Petitioner
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`IPR2019-00973 — US. Patent No. 7,075,917
`
`(Claims 1-3 and 9-10)
`
`
`
`Klarquist
`
`I.
`
`" '
`
`o
`
`_,
`.
`" ’
`
`
`
`Andrew M. Mason
`August20, 2020
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Microsoft Corporation
`
`IPR2019-00973 — US. Patent No. 7,075,917
`
`(Claims 1-3 and 9-10)
`
`
`
`Klarquist
`
`I.
`
`" '
`
`o
`
`_,
`.
`" ’
`
`
`
`Andrew M. Mason
`August20, 2020
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Exhibits Shorthand
`
`Name
`’917 patent
`Bims
`Rodermund
`TR25.835 V1.0.0
`TR25.835 V0.0.2
`Abrol
`Bims_Reply
`Rodermund_Reply
`
`Exhibit
`Ex. 1001
`Ex. 1003
`Ex. 1004
`Ex. 1005
`Ex. 1006
`Ex. 1007
`Ex. 1032
`Ex. 1033
`
`2
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Shorthand
`
` “August TR document” = admitted prior art TR25.835 v0.0.2 (Ex. 1006).
`
` “September TR document” = prior art TR25.835 v1.0.0 (Ex. 1005).
`
`3
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Introduction
`
`(1) The September TR doc. explains the creation and use of sequence numbers. Abrol explains how and
`why abbreviated sequence numbers were beneficial, and expressly teaches using them in the same
`network described in the September TR doc. [Element 1.3]
`
`(2) The movement of specific functions to the physical layer, as described in Chapter 7 of the September TR
`doc., was the whole purpose of fast HARQ. [Element 1.5]
`
`(3) The September TR doc. was well-known and readily-accessible.
`
`4
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`g» 5757] hers whose length depends on the
`3'}
`[l 3] stonnma 7
`maximum number of codedtransport blocks to be stored and which can be
`
`shown unambiguously111 a packet data unit sequence number, and for
`
`’917 patent (Ex. 1001), 8:5-9 (highlighting added) (cited by Petition, 42).
`
`"TE: of a receiving side18 provided for testing the correct reception ofthe coded transport block and
`
`j i'
`
`’917 patent, 8: 12-13 (highlighting added) (cited by Petition, 54).
`
`': Microsoft
`
`5
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT _ NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 V0.0.2 (Ex. 1006), 1 (cited by Petition, 4).
`
`’917 patent (Ex. 1001), 1:5-14 (cited by Petition, 18).
`
`6
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 9 (explained by Bims_Reply, ¶ 39) (cited by Reply, 21).
`
`7
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 27 (cited by Petition, 55).
`
`8
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 29 (highlighting added) (cited by Petition, 2, 11).
`
`9
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶ 83
`(highlighting added)
`(cited by Petition, 45).
`
`
`
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 16 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 12).
`
`11
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Petition, 45.
`
`Reply, 19-20.
`
`12
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Harry V. Bims, Ph.D
`
` Ph.D, Electrical Engineering, Stanford University.
`
` 25 years of industry experience in telecommunications.
`
` Named inventor on 22 U.S. patents relating to communications
`networks, including automatic repeat request technology (“ARQ”).
`
`(Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶¶ 5-6).
`
` Patent Owner did not cross-examine Dr. Bims.
`
`13
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Friedhelm Rodermund
`
` 20 years of experience working with standards development
`organizations including 3GPP and ETSI.
`
` Project manager, ETSI (1998-2004) for various ETSI Special
`Mobile Group and 3GPP working groups.
` Acted as a 3GPP custodian of records managing 3GPP’s
`public FTP folders between 1998 and 2004.
`
`(Rodermund (Ex. 1004), ¶¶ 5-7).
`
` Patent Owner did not cross-examine Rodermund.
`
`14
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`(“POSITA”)
`
`I.“
`I. L
`I. awry".
`
`,
`
`C.‘ “V.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`A POSITA Would Have Closely Followed ARQ Developments by
`3GPP and Other Network Standardization Groups
`
` Patent Owner failed to define a POSITA and waived any challenges. The POR neither proposes its
`own definition of a POSITA, nor disagrees with the Petition’s definition. POR, 14 (cited by Reply, 1).
