IPR2017-01490 Petition

U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Filed on behalf of Unified Patents Inc.
By: Lionel M. Lavenue Ashraf A. Fawzy
C. Brandon Rash Unified Patents Inc.
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, 1875 Connecticut Ave. NW, Floor 10
Garrett & Dunner, LLP Washington, D.C. 20009
Two Freedom Square Telephone: 202-871-0110
11955 Freedom Drive Email: afawzy@unifiedpatents.com
Reston, VA 20190-5675
Telephone: 571-203-2750
Email: UnifiedPatents-IPR2017-
01490@finnegan.com

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

____________________

Unified Patents Inc.

Petitioner

v.

Red Rock Analytics, LLC

Patent Owner

IPR2017-01490
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

CALIBRATION OF I-Q BALANCE IN TRANSCEIVERS

____________________

PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW

 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. MANDATORY NOTICES ............................................................................. 1

A. Real Party-in-Interest ............................................................................ 1

B. Related Matters...................................................................................... 1

C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel and Service Information .......................... 1

II. CERTIFICATION OF GROUNDS FOR STANDING .................................. 2

III. STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED ................................... 2

A. Claims for Which Review Is Requested ............................................... 2

B. Statutory Grounds of Challenge ............................................................ 2

IV. THE 313 PATENT ......................................................................................... 3

A. Overview of the 313 Patent Disclosure ............................................... 3

B. Prosecution History ............................................................................. 13

C. State of the Art at the Time of the Invention ...................................... 14

D. The Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ................................................ 18

V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 19

VI. STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED FOR EACH

CLAIM CHALLENGED .............................................................................. 20

A. Overview of Warner............................................................................ 20

B. Claim 1 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner........ 26

C. Claim 2 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner........ 45

D. Claim 3 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner........ 45

E. Claim 4 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner........ 46

F. Claim 5 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner........ 48

i
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

G. Claim 6 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner........ 49

H. Claim 7 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner........ 50

I. Claim 15 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner...... 58

J. Claim 16 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner...... 59

K. Claim 21 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner...... 60

L. Claim 22 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner...... 60

M. Claim 30 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner...... 63

N. Claim 32 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner...... 63

O. Claim 37 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner...... 63

P. Claims 38-44, 52, 53, 58, 59, 67, 69, and 74 Are Both
Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner .................................. 64

VII. CONCLUSION.............................................................................................. 67

ii
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

I. MANDATORY NOTICES

A. Real Party-in-Interest

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(1), Unified Patents Inc. (Unified or

Petitioner) certifies that Unified is the real party-in-interest and no other party

exercised control or could exercise control over Unifieds participation in this

proceeding, the filing of this petition, or the conduct of any ensuing trial. In this

regard, Petitioner has submitted voluntary discovery (EX1006).

B. Related Matters
U.S. Patent 7,346,313 (the 313 Patent, EX1001) is owned by Red Rock

Analytics, LLC (Red Rock or Patent Owner). Petitioner is aware of the

following case: Red Rock Analytics, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., No. 2:17-cv-

0101 (E.D. Tex.).

C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel and Service Information

Petitioner designates Lionel M. Lavenue (Reg. No. 46,859), available at

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Two Freedom Square,

11955 Freedom Drive, Reston, VA 20190-5675 (phone: 571-203-2700; fax: 202-

408-4000), as lead counsel; and C. Brandon Rash (Reg. No. 59,121), available at

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, 901 New York Avenue,

NW, Washington, DC 20001-4413 (phone: 202-408-4000; fax: 202-408-4400),

and Ashraf A. Fawzy (Reg. No. 67,914), avaible at Unified Patents Inc., 1875

1
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Connecticut Ave. NW, Floor 10, Washington, D.C. 20009 (phone: 202-871-0110).

Petitioner consents to e-mail service at UnifiedPatents-IPR2017-

01490@finnegan.com and afawzy@unifiedpatents.com.

II. CERTIFICATION OF GROUNDS FOR STANDING

Petitioner certifies pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 42.104(a) that the 313 Patent is

available for inter partes review and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped from

requesting inter partes review challenging the patent claims on the grounds

identified in this Petition.

III. STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED

A. Claims for Which Review Is Requested

Petitioner requests inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-7, 15, 16,

21, 22, 30, 32, 37-44, 52, 53, 58, 59, 67, 69, and 74 of the 313 Patent under 35

U.S.C. 311.

B. Statutory Grounds of Challenge

This Petition presents the following grounds:

Ground 1: Claims 1-7, 15, 16, 21, 22, 30, 32, 37-44, 52, 53, 58, 59, 67, 69,

and 74 are anticipated by U.S. Patent 6,940,916 to Warner et al. (Warner,

EX1003) under 35 U.S.C. 102.

Ground 2: Claims 1-7, 15, 16, 21, 22, 30, 32, 37-44, 52, 53, 58, 59, 67, 69,

and 74 are rendered obvious by Warner under 35 U.S.C. 103.

2
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Warner issued on September 6, 2005, was filed on January 26, 2001, and

claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/178,385, filed on January 27,

2000. EX1003. Thus, Warner is prior art to the 313 Patent under pre-AIA 35

U.S.C. 102(e).

IV. THE 313 PATENT

A. Overview of the 313 Patent Disclosure

1. Background of the Technology

The 313 Patent is directed to calibrating the gain balance between I and Q

channels in transceivers for digital communications. EX1001, 1:6-10; EX1004,

11. It was well known in the art that the throughput of wireless transmissions

could be increased by transmitting data as complex componentsan in-phase (I)

component and a quadrature (Q) component. EX1001, 1:26-46; EX1004, 11.

Doing so for digital communications was conventional in the art, but introduced

the problem of gain imbalance between the two components (I and Q) when not

properly calibrated. Id. The 313 Patent is directed to calibrating that balance.

EX1001, 2:14-22.

There are two common types of transceivers: direct conversion and

heterodyne conversion. EX1001, 1:14-25; EX1004, 12. A direct-conversion

transceiver converts directly between the baseband (I and Q channels) and radio

frequency (RF), while a heterodyne-conversion transceiver converts to an

3
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

intermediate frequency (IF) between the baseband and RF. EX1001, 1:16-25,

FIGS. 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b.

