`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`––––––––––
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`––––––––––
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`
`Petitioners,
`
`
`v.
`
`COBBLESTONE WIRELESS, LLC,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`––––––––––
`Case No. IPR2024-00315
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`––––––––––
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,094,888
`
`
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 1 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
`
`II.
`
`Standing ........................................................................................................... 2
`
`III.
`
`Identification of Challenge And Relief Requested .......................................... 3
`
`IV. Level Of Ordinary Skill In The Art ................................................................. 3
`
`V.
`
`Background ...................................................................................................... 4
`
`A. Handover ............................................................................................... 4
`
`B.
`
`The ’888 Patent ..................................................................................... 6
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Description of the ’888 Patent’s Specification ........................... 6
`
`Claim Construction ..................................................................... 9
`
`C.
`
`Prior Art ................................................................................................. 9
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Chitrapu ....................................................................................... 9
`
`TS 36.300 V10.3.0 .................................................................... 17
`
`3. Motivation to Combine ............................................................. 21
`
`VI. Ground of Rejection ...................................................................................... 26
`
`A. Ground 1: 9, 10, 12, 20, 21 and 23 are obvious in view of
`Chitrapu and in further view of TS 36.300 v10.3.0. ........................... 26
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Independent claim 9 .................................................................. 26
`
`Dependent claim 10: A method according to claim 9,
`wherein the receiving the handoff request comprises
`receiving the handoff request via a wireless or a wired
`communication link that communicatively couples the
`first wireless network to the second wireless network. ............ 48
`
`3.
`
`Dependent claim 12: A method according to claim 9,
`wherein the adapting one or more beams comprises
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`
`i
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 2 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`adapting one or more beams based, at least in part, on
`one of a predetermined network load placed on the first
`wireless network due to the handoff of the wireless
`device or an effect of adapting one or more beams on
`other wireless devices currently communicatively
`coupled to the first wireless network. ....................................... 49
`
`Independent claim 20 ................................................................ 52
`
`Dependent claim 21: A system according to claim 20,
`wherein to receive the handoff request comprises to
`receive the handoff request via a wireless or a wired
`communication link that communicatively couples the
`first wireless network to the second wireless network. ............ 55
`
`Dependent claim 23: A system according to claim 20,
`wherein to cause the beam to be adapted comprises to
`cause a beam to be adapted based, at least in part, on one
`of a network load placed on the first wireless network
`due to the handoff of the wireless device or an impact of
`adapting one or more beams on other wireless devices
`currently communicatively coupled to the first wireless
`network. ..................................................................................... 56
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`VII. Discretionary Denial ...................................................................................... 56
`
`A.
`
`Fintiv.................................................................................................... 56
`
`B.
`
`35 U.S.C. §325(d)................................................................................ 57
`
`VIII. Mandatory Notices And Fees ........................................................................ 58
`
`A.
`
`Real Party-In-Interest .......................................................................... 58
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Related Matters .................................................................................... 58
`
`Counsel and Service Information ........................................................ 59
`
`D.
`
`Payment of Fees .................................................................................. 59
`
`IX. Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 60
`
`
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`
`ii
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 3 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`
`iii
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 4 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Ex.
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888 (“’888 Patent”)
`
`1002
`
`Prosecution History for 9,094,888
`
`1003
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2006/0111149A1 (“Chitrapu”)
`
`1004
`
`Intentionally Omitted
`
`1005
`
`Expert Declaration of James Proctor
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`Expert Declaration of Benoist Sébire on the Prior Art Status of TS
`36.300
`
`IBM International Technical Support Organization, An Introduction
`to Wireless Communications, 2d ed. (October 1995)
`
`Taylor, M.S. et al., Internet Mobility: The CDPD Approach (June
`11, 1996)
`
`1009
`
`Steele et al., GSM, cdmaOne and 3G Systems (2001)
`
`1010
`
`Sesia, S. et al., LTE – The UMTS Long Term Evolution, 2d ed.
