UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`DELL INC.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-00983
`Patent 8,155,012
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. VIJAY K. MADISETTI
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-1
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`DELL INC.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-00983
`Patent 8,155,012
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. VIJAY K. MADISETTI
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-1
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION & ASSIGNMENT
`
`1. My name is Vijay Madisetti, and I am a Professor of Electrical and
`
`Computer Engineering at Georgia Institute of Technology (“Georgia Tech”) in
`
`Atlanta, Georgia.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained by Patent Owner Chrimar Systems, Inc. to serve
`
`as a technical expert in this proceeding as well as in several district court
`
`litigations, including Chrimar Systems Inc. et al. v. Cisco Systems Inc., et. Al, Civil
`
`Action No. 4:13-cv-01300-JSW (N.D. Cal.); Chrimar Systems, Inc., et al. v.
`
`Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc., et al., Case No. 6:15-cv-163-JDL (E.D. Tex.); and
`
`Chrimar Systems Inc. et al. v. AMX, LLC, Civil Action No. 6:15–CV–164–JDL
`
`(E.D. Tex.).
`
`3.
`
`I have been asked to evaluate and opine on certain limited aspects of
`
`the Petition for Inter Partes Review in connection with Patent Owner’s
`
`Preliminary Response. Specifically, I have been asked to provide the following:
`
`a. an overview of the technology of U.S. Patent No. 8,155,012 (Ex.
`
`1001, “the ’012 Patent”);
`
`b. an overview of the technology of U.S. Patent No. 6,115,468 (Ex.
`
`1006, “De Nicolo ’468”);
`
`c. an overview of the technology of U.S. Patent No. 6,134,666 (Ex.
`
`1007, “De Nicolo ’666”); and
`
`
`
`1
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-2
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`d. a technical assessment as to whether I could create the proposed
`
`combination of De Nicolo ’468 with De Nicolo ’666 as described
`
`in the Petition, assuming for the sake of argument that the
`
`references include each claim element and could be combined.
`
`4.
`
`At this time, I have been asked to provide testimony only on the topics
`
`addressed in this declaration. Among other things, I have reviewed the Petition and
`
`its exhibits, including the declaration of Richard Seifert (Ex. 1002), the ’012
`
`Patent, De Nicolo ’468, and De Nicolo ’666, as well as orders from the district
`
`court litigations involving the ’012 Patent and Chrimar’s other patents in the light
`
`of my education, training and experience in the field.
`
`5.
`
`If the Board decides to institute this proceeding, and if asked to, I
`
`expect to offer additional opinions and analysis beyond those contained in this
`
`declaration.
`
`6.
`
` I am being compensated by Chrimar at the rate of $450 per hour for
`
`my time when working on this proceeding. My compensation is not tied in any
`
`way to the substance of my testimony or the outcome of this proceeding.
`
`II.
`
`SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
`
`7.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Technology in electronics and Electrical
`
`Communications Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) in
`
`1984. I received my Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences
`
`
`
`2
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-3
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`(EECS) from the University of California, Berkeley in 1989. I am currently a
`
`tenured Professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering at the Georgia Institute
`
`of Technology (“Georgia Tech”), and I have been on the faculty of Georgia Tech
`
`since 1989.
`
`8.
`
`I have been elected a Fellow of the IEEE, for contributions to
`
`embedded computing systems. The Fellow is the highest grade of membership of
`
`the IEEE, a world professional body consisting of over 300,000 electrical and
`
`electronics engineers, with only one‐tenth of one percent (0.1%) of the IEEE
`
`membership being elected to the Fellow grade each year. Election to Fellow is
`
`based upon votes cast by existing Fellows in IEEE.
`
`9.
`
`I have authored or co-authored over 100 reference articles in the area
`
`of electrical engineering. I have also authored, co-authored, or edited several books
`
`in the areas of electrical engineering, communications, signal processing,
`
`communications, and computer engineering, including VLSI Digital Signal
`
`Processors (1995) and The Digital Signal Processing Handbook (First & Second
`
`Editions) (1998, 2012), and recently, Cloud Computing (2013).
`
`10.
