RECORD OF ORAL HEARING
`
`U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________
`
`HYTERA COMMUNICATIONS CORP. LTD.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`__________
`
`Case IPR2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`__________
`
`Oral Hearing Held: February 8, 2019
`__________
`
`Before TREVOR M. JEFFERSON, DANIEL N. FISHMAN, and PATRICK
`M. BOUCHER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________
`
`HYTERA COMMUNICATIONS CORP. LTD.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`__________
`
`Case IPR2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`__________
`
`Oral Hearing Held: February 8, 2019
`__________
`
`Before TREVOR M. JEFFERSON, DANIEL N. FISHMAN, and PATRICK
`M. BOUCHER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
`
`TODD R. TUCKER, ESQ.
`of: Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP
`The Calfee Building
`1405 East Sixth Street
`Cleveland, Ohio 44114
`216-622-8231
`ttucker@calfee.com
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNER:
`
`ADAM ALPER, ESQ.
`of: Kirkland & Ellis LLP
`555 California Street
`San Francisco, California 94104
`415-439-1876
`aalper@kirkland.com
`
`
`
`
`The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on Friday, February 8, 2019,
`commencing at 1:00 p.m. at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 600
`Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`
`P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S
`
`1:11 p.m.
`JUDGE JEFFERSON: This is trial and hearing IPR 2017-00128,
`Patent Number 8,116,284 owned by Motorola Solutions. Petitioner in this
`case is Hytera Communications Corporation.
`I'm Judge Jefferson. With me remotely as we know from our
`earlier hearings is Judges Fishman and Boucher.
`We'll do away with the regular instructions, but I'll still ask you to
`make appearances. So at this time, we'll start with Petitioner.
`MR. TUCKER: Yes, Your Honor. Todd Tucker from Calfee,
`Halter & Griswold for Petitioner Hytera. With me is my colleague Josh
`Friedman.
`JUDGE JEFFERSON: Welcome. Patent Owner.
`MR. ALPER: Good afternoon, Your Honors. Adam Alper from
`Kirkland & Ellis for Patent Owner Motorola Solutions.
`JUDGE JEFFERSON: Thank you. Each side will have 60
`minutes to make their presentation. Petitioner may reserve rebuttal time on
`those issues you have final say on. And you may begin when you're ready.
`MR. TUCKER: Thank you, Your Honor. I'd like to reserve 20
`minutes.
`JUDGE JEFFERSON: Okay. The warning should start at 5
`minutes to, to go with your --
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`MR. TUCKER: Thank you. Okay.
`JUDGE JEFFERSON: But I'll count down from 60 so you know
`where we are. You may begin.
`MR. TUCKER: Thank you, Your Honor. So the '284 patent,
`again, is nothing more than a relatively simple concept of letting a subscriber
`radio pick an open channel for communication without having to request any
`detailed channel assignment from the system. Really nothing more,
`nothing less.
`In old systems, radios would have to request an open channel and
`receive an assignment before every transmission from the operating system,
`which would cause delays. The '284's claimed solution to this issue of it
`taking a while to get what channel you're communicating on is exceedingly
`simple.
`We're going to have a talkgroup of radios. They're going to have
`two channels available to them. When we want to communicate, we check
`if one channel is available. If it's not, use the other one.
`Not surprisingly, this two timeslot rather straightforward concept is
`found in numerous pieces of prior art. In the initial determination, the
`Board focused on the Ganucheau reference. But in addition to Ganucheau,
`Petitioner submits that the combination of Barnes and Janky renders the
`claims obvious as well as the Wiatrowski patent, which we discussed this
`morning in the '991, anticipates the claims.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`What the patent does is it attempts to take this really straightforward
`simple concept and make it much more complicated than it is by breaking it
`into these really trivial steps like determining, searching and selecting.
`So we've got this kind of fancy descriptions of very simple, very
`simple steps. And the reason that they are very trivial is for the most part,
`we're dealing, similar with the Wiatrowski '991 patent, with just a two
`timeslot system.
`So there's not a lot that goes into determining from a two timeslot,
`searching in two timeslots, selecting in a two timeslot, because you have the
`channel you can be on and an alternate. That's it.
`Additionally, there is -- in addition to the two timeslot channels the
`dependent claims have reference to what's called a Common Announcement
`Channel. And that third channel, the Common Announcement Channel,
`what it does is it provides, for instance, some status information to the
`talkgroup.
