DCT

0:14-cv-04666

Regents Of University Of Minnesota v. AT&T Mobility LLC

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 0:14-cv-04666, D. Minn., 01/30/2015
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the District of Minnesota because Defendant conducts continuous business in the state, operates a wireless communication network including 4G LTE services within the district, and employs local sales representatives.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s 4G LTE wireless communication network, services, and related components infringe five patents related to advanced signal processing techniques for improving data transmission reliability and efficiency over fading channels.
  • Technical Context: The patents address fundamental challenges in wireless communications, such as mitigating signal degradation from fading and accurately estimating channel conditions, which are critical for the performance of high-speed mobile networks like 4G LTE.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint is a First Amended Complaint. U.S. Patent No. RE45,230 is a reissue of U.S. Patent No. 7,292,647. No other significant procedural events, such as prior litigation or administrative proceedings involving the patents, are mentioned in the complaint.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2002-04-22 '768 & '230 Patents Priority Date
2003-05-21 '317, '185, '309 Patents Priority Date
2007-07-31 '768 Patent Issue Date
2013-11-19 '317 Patent Issue Date
2014-05-06 '185 Patent Issue Date
2014-07-08 '309 Patent Issue Date
2014-11-04 '230 Patent Issue Date
2014-11-06 Alleged date of Defendant's knowledge of asserted patents
2015-01-30 First Amended Complaint Filing Date

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 7,251,768 - "Wireless Communication System Having Error-Control Coder and Linear Precoder"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,251,768, "Wireless Communication System Having Error-Control Coder and Linear Precoder," issued July 31, 2007.

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes the problem of signal "fading" in wireless communications, which impairs performance. While error-control (EC) coding is a known counter-measure, increasing its diversity gain (effectiveness against fading) typically requires an exponential increase in decoding complexity, making advanced protection impractical. (’768 Patent, col. 1:26-44, 2:3-12).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a joint coding-precoding scheme that combines standard error-control coding with a "complex field linear precoder." This approach applies a linear transformation to the data symbols after they have been error-coded and mapped to a constellation. This combination is asserted to achieve a "multiplicative benefit" to system diversity without the prohibitive complexity increase associated with relying on EC coding alone. (’768 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:16-32; Fig. 1).
  • Technical Importance: This technique offered a method to achieve high resilience to fading in wireless systems without incurring the exponential decoding complexity that would otherwise limit performance. (’768 Patent, col. 2:25-32).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" without specifying them (Compl. ¶32). Independent claim 1 is representative of the system claimed.
  • Essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • An error-control coder applying an error correction code to produce an encoded data stream.
    • A bit interleaver to process the encoded data stream.
    • A mapping unit to map the interleaved data to constellation symbols from a finite alphabet.
    • A precoder that applies a linear transformation to the constellation symbols to produce precoded symbols, which are complex numbers not restricted to the finite alphabet.
    • A symbol interleaver to process the precoded symbols.
    • A modulator to produce an output waveform for transmission.

U.S. Reissue Patent No. RE45,230 - "Wireless Communication System Having Linear Encoder"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Reissue Patent No. RE45,230, "Wireless Communication System Having Linear Encoder," issued November 4, 2014.

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: In multicarrier systems like Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM), frequency-selective fading can create deep nulls on certain subcarrier frequencies, leading to data loss and high error rates. (’230 Patent, col. 1:40-50).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a "linear encoder" that operates on the data stream before modulation. The encoder ensures that the data transmitted on each subcarrier is a different "linear combination" of the original information symbols. This process spreads the information from any single symbol across multiple subcarriers, creating frequency diversity and making the overall transmission robust to fading on any individual subcarrier. (’230 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:45-53).
  • Technical Importance: This approach provides a method for achieving maximum diversity against frequency-selective fading without requiring the transmitter to have prior knowledge of the channel conditions, a significant practical advantage in mobile systems. (’230 Patent, col. 2:15-21).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" (Compl. ¶38). Independent claim 1 is representative of the method claimed.
  • Essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • An encoder that linearly encodes a data stream of information bearing symbols to produce an encoded data stream.
    • A modulator that produces a multicarrier output waveform having a set of subcarriers.
    • The linear encoding is performed such that the subcarriers carry different linear combinations of the information symbols.