`
` The POSITA would have:
` had “working knowledge of the hybrid ARQ methods described in the ’917 patent” and
` “closely followed ARQ developments by 3GPP and other network standardization groups.”
`
`Petition, 28 (emphasis added) (citing ’917 patent (Ex. 1001) 1:5-62 and 5:13-36 (admitting TR25.835 v0.0.2
`and its wireless network were “known”)).
`
`16
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Element 1.3 – Sequence Numbers
`
`’917 patent (Ex. 1001), 8:5-9 (cited by Petition, 42).
`
`18
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abbreviated Sequence Numbers Would Have Been Obvious to
`Implement in TR25.835 V1.0.0
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0
`explains creation and use of
`the sequence numbers
`
`+
`
`Abrol
`explains how and why
`sequence numbers are
`abbreviated and reduces
`overall data processing and
`transmission.
`
`=
`
`a POSITA
`would have been motivated
`and able to implement
`Abrol’s abbreviated
`sequence numbers in the
`TR25.835 network
`
`See Reply 19.
`
`Abrol (Ex. 1007), 3:52-4:24; id., 5:13-35;
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶¶ 23-24 (cited by
`Reply, 15).
`
`See Abrol, 3:32-36 (cited by Petition 44-45); see also
`Bims, ¶ 83; Bims_Reply, ¶ 16 (cited by Reply, 12).
`
`19
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abrol (Ex. 1007), 8:18-21, 9:16-21; see also id., 10:49-54, 12:64–13:6 (emphases added);
`Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶ 47 (cited by Petition, 16).
`
`20
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶ 83
`(highlighting added)
`(cited by Petition, 44-45).
`
`21
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`22
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶ 84
`(cited by Petition, 45-46).
`
`
`
`Abrol (Ex. 1007), 3:32-36 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 10).
`
`+
`
`Abrol, 1:10-11 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 10).
`
`+
`
`Abrol, 3:24-26 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 10).
`
`=
`
`A POSITA would have been motivated to implement TR25.835 V1.0.0
`using abbreviated sequence numbers. Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶¶ 80-86;
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶¶ 12-35 (cited by Reply, 11).
`
`23
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abrol (Ex. 1007), 3:32-36 (highlighting added) (explained by Bims, ¶ 83) (cited by Reply, 11).
`
`Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶ 83 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 11).
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 3 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 11).
`
`24
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`A POSITA Would Have Been Motivated to Combine the Prior Art
`
` Abrol:
` “minimize[d] the overhead inherent in the error control protocol” of wireless communications. Abrol
`(Ex. 1007), 1:10-11 (cited by Reply, 10).
` is broadly “applicable to any communication system employing transmission of a byte stream over a
`wireless channel,” including W-CDMA, the Layer 1 technology used in the TR25.835 network. Id.,
`3:24-38 (cited by Reply, 10).
`
` Patent Owner:
` does not challenge that a POSITA would have been motivated to implement the TR25.835 network
`using the claimed abbreviated sequence numbers. Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶¶ 80-86 (cited by Reply, 10).
`
`25
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abrol’s Express Teaching To Use Its Improvement In W-CDMA
`Networks Is Dispositive As To Combinability
`
` Abrol’s solution is “applicable to systems such as … W-CDMA.” Abrol (Ex. 1007), 3:32-36 (cited by
`Petition, 44-45).
`
` W-CDMA and TR25.835 are both part of the 3GPP standardization efforts. (Id.)
`
` This relationship provided a “specific motivation to apply [Abrol’s] teachings (and gain its benefits) in the
`fast HARQ implementation of TR25.835.” Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶ 83 (cited by Petition, 44-45).
`
` A POSITA knew that Layer 1 of the TR25.835 network was “‘based on WCDMA technology.’”
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 13 (quoting Ex. 1027, 6) (cited by Reply, 11).
`
`26
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abrol’s Ability To Handle Varying Channel Capacities Makes It
`Well-Suited For The TR25.835 V1.0.0 Wireless Network
`
` A POSITA would have known that the TR25.835 V1.0.0 network had varying channel capacity, similar to
`all wireless networks. Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 17 (cited by Reply, 12).
`
` This is reflected in the common channels employed by such networks, such as the DSCH channel, that
`had “variable bit rate on a frame-by-frame basis.” Ex. 1028, 77; see also Bims_Reply, ¶ 18 (cited by
`Reply, 12).
