UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ERICSSON INC. AND
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case No. Unassigned
`Patent 7,359,971
`____________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF CLAIMS 12, 14-15, 18, 21-22, 25,
`27, 33, and 37 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,359,971
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`IV.
`
`V.
`
`INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
`Summary of Unpatentability Grounds .................................................. 1
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES, STANDING, AND FEES .............................. 1
`Mandatory Notices ................................................................................ 1
`Certification of Grounds for Standing ................................................... 2
`Fees ........................................................................................................ 2
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ’971 PATENT ......................................................... 3
`Subject Matter of the ’971 Patent .......................................................... 3
`SUMMARY OF PRIOR ART ...................................................................... 5
`Packet Reservation Multiple Access (PRMA) ...................................... 5
`Sending IP Packets Over Wireless ATM .............................................. 8
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ........................................................................11
`Isochronous – Claim 12 .......................................................................11
`No Periodic Variation – Claim 14 .......................................................13
`Packet-Centric Protocol – Claim 12 ....................................................14
`Means-Plus-Function Terms ...............................................................17
`VI. THERE IS A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE
`CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE.........................................25
`Ground 1: The Combination of Dyson and Raychaudhuri Renders
`Claims 12, 14, 15, 21, 22, 25, 27, 33 and 37 Obvious Under 35 U.S.C.
`§ 103 ....................................................................................................25
`Ground 2: The Combination of Dyson/Raychaudhuri with Ellesson
`Renders Claim 18 Obvious Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 ...........................67
`VII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................72
`
`i
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,359,971 to Jorgensen (“the ’971 Patent”)
`
`CV of Zygmunt Haas
`
`Expert Declaration of Zygmunt Haas
`
`A Dynamic Packet Reservation Multiple Access Scheme for Wireless
`ATM by Deborah A. Dyson and Zygmunt J. Haas (“Dyson”)
`
`WATMnet: A Prototype Wireless ATM System for Multimedia
`Personal Communication by D. Raychaudhuri et al. (“Raychaudhuri”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,459,682 to Ellesson et al. (“Ellesson”)
`
`A Multimedia Synchronization Model and Its Implementation in
`Transport Protocols by Chun-Chuan Yang and Jau-Hsiung Huang
`(“Yang”)
`
`for Local Wireless
`Packet Reservation Multiple Access
`Communications by D.J. Goodman et al. (“Goodman”)
`
`PRMA/DA: A New Media Access Control Protocol for Wireless ATM
`by Jeong Geun Kim et al. (“Kim”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,287,347 to Spanke
`
`IV Infringement Contentions, Exhibit C.
`
`Computer Dictionary & Handbook by Charles J. Sippl et al., 3rd ed.
`(1981) (“Computer Dictionary”)
`
`U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/092542
`
`Computer Networks by Andrew S. Tanenbaum, 3rd ed. (1996)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,754,181 to Elliott
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,185,860 to Wu
`
`Expert Declaration of Dr. Sylvia Hall-Ellis
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`1028
`
`“SWAN: An Indoor Wireless ATM network” by E. Hyden, et al. (1995)
`
`Mobile Cellular Telecommunications: Analog and Digital Systems by
`William C.Y. Lee, 2nd ed. (1995)
`
`NEC Combines High-Speed IP Packet Processing with ATM
`Switching, Japan Industrial Journal, May 22, 1998.
`
`RFC 2063
`
`RFC 1483
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,916,691 to Goodman
`
`Wireless ATM and AD-HOC Networks: Protocols and Architectures,
`C-K Toh (1997)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,862,622 to Jorgensen
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,640,248 Jorgensen
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,769,811 to Eckberg, Jr. et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,872,160 to Hemmady et al.
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`I. INTRODUCTION
`
`Ericsson
`
`Inc. and Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson
`
`(collectively,
`
`“Petitioners”) request inter partes review (“IPR”) under 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 and
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq. of Claims 12, 14-15, 18, 21-22, 25, 27, 33, and 37 of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 7,359,971 (“the ’971 Patent”).
`
`Petitioners assert that there is a reasonable likelihood that the challenged
`
`claims are unpatentable and request review of, and cancellation of, the challenged
`
`claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
`
`Summary of Unpatentability Grounds
`
`Ground
`1
`
`Summary
`Claims 12, 14, 15, 21, 22, 25, 27, 33, and 37 are obvious in view
`of Dyson and Raychaudhuri
`Claim 18 is obvious in view of Dyson, Raychaudhuri, and
`Ellesson
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES, STANDING, AND FEES
`
`2
`
`Mandatory Notices
`
`Real Party in Interest: The real parties in interest are Ericsson Inc. and
`
`Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson.