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,588,317

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,588,317, "Estimating Frequency-Offsets and Multi-Antenna Channels in MIMO OFDM Systems," issued November 19, 2013.
  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses the technical challenge of accurately estimating both carrier frequency offset (CFO) and channel conditions in complex multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) OFDM systems. The disclosed solution involves inserting special training symbols and "hopping" null subcarriers across different transmission blocks, a technique that allows the receiver to decouple the estimation of CFO from the estimation of the channel itself, improving accuracy and system reliability. (’317 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:16-36).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint is general (Compl. ¶44); independent claims are 1 and 15.
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the operation of the radio access portion of Defendant's 4G LTE network. (Compl. ¶¶ 29, 44).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,718,185

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,718,185, "Estimating Frequency-Offsets and Multi-Antenna Channels in MIMO OFDM Systems," issued May 6, 2014.
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent discloses a method for estimating CFO and channel state in MIMO-OFDM systems by inserting training symbols across multiple blocks and using null subcarriers that "hop" to different positions in each block. This structure enables the receiver to separate the tasks of CFO estimation and channel estimation, which is critical for robust performance in advanced wireless networks. (’185 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:20-35).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint is general (Compl. ¶44); independent claims are 1 and 15.
  • Accused Features: The complaint targets methods used in the radio access portion of Defendant's 4G LTE network. (Compl. ¶¶ 29, 44).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,774,309

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,774,309, "Estimating Frequency-Offsets and Multi-Antenna Channels in MIMO OFDM Systems," issued July 8, 2014.
  • Technology Synopsis: The technology relates to CFO and channel estimation in MIMO-OFDM systems. The invention uses training symbols distributed over multiple transmission blocks combined with null subcarriers whose positions change from block to block, allowing the receiver to perform CFO estimation prior to and separate from channel estimation, thereby improving overall system accuracy. (’309 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:21-36).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint is general (Compl. ¶44); independent claims are 1 and 15.
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges infringement by the systems and methods used to operate Defendant's 4G LTE radio access network. (Compl. ¶¶ 29, 44).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The accused instrumentalities are Defendant's "4G LTE network," the "LTE wireless communications systems" that constitute the network, the methods for operating these systems, and components such as mobile devices that operate on the network (Compl. ¶¶ 28-30).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint describes the accused instrumentality as a wireless communication system that provides 4G LTE communication services to customers (Compl. ¶28). The infringement allegations focus on the technical operation of the "radio access portion" of the network (Compl. ¶29). The complaint alleges Defendant has "reaped substantial benefits" from using the patented technologies but provides no specific data on market positioning (Compl. ¶8). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for a claim-chart analysis. The infringement allegations are pleaded at a high level of generality, asserting that the accused 4G LTE network and services embody the claimed inventions without mapping specific product features to claim elements.

The narrative infringement theory for the ’768 Patent is that Defendant's 4G LTE systems perform methods that directly infringe by utilizing the claimed combination of error-control coding and linear precoding to enhance transmission reliability (Compl. ¶¶ 32, 29). For the ’230 Patent, the theory is that Defendant's 4G LTE network, as a multicarrier system, infringes by using a form of linear encoding to distribute information symbols across different subcarriers to achieve frequency diversity (Compl. ¶¶ 38, 29). For the ’317, ’185, and ’309 Patents, the theory is that the accused network infringes by using methods for estimating frequency offsets and channel conditions necessary for the operation of a MIMO-OFDM system (Compl. ¶¶ 44, 29).

