UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PANASONIC AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS CO., LTD.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UNM RAINFOREST INNOVATIONS,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2024-00364
`Patent No. 8,265,096 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S PRELIMINARY RESPONSE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`
`RELATED PROCEEDINGS .......................................................................... 1
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`III. UNM BACKGROUND ................................................................................... 2
`
`IV. THE ASSERTED PRIOR ART ...................................................................... 3
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`The Joint Proposal (EX1016) .................................................................... 3
`
`Trainin (EX1010) ....................................................................................... 4
`
`C. Mujtaba (EX1011) ...................................................................................... 4
`
`V.
`
`THE PREVIOUSLY ASSERTED PRIOR ART ............................................ 5
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Talukdar (EX2002 (previously IPR2021-00375, EX1012)) ...................... 5
`
`Li (EX2003 (previously IPR2021-00375, EX1016)) ................................. 8
`
`Nystrom (EX2004 (previously IPR2021-00375, EX1017)) ....................... 9
`
`VI. THE BOARD SHOULD DENY INSTITUTION UNDER § 325(d) ...........10
`
`A. Mujtaba is cumulative of Nystrom ...........................................................11
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Trainin is cumulative of Talukdar ............................................................13
`
`The Joint Proposal Is Cumulative of Talukdar ........................................15
`
`VII. THE ’096 PATENT .......................................................................................17
`
`Technical Background ..............................................................................17
`
`The Challenged Claims ............................................................................19
`
`1. Claim 8 .............................................................................................19
`
`2. Claim 44 ...........................................................................................19
`
`3. Claim 45 ...........................................................................................20
`i
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`
`
`

`

`4. Claim 46 ...........................................................................................20
`
`5. Claim 47 ...........................................................................................20
`
`6. Claim 49 ...........................................................................................20
`
`7. Claim 50 ...........................................................................................21
`
`8.
`
`Prosecution History ..........................................................................21
`
`C.
`
`Priority Date .............................................................................................21
`
`VIII. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ...........................................22
`
`IX. PATENT OWNER’S CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS ....................................22
`
`A.
`
`Claim Construction Order in UNM Rainforest Innovations v. Apple Inc.,
`No. 1-20-cv-00351 (W.D. Tex.) ...............................................................22
`
`X.
`
`PETITIONER HAS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE A REASONABLE
`LIKELIHOOD OF PREVAILING AS TO ANY CHALLENGED CLAIM.
` .......................................................................................................................23
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 8, 44-47, And 50 Are Not Anticipated By The Joint
`Proposal. ...................................................................................................24
`
`1. Claim 8: A method of constructing a frame structure for data
`transmission ...................................................................................................25
`
`2. Claim 44 ...........................................................................................30
`
`3. Claim 45 ...........................................................................................31
`
`4. Claim 46 ...........................................................................................31
`
`5. Claim 47 ...........................................................................................32
`
`6. Claim 50 ...........................................................................................32
`
`B.
`
`Ground 2: The Combination Of The Joint Proposal And Trainin Does
`Not Disclose Or Suggest All Elements Of Claim 49 ...............................32
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`1. Claim 49: The method of claim 44, wherein each of the first section
`and the second section carries at least one of uplink and downlink data. .....32
`
`2. Motivation To Combine ...................................................................32
`
`C.
