DOCKET NO: 500290US UNITED STATES PATENT AND … · U.S. Patent 8,064,919 Petition for Inter Partes...

DOCKET NO: 500290US

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

_______________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

_______________

BLACKBERRY CORP., Petitioner,

v.

OPTIS WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC, Patent Owner.

_______________

Case IPR2017-______ Patent No. 8,064,919

_______________

PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW

U.S. Patent 8,064,919 Petition for Inter Partes Review

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1

II. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8 ................................... 1

A. Real Party In Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ............................. 1

B. Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ..................................... 1

C. Lead and Back-up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ................... 2

D. Service Information Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ............................... 2

III. PAYMENT OF FEES ..................................................................................... 2

IV. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW ...................................... 3

A. Grounds for Standing Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ............................. 3

B. Identification of Challenge Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) .................... 3

1. The Specific Art on Which the Challenge is Based ................... 3

2. The Specific Grounds on Which the Challenge Is Based ........... 5

V. BACKGROUND OF THE ’919 PATENT ..................................................... 6

A. Technology Overview ........................................................................... 6

B. Summary of the ’919 Patent .................................................................. 9

C. Prosecution History of the ’919 Patent ............................................... 10

VI. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................ 10

VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 11

VIII. GROUNDS OF UNPATENTABILITY ........................................................ 12

A. Claims 1–3, 5, 6, 10–12, 14, and 15 are Anticipated by R1-062771 ................................................................................................. 12

B. Claims 4, 7, 8, 13, 16, and 17 are Obvious over R1-062771 in View of R1-070734 ............................................................................. 29


iii

C. Claims 9 and 18 are Obvious over R1-062771 in View of R1-063326 ................................................................................................. 37

D. Claims 6, 8, 15, and 17 are Obvious over R1-062771 in View of R1-070734 and R1-071137 ............................................................. 39

IX. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 44


1

I. INTRODUCTION

BlackBerry Corp. (“BlackBerry” or “Petitioner”), in accordance with 35

U.S.C. §§ 311–19 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.100 et seq., respectfully requests inter

partes review of claims 1–18 of U.S. Patent No. 8,064,919 (“the ’919 patent”) (Ex.

1001) assigned to Optis Wireless Technology, LLC (“Patent Owner”) via

assignment record at Reel/Frame: 032326/0707. This Petition shows by at least a

preponderance of the evidence that there is a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner

will prevail on proving that claims 1–18 of the ’919 patent are unpatentable based

on prior art that the Office did not have before it or did not fully consider during

prosecution.

II. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1), Petitioner provides the following

mandatory disclosures:

A. Real Party In Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)

Petitioner certifies that BlackBerry Corp. and BlackBerry Limited are the

real parties-in-interest.

B. Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)

The ’919 patent is asserted in at least one currently pending litigation, which

was filed on January 17, 2016 and captioned PanOptis Patent Management, LLC v.

BlackBerry Limited, No. 2:16-cv-00062-JRG-RSP (E. D. Tex.).


2

C. Lead and Back-up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)

Petitioner provides the following designation of counsel: Lead counsel is

Robert C. Mattson (Reg. No. 42,850) and back-up counsel is Sameer Gokhale

(Reg. No. 62,618) and Thomas C. Yebernetsky (Reg. No. 70,418).

D. Service Information Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)

Papers concerning this matter should be served in accordance with the

following:

Email: [email protected]; [email protected]; and

[email protected].

Post: Oblon LLP, 1940 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314

Telephone: (703) 412-6466

Fax: (703) 413-2220

Petitioner consents to electronic service at the above email addresses.

III. PAYMENT OF FEES

The undersigned authorizes the Office to charge the fee required by

37 C.F.R. § 42.15(a) for this Petition for inter partes review to Deposit Account

No. 15-0030. Any additional fees that might be due are also authorized.


3

IV. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW

A. Grounds for Standing Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)

Petitioner hereby certifies that the ’919 patent is available for inter partes

review and that the Petitioner is not barred or estopped from requesting an inter

partes review challenging the patent claims of the ’919 patent on the grounds

identified herein.

B. Identification of Challenge Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)

Petitioner requests inter partes review of claims 1–18 of the ’919 patent and

that the Board cancel the same as unpatentable. The ’919 patent claims priority to

U.S. Patent Application No. 12/532,352, which was filed as PCT/JP2008/000675

on March 21, 2008, and three Japanese patent applications: 2007-077502 (filed on

March 23, 2007), 2007-120853 (filed on May 1, 2007), and 2007-211104 (filed on

August 13, 2007). (Ex. 1001, p. 1). The ’919 patent is subject to pre-AIA 35

U.S.C. §§ 102, 103.

1. The Specific Art on Which the Challenge is Based

Petitioner relies upon the following printed publications:

Exhibit 1004 – NEC Group, “Downlink ACK/NACK Mapping for E-UTRA,”

TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #46bis, Seoul, Korea, October 9–13, 2006 (R1-062771)

(“R1-062771”) was made available to the extent that persons interested and

ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art, exercising reasonable diligence, could


4

locate it by at least October 13, 2006 (see Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 15–20), which is prior to

the earliest filing date claimed by the ’919 patent (March 23, 2007). R1-062771 is

therefore available as prior art under § 102(a). R1-062771 was not considered

during the original prosecution of the ’919 patent.

Exhibit 1005 – Texas Instruments, “ACK/NAK Channel Transmission in E-

UTRA Downlink,” 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #48, Saint Louis, USA,

February 12–16, 2007 (R1-070734) (“R1-070734”) was made available to the

extent that persons interested and ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art,

exercising reasonable diligence, could locate it by at least February 16, 2007 (see

Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 15–20), which is prior to the earliest filing date claimed by the ’919

patent (March 23, 2007). R1-070734 is therefore available as prior art under

§ 102(a). R1-070734 was cited in an IDS but not substantively considered during

the original prosecution of the ’919 patent. Additionally, R1-070734 is presented in

combination with R1-062771, which was not previously considered, and in

combination with the expert declaration of Paul Min, Ph.D.

