Filed on behalf of Nokia of America Corporation
`By: David A. Nelson
`
`Stephen A. Swedlow
`
`Brianne M. Straka
`
`John McKee
`
`John P. Poulos
`
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP
`
`191 N Wacker Drive Suite 2700
`
`Chicago, Illinois 60606
`
`Telephone: (312) 705-7400
`
`Fax: (312) 705-7401
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________________
`
`NOKIA OF AMERICA CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`_____________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,682,357
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandra, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES ............................................................................. 3
`
`A.
`
`Real Party-in-Interest ............................................................................ 3
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Related Matters ...................................................................................... 3
`
`Lead and Back-up Counsel and Service Information ........................ 3
`
`III. GROUNDS FOR STANDING ........................................................................ 4
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF TECHNOLOGY AND OF THE ’357 PATENT ................ 4
`
`A. Wireless Cellular Communication Technology Overview ................... 4
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Paging Technology Overview ............................................................... 5
`
`Summary of the ’357 Patent .................................................................. 7
`
`D.
`
`Prosecution of the ’357 Patent .............................................................. 9
`
`V.
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................... 10
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 11
`
`A.
`
`“first network device” .......................................................................... 11
`
`B.
`
`“second network device” (claim 11) / “network device” (claim 30) ... 12
`
`VII. REQUESTED RELIEF ................................................................................. 14
`
`VIII. IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE ........................................................ 14
`
`A.
`
`Challenged Claims and Statutory Grounds ......................................... 14
`
`IX.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF HOW THE CLAIMS ARE
`UNPATENTABLE ........................................................................................ 19
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 11, 13, 30, 32, 47, and 49 are unpatentable under
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over CATT in view of LG ................................... 19
`
`1.
`
`Summary of CATT ................................................................... 19
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`Summary of LG ........................................................................ 21
`
`Reasons to Combine CATT and LG ......................................... 22
`
`Claim 11 .................................................................................... 26
`
`Claim 13 .................................................................................... 41
`
`Claim 30 .................................................................................... 42
`
`Claim 32 .................................................................................... 45
`
`Claim 47 .................................................................................... 45
`
`Claim 49 .................................................................................... 50
`
`B.
`
`Ground 2: Claims 12, 19, 31, 38, 48, and 54 are unpatentable under
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over CATT in view of LG, further in view of
`CATT2 ................................................................................................. 50
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`Summary of CATT2 ................................................................. 50
`
`Reasons to Combine CATT and CATT2 .................................. 51
`
`Claim 12 .................................................................................... 53
`
`Claim 19 .................................................................................... 57
`
`Claim 31 .................................................................................... 59
`
`Claim 38 .................................................................................... 59
`
`Claim 48 .................................................................................... 59
`
`Claim 54 .................................................................................... 60
`
`C.
`
`Ground 3: Claims 14, 33, and 50 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`§ 103(a) over CATT in view of LG, further in view of Huawei ........ 61
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Summary of Huawei ................................................................. 61
`
`Reasons to Combine CATT and Huawei .................................. 62
`
`Claim 14 .................................................................................... 65
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Claim 33 .................................................................................... 68
`
`Claim 50 .................................................................................... 68
`
`X.