`
`Ground 3: Mujtaba Does Not Disclose All Elements Of Claim 8 ...........35
`
`1. Claim 8: A method of constructing a frame structure for data
`transmission ...................................................................................................35
`
`D. Ground 4: The Combination Of Mujtaba and Trainin Does Not Disclose
`Or Suggest All Elements Of Claims 8, 44-47, and 49-50 ........................47
`
`1. Claim 8: A method of constructing a frame structure for data
`transmission ...................................................................................................47
`
`2. Claim 44 ...........................................................................................48
`
`3. Claim 45 ...........................................................................................50
`
`4. Claim 46 ...........................................................................................50
`
`5. Claim 47 ...........................................................................................51
`
`6. Claim 49 ...........................................................................................51
`
`7. Claim 50 ...........................................................................................51
`
`8. Motivation to Combine ....................................................................51
`
`XI. SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS OF NON-OBVIOUSNESS ..............57
`
`XII. CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................58
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`CASES:
`In re Gorman,
`933 F.2d 982 (Fed. Cir. 1991)....................................................................... 35, 57
`
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp.,
`415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ...........................................................................22
`
`
`Virtek Vision Int'l ULC v. Assembly Guidance Sys., Inc.,
`2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 7185 (Fed. Cir. 2024) ............................................ passim
`STATUTES:
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d) ............................................................................................ 10, 61
`OTHER AUTHORITIES:
`Advanced Bionics, LLC v. Med-El Elektromedizinische Gerate GmbH,
`IPR2019-01469, Paper 6, 8 (PTAB Feb. 13, 2020) ...................................... 10, 11
`
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Patent Owner
`Petitioner
`
`PTAB
`
`’096 Patent
`Joint Proposal
`
`
`
`
`
`Trainin
`
`Mujtaba
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS
`UNM Rainforest Innovations (“UNMRI”)
`Panasonic Automotive Systems Co., Ltd., (“Panasonic”)
`Patent Trial and Appeals Board
`U.S. Patent No. 8,265,096 (EX1001)
`IEEE 802.11-05/1102r4, “Wireless LANs Joint Proposal:
`High throughput extension to the 802.11 Standard: PHY”
`(EX1015)
`U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0204052
`
`U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0072529
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`

`

`Exhibit No.
`2001
`2002
`
`2003
`
`2004
`
`2005
`2006
`2007
`2008
`2009
`
`
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`Descriptions
`Declaration of Dr. Branimir Vojcic
`Talukdar – U.S. Patent Application 2009/0067377 A1
`(previously IPR2021-00375, EX1012)
`Li – U.S. Patent Application 2007/0155387 A1
`(previously IPR2021-00375, EX1016)
`Nystrom – U.S. Patent Application 2007/0104174 A1
`(previously IPR2021-00375, EX1017)
`2018 Economic Impact Report
`Dell litigation notice of withdrawn claims
`Asus litigation notice of withdrawn claims
`Apple litigation joint motion to dismiss with prejudice
`Apple litigation order of dismissal
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`

`

`Limitation
`
`[8pre]
`
`[8a]
`
`8[b]
`
`[8c]
`
`8[d]
`
`8[e]
`
`8[f]
`
`[44a]
`
`[44b]
`
`[44c]
`
`[44d]
`
`LIST OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`Claim Language
`Claim 8
`A method of constructing a frame structure for data transmission,
`the method comprising:
`generating a first section comprising data configured in a first
`format compatible with a first communication system using
`symbols;
`generating a second section following the first section, the second
`section comprising data configured in a second format compatible
`with a second communication system using symbols,
`wherein the first communication system's symbols and the
`second communication system's symbols co-exist in one
`transmission scheme and
`wherein the second communication system has pilot symbols that
`are denser than those in the first communication system;
`generating at least one non-data section containing information
`describing an aspect of data in at least one of the first section
`and the second section; and
`combining the first section, the second section and the at least
`one non-data section to form the frame structure.
`Claim 44
`[44pre] A method of constructing a frame structure for data transmission,
`the method comprising:
`generating a first section comprising data configured in a first
`format compatible with a first communication system using
`symbols;
`generating a second section following the first section, the second
`section comprising data configured in a second format compatible
`with a second communication system using symbols,
`wherein the first communication system's symbols and the second
`communication system's symbols co-exist in one transmission
`scheme and
`wherein: the second format is compatible with the second
`communication system configured to support higher mobility than
`the first communication system,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`vii
`
`

`

`[44e]
`
`[44f]
`
`
`[44g]
`
`
`[44h]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[45]
`
`[46]
`
`[47]
`
`[49]
`
`[50]
`
`
`
`wherein each symbol in the second communication system has a
`shorter symbol period than that in the first communication system;
`and
`wherein the second communication system has pilot symbols that
`are denser than those in the first communication system;
`generating at least one non-data section containing information
`describing an aspect of data in at least one of the first section and
`the second section; and
`combining the first section, the second section and the at least one
`non-data section to form the frame structure.
`Claim 45
`The method of claim 44, wherein the non-data section comprises
`mapping information for at least one of the first section and the
`second section.