`That said, the '284 has almost no detail on Common Announcement
`Channel. In the papers it appears the Patent Owner is trying to make the
`Common Announcement Channel read very narrowly on the term Common
`Announcement Channel, the ETSI standard. The problem with that is even
`though the '284 patent was filed well after the ETSI standard, even though
`the Wiatrowski prior art reference talks about the ETSI standard, the '284
`patent mentions ETSI nowhere.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`So what we are left with is the Common Announcement Channel
`cannot be limited to that very, very specific ETSI version. Instead it must
`mean something else. It must mean something broader.
`We've already talked about a lot of the technology invested in
`TDMA in the '991 IPR earlier this morning. So I'd like to move along and
`just dive into on Slide 15 the '284 patent.
`So Figure 3 from the '284 is fairly representative. And in a
`nutshell, you have a radio communication device with an assigned default
`timeslot. When the timeslot is unavailable, the device searches for and
`selects temporarily another available timeslot for communicating with other
`devices.
`And then when the default timeslot becomes available, the device is
`going to re-select it. What the '284 claims as its big leap is that instead of
`having the timeslots being told what timeslot to use by the system, timeslots
`are stored on the subscriber so that the subscriber is in a group of radios.
`It's called a talkgroup. They're going to communicate to each other. They
`have one of two channels to communicate from.
`And if we go to Slide 16 you'll see this. This is kind of the high
`level view of how the '284 system works where I've got probably a base
`station repeater 210 and then 100, 230, 240, 250, those are my subscribers,
`my radios. And right now those radios form a talkgroup. And that
`talkgroup is communicating on Channel 220.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`Now there's nothing special technology-wise about what it's really
`describing here. If you go to Slide 17, please, the default timeslot has
`really no detail. All it says is that it has an assigned default timeslot for
`communicating with the talkgroup.
`It doesn't explain how or when this is assigned. It just assumes it's
`there. That is Dr. Akl, our expert's testimony on this term of the patent.
`Additionally, they make a lot -- let's go to Slide 18. The Patent
`Owner makes a lot about searching in their papers. But, again, we have
`two timeslots. So, you know, it's not like we're searching for, you know,
`the lost treasure of the Sierra Madre.
`We have two timeslots and we know where they are. So when one
`is not available, guess what you're going to do? You're going to go to the
`other one.
`And in fact, we had an interesting examination of their expert. And
`we asked him to, you know, what is this system all about? And he drew
`this picture. And this picture shows us how simple this patent is. Two
`timeslots and he labeled them slot 1 and slot 2. And that is essentially it for
`the independent claims. That's the basis.
`Now on Slide 20, excuse me, go back to Slide 19, please. Oh, I'm
`sorry, to 20. So the two channel embodiment is what's described time and
`time again throughout the '284. There is mention that they could now get
`more than two slots on the '284 system, which would take you, they say up
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`to five. And then the step of searching for an available timeslot. If you're
`in the five channel, it would be performed in a predefined order.
`What that means is the first available timeslot, if a default is not
`available, we're going to have some predefined order to go through the other
`four timeslots to figure out what should be the channel for the talkgroup.
`And keep that in mind because this will come up a little bit later.
`Also, the claims also involve selecting and re-selecting. If we go to
`Slide 22 -- selecting is not really explained. Go to Slide 22, please. And
`likewise the re-selecting isn't really explained. All we=re just saying is
`select the ultimate and then re-select back to the default.
`JUDGE BOUCHER: So your slide mentions channel switching.
`Can you help me understand what the consequences are of the channel
`switching? So for example in the two timeslot embodiment, suppose the
`default timeslot is timeslot one. But the temporary timeslot is timeslot two
`and then when I re-select, am I necessarily re-selecting timeslot one?
`MR. TUCKER: So you have two timeslots available to you in the
`two timeslot embodiment. If the default channel is one and it becomes
`busy, you're going to move to two. And then at some point, some
`undefined point, that's what I mean by the no temporal limitation, at some
`point when the default, timeslot one, becomes available, we'll re-select it.
`That's all I mean there, Your Honor.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`JUDGE BOUCHER: Okay. And so suppose we have the five
`timeslot embodiment and the default timeslot is one and the temporary one I
`switched to is two. And I re-select the default timeslot. Am I necessarily
`selecting one?