Figures 1a and 1b illustrate a typical prior-art direct-conversion transceiver,

which the 313 Patent calls conventional. EX1001, 4:48-50, 6:46-49; EX1004,

13. Figure 1a, reproduced below, shows the transmit chain (also called a

transmitter or modulator). EX1001, 4:48-50, 6:46-49 (modulator . . .

design), 11:67 (transmitter); EX1004, 13.

EX1001, FIG. 1a. The transmit chain includes two channels, which carry the real,

in-phase (I) signal and the imaginary, quadrature (Q) signal, respectively.

Id., FIG. 1a, 1:31-38. Digital-to-analog (D/A) converters 10a and 10b convert the

baseband I and Q digital signals to analog signals, and amplifiers 14a and 14b

amplify the I and Q analog signals by transmit gains GTI and GTQ. Id., 6:24-32. To
4
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

limit noise, low-pass filters 12a, 12b, 16a, and 16b filter the signals before and

after the amplifiers, and modulator 18 then converts the signals to RF. Id.

Figure 1b, reproduced below, shows the receive chain (also called a

receiver or demodulator) in a typical direct-conversion transceiver. Id., 4:48-

50, 6:36; EX1004, 14.

EX1001, FIG. 1b. The receive chain receives an RF signal, and demodulator 30

converts the RF signal to baseband I and Q analog signals. Id., 6:36-45. The I and

Q signals pass through filters 32a and 32b, and then amplifiers 34a and 34b

amplify the signals by receive gains GRI and GRQ. Id. The signals then pass

through filters 36a and 36b before being converted to digital signals by analog-to-

digital (A/D) converters 38a and 38b. Id.

5
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

The 313 Patent discloses typical prior-art heterodyne-conversion transmit

and receive chains, which in relevant part differ from direct conversion in that they

include an additional conversion to an intermediate frequency (IF). Id., 4:51-53,

FIGS. 2a, 2b; EX1004, 15. For example, in the transmit chain of figure 2a,

modulator 48consisting of mixers 50a and 50b and summation 52converts the

baseband I and Q signals to an IF signal, which is amplified by amplifier 54,

filtered by filter 56, and converted to RF by mixer 58. Id., 6:57-7:4, FIG. 2a. In

the receive chain of figure 2b, the RF signal is converted to IF by mixer 64, filtered

by filter 66, amplified by amplifier 68, and converted to baseband I and Q signals

by mixers 70a and 70b. Id., 7:5-17, FIG. 2b; EX1004, 15.1

One known issue with these conventional transceivers is gain imbalance.

EX1004, 16. Figures 6a and 6b of the 313 Patent, reproduced below, are

graphical representations of I-Q gain balance and imbalance. EX1001, 5:3-8. In

ideal operation, the gains of the I channel (GI) and the Q channel (GQ) are balanced

(i.e., of equal magnitude), forming the circle in figure 6a. EX1001, FIG. 6a, 5:3-8;

EX1003, 2:2-17. Gain imbalance occurs when the I and Q channels have unequal

1
The 313 Patent refers to local oscillator 58 and local oscillator 64, but these

components are known as mixers. EX1004, 15 n.1.

6
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

gains, as shown in figure 6b, where GI is greater in magnitude than GQ, causing a

distortion in the signal. EX1001, FIG. 6a, 5:3-8; EX1003, 2:2-17; EX1004, 16.

EX1001, FIGS. 6a, 6b. Gain imbalance can result when component variability

such as small variations in the components between the I and Q channels (e.g., the

filters or mixers)causes the I signal to be amplified or attenuated by a different

amount than the Q signal. EX1003, 2:2-17. These imbalances cause distortion of

the data symbols being transmitted or received, and such distortion can increase

signal errors in the transceiver. EX1001, 1:47-54; EX1004, 16.

According to the 313 Patent, heterodyne transceivers were attractive for

high-performance applications because most of the required gain is achieved in the

IF stage, requiring less gain in the baseband stage and thus typically resulting in

less imbalance between the I and Q signals. EX1001, 1:15-22, 38-45; EX1004,

17. Heterodyne transceivers, however, could not be integrated on-chip because

they require IF components, thereby increasing their cost. Id. In contrast, direct-

conversion transceivers were popular for integrated circuits (ICs) to be used in

7
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

low-cost equipment, but I-Q gain imbalances are more problematic because most

of the required gain is achieved in baseband. Id.

The 313 Patent discloses two of the many conventional prior-art systems for

reducing gain imbalance by calibrating the baseband gains in the transmitter

(figure 3a) and receiver (figure 3b). EX1001, 4:54-59; EX1004, 18. These two

prior-art approaches added analog circuity to a conventional transceiver:

observation circuitry 84 to observe and compare the analog I and Q signals in the

transmit baseband; and calibration signal source 90 to provide a calibration signal

into the analog I and Q inputs of the receive baseband. EX1001, FIGS. 3a, 3b,

7:34-59. According to the 313 Patent, this extra circuitry presents difficulty

because it must be included in places of the circuit that are typically sensitive to

layout constraints, while also failing to provide calibration of the entire transmit

and receive chains by not accounting for any imbalances caused by the up-

conversion and down-conversion mixers. Id., 1:62-67, 7:60-66.

2. The 313 Patent Disclosure and Claims

The 313 Patent discloses a purportedly improved method of calibrating the

I-Q gain balance in transceivers for digital communications. EX1001, 1:6-8, 7:60-

8:09; EX1004, 19. Specifically, the 313 Patent discloses calibrating the transmit

and receive chains independently and in their entirety by including all relevant

gains from each chain as part of the calibration process. EX1001, 2:1-22.

8
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

required for calibration is a pathfor example, attenuator 120 (in red)for

injecting a calibration signal from the RF transmit output to the RF receive input.

EX1001, 8:21-30, 35-47. Switch 122 may be used to switch between calibration

mode (the position shown in figure 4) and operation mode. Id., 8:21-34.

In calibration mode, a normal baseband transmit input introduces I and Q

calibration signals to the transmit chain, which converts the baseband I and Q

signals to RF, either directly (for direct conversion) or after being converted to IF

(for heterodyne conversion). Id., FIG. 4, 8:10-38; EX1004, 21. The RF transmit

output is injected into the receive chain via attenuator 120, and the receive chain

converts the RF signal to baseband I and Q signals as a normal baseband receive

output. Id. According to the 313 Patent, [a] variety of calibration signals could

be found useful. EX1001, 8:48-53. As two examples, the 313 Patent describes

the calibration signal as a sequence of pulses, in any order, for which a pulse is

either purely real or purely imaginary at the transmit baseband input, or as a

baseband phasor, which was well known in the radar art. Id., 8:48-9:40.