`
`CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 68
`
`XI. CERTIFICATE OF WORD COUNT ........................................................... 70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,682,357 to Worrall (the “’357 Patent”)
`
`Ex. 1002
`
`Prosecution File History of the ’357 Patent
`
`Ex. 1003
`
`Declaration of Dr. Vijay K. Madisetti
`
`Ex. 1004
`
`CV of Dr. Vijay K. Madisetti
`
`Ex. 1005
`
`CATT, “PCH mapping and Paging Control,” published March 24,
`
`2006, prior to 3GPP RAN1/RAN2 joint meeting on LTE, Athens,
`
`Greece, 27-31 March, 2006, R2-060988 (“CATT”)
`
`Ex. 1006
`
`LG Electronics, “Discussion on LTE Paging and DRX,” published
`
`March 23, 2006, prior to Joint RAN WG1 and RAN WG2 on LTE,
`
`Athens, Greece, 27-31 March, 2006, R2-061014 (“LG”)
`
`Ex. 1007
`
`CATT and RITT, “Access Procedure for TDD,” published March
`
`23, 2006, prior to 3GPP RAN1/RAN2 joint meeting on LTE,
`
`Athens, Greece, 27-31 March, 2006, R2-060905 (“CATT2”)
`
`Ex. 1008
`
`Huawei, “Inter-cell Interference Mitigation,” 3GPP TSG RAN
`
`WG1 Ad Hoc on LTE, Sophia Antipolis, France, 20-21 June, 2005,
`
`R1-050629 (“Huawei”)
`
`Ex. 1009
`
`PCT Publication No. WO2004/057896 to Seidel et al. (“Seidel”)
`
`Ex. 1010
`
`Harri Holma & Antti Toskala, WCDMA for UMTS: Radio Access
`
`iv
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`for Third Generation Mobile Communications, Rev. ed. (2001)
`
`(“Holma”)
`
`Ex. 1011
`
`Andrew Richardson, WCDMA Design Handbook (2005)
`
`(“Richardson”)
`
`Ex. 1012
`
`Theodore S. Rappaport, Wireless Communications, Principles &
`
`Practices, 1st ed., (1996) (“Rappaport”)
`
`Ex. 1013
`
`3GPP Technical Report, Technical Specification Group Radio
`
`Access Network, Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-
`
`UTRA) and Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network
`
`(E-UTRAN), Radio Interface Protocol Aspects (Release 7), TR
`
`25.813, v.0.6.0 (March 2006) (“TR25.813”)
`
`Ex. 1014
`
`Hannes Ekström et al., “Technical Solutions for the 3G Long-Term
`
`Evolution,” IEEE Communications Magazine, March 2006, pp. 38-
`
`45 (“Ekström”)
`
`Ex. 1015
`
`Declaration of Craig Bishop
`
`Ex. 1016
`
`Declaration of Sven Ekemark
`
`Ex. 1017
`
`Harry Newton, Newton’s Telecom Dictionary, 14th Ed. (1998)
`
`(selected pages) (“Newton”)
`
`Ex. 1018
`
`3GPP Technical Report, Technical Specification Group Radio
`
`v
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`Access Network, Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-
`
`UTRA) and Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network
`
`(E-UTRAN), Radio Interface Protocol Aspects (Release 7), TR
`
`25.813, v.0.6.0 (March 2006) (same as Ex. 1013 but accepting all
`
`changes shown in document as track changes; references to the
`
`document are to Ex. 1013)
`
`Ex. 1019
`
`IEEE XPlore Abstract page for Ekström, found at
`
`https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1607864/, Ex. 1014
`
`Ex. 1020
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0123382 to Wang et al. (“Wang”)
`
`Ex. 1021
`
`PCT Publication No. WO2004/036947 to Bakri (“Bakri”)
`
`Ex. 1022
`
`PCT Publication No. WO2004/056145 to Ratford et al. (“Ratford”)
`
`Ex. 1023
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,091,781 to Mujtaba (“Mujtaba”)
`
`Ex. 1024
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,137,785 to Bar-Ness (“Bar-Ness”)
`
`Ex. 1025
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,289,203 to Smith et al. (“Smith”)
`
`
`
`Note that the following analysis will cite to the page numbers provided in
`
`the above-listed exhibits, if available. Also, the following analysis may bold,
`
`underline and/or italicize quotations and add color or annotations to the Figures
`
`from these exhibits for the sake of emphasis, unless otherwise indicated.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`

`

`
`
`
`I.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`The ’357 Patent generally relates to “[p]aging in a wireless network.” Ex.
`
`1001, Abstract. Paging had been a part of wireless networking for at least a decade
`
`before the ’357 Patent. For example, in early cellular networks an idle mobile
`
`device would scan certain control channels so that it could be notified of an
`
`incoming call. In that scenario, a paging message that included an identifier
`
`associated with the desired mobile device was used to notify the idle mobile device
`
`of an incoming call. See, e.g., Ex. 1003, ¶ 41 (citing Ex. 1012, p. 16).
`
`
`
`The ’357 Patent acknowledges that paging using two signals was already
`
`known, explaining that in “the conventional paging procedure, two signals are used
`
`to convey the paging message” including a “first paging signal … to indicate
`
`whether a paging message is being transmitted” and a “second paging signal [that]
`
`carries the paging message(s).” Ex. 1001, 1:64-2:4. Either paging signal may be
`
`sent to a group of mobile devices or to a particular mobile device. Id. The two
`
`paging signals in a “conventional” procedure could be separated by “a fixed time
`
`offset.” Id.