`(2011)
`
`1011
`
`3GPP 23.401 V10.3.0 (March 2011)
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014-
`1200
`
`Cobblestone Wireless, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., No. 2:22-cv-
`00477-JRG-RSP (Lead Case), Dkt. 62, Docket Control Order
`
`Katherine K. Vidal, Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in
`AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation
`(June 21, 2022)
`
`Intentionally Omitted
`
`1201
`
`3GPP Partnership Project Description
`
`1202
`
`3GPP Working Procedures 2022
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`
`iv
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 5 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`1203
`
`Introducing 3GPP Webpage
`
`1204
`
`Recommendation for IPv6 in 3GPP Standards (Archived)
`
`1205 Myung, H. & Goodman, D., Single Carrier FDMA – A New Air
`Interface for Long Term Evolution (2008)
`
`1206
`
`RAN WG2 Homepage
`
`1207
`
`RAN2 Meeting #73 (Taipei) Participants List
`
`1208
`
`3GPP FAQs (Archived Webpage - 2008)
`
`1209
`
`3GPP Specifications (Archived Webpage - 2008)
`
`1210
`
`3GPP Homepage (Archived Webpage - 2009)
`
`1211
`
`3GPP Index of ftp Specs (Archived Webpage - 2008)
`
`1212
`
`3GPP Specification Numbering (Archived Webpage - 2008)
`
`1213
`
`3GPP Specification Series (Archived Webpage - 2008)
`
`1214
`
`3GPP Version Numbering Scheme (Archived Webpage - 2008)
`
`1215
`
`Hillebrand, F., ed., GSM and UMTS: The Creation of Global
`Mobile Communication (2002)
`
`1216
`
`3GPP Partners Webpage
`
`1217
`
`3GPP Homepage (Archived Webpage – February 2011)
`
`1218
`
`3GPP Advanced Search (Archived Webpage – March 2011)
`
`1219
`
`3GPP FTP Index (Archived Webpage – 2008)
`
`1220
`
`3GPP FTP RAN WG (Archived Webpage – 2008)
`
`1221
`
`3GPP FTP TSG_RAN WG2_RL2 (Archived Webpage – 2008)
`
`1222
`
`3GPP FAQs Webpage
`
`1223
`
`3GPP TS 36.300 V10.3.0
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`
`v
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 6 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`1224
`
`3GPP FTP TS 36.300 Directory Listing
`
`1225
`
`3GPP FTP TS 36.300 (Archived Webpage - 2014)
`
`1226
`
`RP-110855, Report of 3GPP TSG RAN meeting #51
`
`1227
`
`3GPP Specification by Series
`
`1228
`
`3GPP Directory Listing of Final Specifications After RAN#51
`
`1229
`
`Curriculum Vitae of James Proctor
`
`1230
`
`Cobblestone Wireless, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No.
`2:22-cv-00285-JRG-RSP, Dkt. 29-1, Docket Control Order
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`
`vi
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 7 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`LIST OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`
`Limitation
`
`A method implemented at a first wireless network for a mobile
`wireless device handoff between a second wireless network and
`the first wireless network, the method comprising
`
`receiving a handoff request from the second wireless network,
`the handoff request based, at least in part, on a determination by
`the second wireless network that the wireless device is not
`currently covered by the first wireless network but is capable of
`being covered by the first wireless network;
`
`based, at least in part, on the handoff request, adapting one or
`more beams of an antenna array to facilitate coverage of the
`wireless device by the first wireless network; and.
`
`transmitting a confirmation from the first wireless network to the
`second wireless network to indicate acceptance of the handoff
`request, wherein the wireless device is handed off from the
`second wireless network to the first wireless network.
`
`A method according to claim 9, wherein the receiving the
`handoff request comprises receiving the handoff request via a
`wireless or a wired communication link that communicatively
`couples the first wireless network to the second wireless network
`
`A method according to claim 9, wherein the adapting one or
`more beams comprises adapting one or more beams based, at
`least in part, on one of a predetermined network load placed on
`the first wireless network due to the handoff of the wireless
`device or an effect of adapting one or more beams on other
`wireless devices currently communicatively coupled to the first
`wireless network.
