Trials@uspto.gov Paper No. 8
`
`571-272-7822
`Entered: October 5, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`ERICSSON INC. AND
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before KRISTEN L. DROESCH, BRIAN J. McNAMARA, and
`DAVID C. McKONE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`McNAMARA, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Institution of Inter Partes Review
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`571-272-7822
`Entered: October 5, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`ERICSSON INC. AND
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before KRISTEN L. DROESCH, BRIAN J. McNAMARA, and
`DAVID C. McKONE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`McNAMARA, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Institution of Inter Partes Review
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`Ericsson Inc. and Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (collectively,
`“Petitioner”) filed a Petition, Paper 1 (“Pet.”), to institute an inter partes
`review of claims 1–4 (the “challenged claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 6,628,629
`B1 (“the ’629 patent”). 35 U.S.C. § 311. Intellectual Ventures I LLC
`(“Patent Owner”) timely filed a Preliminary Response, Paper 5 (“Prelim.
`Resp.”), contending that the Petition should be denied as to all challenged
`claims. We have jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 42.4(a) and 35 U.S.C. § 314,
`which provides that an inter partes review may not be instituted unless the
`information presented in the Petition “shows that there is a reasonable
`likelihood that the petitioner would prevail with respect to at least 1 of the
`claims challenged in the petition.” Having considered the arguments and the
`associated evidence presented in the Petition and the Preliminary Response,
`for the reasons described below, we institute inter partes review on all
`challenged claims.
`
`REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST
`The Petition identifies Ericsson Inc. and Telefonaktiebolaget LM
`Ericsson as real parties-in-interest. Pet. 1. Patent Owner identifies itself as
`the real party-in-interest. Paper 3.
`
`RELATED PROCEEDINGS
`The Petition states that the ’629 patent is asserted in Intellectual
`Ventures I LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-00577-JRG
`(E.D. Tex.). Pet. 1
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`
`THE ’629 PATENT (EXHIBIT 1001)
`The ’629 patent concerns telecommunications and, more specifically,
`“implementing a [quality of service] QoS aware wireless point-to-multi-
`point transmission system.” Ex. 1001, 2:43–47. The Specification describes
`the invention “in the context of a point-to-multi-point network,” but states
`that “the invention is equally applicable to a point-to-point network
`environment.” Id. at 41:21–24.
`According to the ’629 patent QoS “can be thought of as a mechanism
`to selectively allocate scarce networking, transmission and communications
`resources to differentiated classes of network traffic with appropriate levels
`of priority” where “the nature of the data traffic, the demands of the users,
`the conditions of the network, and the characteristics of the traffic sources
`and destinations all modify how the QoS mechanism is operating at any
`given instant.” Id. at 13:40–51.
`According to the ’629 patent, in a known circuit switched network,
`the QoS mechanism provides a circuit for a user’s exclusive use, i.e., QoS is
`achieved by dedicating an end-to-end circuit for each connection or service,
`whether it be voice or data. Id. at 13:60–64. This approach dedicates the
`circuit, all circuit associated transmission channels, and the transport media
`to a single user for the duration of the session. Id. at 13:64–67. In this
`context, QoS “implied the ability to carry asynchronous (i.e., transmission of
`data through start and stop sequences without a common clock) as well as
`isochronous (i.e., consistent timed access of network bandwidth for time-
`sensitive voice and video) traffic.” Id. at 13:56–60. Circuit switched
`connections allocate bandwidth between communication nodes whether or
`not traffic is being transferred constantly between the nodes. Id. at 3:4–7.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`The ’629 patent states that in known Asynchronous Transfer Mode
`(ATM) networking, virtual circuits are established for data transmission
`sessions regardless of the data application or whether data is being
`transmitted at the moment. Ex. 1001, 14:27–29. A circuit-centric QoS
`mechanism is provided by establishing permanent virtual connections
`(PVCs) and switched virtual connections (SVCs) in a manner analogous to
`legacy voice circuit mechanisms. Ex. 1001, 14:13–21. A permanent virtual
`connection, such as a virtual path (VPC) or virtual channel connection
`(VCC), is for indefinite use; a switched virtual connection is a logical
`connection between endpoints established by an ATM network on demand,
`based on signaling messages received from the end user or another network.