The 313 Patent describes the basic calibration operation as applying the

test signal as the baseband transmit signal input, holding the receive gains fixed,

and sequentially varying the difference in I- and/or Q-channel gains in the transmit

chain until the observed difference is minimized. Id., 10:24-42; EX1004, 22.

The I-Q gain settings that minimize the transmit gain difference are selected and
10
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

then remain fixed while the process is repeated varying only the receive

differential gain. Id. According to the 313 Patent, this alternate variation enables

the global minimization of the observable indicator, at which point the transmit and

receive chains will have attained I-Q balance. Id. The 313 Patent explains that,

[o]f course, whether the transmit or receive chain is adjusted first is immaterial.

EX1001, 6:6-8; EX1004, 22.

To vary or adjust the differential I-Q gains in the transmit and receive chains,

the 313 Patent explains that the gains may be applied digitally to the digital

representations of the transmit and/or receive baseband samples, or digital control

of analog gain within the transmit and/or receive baseband gain chain.

EX1001, 10:47-52. Figures 1 and 2 show the latter approach of controlling the

analog gain of the I and Q channels using analog amplifiers. Id., FIGS. 1

(amplifiers 14a, 14b, 34a, and 34b), 2 (amplifiers 44a, 44b, 74a, and 74b); EX1004,

23. In the former approach, gains are applied to the digital representations of the

I and Q channels, for example, before D/A converters 40a and 40b in the transmit

chain of figure 1a and after A/D converters 38a and 38b in the receive chain of

figure 1b. EX1001, 10:47-52; EX1004, 23.

The 313 Patent recites independent apparatus claims 1, 7, 16, 22, and 32.

EX1001, 11:56-15:32. Claim 1 is representative:

11
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

1. A transceiver system for transmitting and receiving

data using both I and Q channels, comprising:

a transmit chain;

a receive chain; and

a calibration subsystem comprising a signal path for

injecting a calibration RF signal, generated in response to
and as a function of a signal generated through the
transmit chain, into the receive chain of the transceiver in
order to independently calibrate the I-Q gain balance of
the both transmit and receive chains in their entirety;

wherein the calibration RF signal includes a calibration

cycle, and the calibration cycle determines transmitter I-
Q gain settings which minimize an observable indicator
while holding receive I-Q gain settings constant, and
which in turn determines receiver I-Q gain settings which
minimizes the observable indicator while holding the
transmit I-Q gain settings constant.

Independent claims 7, 16, 22, and 32 are substantially similar to claim 1, except

that they recite: (1) conventional components of the transmit and receive chains; (2)

a channel gain adjuster for varying the differential I-Q gain in the transmit and

receive chains; and (3) either direct conversion (claims 7 and 16) or heterodyne

conversion (claims 22 and 32). EX1004, 24. Claims 38-74 are method claims,

12
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

and each is substantially similar to its counterpart apparatus claim in claims 1-37.

EX1004, 24.

B. Prosecution History
The 313 Patent issued from U.S. Patent Application No. 10/379,352, which

was filed on March 4, 2003 (EX1002, Appl. No. 10/379,352, at 1), and claims

priority to Provisional Application No. 60/361,630, filed on March 4, 2002

(EX1002, 1/31/17 Certificate of Correction, at 1). EX1004, 25.

The Examiner rejected all claims as anticipated or rendered obvious by U.S.

Patent 6,717,981 (Mohindra), except that the Examiner found four dependent

claims allowable if rewritten in independent form, which included (for example in

claims 54 and 70) using the calibration cycle so as to determine the transmitter I-

Q gain settings so as to minimize the observable indicator while holding the

receive I-Q gain settings constant, and determining the receiver I-Q gain settings so

as to minimize the observable indicator while holding the transmit I-Q gain

settings constant. EX1002, 8/9/06 Non-Final Office Action, at 1; id., Appl. No.

10/379,352, at 19 (claim 15), 22 (claim 31), 26 (claim 54), 29 (claim 70); EX1004,

26. The applicants attempted to overcome the rejection (EX1002, 2/9/07

Amendment A, at 17-19), but the Examiner maintained the rejection (id., 4/26/07

Final Action). In response, the applicants incorporated the limitations of the four

allowable dependent claims into each of the independent claims (id., 9/26/07

13
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Amendment B, at 18), and the Examiner allowed the claims (id., 10/23/07

Notice of Allowance, at 1-2).

The Examiner did not cite or rely on Warner during prosecution.

See EX1001, cover page. Unlike Mohindra, Warner discloses determining the

transmitter I-Q gain settings while holding the receive I-Q gain settings constant,

and vice versa, as the claims require. EX1004, 27. Indeed, as explained below,

Warner both anticipates and renders obvious each of the challenged claims.

C. State of the Art at the Time of the Invention

The 313 Patent concedes that both direct- and heterodyne-conversion

transceivers for digital communications were well known and conventional in

the art by 2002. EX1001, 1:14-61, 4:47-53, 6:46-56 (It is well known in the art

that a variety of such direct modulator and demodulator design implementations

can be used, including conventional designs as shown in FIG. 1 . . . .), 8:4-6 (a

conventional heterodyne transceiver), 8:10-18 (well-known elements of

transceiver RF design); EX1004, 28. Indeed, the heterodyne receiver was

introduced a century ago, and radio pioneers were considering the use of direct

conversion as early as the 1920s. EX1007 (Abidi) at 1399, 1401; EX1008 (Cavers)

at 581-88; EX1004, 28.

As the 313 Patent admits, the problem of I-Q gain imbalance and

techniques for calibrating this imbalance in transceivers were also commonly

14
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

known and conventional. EX1001, 2:7-10 (commonly known alternate

calibration approaches), 4:54-59, 7:28-33 (FIGS. 3a and 3b show a conventional

prior art approach to calibration of the baseband gains in the transmit and receive

chains of a transceiver, the approach being one which can be used for . . . either

direct-conversion or heterodyne-conversion transceivers.); EX1007 (Abidi)

at 1400, 1402 (recognizing in 1995 that I-Q gain imbalances or mismatches may be

self-calibrated with loopback modes), 1405-07; EX1008 (Cavers) at 581-88

(discussing in 1993 techniques for compensating I-Q gain imbalance in

transceivers); EX1004, 29.

