge in a particular technical field, and is not an automaton.
`
`Other than the patent specification and prosecution history, I understand that it is
`
`also sometimes permissible to refer to “extrinsic” evidence which includes, among
`
`other things, relevant scientific principles, the general meaning of technical terms,
`
`and the state of the art. However, these extrinsic sources of evidence are inherently
`
`less reliable than the intrinsic evidence identified above.
`
`21. Although the words in the claims are generally given their ordinary and
`
`customary meaning, I have also been informed that a patentee may choose to act as
`
`a lexicographer. I understand that when a patentee explicitly defines a claim term
`
`in the patent specification, then the patentee’s definition control. In addition, I have
`
`been advised that when a patentee describes a feature or embodiment in the
`
`specification in reference to the invention as a whole or as a critical component, such
`
`description(s) may limit the scope of claimed invention.
`
`IV.
`
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS
`22. Based on my review of the 814 patent and its prosecution history, the
`
`other materials I have considered—which are identified throughout this Declaration,
`
`10
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 15
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`and my knowledge and experience, my opinions are as follows:
`
`•
`
`Ground 1: Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 9-13 are obvious over the combination of
`
`Sugar, Bluetooth and Shin.
`
`•
`
`Ground 2: Claim 2 is obvious over the combination of Sugar, Bluetooth,
`
`Shin and Cromer.
`
`•
`
`Ground 3: Claims 1, 3-4, 7-13 are obvious over the combination of
`
`Giaimo and Sinivaara.
`
`•
`
`Ground 4: Claims 1 and 4 are obvious over the combination of
`
`Gurevich, Hansen, 802.11-1999, 802.11b and 802.11g.
`
`V.
`
`SUMMARY OF THE 814 PATENT
`A.
`Overview
`23.
`The 814 patent describes a computing device that communicates over
`
`a first/primary wireless network (“PWN,” e.g., a WLAN) and a secondary wireless
`
`network (“SWN,” e.g., a WPAN). EX1001, 9:60-65. The computing device
`
`purportedly “coordinates the usage of the wireless medium” to “reduce
`
`interference.” Id., 9:65-10:1. The 814 patent states that coordination may be
`
`achieved by using a secondary network protocol that is an “overlay protocol” that is
`
`“partially” compliant with the first network protocol. Id., 10:1-7. The only example
`
`of such coordination is for the computing device to signal the devices on the first
`
`network to “defer” their wireless medium access to devices on the secondary
`
`11
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 16
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`network. Id., 10:8-10.
`
`B.
`24.
`
`Prosecution History
`The 814 patent was filed on January 27, 2012 and incorporated by
`
`reference of application 11/376,753, which published as U.S. Patent Pub. No.
`
`2006/0227753 (“Vleugels I”). EX1012.
`
`25. On December 6, 2012, the examiner rejected certain claims over Eng
`
`(U.S. Patent No. 6,771,933) and Quinn (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2006/0015621) finding
`
`that Bluetooth was an overlay protocol with respect 802.11. EX1003, 180-182.
`
`26. On May 7, 2013, the applicant amended the claims to additionally
`
`require that “at least some of the communications using the second wireless network
`
`protocol impinge on at least some antennae used for the first wireless network.”
`
`EX1003, 100-108. Applicant argued that the art did not disclose this limitation
`
`because the networks in the art could be in “separate spaces not in common.” Id.,
`
`110. Applicant further argued that the references did not discuss any interference
`
`issues, implying the networks were in different spaces. Id. The examiner
`
`subsequently allowed the claims as amended. EX1003, 49-51.
`
`VI. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`27. A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) as of March 14, 2005
`
`(earliest listed priority date) or July 27, 2012 (actual filing date), would have had at
`
`least a Bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering, computer engineering, computer
`
`12
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 17
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`science, or a related field, with at least two years of experience in the field of wireless
`
`communication systems and protocols, with an allowance for additional education
`
`or experience that might substitute for these requirements.
`
`28.
`
`In addition, it is also my opinion that a POSITA, as of the earliest
`
`effective filing date, would have had working knowledge of various known wireless
`
`protocols, including the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
`
`802.11 protocols (i.e., 802.11-1999, 802.11b, and 802.11g), the Bluetooth
`
`Specification (i.e., Bluetooth Specification v.1.1), and other protocol or standards
`
`documents published by each of their respective authoring organizations/working
`
`groups—IEEE and Bluetooth Special Interest Group “Bluetooth SIG”, respectively.
`
`VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`A.
`“wireless personal area network (WPAN)”
`29.
`The specification provides that invention, as whole, relates to
`
`seamlessly integrating short-range wireless personal area networks (‘WPANs’) into
`
`longer-range wireless local area networks. (‘WLANs’).” EX1001, 1:25-29.
`
`Accordingly, in my opinion, a POSITA reading this statement would have
`
`understood that the claims are limited to a short-range WPAN and a longer-range
`
`WLAN.
