Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 1 of 82
`
`BELL NORTHERN RESEARCH, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`Civil Action No. _____
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`HMD AMERICA, INC., HMD GLOBAL
`OY, SHENZHEN CHINO-E
`COMMUNICATION CO. LTD., HON HAI
`PRECISION INDUSTRY CO., LTD,
`TINNO MOBILE TECHNOLOGY CORP.,
`SHENZHEN TINNO MOBILE CO., LTD.,
`TINNO USA, INC., UNISOC
`TECHNOLOGIES CO. LTD.,
`SPREADTRUM COMMUNICATIONS
`USA, INC., WINGTECH TECHNOLOGY
`CO. LTD., WINGTECH
`INTERNATIONAL, INC., HUAQIN CO.
`LTD., BEST BUY CO., INC., BEST BUY
`STORES L.P., TARGET CORP.,
`WALMART INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Bell Northern Research, LLC (“BNR” or “Plaintiff”), for its Complaint against
`
`Defendants HMD America, Inc. and HMD Global Oy (collectively, “HMD” or “Defendant”) and
`
`Defendants Shenzen Chino-E Communication Co. Ltd. (“Chino-E”), Hon Hai Precision Industry
`
`Co. (“Hon Hai”), Tinno Mobile Technology Corp. and Shenzhen Tinno Mobile Co., Ltd. and
`
`Tinno USA, Inc., (collectively, “Tinno”), Unisoc Technologies Co. Ltd. and Spreadtrum
`
`Communications USA Inc. (collectively, “Unisoc”), Wingtech Technology Co. Ltd. and
`
`Wingtech International, Inc. (collectively, “Wingtech”), Huaqin Co. Ltd. (“Huaqin”), Best Buy
`
`Co., Inc. and Best Buy Stores L.P. (collectively, “Best Buy”), Target Corporation (“Target”), and
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 2 of 82
`
`Walmart Inc. (“Walmart”) (individually each a “Defendant” and collectively “Defendants”)
`
`alleges the following:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the
`
`United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff BNR is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State
`
`of Delaware with a place of business at 401 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant HMD America, Inc. is a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, with its principal place of business
`
`at 1200 Brickell Ave., Suite. 510, Miami, Florida 33131. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the United States, including
`
`in this judicial district, and introduces products and services that into the stream of commerce
`
`and that incorporate infringing technology knowing that they would be sold in this judicial
`
`district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant HMD Global Oy is a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of Finland, with its principal place of business at Bertel
`
`Jungin aukio 9, 02600 Espoo, Finland. Upon information and belief, Defendant sells and offers
`
`to sell products and services throughout the United States, including in this judicial district, and
`
`introduces products and services into the stream of commerce that incorporate infringing
`
`technology, knowing that they would be sold in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United
`
`States.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 3 of 82
`
`5.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Shenzhen Chino-E Communication Co.,
`
`Ltd.is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of China, with its principal place of
`
`business at 139 Lixiang Road, Songmushan Dalang Town, Dongguan, 523770, China. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the
`
`United States, including in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the
`
`stream of commerce that incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in
`
`this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`6.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd. is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of China, with its principal place of business
`
`at No.2, Ziyou St., Tucheng Dist., New Taipei City 236, Taiwan. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the United States, including
`
`in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the stream of commerce that
`
`incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in this judicial district and
`
`elsewhere in the United States.
`
`7.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Tinno Mobile Technology Corp. is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of China, with its principal place of business
`
`at 23/F, TINNO Building, No.33, Xiandong Rd, Xili, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, China. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the
`
`United States, including in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the
`
`stream of commerce that incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in
`
`this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`8.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Shenzhen Tinno Mobile Co., Ltd. is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of China, with its principal place of business
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 4 of 82
`
`at 23/F, TINNO Building, No.33, Xiandong Rd, Xili, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, China. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the
`
`United States, including in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the
`
`stream of commerce that incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in
`
`this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`9.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Tinno USA, Inc. is a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of
`
`business at 2301 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 102, Plano, Texas, 75075. Upon information and
`
`belief, Tinno USA, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Tinno Mobile Technology Corp. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the
`
`United States, including in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the
`
`stream of commerce that incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in
`
`this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`10.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Unisoc Technologies Co., Ltd. is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of China with its principal place of business at
`
`Building 1, Zhanxun Center, Lane 2288, Zuchongzhi Road, Pudong New Area, Shanghai,
`
`201203, China. Upon information and belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and
`
`services throughout the United States, including in this judicial district, and introduces products
`
`and services into the stream of commerce that incorporate infringing technology, knowing that
`
`they would be sold in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`11.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Spreadtrum Communications USA Inc.