`
`Claim 46
`The method of claim 44, wherein the non-data section comprises at
`least one of a preamble, a frame control header 60 (FCH), a burst,
`and a map of at least one of the first section and the second section.
`Claim 47
`The method of claim 46, wherein the second section follows the
`first section in at least one of time sequence and frequency
`spectrum.
`
`Claim 49
`The method of claim 44, wherein each of the first section and the
`second section carries at least one of uplink and downlink data.
`Claim 50
`The method of claim 44, wherein the second section carries
`mapping information for data in the second section.
`
`
`
`viii
`
`

`

`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Patent Owner UNMRI respectfully submits this Patent Owner Preliminary
`
`Response to the Petition for Inter Partes Review dated Jan. 3, 2024 (“Petition”) of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,265,096 (EX1001, “’096 patent”) filed by Panasonic. Petitioner
`
`asserts that claims 8, 44–47, and 49–50 of the ’096 patent are unpatentable on four
`
`grounds:
`
`Ground 1: Claims 8, 44–47 and 50 are anticipated by the Joint Proposal
`
`Ground 2: Claim 49 is rendered obvious by the Joint Proposal and Trainin
`
`Ground 3: Claim 8 is anticipated by Mujtaba
`
`Ground 4: Claims 8, 44–47, and 49-50 are obvious by Mujtaba and Trainin
`
`This Preliminary Response is timely filed based on the Board’s Notice Of
`
`Filing Date Accorded To Petition And Time For Filing Patent Owner Preliminary
`
`Response. See Paper 6.
`
`II. RELATED PROCEEDINGS
`
`Related Proceedings are listed in Paper 3 (Patent Owner’s Mandatory
`
`Notice) at 2. Additional related proceedings not listed by Petitioner include inter
`
`partes reviews by ZyXEL Communications Corporation (IPR2021-00734 filed
`
`Mar. 29, 2021), Qualcomm Incorporated (IPR2021-00375 filed Dec. 28, 2020),
`
`and Intel Corporation (IPR2020-01576 filed Sep. 14, 2020).
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`III. UNM BACKGROUND
`
`UNM Rainforest Innovations is the economic development and technology
`
`transfer organization of The University of New Mexico, the State of New Mexico’s
`
`flagship university. EX2005 (Economic Impact Report). In that role, UNM protects
`
`and licenses technology owned by the University, including those developed by
`
`University researchers. It connects the business community to the University and
`
`facilitates the University’s role in the state’s economic development initiatives.1 As
`
`a nonprofit corporation formed and owned entirely by the University of New Mexico
`
`Board of Regents, UNM significantly contributes to the mission statement of the
`
`University of New Mexico.
`
`Since 1996, UNM university researchers have disclosed 2,222 new inventions
`
`to UNM. UNM, in turn, has filed 1,628 patent applications, received 754 issued
`
`U.S. patents, executed 733 licensing agreements, and facilitated the formation of
`
`nearly 160 new startup companies to take those inventions to market.2 These
`
`startups have created or stimulated the creation of hundreds of New Mexico jobs and
`
`tens of millions of dollars in local economic output.3 UNM has also subsidized
`
`college students from the Navajo Nation by housing them at the UNM Lobo
`
`Rainforest Building using licensing proceeds.
`
`
`1 See https://innovations.unm.edu/about/.
`2 See https://innovations.unm.edu/unm-rainforest-innovations-celebrates-25-years/.
`3 See https://innovations.unm.edu/about/metrics/.
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`Today, UNM is a core component of New Mexico’s innovation ecosystem
`
`and an economic driver of high-tech industry. Among its 18 peer institutions
`
`nationwide, UNM ranks first in number of licensing agreements, eighth in number
`
`of faculty and staff invention disclosures, and second in number of startup
`
`companies formed. Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, UNM has initiated new
`
`programs to assist New Mexico small businesses and trained over 225 businesses on
`
`how to build and scale an e-commerce platform that is tailored to their business.
`
`UNM is a highly innovative institution involved in the international scientific
`
`and technological community. As part of its international involvement and to
`
`facilitate and support the mission of the University of New Mexico, UNM acquired
`
`a patent portfolio, including the ’096 patent, from the Industrial Technology
`
`Research Institute of Taiwan and offered a license to its patent portfolio relating to
`
`wireless technology to Qualcomm, which Qualcomm eventually accepted.