`
` TR25.835 V1.0.0 states that “Fast HARQ is planned to be employed on DSCH” (TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex.
`1005), 27 § 7.2) (emphasis added), which a POSITA would have understood was a variable-rate channel
`(e.g., Ex. 1028, 77; Bims_Reply, ¶ 18) (cited by Reply, 12).
`
`27
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 18 (cited by Reply, 12-13).
`
`28
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abrol’s Ability To Handle Varying Channel Capacities Makes It
`Well-Suited For The TR25.835 V1.0.0 Wireless Network
`
` Abrol is “applicable to any communication system employing transmission of a byte stream over a
`wireless channel.” Abrol (Ex. 1007), 3:24-38 (emphasis added) (cited by Petition, 44-45).
`
` A POSITA would have recognized and appreciated:
` the “benefit of ‘minimizing the overhead inherent’ in error control protocols,” taught by Abrol. Petition, 43
`(citing Abrol, 1:7-11).
` Abrol’s teachings that larger sequence numbers resulted in transmission of less data, and thus it was desirable to
`transmit “a fraction of the sequence number bits” whenever possible. Petition, 43 (citing Abrol 4:25-48 and
`9:28-33).
`
` A POSITA would have been motivated to implement abbreviated sequence numbers in any wireless
`network employing error control such as HARQ. See Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 21 (cited by Reply, 13-
`14).
`
`29
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`A POSITA Would Not Have Been Discouraged From Using Abrol’s
`Abbreviated Sequence Numbers in Connection With TR25.835
`
` A POSITA would have known that use of byte sequence numbers was perfectly acceptable for reliable
`transmission, as reflected by the use of byte sequence numbers in the well-known Transmission Control
`Protocol (“TCP”). Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 28; Ex. 1029, 24, 81 (cited by Reply, 14).
`
` Abrol’s solution:
` reduced overall data processing and transmission by reducing transmission errors.
` avoided the processing and transmission associated with additional retransmissions and lost data.
`Abrol (Ex. 1007), 3:52-4:24 and 5:13-35; Bims_Reply, ¶¶ 23-24.
` even if it had required some additional processing for certain steps, the solution’s benefits would have
`far outweighed that minimal cost. Bims_Reply, ¶ 24.
`(Cited by Reply, 15).
`
`30
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abrol’s Frame Sequence Numbers
`(“RLP Sequence Numbers”)
`
` As taught by Abrol, each form of shortening avoids waste by choosing the shortest sequence number
`possible “without impacting the performance of the protocol.” Ex. 1007, 4:48-62 (cited by Reply, 16).
`
` First Approach: “a shortened RLP sequence number … is equal to the byte sequence number of the first
`data byte in the RLP frame divided by the page size.” Abrol, 6:52-58 (cited by Reply, 16).
`
` Second Approach: when it “causes no ambiguity about which data is contained in … the RLP frame,”
`the most significant bits of the sequence number are omitted. Abrol, 6:59-67 (cited by Reply, 16).
`
`31
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abrol Teaches the Use of Abbreviated Sequence Numbers for Both
`Transmissions and Re-Transmissions
`
` Abbreviated sequence numbers are used for both transmissions and retransmissions: “where the
`retransmit frame and the original RLP frame are the same size, the retransmit frame may use the same
`shortened RLP sequence number as the original, as long as doing so causes no sequence number
`ambiguity.” Abrol (Ex. 1007), 7:18-23 (emphasis added) (cited by Reply, 17).
`
` For decreased retransmission channel capacity, Abrol technique uses smaller data frames, each with their
`“own RLP sequence number, which may or may not be shortened.” 7:24-30 (cited by Reply, 17).
`
` Abrol teaches use of abbreviated frame sequence numbers for original transmissions, re-transmissions at
`the same data rate, or re-transmissions at a lower rate. Abrol, 6:52-7:30; Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 30
`(cited by Reply, 17).
`
`32
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Abrol’s Express Benefits Provided Motivation
`
` Abrol explains how reducing sequence number overhead in error control allows for transmission of more
`data bytes in a given frame. E.g., Abrol (Ex. 1007), 4:37-39 (cited by Reply, 18).