`
`
`
`The ’357 Patent claims a paging procedure in which a first message has an
`
`allocation of resources for a second message. For example, claim 1 describes “a
`
`message on a control channel” having an allocation of (1) “resources for a shared
`
`channel”; and (2) an identifier for “a plurality” of mobile devices. A second
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`message, namely a “paging message,” is sent using the allocated resources and
`
`includes another identifier. Ex. 1001, 11:46-60. During prosecution, Patent Owner
`
`argued that the cited prior art did not teach or suggest “sending or receiving a
`
`message on a control channel having an allocation of resources for a shared
`
`channel and a radio network temporary identity (RNTI) associated with a plurality
`
`of [mobile devices].” Ex. 1002, pp. 155-56 (emphasis in original).
`
`
`
`However, before the priority date of the ’357 Patent, others already taught a
`
`paging procedure having these features. For example, CATT (Ex. 1005)
`
`recognized the benefits of paging mobile devices by utilizing a transmission of a
`
`first message on a shared control channel, the first message having an allocation
`
`(scheduling information) for a different, shared channel for the subsequent
`
`transmission of a paging message to the mobile device. The first message also
`
`included a temporary identifier (PI-ID) allocated for multiple mobile devices.
`
`
`
`Accordingly, in view of CATT combined with other prior art, Petitioner
`
`respectfully requests that the Board review and cancel as unpatentable claims 11-
`
`14, 19, 30-33, 38, 47-50, and 54 (hereinafter, the “Challenged Claims”) of the ’357
`
`Patent.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES
`
`A. Real Party-in-Interest
`
`
`
`The real party-in-interest is Petitioner Nokia of America Corporation
`
`(“Nokia” or “Petitioner”).1
`
`B. Related Matters
`
`
`
`As of the filing date of this petition, the ’357 Patent has been asserted in the
`
`following cases:
`
` Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:17- cv-
`
`00661, (E.D.Tex. 2017); and
`
` Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Sprint Spectrum, L.P. et al., Case No. 2:17-
`
`cv-00662, (E.D. Tex. 2017).
`
`
`
`The ’357 Patent is involved in the following inter partes review proceedings:
`
`IPR2018-01380 and IPR2018-01175. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3),
`
`Petitioner identifies the following counsel (and a power of attorney accompanies
`
`this Petition).
`
`C.
`
`Lead and Back-up Counsel and Service Information
`
`
`
`Brianne Straka (Reg. No. 70,152) as lead counsel and John P. Poulos (Reg.
`
`No. 72,551) as back-up counsel, at the address: QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART
`
`& SULLIVAN LLP, 191 N Wacker Drive Suite 2700 Chicago, Illinois 60606,
`
`phone number (312) 705-7400 and facsimile (312) 705-7401. Petitioner also
`
`1 Alcatel Lucent USA was acquired by Nokia in 2016.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`appoints John McKee (Reg. No. 65,926) as back-up counsel at the address:
`
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP, 51 Madison Avenue 22nd
`
`Floor, New York, New York 10010, phone number (212) 849-7000 and facsimile
`
`(212) 849-7100.
`
` Petitioner consents
`
`to electronic service by email at:
`
`briannestraka@quinnemanuel.com,
`
`johnmckee@quinnemanuel.com,
`
`johnpoulos@quinnemanuel.com, and katherinefuller@quinnemanuel.com.
`
`III. GROUNDS FOR STANDING
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a), Petitioner certifies that the ’357 Patent is
`
`eligible for IPR and further certifies that it is not barred or estopped from
`
`requesting this IPR. While Petitioner was served with a complaint alleging
`
`infringement of the ’357 patent more than one year before the date this petition is
`
`filed, the time limitation of 35 U.S.C. §315(b) “shall not apply to a request for
`
`joinder under” 35 U.S.C. § 315(c). Because this petition is accompanied by a
`
`Motion for Joinder (Paper 3), it complies with 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). See, e.g., Dell
`
`Inc. v. Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc., IPR2013-00385, Paper 17 at 4-5
`
`(granting joinder beyond the one-year window).
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF TECHNOLOGY AND OF THE ’357 PATENT
`
`A. Wireless Cellular Communication Technology Overview
`
`
`
`Wireless cellular communication relies upon mobile devices communicating
`
`with fixed transceiver stations, referred to as base stations (also known as
`
`“NodeBs”), situated within geographic regions known as cells. Ex. 1012, p. 14; Ex.