`
`IV. THE ASSERTED PRIOR ART
`A. The Joint Proposal (EX1016)
`
`The Joint Proposal refers to IEEE 802.11-05/1102r4, “Wireless LANs Joint
`
`Proposal: High throughput extension to the 802.11 Standard: PHY” (EX1015).
`
`The Joint Proposal discloses a mixed mode frame structure for the 802.11 WiFi
`
`standard that allows communication either with legacy devices in a legacy format
`
`or with HT (high throughput) devices in an HT format. The mixed mode packets
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`allow only legacy data or HT data to be transmitted in a frame, but not both. The
`
`Joint Proposal is a standard proposal and does not identify any problems needing
`
`to be addressed or solved beyond the proposed communication standard schemes
`
`literally identified in the reference. Both Trainin and Mujtaba also reference the
`
`same mixed mode frame format in passing, but do not vary its operating
`
`characteristics (because it is a standard).
`
`B.
`
`Trainin (EX1010)
`
`Trainin refers to U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0204052. Trainin discloses wireless
`
`transmissions with frame alignment. EX1010 at Abstract. Specifically, Trainin
`
`discloses synchronizing between a transmitter using a first modulation scheme,
`
`which may have multiple frame formats, and a receiver using a second modulation
`
`scheme, by calculating a transmission time that aligns an interframe space start
`
`time of the first and second modulation schemes. Id. Trainin does not address
`
`pilot signals or the symbol period beyond use of the mixed-mode frame also
`
`discussed in the Joint Proposal.
`
`C. Mujtaba (EX1011)
`
`Mujtaba refers to U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0072529. Mujtaba discloses that
`
`“data is transmitted in a multiple antenna communication system by selecting a
`
`number of pilot tones to be employed to transmit the data; and transmitting an
`
`indication of the selected number of pilot tones in a preamble of a packet
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`containing the data.” Id. Further, Mujtaba discloses that “the number of pilot
`
`tones can be selected, for example, based on one or more of (i) a delay spread of a
`
`channel; (ii) the SNR [Signal to Noise Ratio] at the receiver, or (iii) a number of
`
`antennas at a receiver.” Id. Mujtaba thus seeks to solve the problem of providing
`
`an optimal balance between channel estimation and throughput. EX2001¶128.
`
`V. THE PREVIOUSLY ASSERTED PRIOR ART
`
`The ’096 patent has been subjected to three prior inter partes reviews by
`
`ZyXEL Communications Corporation (IPR2021-00734 filed Mar. 29, 2021),
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated (IPR2021-00375 filed Dec. 28, 2020) and Intel
`
`Corporation (IPR2020-01576 filed Sep. 14, 2020). In these proceedings, the Board
`
`has examined the following references in detail.
`
`A.
`
`Talukdar (EX2002 (previously IPR2021-00375, EX1012))
`
`Talukdar refers to U.S. Patent Application 2009/0067377 A1 entitled
`
`“Medium Access Control Frame Structure In Wireless Communication System.”
`
`Talukdar concerns a “wireless communication infrastructure entity configured to
`
`allocate radio resources, in a radio frame, to a wireless terminal compliant with a
`
`first protocol and to a wireless terminal compliant with a second protocol.”
`
`EX2002, Abstract.
`
`Talukdar recognizes that wireless communication systems may typically
`
`implement more than one communication technology. EX2002¶27. “For example,
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`one or more of the base units 101 may be legacy technology base stations, for
`
`example, IEEE 802.16(e) protocol base stations, and other base station may be
`
`newer generation technologies, for example, IEEE 802.16(m) protocol base
`
`stations.” Id. “In these cases, it is generally desirable for the new technologies to
`
`be backward compatible with the legacy technology.” Id. For example, “[f]or the
`
`evolution of IEEE 802.16(e), the backward compatibility constraint implies that
`
`the legacy frame structure, for example, the 5 msec duration 802.16(e) frame, must
`
`be supported by 802.16(m) base stations. Additionally, in order to efficiently
`
`support delay sensitive applications, 802.16(m) base stations should be able to
`
`service both 802.16(m) and legacy terminals within the common frame structure.”
`
`Id.