`Id.
`
`The ’629 patent discloses that known packet-switched data
`communications do not dedicate a circuit to a particular data
`communications session. Ex. 1001, 14:43–45. Packet switching breaks up
`traffic into packets that can be transported from a source node to a
`destination node for reassembly, so that the bandwidth can be shared
`efficiently by many sources and destinations. Id. at 3:10–15.
`The ’629 patent discusses the differences between ATM networks that
`set up virtual circuits between source and destination nodes and packet-
`centric networks, such as those using the Transfer Control Protocol/Internet
`Protocol (TCP/IP), that do not use dedicated circuits. Id. at 32:13–64.
`“TCP/IP performs a packetization of user data to be sent between and among
`various systems on the IP network.” Id. at 32:24–25. When a packet is
`prepared for transmission across a medium, IP places a header on the packet,
`but does not route the call across a specific channel or act further to assure
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`delivery or accuracy of the packet. Id. at 32:31–45. Instead, the network
`routes outbound packets from source to destination over various routes, with
`IP decrementing a counter each time the packet passes through a node until
`the counter expires, when the packet is discarded to prevent undeliverable
`packets from looping around the network. Id. at 32:45–51.
`TCP works with IP to assure a reliable data stream is sent and
`delivered. Id. at 32:52–53. “TCP is a standard protocol for segmenting
`traffic into packets, transmitting, reassembling and retransmitting packets of
`information between a source and destination IP address.” Id. at 47:54–57.
`“At the sending end, TCP puts a byte count header on information to be
`delivered to the IP protocol layer and encapsulates it as part of the packet.”
`Id. at 32:53–56. The receiving end re-sequences the packets and sends a
`byte count acknowledgement or non-acknowledgement message to the
`sending end, prompting the sending end to resend bytes necessary to fill in
`any missing portions of the packet flow. Id. at 32:58–62.
`The challenged claims of the ’629 patent concern a system and
`method for assigning future slots of a transmission frame to a data packet in
`the transmission frame for transmission over a wireless telecommunication
`network system. Ex. 1001, Abstract. In providing discrete slots for data
`transmission, a reservation algorithm assigns future slots to data packets
`based on priority of IP data flow with which the packet is associated. Id. at
`58:36–38, 61:37–40.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`Figure 14 of the ’629 patent is shown below.
`
`
`
`
`Figure 14 is an exemplary two-dimensional block diagram of an advanced
`reservation algorithm. Id. at 61:12–14. Each frame, current frame n (1402)
`through future frame n+x (1416) includes a number of slots (1418–1478)
`that can be allocated to a variable length downlink sub-frame 1202 (slots
`1418–1446) and a variable length uplink sub-frame 1204 (slots 1448–1478)
`that together comprise the length of an entire frame. Id. at 61:12–32. In one
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`embodiment, the number of slots in a frame remains constant, the slots have
`a fixed length, and each slot can store a single data packet. Id. at 61:26–28.
`Each slot has a time value (the slot-to-slot time interval) and each frame has
`a total interval time value (the frame-to-frame time interval). Id. at 61:33–
`36.
`
`The ’629 patent notes that certain types of traffic may require “the
`data be dispersed in the same slot between frames or in slots having a
`periodic variation between frames.” Id. at 61:44–46. “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.”
`Vertical reservation 1480, in which there is no periodic variation shows a
`jitter sensitive signal receiving the same slot 1422 for downlink
`communications in each frame, such that if the frame-to-frame interval is
`0.5 ms, a slot will be provided to the IP flow every 0.5 ms. In another
`example, a jitter sensitive signal receives a slot varying by a period of one
`between sequential frames to create a diagonal, such that if the frame-to-
`frame interval is 0.5 ms and the slot-to-slot interval is 0.01 ms, a slot can be
`provided to the IP flow every 0.5 minus 0.01, or 0.49 ms. Id. at 61:51–57.
`This “diagonal reservation” 1482 can be more pronounced, i.e., using a
`greater or lesser slope, depending on the period between sequential frames
`desired. Id. at 61:63–65. To decrease the frame interval, a positive slope
`diagonal reservation is used; to decrease the frame interval, a negative slope
`is used, e.g., negative slope diagonal uplink 1486.