`
`I have been involved in research and technology in the area of
`
`distributed computer and information systems since the late 1980s, and my work in
`
`this area has focused on secure and efficient distribution of information over
`
`
`
`3
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-4
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`networks, synchronization of updates across a distributed network, and
`
`multiprocessing systems and tools.
`
`11.
`
`I have authored, co-authored, or edited several books in the past 20
`
`years, as detailed in my attached CV. I have also been awarded the 2006 Frederick
`
`Emmons Terman Medal by the American Society of Engineering Education for
`
`contributions to Electrical Engineering, including authoring a widely used textbook
`
`in the design of VLSI digital signal processors. I was awarded VHDL International
`
`Best Ph.D. Dissertation Advisor Award in 1997 and the NSF RI Award in 1990. I
`
`was Technical Program Chair for both the IEEE MASCOTS in 1994 and the IEEE
`
`Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Simulation in 1990. In 1989, I was
`
`recognized with the Ira Kay IEEE/ACM Best Paper Award for Best Paper
`
`presented at the IEEE Annual Simulation Symposium.
`
`12. Over the past 20 years, I have worked in and researched in the area of
`
`computer and communications networks and protocols in general, and in particular
`
`to LAN/Ethernet/WiFi/WAN/ IP networks, looking at the design of efficient
`
`protocols.
`
`13.
`
`I have been an active consultant to industry and various research
`
`laboratories (including Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Labs and
`
`Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory). My consulting work for
`
`MIT Lincoln Labs involved high resolution imaging for defense applications,
`
`
`
`4
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-5
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`where I worked in the area of prototyping complex and specialized computing
`
`systems. My consulting work for the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab (“APL”)
`
`mainly involved localization of objects in image fields, where I worked on
`
`identifying targets in video and other sensor fields and identifying computer
`
`architectures and circuits for power and space‐efficient designs.
`
`14.
`
`I have over 100 peer-reviewed publications issued from the early
`
`1980s to the present on topics related to computer engineering, computer sciences
`
`and wireless communications and digital system design.
`
`15.
`
`In sum, I have over 25 years of experience in research and
`
`development in the areas of computer engineering and electrical engineering as a
`
`professor, researcher and consultant.
`
`16. Exhibit 2016 is my recent and complete curriculum vitae, which
`
`details my educational and professional background and includes a listing of most
`
`of my publications.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF TECHNOLOGY OF THE ’012 PATENT
`
`17. The ’012 Patent discloses inventions related to managing networked
`
`devices (e.g., computers) that connect to a wired network using existing network
`
`cabling. The patent disclosure “relates generally to computer networks and, more
`
`particularly, to a network management and security system for managing, tracking,
`
`
`
`5
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-6
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`and identifying remotely located electronic equipment on a network.” (’012 Patent,
`
`col. 1:23–26).
`
`18. Embodiments of the patent disclose identifying an “asset,” such as a
`
`computer, “by attaching an external or internal device to the asset and
`
`communicating with that device using existing network wiring or cabling” (’012
`
`Patent, col. 1:66 – 2:2). The patent refers to the remote device as a “remote
`
`module.” An asset (e.g., computer) can be managed, tracked, or identified by using
`
`the remote module in conjunction with network monitoring equipment, referred to
`
`as a “central module,” to convey information about the asset to the central module.
`
`(’012 Patent, cols. 4:53-60, 6:7-13 and 8:66 - 9:7). A basic overview is shown in
`
`Figure 4 of the ’012 Patent (omitting the external devices):
`
`
`
`19. This information about the remote piece of networked equipment can
`
`be communicated over the same pairs of wires that carry data during normal
`
`operation without interfering with normal-operation data transmission. (’012
`
`Patent, col. 2:26–30) (“More particularly, it is desirable to provide a means for
`
`identification that feasibly employs the same cable (and, if desired, the same wires
`
`
`
`6
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-7
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`in the cable) that normally carries high frequency data communications in an
`
`existing network.”), 4:56-60 (“The communication system 15 and 16 described
`
`herein is particularly adapted to be easily implemented in conjunction with an
`
`existing computer network 17 while realizing minimal interference to the computer
`
`network.”).