In addition, providing a signal path from the RF transmit output to the

RF receive input in a transceiver for testing and calibration was conventional in the

art well before the time of the invention, for example, as illustrated in the

exemplary figures below. EX1004, 30.

15
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

years of experience working with transceivers for digital communication.

EX1004, 33. Less work experience may be compensated by a higher level of

education, such as a Masters Degree, and vice versa. Id.

V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
Claim terms of an unexpired patent in inter partes review are given the

broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification. 37 C.F.R.

42.100(b); In re Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC, 778 F.3d 1271, 1279-81 (Fed.

Cir. 2015). Any claim term that lacks a definition in the specification is therefore

given a broad interpretation.2 In re ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 496 F.3d 1374,

1379 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard,

claim terms are given their ordinary and customary meaning, as they would be

understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, in the context of the disclosure. In re

Translogic Tech., Inc., 504 F.3d 1249, 1257 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Any special

definition for a claim term must be set forth in the specification with reasonable

clarity, deliberateness, and precision. In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1480 (Fed.

Cir. 1994). Should the Patent Owner, to avoid the prior art, contend that a claim

term has a construction different from its broadest reasonable interpretation, the

2
Petitioner applies the broadest reasonable construction standard as required by

the governing regulations. 37 C.F.R. 42.100(b).

19
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

appropriate course is for the Patent Owner to seek to amend the claim to expressly

correspond to its contentions in this proceeding. 77 Fed. Reg. 48764 (Aug. 14,

2012).

VI. STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED FOR

EACH CLAIM CHALLENGED
Warner both anticipates and renders obvious claims 1-7, 15, 16, 21, 22, 30,

32, 37-44, 52, 53, 58, 59, 67, 69, and 74. EX1004, 45.

A. Overview of Warner
Like the 313 Patent, Warner is directed to calibrating the gain balance

between the I and Q channels in direct- or heterodyne-conversion transceivers for

digital communications. EX1003, Abstract, 2:2-17; EX1004, 46. The 313

Patent and Warner both use the term calibrate interchangeably with the terms

correct and compensate. E.g., EX1001, Abstract (any mismatches in gain can

be observed and corrected), 2:20-21 (calibrate the I-Q gain balance), 10:60-61

(set the compensating gains); EX1003, 7:63-64 (corrects or compensates for the

quadrature impairment), 8:23-24 (quickly calibrate the compensation circuit

parameters) (emphases added); EX1004, 46. Warner refers to calibrating

quadrature impairments, which includes I-Q gain imbalance (as well as other

quadrature impairments such as phase imbalance and DC offset). EX1003, 2:2-29;

EX1004, 46.

20
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Quadrature Demodulation System (AQDS) 110. Id., 6:20-7:15 (describing the

transmit chain), 7:35-67 (describing the receive chain).

Like the transmit chains in the 313 Patent, the transmit chain in Warner

includes two channels, I and Q. Id., 6:20-38, FIG. 1; EX1004, 48. Digital-to-

analog (D/A) converters 130, 132 convert the digital baseband I and Q signals to

analog, low-pass filters 134, 136 filter the signals, and modulator 138 then converts

the signals to RF (for direct conversion) or IF (for heterodyne conversion).

EX1003, 6:39-65. Warner explains that, where modulator 138 outputs an IF signal,

a frequency up-conversion process (not shown in figure 1) can convert the signal

from IF to RF before it is amplified and transmitted. Id., 7:7-15, 24:29-37.

Like the receive chains in the 313 Patent, the receive chain in Warner

receives an RF signal, and for direct conversion, demodulator 150 converts the RF

signal to baseband I and Q analog signals. Id., 7:35-45; EX1004, 49. The I and

Q signals pass through filters 152, 154 and then are converted to digital I and Q

signals by analog-to-digital (A/D) converters 156, 158. EX1003, 7:45-48. Warner

explains that the transceiver can include components typical of a receiver front-

end, such as a low-noise amplifier (not shown in figure 1). Id., 7:48-52, 25:10-22.

For heterodyne conversion, Warner explains that the receive chain includes a

down-conversion process from RF to IF in a separate stage (not shown in figure 1),

and demodulator 150 converts from RF to IF. Id., 24:29-37.

22
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

To vary the gains in the I and Q channels of the transceiver, Warner employs

an alternative embodiment of the 313 Patent, in which the gains may be applied

digitally to the digital representations of the transmit and/or receive baseband

samples. EX1001, 10:43-52; EX1004, 50. In Warner, QMCSP 102 receives

digital baseband input signals 122, 124 and pre-compensates or converts signals

122, 124 to digitally compensated signals 126, 128 to correct the I-Q gain

imbalance (among other impairments) of the transmit chain, AQMS 104. EX1003,

6:20-38, 8:1-16, 12:65-14:22, FIG. 6. In turn, QDCSP 112 converts received

baseband signals 160, 162 to demodulated baseband signals 164, 166 to correct the

I-Q gain imbalance (among other impairments) of the receive chain, AQDS 110.

Id., 7:53-8:16, 16:56-17:9, 18:39-48, FIG. 10.4

Like the 313 Patent, the only additional circuitry that Warner adds to these

well-known elements of transceiver RF design, is a path for injecting a calibration

4
Warner explains that the signal processing performed by QMCSP 102 and

QDCSP 112 can be performed by dedicated hardware or within a microprocessor

or general purpose digital signal processor (DSP) by firmware. Id., 7:56-60.

23
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

signal from the RF transmit output to the RF receive input.5 Id., 6:64-7:15, 7:35-

45; EX1004, 51. Specifically, Warner discloses that coupler 106 apportions

AQMS output signal 140 to AQMD system output signal 142 and sample

signal 144. EX1003, 6:64-7:15. Like attenuator 120 in the 313 Patent, Warner

describes an embodiment in which coupler 106 is configured so that the power

coupled to 144 is relative low (i.e., attenuated) compared to output signal 142. Id.

According to Warner, [t]he coupler can be placed in the data flow either upstream

of a power amplifier or after amplification by the power amplifier. Id.

