`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC 2017 LLC,
`Patent Owner
`_________________
`
`IPR2020-00224
`U.S. Patent No.: 7,075,917
`Issued: July 11, 2006
`Application No.: 09/973,312
`Filed: October 9, 2001
`
`Title: WIRELESS NETWORK WITH A DATA
`EXCHANGE ACCORDING TO THE ARQ METHOD
`
`___________________
`
`
`PETITION FOR
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,075,917
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`IPR2020-00224
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS ................................................................................................ v
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1) ................................. vii
`1. Real Party-In-Interest ................................................................................... vii
`2. Related Matters ............................................................................................ vii
`3. Lead and Back-Up Counsel ......................................................................... vii
`
`I. SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ................................................................ 1
`II. GROUNDS FOR STANDING PER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(A) ............................ 3
`III. IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE ............................................................ 3
`A. Statement Of The Precise Relief Requested .................................................. 3
`B. No Examiner Addressed These Unpatentability Grounds ............................. 4
`C. This Petition Should Be Granted .................................................................... 4
`IV. THE ’917 PATENT ........................................................................................... 6
`A. The ’917 Patent’s Specification ..................................................................... 6
`B. The Prosecution History ................................................................................. 8
`C. The Claims ..................................................................................................... 8
`V. APPLIED PRIOR ART ..................................................................................... 9
`A. TR25.835 ........................................................................................................ 9
`B. Abrol ............................................................................................................ 15
`
`VI. APPLICANT’S ADMISSIONS AS TO THE STATE OF THE ART ............ 18
`A. “Physical” Layer, Wireless Networks, and Hybrid ARO Methods ............. 18
`B. Coded Transport Blocks And Sequence Numbers ....................................... 22
`VII. LEVEL OF SKILL IN THE ART, AND STATE OF THE ART ................... 27
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`A. Person of Ordinary Skill In The Art ............................................................. 27
`VIII. ................................................................................ CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`28
`A. Proposed Constructions ................................................................................ 29
`IX. GROUND 1: CLAIMS 1-3 AND 9-10 ARE OBVIOUS OVER TR25.835 IN
`VIEW OF ABROL ................................................................................................. 29
`A. Claim 1 ......................................................................................................... 30
`
`1. Element 1.1 Preamble ............................................................................... 30
`
`2. Element 1.2 ............................................................................................... 33
`
`3. Element 1.3 ............................................................................................... 42
`
`4. Element 1.4 ............................................................................................... 52
`
`5. Element 1.5 ............................................................................................... 54
`
`6. Element 1.6 ............................................................................................... 56
`
`B. Claim 2 ......................................................................................................... 60
`
`C. Claim 3 ......................................................................................................... 61
`D. Claim 9 ......................................................................................................... 62
`E. Claim 10 ....................................................................................................... 65
`X. NO OBJECTIVE INDICIA OF NON-OBVIOUSNESS ................................ 68
`XI. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 68
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`IPR2020-00224
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`Cases
`Nidec Motor Corp. v. Zhongshan Borad Ocean Motor Co., 868 F.3d 1013 (Fed.
`Cir. 2017) ............................................................................................................ 29
`O2 Micro Int’l Ltd. v. Beyond Innovation Tech. Co., 521 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir.
`2008) ................................................................................................................... 29
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc) ........................ 28
`Board Decisions
`Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. v. Andrx Corp. et al., IPR2017-01648, Paper 34
`(P.T.A.B. Dec. 28, 2018) .................................................................................... 28
`Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Focal IP, LLC, IPR2016-01254, Paper No. 15
`(P.T.A.B. Dec. 28, 2016) .................................................................................... 18
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 102 ................................................................................................ 10, 15
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 ........................................................................................................ 3
`
`35 U.S.C. § 325 ........................................................................................................ 4
`Rules
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104 .................................................................................................... 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.15 ...................................................................................................... 3
`
`83 Fed. Reg. 51340 ................................................................................................. 28
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`IPR2020-00224
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`No.