`
`Related Matters: The ’971 Patent is subject to a pending lawsuit entitled
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-00577-
`
`JRG (E.D. Tex.) in which Petitioners Ericsson Inc. and Telefonaktiebolaget LM
`
`Ericsson are defendants. In addition, Petitioners have filed petitions for IPR against
`1
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`other patents held by Patent Owner, including IPR2018-00727 against U.S. Patent
`
`No. 6,628,629, IPR2018-00758 and IPR2018-00782 against U.S. Patent No.
`
`RE46,206, and IPR2018-01007 against U.S. Patent No. 7,412,517, all of which share
`
`the same specification as the ’971 Patent.
`
`Lead Counsel: Lead Counsel is Brian W. Oaks, Reg. No. 44,981 of Baker
`
`Botts L.L.P., and Back-up Counsel is Megan V. LaDriere, Reg. No. 75,995 of Baker
`
`Botts L.L.P.
`
`Service Information: Baker Botts L.L.P., 98 San Jacinto Boulevard, Suite
`
`1500, Austin, Texas 78701-4078; Tel. (512) 322-2500; Fax (512) 322-2501; Baker
`
`Botts L.L.P., 2001 Ross Ave., Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75201; Tel. (214) 953-6500;
`
`Fax (214) 953-6503. Petitioners consent to service by electronic mail at
`
`Ericsson_971IPR@bakerbotts.com. A Power of Attorney is filed concurrently
`
`herewith under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b).
`
`Certification of Grounds for Standing
`
`Petitioners certify that the ’971 Patent is available for IPR. Petitioners are not
`
`barred or estopped from requesting IPR of the ’971 Patent.
`
`Fees
`
`The Office is authorized to charge any fees that become due in connection
`
`with this Petition to Deposit Account No. 02-0384, Ref. No. 017997.1308, as well
`
`2
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`as any additional fees that might be due in connection with this Petition.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ’971 PATENT
`
`Subject Matter of the ’971 Patent
`
`The ’971 Patent describes a wireless telecommunications network and a
`
`method for providing access to the wireless medium for transmission of data. EX.
`
`1001, Abstract. The claims focus on the well-known concept of isochronous
`
`reservation of slots in transmission frames of such a network. The ’971 Patent
`
`specification recognizes that certain types of traffic may require a particular
`
`assignment of slots: “For calls that are sensitive to jitter, meaning calls that are time
`
`sensitive, it is important to maintain an isochronous (i.e., in phase with respect to
`
`time) connection.” EX. 1001, 62:2-5; EX. 1003, ¶¶ 40-42. Figure 14 of the ’971
`
`Patent illustrates two different types of isochronous reservations—one with no
`
`periodic variation and one with a periodic variation:
`
`3
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`The ’971 Patent provides a specific example of “vertical reservation 1480”
`
`(“no periodic variation” in annotated Fig. 14) and explains that this vertical
`
`reservation “shows a jitter sensitive signal receiving the same slot [1422] for
`
`downlink communications in each frame” (e.g., frame n, frame n+1, frame n+2, etc.).
`
`EX. 1001, 62:7-12. The ’971 Patent also provides an example of “diagonal
`
`reservation 1482” (“periodic variation” in Fig. 14) that shows “a jitter sensitive
`
`signal receiving a slot varying by a period of one between sequential frames.” EX.
`
`1001, 62:12-17. The ’971 Patent specification uses an “advanced reservation
`
`algorithm” to “assign the slots from the highest priority to the lowest priority,
`
`exhausting the number of available slots in future frames.” EX. 1001, 62:46-49; see
`
`4
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`also EX. 1003, ¶ 43.
`
`IV.
`
`SUMMARY OF PRIOR ART
`
`As explained by Dr. Haas (EX. 1003), reserving slots in future frames was
`
`well-known before the priority date. The following prior art demonstrates that the
`
`challenged claims would have been obvious to a POSITA.