`
` TR25.835 V1.0.0 creatively adds and acts upon sequence numbers in the physical layer (rather than the
`MAC), thus “facilitat[ing] fast decoding at the receiver end.” TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 27 § 7.2
`(discussed by Petition, 43-44).
`
` Abrol itself provides the implementation details on how these sequence number choices are made for
`different transmit and re-transmit scenarios. (Discussed by Reply, 19).
`
` Abrol was intended for W-CDMA networks such as TR25.835. Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 34 (cited by
`Reply, 19).
`
`33
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`The ’917 Patent Is No More Detailed Than the Prior Art
`
` The ’917 patent provides:
`
` no lower-level details for how abbreviated sequence numbers would be implemented in the earlier
`version of TR25.835 (v0.0.2, cited by ’917 patent (Ex. 1001), 1:5-15); or
`
` how such a network implementation would be modified to use abbreviated sequence numbers.
`
`(Cited by Reply, 19).
`
`34
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Element 1.5
`
`II
`-
`.- MIC rosoft
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT _ NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Element 1.5 – Physical Layer
`
`’917 patent (Ex. 1001), 8:12-13 (cited by Petition, 54).
`
`36
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 36 (cited by Reply, 20).
`
`TR25.835
`V1.0.0
`
`+
`
`Abrol
`
`=
`
`The ’917
`Patent
`
`37
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Both the ’917 Patent and TR25.838 V1.0.0 Built
`Upon Earlier Versions of TR25.835
`
` Much like the ’917 patent, the fast HARQ of
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 Chapter 7 built upon this earlier
`TR25.835 network, moving even more functions
`to the physical layer. See TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex.
`1005), 27 (cited by Reply, 23).
`
`’917 patent (Ex. 1001), 1:40-50 (cited by Petition, 21).
`
`38
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 27 (cited by Petition, 55).
`
`Bims (Ex. 1003), ¶ 100 (cited by Petition, 56).
`
`39
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Moving Certain Functions to the Physical Layer Is Key
`
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 36 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 20).
`
`40
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 27 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 20)
`
`41
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Fast HARQ Involves Physical Layer Error Correction
`
` Chapter 7 fast HARQ is distinct from the HARQ described in Chapter 6 of TR25.835 V1.0.0. TR25.835
`V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 9 (emphasis added) (cited by Petition, 21).
`
` TR25.835 V1.0.0 leaves no doubt that fast HARQ (the “second option”) is described in Chapter 7 and
`involves Layer 1 (physical layer) error correction. Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 39 (cited by Petition, 21).
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0, 9 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 21).
`
`42
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Fast HARQ (Ch. 7)
`
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 40 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 21).
`
`43
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Confirm First, Then Send Acknowledgement
`
`Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), ¶ 41 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 22).
`
`44
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Both Soft Decision Buffering and Combining
`Happen at the Physical Layer
`
`Physical Layer (Layer 1)
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 (EX. 1005), 27 (discussed by Bims_Reply (Ex. 1032), 1] 42) (cited by Reply, 24).
`
`Soft Decision
`
`(At the Physical
`Layer)
`
`Prerequisite To
`
`Combining
`
`:: Microsoft
`
`45
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT _ NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Chapter 7 of TR25.835 V1.0.0 Specifies That RX Soft Decision
`Includes Buffering and Combining
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 (Ex. 1005), 9 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 23-24)
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0, 27 (highlighting added) (cited by Reply, 24)
`
`46
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 Was Publicly Accessible, and
`Thus, Is Prior Art
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Known and Accessible
`
`by September 2000
`
`> On September 13, 2000, TR 25.835 V1.0.0 was
`shared as an attachment
`to another exploder
`email EXS-
`.1020'21; Rodermund—Reply (EX-
`1033), 1] 21 (Clted by Reply, 8).
`
`> On September 15, 2000, another email was sent
`out Via
`the RAN2 exploder, announcing the
`upload of TR.25.835 V1 .0.0 to the 3GPP ftp server
`and providing a specific link to its location. EX.
`1022; Rodermund_Rep1y, 1] 22 (cited by Reply,
`8).
`
`> Each email specifically mentioned TR25.835 in
`its subject line. Exs. 1020, 1022.