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`1010, p. 53. The fixed transceiver stations convey information between the mobile
`
`devices and a core network, which generally interconnects a number of base
`
`stations. Id. The core network, in turn, communicates with one or more other
`
`networks to reach an end destination. Id.; Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 37-38.
`
`
`
`The mobile devices in cellular networks have been referred to as “user
`
`equipment,” or “UE.” Ex. 1013, p. 8; Ex. 1010, p. xxii. A UE is the interface for a
`
`user to the network, and a mobile phone is an example UE. Ex. 1003, ¶ 38.
`
`
`
`Wireless cellular communication continues to evolve. In 2006, one
`
`development under discussion was referred to as “long term evolution” or “LTE.”
`
`Ex. 1014, p. 38. With this evolution, updated “NodeBs” are referred to as “evolved
`
`NodeBs,” “eNodeBs,” or “E-UTRAN NodeBs.” Ex. 1013, p. 8. The eNodeBs
`
`provide user and control plane termination to the UEs and interface to the core
`
`network. One component of a core network was an access gateway (“aGW”), as
`
`the ’357 Patent acknowledged. See Ex. 1001, 4:54-57. The aGW had multiple
`
`functions, including paging origination and idle mode management. Ex. 1013, pp.
`
`11-12; Ex. 1014, pp. 39-40; Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 39-40.
`
`B.
`
`Paging Technology Overview
`
`
`
`Paging is a well-known tool in wireless cellular networks used to reach UEs
`
`with messages directed to UEs that are in an idle state waiting to receive a
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`message, such as a phone call. For example, in the mid-1990’s, it was well-known
`
`for idle mobile phones to scan control channels for messages. Ex. 1012, p. 16.
`
`When a call was placed to a mobile phone, the network sent a request to base
`
`stations in the cellular network, and the base stations would broadcast an
`
`identifying value for the phone (such as the mobile identification number, to ensure
`
`the identified phone processed the paging message) “as a paging message” on the
`
`control channels. Id. The phone, upon receiving the paging message, would
`
`respond and the phone and the base station would handshake to establish a
`
`communication session. Id.; Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 41-42.
`
`
`
`Paging has continued to be used in networks as wireless communication
`
`standards evolved. In the prior WCDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple
`
`Access) standard, for example, paging was used to reach UEs in an idle state. UEs
`
`were assigned to a paging group. Ex. 1010, p. 104. When a paging message for
`
`any UE in a paging group is sent from the core network to a base station, the base
`
`station sends a paging indicator in a first signal. Id. Upon detecting a paging
`
`indicator, the UE decodes the paging channel to determine whether a paging
`
`message exists for that specific UE. Id. The ’357 Patent admits that paging using
`
`two signals, as in WCDMA, with a fixed time offset between first and second
`
`paging signals was already known. See Ex. 1001, 1:64-2:4; Ex. 1003, ¶ 42.
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`C.
`
`Summary of the ’357 Patent
`
`The ’357 Patent describes a “paging signal 1 [that] wakes up a group of UEs
`
`to read the paging message(s), which are transmitted in paging signal 2.” Ex.
`
`1001, 5:66-6:2; 5:66-6:3, 8:33-36. The paging embodiments use various types of
`
`channels, including a shared control channel (SCCH) and shared channel (SCH),
`
`and various types of identifiers. Id., FIGs. 8, 9; Ex. 1003, ¶ 43.
`
`
`
`Figure 9’s example “uses SCCH and SCH to transmit paging signals.” Ex.
`
`1001, 6:50-51. UEs in a “same paging occasion” are divided into groups based on
`
`the IMSIs of the UEs, and each group has a user group ID that is “indicated in the
`
`SCCH ID field.” Id., 6:58-60. “The message part of SCCH indicates the resources
`
`allocated for a corresponding SCH channel, which carries the paging message(s)
`
`(paging signal 2).” Id., 6:60-63. This is illustrated in Figure 9 below.
`
`Ex. 1001, FIG. 9; Ex. 1003, ¶ 44.