`
`Description
`
`Exhibit 1001 U.S. Patent No. 7,075,917 (“the ’917 Patent”)
`
`Exhibit 1002 File History of U.S. Patent No. 7,075,917
`
`Exhibit 1003 Declaration of Harry Bims, PhD., signed and dated April 15, 2019
`(“Bims Decl.” or “Bims”)
`
`Exhibit 1004 Declaration of Friedhelm Rodermund, signed and dated April 12,
`2019 (“Rodermund Decl.” or “Rodermund”)
`
`Exhibit 1005 3G TR 25.835 V1.0.0 (2000-09) - 3rd Generation Partnership
`Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network;
`Report on Hybrid ARQ Type II/III (Release 2000)” (TR25.835)
`
`Exhibit 1006 3G TR 25.835 V0.0.2 (2000-08) – 3rd Generation Partnership
`Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network;
`Report on Hybrid ARQ Type II/III (Release 2000), TSG-RAN
`Working Group 2 (Radio L2 and Radio L3), Sophia Antipolis,
`France, 21–15 August 2000 (TR25.835 (V0.0.2))
`
`Exhibit 1007 U.S. Patent No. 6,507,582 “Radio Link Protocol Enhancements
`For Dynamic Capacity Wireless Data Channels,” issued January
`14, 2003 (Abrol)
`
`Exhibit 1008 3rd Generation Partnership Project
`Technical
`(3GPP),
`Specification Group (TSG) RAN; Working Group 2 (WG2); Radio
`Interface Protocol Architecture; TS 25.301 V3.2.0 (1999-10)
`(TS25.301)
`
`v
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`Exhibit 1009 R2-001762 – “Title: Fast Hybrid ARQ Description” (TSG-RAN
`Working Group 2 (Radio L2 and Radio L3) Sophia Antipolis,
`France, 21th to 25st August 2000) (R2-001762)
`
`Exhibit 1010 R2-001875 – “Title: Draft Report of the 15th TSG-RAN WG2
`meeting (Sophia Antipolis, France, 21-25 August 2000)” (R2-
`001875)
`
`Exhibit 1011 Complaint for Patent Infringement, Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Microsoft
`Corp., Case No. 8:18-cv-02053 (C.D. Cal.) (Complaint)
`
`Exhibit 1012 Petition for IPR of 7,075,917 – Redline of Apple Petition Relative
`to Microsoft Petition Filed in IPR2019-00973.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(A)(1)
`1. Real Party-In-Interest
`Apple Inc. is the real party-in-interest. 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1).
`
`IPR2020-00224
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`2. Related Matters
`The ’917 patent (Ex. 1001) is asserted in the following litigations: Uniloc
`
`2017 LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 8:18-cv-02053 (C.D. Cal.), filed November 17, 2018;
`
`Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Verizon Commc’ns Inc., et al., 2:18-cv-00513 (E.D. Tex.), filed
`
`November 17, 2018; Apple Inc. v. Uniloc 2017 LLC, IPR2019-00259 (P.T.A.B.),
`
`filed November 12, 2018; Uniloc 2017 LLC, et al. v. Verizon Commc’ns Inc., et al.,
`
`2:18-cv-00380 (E.D. Tex.), filed August 29, 2018; Uniloc 2017 LLC, et al. v.
`
`Microsoft Corp., 8:18-cv-01279 (C.D. Cal.), filed July 24, 2018; Uniloc 2017 v.
`
`AT&T Servs., Inc., 2:19-cv-00120 (E. D. Tex.), filed March 26, 2019.
`
`3. Lead and Back-Up Counsel
`Lead Counsel
`Jennifer C. Bailey (Reg. No. 52,583)
`jennifer.bailey@eriseip.com
`PTAB@eriseip.com
`
`Postal and Hand-Delivery Address:
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`7015 College Blvd., Suite 700
`Overland Park, Kansas 66211
`Telephone: (913) 777-5600
`Fax: (913) 777-5601
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`Adam P. Seitz (Reg. No. 52,206)
`Adam.Seitz@eriseip.com
`
`Postal and Hand-Delivery Address:
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`7015 College Blvd., Ste. 700
`Overland Park, Kansas 66211
`Telephone: (913) 777-5600
`Fax: (913) 777-5601
`
`Petitioner consents to service via email at the above email addresses.
`
`
`
`vii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.10(b), concurrently filed with this Petition is a
`
`Power of Attorney executed by Petitioner and appointing the above counsel.
`
`
`
`
`
`viii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`Apple Inc. (“Petitioner”) respectfully requests inter partes review (“IPR”) of
`
`claims 1-3 and 9-10 of U.S. Patent No. 7,075,917 (“’917 patent”) (Ex. 1001),
`
`allegedly assigned to Uniloc 2017 LLC (“Patent Owner”). For the reasons set forth
`
`below, claims 1-3 and 9-10 should be found unpatentable and cancelled.