Exhibit 1006 – NTT DoCoMo, Fujitsu, Mitsubishi Electric, NEC, Sharp, Toshiba

Corporation, “ACK/NACK Signal Structure in E-UTRA Downlink,” 3GPP TSG

RAN WG1 Meeting #47, Riga, Latvia, November 6–10, 2006 (R1-063326) (“R1-

063326”) was made available to the extent that persons interested and ordinarily

skilled in the subject matter or art, exercising reasonable diligence, could locate it


5

by at least November 10, 2006 (see Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 15–20), which is prior to the

earliest filing date claimed by the ’919 patent (March 23, 2007). R1-063326 is

therefore available as prior art under § 102(a). R1-063326 was cited in an IDS but

not substantively considered during the original prosecution of the ’919 patent.

Additionally, R1-063326 is presented in combination with R1-062771, which was

not previously considered, and in combination with the expert declaration of Paul

Min, Ph.D.

Exhibit 1007 – CATT, TD-TECH, “LCR TDD: Structure and Coding for E-

HICH,” 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #48, Saint Louis, USA, February 12–16,

2007 (R1-071137) (“R1-071137”) was made available to the extent that persons

interested and ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art, exercising reasonable

diligence, could locate it by at least February 16, 2007 (see Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 15–20),

which is prior to the earliest filing date claimed by the ’919 patent (March 23,

2007). R1-071137 is therefore available as prior art under § 102(a). R1-071137

was not considered during the original prosecution of the ’919 patent.

2. The Specific Grounds on Which the Challenge Is Based

Petitioner respectfully requests cancellation of claims 1–18 of the ’919

patent on the following grounds:

(1) Claims 1–3, 5, 6, 10–12, 14, and 15 are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. §102

by R1-062771;


6

(2) Claims 4, 7, 8, 13, 16, and 17 are rendered obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103

by R1-062771 in view of R1-070734; and

(3) Claims 9 and 18 are rendered obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103 by R1-

062771 in view of R1-063326; and

(4) Claims 6, 8, 15, and 17 are rendered obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103 by

R1-062771 in view of R1-070734 and R1-071137.

V. BACKGROUND OF THE ’919 PATENT

A. Technology Overview

Mobile communication systems include base stations and mobile stations,

which are also known as “User Equipment” or “UEs.” (Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 31–32).

Communications from the base station to the mobile station are referred to as

“downlink” or “DL” communications, whereas communications from the mobile

station to the base station are referred to as “uplink” or “UL” communications.

Communications on the DL or UL are limited by the amount of resources (e.g.,

frequency bandwidth and time) available for the stations. In a mobile

communication system that uses a transmission scheme known as “Orthogonal

Frequency-Division Multiplexing” or “OFDM” the time and frequency domain are

divided into chunks of resources known as “resource blocks” or “RBs.” As shown

below, each row in the resource block is a “slot” or “symbol” and each column in

the resource block is “subcarrier”:


7

The example provided below schematically shows a 5 MHz UL bandwidth divided

into 12 resource blocks or RBs:

(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, cropped). The available UL resource blocks are assigned to

the various mobile stations by the base station. In order for the mobile station to

known which of the RB(s) it is assigned, the base station sends the mobile station

allocation information, which identifies the RB(s) provided to the mobile station

for use based on the index number(s) of the RB(s).

Base stations send mobile stations “control” information that controls the

communication flow between the base and mobile stations by identifying a variety

of parameters that regulate the communication flow. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 33). One piece of

control information that is sent from the base station to the mobile station is a

Tim

e

Frequency


8

response message, which indicates the success or failure of a data transmission

from the mobile station to the base station. The response signal can be either an

“ACK,” which is a positive acknowledgement, or a “NACK,” which is a negative

acknowledgment.

After the mobile station transmits information to the base station on the UL

using its allocated RB(s), it awaits an ACK/NACK response signal from the base

station. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 34). But first, the mobile station must know where to find the

response signal on the DL. As the ’919 admits, it was known in the art to associate

the assigned UL RB number to DL control channels that contain the response

signal in order to efficiently use DL communication resources. (Ex. 1001, 1:33–

42). Specifically, the ’919 patent references R1-010932 (Ex. 1006) as teaching this

method of associating the UL RBs with DL control channels containing the

response signals. (Ex. 1001, 1:49–51). In order to further improve the efficiency of

the DL communication resources, the DL control channels with the response

signals are multiplexed. Multiplexing techniques for DL communication resources,

such as code-division multiplexing (“CDM”) and frequency-division multiplexing

(“FDM”), were well known in the art. See generally, Ex. 1004. The ’919 patent

admits that it was known to use both CDM and FDM, individually or in a hybrid

CDM/FDM scheme, as methods for multiplexing response signals in the DL. (Ex.


9

1001, 1:43–48). Specifically, the ’919 patent references R1-070734 (Ex. 1005) as

teaching this method of CDM and FDM response signals. (Ex. 1001, 1:52–54).

The claims of the ’919 patent are a directed to a simple combination of the

above principles.

B. Summary of the ’919 Patent

The ’919 patent is generally directed to a mobile communication system that

performs the well-known practice of providing a response signal to a mobile

station. (Ex. 1001, 1:21–32, 2:46–67). As was well known in the art, the ’919

patent provides an exemplary UL resource that is divided into RBs.

(Ex. 1001, Figure 1). As was also known in the art, the DL response signals for

each UL RB is correlated on a one-to-one relationship to the UL RBs (e.g., DL

response signal #1 is for UL RB#1). (Ex. 1001, Figure 3). The DL response

signals, which are mapped onto DL control channels, are then sent on the DL using

a hybrid CDM/FDM scheme. (Ex. 1001, 7:35–48). Specifically, as seen in figure 6,

consecutive pairs of DL control channels with the response signals are sent via

different frequency bands.


10

(Ex. 1001, Figure 6).