`
`Claim
`
`9[pre]
`
`9[a]
`
`9[b]
`
`9[c]
`
`10
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`
`vii
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 8 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Claim
`
`20[pre]
`
`20[a]
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`Limitation
`
`A system for a wireless device handoff between a first wireless
`network and a second wireless network, the system comprising:
`
`an antenna array configured to generate one or more adaptable
`beams to modify a coverage area for the first wireless network;
`and
`
`20[b]
`
`an adaption manager having logic, the logic configured to:
`
`20[c]
`
`20[d]
`
`20[e]
`
`21
`
`23
`
`
`
`
`
`receive a handoff request from the second wireless network, the
`handoff request based, at least in part, on a determination by the
`second wireless network that the wireless device is capable of
`being covered by the first wireless network
`
`cause a beam from among the one or more adaptable beams to be
`adapted in order to enable the wireless device to be covered by
`the first wireless network, and
`
`transmit a confirmation to the second wireless network to
`indicate acceptance of the handoff request, wherein the wireless
`device is handed off from the second wireless network to the
`first wireless network.
`
`A system according to claim 20, wherein to receive the handoff
`request comprises to receive the handoff request via a wireless or
`a wired communication link that communicatively couples the
`first wireless network to the second wireless network.
`
`A system according to claim 20, wherein to cause the beam to be
`adapted comprises to cause a beam to be adapted based, at least
`in part, on one of a network load placed on the first wireless
`network due to the handoff of the wireless device or an impact of
`adapting one or more beams on other wireless devices currently
`communicatively coupled to the first wireless network
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`
`
`
`viii
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 9 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
`
`(“Petitioners”) respectfully requests inter partes review of claims 9, 10, 12, 20, 21,
`
`and 23 (the “Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888 (the “’888 Patent”)
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §311 and 37 C.F.R. §42.100. Petitioners note that the grounds
`
`of challenge in this Petition are a “copycat” of the Petition filed in T-Mobile USA,
`
`Inc. et al. v. Cobblestone Wireless, LLC, IPR2024-00135. Both Petitions challenge
`
`the same claims using the same prior art and for the same reasons. The expert
`
`declaration filed in this proceeding is substantively identical to the expert declaration
`
`in IPR2024-00135 and signed by the same expert, and both Petitions otherwise cite
`
`to the same exhibits. If IPR2024-00135 is instituted, Petitioners intend to move for
`
`joinder.
`
`The Challenged Claims of the ’888 Patent are directed to a handover method
`
`for base stations that have the ability to change their geographic coverage area.
`
`Handover is a process where a wireless device’s connection to a network through a
`
`base station (referred to as a source base station) is transferred to a new base station
`
`(referred to as a target base station). Handover is a fundamental process to wireless
`
`and cellular communications that has been part of every major cellular standard. The
`
`’888 Patent is directed a very specific type of handover, whereby a target network
`
`adapts its coverage area to account for a wireless device (e.g., a cell phone) that is
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`1
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 10 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`not currently within the target base station’s coverage area. According to the
`
`Challenged Claims, the determination of whether to adapt the target coverage area
`
`is made by the source base station (i.e., the base station that is currently in
`
`communication with the device).
`
`This adaptive handover, however, was not new. Chitrapu discloses the exact
`
`same problem and the exact same solution as the ’888 Patent. Specifically, Chitrapu
`
`discloses a “smart” handover between base stations capable of dynamically changing
`
`their coverage area. Chitrapu expressly describes that a source base station can
`
`consider load balancing and the location of a UE in determining whether to adapt
`
`the coverage of a target base station during handover. Chitrapu also discloses that
`
`the details of the messaging between a source base station and target base station
`
`could follow the standard handover messaging protocols described in the 3GPP
`
`technical specifications. TS 36.300 is an example of a 3GPP technical specification,
`
`and it discloses the standard messaging protocols for handover in LTE.