In one embodiment, Warner describes a calibration mode called System

Identification (SID) mode. Id., 8:1-26; EX1004, 52. In SID mode, adaptive

control processing and compensation estimation (ACPCE) circuit 118 applies test

signals at the baseband signal input to the transmit chain and observes the test

signals at the baseband signal output from the receive chain. EX1003, 8:1-26.

The test signals 180, 182 enable the ACPCE circuit 118 to quickly calibrate the

compensation circuit parameters for the QMCSP 102 and the QDCSP 112 by

observation of the demodulated baseband signals 164, 166. Id. As illustrated in

5
In an alternative embodiment, Warner teaches a path from IF transmit output to

IF receive input, which need not be considered for purposes of this Petition

because the challenged claims in the 313 Patent are directed to an RF signal path.

24
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

and the quadrature impairments caused by the receiver. EX1003, 2:63-67; EX1004,

53. Thus, Warner discloses a calibration system designed to calibrate gain

imbalances of the transmitter and receiver independently, for example, using

phase shifter 114. EX1003, 21:4-22:38 ([T]o characterize the quadrature

impairment introduced by the AQMS 104 and by the AQDS 110 independently,

the impulse responses . . . are characterized for each of the AQMS 104 and the

AQDS 110. (emphasis added)); id., 8:1-47; EX1004, 53.

B. Claim 1 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner

Warner both anticipates and renders obvious claim 1. EX1004, 54-83.

1. A transceiver system for transmitting and receiving

data using both I and Q channels
To the extent that the preamble is considered limiting, Warner discloses [a]

transceiver system for transmitting and receiving data using both I and Q

channels, as illustrated in figures 1 and 5. EX1003, 1:16-43 (a radio frequency

(RF) transmitter/receiver (transceiver); The two baseband signals are referred to

as a real or in-phase signal (often denoted by I), and an imaginary or quadrature-

phase signal (often denoted by Q).); EX1004, 55; supra VI.A. Figure 1,

below, discloses a transceiver system comprising AQMD 100. EX1003, 6:4-9.

26
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Q baseband output signals (EX1003, 7:53-67, 8:10-16), like in an embodiment of

the 313 Patent (EX1001, 10:47-52).

4. [4a] a calibration subsystem comprising [4b] a signal

path for injecting a calibration RF signal, generated in
response to and as a function of a signal generated
through the transmit chain, into the receive chain of the
transceiver in order to [4c] independently calibrate the
I-Q gain balance of the both transmit and receive
chains [4d] in their entirety
Warner both discloses and renders obvious these limitations. EX1003, 6:10-

8:47; EX1004, 58-71; supra VI.A.

[4a] Warner discloses a calibration subsystem, including for example

ACPCE circuit 118, the signal path from coupler 106 to the receiver (AQDS 110),

and optionally phase shifter 114, as shown in figures 1 and 5. EX1003, 6:4-8:47,

21:4-23:9; EX1004, 59. This calibration subsystem calibrates the I-Q gain

imbalance of the transmit and receive chains (AQMS 104 and AQDS 110).

EX1003, 2:2-17, 8:1-26, 10:62-11:11. Warner uses the term quadrature

impairments to describe deviations from an ideal quadrature modulation or

demodulation, including I-Q gain imbalance. Id., 2:2-17. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate

models of quadrature impairment in transmitters and receivers, and gain impulse

responses 218 (figure 2) and 312 (figure 3) simulate the gain difference between

the I and Q channels. Id., 4:47-51, 9:11-10:48.

30
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

chain at input signals 122, 124. EX1003, 8:17-26, 11:24-12:64, FIGS. 1, 5. These

test signals pass through QMCSP 102 and AQMS 104, which converts the signals

into a calibration RF signal (e.g., signal 140). Id., 6:20-65, 12:56-64, FIG. 5. The

calibration RF signal passes through the signal path into the receive chain, which

converts the calibration RF signal to baseband I and Q signals 164, 166. Id., 7:35-

67.

[4c] Warner both discloses and renders obvious injecting the calibration RF

signal into the receive chain in order to independently calibrate the I-Q gain

balance of the both transmit and receive chains. EX1004, 61-71. ACPCE

circuit 118 observes signals 164, 166 to measure the impairment characteristics

and then determines the gain settings to correct or minimize the I-Q gain imbalance

(among other impairments) in each of the transmit and receive chains. EX1003,

8:1-26, 11:24-12:64, FIG. 5. 7 Warner recognized conventional techniques that

failed to distinguish between impairments in the transmit (AQMS 104) and receive

(AQDS 110) chains. Id., 2:63-67. To address this failure, Warners system

characterizes the quadrature impairment introduced by the AQMS 104 and by the

7
Figures 2 and 3 in Warner model I-Q gain imbalances, among other impairments,

in the transmit chain (gain impulse 218 in figure 2) and the receive chain (gain

impulse 312 in figure 2). See id., 4:47-51, 9:48-11:48; EX1004, 62.

32
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

AQDS 110 independently, like in the 313 Patent. Id., 22:3-7 (emphasis added);

id., 8:1-47, 21:4-22:38; EX1004, 61.

One approach that Warner discloses for independently calibrating the

transmit and receive chains is to solve the time-domain Equations 2 and 9. 8

EX1003, 14:53-16:13, 19:3-28, FIGS. 8, 11; EX1004, 63-66. Warner discloses

calculating impairment correction coefficients for the transmit chain (modulator)

by solving Equation 2 and for the receive chain (demodulator) by solving

Equation 9. Id. Selection of the coefficients to satisfy or substantially satisfy these

equations, as Warner explains, will minimize the error caused by I-Q gain

imbalance (among other impairments) in each of the transmit and receive chains,

thereby calibrating each chain. Id. None of the terms in Equation 2 is dependent

on the receive chain, and none of the terms in Equation 9 is dependent on the

transmit chain. Id. Thus, solving each equation, i.e., determining the I-Q gain

settings to calibrate the transmit or receive chain, is independent of the other chain.

Id.; EX1004, 63-66.

8
Warner also teaches independently calibrating the transmit and receive chains

based on the frequency-domain duals of Equations 2 and 9, i.e., Equations 5

and 12. EX1003 at 15:35-16:13 (Equation 5), 19:57-20:28 (Equation 12),

FIGS. 9, 12; EX1004, 63-66.

33
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

As an alternative to solving Equations 2 and 9, Warner discloses solving

Equation 15 to calibrate the I-Q gain balance of the transmit and receive chains.