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Technical Questions: A primary point of contention will be factual. What specific algorithms, standards, and hardware/software components within the accused 4G LTE network perform the functions recited in the claims? For instance, what evidence does the complaint provide that the accused network uses a "linear precoder" that operates on "constellation symbols" ('768 Patent) or a "linear encoder" that creates "linear combinations" of symbols ('230 Patent) in a manner that maps to the patent claims?
    • Scope Questions: The dispute may center on whether the general signal processing techniques employed in the 4G LTE standard fall within the scope of the patent claims. For example, does the term "linear encoder" as used in the ’230 Patent read on standard channel interleaving techniques used in OFDM systems, or does the patent’s specification limit the term to a more specific set of mathematical transformations?

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • For the ’768 Patent:

    • The Term: "precoder that applies a liner transformation to the constellation symbols"
    • Context and Importance: This term is central to distinguishing the invention from conventional systems where all encoding occurs at the bit level. The infringement analysis will depend on whether the accused functionality in the LTE standard operates on constellation symbols (post-mapping), as required by the claim, or on data at a different stage of the transmission chain.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the precoder’s function generally as processing "successive blocks of M symbols" after constellation mapping to "linearly precode the blocks" (’768 Patent, col. 3:45-48). This functional language may support a broad definition of "linear transformation."
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent emphasizes the distinction between the EC coder operating over a "finite field" and the precoder operating over a "complex field" (’768 Patent, col. 3:28-34). This distinction, along with the specific matrix embodiments disclosed (e.g., O₄ in col. 7:15-24), could be used to argue for a narrower construction limited to transformations with specific mathematical properties.

  • For the ’230 Patent:

    • The Term: "encoder that linearly encodes a data stream...so that the subcarriers carry different linear combinations of information symbols"
    • Context and Importance: This term captures the core mechanism for achieving frequency diversity. Defendant may argue that common techniques in OFDM systems do not meet this definition of "linear encoding." The case may turn on whether this term is construed to cover any method that spreads symbol information across subcarriers or is limited to the specific encoding schemes taught.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent's summary states the invention robustifies multicarrier transmissions by "introducing memory into the transmission with complex field (CF) encoding across the subcarriers" (’230 Patent, col. 2:45-48). This purpose-driven language could support a broader reading.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description contrasts the invention with conventional coded OFDM and describes specific mathematical constructs for the encoder. This may support an interpretation limiting the claim to encoders that implement a distinct, pre-modulation transformation to create these linear combinations, as opposed to other forms of signal processing. (’230 Patent, col. 1:56-67).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges both inducement and contributory infringement. The inducement theory is based on Defendant allegedly marketing its LTE network and requiring customer devices to operate in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶¶ 33, 39, 45). The contributory infringement theory is based on Defendant providing components, such as mobile devices, that are allegedly especially adapted for infringement and are not staple articles of commerce (Compl. ¶¶ 30, 33, 39, 45).
  • Willful Infringement: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knew of the asserted patents "no later than November 6, 2014," a date prior to the filing of the complaint (Compl. ¶¶ 30, 33, 39, 45). The complaint also pleads willful blindness in the alternative, alleging Defendant knew of a high probability of infringement but took "deliberate actions to avoid learning of these facts" (Compl. ¶¶ 33, 39, 45).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

  • A core issue will be one of evidentiary mapping: given the complaint's high level of generality, the case will depend on whether discovery uncovers specific components, algorithms, or processes within the accused 4G LTE network and its enabling standards that correspond directly to the functional elements recited in the patent claims. The plaintiff bears the burden of mapping abstract claim limitations like "linear precoder" onto concrete technical implementations.
  • A key legal question will be one of definitional scope: the dispute will likely center on the construction of foundational terms such as "linearly encodes" and "applies a liner transformation to the constellation symbols." The outcome may turn on whether these terms are interpreted broadly to cover a wide range of techniques for achieving diversity and channel estimation in multicarrier systems, or narrowly to the specific mathematical structures and operational sequences disclosed in the patents' specifications, which might distinguish them from the standardized methods employed in 4G LTE.