`
`Thus, Chitrapu in combination with the TS 36.300 render obvious the
`
`Challenged Claims of the ’888 Patent.
`
`II.
`
`STANDING
`
`Petitioners certify that the ʼ888 Patent is available for inter partes review.
`
`Petitioners also certify that they are not barred or estopped from requesting this inter
`
`partes review on the grounds identified herein. Neither Petitioners, nor any party in
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`2
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 11 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`privity with Petitioners: (i) have filed a civil action challenging the validity of claims
`
`9, 10, 12, 20, 21, 23 of the ’888 Patent; (ii) have been served a complaint alleging
`
`infringement of the ’888 Patent more than one year prior to the present date; or (iii)
`
`are estopped from challenging the claims on the grounds identified in the Petition.
`
`Claims 9, 10, 12, 20, 21, 23 of the ’888 Patent also have not been the subject of a
`
`prior IPR or a finally concluded district court litigation.
`
`III.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE AND RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Petitioners request inter partes review and cancellation of challenged claims
`
`9, 10, 12, 20, 21 and 23 based on the detailed statements presented below.
`
`Ground
`
`Reference(s)
`
`Basis
`
`Claims
`
`1
`
`2006/0111149
`US
`in
`(“Chitrapu”)
`combination with 3GPP
`Technical
`Specification
`36.300 v10.3.0 (TS 36.300)
`
`§103
`
`9, 10, 12, 20, 21, 23
`
`
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`A POSITA at the time of the alleged invention of the ’888 Patent would have
`
`had at least a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering, computer engineering,
`
`computer science, physics, or the equivalent, and at least two years of experience
`
`working in the field. Ex. 1005, ¶41. Relevant working experience would include
`
`experience with telecommunications and networking, radio-access network
`
`architectures, protocols and signal propagation, and including handovers in wireless
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`3
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 12 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`networks. Ex. 1005, ¶41. More education can supplement practical experience and
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`vice versa. Ex. 1005, ¶41.
`
`V. BACKGROUND
`
`A. Handover
`
`At the time the ’888 Patent was filed, a POSITA would have known that
`
`cellular network operators had deployed multiple types of networks in the United
`
`States. For example, networks operating according to the Third-Generation (3G)
`
`standards, such as Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) and
`
`CDMA2000, had been deployed in the United States for almost a decade, and US
`
`network operators had also widely deployed networks operating according to
`
`Fourth-Generation (4G) standards, such as Long Term Evolution or LTE. Ex. 1005,
`
`¶60.
`
`For a wireless device (also known as user equipment or UE), handover ensures
`
`that a UE can maintain an ongoing communication session while moving between
`
`different cells or coverage areas. Ex. 1005, ¶61.
`
`Examples of handover procedures are implemented in every major cellular
`
`technology, including GSM, UMTS, and 4G LTE. Ex. 1005, ¶62. These handover
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`4
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 13 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`processes were standardized by 3GPP (3rd Generation Partnership Project1) and
`
`have been widely implemented in 3G and 4G networks. Ex. 1005, ¶62. The reason
`
`that the standards provided for different handover procedures is that slightly
`
`different procedures may be used depending on the destination of the cellular
`
`devices. Ex. 1005, ¶¶63-65 (listing two types of handover). The following provides
`
`examples of the types of handover procedures available in the prior art LTE standard
`
`and that would have been known to a POSITA.
`
`Intra-RAT Handover. An intra-RAT handover is a type of handover where
`
`a UE is handed off from a base station to another base station that are operating using
`
`the same radio access technology (or RAT). In one example of an intra-RAT
`
`handover, intra-LTE handover, a UE is handed off from one base station (referred
`
`to as an eNodeB) within an LTE network to another base station within the same
`
`LTE network. During this handover, an on-going connection with the LTE network
`
`is maintained. Ex. 1005, ¶64.