`MR. TUCKER: So in the five channel, you=ll have timeslot one is
`your default. You'll have some sort of predefined order. So when
`timeslot one is not available, you'll look to that pre-defined order.
`One of the pieces of prior art actually discloses it. It says you go to
`the next lowest available. So go to whatever the criteria is pre-defined.
`I'm now on that channel for my talkgroup, default becomes available. I re-
`select the default. Again, it doesn't say immediately, no temporal
`limitation. Just, it happens.
`JUDGE BOUCHER: Well, when you say re-selects the default,
`you mean one?
`MR. TUCKER: Yes, in your example if one is the default. So the
`subscriber has on account of a priori that for this talkgroup right now, one is
`my default.
`JUDGE BOUCHER: Can the default change?
`MR. TUCKER: So there's nothing about -- if we go back to Slide
`17. There is nothing in the patent about how it's assigned. It just assumes
`it's there. So I think because it's just being provided, it's just kind of there a
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`priori, I think you have to understand that it could always be static. But it's
`also contemplated that it could change because it's silent. We don't know.
`JUDGE BOUCHER: Okay. And if it changes, then what does re-
`selecting the default channel mean?
`MR. TUCKER: So if timeslot one is the default and let's put this
`like in the context of Barnes. In Barnes, well, I=ll say the '284 and then I'll
`compare it to Barnes because they're the same.
`If timeslot one is the default and that for some reason changes and
`now timeslot two is the default, in your two channel embodiment now
`you've been told somehow that timeslot two is the default.
`Timeslot two becomes available. Go to timeslot one. Timeslot
`two later becomes re-available. You re-select it. And that would happen
`until for some reason, again, we don't what that reason is or how it's done,
`but the default changes. The patent is entirely silent on how we determine
`what the default is. It just tells us it's there. It's there somehow.
`JUDGE BOUCHER: So re-selecting the default channel doesn't
`necessarily mean selecting the same channel again?
`MR. TUCKER: Exactly. Re-selecting the default is re-selecting
`the default at that moment in time.
`JUDGE BOUCHER: Okay. Thanks.
`MR. TUCKER: So let's jump into claim construction very quickly
`then, which is Slide 25, because this is to your point, Your Honor. What
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`Motorola has argued despite the silence of the '284 is that it wants the
`default to be, for instance, like a factory assigned channel that more
`importantly it never changes. But the patent doesn't say anything about
`that. The patent doesn't say what default means.
`So the Board, in its initial determination, construed default timeslot
`as Petitioner advocated because there's just no info in '284 about giving us
`an indication or limitation on it that default timeslot includes a timeslot that
`changes based on time location or other criteria.
`This you'll see in both how the '284 would operate and how some of
`the prior, like Barnes, would operate where you're moving. So if we go
`back to Figure -- was it 7? Hang on one second. I'm sorry. Way off.
`If we go back to Slide 16 and we look at Figure 2 from the patent,
`we see these subscribers, these radios. We don't know where they are.
`And 210 is a repeater. So that's a tower. So there's multiple towards,
`multiple repeaters.
`As these radios are moving, they may move from one talkgroup to
`the next. So based on your location, your default could change. Based on
`time, for some reason the channel is no longer available, based on time the
`default could change.
`Motorola's argument that this should be essentially a static default
`channel, there is no support for that in the '284. And that construction is
`improper.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`Since we're talking about how the default channels work, let's stick
`with that before we go to the Common Announcement. And so if you
`could follow me to Slide 30, in the institution decision, the institution was
`really focused on Ganucheau. And I'll get to that in a minute.
`But the Barnes and Janky combination, for obviousness, I find
`particularly interesting because it just has so much information in it and so
`many different embodiments and ways that when you look at Barnes, and it's
`filed in 1998 and it's contemplating all these different ways we can assign a
`channel, make it a default and then get to a second channel when the first
`channel becomes unavailable.
`It was done, you know, years, years before the '284, 10 years before
`the '284 contemplates any of this. And they contemplate it with more detail
`and more embodiments.
`JUDGE BOUCHER: Barnes is not TDMA right?
`MR. TUCKER: Right. Barnes is not TDMA, but Barnes is
`FDMA. As I discussed this morning and why don't we go to Slide 7 --
`excuse me, Slide 5.
