`
`V.
`
`Uniloc 2017 LLC
`
`IPR2019-00973 (Patent 7,075,917 32)
`
`Patent Owner’s Demonstrative Exhibits
`
`Before Sally C. Medley, Kalyan K. Deshpande, and Robert J.
`Weinschen k, Administrative Patent Judges
`
`August 20, 2020
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`- Petitioner fails to show that a POSITA
`
`would modify TR25.835 with Abrol
`
`- TR25.835 does not teach “a physical layer
`of a receiving side is provided for testing
`the correct reception of the coded
`transport block”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`
`
`Attempt to Argue Prima Facie Case in Petition
`
`A.
`
`TR25.835
`
`TR25.835 (Ex. 1005) was published by 3GPP in 2000 and publicly available
`
`on the 3GPP file server no later than September 13, 2000. See Rodermund Decl., Ex.
`
`1004, 11 25, see also id. at 111i 12-24. It thus qualifies as prior an under at least Sections
`
`102(a) and (b)1.
`
`Petition (P'aner 2] at 10.
`
`3
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`- Failure to show TR25.832 is a printed
`pubHcaflon
`
`- TR25.835 does not teach “a physical layer
`of a receiving side is provided for testing
`the correct reception of the coded
`transport block”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`
`
`POSITA would not have modified TR25.835 with Abrol
`
`- Petitioner fails to meet its burden to prove obviousness of
`“storing abbreviated sequence numbers whose length
`depends on the maximum number of coded transport
`blocks to be stored and which can be shown unambiguously
`in a packet data unit sequence number”
`
`- Petitioner fails to prove POSITA would have found it obvious
`to modify TR25.835 (EX1005) using the teachings of Abrol
`(EX1007)
`
`PO Resnonse [Paper 91 at 31-38: PO sur-Reolv {Paper 13] at 13—20.
`
`5
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Overview
`
`- Failure to show TR25.832 is a printed
`pubHcafion
`
`- Petitioner fails to show that a POSITA
`
`would modify TR25.835 with Abrol
`
`- TR25.835 does not teach “a physical layer
`of a receiving side is provided for testing
`the correct reception of the coded
`transport block”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`
`
`Petition’s Element 1.5 relies on TR25.835 exclusively
`
`- TR25.835 does not teach “a physical layer of a receiving
`side is provided for testing the correct reception of the
`coded transport block”
`
`PO Resnonse [Paper 91 at 38-43: PO ”Sur-Reolv (Paper 131 at 20—23.
`
`7
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`