`
`Inter-RAT handover. In this type of handover, a UE is handed off from a
`
`base station operating according to one type of RAT (e.g. 4G LTE) to a base station
`
`operating according to a different type of RAT (e.g., 3G UMTS). Ex. 1005, ¶65. The
`
`
`1 3GPP is a standards setting organization that releases technical specifications (TS)
`
`that cover cellular telecommunications technologies. Ex. 1005, ¶¶56-57.
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`5
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 14 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`ability to perform inter-RAT handovers is fundamental to the operation of cellular
`
`devices prior to the ’888 Patent. A POSITA would have known that, prior to the ’888
`
`Patent, network operators in the United States typically operated multiple networks.
`
`For example, in 2011, network operators had a robust 3G networks throughout the
`
`United States and had begun building 4G networks on top of the 3G networks in
`
`major metropolitan cities. As result, a POSITA would have known that UEs in 2011
`
`were often compatible with 3G and 4G networks. This concept is known as
`
`“backward compatibility.” Ex. 1005, ¶65.
`
`A POSITA would have recognized that as a UE moved in and out of certain
`
`coverage areas (e.g., entering or leaving a city with 4G coverage), the UE would
`
`move between 4G and 3G coverage. In order to ensure seamless service, (e.g.,
`
`prevent dropped calls) and in order to ensure UEs were receiving the highest level
`
`of service (e.g., moving the UE to 4G service when it became available), the UE
`
`must have capable of handover between the different 3G and 4G wireless networks
`
`using the standardized inter-RAT handover procedure. Ex. 1005, ¶66.
`
`B.
`
`The ’888 Patent
`
`1.
`
`Description of the ’888 Patent’s Specification
`
`The ’888 Patent is titled “Wireless Handoff Between Wireless Networks” and
`
`discloses methods and systems to facilitate handoff between a first and second
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`6
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 15 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`wireless network. Ex. 1001, 3:27-30. Annotated Figure 1A below illustrates the
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`concepts from the ’888 Patent.
`
`Ex. 1001, Fig. 1A (annotated); Ex. 1005, ¶69
`
`
`
`
`
`In Figure 1A, there are two wireless networks labeled 110 and 120, shown in
`
`orange and green respectively. The wireless device (e.g., UE) labeled 130A (for
`
`example) is shown in blue. In this figure, the UE is connected to the source network
`
`(called the “second wireless network” in the claims and shown in orange). The ’888
`
`Patent describes handover of a UE between the source network and a target wireless
`
`network 120 (called the “first wireless network” in the claims and shown in green).
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`7
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 16 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`As shown below, Figure 1A illustrates that the target wireless network has two
`
`potential “coverage areas”: (i) 125-2 (shown cross-striped in orange) and (ii) 125-1
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`(shown cross-striped in blue).
`
`Ex. 1001, Fig. 1A (annotated); Ex. 1005, ¶70
`
`
`
`
`
`The ’888 Patent describes how, in Figure 1A, the target wireless network is
`
`operating with coverage area 125-2 (in orange). UE 130A (shown in blue) is not
`
`covered by coverage area 125-2 (in orange). Ex. 1001, 5:35-38. To facilitate the
`
`handover, the ’888 Patent describes that the target network must adapt its coverage
`
`area to 125-1 (in blue) to cover the UE 130A. To do so, the ’888 Patent describes
`
`adapting one or more beams of an antenna array to match coverage area 125-1. Ex.
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`8
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 17 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`1005, ¶71. The ’888 Patent discloses a series of “coverage managers” and “adaption
`
`managers” to negotiate and exchange information to accomplish this task. Ex. 1005,
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`¶72.
`
`2.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`In an inter partes review, claims are “construed using the same claim
`
`construction standard that would be used to construe the claim in a civil action under
`
`35 U.S.C. 282(b).” 37 C.F.R. §42.100(b). When a trial is instituted, claim terms must
`
`be given their plain ordinary and customary meaning as understood by a POSITA
`
`during the relevant timeframe in light of the specification and the prosecution
`
`history. Id.; Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312-13 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en
`
`banc); see 83 Fed. Reg. 51340.