`Where calls are sensitive to latency, one or more slots can be
`guaranteed in each frame, i.e., one slot per frame that need not be periodic
`between frames, but calls that are less sensitive to latency can receive fewer
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`slots, e.g., one slot every four or ten frames. Id. at 62:4–17. The greater the
`number of slots allocated per frame to an IP flow, the greater the total
`bandwidth per frame rate for the IP flow. Id. at 62:9–11.
`
`ILLUSTRATIVE CLAIM
`Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative
`1. A method for assigning future slots of a transmission frame
`to a data packet in the transmission frame for transmission over
`a wireless medium, comprising:
`applying a reservation algorithm;
`reserving a first slot for a first data packet of an internet
`protocol (IP) flow in a future transmission frame based on
`said reservation algorithm; and
`reserving a second slot for a second data packet of said IP
`flow in a transmission frame, subsequent in time to said future
`transmission frame based on said reservation algorithm,
`wherein said second data packet is placed in said second
`slot in an isochronous manner to the placing of said first data
`packet in said first slot.
`Claims 2–4 are method claims that depend from claim 1. Claims 2
`and 3 recite the presence (claim 2) or absence (claim 3) of a periodic
`variation between placing the first data packet in the first slot and the second
`data packet in the second slot. Claim 4 recites that the reservation algorithm
`determines whether the IP is jitter sensitive.
`
`ART CITED IN PETITIONER’S CHALLENGES
`
`Petitioner cites the following references in its challenges to
`patentability:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`
`
`
`Reference
`Deborah A. Dyson and Zygmunt J.
`Haas, A Dynamic Packet
`Reservation Multiple Access
`Scheme for Wireless ATM,
`MILCOM 97 PROCEEDINGS 687,
`Nov. 3–5, 1997
`D. Raychaudhuri et al., WATMnet:
`A Prototype Wireless ATM System
`for Multimedia Personal
`Communication, 1996 IEEE
`INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
`COMMUNICATIONS 469, June 23–27
`1996
`U.S. Patent No. 5,020,056 issued
`May 28, 1991
`Chun-Chuan Yang and Jau-Hsiung
`Huang, A Multimedia
`Synchronization Model and Its
`Implementation in Transport
`Protocols, VOL. 14, NO. 1 IEEE
`JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN
`COMMUNICATIONS, IEEE
`TRANSACTION 212, Jan. 1996
`D.J. Goodman et al., Packet
`Reservation Multiple Access for
`Local Wireless
`Communications, VOL. 37, NO. 8
`IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
`COMMUNICATIONS 885, Aug. 1989
`
`Designation
`
`Exhibit No.
`
`Dyson
`
`Ex. 1004
`
`Raychaudhuri
`
`Ex. 1005
`
`Chennakeshu
`
`Ex. 1006
`
`Yang
`
`Ex. 1007
`
`Goodman
`
`Ex. 1008
`
`Petitioner also cites the Declaration of Dr. Zygmunt Haas In Support
`Of Petition For Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,628,629 (Ex. 1003,
`“Haas Decl.”). Dr. Haas is one of the authors of Dyson, Exhibit 1004.
`Pet. 29.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`CHALLENGES ASSERTED IN PETITION
`The basis of each of Petitioner’s challenges is that the challenged
`claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Petitioner’s challenges are
`summarized in the following table:
`Claims
`1, 3, and 4
`
`Challenge
`Obvious over the combination of Dyson and
`Raychaudhuri
`Obvious over the combination of Dyson, Raychaudhuri
`and Chennakeshu
`Obvious over the combination of Dyson/Raychaudhuri
`with Goodman and Yang
`
`2
`
`4
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`Petitioner’s expert, Dr. Zygmunt Haas, describes a person of ordinary
`skill as having a B.Sc. in Electrical Engineering or a related field with three
`years of experience in the field of telecommunication networks. Ex. 1003,
`Haas Decl. ¶ 36. Patent Owner does not address this issue explicitly. For
`purposes of this Decisions, we apply the definition provided by Dr. Haas.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`Noting the that the ’629 patent will expire while this proceeding is
`pending, both Petitioner and Patent Owner agree that the claim construction
`principles articulated in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312–13
`(Fed. Cir. 2005), apply in this proceeding. Pet. 23, Prelim Resp. 24. Under
`Phillips, relying first on intrinsic evidence and secondarily on extrinsic
`evidence, a claim term is given “the meaning that the term would have to a
`person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time of the invention.”
`Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1315–18.
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`Petitioner proposes constructions for the following terms:
`Isochronous
`Petitioner notes that the ’629 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.” Pet. 24 (citing Ex. 1001, 13:59–60, 61:43–45). Noting
`the illustration in Figure 14, Petitioner argues that “isochronous” should be
`construed to mean “consistent timed access interval” and that for avoidance
`of doubt “this ‘consistent timed access interval’ includes both a periodic
`variation between slots (‘a consistent time interval equal to the frame
`duration interval’) and no periodic variation between slots (‘a consistent
`time interval other than the frame duration interval’).” Id. at 26 (citing Ex.
`1003, Haas Decl. ¶¶78–79).
`Patent Owner argues that Petitioner’s proposed construction is
`inconsistent with Petitioner’s construction of a similar term (“in an
`isochronous manner” as “in a manner which provides for consistent timed
`access”) in related district court litigation because Petitioner’s proposed
`construction in this proceeding omits the word “access.” Prelim. Resp. 24
`(citing Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. TMobile USA, Inc. et al., Case
`No. 2:17-cv-00577-JRG (E.D. Tex.). Patent Owner notes that because a
`Phillips construction applies to this proceeding and the district court
`proceeding, “isochronous” should be construed to mean “providing for
`consistent timed access” to be consistent with the construction proposed by
`Petitioner in the district court. Id.
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`Claim 1 recites “said second data packet is placed in said second slot
`in an isochronous manner to the placing of said first data packet.” The ’629
`patent Specification defines an “isochronous” connection as one that is “in
`phase with respect to time.” Ex. 1001 61:43–44. The Merriam Webster
`Dictionary defines “isochronous” as meaning “isochronal” and “isochronal”
`as meaning “uniform in time; having equal duration; recurring at regular
`intervals.” Ex. 3001, WEBSTER’S NEW COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY, 1977 at
`613, see also https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/isochronous,
`(citing Richard C. Moss, ars Technica, Jun 6, 2017 “The Tragedy of
`Firewire: Collaborative Tech Torpedoed by Corporations “Teener and James
`. . . invented an isochronous transport method—meaning transfers at regular
`intervals,” available at https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/06/the-rise-and-
`fall-of-firewire-the-standard-everyone-couldnt-quite-agree-on/) and
`https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/isochronal. The IEEE
`Dictionary defines “isochronous” as
`(1) The time characteristic of an event or signal recurring at
`known, periodic time intervals. (LM/C) 8802-6-1994 (2) A
`communication stream transport that is uniform in time. The
`delivery of the physical stream of information is recurring at
`regular intervals. (C/LM/COM) 802.9a-1995w, 8802-9-1996 (3)
`The essential characteristic of a time-scale or a signal such that
`the time intervals between consecutive significant instances
`either have the same duration or durations that are integral
`multiples of the shortest duration. (C/MM) 1394-1995 (4)
`Uniform in time (i.e., having equal duration) and recurring at
`regular intervals. (C/MM) 1394a-2000
`
`Ex. 3002, IEEE 100 THE AUTHORITATIVE DICTIONARY OF IEEE STANDARDS
`TERMS (7th ed. 2000) at 591.
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`The common thread among Petitioner’s proposed construction, Patent
`Owner’s proposed construction, and the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence is
`that “isochronous” refers to regular, consistent or recurring time intervals.
`Therefore, for purposes of this Decision, we construe “an isochronous
`manner” to mean “a consistent timed interval.”
`Periodic Variation
`Noting that the ’629 patent does not provide a special meaning for
`“periodic variation,” referencing the patent’s description of “diagonal
`reservation,” Petitioner cites the example in the Specification that when the
`frame-to-frame interval is 0.5 ms and the slot-to-slot interval is 0.01 ms, a
`slot is provided to the IP flow every 0.49 ms. Pet. at 27–28. According to
`Petitioner, this means that the slot provided in each frame is one slot earlier
`than in the previous frame. Id. at 28 (citing Ex. 1003, Haas Decl. ¶ 84).