`
`I. SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
`The ’917 Patent generally discusses a system and method of detecting error-
`
`affected data transmitted over a wireless network and requesting retransmission
`
`using automatic repeat request technology (or “ARQ”). ’917 Patent (Ex. 1001) at
`
`1:5-8, 1:64-67. The ’917 Patent itself admits that ARQ-type technology for detecting
`
`error-affected data
`
`transmitted over a wireless network and
`
`requesting
`
`retransmission was well known prior to the ’917 Patent. Id. at 1:9-37. Bims, ¶ 23.
`
`The ’917 Patent purportedly discusses and claims two alleged improvements
`
`over such prior art systems, namely (1) detecting error-affected data at the physical
`
`layer of the receiving side (rather than waiting for this step to be performed at the
`
`radio link control, i.e., “RLC,” layer), and for sending positive and negative
`
`acknowledgments over a back channel directly between the physical layers of the
`
`receiver and transmitter (id. at 1:40-50, 2:28-44, 6:1-15); and (2) unambiguously
`
`identifying each packet data unit with an abbreviated sequence number (whose
`
`length depends on the maximum number of coded transport blocks). Id. at 2:45-54.
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`However, and as shown below, such features were already well known in connection
`
`with ARQ systems and methods. Bims, ¶ 24.
`
`In particular, TR25.835 (Ex. 1005), published September 13, 2000, discloses
`
`the first alleged improvement: detecting error-affected data at the physical layer,
`
`rather than waiting for this step to be performed at the radio link control layer, and
`
`further discloses sending the positive or negative transmission acknowledgments
`
`along a direct (or back) channel between the physical layers of the receiver and
`
`transmitter. Notably, the ’917 patent contrasts its alleged invention with an earlier
`
`version of this same specification (Ex. 1006) that did not include these disclosures.
`
`Bims, ¶ 25.
`
`The second alleged improvement of the ’917 patent, the use of an abbreviated
`
`or shortened sequence number for a coded transport block to unambiguously
`
`identify a packet data unit and whose length depends on the maximum number of
`
`coded transport blocks to be stored, was taught by Abrol (Ex. 1007) well before the
`
`alleged invention of the ’917 Patent. As discussed below, a POSITA would have
`
`naturally incorporated these teachings of Abrol into the ARQ implementation for
`
`wireless communication as disclosed by TR25.385, thus satisfying all limitations of
`
`the challenged claims. Bims, ¶ 26.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`II. GROUNDS FOR STANDING PER 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(A)
`Petitioner certifies that the ’917 Patent is available for IPR and that Petitioner
`
`is not barred or estopped from requesting an IPR challenging the patent claims on
`
`the ground identified in this petition.
`
`III.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE
`A. Statement Of The Precise Relief Requested
`
`Petitioner requests inter partes review of claims 1-3 and 9-10 (each a
`
`“Challenged Claim,” and collectively the “Challenged Claims”) of the ’917 Patent
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103, based on the following statutory grounds.
`
`
`
`Reference(s)
`
`Basis Claims
`
`Ground 1 3G TR 25.835 (Ex. 1005) and Abrol (Ex. 1007) § 103
`
`1-3, 9-10
`
`This petition presents evidence of unpatentability and establishes a reasonable
`
`likelihood that the Petitioner will prevail in establishing that each Challenged Claim
`
`is unpatentable.
`
`An electronic payment in the amount of $30,500 for the fee specified by 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.15(a) is being paid at the time of filing this petition, charged to deposit
`
`account no. 50-6159. Any adjustments in the fee may be debited/credited to the
`
`deposit account.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`B. No Examiner Addressed These Unpatentability Grounds
`
`Neither “the same [n]or substantially the same prior art or arguments
`
`previously were presented to the Office.” 35 U.S.C. § 325(d). Specifically, neither
`
`the applicants nor any Examiner addressed whether the information contained in
`
`TR25.835 (Ex. 1005) was prior art or attempted to distinguish the claims from that
`
`publication. Applicants disclosed an earlier version of this specification (Ex. 1006)
`
`but that earlier version lacked the critical disclosures teaching use of the physical
`
`layer as a back-channel for sending ARQ messages (among other things). Bims, ¶
`
`41; compare TR25.835 Chapter 7 with Ex. 1006, Chapter 7.
