BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`OSSIA, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`
`ENERGOUS CORPORATION
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024
`Patent 9,124,125
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF STEPHEN B. HEPPE IN SUPPORT OF PETITION
`FOR POST-GRANT REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT 9,124,125
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ossia, Inc.
`Exhibit 1005
`PGR2016-00024
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`OSSIA, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`
`ENERGOUS CORPORATION
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024
`Patent 9,124,125
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF STEPHEN B. HEPPE IN SUPPORT OF PETITION
`FOR POST-GRANT REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT 9,124,125
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ossia, Inc.
`Exhibit 1005
`PGR2016-00024
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`I, Stephen B. Heppe, a resident of Hood River, Oregon, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained on behalf of Ossia, Inc. (“Ossia”) to provide
`
`declaratory evidence in post-grant review of U.S. Patent 9,124,125 (the “’125
`
`patent”).
`
`2.
`
`I have reviewed and am familiar with the specification and the claims
`
`of the ’125 patent. I will cite to the specification using the following format: (’125
`
`patent, 1:1-10). This example citation points to the ’125 patent specification at
`
`column 1, lines 1-10.
`
`3.
`
`I have reviewed and am familiar with the specification of U.S. Patent
`
`Publication No. 2014/0008993 which the ’125 patent incorporates by reference. I
`
`will cite to the specification using the following format: (’993 publication, ¶ 0030).
`
`This example citation points to the ’993 publication specification at paragraph 30.
`
`4.
`
`I have reviewed and am familiar with the following documents and
`
`materials:
`
` U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125 (OSSIA 1001);
`
` Prosecution File History for U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125 (OSSIA 1002);
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0008993 (OSSIA 1003);
`
` Prosecution File History for U.S. Patent No. 2014/0008993 (OSSIA
`
`1004);
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
` Definition of “Accumulate,” Excerpt from Webster’s New World
`
`College Dictionary, 3rd Edition, New York: MacMillan, 1988
`
`5.
`
`I am familiar with the technology at issue and the state of the art at the
`
`time the application leading to the ’125 patent was filed.
`
`6.
`
`I have been asked to provide my technical review, analysis, insights,
`
`and opinions regarding the above-noted references, in relation to the issues
`
`addressed herein.
`
`7.
`
`The headings and sub-headings in this Declaration are provided for
`
`the convenience of the reader, and are for reference purposes only.
`
`I.
`
`Qualifications
`8. My academic and professional pursuits are closely related to the
`
`subject matter of the ’125 patent.
`
`9.
`
`I obtained a Bachelor’s of Science degree in electrical engineering and
`
`computer science at Princeton University in 1977, a Master’s of Science degree in
`
`electrical engineering (specializing
`
`in communications) from The George
`
`Washington University (GWU) in 1982, and a Doctor of Science in electrical
`
`engineering (specializing in communications, with minors in operations research
`
`and electrophysics) in 1989. I have worked in the fields of radio communication,
`
`antenna beamforming and null-steering, direction-finding, computer and network
`
`communications, packet radio, and ad hoc packet radio networking since 1977. My
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`doctoral dissertation focused on direction-finding using a phased-array antenna,
`
`with beamforming and null-steering using subarrays to enhance the direction-
`
`finding accuracy of the system while reducing computational load.
`
`10. My first job after college, at General Electric Space Division, focused
`
`on the RF communications and command and data handling system for the Nimbus
`
`G weather satellite. RF communications took place at S-band (2.2-2.3 GHz).
`
`11. While working at Stanford Telecommunications, Inc., I participated in
`
`the performance analysis of (and development of operating strategies for) the
`
`beamforming and null-steering antenna arrays used on the DSCS III spacecraft.
`
`These included two 19-element transmit arrays and one 61-element receive array.
`
`Frequency bands of operation ranged from 7.25 GHz to 8.4 GHz. I also led a team
`
`investigating various satellite communication options for the FAA, for aeronautical
`
`air/ground communications, which included consideration of L-band phased-array
`
`antennas on the spacecraft (i.e., operating roughly at 1.6 GHz), as well as
`
`beamforming at the ground stations in order to minimize spacecraft cost.