`So FDMA, again, you have your frequency. And the frequency
`band is used as subchannels so we can get more information out there. The
`radios will demodulate the frequency to separate end signals. This has
`been out there for over a century.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`If you turn to Slide 6, Barnes talks about, well, what this is showing
`is just very quickly that the push-to-talk radios have been used for group
`communications over a single channel for a long time. And that's often
`what is called point-to-multipoint conversation or point-to-multipoint
`communication versus point-to-point.
`Point to point is a radio pushing a button to another radio. Point to
`multi-point is I have a talkgroup full of radios. They all share a common
`channel and communicate on that. One of the problems, and it's replete
`through Patent Owner's papers, is they often conflate busy and available
`with is the channel available to the talkgroup versus someone is
`communicating on it.
`Just because someone's communicating within the talkgroup on the
`channel doesn't mean it's busy in the terms of the '284 patent. We're talking
`about is the channel available to the talkgroup? Again, an old concept.
`Then, when you go to Slide 7, as I said earlier, the '284 is so highly
`focused on the fact that the subscriber is making the channel selection.
`That we don't have to go out to the system to make the channel selection.
`This makes it more efficient, more quicker, speedier, whatever.
`Here FDMA, and this is a figure from Barnes that, you know, if you
`look at that box, this is -- this box ,Petitioner submits, is the '284 patent
`shown in FDMA. Home channel available, yes or no. If it is, you use that
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`channel. If it isn't, you select another channel. That is the essence, or at
`least a huge part of, the '284 in FDMA.
`If we move on to Slide 8, TDMA came after FDMA. And the
`whole idea behind TDMA was FDMA there were subchannels that we
`showed previously have a lot of wasted space on them. So let's make
`things more efficient.
`We will now use -- we will frequency demodulate to make the
`frequency band and then, as we discussed this morning, we'll use
`synchronization so that we can take the frequency and cut it into all these
`individual timeslots.
`TDMA was standardized in 1994 in the ANSI-136 standard that was
`discussed earlier this morning. And then I believe it was 2005, it was
`standardized for mobile radios under the ETSI standard.
`So while Barnes is indeed FDMA, what we have is the Janky
`reference, which contemplates, and actually beyond contemplating, Janky is
`an instruction manual for how to get TDMA into FDMA.
`As our expert testified and I think as it=s understood in the art, these
`were never supposed to be standalone systems because there were extreme
`capital costs involved of going totally TDMA versus taking the existing
`FDMA and modifying them so that they would work in a TDMA way. In
`fact, we have testimony from Dr. Akl that when he hears TDMA system, he
`usually assumes it's a hybrid FDMA/TDMA.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`So when we get to Barnes, there's three embodiments for how we
`determine the channels. They are a combination of Barnes and Janky.
`You have the free channel embodiment, which is Slide 32. And how that
`works is, again, there's a pre-assigned home channel. A pre-assigned home
`channel on the subscriber and a free channel.
`If the home channel is busy when the call is made, the subscriber
`looks to memory to see what the free channel is, uses that instead. And
`then there's a home channel repeater at some point who will send out a
`signal with a new free channel. And that's your sign of get off the home
`channel and go, I'm sorry, go back to the original home channel.
`Again, you know, it's two timeslots. It looks to the second when
`the first is busy. It looks to the default when the default is busy, go to the
`second and then go back.
`What Motorola says about this embodiment is that Barnes is not
`searching for the free channel because the free channel was assigned and
`stored in memory. But again, this is no different than the '284.
`The '284 you a priori know what this channel is and your searching
`is just to go find Channel 2 when Channel 1 is busy. When the default is
`busy go find two.
`The next embodiment is on Slide 33. And that is the alias channel
`embodiment. How the alias channel works -- this is called -- you know, it
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`kind of looks for the next lowest. But the subscribers again have a home
`channel. And that is assigned to them.
`The subscriber enters an area where the home channel is unavailable
`based on a channel map. And we'll talk about that in a little bit. The
`subscriber switches to the next lowest available channel and uses it as an
`alias.
`
`So if we go to Slide 34, this gets back to the Panel's question on --
`are you on 34? One second, Your Honor.
`Okay. So when we go to -- in Barnes, it's going to look for the next
`low. So a subscriber unit is programmed for Home Channel 12 on a five
`channel locality. There's no known 12 in the locality. So your second
`timeslot is the next lowest defined, Channel 9.