`
`Unless otherwise indicated in the discussion of the limitations below,
`
`Petitioners believe that the terms of the ’888 Patent, for purposes of this proceeding,
`
`should be given their plain and ordinary meaning under the Phillips standard.
`
`C.
`
`Prior Art
`
`1.
`
`Chitrapu
`
`Chitrapu discloses a beaming forming method used to dynamically shape cell
`
`coverage in conjunction with a “smart” handover mechanism. Ex. 1003, ¶¶[0008]-
`
`[0011].
`
`As background, Chitrapu describes how prior art networks without dynamically
`
`changing coverage areas effectuate a handover. Referencing prior art Figure 1B,
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`9
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 18 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`Chitrapu explains how, in conventional systems, the base stations have “strictly
`
`defined coverage areas” that typically overlap with adjacent base stations. Ex. 1003,
`
`¶[0071]. These prior art coverage areas of three base stations below are shown with
`
`different colors (blue, green, and orange):
`
`Ex. 1003, Fig. 1B (annotated); Ex. 1005, ¶78
`
`
`
`
`
`Chitrapu describes that, conventionally, “the overlap of beam coverage
`
`enables ‘handover’ of a communication being conducted by a mobile UE from one
`
`base station to another as the mobile UE travels from one cell to another.” Ex. 1003,
`
`¶[0008].
`
`Chitrapu proposes two changes to improve on these conventional systems: (i)
`
`dynamically shaping cell coverage, and (ii) “smart handover.” Ex. 1003, ¶[0011].
`
`(a) Chitrapu’s Dynamic Shaping of Cell Coverage
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`10
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 19 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`First, Chitrapu discloses “dynamically shaping of cell coverage” instead of
`
`maintaining “strict coverage areas.” Ex. 1003, ¶[0071]; Ex. 1005, ¶81.
`
`Dynamically shaping cell coverage is illustrated using Figure 2 and Figure 3
`
`in Chitrapu. For example. Figure 2 is shown below to illustrate the coverage areas
`
`of two base stations (BS1, BS2, and BS3):
`
`Ex. 1003, Fig. 2 (annotated); Ex. 1005, ¶82
`
`
`
`
`
`In Figure 2, Chitrapu discloses a concentration of users around base station 1
`
`(BS1 shown in orange). Ex. 1003, ¶[0075]. Due to this concentration, BS1 and
`
`adjacent BS3 negotiate and dynamically change their coverage areas to
`
`accommodate the concentration of users. Ex. 1003, ¶[0075]. Figure 3 is shown below
`
`illustrates this change:
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`11
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 20 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1003, Fig. 3 (annotated); Ex. 1005, ¶84
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`
`
`
`
`“FIG. 3 shows a situation where base station BS3 has suffered a failure.” Ex.
`
`1003, ¶[0075]. “Base station BS1 and base station BS2 are then used to transmit a
`
`selectively shaped and directed beam to provide the needed radio resources to the
`
`users in the region normally served by base station BS3.” Ex. 1003, ¶[0075].
`
`Comparing Figure 2 and Figure 3 shows how the base stations can dynamically
`
`adjust their coverage area based on network conditions.
`
`The process used to dynamically shape cell coverage is shown in Figure 6.
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`12
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 21 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1003, Fig. 6 (annotated); Ex. 1005, ¶86.
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`
`
`
`
`In the description of Figure 6, Chitrapu provides that the “first step consists
`
`of determination of location and/or locations of the targeted UE,” which “is
`
`preferably achieved by using well known techniques including . . . such as GPS
`
`based methods.” Ex. 1003, ¶[0082]. In step two, the network is then made aware of
`
`the location data for each UE by “an exchange of appropriately designed messages
`
`between the UE and the network.” Ex. 1003, ¶[0082]. In step three, “the network
`
`determines the characteristics of the beam forming in order to serve the targeted
`
`UE(s) in a manner deemed appropriate and/or optimal by the network.” Ex. 1003,
`
`¶[0083]. As a result, “[o]nce the negotiation process is completed, the base stations
`
`refocus their transmitted RF signals to provide the beams for the UEs which are
`
`determined during the negotiation process.” Ex. 1003, ¶[0083].