`
`12. More recently, while serving at Insitu, Inc., as Chief Engineer, VP,
`
`and ultimately Chief Scientist, I was the architect of the air/ground radio
`
`communication system which employed orthogonal polarization diversity and
`
`frequency diversity for downlink video at 2.4 GHz, as well as command and
`
`control (using a single antenna) at 900 MHz and 1.3 GHz.
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`13. My Curriculum Vitae is submitted as Exhibit 1009, which contains
`
`further details on my education, experience, publications, and other qualifications
`
`to render an expert opinion. I am being compensated at my standard rate of
`
`$300/hour for my work related to this post-grant review proceeding. My
`
`compensation is not dependent on and in no way affects the substance of my
`
`statements in this Declaration.
`
`II. Level of Skill in the Art
`14.
`I have been asked to consider the level of ordinary skill in the art that
`
`someone would have had at the time the claimed invention was made. In deciding
`
`the level of ordinary skill, I considered the following:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the levels of education and experience of persons working in the field;
`
`the types of problems encountered in the field; and
`
`the sophistication of the technology.
`
`15. The ’125 patent addresses at least the following technical and
`
`mathematical domains which I will refer to as a “basic toolkit” for a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) at the time of the invention: a) antenna design
`
`for frequencies between 900 MHz and 5.8 GHz; b) radio-frequency (“RF”)
`
`propagation; c) constructive and destructive interference of multiple RF signals at
`
`the same frequency; and d) mathematics sufficient to handle the optimization of
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`multiple complex values, representing the RF signals generated at the various
`
`antenna elements described in the ’125 patent (i.e., complex numbers represented
`
`as X + iY, or equivalently, Aeiθ), subject to optimization constraints such as “power
`
`desired in direction A; but no power desired in direction B.”
`
`16.
`
`It can be argued that the ’125 patent goes further, addressing the
`
`intentional tailoring of constructive and destructive interference of multiple RF
`
`signals at different frequencies, and the optimization of at least RF signal
`
`amplitude and phase (at the various antenna elements described in the ’125 patent)
`
`subject to more complex constraints such as “power desired in 3D region A; but no
`
`power desired in 3D region B” (i.e., “pocket forming”). However, these topics are
`
`problematic since a proper treatment would also have to consider questions of
`
`claim construction, technical feasibility, enablement, and possession. Therefore, I
`
`will focus on the “basic toolkit” described above, and address these additional
`
`topics separately.
`
`17. The fundamentals of RF propagation, constructive and destructive
`
`interference, and antenna behavior, such as the concept of resonance and the
`
`radiation pattern for simple antennas such as “whips” (dipoles), are generally
`
`introduced at the undergraduate level in electrical engineering and physics
`
`curricula. However, adaptive antenna beamforming and null-steering, which lies at
`
`the heart of the ’125 patent, is generally not addressed until the Master’s level in
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`electrical engineering and physics degree programs specializing in RF propagation
`
`and radio communication. Adaptive beamforming and null-steering requires the
`
`adjustment of amplitude and phase across multiple antenna elements subject to a
`
`set of “constraints” intended to maximize signal strength in certain directions while
`
`minimizing signal strength in other directions. Even a theoretical and simplified
`
`treatment, focusing on “open-loop” operation where beams and nulls are to be
`
`formed in known directions with a theoretically perfect array, requires familiarity
`
`with complex numbers and matrix manipulation, as well as multi-dimensional
`
`optimization techniques, in addition to the general familiarity with RF propagation
`
`and constructive/destructive interference between RF signals at arbitrary points in
`
`space relative to the points at which the signals were created. In my experience, the
`
`academic training in all these areas, necessary to setup and solve a problem
`
`involving adaptive beamforming and null-steering, is only completed at the
`
`Master’s level. One to two years of practical experience is also beneficial, in order
`
`to learn the subtleties of antenna design and interaction with other nearby
`
`structures (including other antennas), and understand the issues involved in
`
`characterizing a real-world antenna. Therefore, in my opinion, the minimum level
`
`of skill in the area of the ’125 patent would be a Master’s degree in electrical
`
`engineering or physics, specializing in antennas or RF propagation, with one or
`
`two years of practical experience in the analysis or design of phased-array
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`antennas. Additional academic training could substitute for practical experience,
`
`and additional practical experience (augmented with self-study) could substitute
`
`for formal academic training.