`
`20. The embodiments of the patent provide that the central and remote
`
`modules work together to communicate information about the remote equipment or
`
`object using, inter alia, different magnitudes of direct current. (’012 Patent, col.
`
`3:29–32) (“The power signal to the communication device may also be fluctuated
`
`to provide useful information, such as status information, to the communication
`
`device.”), 6:51–54 (“In the first embodiment current sourced from central module
`
`15 to remote module 16 is modulated within remote module 16 and then returned
`
`to central module 15.”), 8:51-56 (“it is within the scope of the invention to source
`
`current from the central module and alter the flow of current from within the
`
`remote module 16a by changing the impedance of a circuit connected across the
`
`data communication link 2A.).
`
`21. The embodiments described in the patent show ways of fluctuating the
`
`current to provide useful information from the remote module to the central
`
`module by, inter alia, either changing the impedance (’012 patent, col. 8:49-57) or
`
`changing the applied voltage V (’012 patent, col. 8:22-31) in the circuit.
`
`
`
`7
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-8
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`22. Notably, the patent describes embodiments where the central module
`
`works in conjunction with the remote module by providing the power necessary for
`
`the remote module to convey information. In the context of the first disclosed
`
`embodiment of the patent (’012 Patent, col. 4:44–6:47), the central module
`
`contains power source supply voltage V and the remote module provides the
`
`resistance R (col. 6:10–13 (“altering the total current draw of the remote
`
`module”)).
`
`23. The current I flows through pairs of wires in the Ethernet cabling that
`
`connects a remote module to the central module. In this embodiment, the central
`
`module and the remote module operate jointly such that the remote module can
`
`provide different magnitudes of current because the central module can alter the
`
`voltage V, while the remote module can present a selectable resistance or series of
`
`resistances, R, to the circuit. In this embodiment, the different magnitudes of
`
`current is controlled by the resistor value switched into the circuit at the remote
`
`module. The voltage supplied by the central module works together with the
`
`resistor used by the remote module to produce different magnitudes of current,
`
`which are used to provide information about the remote device.
`
`24. Claim 1 of the ’012 Patent, for example, states the following:
`
`1. An adapted piece of Ethernet data terminal equipment
`comprising:
`an Ethernet connector comprising a plurality of contacts; and
`
`
`
`8
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-9
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`at least one path coupled across selected contacts, the selected
`contacts comprising at least one of the plurality of contacts of the
`Ethernet connector and at least another one of the plurality of
`contacts of the Ethernet connector,
`wherein distinguishing information about the piece of Ethernet
`data terminal equipment is associated to impedance within the at
`least one path.
`
`25. Figure 3 of the patent shows one embodiment of the invention in
`
`which a remote module (element 16, highlighted in blue) works together with a
`
`central module (element 15, highlighted in red) to convey information about “PC
`
`3a” to a central module over standard twisted pair Ethernet cabling.
`
`
`In this embodiment, the central module provides a DC power signal to
`
`26.
`
`the remote module from the signal modulator 7 to the isolation power supply 13
`
`
`
`9
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-10
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`inside the remote module, as denoted by the red line. Information about PC 3a is
`
`sent back via the blue line from the signal transmitter 12 to the signal receiver 6.
`
`The hub (element 1) and central module (element 15) are examples of centralized
`
`equipment, while the remote module (element 16) is attached to “remotely located
`
`electronic workstations” (e.g., elements 3a, 3b, 3c, or 3d). In Figure 3, the PCs are
`
`examples of what the claims refer to as “piece[s] of equipment” or “object[s].” The
`
`patent also discloses the integration of the central or remote modules into the
`
`respective central or remote equipment or object.
`
`27. As illustrated in Figure 5 and Figure 7 below, the patent shows how
`
`the remote module (highlighted in blue) works together with a central module
`
`(highlighted in red) to convey information about a PC to a central module over
`
`standard twisted pair Ethernet cabling. This information is conveyed to the central
`
`module using impedance in a path in the remote module, which can then be used to
`
`alter the resulting current and/or voltage.