`
`is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal
`
`place of business at 2674 N 1st St., San Jose, California, 95134. Upon information and belief,
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 5 of 82
`
`Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the United States, including
`
`in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the stream of commerce that
`
`incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in this judicial district and
`
`elsewhere in the United States.
`
`12.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Wingtech Technology Co., Ltd. is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of China, with its principal place of business
`
`at No. 777, Subcentral Road, Nanhu District, Jiaxing, Zhejiang Province, China. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the
`
`United States, including in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the
`
`stream of commerce that incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in
`
`this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`13.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Wingtech International, Inc. is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, with its principal
`
`place of business at 21900 Oakview Ln., Cupertino, California, 95014. Upon information and
`
`belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the United States,
`
`including in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the stream of
`
`commerce that incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in this
`
`judicial district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`14.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Huaqin Co. Ltd. is a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of China, with its principal place of business at Building 1
`
`& 9 & 11, NO.399 Keyuan Road, Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park, Pudong New District, Shanghai,
`
`China. Upon information and belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services
`
`throughout the United States, including in this judicial district, and introduces products and
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 6 of 82
`
`services into the stream of commerce that incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they
`
`would be sold in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`15.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Best Buy Co., Inc. is a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, with its principal place of
`
`business at 7601 Penn Ave. S., Richfield, Minnesota, 55423. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the United States, including
`
`in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the stream of commerce that
`
`incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in this judicial district and
`
`elsewhere in the United States.
`
`16.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Best Buy Stores L.P. is a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of
`
`business at 7601 Penn Ave. S., Richfield, Minnesota, 55423. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services throughout the United States, including
`
`in this judicial district, and introduces products and services into the stream of commerce that
`
`incorporate infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in this judicial district and
`
`elsewhere in the United States.
`
`17.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Target Corp. is a corporation organized
`
`and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, with its principal place of business at 33
`
`South 6th St., Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55402. Upon information and belief, Defendant sells and
`
`offers to sell products and services throughout the United States, including in this judicial
`
`district, and introduces products and services into the stream of commerce that incorporate
`
`infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in this judicial district and elsewhere in
`
`the United States.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 7 of 82
`
`18.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Walmart Inc. is a corporation organized
`
`and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 702
`
`SW 8th St., Bentonville, Arkansas, 72716. Upon information and belief, Defendant sells and
`
`offers to sell products and services throughout the United States, including in this judicial
`
`district, and introduces products and services into the stream of commerce that incorporate
`
`infringing technology, knowing that they would be sold in this judicial district and elsewhere in
`
`the United States.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`19.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the
`
`United States, Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`20.
`
`21.
`
`22.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b).
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant HMD Global Oy is not a resident in the
`
`United States and may be sued in any judicial district. Defendant HMD America, Inc. has
`
`committed acts of infringement in this District and has a regular and established place of
`
`business in this District at 1200 Brickell Ave., Suite. 510, Miami, Florida 33131 and is
`
`incorporated in Florida.
`
`23.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Chino-E is not a resident in the United
`
`States and may be sued in any judicial district. Defendant has committed acts of infringement in
`
`this District and has a regular and established place of business within this District.