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`13
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 22 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`(b) Chitrapu’s Smart Handover
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`Second, Chitrapu discloses a “smart” handover, which allows handover to be
`
`facilitated using these dynamic coverage areas. Ex. 1003, ¶[0011]. This type of
`
`handover uses (i) UE geographical position, (ii) beam forming capabilities of
`
`neighboring cells, and (iii) a negotiation between base stations to determine the
`
`handover and beam shape of the various base stations. Ex. 1003, ¶¶[0011], [0105];
`
`Ex. 1005, ¶91.
`
`This “smart” handover technique is shown in Figure 8. In Figure 8 (shown
`
`below), the UE is communicating with a source base station (BS1 in orange) and
`
`moving toward a target base station (BS2 in green).
`
`Ex. 1003, Fig. 8 (annotated); Ex. 1005, ¶92
`
`
`
`
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`14
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 23 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`In the “smart handover,” Chitrapu discloses that the source base station BS1 makes
`
`the decision to perform the handover and selects the beams of the target base stations
`
`(e.g., BS2) to cover the UEs. Ex. 1003, ¶[0109]. Chitrapu states: “[T]he serving base
`
`station determines which base stations are to be involved and proceeds with the
`
`negotiation process to select[] a preferred beam allocation pattern for all of the
`
`involved base stations.” Ex. 1003, ¶[0109]; see also Ex. 1003, Fig. 10, ¶[0107]
`
`(determining not to handover from BS1 to BS2).
`
`Mr. Proctor uses annotated versions Figure 2 in his declaration to illustrate
`
`how the coverage area of Figure 2 changes during a smart handover. For example,
`
`Mr. Proctor removed the coverage areas of Figure 2 and inserted an illustration of
`
`the conventional coverage area of the prior art (shown in blue).
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`15
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 24 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1003, Fig. 2 (annotated with dynamic coverage removed and conventional
`coverage shown); Ex. 1005, ¶95
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`
`
`
`
`Mr. Proctor then illustrated how the coverage areas were dynamically changed
`
`using the negotiation process described above. This dynamic change allows the
`
`network to adapt the beams of each base station to better manage the concentration
`
`of users around BS1.
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`16
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 25 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1003, Fig. 2 (annotated with dynamic coverage highlighted in red and
`green); Ex. 1005, ¶96
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`
`
`
`
`Comparing the two annotated figures shows how the coverage area of BS1
`
`and BS3 dynamically change.
`
`Lastly, while the specific messages used to negotiate and execute the handover
`
`are not directly disclosed in Chitrapu, Chitrapu discloses that its systems are
`
`constructed in accordance with “specifications of the 3rd Generation Partnership
`
`Program (3GPP).” Ex. 1003, ¶[0007]; Ex. 1005, ¶98.
`
`2.
`
`TS 36.300 V10.3.0
`
`As described in Section VII.B above, by 2011, various handover concepts
`
`were well-known in the art. Ex. 1005, ¶99. The details of the handover procedures
`
`were described in technical specifications (TS) published by standard setting
`
`02198-00092/14571941.3
`
`17
`
`Headwater Research LLC
`Ex. 2002, IPR2024-00137
`Page 26 of 71
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888
`
`organizations, like 3GPP. Ex. 1005, ¶99. A POSITA would have been aware of the
`
`3GPP technical specifications and would have used them as a resource for designing
`
`a handset or base station compliant with the relevant standard. Ex. 1005, ¶100.
`
`TS 36.300 V10.3.0 (“TS 36.300”) is a technical specification produced by
`
`3GPP that provides an overview and overall description of the Evolved Universal
`
`Terrestrial Radio Access Network’s (E-UTRAN) radio
`
`interface protocol
`
`architecture. Ex. 1005, ¶101. The specification is part