`If you go to Barnes, and it is around Column 20, there's actually a
`channel map that shows this. And this gets to -- excuse me, Column 21,
`it=s between 21 and 22. And this gets to the question about the five slot
`embodiment.
`And so what Barnes does here is if you look at this chart, you're in a
`five channel system and let's say that your home channel is -- you're in the
`ten channel system and your home channel is three. So the second line of
`that table, your home channel is three.
`When I move to the five channel system, Channel 3 is not available.
`So what I do is I immediately go to the predefined next lowest. One
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`becomes my channel. When I move back into the ten channel system, three
`is there, I switch back to three. So that is the alias embodiment.
`Now Motorola says that Barnes does not determine whether the
`channel is available. It's just tuning to monitor to see if it's busy. Again,
`but this is where they're conflating busy because somebody is talking on it
`versus a channel that is available to the talkgroup, which are two different
`things.
`
`All of the subscribers will be able to use that channel when it's their
`turn to talk. So it's not busy and unavailable. It's busy because
`somebody's talking, because someone within the group was communicating
`on it. But that's the channel that the group is going to be using for
`communication based on the home to the alias.
`And then finally Barnes has the backup channel embodiment, which
`is Slide 36. How this works is subscribers are assigned a home channel and
`monitor that for a periodic control message. If no message is received for a
`certain time period, essentially pinging it, the subscriber assumes it's
`unavailable and switches to the backup it has stored in memory.
`If activity is detected on the backup, the subscriber is going to use it
`temporarily as the home channel. If no activity is detected on the backup,
`the subscriber assumes it's left the backup coverage area and goes back to
`the home channel.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`Motorola claims that Barnes doesn't select somehow. But I think
`the tuning and what they say is just because you're tuning you're monitoring.
`But in reality what that is doing is that's ignoring that selecting can mean
`deciding to remain on the backup channel after determining that it's
`available.
`If you think back to cars in the '80s and '90s on your radio, you had
`two buttons. And one was sometimes I think called seek and one was
`called scan. So seek you would push it and you would go to the channel it
`was programmed to seek.
`Scan was you would go to the next closest channel and it would play
`for like 5 or 10 seconds. If you wanted to listen to that channel, you would
`hit scan. That's somewhat similar here.
`We're going to go -- our default channel is not available. We go to
`the next available channel. Tune it. See if we can get activity on it and
`then we select it. I submit to you, you know, the scanning feature in that
`old car radio is analogous to this. And that's selecting.
`So based on these three embodiments of Barnes and Janky, the
`combination, all of the steps of the independent claims are disclosed in
`these. There are criticisms about selecting and about that it's got to be a
`hard assigned default channel. Again, that's nowhere in the '284 so that's a
`limitation that you read into the claims that shouldn't be read into.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`The Barnes-Janky embodiments have radio communication devices
`having an assigned default timeslot, a couple different ways. They have an
`assigned default timeslot in the talkgroup. The device determines if the
`default timeslot is available in each embodiment albeit in some different
`ways but it does do that in each embodiment.
`If it is not available, it will search for an available timeslot when
`unavailable. And again, I think that searching term is quite the misnomer
`because it's a two channel. It's one of the embodiments that is covered by
`these claims, by claim one, is a two channel embodiment.
`So if the prior art has that two channel embodiment, claim one is
`invalid. And indeed Barnes and Janky have that so it renders obvious and
`thus invalid and unpatentable.
`The searching in a two channel embodiment is greatly overstated by
`the patent owner. You have two channels. Where else are you going to
`go?
`
`And then the Barnes-Janky combination will temporarily select the
`available timeslot when the default is busy and then it will re-select. Now
`again, based on the Board's claim construction, re-selecting it doesn't
`necessarily mean immediate.
`If we go back to Slide 7, again, the claim construction, there's
`nothing to make it have to go back immediate. And also the claim
`construction contemplates that the default is capable of changing. So
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`because of that, Claims 1, 9 and 15 are rendered obvious by Barnes and
`Janky.
`
`What I would like to move to now is talking about Claim 6, 8 and 14
`about the Common Announcement Channel and what is the Common
`Announcement Channel.
`JUDGE BOUCHER: When you addressed Barnes and Janky there,
`you didn't say much about the reason why some of it modified Barnes to use
`TDMA. At least not that I appreciated. Could you touch on that a little
`bit?
`
`MR. TUCKER: Absolutely, Your Honor. Go to Slide 42, please.