`
`Packet Reservation Multiple Access (PRMA)
`As described below, both Goodman and Dyson disclose a scheme called
`
`“Packet Reservation Multiple Access” (“PRMA”) for reserving isochronous future
`
`slots for constant bit rate (CBR) packets transmitted in a wireless Asynchronous
`
`Transfer Mode (ATM) network.1 Both disclose using PRMA in a system where the
`
`wireless bandwidth is divided in the time domain, so that multiple devices share the
`
`bandwidth over time. EX. 1008, 885-86; EX. 1004, 688. PRMA provides wireless
`
`network stations access to the shared frequency channel by reserving isochronous
`
`time slots in multiple future frames for transmission of packets between a wireless
`
`1 An ATM network establishes a virtual circuit between two endpoints of the
`
`communication, such that data can be exchanged. EX. 1019 at 628-29. In a wireless
`
`ATM network, these virtual circuits are established over the air interface between
`
`base stations and wireless network stations. EX. 1019 at 628.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`network station and the network.
`
`Goodman, published in 1989, is one of the earliest disclosures regarding the
`
`PRMA scheme. EX. 1003, ¶¶ 45-47. In general, Goodman’s PRMA scheme builds
`
`on the ALOHA contention protocol,2 by requiring a terminal to initial contend for
`
`access to a slot, but “[w]hen [the terminal] successfully transmits a speech packet, it
`
`reserves that slot in future frames and there are no subsequent collisions with packets
`
`from other terminals.” Id.; EX. 1003, ¶¶ 47-51. Dyson, published in 1997,
`
`incorporates the PRMA disclosure as it relates to CBR traffic, and further proposes
`
`enhancements for variable bit rate (VBR) traffic. EX. 1004, 687.
`
`1. Dyson3
`Dyson discloses a “Dynamic Packet Reservation Multiple Access” (DPRMA)
`
`2 The ’971 Patent similarly explains that “[t]he radio contention method of the
`
`present invention builds upon aspects of the ‘Slotted Aloha’ method developed by
`
`L. Roberts in 1972, as a refinement of the ‘Aloha’ method developed by N.
`
`Abramson in the early 1970’s, and so-called bit-mapped reservation protocols.” EX.
`
`1001, 58:60-64.
`
`3 “A Dynamic Packet Reservation Multiple Access Scheme for Wireless ATM,” by
`
`Deborah A. Dyson and Zygmunt J. Haas was published by at least July 8, 1997, was
`
`6
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`scheme in a wireless ATM network. EX. 1004, 687. DPRMA is an extension of
`
`Goodman’s earlier PRMA protocol that is “more suited for the combination of both
`
`VBR and [CBR] traffic.” EX. 1004, 687; EX. 1008, 889. In citing to Goodman,
`
`Dyson discloses that, as an extension of PRMA, DPRMA incorporates the
`
`functionality of PRMA for packetized voice transmission (i.e., CBR traffic). EX.
`
`1004, 688 (“[W]ith only voice users present, the system reverts back into PRMA.”);
`
`id. 687 (recognizing that PRMA is “one of the most noteworthy schemes for
`
`packetized voice transmission”); id. (“[DPRMA] is based on the principles of
`
`PRMA.”); EX. 1003, ¶ 52.
`
`As Dyson describes, users (i.e., wireless network stations) in a PRMA system
`
`share the resources of one frequency channel using a contention process to initially
`
`gain access to slots of the channel. EX. 1004, 688; EX. 1008, 886. Dyson explains
`
`for CBR (e.g., voice) traffic, once a user in a PRMA network “is successful in
`
`transmitting in a slot, the same slot in every subsequent frame is reserved for this
`
`user.” EX. 1004, 688. The process continues where “[e]ach user transmits in its
`
`reserved slot until it no longer has any more packets to send. Then the user leaves
`
`publicly accessible at that time, and is § 102(b) prior art. EX. 1017, ¶¶ 30-34, 50.
`
`Dyson was not considered during the prosecution of the ’971 Patent.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`its next reserved slot empty, [which] informs the base station that the user releases
`
`its reservation.” EX. 1004, 688. Thus, for voice traffic, DPRMA (like PRMA)
`
`reserves the same slot in subsequent, future frames for transmission of additional
`
`voice packets, until the user has no more packets to transmit (e.g., the talkspurt
`
`ended). EX. 1003, ¶¶ 53-56.
`
`Sending IP Packets Over Wireless ATM
`The ’971 Patent includes claims directed to reserving slots for data packets of
`
`an IP flow in future transmission frames. Dyson does not specify or limit that the
`
`packets must be data packets of an IP flow. However, as evidenced below, it was
`
`well-known that IP packets are one type of packet transmitted over a wireless ATM
`
`network. EX. 1003, ¶¶ 57-62.