EX1003, 21:4-23:9; EX1004, 67-69. Equation 15 combines the impairments

introduced by the transmit and receive chains using four impulse responses: a(t),

b(t), c(t), and d(t). EX1003, 21:62-22:28. To characterize the impairments

(including I-Q gain imbalance) of the transmit and receive chains independently,

those responses are characterized for each of the transmit and receive chains. Id.

A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that Equation 15 can be

solved one of two wayseither with or without a phase shifter (e.g., phase shifter

114). EX1004, 67.

Without a phase shifter, Warner teaches that Equation 15 has eight unknown

parameters, but ACPCE circuit 118 can observe only four of the parameters.

EX1003, 21:62-22:28; EX1004, 68. In this scenario, a skilled artisan would

calibrate four parameters while holding the other four constant, and vice versa. Id.

In other words, a person of ordinary skill would calibrate the compensation

coefficients in the transmit chain while holding the coefficients in the receive chain

constant, and calibrate the coefficients in the receive chain while holding the

transmit coefficients constant, in either order depending on the needs of the

application. Id. This conventional approach to calibration, to the extent that it is

not implicitly disclosed by Warner, would have been predictable to a person of

34
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

ordinary skill, using known calibration techniques with no unexpected results.

EX1004, 68. Moreover, a person of ordinary skill would understand that this

common-sense approach has the advantages of quick and minimal processing,

because the one-at-a-time, iterative approach avoids having to solve more complex

equations. Id.

On the other hand, with a phase shifter, Warner teaches how to calibrate the

transmit and receive chains in sequential order or at the same time using

Equation 15. EX1003, 8:1-10, 39-44, 21:4-23:9; EX1004, 69. Specifically,

Warner explains that ACPCE circuit 118 controls phase shifter 114 to measure

impairment characteristics, including I-Q gain imbalance. EX1003, 8:1-10.

ACPCE circuit 118 adjusts the phase shifting characteristics of the variable phase

shifter 114 to distinguish quadrature impairment due to the AQMS 104 [transmit

chain] from quadrature impairment due to the AQDS 110 [receive chain] to enable

the ACPCE circuit 118 to compute the appropriate correction parameters for each.

Id., 8:39-44. To distinguish the I-Q gain imbalance in each of the transmit and

receive chains for independent calibration, (id., 22:3-7), Warner explains that

ACPCE circuit 118 shifts variable phase shifter 114 to select at least three phase

settings to solve for the eight unknown parameters in Equation 15 (id., 22:20-38).

EX1004, 69.

35
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Figures 6 and 10 illustrate embodiments of QMCSP 102 and QDCSP 112

for varying the gains in the transmit and receive chains, respectively.

EX1003, 6:32-38, 7:53-67, 12:65-14:23 (describing embodiment of QMCSP in

figure 6), 16:56-19:2 (describing embodiment of QDCSP in figure 10); EX1004,

70. Upon determining the I-Q gain settings (using any of the conventional ways

both known in the art and disclosed in Warner), ACPCE circuit 118 updates

parameters in QMCSP 102 and QDCSP 112 to vary the differential I-Q gains and

correct the I-Q gain imbalances in the transmit and receive chains, respectively.

EX1003, Abstract, 6:20-38, 7:53-8:26; EX1004, 70. Like an alternative

embodiment in the 313 Patent (EX1001, 8:47-53), QMCSP 102 and QDCSP 112

apply the gains digitally to digital representations of the transmit and receive

baseband signals (EX1003, 6:20-38, 7:53-67, 26:15-19). QMCSP 102 and

QDCSP 112 independently adjust the I-Q gains of the transmit chain (modulator)

and receive chain (demodulator), respectively, because they have independent

coefficients that are independently set. EX1003, 6:32-38, 7:53-67, 12:65-14:23,

16:56-19:2; EX1004, 70.

[4d] Warner discloses calibrat[ing] the I-Q gain balance of the both

transmit and receive chains in their entirety. EX1004, 71. As explained, like in

the 313 Patent, ACPCE circuit 118 introduces a calibration signal at the baseband

transmit input (signals 122, 124) and observes an indicator of gain imbalance at the
36
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

baseband receive output (signals 164, 166). EX1003, 8:1-26.9 Thus, as shown in

figure 5 below, Warners system includes in the overall path of the calibration

signal (in orange) all I-Q paths during normal operation of the transceiver, and

therefore all possible sources of I-Q gain imbalance in the transmit and receive

chains. Id.; EX1004, 71.

9
In figure 16, Warner discloses an embodiment in which the ACPCE circuit

monitors compensated signals 126, 128 (instead of signals 122, 124) and received

baseband signals 160, 162 (instead of signals 164, 166) and injects test signals to

the input of AQMS 104 (instead of QMCSP 102). Id., 24:38-48, FIG. 16. Warner

explains that combinations of the features in the embodiments of figures 1 and 16

are also possible. Id. Each of these embodiments discloses the limitations of

claim 1 for the same reasons as the embodiment in figures 1 and 5 does. EX1004,

71 n.6.

37
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

minimize an observable indicator . . . and which in turn determines receiver I-Q

gain settings which minimizes the observable indicator, like in the 313 Patent.

EX1004, 72-75. The 313 Patent describes such I-Q gain settings as settings

that minimize the difference or imbalance between the gains on the I and Q

channels. EX1001, 3:49-51, 10:26-42; EX1004, 73. The 313 Patent describes

originating a calibration signal at the baseband transmit input, observing the

calibration signal at the receive baseband output, and processing the calibration

signal to form and minimize an observable indicator of I-Q imbalance.

EX1001, 2:55-56 (processing the baseband receive calibration RF signal to form

an observable indicator of I-Q imbalance), 5:29-31 ([T]he calibration signals can

originate at baseband in the transmit channel, and be observed at baseband in the

receive channel.); EX1004, 73.

As explained, like the 313 Patent, Warner describes observing the

calibration signals at baseband in the receive channel to determine the

characteristics of the transmitter and receiver. EX1003, 7:35-56 (observation

signal 148), 8:1-33 (observation of the demodulated baseband signals;

observes the characteristics of the demodulated baseband signals), 21:4-38, 25:1-

9 (effectively observe the quadrature impairments), FIG. 5 (OBSERVATION

DATA FLOW); EX1004, 74; supra VI.A, B.4. Warner explains,

39
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

The ACPCE circuit 118 characterizes the quadrature

impairment behavior of the AQMS 104 and the
AQDS 110. In the illustrated embodiment, the ACPCE
circuit 118 monitors the input signals 122, 124 and the
demodulated baseband signals 164, 166. In other
embodiments, the ACPCE circuit 118 monitors other
signals, such as the digital compensated signals 126, 128
and the received baseband signals 160, 162.