`
`
`
`
`
`The ’357 Patent illustrates a paging procedure with respect to “an Idle mode
`
`UE with limited connection to RAN (possible Idle state definition in LTE)” in
`
`Figure 13, reproduced below. Ex. 1001, 8:33-36. A “paging signal 1” is sent,
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`followed by the “paging signal 2” that includes “paging message, c-RNTI, SCCH
`
`index.” Ex. 1001, FIGs. 9, 13; Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 45-46.
`
`Ex. 1001, FIG. 13.
`
`
`
`
`
`After paging, the UE “sends a paging acknowledgment message to the Node
`
`Bs in the RAN.” Ex. 1001, 5:35-36; see also id., 7:2-4. “The message may be
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`combined with uplink synchronization information and transmitted over a
`
`contention-based uplink channel (such as a random access channel (RACH)),” or
`
`“an allocated, dedicated access channel.” Id., 5:36-39, 7:4-6. Together with, or
`
`separate from, this paging acknowledgment, the UE also sends an “UL
`
`synchronization request message.” Id., 7:7-8; Ex. 1003, ¶ 47.
`
`D.
`
`Prosecution of the ’357 Patent
`
`
`
`After multiple rejections and arguments relating to the original claims over
`
`the span of several years, and after the current Patent Owner acquired the
`
`application from the prior applicant, Patent Owner cancelled all pending claims.
`
`Ex. 1002, pp. 137-165 (Supplemental Reply); 176-180 (power of attorney). The
`
`new claims recited—for the first time—the language found in the issued claims.
`
`
`
`As part of the Supplemental Reply, Patent Owner argued that the cited prior
`
`art did not teach or suggest “sending or receiving a message on a control channel
`
`having an allocation of resources for a shared channel and a radio network
`
`temporary identity (RNTI) associated with a plurality of UEs.” Ex. 1002, pp. 155-
`
`56 (emphasis in original). Patent Owner further argued that the cited prior art did
`
`not teach or suggest “then sending a paging message having an International
`
`Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) or a Temporary Mobile Subscriber Identity
`
`(TMSI).” Id., p. 156 (emphasis in original).
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`The Patent Office issued a notice of allowance in response. Id., pp. 12-19.
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`None of the references used in the challenges herein were cited by the Examiner
`
`during prosecution.
`
`V.
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`
`
`The level of ordinary skill in the art may be reflected by the prior art of
`
`record. See Okajima v. Bourdeau, 261 F.3d 1350, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2001). Here, a
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill In The Art (“POSITA”) at the time of the earliest possible
`
`priority date of May 2, 2006 would have had a bachelor’s degree in electrical
`
`engineering, computer engineering, computer science or similar field, and three to
`
`five years of experience in digital communications systems, such as wireless
`
`communications systems and networks, or equivalent, or a Master’s degree in
`
`electrical engineering, computer engineering, computer science or similar field,
`
`and at least two years of work or research experience in digital communications
`
`systems, such as wireless communications systems and networks, or equivalent.
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 23-25. Furthermore, a person with more technical education but less
`
`experience would also meet the relevant standard for a POSITA. Id., ¶ 25. Dr.
`
`Vijay Madisetti, whose declaration this Petition cites, was at least a POSITA as of
`
`the claimed priority date for the ’357 Patent. Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 25-26.
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`
`
`Claims of an unexpired patent are to be given their “broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation” consistent with the specification. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b); Cuozzo
`
`Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131, 2144-45 (2016). All claim terms not
`
`specifically construed below are given their broadest reasonable interpretation, as
`
`understood by one of ordinary skill in the art consistent with the disclosure. In re
`
`Translogic Tech., Inc., 504 F.3d 1249, 1256-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007). The following
`
`analysis would not be different if done under the standard used in Phillips v. AWH
`
`Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Under both BRI and Phillips, the analysis
`
`below looks to the claim language itself, followed by the intrinsic evidence
`
`including the specification.
`
`A.
`
`“first network device”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The term “first network device” is used in the claims.
`
`In the claims, “first network device” is used in challenged claims 11 and 20.
`
`For example, claim 11 recites “sending, by a first network device, a paging signal
`
`to a second network device,” and “paging, by the second network device, a user
`
`equipment (UE).” Ex. 1001, 12:20-23. As used in the claims, a “first network
`
`device” is a source of a paging signal to a “second network device,” and it is the
`
`“second network device” that “pag[es] … a user equipment (UE).” Id., 12:22-27;
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 48-49.