`
`1. Raychaudhuri4
`Raychaudhuri discloses a wireless ATM network (WATMnet) for multimedia
`
`4 “WATMnet: A Prototype Wireless ATM System for Multimedia Personal
`
`Communication,” by D. Raychaudhuri et al. was published by at least July 26, 1996,
`
`was publicly accessible at that time, and thus is § 102(b) prior art. EX. 1017, ¶¶ 40-
`
`44, 50. Raychaudhuri was not considered during the prosecution of the ’971 Patent.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`personal communication that transports IP packets over an ATM connection in a
`
`wireless Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) network, where the wireless
`
`bandwidth is divided in the time domain, just like the ATM connections in the
`
`wireless networks of Goodman and Dyson. EX. 1005, 469; EX. 1003, ¶ 58.
`
`Raychaudhuri’s WATMnet architecture provides “[i]ntegrated ATM services (ABR,
`
`VBR, CBR) with QoS control” to provide for “ubiquitous personal multimedia
`
`communication and computing applications.” EX. 1005, 470, 477. Raychaudhuri
`
`discloses that the wireless network stations can communicate with devices in the
`
`wired ATM network using IP packets. EX. 1005, 472.
`
`Raychaudhuri explains the benefit of its WATMnet system as being “capable
`
`of providing integrated multimedia communication services to mobile terminals”
`
`such that there is “seamless support of network-based multimedia applications on
`
`9
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`both fixed and portable devices.” EX. 1005, 469; EX. 1003, ¶ 59. Specifically,
`
`Raychaudhuri discloses using a dynamic MAC protocol that supports various
`
`transport services such as average bit rate (ABR), variable bit rate (VBR), and CBR
`
`transport services. EX. 1005, 469 (Abstract). In the transmission of uplink
`
`information, Raychaudhuri discloses a “contention access (slotted ALOHA) control
`
`subframe, followed by reserved ABR, VBR, and CBR data slots.” EX. 1005, 474.
`
`In handling CBR traffic, Raychaudhuri discloses that “CBR VCs [Virtual
`
`Circuits] are assigned fixed periodic slots according to the required bit-rate.” Id.
`
`Further, with CBR, “[t]he positions of the assigned slots within a MAC subframe
`
`are maintained relatively static in order to facilitate operation of low complexity
`
`telephone terminals and also to reduce the control signaling load on the wireless
`
`link.” Id. In other words, Raychaudhuri reserves consistent slots over time for the
`
`CBR traffic. EX. 1003, ¶¶ 60-61. As explained above, Dyson treats CBR traffic in
`
`a similar manner, specifically reserving the same slot in each future subsequent
`
`frame, until all voice packets are transmitted. See Section IV.A.1; EX. 1004, 688.
`
`While Raychaudhuri discloses a system to provide integrated ATM services (ABR,
`
`VBR, CBR) with QoS control, it acknowledges that a specific algorithm or
`
`implementation was not yet finalized (although one was proposed in Dyson). EX.
`
`1005, 474.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`Thus, Raychaudhuri provides an wireless IP-over-ATM network in order to
`
`provide integrated multimedia communication services to wireless network stations.
`
`EX. 1003, ¶ 62.
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`The Phillips standard governs interpretation of the claims in the ’971 Patent.
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312-13 (Fed. Cir. 2005). The ’971 Patent
`
`expires on July 9, 2019, and thus the ’971 Patent will expire during the pendency of
`
`this IPR. Accordingly, Petitioners have applied the Phillips standard to construe the
`
`following claim terms.