`Thus, Petitioner proposes that “periodic variation” be construed to mean “a
`consistent time interval other than the frame duration interval.” Id. at 28.
`Patent Owner argues the Petitioner’s proposed construction in this
`proceeding differs from its proposed construction in the district court where
`Petitioner proposed “periodic variation” be given its plain and ordinary
`meaning. Prelim. Resp. 25. Patent Owner contends that the plain and
`ordinary meaning is the appropriate construction, but does not articulate a
`plain and ordinary meaning and does not dispute explicitly Petitioner’s
`proposed construction as inconsistent with the use of the term in the ’629
`patent. Id. As Petitioner’s proposed construction appears to be consistent
`with the plain and ordinary meaning in the context of this proceeding, we
`adopt Petitioner’s proposed construction of “periodic variation” as “a
`consistent time interval other than the frame duration interval.”
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`No Periodic Variation
`Petitioner notes that the ’629 patent does not define explicitly the
`meaning of “no periodic variation,” but instead describes “vertical
`reservation 1480” of Figure 14 as showing “a jitter sensitive signal receiving
`the same slot for downlink communication in each frame.” Pet. 26 (citing
`Ex. 1001, 61:46–48). Noting the example that if the frame to frame interval
`is 0.5 ms, a slot is provided to the PR flow every 0.5 ms, Petitioner asserts
`that the slot reservation interval is the same as the frame duration interval, so
`that the same slot is reserved in each frame. Id. at 27 (citing Ex. 1003, Haas
`Decl. ¶¶ 80–82). With this in mind, Petitioner proposes that we construe “no
`periodic variation” to mean “a consistent time interval equal to the frame
`duration interval.” Id. Patent Owner contends that the plain and ordinary
`meaning is the appropriate construction, but does not articulate a plain and
`ordinary meaning and does not dispute explicitly Petitioner’s proposed
`construction as inconsistent with the use of the term in the ’629 patent.
`Prelim. Resp. 25. As Petitioner’s proposed construction appears to be
`consistent with the plain and ordinary meaning in the context of this
`proceeding, we adopt Petitioner’s proposed construction of “periodic
`variation” to mean “a consistent time interval equal to the frame duration
`interval.”
`Packet
`Petitioner does not propose a construction of the term “packet.”
`Patent Owner proposes that “packet” be construed to mean “a piece or
`segment of a data/media stream that serves as a unit of transmission over a
`packet switched network.” Prelim. Resp. 26. Patent Owner notes that in the
`context of the related U.S. Patent 7,496,674 B3 (“the ’674 patent”) another
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`panel of the Board construed “packet” to mean “a piece or segment of a
`data/media stream that serves as a unit of transmission over a packet
`switched network.” Prelim. Resp. 26–28 (citing Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual
`Ventures I LLC, Case IPR2014-00527, slip op. at 9 (PTAB May 18, 2015);
`Ex. 2001, 9).
`The ’629 patent Specification states “Packet switching breaks up
`traffic into so-called ‘packets’ which can then be transported from a source
`node to a destination for reassembly.” Ex. 1001, 3:11–14. Claim 1 recites a
`“packet of an internet protocol (IP) flow.” The ’629 patent describes an
`example embodiment in which data network 142 can be an IP packet
`switched network. Ex. 1001, 34:40–41. However, the Specification also
`states that data network 142 represents “any art-recognized packet centric
`data network,” including the global Internet, and states that “[o]ther
`examples include a private intranet, a packet-switched network, a frame
`relay network, and an asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) circuit-centric
`network.” Id. at 34:34–39. Consistent with the construction applied by the
`panel in IPR2014-00527, we construe “packet” to mean “a piece or segment
`of a data/media stream that serves as a unit of transmission over a packet
`switched network.” However, in view of the description in the Specification
`that packet switching is one embodiment and that other networks including
`ATM can be employed with the invention, as discussed further herein, we do
`not disregard the teachings of references on the basis that they concern ATM
`implementations. Thus, in the context of obviousness of the challenged
`clams, the construction of “packet” is not determinative.
