PTAB

IPR2015-01577

Qualcomm Inc v. Bandspeed Inc

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition Intelligence

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Approach for Managing the Use of Communications Channels Based on Performance
  • Brief Description: The ’624 patent discloses a system for managing channels in a frequency hopping (FH) communications network. The system dynamically selects sets of channels for use based on the measured performance of a plurality of available channels.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 1, 4, 13, 16, 25, 28, and 29 are anticipated by Gerten under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Gerten (Patent 6,760,319).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Gerten discloses every element of the challenged claims. Gerten describes a wireless communication system with master and slave devices in a piconet that identifies and avoids channels with strong interference. The master device performs a channel scan to determine performance ("at a first time"), selects a set of channels to avoid, and modifies the hopping sequence. Gerten’s master device also "periodically updates the channels to be avoided," which Petitioner mapped to the claim limitation of selecting a second set of channels "at a second time that is later than the first time." For claim 4, Petitioner asserted that Gerten's disclosure of using a "first register bank" for normal mode and an "alternate register bank" for interference avoidance mode meets the limitation of loading the selected channels into registers of the communicating devices.

Ground 2: Claims 2, 3, 14, 15, 26, and 27 are obvious over Gerten in view of Cuffaro.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Gerten (Patent 6,760,319), Cuffaro (Patent 6,418,317).

  • Core Argument for this Ground:

    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner contended that Gerten teaches the base system of selecting channels to avoid interference but does not explicitly disclose two key features recited in these dependent claims. First, for claims 2, 14, and 26, Cuffaro was cited to supply the limitation that channel selection is based on "channel performance data that is transmitted over" the communication channels. Cuffaro explicitly teaches a mobile station measuring channel quality and reporting those measurements back to a base station. Second, for claims 3, 15, and 27, Cuffaro was cited for its disclosure of a "channel voting feature." Cuffaro describes a mechanism where a wireless device makes a "vote" for or against using a channel based on quality metrics, and a channel is selected for use if it receives a specified number of votes (e.g., the maximum number of positive votes).
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine Gerten and Cuffaro as both address the same problem of channel selection to avoid interference in a wireless system. Petitioner argued a POSITA would be motivated to incorporate Cuffaro’s teaching of reporting performance data from the slave device into Gerten’s system to obtain a more accurate assessment of interference as experienced by the receiver, thereby improving the channel selection process. Gerten itself suggests that both master and slave devices can participate in identifying channels to avoid. The addition of Cuffaro's voting mechanism was presented as a known technique for improving channel selection criteria.
    • Expectation of Success: The combination was argued to be a predictable integration of known techniques. Using performance data from a remote device to inform a master device's channel selection would predictably improve the system's performance.

  • Additional Grounds: Petitioner asserted additional obviousness challenges, including that claims 1, 3, 4, 13, 15, 16, 25, 27, 28, and 29 are obvious over Gendel (Patent 6,115,407) in view of Haartsen (Patent 7,280,580), and that claims 2, 14, and 26 are obvious over Gendel in view of Haartsen and Sage (Patent 5,781,582). These grounds relied on the theory that Gendel taught most claim elements, while Haartsen supplied a standard processor/memory architecture and Sage supplied the element of transmitting performance data.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

  • Hopping Sequence: Petitioner proposed this term be construed as "the order in which the network hops among a set of frequencies." This construction was argued to be consistent with the term's well-understood meaning in the art and the patent's own specification.
  • Vote: Petitioner proposed that a "vote[s] to use the particular communications channel" be construed to mean "at least an indication whether to use (or not to use) the communications channel or an indication whether the communication channel is good or bad." This construction was argued as necessary to encompass the technical disclosures in the prior art, where channel selection is based on performance indicators rather than an explicit polling process.

5. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review (IPR) and cancellation of claims 1-4, 13-16, and 25-29 of Patent 7,477,624 as unpatentable.