`So if you're on Slide 42, first off there is nothing unique in the claims of '284
`that requires anything special from TDMA other than the timeslot.
`There's no reason if I take timeslot out of claim one, we'd be able to
`do this in the FDMA. So that's why Barnes is reading on everything in this
`claim except the additional limitation of TDMA timeslot.
`If we go to Slide 31 -- one second, Your Honor. When TDMA was
`invented, it was viewed as being cost prohibitive. And this is in our papers.
`It was being cost prohibited to immediately migrate to -- from FDMA to
`TDMA.
`So when we look at Janky in the abstract, right up front it's
`contemplating that we're able to take timeslots and put them into FDMA,
`which is the only thing missing out of Barnes.
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`And it says in the abstract, in the trunk radio communication system,
`apparatus and methods are providing for transparently updating existing
`frequency division multiple access communication facilities to accommodate
`time division multiple access communications.
`TDMA channels, a channel in TDMA is a timeslot, TDMA channels
`are added into existing FDMA sites -- and I'm skipping a few things -- but to
`increase spectral efficiency and capacity while still being compatible with
`existing FDMA equipment and protocol.
`So Janky is giving us right up front in its abstract a very strong
`motivation statement that what we're doing here is we're going to take the
`aspects of TDMA, especially the TDMA channels, the timeslots, and put
`those FDMA system.
`Then if we go to the background of Janky on Column 2, it states that
`in that line -- it starts on Line 3. Significant interest has been shown in the
`cellular phone industry in the digital mode of operation in which time
`division multiple access, TDMA techniques segment a single frequency
`carrier into consecutive frames of timeslots with each slot in a frame so that
`the plural voice communications occupy a single frequency.
`Since in the FDMA mode a single frequency supports only one user
`at a time, TDMA achieves a significant increase in capacity by supporting
`multiple users on a single frequency.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`
`Despite the advantages, and I've gone on now to the same column,
`Line 12 -- despite the advantages of TDMA communications, huge
`investments in existing FDMA systems make it economically impractical to
`immediately replace the existing FDMA with TDMA systems.
`It then goes on finally a little bit further down on Line 29 -- 28,
`excuse me, the present invention provides methods and apparatus which
`transparently integrate TDMA capabilities to existing trunk FDMA base
`communication systems.
`So Janky is a huge motivation of, you know what? Don't throw
`away these FDMA systems. Let's take an FDMA system like what is
`taught in Barnes and move that into timeslots. It's almost beyond perhaps a
`motivation. It's almost like an instruction manual or recipe book in a lot of
`ways. So turning back --
`JUDGE BOUCHER: Isn't Janky really saying to add TDMA
`channels to an existing FDMA system? It's not apparent to me that it's
`talking about some kind of conversion of an FDMA system into a TDMA
`system so is the scope of your reply all of the teachings in FDMA are
`necessarily to TDMA?
`MR. TUCKER: Yes. So what it's saying is we're going to convert
`or we're going to take the frequency band and put timeslots in there. And
`when you look at claim one of the '284, all its -- and in my perception is
`what Janky is saying is how the FDMA systems work, we're going to let
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`them keep working that way except we're going to have them work in
`timeslots. That's the motivation it's trying to do.
`So knowing that, knowing that you can keep your FDMA system
`alive and make it better by putting it in timeslots. And there's nothing
`special in claim one of the '284 other than that we're just operating on
`timeslots.
`If you take TDMA out of claim one, or if claim one did not have
`TDMA timeslot in it, if it did not have TDMA timeslot in it, Barnes would
`anticipate it. Barnes does all of that. He just doesn't mention TDMA
`timeslot.
`Janky is saying I can take that technique. I can take that pre-
`existing FDMA structure and use that in a timeslot. Janky is telling us that
`take things like Barnes and put them into a timeslot.
`And, again, there's nothing else in claim one that sets it apart from
`Barnes except for that little -- just TDMA timeslot. So that falls into,
`especially with obviousness, beyond motivation, you know, there's
`predictable results. If we know this works when we're across the entire
`frequency band, we can make it work in a timeslot. That's a predictable
`result. That's a design choice.
`This is classic, classic obviousness of taking something that's very
`well-known and you make one little tweak to it that previously somebody
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`
`
`
`23
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2018-00128
`Patent 8,116,284 B2
`
`
`has said hey, that tweak can be done. That's what this is.
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