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`The ’357 Patent specification does not use the term “network device.” The
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`specification’s summary states that a “network (e.g., an aGW) initiates” a
`
`connection to a UE by transmitting a paging message to Node Bs. Ex. 1001, 2:60-
`
`65. Discussion of FIG. 1’s example “cellular communication system” divides the
`
`system into a UE domain, a RAN domain, and a core network domain. Id., 4:40-
`
`43. The core network includes an aGW, a serving GPRS support node (SGSN),
`
`and a gateway GPRS support node (GGSN). Id., 4:54-57; Ex. 1003, ¶ 50.
`
`
`
`The ’357 Patent describes the source of the paging in the core network as
`
`“[a] network controller (e.g., an access gateway 118 in a core network).” Ex. 1001,
`
`5:5-8. In FIG. 3’s example flow, the core network includes “in some
`
`embodiments, access gateway 118 within the core network.” Id., 5:19-23. In FIG.
`
`13’s example flow, the paging message is “sent (from aGW or other core network
`
`element).” Id., 8:38-40; Ex. 1003, ¶ 51.
`
`
`
`Thus, the ’357 Patent provides examples of sending paging signals to Node
`
`Bs from a “core network element” of which an “aGW” is an example.
`
`
`
`Accordingly, “first network device” should be construed to include at least a
`
`“core network element,” including an aGW as an example. Ex. 1003, ¶ 52.
`
`B.
`
`“second network device” (claim 11) / “network device” (claim 30)
`
`
`
`The terms “second network device” as well as “network device” are used in
`
`the claims.
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`In the claims, “second network device” is used in challenged claims 11-12
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`and 18-20. For example, claim 11 recites “paging, by the second network device, a
`
`user equipment (UE) in idle mode by sending a message on a control channel.”
`
`Ex. 1001, 12:22-27. As used in the claims, a “second network device” is a device
`
`that receives a “paging signal” from the “first network device” and “pag[es] … a
`
`user equipment (UE).” Id., 12:20-27; Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 53-54.
`
`
`
`Further, in the claims, “network device” is used in challenged claims 30-31
`
`and 37-38. For example, claim 30 recites “paging, by the network device, a user
`
`equipment (UE) in idle mode by sending a message on a control channel, the
`
`message having an allocation of resources for a shared channel and a radio network
`
`temporary identity (RNTI) associated with a plurality of UEs including the UE.”
`
`Ex. 1001, 13:23-28. Thus, paging is performed by the “network device,” because it
`
`“pag[es] … a user equipment (UE).” Id.; Ex. 1003, ¶ 55.
`
`
`
`As stated above, the ’357 Patent does not use “network device” in the
`
`specification. Rather, the specification’s summary states that “the Node Bs
`
`(belonging to the tracking area) receive the paging message [from the core
`
`network] … [which] is broadcast in the cell.” Ex. 1001, 2:60-3:7. According to
`
`the ’357 Patent, a “Node B” is another name for a base station. Id., 1:19-20; Ex.
`
`1003, ¶ 56.
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`The ’357 Patent continues in describing that the Node Bs send paging
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`messages to the UEs to initiate a connection. Ex. 1001, 5:18-19. In FIG. 3’s
`
`example flow, the core network “transmits the paging message to the relevant
`
`Node Bs.” Id., 5:19-23. In FIG. 13’s example flow, “[p]aging is broadcast in the
`
`cell (by Node Bs).” Id., 8:40-42; Ex. 1003, ¶ 57.
`
`
`
`Thus, the ’357 Patent provides examples of Node Bs/base stations that
`
`receive paging signals from a core network, and broadcast from the Node Bs to the
`
`UEs in their areas.
`
`
`
`Accordingly, “second network device” and “network device” should be
`
`construed to include at least “a device that communicates paging wirelessly to one
`
`or more UEs,” including base stations such as Node Bs. Ex. 1003, ¶ 58.
`
`VII. REQUESTED RELIEF
`
`
`
`Petitioner asks that the Board review the accompanying prior art and
`
`analysis, institute a trial for IPR of claims 11-14, 19, 30-33, 38, 47-50, and 54 of
`
`the ’357 Patent, and cancel those claims as unpatentable.
`
`VIII. IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE
`
`A. Challenged Claims and Statutory Grounds
`
`
`
`This Petition challenges claims 11-14, 19, 30-33, 38, 47-50, and 54 of the
`
`’357 Patent on three grounds.