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`ANALYSIS OF PETITIONER’S PRIOR ART CHALLENGES
`Introduction
`A patent claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) if the
`differences between the claimed subject matter and the prior art are such that
`the subject matter, as a whole, would have been obvious at the time the
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said
`subject matter pertains. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 406
`(2007). The question of obviousness is resolved on the basis of underlying
`factual determinations including: (1) the scope and content of the prior art;
`(2) any differences between the claimed subject matter and the prior art;
`(3) the level of ordinary skill in the art; and (4) objective evidence of
`nonobviousness. Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17–18 (1966).
`Claims, 1, 3, and 4 As Unpatentable Over the Combination of Dyson and
`Raychaudhuri
`
`Goodman – Ex. 1008
`Petitioner cites Goodman as disclosing a Packet Reservation Multiple
`Access (“PRMA”) scheme in a wireless network in which time slots are
`used to transmit data between mobile terminals (“speech terminals”) and
`base stations. Pet. 9–10 (citing Ex. 1008, 885–86). Goodman’s PRMA is “a
`technique for transmitting, over short range radio channels, a mixture of
`voice packets and packets from other information sources.” Ex. 1008, 886.
`The PRMA protocol is organized around time frames with
`duration matched to the periodic rate of voice packets. In each
`frame, time slots are dynamically reserved for packets from
`active voice terminals. As a consequence the terminals with
`reservations share the channel in a manner closely resembling
`time division multiple access (TDMA).
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`Id. A packet assembler distinguishes between periodic information packets
`and random information packets, as categorized by a packet header. Id. at
`887. Speech packets are always periodic; some data packets, such as those
`involved in file transfers are periodic, while other data packets, such as
`keyboard entries, signaling messages and system control information are
`random. Id. Terminals organize transmission time slots into frames with N
`slots per frame, where N is common to all terminals. Id. A frame
`reservation register with one bit per slot in a frame sets the bit to “0” when a
`base station indicates a time slot is unreserved and to “1” otherwise. Id.
`When a base station acknowledges receipt of a periodic information packet
`from a terminal contending for access, as in the ALOHA protocol, the
`terminal that sent the packet reserves that time slot for future transmission
`and all other terminals refrain from using that slot in future frames. Id. The
`terminal with the reservation has uncontested use of that time slot until the
`base station broadcasts an indication that the terminal has stopped sending
`periodic information in the reserved slot. Id.
`Petitioner cites Goodman as disclosing identifying voice packets that
`are well known as being jitter sensitive and utilizing the PRMA scheme to
`reserve isochronous slots in future frames to ensure the voice packets are
`transmitted properly. Pet. 12.
`Dyson - Ex. 1004
`Petitioner cites Dyson’s disclosure of a Dynamic Packet Reservation
`Multiple Access (DPRMA) scheme in a wireless ATM network as an
`extension of Goodman’s PRMA protocol that is more suited for the
`combination of both variable bit rate (VBR) and constant bit rate (CBR)
`traffic. Pet. 13 (citing Ex. 1004, 687). DPRMA operates much like PRMA,
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`except that slots within a DPRMA frame are divided among users based on
`the amount of bandwidth a user requires, allowing users to reserve more than
`one slot in a frame or slots in alternating frames, according to system
`capacity. Ex. 1004, 688. When a user has a new burst of information to
`transmit, it contends for an empty slot and monitors the downlink for
`Reservation Acknowledge (RA) bits to determine success or failure status
`from the base station. Id. at 689. The user communicates its bandwidth
`requirements using Reservation Request (RR) bits within the header of the
`uplink time slot. Id. at 688. When a successful transmission to a base
`station occurs, the base station attempts to accommodate as much of the rate
`requested as possible. Id. If a full allocation is made, the base station
`determines which of the unclaimed slots will be assigned. Id. The base
`station records partial allocations so that the remaining request can be
`accommodated later. Id. The user can update information to reflect changes
`in data rates. Ex. 1004, Abstract. Petitioner notes that Dyson considers this
`feature advantageous as it permits the system to determine the appropriate
`reservation request that ensures timely delivery of traffic. Pet. 16 (citing
`Ex. 1004, 689–90).