`
`24.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Hon Hai is not a resident in the United
`
`States and may be sued in any judicial district. Defendant has committed acts of infringement in
`
`this District and has a regular and established place of business within this District.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 8 of 82
`
`25.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants Tinno Mobile Technology Corp. and
`
`Shenzhen Tinno Mobile Co., Ltd. are not residents in the United States and may be sued in any
`
`judicial district. Upon information and belief, Defendant Tinno USA, Inc. has a principal place
`
`of business at 2301 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 102, Plano, Texas, 75075, a testing site in Miami,
`
`Florida, in this District, and is registered for service of process at 7901 4th St. N., Ste. 300, St.
`
`Petersburg, Florida, 33702. Defendants have committed acts of infringement in this District and
`
`have a regular and established place of business within this District.
`
`26.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Unisoc Technologies Co., Ltd. is not a
`
`resident in the United States and may be sued in any judicial district. Defendant has committed
`
`acts of infringement in this District and has a regular and established place of business within
`
`this District.
`
`27.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Spreadtrum Communications USA Inc.
`
`(“Spreadtrum”) is wholly owned by Unisoc Technologies Co., Ltd., and has committed acts of
`
`infringement in this District and has a regular and established place of business within this
`
`District.
`
`28.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Wingtech Technology Co., Ltd. is not a
`
`resident in the United States and may be sued in any judicial district. Defendant has committed
`
`acts of infringement in this District and has a regular and established place of business within
`
`this District.
`
`29.
`
`Upon information and belief, Wingtech International, Inc. is wholly owned by
`
`Wingtech Technology Co., Ltd., and has committed acts of infringement in this District and has
`
`a regular and established place of business within this District.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 9 of 82
`
`30.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Huaqin is not a resident in the United
`
`States and may be sued in any judicial district. Defendant has committed acts of infringement in
`
`this District and has a regular and established place of business within this District.
`
`31.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Best Buy Co., Inc. has committed acts of
`
`infringement in this District (including, but not limited to, offers for sale of the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities via Bestbuy.com and its physical locations) and, on information and belief,
`
`actual sales of the Accused Instrumentalities at its physical locations, and has a regular and
`
`established place of business in this District, for example, at 10760 NW 17th St., Miami, Florida
`
`33172.
`
`32.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Best Buy Stores L.P. has committed acts
`
`of infringement in this District (including, but not limited to, offers for sale of the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities via Bestbuy.com and its physical locations) and, on information and belief,
`
`actual sales of the Accused Instrumentalities at its physical locations), and has a regular and
`
`established place of business in this District, for example, at 10760 NW 17th St., Miami, Florida
`
`33172.
`
`33.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Target has committed acts of
`
`infringement in this District (including, but not limited to, offers for sale of the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities via Target.com and its physical locations) and, on information and belief, actual
`
`sales of the Accused Instrumentalities at its physical locations, and has a regular and established
`
`place of business in this District, for example, at 10101 W. Flagler St., Miami, Florida 33174.
`
`34.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Walmart has committed acts of
`
`infringement in this District (including, but not limited to, offers for sale of the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities via Walmart.com and its physical locations) and, on information and belief,
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 10 of 82
`
`actual sales of the Accused Instrumentalities at its physical locations, and has a regular and
`
`established place of business in this District, for example, at 9191 W. Flagler St., Miami, Florida
`
`33174.
`
`35.
`
`Upon information and belief, each Defendant is subject to this Court’s general
`
`and specific personal jurisdiction, because each Defendant has sufficient minimum contacts
`
`within the State of Florida and this District, pursuant to due process and/or the Florida Long Arm
`
`Statute, because each Defendant purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting
`
`business in the State of Florida and in this District, because each Defendant regularly conducts
`
`and solicits business within the State of Florida and within this District, and because Plaintiff’s
`
`causes of action arise directly from each of Defendants’ business contacts and other activities in
`
`the State of Florida and this District. Further, this Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant
`
`HMD America, Inc. because it is incorporated in the State of Florida and has purposely availed
`
`itself of the privileges and benefits of the laws of the State of Florida.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`36.
