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
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`
`I.
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8 ................................... 1
`
`Real Party In Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ............................. 1
`A.
`Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ..................................... 1
`B.
`Lead and Back-up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ................... 2
`C.
`Service Information Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ............................... 2
`D.
`PAYMENT OF FEES ..................................................................................... 2
`
`III.
`
`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
`
`Technology Overview ........................................................................... 6
`A.
`Summary of the ’919 Patent .................................................................. 9
`B.
`Prosecution History of the ’919 Patent ............................................... 10
`C.
`VI. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................ 10
`
`VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 11
`
`VIII. GROUNDS OF UNPATENTABILITY ........................................................ 12
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Claims 1–3, 5, 6, 10–12, 14, and 15 are Anticipated by R1-
`062771 ................................................................................................. 12
`Claims 4, 7, 8, 13, 16, and 17 are Obvious over R1-062771 in
`View of R1-070734 ............................................................................. 29
`
`ii
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`C.
`
`Claims 9 and 18 are Obvious over R1-062771 in View of R1-
`063326 ................................................................................................. 37
`Claims 6, 8, 15, and 17 are Obvious over R1-062771 in View
`of R1-070734 and R1-071137 ............................................................. 39
`IX. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 44
`
`D.
`
`iii
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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.).
`
`1
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`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: cpdocketmattson@oblon.com; cpdocketgokhale@oblon.com; and
`
`cpdocketyebernetsky@oblon.com.
`
`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.
`
`2
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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
`
`3
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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
`
`4
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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;
`
`5
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`(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”:
`
`6
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`
`Time
`
`Frequency
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`7
`
`

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

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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.
`
`9
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`
`(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
`
`10
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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
`
`11
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`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
`
`12
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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
`
`13
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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
`
`14
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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:
`
`
`
`Frequency
`
`
`(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):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`(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:
`
`16
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1004, p. 3).
`
`The methods and operations described in R1-062771 necessarily require “a
`
`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).
`
`17
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`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:
`
`Resource
`Block #6
`
`
`
`Resource
`Block #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:
`
`18
`
`
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`(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:
`
`Resources Associated
`with the 6th RB
`
`
`(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated).
`
`Resources Associated
`with the 7th RB
`
`Frequency
`
`
`
`
`
`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:
`
`19
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`“SG” = Subcarrier Group
`
`
`
`Resources Associated
`with the 6th RB
`
`Resources Associated
`with the 7th RB
`
`SG
`SG GAP
`GAP
`
`SG
`SGGAP
`GAP
`
`SG
`SG
`GAP GAP
`
`
`(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated). As seen in the annotated figure above, the
`
`
`
`Frequency
`
`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:
`
`20
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`Response Signal to the
`6th Mobile Station
`
`
`(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated).
`
`Response Signal to the
`7th Mobile Station
`
`
`
`
`
`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).
`
`The methods and operations described in R1-062771 necessarily require “a
`
`transmission unit” in the mobile station apparatus. (Ex. 1003, ¶ 50). As discussed
`21
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`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:
`
`22
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`Resources Associated
`with the 6th RB
`
`Resources Associated
`with the 7th RB
`
`Response Signal to the
`7th Mobile Station
`Frequency
`
`Response Signal to the
`6th Mobile Station
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated).
`
`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:
`
`23
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent 8,064,919
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`Resources Associated
`with the 6th RB
`
`Resources Associated
`with the 7th RB
`
`Response Signal to the
`7th Mobile Station
`Frequency
`
`Response Signal to the
`6th Mobile Station
`
`
`
`(Ex. 1004, Figure 1, annotated).
`
`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
`
`24
`
`

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