`
`18. For so-called “closed-loop” systems, where a target device is tracked
`
`and the antenna is controlled to steer a beam in the direction of the target,
`
`additional issues come into play. In order to actually “track” a target with a multi-
`
`element or phased-array antenna – ascertain its location in three-dimensional
`
`space, or even its azimuth and elevation angle (ignoring distance) -- the tracking
`
`system must analyze the phase and amplitude of RF signals incident on the array
`
`and calculate the location (or at least the azimuth and elevation) of the target. This
`
`also requires familiarity with complex analysis and matrix manipulation, and
`
`requires characterization of the array as well as a consideration of the operating
`
`environment. Different techniques are available for closed-loop tracking and
`
`beamforming/null-steering systems that employ two-way interactions with a target
`
`(e.g., such as a traditional radar) versus one-way systems where a pilot signal
`
`generated by the target is used to ascertain location (or direction), and thereby
`
`command a separate beamforming and null-steering system that places a beam in
`
`the desired direction while minimizing RF energy in other directions.
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`19. Target tracking, and even direction-finding, is particularly challenging
`
`in an in-door environment where reflected signals can be difficult to distinguish
`
`from direct signals, and where reflected and direct signals can be “correlated.”
`
`20. Systems for target tracking and direction-finding are an academic area
`
`and engineering discipline in their own right; however, they rely on the same
`
`mathematical foundation as needed for dynamic beamforming and null-steering.
`
`Therefore, I have not assessed any additional training needed for this aspect of the
`
`problem.
`
`21. Based on these considerations, it is my opinion that, at the earliest
`
`filing date of the ’125 patent, which I understand to be June 25, 2013, a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would have a Master’s degree in electrical engineering or
`
`physics, specializing in antennas or RF propagation, with one or two years of
`
`practical experience in the analysis or design of phased-array antennas. Additional
`
`academic training could substitute for practical experience, and additional practical
`
`experience (augmented with self-study) could substitute for formal academic
`
`training.
`
`III. My Understanding of Claim Construction
`22.
`It is my understanding that in order to properly evaluate the ’125
`
`patent, the terms of the claims must first be interpreted. It is my understanding that
`
`the claims are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`specification. It is my further understanding that claim terms are given their
`
`ordinary and customary meaning as would have been understood by one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the earliest filing date of the ’125 patent, unless the
`
`inventor has set forth a special meaning for a term. I have applied the ordinary and
`
`customary meaning to each of the ’125 patent claim terms except as noted below.
`
`IV. Relevant Legal Standards
`A. My Understanding of Enablement
`23.
`I have been advised and understand that a claim is not enabled when
`
`the specification fails to teach those in the art how to make and use the claimed
`
`invention without undue experimentation.
`
`24.
`
`I have been advised and understand that there is consideration of
`
`multiple
`
`factors
`
`in determining whether a specification
`
`requires undue
`
`experimentation in order to make or practice a claimed invention, these factors
`
`including: (1) the quantity of experimentation necessary, (2) the amount of
`
`direction or guidance presented, (3) the presence or absence of working examples,
`
`(4) the nature of the invention, (5) the state of the prior art, (6) the relative skill of
`
`those in the art, (7) the predictability or unpredictability of the art, and (8) the
`
`breadth of the claims. I have been advised and understand that, to be “enabled”, the
`
`full scope of the claim must be enabled.
`
`25.
`
`I have also been advised that the novel aspects of the invention must
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`be described and enabled in the patent. In other words, the knowledge of one
`
`skilled in the art is not sufficient to supply any information that is missing or
`
`absent from the specification.
`
`B. My Understanding of Written Description
`26.
`I have been advised and understand that there is a written description
`
`requirement that requires a specification to describe an invention understandable to
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art and show that the inventor actually invented the
`
`invention claimed.
`
`C. My Understanding of Indefiniteness
`27.
`I have been advised and understand that a claim is indefinite when it
`
`fails to inform, with reasonable certainty, those skilled in the art about the scope of
`
`the invention. I also understand that the Patent Office may employ a lower
`
`“plausible” indefiniteness standard. In particular, I understand that if a claim is
`
`amenable to two or more plausible claim constructions, the USPTO requires the
`
`applicant to more precisely define the metes and bounds of the claimed invention
`
`by holding the claim unpatentable for being indefinite. These two different
`
`standards would not change my opinion set out below.