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
` Grounds
`
` Claims
`
` Basis
`
` Ground 1
`
` 11, 13, 30, 32, 47,
`
` 35 U.S.C. § 103 over CATT in view of LG.
`
`and 49
`
`Ground 2
`
`12, 19, 31, 38, 48,
`
` 35 U.S.C. § 103 over CATT in view of LG
`
`and 54
`
`and CATT2.
`
` Ground 3
`
` 14, 33, and 50
`
` 35 U.S.C. § 103 over CATT in view of LG
`
`and Huawei.
`
`
`
`LG and CATT2 were publicly available as of March 23, 2006, and are prior
`
`art under at least 35 U.S.C. §102(a). See Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 28-35, 44-51, 74, 76; Ex.
`
`1016, ¶¶ 21-23, 24-31, 40-47. CATT was publicly available as of March 24, 2006,
`
`and is prior art under at least 35 U.S.C. §102(a). See Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 36-43, 75; Ex.
`
`1016, ¶¶ 32-39. Huawei was publicly available as of June 16, 2005, and is prior art
`
`under at least 35 U.S.C. §102(a). See Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 52-59, 77; Ex. 1016, ¶¶ 48-56.
`
`TR25.813 was publicly available as of March 15, 2006. See Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 60-73;
`
`Ex. 1016, ¶¶ 57-65.
`
`
`
`That these references were publicly available is evidenced by the testimony
`
`of members who attended relevant 3rd Generation Partnership Project’s (3GPP)
`
`meetings (see Ex. 1015, “Bishop Declaration”; Ex. 1016, “Ekemark Declaration”).
`
`CATT, LG, CATT2, Huawei, and TR25.813 were disseminated via e-mail to
`
`subscribers of various 3GPP email lists on or before those same dates, and these e-
`
`mails had no restriction on further dissemination and distribution. Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 23-
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
`27; Ex. 1016, ¶¶ 16-20. Over 100 persons subscribed to each email list. Ex. 1015,
`
`25; Ex. 1016, ¶ 16.
`
`
`
`Anyone was able to join e-mail distribution lists for 3GPP documents. Ex.
`
`1015, ¶ 24; Ex. 1016, ¶¶ 16, 19. POSITAs at the time of the ’357 Patent would
`
`have been aware that 3GPP was a significant world-wide forum for the creation of
`
`wireless cellular standards. Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 17-19; Ex. 1016, ¶¶ 7-11. One of the
`
`purposes of the e-mail distribution lists was to share technical ideas for discussion
`
`and possible introduction into the 3GPP standards. Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 20, 24-27; Ex.
`
`1016, ¶¶ 16-20. The 3GPP references do not bear any confidentiality, password
`
`protection, or any indicia that might suggest a restriction on public dissemination,
`
`and in fact were expressly freely disseminated. Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 23, 26-27; Ex. 1016,
`
`¶¶ 14, 17.
`
`
`
`Record emails distributing various 3GPP references are presented below,
`
`and the dates of email distribution are shown. Ex. 1015, ¶¶ 31-34, 39-42, 47-50,
`
`55-58, 66-70; Ex. 1016, ¶¶ 27-30, 35-38, 43-46, 52-55, 60-65. The dates represent
`
`the date of public dissemination.
`
` Reference
`
` Hyperlink
`
` CATT
`
`
`
` Date
`
` 3/24/2006
`
`https://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0603
`
` &L=3GPP_TSG_RAN_WG2&P=77863
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`
`
`
` LG
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00667 Petition
`Inter Partes Review of 8,682,357
`
` 3/21/2006
`
`https://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0603
`
` &L=3GPP_TSG_RAN_WG2&P=46692
`
` CATT2
`
`
`
` 3/21/2006
`
`https://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0603
`
` &L=3GPP_TSG_RAN_WG2&P=39601
`
` Huawei
`
`
`
` 6/16/2005
`
`https://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0506
`
` &L=%203GPP_TSG_RAN_WG1&P=26850
`
` TR25.813
`
`
`
` 3/15/2006
`
`https://list.etsi.org/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0603
`
` &L=3GPP_TSG_RAN_WG2&P=25253
`
`
`
`In addition, members of the public, including interested members, could
`
`have accessed the 3GPP references without restriction before the ’357 Patent’s
`
`claimed priority d