`
`The Asserted Patents come from a rich pedigree dating back to the late 19th
`
`century. This is when Bell Labs sprang to life from the combined efforts of AT&T and Western
`
`Electric. Bell Labs is one of America’s greatest technology incubators, and paved the way for
`
`many technological advances we know and use today, including the transistor, several kinds of
`
`lasers, the UNIX operating system, and computer languages such as C++. In total, Bell Labs
`
`received nine Nobel Prizes for its work over the years.
`
`37.
`
`Eventually the Bell system broke up and spawned several new companies. They
`
`included telecommunications powerhouses Lucent and Agere Systems. Lucent was absorbed by
`
`Nokia, while Agere Systems was acquired by LSI, then Avago, and ultimately renamed
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 11 of 82
`
`Broadcom. The Bell system also spun off Northern Electric which led to the creation of a
`
`research lab known as BNR. This lab grew to host thousands of engineers in offices around the
`
`globe. One of those was an 800,000-square-foot campus in Richardson, Texas.
`
`38.
`
`Collectively, these companies spurred a digital revolution in telecommunications,
`
`starting with the first digital telephone switch in 1975. They continued to push the industry to
`
`new heights in the late-80s, when BNR announced the desire to create a global fiber optic
`
`network (called “FiberWorld”). Its goal was to give users easy, reliable, and fast access to a
`
`variety of multimedia services. To realize this vision, Bell Labs and subsequent innovators made
`
`numerous breakthroughs in laser, integrated circuit, photodetector, amplifier, and waveguide
`
`designs. These advancements led to the modern fiber optic systems we use today.
`
`39.
`
`This work naturally evolved to include cellular telecommunications as well. On
`
`May 6, 1992, BNR VP George Brody—along with executives from Bell Cellular and Northern
`
`Electric—made the first Canada-US digital cellular call. It stretched from Toronto, Ontario to
`
`Fort Worth, Texas.
`
`40.
`
`Eventually, Nortel Networks absorbed BNR. Although Nortel was ultimately
`
`unsuccessful in its bid to supply digital telecommunications and networking solutions to the
`
`market, some Bell Labs and Nortel alumni decided to reenergize BNR in 2017. Today it is the
`
`successor in interest to many of the key telecommunications technologies.
`
`41.
`
`The BNR Patent portfolio comprises hundreds of patents that reflect important
`
`developments in telecommunications that were invented and refined by leading technology
`
`research companies, including Agere, LSI, and Broadcom. These include U.S. Patent Nos.
`
`8,204,554, 7,319,889, RE 48,629, 8,416,862, 7,564,914, 7,957,450, 6,941,156, 6,696,941,
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 12 of 82
`
`7,039,435, 6,963,129, 6,858,930, 8,396,072, and 8,792,432. (collectively, these patents comprise
`
`the “Asserted Patents”).
`
`42.
`
`Portions of the BNR portfolio are presently licensed and/or were previously
`
`licensed to leading technology companies.
`
`43.
`
`BNR brings this action to put a stop to each Defendant’s unauthorized and
`
`unlicensed use of the Asserted Patents.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,204,554
`
`44.
`
`Norman Goris and Wolfgang Scheit are the inventors of U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,204,554 (“the ’554 patent”). A true and correct copy of the ’554 patent is attached as Exhibit
`
`A.
`
`45.
`
`The ’554 patent resulted from the pioneering efforts of Messrs. Goris and Scheit
`
`(hereinafter “the Inventors”) in the area of mobile devices. These efforts resulted in the
`
`development of a system of power reducer controls to control the power consumption of a
`
`mobile station display use with a mobile device and a method of operation thereof in the early
`
`2000s. At the time of these pioneering efforts, the most widely implemented technology used to
`
`increase stand-by time as well as the talk-time of a mobile device was to increase the capacity of
`
`the battery. The drawback of increasing the capacity of the battery is that as the capacity of the
`
`battery increases, so too does its size, weight, and cost. The Inventors conceived of the invention
`
`claimed in the ’554 patent as a way of prolonging the use of a mobile device without increasing
`
`the capacity of the battery.
`
`46.