`
`D. Means-plus-function under § 112(f)
`28.
`I have been advised and understand that construing a means-plus-
`
`function (“MPF”) claim element is a two-step process: (1) define the particular
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`function of the claim element, and (2) look to the specification and identify the
`
`corresponding structure for that function.
`
`29.
`
`I have been advised and understand that a structure disclosed in the
`
`specification qualifies as a “corresponding structure” if the specification or the
`
`prosecution history clearly links or associates that structure to the function recited
`
`in the claim. I understand that if one employs means-plus-function language in a
`
`claim, then one must set forth in the specification an adequate disclosure showing
`
`what that language means.
`
`30. There is a presumption that claim limitations are means-plus-function
`
`limitations invoking Section 112, sixth paragraph, where the claim limitations use
`
`the phrase “means for”; the phrase “means for” is modified by functional language;
`
`and the phrase “means for” is not modified by sufficient structure for achieving the
`
`specified function.
`
`31.
`
`I have been advised and understand that a means-plus-function claim
`
`is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) if the specification does not contain an
`
`adequate disclosure of the structure that corresponds to the claimed function.
`
`V. Overview of ’125 Patent
`32. The ’125 patent, entitled “Wireless Power Transmission With
`
`Selective Range,” is directed to electronic transmitters for wireless power
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`transmission. It purports to teach systems and methods for creating “pockets of
`
`energy”, surrounded by “null-space”, where the pockets of energy can be used to
`
`power or charge portable electronic devices. It purports to achieve this goal by
`
`“pocket-forming”, which the specification describes as “generating two or more RF
`
`waves which converge in 3-d space, forming controlled constructive and destructive
`
`interference patterns.” (Exhibit 1001, ’125 patent, 2:30-32.) The specification does
`
`not provide a precise definition of a “pocket”, but provides several examples in text
`
`and illustration. For example, FIG. 1 reproduced below, and described at 2:59-3:15,
`
`illustrates a “pocket of energy” 108 purportedly formed by “controlled Radio RF
`
`waves” 104 which are generated by the transmitter 102. The specification teaches
`
`that the RF waves may be controlled through phase and/or amplitude adjustments.
`
`These RF waves converge in 3-d space to form constructive and destructive
`
`interference patterns (pocket-forming). Pockets of energy can be 3-dimensional in
`
`shape, and can be utilized to charge or power the e.g. laptop computer 110. Id.
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CCase PGRR2016-000224 of
`
`UU.S. Patent
`
`No. 9,1244,125
`
`
`
`
`
`33. Theree is very liittle speciffic disclosuure regardiing the dettails of FIGG. 1,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`such as
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the frequeency band oof operatioon or the diistance bettween the ttransmitterr and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`receiverr. Howeveer, the maaximum raange of wiireless powwer transmmission 1000 is
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`claims 11
`
` and
`
`
`
`4 GHz annd 5.7 GHHz. A
`
`
`
`
`
`describeed as “oveer hundredss of meters” (’125 ppatent, 3:344-37), and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`18 recitte RF freqquency bannds of gennerally 9000 MHz, 2.
`
`
`
`
`
`POSITAA would rrecognize tthat these
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`frequencyy bands, wwith waveleengths rannging
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`from 333 cm downn to 5 cm,
`
`
`
`
`
`are roughlly consistennt with thee apparent
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`dimensionns of
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`the transmitting phased-array antenna of 16 antenna elements (the dashed squares
`
`at 102) and the receiving phased-array antenna of 4 antenna elements (the dashed
`
`squares on the laptop) illustrated in FIG. 1.1 The described frequencies and
`
`maximum range puts the purported “pocket of energy” in the so-called “far field”
`
`of the transmitting antenna, and the full scope of the claims would therefore have
`
`to include “pocket-forming” in the far field with at least frequencies in the range of
`
`900 MHz, 2.4 GHz, and 5.7 GHz. The claims do not require the transmitter to form
`
`the “pocket” based purely on two (or a plurality of) signals propagating directly
`
`from the transmitter to the receiver as shown in FIG. 1; however, I note that this
`
`figure, with a pocket in the far field, is unrealizable in the real world. I will return
`
`to this point later.