`
`
`
`10
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-11
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`28. To accomplish this goal, the patent describes having a direct electrical
`
`connection between the central module and each remote module. The diagram
`
`below refers to the invention being used within an exemplary configuration
`
`consisting of a central module (CM) and four remote modules (RM):
`
`
`
`11
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-12
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`
`
`29. This arrangement is commonly referred to as a “star” or “hub and
`
`spoke” configuration. This diagram of a “star” or “hub and spoke” configuration
`
`illustrates the arrangement of the remote modules and central module as disclosed
`
`in the patent.
`
`30. The patent provides that the central and remote modules work
`
`together to communicate information about the remote equipment or “asset” by,
`
`using different magnitudes of current in one or more pairs of wires in the cable.
`
`For example, the patent discloses and claims a piece of remote equipment, such as
`
`a computer, having at least one path coupled across selected contacts of an
`
`Ethernet connector. Because the remote module may be wholly contained within
`
`the computer, the computer is configured to convey information about itself using
`
`an impedance in a path in the device (e.g., ’012 Patent, claim 1), which can be used
`
`even when that computer is without its operating power.
`
`31. Different magnitudes of current flow through pairs of wires in the
`
`Ethernet cabling that connects a remote module to the central module. The central
`
`
`
`12
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-13
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`module can alter the voltage V, while the remote module can present different
`
`impedances to the circuit, such as a selectable resistance or series of resistances, R.
`
`In certain embodiments, the different magnitudes of current are controlled by the
`
`resistor value switched into the circuit at the remote module (e.g., ’012 Patent, col.
`
`8:49-55). The voltage supplied by the central module works together with the
`
`resistor(s) used by the remote module to produce different magnitudes of direct
`
`current, which provides information about the asset (e.g., PC).
`
`32. Another key concept disclosed in the embodiments of the patent is
`
`that the system functions even when the remote equipment is powered off (i.e.,
`
`without its operating power). According to the patent, a central piece of equipment
`
`could be capable of identifying networked devices without operating power being
`
`applied to the remote equipment. (’012 Patent, col. 4:65-67 (“The asset aware
`
`patchpanel would then be capable of identifying the existence and location of
`
`network assets without power being applied to the assets.”)). The patent discloses
`
`that this ability of the system to function—even wen the piece of remotely located
`
`equipment is powered off—enables a range of applications for their inventions, as
`
`it notes that “other objects are within the scope of the invention, such as desks
`
`204b, monitors 204c, computer pointing devices, other computers (powered and
`
`unpowered), and clothing.” (’012 Patent, col. 13:22-25).
`
`
`
`13
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-14
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`IV. SUMMARY OF DE NICOLO ’468
`
`33. De Nicolo ’468 is directed to indiscriminately and continuously
`
`providing operating power to multiple devices, such as IP phones, connected to an
`
`Ethernet network. “An Ethernet device power transmission system provides
`
`electrical power to devices such as Ethernet telephones and related equipment over
`
`a 4-wire Ethernet connection without any need for requiring premises having an
`
`existing 4-wire Ethernet system” (De Nicolo ’468, col. 2:30-32).
`
`34. Figure 3 of De Nicolo ’468, reproduced below, shows that a DC
`
`voltage from power supply 144 is provided to each connected device via lines 142
`
`and 146. There is no disclosure in De Nicolo ’468 of a separate or direct
`
`connection that is distinct and separate for each connected device from the power
`
`supply 144. Thus, each Ethernet device cannot provide information about itself,
`
`nor can work together with a central module to do so, on a path that also utilizes
`
`the Ethernet contacts and current magnitudes as per the requirements of the claims.
`
`
`
`14
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-15
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`
`
`35. Notably, the system described in De Nicolo ’468 assumes that all
`
`devices connected to the Ethernet cable (e.g., load 1 (98), load 2 (100), and load 3
`
`(102) in Figure 3) are designed to and can accept remote power via the Ethernet
`
`cable (line 102). De Nicolo ’468 further describes how power supply 144 is
`
`“preferably [] an uninterruptible power supply (UPS)” so that in the event of a
`
`power outage, the IP telephones can remain powered. (De Nicolo ’468, col. 3:36-
`
`39).