`
`Talukdar specifically addresses the problem of one-way air-interface
`
`latency, which is primarily dependent on the MAC frame duration. Id, ¶2.
`
`However, this concern is balanced against the referenced need for backward
`
`compatibility. Id, ¶3. The desire to vary the frame structure to improve latency
`
`must be balanced against the need of legacy systems to have a compatible frame
`
`structure:
`
`Regarding frame structure, it is generally necessary to design frames
`
`having a relatively short duration in order to reduce latency. Thus to
`
`deliver low latency in 802.16m systems with backward compatibility,
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`it is necessary to develop a sub-frame structure based on the legacy
`
`802.16( e) frame. In order to address the latency requirements, it is
`
`necessary to design frames with shorter than 5 msec duration.
`
`However, to efficiently serve legacy traffic, it is also necessary that
`
`802.16(m) systems have 5 msec legacy frames. Thus two broad
`
`classes of frames would be required for an 802.16(m) system having
`
`reduced latency and support for legacy 802.16(e) devices.
`
`EX2002¶28.
`In summary, Talukdar discloses frames with the 1st and 2nd communication
`
`systems sections, where the 2nd section could have different symbol duration—but
`
`does not specifically disclose a shorter duration. Talukdar further discloses that
`
`the 2nd section could have a different pilot structure—but does not specifically
`
`disclose a denser structure. Regarding symbol duration, Talukdar discloses only
`
`that “in the 802.16(m) downlink and uplink zones (second protocol regions on
`
`downlink and uplink) the . . . symbol duration, may be the same as or different
`
`from those defined in 802.16(e).” EX2002¶64 (emphasis added). Similarly,
`
`regarding pilot structures, Talukdar discloses only that “the structures of the
`
`802.16(m) region (sub-channel and pilot structures) can be different from those of
`
`the 802.16(e) regions.” EX1012¶29 (emphasis added); “The m-D L and m-UL
`
`regions in these frames may have different sub-channel/pilot structures than the
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`legacy systems.” EX2002¶64 (emphasis added). It also includes at least one non-
`
`data section.
`
`B.
`
`Li (EX2003 (previously IPR2021-00375, EX1016))
`
`Li refers to U.S. Patent Application 2007/0155387 A1 entitled “Techniques
`
`For Scheduling And Adaptation To Combat Fast Fading.” Li concerns “techniques
`
`to perform scheduling and adaptation to combat fast fading,” which specifically
`
`refers to a “scheduling/adaptation scheme for a communications system for which
`
`different Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) symbol durations
`
`and subcarrier spacing are employed for slow and fast subscribers, respectively.”
`
`EX2003 at abstract
`
`Li recognizes that “[t]he grouping of subscribers according to their speed
`
`and apportionment of subcarrier spacing accordingly may reduce inter-subcarrier
`
`interference (“ICI”) in OFDM and the corresponding OFDMA systems that
`
`support the subscribers.” EX2003¶10.
`
`Li discloses “slow subscribers with … longer OFDM symbol durations” and
`
`“fast subscribers with … shorter OFDM symbol durations.” EX2003¶22; Fig. 8.
`
`However, in Li all subscribers belong to 802.16e (a single system). Further, in Li,
`
`separate scheduling for slow and fast users occurs in separate frames, not in the
`
`same frame. So Li does not disclose one frame format with the 1st and 2nd
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`sections corresponding to the 1st and 2nd communication systems as disclosed in
`
`the ’096 patent.
`
`C. Nystrom (EX2004 (previously IPR2021-00375, EX1017))
`
`Nystrom refers to U.S. Patent Application 2007/0104174 A1 entitled
`
`“Method And Apparatus For Allocating A Pilot Signal Adapted To The Channel
`
`Characteristics.” Nystrom concerns a “set of different pilot structures[,] designed
`
`for use in different environments and/or different user behaviors that are expected
`
`to occur in a cell.” EX2004, Abstract. Nystrom thus attempts to adapt pilot
`
`structure to the particular radio conditions for a given user. Id. Nystrom teaches
`
`two embodiments to accomplish this, one in which “the entire resource space is
`
`provided with different pilot structures in different parts (110A-D) in advance and
`
`allocation of resources to the users are then performed in order to match estimated
`
`radio conditions to the provided pilot structure.” Id. In the second, “allocation is
`
`performed first, and then the actual pilot structure is adapted within the allocated
`
`resource space area to suit the environmental conditions.” Id.