`
`34. FIG. 3 of the ’125 patent, reproduced below, shows wireless power
`
`transmission with “selective range”, where a plurality of pockets of energy may be
`
`
`1 In my opinion, the ’125 Patent and the ‘993 publication use the terms
`
`“antenna” and “antenna element” interchangeably. See, e.g., ‘993 FIG. 1
`
`comparing to ¶ 0008; ’993 FIG. 2 comparing to ¶ 0026; ’125 Patent at 2:45-46
`
`(“‘Receiver’ may refer to a device including at least one antenna element”
`
`(emphasis added), which a POSITA would understand to be an antenna) compared
`
`to claim 2 at 4:43-44 (“receiver with a RF antenna…”).
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CCase PGRR2016-000224 of
`
`UU.S. Patent
`
`No. 9,1244,125
`generateed along vaarious radiii from thee transmittter 302. (’
`
`
`; see 125 patentt, 2:21-23;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`also 3:466-64.) Specifically, thhe “selectiive range”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`may incluude one or
`
`
`
`more wireeless
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`chargingg radii 3044 (indicatedd by the ccrosshatcheed concenttric annulaar regions)
`
`
`
`
`
` and
`
`
`
`one or mmore radii oof null-spaace 306 (indicated byy white spaace). All thhe claims reecite
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`with “sele
`wireless power trannsmission
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ctive rangee.”
`
`5. FIG.
`3
`
`4 of the
`
`’125 pateent (reprod
`duced bel
`
`
`
`
`low) appeaars to shoow a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`pluralityy of wireleess “charging spots” 404, and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the speciffication puurports to tteach
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CCase PGRR2016-000224 of
`
`UU.S. Patent
`
`No. 9,1244,125
`
`that pocckets of eenergy 1088 (as in FFIG. 1) maay be gennerated in
`
`these wireeless
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`charging spots. (’’125 patennt, 4:9-11.)) These “ppockets of f energy,”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`as well ass the
`
`
`
`“pockett of energyy” in FIG.
`
`
`
`
`
`1, appear tto be consttrained in rrange, as wwell as late
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`rally
`
`
`
`(and vertically, inn the case oof FIG. 1),, to create
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`a “pocket”” (althoughh the claimms of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the ’1255 patent ceertainly do
`
`
`
`
`
`not requirre a perfecttly sphericcal pocket
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`or “bubblee” as
`
` 1).
`illustratted in FIG.
`
`
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`If FIG. 3 and FIG. 4 are interpreted to imply that an isolated
`
`36.
`
`transmitter can create “pockets of energy” with “selective range” (minimum and
`
`maximum radii) in its far field as apparently illustrated, based on signals
`
`propagating directly from the transmitter to a potential receiver as shown in FIG. 1,
`
`these figures are also unrealizable in the real world.
`
`37.
`
`Independent claims 10, 13 and 18 recite “a
`
`transmitter for
`
`generating… short RF control signals”. These “short RF control signals” are not
`
`described anywhere in the specification, and their scope cannot be ascertained with
`
`reasonable certainty by a POSITA at the time of filing (or even today).
`
`38. The related ’993 Publication, also by Leabman, provides a graphical
`
`illustration of a transmitter and receiver which are purported to support a
`
`methodology for pocket-forming (title of the ’993 Publication), and wireless power
`
`transmission using constructive interference patterns to form pockets of energy
`
`(claim 1). The illustrations of the transmitter and receiver are shown below.
`
`
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CCase PGRR2016-000224 of
`
`UU.S. Patent
`
`No. 9,1244,125
`
`
`
`
`
`339. FIG.
`
`
`
`1 of the ’9993 Publicaation showws a transmmitter that ccan be usedd for
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`pocket-forming ((Exhibit 1003, ’9933 publicattion, ¶ 00014.) It ccomprises
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`two
`
`
`
`“antennna” conneccted to an
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`RF Integrated Circuuit (RFIC),, although
`
`
`
`the “antennna”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`are alsoo describedd as “anteenna elemeents” in thhe text of
`
`
`
`
`
`the speciffication, wwhich
`
`
`
`teaches
`
`
`
`that the ttransmitterr may incllude a houusing havinng at leastt two or mmore
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`0025.) Thhe ’993 Puublication
`
`
`
`
`
`teaches thhat the anteenna
`
`
`
`
`
`antennaa elements. (Id. at ¶
`
`
`
`
`
`elementts may incclude “suittable antennna types
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Hz… for
`such as 900 MHzz, 2.5 GHzz or 5.8 G
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`example, ppatch anteennas”. Id.