`
`Moreover, the Examiner did not consider Abrol or any other reference that
`
`taught use of abbreviated sequence numbers to unambiguously identify a packet data
`
`unit and whose length depends on the maximum number of coded transport blocks
`
`to be stored. Because these key teachings in the prior art were not previously
`
`considered by the Office, this petition should not be denied under Section 325(d).
`
`C. This Petition Should Be Granted
`
`The present petition presents obviousness combinations that include
`
`TR25.835 (Ex. 1005), a reference not presented in IPR2019-00259. Importantly, the
`
`Applicant cited to an earlier version of that reference, i.e., TR25.835 (V0.0.2) (Ex.
`
`1006), which did not disclose information critical to the patentability of the claims,
`
`and the Applicant apparently attempted to distinguish the earlier version based on
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`the lack of such information. Even to this day the putative Patent Owner touts its
`
`alleged
`
`invention as an
`
`improvement over
`
`this earlier version without
`
`acknowledging that the same 3GPP group also published the updated TR25.835
`
`before the alleged ’917 Patent’s “time of invention.” In particular, in its Complaint
`
`against Petitioner it stated:
`
`Indeed, the time of invention was less than two months
`after the release of the document entitled, “3rd Generation
`Partnership Project, Technical Specification Group Radio
`Access Network, Report on Hybrid ARQ Type II/III
`(Release 2000), 3G TR 25.835 V0.0.2, TSG-RAN
`Working Group 2 (Radio L2 and Radio L3), Sophia
`Antipolis, France, 21–15 August 2000,” which described
`the specific types of hybrid ARQ network on which the
`invention improves. And, as detailed by the specification,
`the prior hybrid ARQ data transmission methods suffered
`drawbacks such that a new and novel method was
`required. The inventions of the ’917 patent are also
`indigenous to the then nascent field of wireless networks
`implementing hybrid ARQ data transmission methods.
`
`Complaint at ¶ 35, Ex. 1011.
`
`Such statements highlight that the Office previously considered the
`
`challenged claims only in view of an outdated and superseded document. Such
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`statements also make clear the importance that the Board now scrutinize the ’917
`
`Patent in view of the version that was current at the time of the alleged invention.
`
`IV. THE ’917 PATENT
`The ’917 Patent, titled “Wireless Network With A Data Exchange According
`
`To The ARQ Method” issued on July 11, 2006, from a U.S. patent application filed
`
`on October 9, 2001. The ’917 Patent alleges priority to German Patent Application
`
`No. 100 50 117, filed October 11, 2000.
`
`A. The ’917 Patent’s Specification
`
`The ’917 Patent relates to “a wireless network comprising a radio network
`
`controller and a plurality of assigned terminals, which are each provided for
`
`exchanging data and which form a receiving and/or transmitting side.” Ex. 1001 at
`
`1:6-9. It admits that “[s]uch a wireless network [wa]s known” from the earlier
`
`version 0.0.2 of TR25.385. Id. at 1:10-18 (emphasis added). The patent generally
`
`explains how known ARQ technology was used to identify and correct transmissions
`
`errors for “data sent in Packet Data Units (PDU) by the Radio Link Control layer
`
`(RLC layer)” of a communications network. Id. at 1:18-32. See Bims, ¶ 28.
`
`The ’917 Patent alleges that these prior art ARQ systems introduced
`
`unnecessary delay because they relied on the higher-level radio control link (“RLC”)
`
`layer to identify missing/corrupted PDUs and request retransmission of those
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`packets. Id. at 1:40-50. The ’917 Patent purports to solve this alleged problem and
`
`reduce ARQ delay in two basic ways. See Bims, ¶¶ 29-30.
`
`First, by detecting error-affected data at the physical layer, rather than waiting
`
`for this step to be performed at the radio link control layer, and sends
`
`acknowledgments over a back channel directly between the physical layers of the
`
`receiver and transmitter. Id. at 1:40-50, 2:28-44. For example, it explains:
`
`according to the invention a fast back channel is provided
`which is inserted directly between the receiving physical
`layer and the sending physical layer and not between the
`RLC layers concerned. … The receiving physical layer
`checks whether the coded transport block has been
`transmitted correctly. If it has, a positive acknowledge
`signal ACK is sent to the sending physical layer over the
`back channel. Conversely, if the coded transport block has
`not been received error-free, a negative acknowledge
`command NACK is sent to the sending physical layer.