C. Prosecution History of the ’919 Patent

The ’919 patent issued on November 22, 2011 from U.S. Patent Application

No. 12/983,770, filed on January 3, 2011, which claims priority to U.S. Patent

Application No. 12/532,352, which was filed as PCT/JP2008/000675 on March 21,

2008, and three Japanese patent applications: 2007-077502 (filed on March 23,

2007), 2007-120853 (filed on May 1, 2007), and 2007-211104 (filed on August 13,

2007). (Ex. 1001, p. 1).

The ’919 patent issued without any office actions or substantive discussion

explaining the reasons of allowance.

VI. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART

The level of ordinary skill in the art is evidenced by the prior art. See In re

GPAC Inc., 57 F.3d 1573, 1579 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (determining that the Board did


11

not err in adopting the approach that the level of skill in the art was best

determined by references of record). The prior art discussed herein, and in the

declaration of Paul Min, Ph.D., demonstrates that a person of ordinary skill in the

art in the field of the ’919 patent would have been someone with an undergraduate

degree in electrical engineering, computer science, or computer engineering, or a

related field, and around two years of experience in the design, development,

and/or testing of cellular networks or equivalent combination of education and

experience.

VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION

In an inter partes review, claim terms in an unexpired patent are interpreted

according to their broadest reasonable interpretation (“BRI”) in view of the

specification in which they appear. 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). Thus, as required by the

rules, this Petition uses the BRI standard.

“Hybrid ARQ Indicator Channel (HICH)”

Claims 6, 8, 15, and 17 recite the “hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH)”

claim term. The specification describes “hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH)”

only once in the specification, where it explains that it is a synonym for

“ACK/NACK channels”:

Further, the downlink control channels for transmitting response

signals used in the explanation of the above embodiments are


12

channels for feeding back ACK signals or NACK signals for mobile

stations. For this reason, the downlink control channels for

transmitting response signals may be referred to as “DCCHs

(Dedicated Control Channels),” “ACK/NACK channels,” “response

channels” and “HICH (Hybrid ARQ Indicator Channel).”

(Ex. 1001, 21:63–22:3). This is consistent with the plain and ordinary meaning of

the term “hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH).” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 38). Accordingly, a

person of ordinary skill in the art would consider the broadest reasonable

interpretation in light of the specification and prosecution history of “hybrid ARQ

indicator channel (HICH)” to be a downlink control channel for transmitting a

response signal that can also be referred to as a “DCCH (Dedicated Control

Channel),” “ACK/NACK channel,” or “response channel.” (Ex. 1003 ¶38).

VIII. GROUNDS OF UNPATENTABILITY

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) and (5), this section demonstrates that

claims 1–18 of the ’919 patent are unpatentable.

A. Claims 1–3, 5, 6, 10–12, 14, and 15 are Anticipated by R1-062771

As demonstrated by the following element-by-element analysis as well as

the declaration of Paul Min, Ph.D. (Ex. 1003), claims 1–3, 5, 10–12, and 14 of the

’919 patent are anticipated by R1-062771.

R1-062771 is directed to methods of mapping the ACK/NACK response

signals in the DL in association with the UL RB. (Ex. 1004, p. 2). R1-062771


13

proposes three methods for mapping the ACK/NACK response signal on the DL:

(1) “FDM Multiplexing of ACK/NACK,” (2) “Scatter Multiplexing of

ACK/NACK,” and (3) “CDM Multiplexing of ACK/NACK.” (Ex. 1004, pp. 1–9).

With reference to the FDM Multiplexing of ACK/NACK scheme, each UL RB’s

response signal is associated with particular subcarriers in the DL resources based

on a disclosed formula. (Ex. 1004, p. 3). Accordingly, each mobile station can

determine the associated response signals based on its UL RBs.

Claim 1[preamble]: “A mobile station apparatus comprising:”

The methods and operations described in R1-062771 necessarily require “[a]

mobile station apparatus.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 40). R1-062771 discusses the flow of

signals to and from a UE or User Equipment. (Ex. 1004, pp. 1, 2). A person of

ordinary skill in the art would have known that a UE is mobile station. (Ex. 1003,

¶ 40).

Claim 1[a]: “a reception unit configured to receive, from a base station, allocation information indicating one or a plurality of allocated resource block(s) of uplink”

R1-062771 describes “receiv[ing], from a base station, allocation

information indicating one or a plurality of allocated resource block(s) of uplink.”

(Ex. 1003, ¶ 41). R1-062771 states that the DL control channel must contain

“information on the resource allocation.” (Ex. 1004, pp. 1, 2). R1-062771 provides

an example were 12 users are allocated one RB each: “The structure in Figure 1 is


14

designed to support a maximum of 12 simultaneous users within 5 MHz (each user

with one chunk) ….” (Ex. 1004, p. 3). Accordingly, the allocation information

provided by the base station to the mobile stations would indicate that each mobile

station is allocated one chunk, or resource block. R1-062771 uses the terms

“chunk” and “resource” block interchangeably. (Ex. 1004, pp. 5–6). As shown

below, a first mobile station’s allocation information would indicate that it is

allocated resource block one (red) and a third mobile stations allocation

information would indicate that it is allocated resource block three (yellow):

(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, cropped).

The methods and operations described in R1-062771 necessarily require “a

reception unit” in the mobile station apparatus. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 42). R1-062771

discusses a downlink control channel that is used to send signals from the base

station to the mobile station. (Ex. 1004, pp. 1, 2). A person of ordinary skill in the

art would have known that a mobile station must contain a reception unit because

the reception unit is necessary for the mobile station to receive both allocation

information and response signals (e.g., ACK/NACK). (Ex. 1003, ¶ 42). Patent

Owner’s own expert agreed that a reception unit is necessary part of a mobile


15

station: “Reception units were a fundamental part of wireless devices, as they are

today, since they are needed to receive wireless signals.” (Ex. 1011, ¶ 43). Without

the ability to receive the allocation and response signals from the base station, the

mobile station would be inoperable in the mobile communication system. (Ex.

1003, ¶ 42).

