LG Electronics Inc v. Constellation Designs LLC

1. Case Identification

• Case #: IPR2023-00320
• Patent #: 11,019,509
• Filed: December 9, 2022
• Petitioner(s): LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics USA, Inc., and LG Electronics Alabama, Inc.
• Patent Owner(s): Constellation Designs, LLC.
• Challenged Claims: 3-7, 13-17, and 24-28

2. Patent Overview

• Title: Receivers Incorporating Non-Uniform Constellations with Overlapping Constellation Point Locations
• Brief Description: The ’509 patent relates to communication systems with receivers that utilize non-uniform, geometrically shaped symbol constellations to optimize data transmission capacity. The technology involves pairing specific low-density parity-check (LDPC) code rates with particular constellations based on channel conditions, such as the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 3-7, 13-17, and 24-28 are obvious over Barsoum ’777 in view of ATSC327.

• Prior Art Relied Upon:
  • Barsoum ’777 (Patent 7,978,777)
  • ATSC327 (ATSC Recommended Practice: Guidelines for the Physical Layer Protocol, Document no. A/327:2018)
• Core Argument for this Ground:
  • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Barsoum ’777 disclosed the foundational communication system of the challenged claims. This included a receiver with a demodulator, demapper, and decoder, capable of using unequally spaced (geometrically shaped) symbol constellations optimized for capacity. Barsoum ’777 further taught that these constellations could have overlapping point locations. Petitioner contended that ATSC327, a technical standard for digital broadcasting, provided the missing elements. Specifically, ATSC327 taught a "toolbox" of 120 standardized modulation and code rate (ModCod) combinations, including detailed look-up tables that pair specific non-uniform quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) constellations with various LDPC code rates and specify the required SNR for their operation. Petitioner asserted that implementing the specific ModCod tables from ATSC327 into the adaptable system of Barsoum ’777 would result in the claimed invention, including the specific code rate ranges and SNR performance thresholds recited in the challenged claims.
  • Motivation to Combine: A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine the teachings of Barsoum ’777 and ATSC327 for several reasons. First, a POSITA designing a communication system like that in Barsoum ’777 would naturally consult a well-known industry standard like ATSC327 for implementation guidelines and pre-validated operational parameters. Second, ATSC327 provided a finite, well-defined set of ModCod pairs designed to optimize performance across a wide range of channel conditions, making it an obvious choice for improving the flexibility and robustness of the Barsoum ’777 system. Third, adopting a technical standard would ensure interoperability with other devices in the industry, which is a strong commercial motivation.
  • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a high expectation of success because ATSC327 provided a ready-made "look-up table" solution with defined constellation mappings and their corresponding performance metrics (required SNRs). This eliminated the need for undue experimentation, as the standard provided a clear and predictable path to implementing high-performance, non-uniform constellations within the framework taught by Barsoum ’777.

4. Key Technical Contentions (Beyond Claim Construction)

• Priority Date Challenge: A central argument of the petition was that the challenged claims were not entitled to the claimed 2007 priority date of the ’319 provisional application. Petitioner asserted that the priority documents only disclosed optimizing constellations for specific, discrete code rates rather than the broad ranges of code rates and associated SNR performance thresholds recited in the challenged claims.
• Relevance of Priority Date: This contention was critical to the petition's foundation. By successfully arguing for a later effective filing date of December 27, 2019, Petitioner established that both Barsoum ’777 (published 2011) and ATSC327 (published March 2019) qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. §102, making them available for the obviousness challenge under §103.

5. Arguments Regarding Discretionary Denial

• Petitioner argued that discretionary denial under 35 U.S.C. §314(a), based on the Fintiv factors, was not merited due to a parallel district court litigation.
• The core of this argument was Petitioner's submission of a Sotera-style stipulation. In this stipulation, Petitioner committed that if the IPR was instituted, it would not pursue in the parallel district court proceeding the same grounds asserted in the petition or any other grounds that it reasonably could have raised in the IPR. Petitioner asserted that this stipulation aligns with USPTO guidance and eliminates the risk of duplicative efforts and inefficient use of resources, thereby weighing strongly against a discretionary denial of the petition.

6. Relief Requested

• Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 3-7, 13-17, and 24-28 of the ’509 patent as unpatentable.