`
`Ex. 1001 at 6:1-15 (emphasis added); see Bims, ¶ 33.
`
`Second, by using abbreviated sequence numbers in lieu of the prior art RLC
`
`sequence numbers. The abbreviated sequence number supposedly “reduces the
`
`extent of information that is required to be additionally transmitted for managing the
`
`transport blocks and packet data units and simplifies the assignment of the received
`
`7
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`acknowledge command to the stored transport blocks.” Id. at 2:45-49, 5:36-50; see
`
`Bims, ¶¶ 31-32.
`
`As outlined above, and as shown in detail below, these alleged “inventions”
`
`were known in the prior art, and a POSITA would have naturally implemented an
`
`ARQ system that satisfied each recited claim element. See Bims, ¶ 34.
`
`B. The Prosecution History
`
`On September 21, 2005, the Examiner issued a non-final rejection, objecting
`
`to informalities and requesting clarification of dependent claims 4-8, but citing no
`
`prior art directly and finding allowable subject matter in claims 1-3, 9, and 10. ’917
`
`Patent File History (Ex. 1002) at 61.
`
`In response, the Applicant amended the claims to address the Examiner’s
`
`concerns. Id. at pp. 69-73. The Examiner subsequently issued a notice of allowance
`
`for claims 1-10, issuing as the ’917 Patent on July 11, 2006. Id. at p. 81.
`
`C. The Claims
`
`This Petition challenges claims 1-3, and 9-10 of the ’917 Patent. Claims 1, 9
`
`and 10 are independent claims. Claim 1 is shown below.
`
`A wireless network comprising a radio network
`1.
`controller and a plurality of assigned terminals, which are
`each provided for exchanging data according to the hybrid
`ARQ method and which form a receiving and/or
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`transmitting side, in which a physical layer of a
`transmitting side is arranged for
`
`storing coded transport blocks in a memory, which
`blocks contain at least a packet data unit which is delivered
`by an assigned radio link control layer and can be
`identified by a packet data unit sequence number,
`
`storing abbreviated sequence numbers whose length
`depends on the maximum number of coded transport
`blocks
`to be stored and which can be shown
`unambiguously in a packet data unit sequence number, and
`for
`
`transmitting coded transport blocks having at least
`an assigned abbreviated sequence number and
`
`a physical layer of a receiving side is provided for
`testing the correct reception of the coded transport block
`and for sending a positive acknowledge command to the
`transmitting side over a back channel when there is correct
`reception and a negative acknowledge command when
`there is error-affected reception.
`
`V. APPLIED PRIOR ART
`A. TR25.835
`
`TR25.835 (Ex. 1005) was published by 3GPP in 2000 and publicly available
`
`on the 3GPP file server no later than September 13, 2000. See Rodermund Decl., Ex.
`
`9
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`1004, ¶ 25, see also id. at ¶¶ 12-24. It thus qualifies as prior art under at least Sections
`
`102(a) and (b)1.
`
`TR25.835 is directed to a wireless network comprising a radio network
`
`controller and a plurality of assigned terminals, which are each provided for
`
`exchanging data and which form a receiving and/or transmitting side, as essentially
`
`admitted to by the ’917 Parent. (Ex. 1001 at 1:10-18.) TR25.835 is specifically
`
`directed to Hybrid ARQ Type II/III technical solutions. (TR25.835 at pp. 7 and 8.)
`
`In particular, TR25.835 describes alternative approaches to Hybrid ARQ
`
`implementations. One of those options “uses hybrid ARQ type II/III retransmissions
`
`at Layer 1” [i.e., the physical layer] as explained in more detail in Chapter 7 of
`
`TR25.835 (Id. at p. 9.) TR25.835 states that this option adds “fast hybrid ARQ II/III
`
`functionality” (or “FHARQ” or “fast HARQ”) to the physical layer. (TR25.835 at p.
`
`9; Bims, ¶ 40.)
`
`Chapter 7 of TR25.835 was not contained in the earlier version of TR25.835
`
`(V0.0.2) that is discussed in the specification of the ’917 Patent (Ex. 1001, 1:9-62;
`
`5:13-35) and which was disclosed in an IDS submitted during the prosecution of the
`
`
`1 Pre-AIA Section 102(b) time bars are triggered off “the date of the application for
`
`patent in the United States” (emphasis added), not the date of the German application
`
`to which the ’917 Patent alleges pfriority. See 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (Pre-AIA).