Claim 1[b]: “the resource blocks being consecutive in a frequency domain”

R1-062771’s resource blocks are consecutive in the frequency domain. (Ex.

1003, ¶ 43). R1-062771 shows the entire 5 MHz bandwidth being divided into

consecutive RBs:

(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, cropped, annotated). R1-062771’s RB diagram is nearly

identical to the ’919 patent’s RB diagram, the primary exception being the number

of RBs depicted (12 in R1-062771 versus 8 in the ’919 patent):

Frequency


16

(Ex. 1001, Figure 1).

Claim 1[c]: “a determination unit configured to determine a resource of downlink, to which a response signal transmitted from the base station is mapped, from an index of the allocated resource block based on the allocation information”

R1-062771 describes “determin[ing] a resource of downlink, to which a

response signal transmitted from the base station is mapped, from an index of the

allocated resource block based on the allocation information.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 44). In

R1-062771, the method for determining the resource of DL to which the response

signal is mapped depends on the multiplexing scheme used to transmit the

response signals on the DL. R1-062771 provides three methods for mapping the

ACK/NACK signals in the DL from the base station to the mobile station: (1)

FDM Multiplexing of ACK/NACK, (2) Scatter Multiplexing of ACK/NACK, and

(3) CDM Multiplexing of ACK/NACK. (Ex. 1004, pp. 2–9). With reference to the

first method, FDM multiplexing of ACK/NACK, R1-062771 describes the

relationship between the index of the allocated resource block (i or j) and the

downlink resource (Position) as follows:


17

(Ex. 1004, p. 3).


determination unit” in the mobile station apparatus. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 45). As discussed

above, R1-062771 describes the mobile station as being able to determine where

the ACK/NACK is located in the DL control channels. (Ex. 1004, pp. 2, 3). A

person of ordinary skill in the art would have known that a mobile station must

contain a determination unit because the determination unit is necessary for the

mobile station to be able locate the response signal (e.g., ACK/NACK) from the

base station. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 45). Without the ability to determine the location of the

response signal from the base station, the mobile station would be inoperable in the

mobile communication system. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 45).


18

Claim 1[d]: “wherein: the indices of a plurality of the consecutive resource blocks are respectively associated with a plurality of the resources which are different in a frequency domain;”

R1-062771 describes that “the indices of a plurality of the consecutive

resource blocks are respectively associated with a plurality of the resources which

are different in a frequency domain.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 46). In the depicted example,

R1-062771’s plurality of consecutive RBs includes RBs 6 and 7:

(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, cropped, annotated). As discussed above, the relationship

between the indices of the plurality of resource blocks (i or j) and the plurality of

resources (Position) is as follows:

Resource Block #6

Resource Block #7


19

(Ex. 1004, p. 3). The relationship between the indices of resource blocks and the

DL resources results in resources of different frequencies for the respective

resources associated with RBs 6 and 7:

(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated).

Claim 1[e]: “the plurality of the resources are respectively comprised of a plurality of subcarrier groups which are inconsecutive in a frequency domain”

R1-062771 describes that “the plurality of the resources are respectively

comprised of a plurality of subcarrier groups which are inconsecutive in a

frequency domain.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 47). Specifically, R1-062771’s respective

resources associated with RBs 6 and 7 are comprised of a plurality of subcarrier

groups that are inconsecutive in the frequency domain, as shown below:

Resources Associated with the 7th RB


Frequency


20

(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated). As seen in the annotated figure above, the

subcarrier groups are inconsistent in the frequency domain because there are gaps

in the subcarrier groups that contain the ACK/NACK signals.

Claim 1[f]: “the response signal is mapped to the subcarrier group”

R1-062771 discloses that “the response signal is mapped to the subcarrier

group.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 48). R1-062771 shows that the response signal to the sixth

mobile station (brown) and to the seventh mobile station (orange) are mapped to

their respective subcarrier groups as follows:

“SG” = Subcarrier Group



Frequency

SG GAP

SG GAP

SGGAP

SGGAP

SGGAP GAP

SG


21


Claim 2[a]: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1 further comprising a transmission unit configured to transmit data using the allocated resource block(s) based on the allocation information”

R1-062771 describes “transmit[ing] data using the allocated resource

block(s) based on the allocation information.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 49). R1-062771

explains that the mobile station has “knowledge of the UL chunks used for the UL

transmission ….” (Ex. 1004, p. 2). R1-062771 explains that the mobile station

transmits data using the “N” number of RBs that it was allocated by the base

station. (Ex. 1004, pp. 2, 3).


transmission unit” in the mobile station apparatus. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 50). As discussed

Response Signal to the 7th Mobile Station



22

above, R1-062771 describes the mobile station as transmitting data using the

allocated RB(s) based on the allocation information. (Ex. 1004, pp. 2, 3). A person

of ordinary skill in the art would have known that a mobile station must contain a

transmission unit because the transmission unit is necessary for the mobile station

to be able transmit data, which is the fundamental function of the mobile unit. (Ex.

1003, ¶ 50). Patent Owner’s own expert agreed that a transmission unit is

necessary part of a mobile station: “Transmission units were a fundamental part of

wireless devices, as they are today, since they are needed to transmit signals

wirelessly.” (Ex. 1011, ¶ 43). Without the ability to transmit data, the mobile

station would be inoperable in the mobile communication system. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 50).

Claim 2[b]: “wherein said determination unit determines the resource, to which the response signal is mapped, from an index of the resource block used for transmitting the data”

See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 1[c].

Claim 3: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the response signal is mapped to a plurality of the resources distributed in the frequency domain”

R1-062771 discloses that “the response signal is mapped to a plurality of the

resources distributed in the frequency domain.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 52). R1-062771

shows that the response signal to the sixth mobile station (brown) and to the

seventh mobile station (orange) are mapped to a plurality of the resources that are

distributed in the frequency domain as follows:


23


Claim 5: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of the same response signals are generated with a repetition in the base station, and the plurality of the same response signals are mapped to a plurality of the resources distributed in the frequency domain, respectively.”