`
`36. De Nicolo ’468 assumes that the telephones (or other devices
`
`connected to the Ethernet wire link) are captive – that is, they are all of a known
`
`design and capable of receiving and managing remote power. As shown in Figure
`
`3, each Ethernet device includes a power processor 149 to “perform[] any DC-DC
`
`power conversion and filtering required.” (De Nicolo ’468, col. 3:47-50). Thus, the
`
`
`
`15
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-16
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`system described in De Nicolo ’468 has no need to determine any information
`
`about the Ethernet devices as it assumes that each connected device is capable of
`
`receiving and managing power over the Ethernet pairs.
`
`V.
`
`SUMMARY OF DE NICOLO ’666
`
`37.
`
` De Nicolo ’666 is directed to managing the power resources of a
`
`multi-card modular electronic system. Such modular systems typically include a
`
`housing and a plurality of removable electronic cards or boards. (See De Nicolo
`
`’666, col. 1:14-25). The housing of such systems have “a back plane having a
`
`plurality of connectors to which a number of line cards or processor cards are
`
`connected.” (De Nicolo ’666, col. 1:15-17). Such cards connect to the system and
`
`each other via the back plane. As stated in De Nicolo ’666, “[t]he back plane [of
`
`the housing] provides electrical interconnections to the process cards, such as data,
`
`power, ground and signaling.” (col. 1:19-21).
`
`38. As noted in De Nicolo ’666, “it is frequently a problem that an
`
`individual responsible for such systems may inadvertently place too high a power
`
`demand upon a particular power supply configuration of such a system through the
`
`additional of a particular process card to a previously functioning system.” (col. 1:
`
`36-41). In other words, such systems have a limited amount of power to supply, as
`
`governed by the housing power supplies, and the removable cards may demand
`
`
`
`16
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-17
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`more power than the housing has to offer. As a result, the system may shut down,
`
`become unable to start up, or actually damage the equipment. Col. 1, lines 41-42.
`
`39. To address this problem, De Nicolo ’666 discloses adding three
`
`components to an existing modular system: (1) a “power supervisor”; (2) circuitry
`
`in each modular card that will specify a maximum power requirement via an
`
`analog voltage signal; and (3) a dedicated query conductor line in the back plane so
`
`the power supervisor can read the power requirement of each inserted card before
`
`operational power is supplied to the card.
`
`40. Figure 1, reproduced below, shows the power supervisor 14
`
`(highlighted in yellow); circuitry in modular card 26 (highlighted in green); and
`
`query line 28 (highlighted in red).
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-18
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`41.
`
` As De Nicolo ’666 explains, power supervisor 14 is responsible for
`
`allocating the power resources of the system to determine if a newly inserted card
`
`will receive power. “The supervisor may then weigh existing power supply
`
`resources of the modular electronic system with existing current/power demand
`
`and make a decision to allow power-up of the card if sufficient overhead is
`
`available, or, alternatively, make a decision to deny power-up of the card if
`
`insufficient additional current/power resources are available.” Col. 1, line 60 – col.
`
`2, line 1. However, the power supervisor has no capability of providing operating
`
`power to any modular card—it is primarily a broker of sorts.
`
`42. Power supervisor obtains information about the available power
`
`resources from the system’s power supplies 18, 20, and 22 via link 16. “[E]ach
`
`power supply module 18, 20, 22 may have stored in it a relatively permanent
`
`memory having a three (or more) bit identification code that can be read by power
`
`supervisor 14 over communications link 16.” Col. 2, line 57-60.
`
`43. When a new card is inserted into the system, power supervisor, via
`
`query line 28, determines what the maximum power requirements are for the newly
`
`inserted card. If there are sufficient power resources available, power supervisor
`
`sends an “enable” signal via query line 28 to power circuit soft start 44 to turn on.