`
`Isochronous – Claim 12
`The ’971 Patent uses the term “isochronous” in the claims, the abstract, and
`
`the detailed description. The ’971 Patent describes “isochronous” as “consistent
`
`timed access of network bandwidth for time-sensitive voice and video” and “in phase
`
`with respect to time” such that “the data [is] dispersed in the same slot between
`
`frames, or in slots having a periodic variation between frames.” EX. 1001, 13:63-
`
`64, 62:4-6. The ’971 Patent illustrates isochronous reservations in Figure 14,
`
`reproduced below.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`Specifically, Figure 14 illustrates a “two-dimensional block diagram 1400 of the
`
`advanced reservation algorithm” with “isochronous advance reservations” of slots
`
`for frame N and future frames (e.g., N+1 to N+x). EX. 1001, 61:40-41. The grey
`
`slots in frames N+1 to N+x indicate “equal time spaced slot reservations in future
`
`frames” for particular data flows. EX. 1001, 61:11-12. The description and
`
`illustration of isochronous reservations also are consistent with dictionary
`
`definitions of isochronous, which recite “having a regular periodicity.” EX. 1012,
`
`267. Thus, based on the above discussion, a POSITA would have understood the
`
`term “isochronous” to mean “consistent timed access interval.” See EX. 1003, ¶¶
`
`12
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`65-66. For avoidance of doubt, this “consistent timed access interval” includes both
`
`a periodic variation between slots (“a consistent time interval other than the frame
`
`duration interval”) and no periodic variation between slots (“a consistent time
`
`interval equal to the frame duration interval”), as discussed below. EX. 1003, ¶ 66.
`
`No Periodic Variation – Claim 14
`The ’971 Patent uses the term “no periodic variation” in the claims, the
`
`abstract, and the detailed description. The ’971 Patent does not set forth a special
`
`meaning for this term. However, the specification describes “vertical reservation
`
`1480” of Figure 14 (in red) as showing “a jitter sensitive signal receiving the same
`
`slot for downlink communications in each frame.” EX. 1001, 62:7-9.
`
`13
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`As an example, “[i]f the frame-to-frame interval is 0.5 ms, then a slot will be
`
`provided to the IP flow every 0.5 ms.” EX. 1001, 62:11-12. In other words, the slot
`
`reservation interval is the same as the frame duration interval, and thus the same slot
`
`is reserved in each frame. EX. 1003, ¶¶ 67-68.
`
`Therefore, a POSITA would have understood the term “no periodic variation”
`
`to mean “a consistent time interval equal to the frame duration interval.” See EX.
`
`1003, ¶ 69.
`
`Packet-Centric Protocol – Claim 12
`The ’971 Patent uses the term “packet-centric protocol” in the claims, the
`
`abstract, and the detailed description, but does not set forth a special meaning for
`
`this term. The specification states that “[p]acket switching breaks a media stream
`
`into pieces known as, for example, packets, cells, or frames. Each packet can then
`
`be encoded with address information for delivery to the proper destination and can
`
`be sent through the network.” EX. 1001, 31:16-19, 4:5-9. Consistently, a POSITA
`
`would have understood that packet-centric systems are systems that perform packet-
`
`switching. EX. 1003, ¶¶ 70-72. Therefore, a POSITA would have understood
`
`“packet-centric protocol” to mean “a protocol that utilizes packets to transmit
`
`information from a sender of the information to a destination of said information.”
`
`14
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`An ATM network is one example of a system using a “packet-centric
`
`protocol.” ATM systems break large amounts of data (information, voice, video,
`
`etc.) into fixed-sized, independent ATM cells for transmission. EX. 1003, ¶ 71; EX.
`
`1014, 62; EX. 1023, 22-23. These ATM cells are packets that each include a header,
`
`which indicates the cell’s destination, and a payload comprising the chunks of data.
`
`EX. 1003, ¶ 71. In being transmitted through the network, each cell is then
`
`individually switched through ATM switches in the network to reach its destination
`
`based on the information in the cell’s headers. Id. Thus, ATM cells constitute
`
`“packets” that are used in ATM’s “packet-centric protocol.”
`
`To the extent that Patent Owner pursues a narrower construction (such as one
`
`that would attempt to exclude packet-centric networks that also happen to be
`
`“circuit-centric”) such a construction should be rejected. For example, while the
`
`specification contrasts “packet-centric” networks with “circuit-centric” networks,
`
`there is no suggestion that those terms are mutually exclusive. See EX. 1001, 30:57-
`
`31:32
`
`(describing differences between packet-centric and circuit-centric
`
`protocols). To the contrary, the specification describes embodiments where aspects
`
`of packet-centric and circuit-centric concepts are combined. For example, ATM is
`
`described by the patent as combining aspects of both circuit-centric and packet-
`
`centric technologies. Id. at 36:40-42 (“When using ATM, longer packets cannot
`
`15
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`delay shorter packets as in other packet-switched networks.”); see id. at 34:55-60
`
`(describing data network 142 as “any art-recognized packet centric data network”
`
`including an “ATM circuit centric network”). ATM differs from traditional circuit-
`
`centric technologies, because it shares transmission resources for the connections.