R1-062771 discloses that “a plurality of the same response signals are

generated with a repetition in the base station, and the plurality of the same

response signals are mapped to a plurality of the resources distributed in the

frequency domain, respectively.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 53). R1-062771 shows that the

response signal to the sixth mobile station (brown) and to the seventh mobile

station (orange) are generated with a repetition at the base station and mapped to a

plurality of the resources that are distributed in the frequency domain as follows:



Frequency




24


Claim 6: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and the response signal is mapped to the resource to which the hybrid ARQ indicator channel is mapped.”

R1-062771 discloses that “the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ

indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and the response signal is mapped to

the resource to which the hybrid ARQ indicator channel is mapped.” As discussed

above, a “hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH)” is a downlink control channel

for transmitting a response signal and is synonymous with an ACK/NACK

channel. See supra Section VII. R1-062771 specifically describes an ACK/NACK

channel: “The structure in Figure 1 is designed to support a maximum of 12



Frequency




25

simultaneous users within 5 MHz (each user with one chunk) with each chunk

being acknowledged by a six subcarrier ACK/NACK channel.” (Ex. 1004, p. 3).

Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would consider R1-062771’s

ACK/NACK channel to be a hybrid ARQ indicator channel. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 54). R1-

062771’s response signals (the ACK/NACKs) are mapped to a resource to which

the hybrid ARQ indicator channel (the ACK/NACK channel) is mapped. (Ex.

1004, pp. 2–4). The response signals in R1-062771 are ACK/NACK signals and,

thus, are necessarily carried on ACK/NACK channels in the base station. (Ex.

1003, ¶ 54). R1-062771 shows the response signal being mapped to the resource to

which the hybrid ARQ indicator channel (the ACK/NACK channel) is mapped:


“HICH” – ACK/NACK Channel


HICH HICH HICH


26


Claim 10[preamble]: “A method for determining a response signal resource comprising:”

Claim 10 is directed to a method for performing the functions recited in

claim 1 and is therefore anticipated by R1-062771 for the same reasons.

R1-062771 discloses “A method for determining a response signal

resource.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 56). R1-062771 describes several methods for determining

the resource of DL to which the response signal is mapped: (1) FDM Multiplexing

of ACK/NACK, (2) Scatter Multiplexing of ACK/NACK, and (3) CDM

Multiplexing of ACK/NACK. (Ex. 1004, pp. 2–9). With reference to the first

method, FDM multiplexing of ACK/NACK, R1-062771 describes the relationship

between the index of the allocated resource block (i or j) and the DL resource

(Position) as follows:

(Ex. 1004, p. 3). Thus, R1-062771 teaches the preamble of claim 10.


27

Claim 10[a]: “receiving, from a base station, allocation information indicating one or a plurality of allocated resource block(s) of uplink”

See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 1[a].

Claim 10[b]: “the resource blocks being consecutive in a frequency domain”

See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 1[b].

Claim 10[c]: “determining a resource of downlink, to which a response signal transmitted from the base station is mapped, from an index of the allocated resource block based on the allocation information”

See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 1[c].

Claim 10[d]: “wherein: the indices of a plurality of the consecutive resource blocks are respectively associated with a plurality of the resources which are different in a frequency domain”

See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 1[d].

Claim 10[e]: “the plurality of the resources are respectively comprised of a plurality of subcarrier groups which are inconsecutive in a frequency domain”

See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 1[e].

Claim 10[f]: “the response signal is mapped to the subcarrier group”

See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 1[f].


28

Claim 11: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10 further comprising transmitting data using the allocated resource block(s) based on the allocation information, wherein the resource, to which the response signal is mapped, is determined from an index of the resource block used for transmitting the data”

Claim 11 is directed to a method for performing the functions recited in

claim 2. See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 2[a], [b]. Thus, claim 11 is anticipated by

R1-062771 for the same reasons.

Claim 12: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein the response signal is mapped to a plurality of the resources distributed in the frequency domain”

Claim 12 is directed to a method for performing the function recited in claim

3. See supra Section VIII.A, Claim 3. Thus, claim 12 is anticipated by R1-062771

for the same reasons.

Claim 14: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein a plurality of the same response signals are generated with a repetition in the base station, and the plurality of the same response signals are mapped to a plurality of the resources distributed in the frequency domain, respectively.”





29

Claim 15: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and the response signal is mapped to the resource to which the hybrid ARQ indicator channel is mapped.”




B. Claims 4, 7, 8, 13, 16, and 17 are Obvious over R1-062771 in View of R1-070734

As demonstrated by the following detailed analysis as well as the declaration

of Paul Min, Ph.D. (Ex. 1003), claims 4, 7, 8, 13, 16, and 17 of the ’919 patent are

rendered obvious by R1-062771 in view of R1-070734.

R1-062771 does not explicitly discuss combining the CDM and FDM

schemes for providing response signals (ACK/NACKs) on the DL. R1-070734

describes a hybrid CDM/FDM scheme for providing response signals

(ACK/NACKs) on the DL. (Ex. 1005, pp. 1–4). As discussed below, R1-062771 in

view of R1-070734’s hybrid CDM/FDM scheme renders obvious claims 4, 7, 8,

13, 16, and 17 of the ’919 patent.


30

Claim 4: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the response signal is spread in the base station, and the spread response signal is mapped to the resource.”

R1-070734 explains that “the response signal is spread in the base station,

and the spread response signal is mapped to the resource.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 69). R1-

070734 describes a “hybrid CDM/FDM” scheme for transmitting downlink

ACK/NACK signals. (Ex. 1005, pp. 1–4). The CDM portion of the hybrid

CDM/FDM transmission scheme uses “Walsh-Hadamard (WH) orthogonal

spreading.” (Ex. 1005, p. 1). Because R1-070734 describes a DL transmission (i.e.,

from the base station to the mobile station) the process of creating the hybrid

CDM/FDM DL transmission is necessarily completed in the base station prior to

transmission on the DL. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 69). The ’919 patent even admits that R1-

070734 teaches spreading the response signal and mapping it to the resource:

Further, studies are conduct for ARQ recently whereby a

response signal is spread and the spread response signal is duplicated

in order to average interference of the response signal from

neighboring cells or sectors and provide frequency diversity gain for

the response signal (e.g. see Non-patent Document 2).