`
`30. Regarding the relative ranges of the short-range WPAN, the
`
`specification unambiguously states that “WPAN is a short-range wireless network,
`
`13
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 18
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`with typical coverage ranges on the order of 30 feet.” EX1001, 9:36-37. In addition,
`
`Vluegels I similarly states:
`
`[0008] A personal area network or “PAN” is a short-range wireless network,
`
`with typical coverage ranges on the order of 30 feet …
`
`Vleugels I at [0008]. Therefore, it is my opinion that a POSITA would have
`
`understood that the patentee defined WPAN in accordance with these statements in
`
`Vluegels I and the ’814 patent.
`
`31.
`
`It is also my opinion that the specification consistently describes
`
`WPAN in accordance with these definitional phrases. For example, the specification
`
`provides that a WPAN “connect[s] peripherals to devices in close proximity.”
`
`EX1001, 9:37-38; see also id., 9:48-50 (“WPAN is generally used for the
`
`interconnection of … devices within the range of an individual person, typically
`
`within a range of 10 meters.”), Fig. 1 (identifying WPAN as a range of less than
`
`10m).
`
`32.
`
`Thus, in view of the foregoing, it is my opinion that a POSITA would
`
`have understood that the specification defined WPAN as “a wireless network with a
`
`typical coverage range on the order of 30 feet.”.
`
`VIII. GROUND 1: CLAIMS 1, 3, 5-7, 913 ARE OBVIOUS OVER SUGAR,
`SHIN AND BLUETOOTH
`A.
`Sugar (EX1004)
`33.
`Sugar discloses “systems and methods for preventing the collisions or
`
`14
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 19
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`interference” between an 802.11 network/WLAN and Bluetooth network/WPAN.
`
`EX1004, [0002], [0066]-[0067]. For example, Sugar discloses modifications to
`
`known, existing protocols, e.g., new rules related to CTS/RTS and DIFS, to promote
`
`coexistence. Id., [0084]-[0107]. Therefore, in my opinion a POSITA would have
`
`understood that Sugar discloses a multi-protocol device is a “hub” that distributes
`
`and receives information from the terminals on the networks. Further, as explained
`
`in greater detail below, it is also my opinion that Sugar’s teachings regarding its
`
`“hub” renders the claimed “data forwarding logic” obvious. Id., [0038]-[0039].
`
`B.
`34.
`
`Shin (EX1005)
`Shin discloses an apparatus and method for forwarding data between
`
`802.11 network/WLAN and Bluetooth network/WPAN. EX1005, Title, Abstract. In
`
`particular, Shin discloses that devices on one network communicate with devices on
`
`the other network indirectly through a hub using IP addresses, wherein the hub
`
`includes data forwarding logic to route those messages based on those IP addresses.
`
`Id., Fig. 3, [0007]-[0011], [0050].
`
`C.
`35.
`
`Bluetooth Specification (EX1006)
`The Bluetooth Specification discloses the details of the protocol, which
`
`Sugar explicitly teaches should be used. EX1004, [0078]-[0083]. Based on the
`
`express teachings of Sugar, it is my opinion that a POSITA would have found it
`
`obvious to implement aspects of Bluetooth as explained below.
`
`15
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 20
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`D.
`36.
`
`Combination Rationale
`In my opinion, it would have been obvious for a POSITA to combine
`
`Sugar’s techniques for co-existence of WLAN and WPAN networks with Shin’s
`
`techniques for IP addressing and routing between WLAN and WPAN networks.
`
`37.
`
`Specifically, it is my opinion that it would have been obvious to
`
`implement the details in the Bluetooth Specification in the combination based on the
`
`explicit teachings in Sugar and Shin that disclose Bluetooth. EX1004, [0078]-
`
`[0083]; EX1005, [0022]-[0032].
`
`38.
`
`In addition, it is my opinion that these references are analogous art
`
`because each is directed to the field of wireless networks. Further, Sugar is highly
`
`pertinent to the co-existence problems (EX1001, 2:39-44; EX1004, Abstract), Shin
`
`is highly pertinent to IP-addressability and data forwarding problems (EX1001, 4:1-
`
`15; EX1005, Abstract), and the Bluetooth Specification is highly pertinent to power
`
`management problems addressed by the inventor. EX1001, 12:19-13:15; EX1006,
`
`§§ 10.8 et seq., 10.10 et seq.
`
`39.
`
`In my opinion, a POSITA would have been motivated to combine the
`
`teachings of Sugar, Bluetooth and Shin to have an improved WLAN/WPAN hub. A
`
`POSITA implementing the hub disclosed in Shin would have been motivated by the
`
`express teaching of Sugar to use Sugar’s techniques to improve the co-existence of
`
`those networks. Similarly, a POSITA implementing the hub disclosed in Sugar
`
`16
`
`DELL
`EXHIBIT 1002 - PAGE 21
`
`

`

`Dr. Zhi Ding Opening Declaration
`
`would have been motivated by the express teaching of Shin to use Shin’s techniques
`
`to provide the ability to address and route data between the networks. Thus, it would
`
`have been obvious to a POSITA to combine the teachings of Sugar/Bluetooth and
`
`Shin with either serving as the base reference.
`
`40.
`
`In my opinion, a POSITA would have combined the references using
`
`known methods to yield predictable results. Shin discloses that the IP addressing and
`
`routing techniques may be implemented in