`Raychaudhuri – Ex. 1006
`Petitioner cites Raychaudhuri as disclosing a system for transmitting
`IP packet/datagrams using a wireless ATM connection in order to provide
`integrated multimedia communication services to mobile terminals. Pet. 23;
`Ex. 1003, Haas Decl. ¶ 70. According to Petitioner,
`Raychaudhuri discloses a wireless ATM network (WATMnet)
`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 so that multiple
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`devices can share the bandwidth over time, just like ATM
`connections in the wireless networks of Goodman and Dyson.
`Pet. 17 (citing Ex. 1005, 469; Ex. 1003, Haas Decl. ¶ 61).
`In Raychaudhuri, when a WATMnet interface card is plugged into a
`laptop PC running Linux, a loadable device driver exports a network
`interface to the standard Linux IP and TCP code. Ex. 1005, 472. When an
`IP packet is received for a new IP address the following steps are performed:
`(1) An ATM-ARP (Asynchronous Transfer Mode t- Address Resolution
`Protocol)1 message is transmitted to resolve the IP address; (2) when the
`ARP reply is received, a signaling message is sent to the resolved address to
`establish an ATM connection; (3) once the connection is established, the
`saved IP packets are transmitted. Id. Subsequent IP packets are transmitted
`over the same connection. Id.
`
`
`1 ARP (Address Resolution Protocol) is a network layer protocol used to
`convert an IP address into a physical address, called a DLC address, such as
`an Ethernet address). See https://www.webopedia.com/TERM/A/ARP.html
`(accessed on October 1, 2018). DLC is short for Data Link Control, the
`second lowest layer in the OSI Reference Model. Every network interface
`card (NIC) has a DLC address or DLC identifier (DLCI) that uniquely
`identifies the node on the network. Some network protocols, such
`as Ethernet and Token-Ring use the DLC addresses exclusively. Other
`protocols, such as TCP/IP, use a logical address at the Network Layer to
`identify nodes. Ultimately, however, all network addresses must be
`translated to DLC addresses. In TCP/IP networks, this translation is
`performed with the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP). For networks that
`conform to the IEEE 802 standards (e.g., Ethernet), the DLC address is
`usually called the Media Access Control (MAC) address. See
`https://www.webopedia.com/TERM/D/DLC.html (accessed on October 1,
`2018).
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00727
`Patent 6,628,629 B1
`
`
`Petitioner argues that a person of ordinary skill would have
`understood that in order to be transmitted using a wireless ATM connection,
`the IP packets (or datagrams) would need to be fragmented into smaller
`packets (e.g., ATM cells) and then reassembled at the receiving unit. Pet. 22
`(citing Ex. 1003, Haas Decl. ¶¶ 72–75). Petitioner also notes that
`Raychaudhuri discloses a dynamic MAC protocol that supports various
`transport services including average bit rate (ABR), variable bit rate (VBR)
`and constant bit rate (CBR) and in the transmission of uplink information
`Raychaudhuri discloses a contention access (slotted ALOHA) control
`subframe, followed by reserved ABR, VBR, and CBR data slots. Id. (citing
`Ex. 1005, 469, 474). As to CBR traffic, petitioner further emphasizes that
`Raychaudhuri discloses CBR VCs are assigned fixed periodic slots
`according to the required bit rate. Id. (citing Ex. 1005, 474)
`Petitioner notes that Dyson’s reservation of the same slot in each
`future subsequent frame until all voice packets are transmitted treats CBR
`traffic in a manner similar to that of Raychaudhuri, where the positions of
`assigned slots within a media access control (MAC) subframe are
`maintained relatively static in order to facilitate operation of low complexity
`telephone terminals and to reduce the signaling load on the wireless link.
`Pet. 22–23 (citing Ex. 1005, 474), Ex. 1003, Haas Decl. ¶ 69. Raychaudhuri
`also discloses that VBR VCs are handled as a combination of static and
`dynamic assignment controlled by a usage parameter based statistical
`multiplexing algorithm. Ex. 10
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