…

Non-patent Document 2: 3GPP RAN WG1 Meeting document, R1-

070734, “ACK/NACK Channel Transmission in E-UTRA

Downlink,” TI, February 2007

(Ex. 1001, 1:43–54).


31

For example, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that

R1-062771 could be modified by the teachings of R1-070734 such that each DL

RB would include 6 code-multiplexed response signals that are responsive to the

first 6 UL RBs. A pictorial representation of R1-062771 as modified by the

teachings of R1-070734 is shown below:

(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated and modified in view of R1-070734).

It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify

R1-062771’s FDM scheme with R1-070734’s hybrid CDM/FDM scheme in order

to provide the benefits of both CDM and FDM, while avoiding the shortcomings of

pure a CDM or FDM scheme. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 71). Specifically, R1-070734 explains

the benefits of a hybrid CDM/FDM scheme over a pure FDM scheme:

Modified In View Of R1-070734


32

Hybrid CDM/FDM is recommended for DL ACK/NAK signaling as it

provides all desirable properties (frequency diversity, individual

power adaptation for coverage and enhanced reliability for NAK,

interference averaging and randomization, power balancing per sub-

carrier among multiple ACK/NAK signals, applicability to all E-

UTRA BWs and for any number of ACK/NAK signals) while

avoiding the shortcomings of pure CDM or FDM.

(Ex. 1005, p. 9, underlining in the original). Both R1-062771 and R1-070734

discuss multiplexing techniques for multiple DL ACK/NACK signals and, thus,

are directed to the same field of endeavor and, in fact, originated from the same

series of 3GPP standards-setting meetings. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 71). The methods and

techniques discussed in R1-062771 and R1-070734 were well understood by

persons of ordinary skill in the art and, therefore, could be combined to yield

predictable results. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 71). Accordingly, modifying R1-062771’s FDM

scheme with the teachings of R1-070734 is the “mere application of a known

technique to a piece of prior art ready for the improvement.” KSR Int’l Co. v.

Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 405 (2007). Additionally, by explicitly reciting the

benefit of providing interference randomization, R1-070734 provides a specific

teaching, suggestion, or motivation for the modification of R1-062771’s FDM

scheme with the teachings of R1-070734. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 71). For all the same

reasons, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have also had a reasonable


33

expectation of success in combining the references. Thus, claim 4 is obvious over

the combination of R1-062771 and R1-070734.

Claim 7: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of the response signals are mapped to the resource with code-multiplexed.”

The combination of R1-062771 and R1-070734, as applied in claim 4,

teaches that “a plurality of the response signals are mapped to the resource with

code-multiplexed.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 72). The apparatus of R1-062771, thus modified,

maps a plurality of the response signals to the resource with code multiplexing as

shown below:

(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated and modified in view of R1-070734). Thus, claim 7

is obvious over the combination of R1-062771 and R1-070734.


Plurality Of Response Signals


34

Claim 8: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and a plurality of the response signals are mapped to the resource, to which a plurality of the hybrid ARQ indicator channels are mapped, with code-multiplexed.”

The combination of R1-062771 and R1-070734, as applied in claim 4,

teaches that “the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel

(HICH) in the base station, and a plurality of the response signals are mapped to

the resource, to which a plurality of the hybrid ARQ indicator channels are

mapped, with code-multiplexed.” As discussed above, a “hybrid ARQ indicator

channel (HICH)” is simply a DL control channel for transmitting a response signal

and is synonymous with an ACK/NACK channel. See supra Section VII. While

the ACK/NACK “channel” can be a collection of subcarrier channels, as shown

above in reference to claim 6 (see supra Section VIII.A, Claim 6), a person of

ordinary skill in the art would also understand that the ACK/NACK “channel” as a

single subcarrier or CDM-based channel. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 73). Thus, each CDM-based

ACK/NACK channel in R1-062771 in view of R1-070734’s system would be a

hybrid ARQ indicator channel (the ACK/NACK channel). (Ex. 1003, ¶ 73).

Accordingly, the apparatus of R1-062771, as modified in view of R1-070734,

maps a plurality of response signals (ACK/NACK signals) to the resource to which

a plurality of hybrid ARQ indicator channels are mapped with CDM (CDM-based


35

ACK/NACK signals). (Ex. 1003, ¶ 73). The response signals in R1-062771, thus

modified, are ACK/NACK signals and, thus, are necessarily carried on hybrid

ARQ indicator channels (ACK/NACK channels) in the base station. (Ex. 1003,

¶ 73). The apparatus of R1-062771, as modified in view of R1-070734, maps a

plurality of the response signals to the resource, to which a plurality of the hybrid

ARQ indicator channels are mapped, with code-multiplexing:


is obvious over the combination of R1-062771 and R1-070734.


Plurality Of CDM-Based Response Signals

Plurality Of Hybrid ARQ Indicator Channels


36

Claim 13: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein the response signal is spread in the base station, and the spread response signal is mapped to the resource.”


4. See supra Section VIII.B, Claim 4. Thus, claim 13 is obvious over R1-062771 in

view of R1-070734 for the same reasons as claim 4.

Claim 16: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein a plurality of the response signals are mapped to the resource with code-multiplexed.”




Claim 17: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and a plurality of the response signals are mapped to the resource, to which a plurality of the hybrid ARQ indicator channels are mapped, with code-multiplexed.”





37

C. Claims 9 and 18 are Obvious over R1-062771 in View of R1-063326


of Paul Min, Ph.D. (Ex. 1003), claims 9 and 18 of the ’919 patent are rendered

obvious by R1-062771 in view of R1-063326.