`
`Nystrom addresses the problem of adapting a multi-carrier system to the
`
`“difficult, ever changing, hard-to-predict multi-user environments that are
`
`envisioned for future wireless systems.” EX2004¶5. It teaches a balanced design
`
`of its pilot structure to accommodate the worst-case scenario so that detection
`
`becomes possible even under the worst possible conditions, as well as when the
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`situation is better than the worst case, which typically is the case most of the time.
`
`In the first situation, “such a [worst-case] pilot structure gives rise to a substantial
`
`pilot overhead and is indeed necessary in these worst-case scenarios.” EX2004¶6.
`
`In the second, the normal case, “the pilot structure is unnecessarily extensive,
`
`giving an unnecessary pilot overhead for most users.” Id. “This reduces data
`
`capacity in the own cell and furthermore increases the interference to the
`
`neighboring cells (so called 'pilot pollution').” Id.
`
`In summary, Nystrom thus discloses the use of denser pilots for high
`
`mobility users: Users with “radio conditions demanding a high density of pilots”—
`
`such as fast-moving users—could be allocated resource space with increased pilot
`
`density in the time dimension, frequency dimension, or both.” EX2004¶43; Fig.
`
`5A (showing portions of the radio resource space 110A, 110C, and 110D with
`
`higher pilot density). But Nystrom also does not disclose one frame format with
`
`the 1st and 2nd sections.
`
`VI. THE BOARD SHOULD DENY INSTITUTION UNDER § 325(d)
`
`The Board should exercise its discretion to deny Panasonic’s Petition under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d) (“In determining whether to institute or order a proceeding …
`
`the Director may take into account whether, and reject the petition or request
`
`because, the same or substantially the same prior art or arguments previously were
`
`presented to the Office.”) In Advanced Bionics (precedential), the PTAB established
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`a two-part framework: (1) whether the same or substantially the same art or argument
`
`was previously presented to the Office; and, if so, (2) whether the petitioner has
`
`demonstrated that the Office erred in a manner material to the patentability of
`
`challenged claims. Advanced Bionics, LLC v. Med-El Elektromedizinische Geräte
`
`GmbH, IPR Case No. IPR2019-01469, Paper 6, 8 (PTAB Feb. 13, 2020)
`
`(precedential). Here, Panasonic sets forth substantially similar art and arguments as
`
`those previously presented by Intel (IPR2020-01576), Qualcomm (IPR2021-00375),
`
`and/or ZyXEL (IPR2021-00734).
`
`A. Mujtaba is cumulative of Nystrom
`
`This Board has already considered Nystrom (EX2004 (previously IPR2021-
`
`00375, EX1017)) against the ’096 patent. Nystrom refers to U.S. Patent Application
`
`2007/0104174 A1 entitled “Method And Apparatus For Allocating A Pilot Signal
`
`Adapted To The Channel Characteristics.” The disclosures in Mujtaba which
`
`Petitioner identifies are cumulative of Nystrom. Both references disclose various
`
`pilot structures that can be changed, but both also stress that the number of pilot
`
`symbols
`
`should
`
`be
`
`as
`
`small
`
`as
`
`possible
`
`to
`
`avoid
`
`unnecessary
`
`overhead. EX2001¶132. Both references, Mujtaba and Nystrom, therefore teach
`
`away from increasing the number of pilot symbols. Id. The below table from Dr.
`
`Vojcic cross references the relevant disclosures:
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Nystrom
`Mujtaba
`Mujtaba and Nystrom both teach varying pilot structures
`
`Nystrom concerns a “set of
`“Data is transmitted in a multiple
`antenna communication system by
`different pilot structures[,] designed for
`selecting a number of pilot tones to be
`use in different environments and/or
`different user behaviors that are
`employed to transmit the data; and
`expected to occur in a cell.” EX2004,
`transmitting an indication of the
`Abstract. Nystrom thus attempts to
`selected number of pilot tones in a
`adapt pilot structure to the particular
`preamble of a packet containing the
`radio conditions for a given user. Id.