`
`
`
`
`
`for operaating in freequency b
`
`
`
`ands
`
`The
`
`
`
`’993 Puublication
`
`
`
`also descrribes a “ccommunicaations commponent” 1110, showwn as
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`separatee from the RFIC aand antennnas, whichh may bee used to
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`transfer oother
`
`
`
`
`
`informaation such
`
`
`
`as an identtifier for thhe device oor user, batttery level,, or geograaphic
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`locationn data (Id. aat ¶ 0025; 0029.)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 18 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`40. FIG. 2 of the ’993 Publication ‟shows a receiver that can be used for
`
`pocket-forming.ˮ (Id. at ¶ 0015.) It comprises at least one antenna connected to a
`
`rectifier, although the “antenna” is also described as an “antenna element” in the
`
`text of
`
`the specification. (Id at 0026.) The receiver also contains a
`
`“communications component” 210 which can send out status information including
`
`present location information of the client device. Id.
`
`41. FIG. 3 of the ’993 Publication appears to be similar to FIG. 1 of the
`
`’125 Patent, already reproduced above, although the ’993 Publication teaches that
`
`the receiver may communicate with the transmitter by generating a “short control
`
`signal” through its antenna elements 204 in order to locate its position with respect
`
`to the transmitter (Id. at ¶ 0029.) In some embodiments, receiver 200 may
`
`additionally utilize at least one communications component 210 to communicate
`
`with other devices or components. Id. Once transmitter 100 identifies and locates
`
`receiver 200, a channel or path can be established by knowing the gain and phases
`
`coming from receiver 200 (Id. at ¶ 0030.) Transmitter 100 may start to transmit or
`
`broadcast controlled Radio Frequency (RF) waves 302 which may converge in 3-d
`
`space by using a minimum of two antenna elements 104. Id.
`
`42. FIG. 4 of the ’993 Publication, shown below, is described as an
`
`exemplary illustration of adaptive pocket-forming (Id. at ¶ 0031.) In the illustrated
`
`embodiment, the “short signals” generated by the receiver are omni-directional,
`
`
`
`- 19 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CCase PGRR2016-000224 of
`
`UU.S. Patent
`
`No. 9,1244,125
`
`
`
`and “boounce overr the wallss until theey find thee transmittter 100.” IId. The miicro-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`controlller in the ttransmitter
`
`
`
`
`
`may “recaalibrate thee signals…… by adjussting gainss and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`phases
`
`and form
`
`
`
`conjugatees taking iinto accouunt the buuilt-in phasses of anteenna
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`elementts 104. Once calibrattion is perfformed, traansmitter 1100 may foocus RF wwaves
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`406 in
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`two channnels followwing the ppath descriibed in FIIG. 4… Suubsequentlly, a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`pocket oof energy 4408 may foorm on tabblet 404 whhile avoidinng obstacl
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`402.” Idd.
`
`
`
`- 20 -
`
`es such as
`
`user
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`43. The ’125 Patent, and the ’993 Publication, share common descriptions
`
`for “pocket-forming”, “pockets of energy”, “null-space”, “transmitter”, “receiver”,
`
`and adaptive pocket-forming”. (See, e.g., ’125 Patent at 2:30-52; ’993 Publication
`
`at ¶ 0018 - 0023.)
`
`VI. Claim Construction
`44. As stated above, I understand that, during a post-grant review, claims
`
`are to be given their broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification
`
`as would be read by a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art.
`
`A.
`
`"unified waveform"
`45. As stated above, I understand that, during a post-grant review, claims
`
`are to be given their broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification
`
`as would be read by a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art.
`
`B.
`
`"pockets of energy"
`46.
`
`It is my opinion that “pockets of energy” should be interpreted as
`
`"areas or regions of space where energy or power may accumulate in the form of
`
`constructive interference patterns of RF waves.” The ’125 patent states that
`
`pockets of energy "may refer to areas or regions of space where energy or power
`
`may accumulate in the form of constructive interference patterns of RF waves."
`
`(’125 patent, 2:33-35.) While this statement uses the non-limiting term "may," the
`
`specification's use of the phrase is consistent with this statement. For example, the
`
`
`
`- 21 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`’125 patent discloses "[p]ockets of energy 108 may be formed at constructive
`
`interference patterns and can be 3-dimensional in shape." (Id. at 3:3-5.)