`
`For example, the Inventors developed a mobile station, comprising: a display; a
`
`proximity sensor adapted to generate a signal indicative of the existence of a first condition, the
`
`first condition being that an external object is proximate; and a microprocessor adapted to:
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 13 of 82
`
`(a)determine, without using the proximity sensor, the existence of a second condition
`
`independent and different from the first condition, the second condition being that a user of the
`
`mobile station has performed an action to initiate an outgoing call or to answer an incoming call;
`
`(b) in response to a determination in step (a) that the second condition exists, activate the
`
`proximity sensor; (c) receive the signal from the activated proximity sensor; and (d) reduce
`
`power to the display if the signal from the activated proximity sensor indicates that the first
`
`condition exists.
`
`47.
`
`One advantage of the claimed ’554 invention over the prior art is to reduce the
`
`power consumption of a cell phone display when the display is not needed. (See ’554 patent at
`
`1:40-52.) This increases available battery power that results in increased stand-by and/or talk
`
`time. (See ’554 patent at 1:50-55.)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,319,889
`
`48.
`
`Norman Goris and Wolfgang Scheit are the inventors of U.S. Patent No.
`
`7,319,889 (“the ’889 patent”). A true and correct copy of the ’889 patent is attached as Exhibit
`
`B.
`
`49.
`
`The ’889 patent resulted from the pioneering efforts of Messrs. Goris and Scheit
`
`(hereinafter “the Inventors”) in the area of mobile devices. These efforts resulted in the
`
`development of a system of power reducer controls to control the power consumption of a
`
`mobile station display use with a mobile device and a method of operation thereof in the early
`
`2000s. At the time of these pioneering efforts, the most widely implemented technology used to
`
`increase stand-by time as well as the talk-time of a mobile device was to increase the capacity of
`
`the battery. The drawback of increasing the capacity of the battery is that as the capacity of the
`
`battery increases, so too does its size, weight, and cost. The Inventors conceived of the invention
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 14 of 82
`
`claimed in the ’889 patent as a way of prolonging the use of a mobile device without increasing
`
`the capacity of the battery.
`
`50.
`
`For example, the Inventors developed a mobile station, comprising: a display; a
`
`proximity sensor adapted to generate a signal indicative of proximity of an external object; and a
`
`microprocessor adapted to: (a) determine whether a telephone call is active; (b) receive the signal
`
`from the proximity sensor; and (c) reduce power to the display if (i) the microprocessor
`
`determines that a telephone call is active and (ii) the signal indicates the proximity of the external
`
`object; wherein: the telephone call is a wireless telephone call; the microprocessor reduces power
`
`to the display while the signal indicates the proximity of the external object only if the
`
`microprocessor determines that the wireless telephone call is active; and the proximity sensor
`
`begins detecting whether an external object is proximate substantially concurrently with the
`
`mobile station initiating an outgoing wireless telephone call or receiving an incoming wireless
`
`telephone call.
`
`51.
`
`One advantage of the claimed ʼ889 invention over the prior art is to reduce the
`
`power consumption of the display of a cell phone when the display is not needed. (See ’889
`
`patent at 1:40-52.)
`
`U.S. Patent No. RE 48,629
`
`52.
`
`Jason Alexander Trachewsky and Rajendra T. Moorti are the inventors of U.S.
`
`Patent No. RE 48,629 (the ’629 patent). A true and correct copy of the ’629 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit C.
`
`53.
`
`The ’629 patent resulted from the pioneering efforts of Messrs. Trachewsky and
`
`Moorti (hereinafter “the Inventors”) in the general area of wireless communication systems and
`
`more particularly to long training sequences of minimum peak-to-average power ratio which
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 15 of 82
`
`may be used in legacy systems. At the time of these pioneering efforts, conventionally
`
`implemented technology did not sufficiently address the problem of different wireless devices
`
`compliant with different standards or different versions of the same standard while enabling
`
`backward compatibility with legacy devices that avoids collisions. For example, in the 802.11a
`
`and 802.11g standards, each data packet starts with a preamble which includes a short training
`
`sequence followed by a long training sequence. The short and long training sequences are used
`
`for synchronization between the sender and the receiver. The long training sequence of 802.11a
`
`and 802.11g is defined such that each of sub-carriers -26 to +26, except for the subcarrier 0
`
`which is set to 0, has one binary phase shift keying constellation point, either +1 or -1.