EX1003, 8:1-8; id., 30:18-22 (an adaptive control processing and compensation

estimation (ACPCE) circuit adapted to monitor the baseband signal and the

received baseband signal, where the ACPCE circuit is further adapted to update

parameters used by the QMCSP and the QDCSP to compensate for quadrature

impairment).

One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that any variable that is

measurable or calculatable from measurements is an observable indicator, and that

Warner discloses minimizing an observable indicator. EX1004, 75. To

determine the transmitter and receiver I-Q gain settings, Warner determines an

errori.e., an observable indicatorbetween input impulses and the observed

signal at the receive baseband output, using for example the equations described

above. Supra VI.B.4; EX1003, 16:33-48; EX1004, 75. To calibrate the I-Q

gain settings in each of the transmitter and receiver, Warner minimizes this error,

40
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

thereby minimizing an observable indicator. EX1003, 8:1-26, 9:5-10 (compute

coefficients or parameters for the QMCSP 102 to complement or negate the

quadrature impairment introduced by the AQMS 104 so that the output of the

AQMS 104 is substantially unimpaired), 15:13-20 (The filter coefficients of the

QMCSP 102 are selected so that the impulse responses . . . satisfy or

approximately satisfy Equation 2 . . . .), 16:14-19, 19:33-40, 20:13-20, 21:4-38;

EX1004, 75.

[5b] Warner also both discloses and renders obvious that the calibration

cycle determines the transmitter I-Q gain settings . . . while holding the receiver I-

Q gain settings constant, and which in turn, determines receiver I-Q gain

settings . . . while holding the transmit I-Q gain settings constant. EX1004,

76-83. The calibration subsystem in Warner does not vary any I-Q gain settings

during the process of determining I-Q gain settings. EX1004, 76. Rather,

ACPCE circuit 118 observes the impairments and determines the correct I-Q gain

settings while holding the settings constant, and only then, after determining the

settings, does ACPCE circuit 118 actually vary the I-Q gain settings in

QMCSP 102 and/or QDCSP 112. Id.; EX1003, 8:10-16 (Upon analysis of the

quadrature impairment and the subsequent determination of updated compensation

parameters, the ACPCE circuit 118 updates the QMCSP 102 and the QDCSP 112

through a modulator state parameter update vector 168, Xm+, and the demodulator
41
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

state parameter update vector 170, Xd+, respectively. (emphases added)). This

varying of the gain settings can be performed on the transmitter alone, the receiver

alone, or both transmitter and receiver. EX1003, 21:60-22:39; EX1004, 76.

To the extent that the Patent Owner argues that this limitation is narrowly

limited to a specific order (i.e., determining transmitter I-Q gain settings prior to

receiver I-Q gain settings), that argument is not supported by the intrinsic record.

EX1004, 77. The 313 Patent describes an embodiment that determines the gain

settings for the transmitter and then for the receiver, but nothing in the

specification requires this ordering. EX1001, 6:1-8; EX1004, 77. To the

contrary, the 313 Patent expressly states that, [o]f course, whether the transmit or

receive chain is adjusted first is immaterial. EX1001, 6:1-8 (emphasis added).

There is also no prosecution history disclaimer that would limit the claims to a

particular order. EX1002. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would understand that,

under the broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation is not limited to a

specific order and that it is disclosed in Warner. EX1004, 77.

To the extent that this limitation is interpreted to require a sequential

ordering (i.e., transmitter first and receiver second), Warner still discloses this

limitation. EX1004, 78-81. Warner is capable of determining the transmitter

and receiver gain settings separately, in either order, or together at the same time,

and its disclosure is not limited to one specific order. EX1004, 78; supra
42
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

VI.B.4. Warner describes a calibration subsystem that can determine and

compensate impairments in the transmitter (demodulator) and/or receiver

(demodulator) independently (EX1003, Abstract, 2:3-6, 31-36, 22:3-7), and

Warner describes the operation of ACPCE circuit 118 as characterizing the

quadrature impairment of the AQMS 104 and/or the AQDS 110 (id., 12:2-4)

(emphases added).

As explained, figures 6 and 10 illustrate embodiments of QMCSP 102 and

QDCSP 112 for varying the gains in the transmit and receive chains, respectively,

which have independent correction coefficients that are independently set.

EX1004, 79; supra VI.B.4. For example, Warner teaches independently

determining the transmitter and receiver I-Q gain settings (i.e., the correction

coefficients) using Equations 2 and 9, respectively. Id. Warner alternatively

teaches and renders obvious independently determining the transmitter and

receiver I-Q gain settings using Equation 15, either in sequential order (with or

without using a phase shifter) or at the same time (using a phase shifter). Id.

Thus, Warner discloses optionally determining the I-Q gain settings of the

transmitter first, the receiver first, or both simultaneously, while holding the gain

settings of the other (or both) constant. EX1004, 80. Also, Warner discloses any

requirement in the claim of determining transmitter I-Q gain settings first for the

additional reason that Warner teaches periodically calibrating the transmitter and
43
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

receiver, which further teaches determining the I-Q gain settings for the transmitter

(while holding the receiver settings constant), and later determining the I-Q gain

settings for the receiver (while holding the transmit settings constant). EX1003,

11:66-12:2; EX1004, 81.

In addition, Warner renders obvious any requirement of determining the

transmitter I-Q gain settings first. EX1004, 82-83. Determining the I-Q gain

settings of one before, after, or at the same time as the I-Q gain settings of the other

would have been an obvious, predictable matter of design choice within the skill of

the art. EX1004, 82; In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 555 (C.C.P.A. 1975). As

explained, using Equations 2 and 9 or Equation 15, a person of ordinary skill in the

art would solve them in sequential order (transmitter first or receiver first) or

simultaneously depending on the design needs. EX1004, 82. Thus, determining

the transmitter I-Q gain settings first solves no stated problem and presents no

unexpected result. Id. Indeed, the 313 Patent admits that [o]f course, whether

the transmit or receive chain is adjusted first is immaterial. EX1001, 6:6-8

(emphasis added).