`
`47. The terms “pocket” and “pocket of energy” are not terms of art. I have
`
`been working in the fields of RF communication and propagation, radar, direction-
`
`finding, antenna beamforming, and null-steering, for over 35 years. I have not seen
`
`these terms used in any literature that I can recall, in the sense apparently intended
`
`by the ’125 Patent, prior to encountering this case. The specification does not
`
`evince any intent to deviate from the specification's description, and because the
`
`terms are not terms of art, a skilled artisan would have relied on the description in
`
`the specification.
`
`C.
`48.
`
`“pocket-forming”
`
`It is my opinion that the proper interpretation of this term is “forming
`
`controlled constructive and destructive interference patterns through generation of
`
`two or more RF waves which converge in 3-d space.”
`
`49. The ’125 patent appears to define “pocket-forming” as "generating
`
`two or more RF waves which converge in 3-d space, forming controlled
`
`constructive and destructive interference patterns." (Id. at 2:30-32.) While this
`
`statement uses the non-limiting term "may," the ’125 patent's use of the phrase is
`
`consistent with this explanation.
`
`
`
`- 22 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`50. The ’125 patent uses the term ‟pocket-formingˮ in a variety of
`
`different ways including as an adjective, a noun, and a verb. (Id. at 2:30-32 (verb);
`
`2:49-51 (noun); 3:6-8, 13-15, 25-30, 46-50, and 66-67 (noun); 3:40-42 (adjective);
`
`4:26 and 53 (adjective); 5:18 (noun); 5:28 (adjective); 5:38 and 45 (noun); 6:61
`
`(noun); 7:1 (noun).) Each of these uses appears to link the term to the concept of
`
`constructive and destructive interference patterns. For example, the '125 patent
`
`states that the formation of constructive and destructive interference patterns is tied
`
`to the concept of pocket-forming. (Id. at 2:67-3:3.)
`
`51. The ’125 patent further describes the concept of ‟pocketˮ in relation
`
`to the constructive and destructive interference patterns. Based on these disclosures
`
`in the ’125 patent, it is my opinion a POSITA would have relied on the ’125
`
`patent’s description of the term in order to interpret it.
`
`52.
`
`It is unclear from the specification of the ’125 Patent if the inventors
`
`believed that “pocket-forming” was known in the prior art, or if they believed that
`
`“pocket-forming” represented a novel feature of their purported invention. Those
`
`of skill in the art, at the time of the invention, already knew how to form “beams”
`
`and “nulls” with phased-array antennas, and also knew how to build “phase-
`
`conjugate” systems that would generate multiple signals with a phased-array
`
`antenna which would create a region of “constructive interference” at the location
`
`of an emitter in the environment. I have provided a Declaration in a related PGR
`
`
`
`- 23 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2016-00024 of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,124,125
`Petition which interprets “pocket-forming” as one of these capabilities known in
`
`the prior art. The present Declaration treats "pocket-forming" as a potentially novel
`
`feature of the purported invention which may go beyond the prior art.
`
`D.
`“accumulate”/“accumulating”
`53. All the independent claims recite “accumulating pockets of energy” or
`
`“accumulate as pockets of energy”. The plain and ordinary meaning of
`
`“accumulate” is to pile up, collect, or gather together, especially over a period of
`
`time (Webster’s New World College Dictionary, 3rd ed., 1988). The claims do not
`
`recite merely “creating” a pocket of energy (or “create” as a pocket of energy);
`
`instead, they recite “accumulate” or “accumulating”. This would seem to imply
`
`that the inventors intended to claim a system where energy accumulated in 3-d
`
`space over a period of time (i.e., increased, as in a reservoir). However, an
`
`alternate theory is that the inventors were either acting as their own lexicographer,
`
`or perhaps meant “create”/”creating”, even though they wrote “accumulate”/
`
`“accumulating.” The specification teaches that “‘Pockets of energy’ may refer to
`
`areas or regions of space where energy or power may accumulate in the form of
`
`constructive interference patterns of RF waves” (’125 patent, 2:33-35) (emphasis
`
`added), but I do not believe this resolves the issue. This citation actually i
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