`
`“If microprocessor 24 decides that sufficient power resources are available to
`
`permit module 26 to be turned on with its now known maximum power
`
`
`
`18
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-19
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`requirement, then microprocessor 24 sends a signal ‘PWRUP’ on line 40 to a
`
`switch shown here as transistor Ql.” Col. 3, lines 63-67. The modular card then
`
`draws operating power from Vcc line 46 through power circuit soft start 44 as long
`
`as the “enable” signal is present. “Power circuit soft start 44 operates in a
`
`conventional manner, such as that shown in FIG. 2, to slowly turn on power
`
`available on line 46 and apply it to the power consuming circuitry of module 26
`
`denoted ‘A’ while the ENABLE signal is asserted on line 42.” (CITE) Power to the
`
`card is provided “ over line 74 from a backplane connection to Vcc 76. Prestart
`
`area 72’s circuitry is powered by connection to line 74, but the bulk of the power-
`
`consuming circuitry of module 66 remains unpowered until the prestart area 72
`
`receives instructions from power supervisor 64 to turn on module 66.” (Id.
`
`(quoting Ex. 1020, De Nicolo ’666, at 4:63-67).)
`
`VI. PETITIONER’S PROPOSED COMBINATION
`
`44.
`
`I have reviewed the petition and the declaration of Richard Seifert
`
`regarding Petitioner’s proposal of combining De Nicolo ’468’s teachings with De
`
`Nicolo ’666’s teachings. For the purposes of this declaration, I was not asked to
`
`evaluate whether the De Nicolo ’468 and De Nicolo ’666 references, taken alone
`
`or in combination, disclose the individual elements of the claims at issue. Should
`
`the Board institute this inter partes review, I expect to offer opinions that the De
`
`
`
`19
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-20
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Nicolo references, whether viewed alone or in combination, fail to disclose,
`
`anticipate, or render obvious certain claims and/or claim elements.
`
`45. Mr. Seifert states that “De Nicolo ’468’s system in Figure 3 could
`
`include a single remote device (e.g., a device that includes load 98)” and that “[i]n
`
`this system, the skilled artisan could have included De Nicolo ’666’s power
`
`supervisor 14 (see Figure 1) into De Nicolo ’468’s power supply module 144 (see
`
`Figure 3) and included De Nicolo ’666’s electronic module 26 (see Figure 1) into
`
`De Nicolo ’468’s power processor 149.” Ex. 1002, Seifert Decl. at ¶ 53.
`
`46.
`
`I was asked by Chrimar if I could replicate the system based on Mr.
`
`Seifert’s description in order to explain how it would operate. Based on the
`
`information provided by Mr. Seifert, I cannot replicate his proposed combination
`
`without significant experimentation and a number of engineering design decisions.
`
`Many of those design decisions would be heavily influenced by information that is
`
`not discussed in Mr. Seifert’s declaration and not disclosed in either of the De
`
`Nicolo references. In my opinion, it would require hindsight consideration of the
`
`’012 Patent itself in order to combine the De Nicolo references in a way that would
`
`result in the claimed inventions of the ’012 Patent (if such a combination could be
`
`done at all to result in the claimed inventions).
`
`47.
`
`In addition, it is not clear why any person skilled in the art would
`
`want to make the combination Mr. Seifert proposes. In my view, Mr. Seifert’s
`
`
`
`20
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-21
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`proposed combination is an attempt to use the ’012 Patent as a roadmap for
`
`combining two unrelated and divergent references (De Nicolo ’666 and De Nicolo
`
`’468) without sufficient explanation of how to make the combination or what the
`
`benefits would be in such a combination even if someone could figure out a way to
`
`combine the references.
`
`48. Below is a basic representation of Mr. Seifert’s alleged combination
`
`of adding the power supervisor (highlighted in yellow) of De Nicolo ’666 to the
`
`power supply of De Nicolo ’468, and adding the electronic module (highlighted in
`
`green) of De Nicolo ’666 to the power processor of De Nicolo ’468.
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-22
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`49.
`
` Circled in red are the open connections to the dedicated query line 28
`
`that is intended to run between the electronic module and the power supervisor; as
`
`well as the Vcc connection to line 46 from De Nicolo ’666 that is used to power
`
`the electronic module. Mr. Seifert does not provide any explanation as to how
`
`these connections can or will be made in his proposed combined system. There are
`
`several technical problems that render the proposed combination unworkable.