`
`
`
`'
`3G TR 25-835 V1-0.0‘2000-09)
`TWWM '
`Spam35:52:33:‘szdfiz'zzifsazasa '
`Report on Hybrid ARQTypeII/lll
`'
`(Release 2000)
`
`. .
`
`
`
`fiF? .
`5
`'
`______________________________________________________
`TR25.835V1.0.0(Ex.1005),2
`
`E: Microsoft
`
`48
`
`Klarquist
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 Was Publicly and Freely Accessible
`by September 13, 2000
`
`Rodermund Testimony (Ex. 1004) (cited by Reply, 1):
` TR25.835 “was published and freely available on 3GPP’s ftp server by September 13, 2000.” ¶ 25.
` 3GPP sent emails notifications as soon as new or additional documents had been uploaded. ¶ 19.
` TR25.835 was presented at a September 2000 meeting attended by 140 people. ¶ 25.
`
`The Institution Decision:
` “reasonable likelihood” that a POSITA would have been “able to access TR25.835, at least because notification
`of such document was made by way of email to interested persons.” Paper 7, 16.
`
`Patent Owner neither cross-examined Mr. Rodermund nor submitted testimony of its own on this issue.
`
`49
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`’917 patent (Ex. 1001), 5:18-28 (cited by Reply, 2)
`
` The ’917 patent admits that the preceding version of TR25.835 V0.0.2 was “known.” ’917 patent,
`1:10-15; see also id., 5:18-28 (cited by Reply, 2).
`
` Uniloc itself has recently touted the wide dissemination of 3GPP TR docs. See Apple, Inc. et al. v.
`Uniloc 2017 LLC, IPR2019-00222, Paper 26, TR at 41:10-25 (cited by Reply, 2).
`
`50
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`3GPP Was a Source of Industry Standards To Persons in
`the Cellular Telecommunications Industry in the 1990s
`
` 3GPP’s ftp server was freely accessible in 1998. Rodermund (Ex. 1004), ¶ 18 (cited by Reply, 5).
`
` 3GPP sent email notifications of new updates as soon as new or additional documents are uploaded. Id., ¶
`19 (cited by Reply, 5).
`
` 3GPP was well-known well before the ’917 patent’s priority date. Id., ¶ 20 (cited by Reply, 5-6).
`
`51
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`TR25.835 V1.0.0 Itself Was Archived and Sent
`to 3GPP Listserv In September 2000
`
` The 3GPP listserv was well-known and open to everyone. (See Reply, 7).
`
` Emails providing direct access to TR25.835 V1.0.0 were sent and archived in September 2000. (Id.)
`
` A POSITA would have:
` easily subscribed to the listservs.
` known the relevant 3GPP working group was TSG RAN Working Group 2. See ’917 patent (Ex.
`1001), 1:10-15.
` known the relevant email listservs were 3GPP_TSG_RAN_WG2 and 3GPP_TSG_RAN.
`
`Rodermund_Reply (Ex. 1033), ¶¶ 11-13 (cited by Reply, 7-8).
`
`52
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`> On September 13, 2000, TR 25.835 V1.0.0 was
`shared as an attachment to another exploder
`email. Exs. 1020-21; Rodermund_Reply (EX.
`1033), 1] 21 (cited by Reply, 8).
`
`specifically
`> The
`25.835v1.0.0 in its subject
`(cited by Reply, 8).
`
`mentioned
`line. Ex. 1020
`
`||| III|IIIIIIII
`
`}IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
`
`53
`
`/ Reply
`
`l—..______..—N—..q—__e_ ._ ._____. _.—_m_—mmm—__mmn
`
`: SGPP_TSG_RAN_WGZ@LIST.ETSI.ORG
`
`I last ]
`[ FlfSl 1 Previous 1 Next
`I View: Message:
`[ First
`1 Previous
`1 Men I Last
`ByTopic:
`]
`By Author: [ first 1 Pvevmus 1 Next
`| Last ]
`Fom:
`Pic-pomonnl Fom
`
`III|II I l|lI I :
`
`IIIIIlIl|II II|
`
`Subject: 25.834v1.0.