`data.” Mujtaba at abstract.
`Mujtaba and Nystrom address the same problem of pilot overhead
`
`[006] The pilot overhead can
`[0021] A greater number of
`indeed be substantial. This reduces
`pilots, however, reduces the effective
`data capacity in the own cell and
`data rate, since actual data is now
`furthermore increases the interference
`replaced by the pilots (which are
`to the neighboring cells (so called 'pilot
`known at both the transmitter and the
`pollution').
`receiver).
`Mujtaba and Nystrom teach different pilot configurations for different
`channel parameters
`
`Mujtaba discloses that “the
`number of pilot tones can be selected,
`for example, based on one or more of
`(i) a delay spread of a channel; (ii) the
`SNR at the receiver, or (iii) a number
`of antennas at a receiver.” Mujtaba at
`abstract. Mujtaba thus seeks to solve
`the problem of providing an optimal
`balance between channel estimation
`and throughput.
`
`
`
`Nystrom teaches two
`embodiments to accomplish this, one in
`which “the entire resource space is
`provided with different pilot structures
`in different parts (110A-D) in advance
`and allocation of resources to the users
`are then performed in order to match
`estimated radio conditions to the
`provided pilot structure.” Nystrom at
`abstract and [0011]. In the second,
`“allocation is performed first, and then
`the actual pilot structure is adapted
`within the allocated resource space area
`to suit the environmental conditions.”
`Id.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Mujtaba and Nystrom both teach away from denser pilot symbols
`
`[0006] A greater number of
`pilots, however, reduces the effective
`data rate, since actual data is now
`replaced by pilots (which are known at
`both the transmitter and the receiver).
`[0021] A greater number of
`pilots, however, reduces the effective
`data rate, since actual data is now
`replaced by the pilots (which are
`known at both the transmitter and the
`receiver).
`[0022] From an efficiency
`perspective, the lowest number of
`pilots to achieve the desired robustness
`is desirable. In other words, from an
`efficiency perspective, data should be
`transmitted on as many tones as
`possible.
`
`EX2001¶132.
`
`[006] Such systems must design
`their pilot structure according to the
`worst-case scenario so that detection
`becomes possible even under the worst
`possible conditions. Such a pilot
`structure gives rise to a substantial pilot
`overhead and is indeed necessary in
`these worst-case scenarios. However,
`whenever the situation is better than
`the worst case, which typically is the
`case most of the time, the pilot
`structure is unnecessarily extensive,
`giving an unnecessary pilot overhead
`for most users. The pilot overhead can
`indeed be substantial. This reduces
`data capacity in the own cell and
`furthermore increases the interference
`to the neighboring cells (so called 'pilot
`pollution').
`“[009] The main problems with
`existing solutions are that pilot
`structures are either not at all suitable
`for considerably changing radio
`conditions or that they are designed for
`worst cases which in turn results in vast
`pilot overhead and ‘pilot pollution’.”
`
`Therefore, Mujtaba is cumulative of Nystrom’s relevant disclosures.
`
`B.
`
`Trainin is cumulative of Talukdar
`
`This Board has already considered Talukdar (EX2002 (previously IPR2021-
`
`00375, EX1012)) against the ’096 patent. Talukdar refers to U.S. Patent Application
`
`2009/0067377 A1 entitled “Medium Access Control Frame Structure In Wireless
`13
`
`
`
`

`

`Communication System.”
`
` Talukdar concerns a “wireless communication
`
`infrastructure entity configured to allocate radio resources, in a radio frame, to a
`
`wireless terminal compliant with a first protocol and to a wireless terminal compliant
`
`with a second protocol.” The disclosures in Trainin which Petitioner identifies are
`
`cumulative of Talukdar. Both references disclose wireless communications using
`
`downlink and uplink structures. The below table from Dr. Vojcic cross references
`
`the relevant disclosures:
`
`Trainin
`
`Talukdar
`
`Trainin discloses that wireless
`communication in the mixed mode
`packet between a transmitter and a
`receiver can be carried out via wireless
`links such as a downlink and an uplink.
`Trainin at [0020], [0034].
`The teachings of Trainin using a
`downlink and an uplink for data
`transmission between a transmitter and
`a receiver could be used to transmit
`data in the