`
`50. Below is a demonstrative describing the incompatibility of De Nicolo
`
`’468 and De Nicolo ’666. As disclosed in De Nicolo ’468, power supply 144 is
`
`connected to all devices, and therefore, it is not possible for the power supervisor
`
`of De Nicolo ’666 to be able to turn on a particular supply for a particular device,
`
`without turning it on for all devices. This alone ensures that the combination will
`
`not work.
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-23
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`51. Mr. Seifert attempts to remedy this basic problem by stating that the
`
`De Nicolo ’468 system would be modified to only include one power supply and
`
`one device. But that proposal is contrary to the purpose of De Nicolo ’468, and
`
`even if the system were a one-to-one arrangement, there would be no reason to
`
`selectively operate the power supply as the single device would not draw more
`
`power than the supply can provide.
`
`52. Mr. Seifert simply states that “[t]his is a routine, common sense
`
`design choice that is well within the skilled artisan’s knowledge and capabilities.
`
`This modification would maintain the De Nicolo ’468 circuitry’s existing purpose
`
`and functionality—providing power and data over the Ethernet pairs 128 and
`
`powering the load 98 via the power processor 149. It would also enable the power
`
`processor 149 to power the load 98 in the selective manner that De Nicolo ’666
`
`teaches.” Id. I disagree.
`
`53. Mr. Seifert has not provided any details as to how the parts of these
`
`systems would be or could be combined. Mr. Seifert appears to state, in a
`
`conclusory fashion, that this is a mere simple substitution of known elements in a
`
`conventional manner. From Mr. Seifert’s declaration, I was unable to discern any
`
`facts or data supporting this proposition.
`
`54. Mr. Seifert does not identify the claimed “path” in De Nicolo ’468,
`
`nor does he provide any explanation as to how the claimed “path” could exist in
`
`
`
`23
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-24
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`the proposed combination. Further, Mr. Seifert does not explain how the electronic
`
`module of De Nicolo ’666 would be re-designed such that it could combine the
`
`query line (the dedicated analog communication line) and the Vcc line (which
`
`provides operational power to the electronic module card through the power circuit
`
`soft start). Nor does Mr. Seifert explain how these connections could be combined
`
`with the Ethernet connections in De Nicolo ’468 without disrupting the Ethernet
`
`data signals.
`
`55. Mr. Seifert also fails to explain how the power supply of De Nicolo
`
`’468 could be modified to include the power supervisor of De Nicolo ’666, which
`
`is explicitly separate from the power supplies of De Nicolo ’666. In fact, in both
`
`De Nicolo ’468 and De Nicolo ’666, the power supplies are not selectively
`
`operable. Instead, the power supplies in both systems provide constant power. Mr.
`
`Seifert does not explain how or why one would modify the power supply of De
`
`Nicolo ’468 to make it selectively operable. In particular, Petitioner alleges that the
`
`combined system must be envisioned as having only one power supply and only
`
`one Ethernet device. If that is the case, then there would be no reason to provide a
`
`selectively operable power supply in De Nicolo ’468.
`
`56.
`
`In addition, Mr. Seifert does not explain, at any level, how or where
`
`the claimed “path” would exist in the combined system, such as to explain how the
`
`claimed “path” would be routed through the power processor and/or the load of De
`
`
`
`24
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2015-25
`IPR2016-001151 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Nicolo ’468, and does not explain how the claimed “path” would then be modified
`
`to connect to the additional parts from De Nicolo ’666. These are non-trivial issues
`
`as there is nothing in De Nicolo ’468 to explain how the power supply would
`
`function if it is not supplying operational power to the connected devices.
`
`57.
`
`In summary, without further study or experimentation, neither I nor a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art can replicate his proposed combination. To create
`
`this type of system, I would have to engage in several engineering design decisions
`
`with the express purpose of designing a system to selectively power the load of De
`
`Nicolo ’468. To create this combined system, at a minimum, I would have to:
`
`a. re-design the power supply of De Nicolo ’468 to include some type
`
`logic circuitry or microprocessor so the power supply would be
`
`selectively operable as neither of the De Nicolo references
`
`discloses a selectively operable power supply;
`
`b. redesign the power supply architecture of De Nicolo ’468 so that
`
`each device is separately connected to a power supply that can be
`
`selectively o
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