`
`54.
`
`There existed a need to create a long training sequence of minimum peak-to-
`
`average ratio that uses more sub-carriers without interfering with adjacent channels.
`
`55.
`
`For example, the Inventors developed a wireless communications device,
`
`comprising: a signal generator that generates an extended long training sequence; and an Inverse
`
`Fourier Transformer operatively coupled to the signal generator, wherein the Inverse Fourier
`
`Transformer processes the extended long training sequence from the signal generator and
`
`provides an optimal extended long training sequence with a minimal peak-to-average ratio, and
`
`wherein at least the optimal extended long training sequence is carried by a greater number of
`
`subcarriers than a standard wireless networking configuration for an Orthogonal Frequency
`
`Division Multiplexing scheme, wherein the optimal extended long training sequence is carried
`
`by exactly 56 active sub-carriers, and wherein the optimal extended long training sequence is
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 16 of 82
`
`represented by encodings for indexed sub-carriers -28 to +28, excluding indexed sub-carrier 0
`
`which is set to zero, as follows:
`
`
`
`56.
`
`One advantage of the patented invention is that it provides an expanded long
`
`training sequence of minimum peak-to-average power ratio thereby decreasing power back-off.
`
`(See ’629 patent at 4:15-17.)
`
`57.
`
`Another advantage of the invention is that expanded long training sequence may
`
`be used by 802.11a and 802.11g devices for estimating the channel impulse response and by a
`
`receiver for estimating the carrier frequency offset between the transmitter clock and receiver
`
`clock. (See ’629 patent at 4:17-21.)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,416,862
`
`58.
`
`Carlos Aldana and Joonsuk Kim are the inventors of U.S. Patent No 8,416,862
`
`(“the ’862 patent”). A true and correct copy of the ’862 patent is attached as Exhibit D.
`
`59.
`
`The ’862 patent resulted from the pioneering efforts of Messrs. Aldana and Kim
`
`(hereinafter “the Inventors”) in the area of wireless communications systems using beamforming.
`
`These efforts resulted in the development of a method and system for the efficient feedback of
`
`channel information in a closed loop beamforming wireless communication system.
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2022 Page 17 of 82
`
`60.
`
`At the time of these pioneering efforts, the most widely implemented technology
`
`used to address reduced beam forming feedback information for wireless communications was to
`
`reduce the size of the feedback. For instance, in a 2x2 MIMO wireless communication, the
`
`feedback needs four elements that are all complex Cartesian coordinate values V11 V12;V21
`
`V22. In general, Vik=aik+j*bik, where aik and bik are values between -1, 1. Thus, with 1 bit
`
`express per each element for each of the real and imaginary components, aik and bik can be
`
`either -1/2 or +1/2, which requires 4x2x1=8 bits per tone. With 4 bit expressions per each
`
`element of V(f) in an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) 2x2 MIMO wireless
`
`communication, the number of bits required is 1728 per tone (e.g., 42*54*4=1728, 4 elements
`
`per tone, 2 bits for real and imaginary components per tone, 54 data tones per frame, and 4 bits
`
`per element), which requires overhead for a packet exchange that is too large for practical
`
`applications.
`
`61.
`
`The Inventors conceived of the invention claimed in the ’862 patent as a way to
`
`reduce beam forming feedback information for wireless communications.
`
`62.
`
`For example, the Inventors developed a method for feeding back transmitter
`
`beamforming information from a receiving wireless communication device to a transmitting
`
`wireless communication device, the method comprising: the receiving wireless communication
`
`device receiving a preamble sequence from the transmitting wireless device; the receiving
`
`wireless device estimating a channel response based upon the preamble sequence; the receiving
`
`wireless device determining an estimated transmitter beamforming unitary matrix (V) based
`
`upon the channel response and a receiver beamf