`r‘leen@ETSI.FR>
`From: Hans van .-
`Reply—1’0: Hans van der Veen <Hans.vander\'een@ETSl.FR>
`Date: Wed. 13 Sep 2000133513 +0200
`Comem-Type: mum'panlmixed
`PansIAtlachmems:
`lexUpIam (16 lines) . 15834JUOMOL (16 lines) , 25835100.d0c (16 Ines)
`
`Dear all,
`Please find attached the fits 25.834vl.0.0 and 25.835v1.0.0.
`These are the documents dlstributed earller by CWTS and Elemens,
`with :11 changes accepted and the history table updated (and
`date set to September).
`
`Rapporteurs, please use this versum for further work on the WIs.
`
`Best regards .
`
`‘ IEsns.<«25834—100.doc:-.>
`
`<425835—100.doc:~2
`
`Iop ol Message I Prevuous Page I Pennallnk
`
`EX. 1020 (cited by Reply, 8)
`(explained by Rodermund (EX. 1004), 1] 21).
`
`E: Microsoft
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Klarquist
`
`
`
`> On September 15, 2000, another email was sent
`out Via the RAN2 exploder, announcing the
`upload of TR.25.835 V1.0.0 to the 3GPP ftp
`server and providing a specific link to its
`location. Ex. 1022; Rodermund_Reply (Ex.
`1033), 1] 22 (cited by Reply, 8).
`
`> The email specifically mentioned 25.835 in
`its subject line. EX. 1022 (cited by Reply, 8).
`
`i
`
`L
`
` F
`SGPP_TSG_RAN_WGZ@LIST.ETSI.ORG
`
`} i313: {23:13:21.53'51323 18:11
`Eggrm"gf;';g,{,§;;rgggg WW]
`s“W“no,“mx-V
`Really): Eggggegzzggegm.mwngaztis:
`'
`
`Content-Type: lexflplam
`Pam/Attachments:
`' text/plain (13 IIDESJ
`
`mew
`
`Dear all,
`
`A draft of 25.304 (checked by the rapporteur, but not yet
`approved, as with all new drafts), and the versmns 1.0.0
`of 25.834 and 25.835 (TR: on low chip rate and Hybrid ARQ)
`are now on the server in
`
`npzn‘np.}g[)p.om 1 SL':_RAN WGLRLI Specmcauons
`
`Best regards ,
`
`Hans .
`
`Top of Message | Previous Pauel Peundlmk
`
`
`Ex. 1022 (cited by Reply, 8)
`(explained by Rodermund (Ex. 1004), fl 22).
`
`:: Microsoft
`
`54
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT — NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Klarquist
`
`
`
`The Ease of Accessibility Allowed a POSITA
`to Easily Locate TR25.835 V1.0.0
`
` 3GPP sent an email clearly linking the document
`named RP-000416 to TR25.835 V1.0.0. Exs. 1023,
`1025; Rodermund_Reply (Ex. 1033), ¶¶ 23-26 (cited
`by Reply, 8).
`
` A POSITA would have had knowledge sufficient to
`easily locate TR25.835 V1.0.0 on the 3GPP FTP
`server and there would have been no problem of
`indexing. See Reply, 8.
`
`Ex. 1025, 10 (highlighting added)
`(cited by Reply, 8).
`
`55
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Thank You
`
`Andrew M. Mason
`
`August 20, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00973
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that on August 12, 2020, a true and correct copy of
`
`PETITIONER’S DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS was served on counsel for
`
`Uniloc 2017 LLC via electronic mail as follows:
`
`Jeffrey Huang – Lead Counsel
`jeff@etheridgelaw.com
`Ryan Loveless – First Back-up Counsel
`ryan@etheridgelaw.com
`Brett Mangrum – Back-up Counsel
`brett@etheridgelaw.com
`James Etheridge – Back-up Counsel
`jim@etheridgelaw.com
`Brian Koide – Back-up Counsel
`brian@etheridgelaw.com
`Etheridge Law Group
`2600 E. Southlake Blvd., Ste. 120-324
`Southlake, TX 76092
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /Andrew M. Mason/
`Andrew M. Mason (Reg. No. 64,034)
`andrew.mason@klarquist.com
`KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP
`One World Trade Center, Suite 1600
`121 S.W. Salmon Street
`Portland, Oregon 97204
`Tel: 503-595-5300
`Fax: 503-595-5301
`
`Counsel for Petitioners
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`Page 1
`
`
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
