PTAB

IPR2025-01510

Southwest Airlines Co v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Dual Mode Communication Systems and Methods
  • Brief Description: The ’845 patent relates to an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) communication system capable of operating in dual modes. The system can switch between a first mode using spatial multiplexing for data transmission over a single frequency spectrum and a second mode using both spatial multiplexing and bandwidth expansion across multiple, non-overlapping frequency spectrums.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 1-21 are obvious over Walton, alone or in view of Maltsev.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Walton (Application # 2002/0154705) and Maltsev (Patent 7,885,178).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Walton discloses a configurable multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) communication system that renders all challenged claims obvious. Walton’s “antenna diversity” or “MIMO communications mode,” which uses multiple antennas to transmit data concurrently over a single frequency spectrum, allegedly teaches the claimed “first mode” of operation based on spatial multiplexing. Walton’s “frequency diversity” mode, which describes transmitting data over multiple independent sub-bands at different center frequencies, allegedly teaches the claimed “second mode” of combined spatial multiplexing and bandwidth expansion. Walton further taught dynamically selecting between these modes based on link characteristics like carrier-to-noise ratio, satisfying limitations in dependent claims. To the extent Walton alone was deemed insufficient, Maltsev was introduced. Maltsev disclosed a multichannel receiver for wideband OFDM communications that explicitly combined the use of spatially-diverse antennas with the reception of signals across multiple frequency-separated subchannels, reinforcing the obviousness of combining the two modes.
    • Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds): A person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would combine Walton with Maltsev because both references addressed the same problem of increasing throughput and reliability in OFDM systems. Further motivation was provided by the concurrent development of the 802.11n Wi-Fi standard, which prominently featured both MIMO spatial multiplexing and channel bonding (bandwidth expansion) as core advancements. Combining the teachings would have been a routine step to create an improved system consistent with industry trends.
    • Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds): A POSITA would have had a reasonable expectation of success in combining the known elements from Walton and Maltsev to achieve a predictable improvement in wireless data transmission, as it required no undue experimentation and aligned with the established trajectory of the 802.11n standard development.

Ground 2: Claims 1-21 are obvious over Ishikawa, alone or in view of Gardner.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Ishikawa (Patent 7,130,592) and Gardner (Patent 7,916,803).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner contended that Ishikawa taught a radio transmission apparatus that renders the claims obvious. Ishikawa disclosed adaptively selecting between a “space multiplex” mode (transmitting different information from multiple antennas on the same frequency) and a “frequency multiplex” mode (transmitting different information from multiple antennas on different frequencies). These modes were argued to directly correspond to the claimed first and second modes of the ’845 patent. Ishikawa also disclosed a control section that adaptively switches between these modes based on detected interference and error rates, mapping to dependent claim limitations. Gardner was cited to supplement Ishikawa’s teachings. Gardner disclosed multi-antenna MIMO devices employing “multichannel techniques,” including the specific ability to transmit simultaneously on non-adjacent channels (e.g., channels 1 and 4) and to use the out-of-band subcarriers in the "gap" between adjacent channels to carry additional data, directly teaching the claimed “gap filling” limitation.
    • Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds): A POSITA would combine Ishikawa and Gardner because both were in the same field of OFDM-based communication and aimed to increase data rates. Gardner’s techniques for using non-adjacent channels and gap filling were known methods for improving spectral efficiency and flexibility. Combining Gardner’s advanced channel usage with Ishikawa’s adaptive mode-switching system was presented as a simple combination of known elements to achieve a predictable result. The relevance of both references to the 802.11n standard further motivated their combination.
    • Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds): Integrating Gardner's established multi-channel and gap-filling techniques into Ishikawa's adaptive system would have been a straightforward modification for a POSITA, with a high expectation of successfully creating a more robust and efficient communication system.

4. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-21 of the ’845 patent as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103.