PTAB

IPR2016-01898

Cisco Systems Inc v. ChanBond LLC

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Intelligent Device System and Method for Distribution of Digital Signals on a Wideband Signal Distribution System
  • Brief Description: The ’679 patent relates to an intelligent radio frequency (RF) transmission device. The device analyzes an incoming high-rate digital data stream, dynamically selects multiple available RF channels based on the data's throughput, divides the stream, and transmits the resulting smaller streams across the selected channels.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Obviousness of Claim 1 over Tiedemann, Gilhousen, and Jacobs

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Tiedemann (Patent 5,859,840), Gilhousen (Patent 5,103,459), and Jacobs (Patent 5,414,796).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Tiedemann disclosed the core intelligent device of the claim: a cellular base station that de-multiplexes a high-rate data stream and transmits it over a primary channel plus one or more dynamically assigned additional channels. Petitioner asserted that Tiedemann’s cell controller functions as the claimed "RF channel detector" and "processor," as it must know which channels are in use to allocate new ones. To meet the "traffic sensor" limitation, Petitioner pointed to Tiedemann's data source, which sends a request when high-rate data is needed, and cited the incorporated Jacobs patent as teaching an explicit data rate sensor (a variable-rate vocoder). To meet the "destination address" limitation, Petitioner relied on the incorporated Gilhousen patent, which explicitly teaches addressing for mobile units in a CDMA system.
    • Motivation to Combine: Petitioner asserted that a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would be motivated to combine the references because Tiedemann expressly incorporates both Gilhousen and Jacobs by reference. A POSITA would combine Jacobs’s data rate sensor with Tiedemann’s system to achieve Tiedemann’s stated goal of efficient channel utilization. Likewise, a POSITA would use Gilhousen’s addressing scheme with Tiedemann to achieve the predictable result of routing data to the correct mobile device.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a high expectation of success, as the combination involves integrating systems and components (e.g., vocoders, addressing protocols) explicitly designed to work together within well-understood CDMA cellular frameworks.

Ground 2: Obviousness of Claims 1 and 9 over Tiedemann, Gilhousen, Jacobs, and Gorsuch

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Tiedemann (Patent 5,859,840), Gilhousen (Patent 5,103,459), Jacobs (Patent 5,414,796), and Gorsuch (Patent 6,081,536).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground adds Gorsuch to provide alternative teachings for claim 1 and to supply the necessary elements for dependent claim 9. For claim 1, Gorsuch was argued to teach a "traffic sensor" in the form of an input buffer that detects its fill rate to determine channel needs. Gorsuch also explicitly taught determining available channels using a "radio assignment table," strengthening the mapping for the channel detector and processor limitations. For dependent claim 9, which adds limitations requiring the receipt and combination of separate "first" and "second" digital information streams with distinct destination addresses, Petitioner argued Gorsuch was essential. Gorsuch explicitly discloses a base station that receives, processes, and combines separate voice and data streams (e.g., from a telephone and a computer attached to a subscriber unit) into a single data stream for transmission.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine Gorsuch with the Tiedemann system to efficiently handle diverse, non-voice data streams like internet traffic, for which Gorsuch’s buffer-based traffic sensor is better suited than the voice-oriented vocoder of Jacobs. This combination would directly address the known market demand for high-data-rate cellular modems capable of supporting multiple services (e.g., simultaneous voice and data), yielding a predictable improvement over the base Tiedemann system.
    • Expectation of Success: Success would be expected because both Gorsuch and Tiedemann operate using standardized and compatible technologies, including CDMA transmission protocols and ISDN network layer protocols, facilitating their integration.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

  • "RF Channel": Petitioner proposed the construction "an RF path for transmitting electric signals." This broad interpretation was argued to be necessary to encompass the various types of "channels" disclosed across the prior art references, including frequency-division channels, time-division slots (TDMA), and code-division channels (CDMA), thereby allowing those references to be mapped to the claim limitations.
  • "Address" and "addressable device": Petitioner proposed that "address" should be construed as "information identifying a device or location." This construction was central to its argument that disclosures of telephone numbers, user IDs (in Gilhousen), and IP addresses met the "destination address" limitation of the claims.

5. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requested institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1 and 9 of Patent 8,341,679 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103.