`
`ATM relies on the use of virtual circuits to implement a virtual circuit packet-
`
`switched protocol. EX. 1003, ¶ 71; see, e.g., EX. 1023, 2:56-58 (“In a sense, the
`
`advantages of the packet switch architecture and the circuit switch architecture are
`
`combined in the virtual circuit packet switch.”). Thus, ATM is an example of a
`
`packet-centric network protocol. Id.
`
`The Patent Owner’s claims in other, related patents confirm that the patentees
`
`believed ATM to be packet-centric: dependent Claim 20 of U.S. Patent 6,862,6225
`
`expressly recites, “The system of Claim 13, wherein said packet-centric protocol is
`
`not an asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) protocol,” clearly evincing through claim
`
`differentiation that the patentees believed that broader independent Claim 13
`
`covered ATM packet-centric protocols. EX. 1025, 84:42-43. Consistently, where
`
`the patentee sought to exclude circuit-centric protocols and ATM from claimed
`
`5 U.S. Pat. 6,862,622 shares a common specification with the ’971 Patent and claims
`
`priority to the same non-provisional and provisional application. See EX. 1025.
`
`16
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`packet-centric protocols, it did so expressly. See EX. 1026, 6 83:14-15 (reciting a
`
`“packet centric manner that is not circuit-centric and does not use [ATM]”).
`
`Means-Plus-Function Terms
`Claims 12 and 18 recite limitations that include the term “means,” which
`
`creates a presumption that they are written in means-plus-function format under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6. TriMed, Inc. v. Stryker Corp., 514 F.3d 1256, 1259 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2008). The claim chart below identifies exemplary disclosure of structure for
`
`performing such functions. EX. 1003, ¶¶ 73-78. The construction proposed for each
`
`of these means-plus-function elements is the structure identified in the chart and
`
`equivalents thereof for performing the claimed function. 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6.
`
`Claim 12 – assigning means for assigning future slots of a transmission frame to a
`portion of said IP flow in said transmission frame for transmission over said shared
`wireless network7
`
`6 U.S. Patent 6,640,248 shares a common specification with the ’971 Patent and
`
`claims priority to the same non-provisional and provisional application. See EX.
`
`1026.
`
`7 Petitioners note that the next three means-plus-function limitations are nested
`
`within this “assigning means” limitation. Thus, this “assigning means’ limitation is
`
`17
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`MPF Function
`and Structure
`
`Function: assigning future slots of a transmission frame to a
`portion of said IP flow in said transmission frame for
`transmission over said shared wireless network
`Structure: downlink scheduler 1566 or uplink scheduler 1666,8
`implementing an algorithm that assigns future slots to a portion
`of an IP flow based on the priority of the IP flow9
`
`appropriately higher level in both function and structure that encompasses the
`
`corresponding structures of the three nested means-plus-function limitations.
`
`8 Because the specification discloses both downlink and uplink schedulers as
`
`corresponding structure, they are alternative embodiments. Petitioners assert that
`
`for purposes of prior art, only a downlink schedule or an uplink scheduler needs to
`
`be disclosed.
`
`9 Petitioners note that the ’971 Patent describes schedulers 1566/1666 as generic
`
`“processor module[s],” (EX. 1001, 67:36-37) and thus the corresponding structure
`
`for the means-plus-function elements in these charts are correctly construed as the
`
`algorithm being implemented by the processor modules. See WMS Gaming, Inc. v.
`
`Int'l Game Tech., 184 F.3d 1339, 1349 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (“In a means-plus-function
`
`claim in which the disclosed structure is a computer, or microprocessor,
`
`programmed to carry out an algorithm, the disclosed structure is not the general
`
`18
`
`

`

`Disclosure
`
`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`In the present invention, an advanced reservation algorithm
`assigns future slots to data packets based on the priority of
`the IP data flow with which the packet is associated. … For
`calls that are sensitive to jitter, meaning calls that are time
`sensitive, it is important to maintain an isochronous (i.e., in
`phase with respect to time) connection. With such signals, it is
`important that the data be dispersed in the same slot between
`frames, or in slots having a periodic variation between frames.
`For example, vertical reservation 1480 shows a jitter sensitive
`signal receiving the same slot for downlink communications in
`each frame. Specifically, the signal is assigned slot 1422 in
`frames 1402-1416. EX. 1001, 61:65-62:11.