R1-062771 does not explicitly discuss modifying the mapping scheme based

on the cell. However, R1-063326 specifically discuss varying the mapping scheme

between cells by performing “FDM with cell-specific frequency mapping for

multiple UEs” to beneficially provide interference randomization. (Ex. 1006, pp.

1–2). As explained below, R1-062771 in combination with R1-063326’s cell-

specific mapping renders obvious claims 9 and 18 of the ’919 patent.

Claim 9: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the index of the resource block is associated with the resource depending on a cell”

R1-063326 explains that “the index of the resource block is associated with

the resource depending on a cell.” (Ex. 1003, ¶ 79). Specifically, R1-063326

explains an alternative approach to a pure FDM scheme: a “FDM with cell-specific

frequency mapping for multiple UEs.” (Ex. 1006, pp. 1–2). R1-063326’s FDM

with cell-specific frequency mapping scheme would vary the resource block-to-

resource association based on the cell. (Ex. 1006, pp. 1–2). The basic FDM

scheme, without R1-063326’s FDM with cell-specific frequency mapping, would


38

result in an identical mapping of the ACK/NACK response resource to the mobile

station (and hence the mobile station’s resource block) for each cell. (Ex. 1006, p.

2; Ex. 1003, ¶ 79). But, R1-063326’s FDM with cell-specific frequency mapping

would vary the mapping of the ACK/NACK response resource to the associated

mobile station (and hence the mobile station’s resource block) on a cell-by-cell

basis. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 79). As R1-063326 explains, cell-specific frequency mapping

provides “interference randomization,” which improves the mobile station’s ability

to successfully receive DL ACK/NACK signals. (Ex. 1006, p. 2; Ex. 1003, ¶ 79).


R1-062771’s FDM scheme to incorporate R1-063326’s FDM with cell-specific

frequency mapping to provide “interference randomization,” which improves the

quality of the communication network by improving the mobile station’s ability to

successfully receive DL ACK/NACK signals. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 80). Both R1-062771

and R1-063326 discuss multiplexing techniques for multiple DL ACK/NACK

signals and, thus, are directed to the same field of endeavor and, in fact, originated

from the same series of 3GPP standards-setting meetings. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 80). The

methods and techniques discussed in R1-062771 and R1-063326 were well

understood by persons of ordinary skill in the art and, therefore, could be combined

to yield predictable results. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 80). Accordingly, modifying R1-062771’s

FDM multiplexing scheme with the teachings of R1-063326 is the “mere


39

application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for the

improvement.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 405 (2007).

Additionally, by explicitly reciting the benefit of providing interference

randomization, R1-063326 provides a specific teaching, suggestion, or motivation

for the modification of R1-062771’s FDM scheme with the teachings of R1-

063326. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 80). For all the same reasons, a person of ordinary skill in the

art would have also had a reasonable expectation of success in combining the

references.

Thus, claim 4 is obvious over the combination of R1-062771 and R1-

063326.

Claim 18: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein the index of the resource block is associated with the resource depending on a cell.”


9. See supra Section VIII.C, Claim 9. Thus, claim 18 is obvious over R1-062771 in


D. Claims 6, 8, 15, and 17 are Obvious over R1-062771 in View of R1-070734 and R1-071137


of Paul Min, Ph.D. (Ex. 1003), claims 6, 8, 15, and 17 of the ’919 patent are

rendered obvious by R1-062771 in view of R1-070734 and R1-071137.


40

To the extent the Board determines that the ACK/NACK channels of R1-

062771 are not hybrid ARQ indicator channels, R1-071137 explicitly discusses the

use of a “HARQ Acknowledgement Indicator Channel” to carry ACK/NACK

indicators. (Ex. 1007, p. 1). As discussed below, R1-062771 in view of R1-070734

and R1-071137’s explicit hybrid ARQ indicator channels renders obvious claims 6,

8, 15, and 17 of the ’919 patent.

Claim 6: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and the response signal is mapped to the resource to which the hybrid ARQ indicator channel is mapped.”

To the extent the Board determines that the ACK/NACK channels of R1-

062771 are not hybrid ARQ indicator channels, R1-071137 explicitly discusses the

use of a “HARQ Acknowledgement Indicator Channel” to carry ACK/NACK

indicators. (Ex. 1007, p. 1). R1-071137 teaches that “The HARQ

acknowledgement indicators are transmitted on a new downlink physical channel

termed E-DCH HARQ Acknowledgement Indicator Channel (E-HICH) ….” (Ex.

1007, p. 1). R1-071137 further teaches that “Multiple users’ ACK/NACK

indicators are code-division-multiplexed on E-HICH.” (Ex. 1007, p. 1). R1-071137

is an “enhanced” version of HICH because it allows for the inclusion of other

control information (transmit power control (TPC) and synchronization shift (SS)

data). (Ex. 1007, p. 1).


41


the combination of R1-062771 and R1-070734 to incorporate R1-071137’s E-

HICH system to allow for inclusion of additional control information in the DL

control channel, which improves the quality of the communication network by

improving the efficiency of the DL control channel. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 86). All three

references R1-062771, R1-071734, and R1-071137 discuss multiplexing

techniques for multiple DL ACK/NACK signals and, thus, are directed to the same

field of endeavor and, in fact, originated from the same series of 3GPP standards-

setting meetings. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 86). The methods and techniques discussed in R1-

062771, R1-0671734, and R1-071337 were well understood by persons of ordinary

skill in the art and, therefore, could be combined to yield predictable results. (Ex.

1003, ¶ 86). As discussed above, the combination of R1-062771 and R1-070734

teaches a mobile station with code multiplexed ACK/NACK response signals. See

supra Section VIII. B, Claim 7. Accordingly, modifying R1-062771 and R1-

070734’s CDM multiplexed system with the teachings of R1-071137 is the “mere

application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for the

improvement.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 405 (2007).

Additionally, by explicitly reciting the benefit of additional control data in the E-

HICH DL channel, R1-071137 provides a specific teaching, suggestion, or

motivation for the modification of the combined R1-062771 and R1-070734


42

system with the teachings of R1-071137. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 86). For all the same

reasons, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have also had a reasonable

expectation of success in combining the references.