`
`10
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`’917 Patent (Ex. 1002 at pp. 52-53).2 Thus, the Examiner did not have this
`
`information when examining the application. Bims, ¶ 41.
`
`Chapter 7 discusses the structure, function, and advantages of the HARQ
`
`option. TR25.835 at pp. 25-28. Among other things, the HARQ option of Chapter 7
`
`discloses and suggests several features that are relevant to the ’917 Patent’s claims,
`
`including but not limited to:
`
`(1) the physical layer of the receiving side testing whether the coded transport
`
`blocks were correctly
`
`received
`
`(without waiting
`
`for such
`
`testing or
`
`acknowledgement from the radio link control layer or “RLC” layer);
`
`(2) the physical layer sending over a back channel (or a channel directly
`
`between the physical layers of the transmitting and receiving sides) a positive
`
`acknowledgment when there is a correct reception of the coded transport blocks (i.e.,
`
`data and CRC or redundancy information) and a negative acknowledgment when
`
`
`2 Indeed, the 3GPP document that proposed the Chapter 7 changes that led up to
`
`TR25.835 is dated even earlier, i.e., August 23, 2000. See Ex. 1009; Rodermund
`
`Decl., Ex. 1004 at ¶ 27. It also was not cited during the prosecution of the ’917
`
`Patent. Christoph Herrmann, the named inventor on the ’917 Patent, was apparently
`
`at the Sophia Antipolis, France conference where this change proposal was
`
`presented. See Ex. 1010; Rodermund Decl., ¶ 28.
`
`11
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`there is an error-affected reception (without waiting for such testing or
`
`acknowledgement from the RLC layer); and
`
`(3) generating a sequence number at the physical layer.
`
`Specifically, for instance, Chapter 7 of TR25.835 states:
`
`To perform the fast HARQ operation the physical layer
`requires some additional side information, e.g. FHARQ
`sequence number, and redundancy version. The
`selection of these parameters should be under the control
`of MAC but the actual parameter values are generated at
`L1. The physical layer can encode the data and the side
`information separately, and map them on one, or possibly
`even different physical channels. At the receiver the
`buffering and recombining of the data is performed.
`
`Id. at p. 26 (emphases added); see Bims, ¶¶ 42-43.
`
`Further, for example, TR25.835 explains how the physical layers are used.
`
`7.2 Usage of transport channels and physical
`
`channels
`
`If fast HARQ is operated as a dual-channel model, the side
`information must be available very quickly since the
`retransmission interval is only one frame. The receiver
`reads the sequence number and redundancy version
`after which the packet is decoded. The integrity of the
`packet is checked and an acknowledgement is sent in
`the current uplink frame. Fast HARQ is planned to be
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`employed on DSCH. Side information and sequence
`number are added by Layer 1 to facilitate fast decoding
`at the receiver end.
`
`****
`7.3 Services provided by the physical layer
`7.3.1 Functions of Layer 1
`The main functions of the physical layer are listed in [1].
`The following additional functions have to be performed
`for fast HARQ operation:
`
`-
`
`redundancy selection, TX buffering, retransmission
`control, RX soft decision buffering and combining for
`data
`
`- encoding/decoding, transmission, and error detection
`on fast HARQ side information (including fast
`acknowledgements)
`
`- generation of Acknowledgement PDU & Side
`Information
`
`7.3.2 Interface to Layer 1
`According to the functional split, major parts of the
`functionality for fast HARQ have to be performed in
`the physical layer. Some fast HARQ parameters are
`passed from higher layers, the required changes are FFS.
`
`TR25.835 at p. 27 (emphasis added); see Bims, ¶¶ 44.
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`The following figure from TR25.835 clearly shows a “back” channel or
`
`channels directly between the physical sides of a transmitter and receiver. The solid
`
`lines generally show “the transport of user data that is to utilize fast hybrid ARQ”
`
`and the dotted lines “visualise the transport of necessary side information for fast
`
`hybrid ARQ operation.” TR25.835 at p. 27. As shown above, the physical layer
`
`performs (among other things) “error detection on fast HARQ side information
`
`(including fast acknowledgements” as well as “generation of Acknowledgement
`
`PDU & Side Information” without waiting for the RLC layer. Id. at p. 27 (emphasis
`
`added). Thus, TR25.835 teaches that the physical layer of the receiving side tests
`
`whether the coded transport data was correctly received or not, and sends over a
`
`“back” channel a positive or negative acknowledgment, respectively, without
`
`waiting for the RLC layer.