`
`As explained above, the ’971 Patent describes schedulers 1566/1666 as
`
`generic “processor module[s],” (EX. 1001, 67:36-37), and thus the corresponding
`
`structure for this means-plus-function element is the algorithm being implemented
`
`by the processor modules. See WMS Gaming, 184 F.3d at 1349. The ’971 Patent
`
`describes its “advanced reservation algorithm” as “assign[ing] future slots to data
`
`packets based on the priority of the IP data flow with which the packet is associated.”
`
`EX. 1001, 61:65-62:1. Thus, the corresponding structure is a scheduler that assigns
`
`future slots to a portion of an IP flow based on the priority of the IP flow.
`
`purpose computer, but rather the special purpose computer programmed to perform
`
`the disclosed algorithm.”)
`
`19
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`Claim 12 – means for applying an advanced reservation algorithm
`MPF Function
`and Structure
`
`Function: applying an advanced reservation algorithm.
`Structure: downlink scheduler 1566 or uplink scheduler 1666
`implementing an algorithm that determines the latency and jitter
`sensitivity of flows and then determines how to assign slots
`based on that determination (e.g., periodically or not, with what
`period)
`
`Disclosure
`
`“Downlink flow scheduler places the data packets of an IP data
`flow into a class queue based on class queue priorities, and using
`a set of rules, schedules the data packets for transmission
`over a wireless medium to a subscriber CPE station 294 at
`subscriber CPE location 306 with an advanced reservation
`algorithm. …. The advanced reservation algorithm for use
`in scheduling, e.g., isochronous traffic, is described with
`respect to FIG. 14 below. EX. 1001, 51:11-23, 61:6-16.
`In the present invention, an advanced reservation algorithm
`assigns future slots to data packets based on the priority of
`the IP data flow with which the packet is associated. … For
`calls that are sensitive to jitter, meaning calls that are time
`sensitive, it is important to maintain an isochronous (i.e., in
`phase with respect to time) connection. With such signals, it is
`important that the data be dispersed in the same slot between
`frames, or in slots having a periodic variation between
`frames. EX. 1001, 61:65-62:7.
`For latency sensitivity, one or more slots can be guaranteed in
`each frame. For example, for a call that is latency sensitive, but
`not jitter sensitive, each frame can be assigned one (or more)
`slots for communications. However, the slot(s) need not be
`periodic between frames, as with jitter sensitive calls. EX. 1001,
`62:32-37, 62:30-45.
`See also EX. 1001, 62:46-54, 51:64-52:6.
`
`20
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`The ’971 Patent describes the advanced reservation algorithm as “assign[ing]
`
`future slots to data packets based on the priority of the IP data flow.” EX. 1001,
`
`61:65-68. Included in these priorities are the latency-sensitivity and jitter-sensitivity
`
`of these flows. EX. 1001, 61:65-62:7, 62:30-45; 62:46-54; 51:64-52:6; see Section
`
`C. The latency-sensitivity and jitter-sensitivity determination affects which slots are
`
`reserved (e.g., pattern of slots over frames) by the reservation algorithm for an IP
`
`flow. For example, Figure 14 shows vertical reservation 1480 for a “jitter sensitive
`
`signal receiving the same slot for downlink communications in each frame” and
`
`diagonal reservation 1482 for a “jitter sensitive signal receiving a slot varying by a
`
`period of one between sequential frames.” EX. 1001, 62:7-15.
`
`21
`
`

`

`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`Thus, the corresponding structure for this claim element is an algorithm
`
`(implemented by a processor module), that determines the priorities (e.g., latency-
`
`sensitivity and/or jitter-sensitivity) of an IP flow, and determines how to assign slots
`
`based on that determination.
`
`Claim 12 – means for reserving a first slot for a first data packet of an Internet
`Protocol (IP) flow in a future transmission frame based on said algorithm
`MPF Function
`and Structure
`
`Function: reserving a first slot for a first data packet of an
`Internet Protocol (IP) flow in a future transmission frame based
`on said algorithm
`Structure: downlink scheduler 1566 or uplink scheduler 1666
`implementing an algorithm for assigning a first future slot that
`22
`
`

`

`Disclosure
`
`Petition for IPR of U.S. Patent 7,359,971
`
`is at least one frame in the future from the current frame based
`on the determination by the reservation algorithm of the latency-
`and jitter-sensitivity of the flows.
`Using these principles, the advanced reservation algorithm
`can assign the slots from highest priority to lowest priority,
`exhausting the number of available slots in future frames. IP data
`flows