Thus, claim 6 is obvious over the combination of R1-062771, R1-070734,

and R1-071137.

Claim 8: “The mobile station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and a plurality of the response signals are mapped to the resource, to which a plurality of the hybrid ARQ indicator channels are mapped, with code-multiplexed.”

As discussed above (see supra Section VIII.B, claim 8), the apparatus of R1-

062771, as modified in view of R1-070734, maps a plurality of the response

signals to the resource, to which a plurality of the ACK/NACK channels are

mapped, with code-multiplexing. As discussed above (see supra Section VIII.C,

claim 6), the combined system of R1-062771 and R1-070734, as modified in view

of R1-071137, teaches that the enhanced hybrid ARQ indicator channels are

mapped, with code-multiplexing. Accordingly, the combined system of R1-

062771, R1-070734, and R1-071137 teach that “the response signal is carried on a

hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and a plurality of the

response signals are mapped to the resource, to which a plurality of the hybrid

ARQ indicator channels are mapped, with code-multiplexed”:


43


is obvious over the combination of R1-062771, R1-070734, R1-071137.

Claim 15: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and the response signal is mapped to the resource to which the hybrid ARQ indicator channel is mapped.”


6. See supra Section VIII.D, Claim 6. Thus, claim 15 is obvious over R1-062771 in

view of R1-070734 and R1-071137 for the same reasons as claim 6.


Plurality Of CDM-Based Response Signals

Plurality Of Enhanced Hybrid ARQ Indicator


44

Claim 17: “The method for determining a response signal resource according to claim 10, wherein the response signal is carried on a hybrid ARQ indicator channel (HICH) in the base station, and a plurality of the response signals are mapped to the resource, to which a plurality of the hybrid ARQ indicator channels are mapped, with code-multiplexed.”


8. See supra Section VIII.D, Claim 8. Thus, claim 17 is obvious over R1-062771 in

view of R1-070734 and R1-071137 for the same reasons as claim 8.

IX. CONCLUSION

Substantial, new, and noncumulative technical teachings have been

presented for each of claims 1–18 of the ’919 patent, which claims are rendered

anticipated or obvious for the reasons set forth above. There is a reasonable

likelihood that Petitioner will prevail as to each of these claims. Therefore, inter

partes review of claims 1–18 should be instituted.

Respectfully submitted,

BlackBerry Corp., Petitioner,

By: /Robert C. Mattson /

Robert C. Mattson Reg. No. 42,850

OBLON, McCLELLAND,MAIER &, NEUSTADT, L.L.P.

Customer Number

22850 Tel: (703) 413-3000 Fax: (703) 413 -2220 (OSMMN 07/09)


45

Appendix – List of Exhibits

Exhibit No. Description 1001 U.S. Patent No. 8,064,919 to Fukuoka et al. 1002 Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 6,694,034 to Fukuoka et al. 1003 Declaration of Paul Min, Ph.D. 1004 NEC Group, “Downlink ACK/NACK Mapping for E-UTRA,” TSG-

RAN WG1 Meeting #46bis, Seoul, Korea, October 9–13, 2006 (R1-062771) (“R1-062771”)

1005 Texas Instruments, “ACK/NAK Channel Transmission in E-UTRA Downlink,” 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #48, Saint Louis, USA, February 12–16, 2007 (R1-070734) (“R1-070734”)

1006 NTT DoCoMo, Fujitsu, Mitsubishi Electric, NEC, Sharp, Toshiba Corporation, “ACK/NACK Signal Structure in E-UTRA Downlink,” 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #47, Riga, Latvia, November 6–10, 2006 (R1-063326) (“R1-063326”)

1007 CATT, TD-TECH, “LCR TDD: Structure and Coding for E-HICH,” 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #48, Saint Louis, USA, February 12–16, 2007 (R1-071137) (“R1-071137”)

1008 Internet Achieve capture of meeting #46 documents uploaded onto www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_ran/WG1_RL1/TSGR1_46bis/Docs/

1009 Internet Achieve capture of meeting #47 documents uploaded onto www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_ran/WG1_RL1/TSGR1_47/Docs/

1010 FTP of meeting #48 documents uploaded onto http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_ran/WG1_RL1/TSGR1_48/Docs/

1011 Declaration of Richard Gitlin, Sc.d, in Support of Plaintiffs’ Opening Claim Construction Brief, PanOptis v. BlackBerry, 2:16-cv-0062- JRG-RSP, D.I. 88-6 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 7, 2016)


CERTIFICATE OF WORD COUNT

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(d), the undersigned certifies that the foregoing

document, excluding the portions exempted under 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(a)(1),

contains 8,014 words, including the words added in annotating the figures, which

is under the limit of 14,000 words set by 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(a)(1)(i).

Dated: January 23, 2017 By: /Robert C. Mattson/ Robert C. Mattson Registration No. 42,850


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies service pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e) and

42.105(b) on Patent Owner by UPS overnight delivery of a copy of this Petition for

Inter Partes Review and supporting materials at the correspondence address of

record for the ’919 patent:

NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC 901 North Glebe Road, 11th Floor

Arlington, VA 22203

Eric M. Albritton Shawn A. Latchford Albritton Law Firm 222 North Fredonia

P O Box 2649 - 75606 Longview, TX 75601

Eric Sean Tautfest

James Joseph Ormiston Jared M Hoggan Mara Jill Bindler

J Cary Gray Gray Reed & McGraw, PC - Dallas

1601 Elm Street Suite 4600

Dallas, TX 75201

Respectfully submitted, Dated: January 23, 2017 /Robert C. Mattson/ Robert. C. Mattson Reg. No. 42,850

DOCKET NO: 500290US UNITED STATES PATENT AND … · U.S. Patent 8,064,919 Petition for Inter Partes...

Documents

Transcript of DOCKET NO: 500290US UNITED STATES PATENT AND … · U.S. Patent 8,064,919 Petition for Inter Partes...