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`
`Id. at Figure 2, p. 27; see Bims, ¶ 45.
`
`B. Abrol
`
`Abrol (Ex. 1007) teaches the use of an abbreviated or shortened sequence
`
`number to identify a packet data unit in a wireless communication system employing
`
`ARQ protocols. Bims, ¶ 46. Abrol was filed on May 27, 1999 and issued on January
`
`14, 2003. Abrol is prior art to the ’917 Patent (at least) under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
`
`(pre-AIA).
`
`Specifically, Abrol teaches generating shortened sequence numbers from
`
`assigned sequence numbers to unambiguously identify an item of data:
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`The RLP sequence number 240 in each retransmit frame
`230 may optionally be shortened in the same ways as
`discussed for RLP sequence numbers as long as doing so
`causes no sequence number ambiguity.
`
`***
`
`The type field is followed by the RLP sequence number.
`When possible without causing sequence number
`ambiguity, shortened RLP sequence numbers of 8 bits
`are used. At other times, shortened RLP sequence
`numbers of 14 bits or full 20-bit RLP sequence numbers
`are contained by the RLP header.
`
`Abrol at 8:18-21, 9:16-21; see also id. at 10:49-54, 12:64–13:6 (emphases added);
`
`Bims, ¶ 47.
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`Abrol at Fig. 6; Bims, ¶ 47.
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`
`VI. APPLICANT’S ADMISSIONS AS TO THE STATE OF THE ART
`Applicant admits that a large portion of the technology and features described
`
`in the ’917 patent were known in the art. Below are a few such examples. These
`
`admissions inform in part what a POSITA would know and understand at the time
`
`of the filing of the application. (See Bims, ¶ 48.) See, e.g., Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Focal
`
`IP, LLC, IPR2016-01254, Paper No. 15, pp. 23, 27-28 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 28, 2016)
`
`(knowledge of a POSITA includes admitted prior art described in the patent at issue).
`
`A. “Physical” Layer, Wireless Networks, and Hybrid ARO Methods
`
`The ’917 Patent explains that it is related to well-known wireless technology
`
`comprising “a radio network controller and a plurality of assigned terminals which
`
`are each provided for exchanging data and which form a receiving and/or
`
`transmitting side” such as that set forth in TR25.835 (V0.0.2). Ex. 1001 at 1:5-14;
`
`Bims, ¶ 49.
`
`The ’917 patent also admits that it utilizes a well-known, three-layer protocol
`
`architecture as shown in TS25.301 (Ex. 1008)3.
`
`The exchange of control and useful data via the radio
`interface between the radio network controller 1 and the
`
`
`3 TS25.301 (Ex. 1008), which is referenced in the ’917 Patent, is used herein to show
`
`Applicant’s admissions as to the state of the technology and what a POSITA would
`
`know at the time the ’917 Patent application was filed.
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`terminals 2 to 9 can be explained with the layer model or
`protocol architecture shown by way of example in FIG. 2
`(compare for example 3rd Generation Partnership
`Project (3GPP); Technical Specification Group (TSG)
`RAN; Working Group 2 (WG2); Radio Interface
`Protocol Architecture; TS 25.301 V3.2.0 (1999-10)). The
`layer model comprises three protocol layers: the physical
`layer PHY, the data link layer having the sub-layers MAC
`and RLC (in FIG. 2 various objects of the sub-layer RLC
`are shown) and the layer RRC.
`
`Ex. 1001 at 4:35-46 (emphasis added). The ’917 Patent’s use of this well-known
`
`architecture can be seen by comparing Fig. 2 of the ’917 Patent (Ex. 1001) with Fig.
`
`2 of TS25.301 (Ex. 1008) (referenced in the ’917 Patent, above). See Bims, ¶ 50.
`
`19
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00224
`
`IPR2020-00224
`Patent 7,075,917
`Patent 7,075,917
`
`Hmi Ii
`
`Ex. 1001, Fig. 2.
`EX. 1001,