The calibration circuitry determining the I-Q gain settings would perform

the same intended functionminimizing the I-Q gain imbalanceregardless of

whether it determines settings for the transmitter first, the receiver first, or the

transmitter and receiver together. EX1004, 83; see KSR Intl Co. v. Teleflex, Inc.,
44
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007). And even if not disclosed in Warner (they were as

explained above), these three choicestransmitter first, receiver first, or both

togetherwere known options available from a finite number of identified,

predictable solutions that were within the technical grasp and common sense of a

person of ordinary skill, and all would lead to anticipated success, i.e., calibration

of the I-Q gain imbalances in each of the transmitter and receiver. EX1004, 83;

see KSR, 550 U.S. at 421; Perfect Web Techs., Inc. v. InfoUSA, Inc., 567 F.3d 1324,

1331 (Fed. Cir. 2009); In re Kubin, 561 F.3d 1351, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

C. Claim 2 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner

Warner discloses that the calibration signal originates at baseband in the

transmit channel, and is observed at baseband in the receive channel. EX1004,

84-85; supra VI.B.4. The signal originates at the baseband signals 122, 124

(or signals 126, 128) in the transmit channel and is observed at demodulated

baseband signals 164, 166 (or signals 160, 162) in the receive channel.

EX1003, 8:1-26.

D. Claim 3 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner

Warner discloses that the transceiver is a direct-conversion transceiver.

EX1004, 86-87; supra IV.A.1, VI.B. The embodiment in figure 1 discloses a

direct-conversion transceiver by configuring each of the transmit and receive

chains to convert directly between baseband and RF. EX1003, 6:58-7:15, 7:35-52.

45
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

E. Claim 4 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner

Warner both discloses and renders obvious that the transceiver is a

heterodyne-conversion transceiver. EX1004, 88-93; supra IV.A.1, VI.A.

As explained, Warner discloses that the embodiment in figure 1 can be configured

for heterodyne conversion where the transmit and receive chains convert to IF

between baseband and RF. Id. Warner explains that the modulator and

demodulator in the figures can modulate to IF, and in a separate stage, the

transceiver can perform the up-conversion from IF to RF in the transmitter and the

down-conversion from RF to IF in the receiver. EX1003, 24:29-37; EX1004, 89.

For example, Warner explains that AQM 138 and AQD 150 can be

configured to convert between baseband and IF. EX1003, 6:39-65, 7:35-52. And

a frequency up-conversion process can convert the AQMD system output

signal 142 from IF to RF before it is amplified and transmitted. Id., 7:11-15,

24:29-37 (describing up-conversion (IF to RF) in transmitter and down-conversion

(RF to IF) in receiver). Warner also explains that [t]he coupler can be placed in

the data flow either upstream of a power amplifier or after amplification by the

power amplifier (id., 7:4-6), which positions the coupler for injecting a calibration

RF signal into the receive chain. EX1004, 90. In this configuration, the receive

chain performs a down-conversion from RF to IF in a separate stage and then from

46
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

IF to baseband, as disclosed by Warner. EX1004, 7:35-45, 24:29-37; EX1004,

90.

But even assuming that Warner did not disclose a heterodyne-conversion

transceiver, Warner renders its use obvious. EX1004, 91-93. As explained, the

heterodyne receiver was introduced a century ago, and heterodyne-conversion

transceivers were ubiquitous at the time of the invention. EX1007 (Abidi) at 1399

(stating in 1995 that [s]omething like 98% of radio receivers use heterodyne

conversion); EX1004, 91; supra IV.C. Thus, one of ordinary skill would have

been motivated to combine Warners calibration subsystem with a conventional

heterodyne-conversion transceiver to combine the advantages of improved

calibration with the high selectivity and sensitivity that heterodyne conversion was

known to provide. EX1007 (Abidi) at 1399; EX1004, 91. Also, nothing in

Warners disclosed processes for calibration is dependent on which conversion

architecture (direct or heterodyne) the transceiver adopts. EX1004, 91.

Selecting between direct and heterodyne conversion would have been an

obvious, predictable matter of design choice within the skill of the art, and

selecting heterodyne conversion would present no unexpected result. EX1004,

92; Kuhle, 526 F.2d at 555. The selection of direct or heterodyne conversion for

the transceiver would be a design decision made for reasons other than the

calibration architecture and processes of Warner. EX1004, 92. Nothing in

47
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Warner requires the use of direct or heterodyne conversion because, as explained,

Warner teaches both. EX1004, 92. Warner states that the quadrature

impairment compensation techniques disclosed herein apply generally to analog-

based quadrature modulators, regardless of configuration. EX1003, 6:58-63.

The calibration subsystem in Warner would perform the same intended

function (in the same way)minimizing the I-Q gain imbalanceregardless of

whether the transceiver employs direct or heterodyne conversion. EX1004, 93;

see KSR, 550 U.S. at 417. Because heterodyne conversion was conventional, it

would have been a predictable solution within the technical grasp of a person of

ordinary skill, and would lead to anticipated success, i.e., calibration of the I-Q

gain imbalances in each of the transmitter and receiver. EX1004, 93; see KSR,

550 U.S. at 421; Perfect Web, 567 F.3d at 1331; Kubin, 561 F.3d at 1359. The

choice of a conventional, well-known direct- or heterodyne-conversion architecture

is independent of Warners calibration subsystem (supra VI.A), just as the same

choice is independent of the calibration subsystem in the 313 Patent (supra

IV.A). EX1004, 93.

F. Claim 5 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner

Warner discloses a channel gain adjuster for varying the differential I-Q

gain in the transmit and receive chains independently in response to the

calibration signal being injected into the receiver chain. EX1004, 94-96.

48
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Although the 313 Patent does not use the term channel gain adjuster outside of

the claims or disclose structure that performs the recited function, it does disclose

two ways to vary the differential I-Q gain: either the gains may be applied

digitally to the digital representations of the transmit and/or receive baseband

samples, or digital control of analog gain within the transmit and/or receive

baseband gain chain. EX1001, 10:47-52; supra IV.A.2. Warner discloses the

former way. EX1004, 95.

Differential I-Q gain in the 313 Patent refers to the difference in gains

between the I and Q channels, and both the 313 Patent and Warner vary that

difference to calibrate the I-Q gain balance. EX1004, 96. As explained, after

observing the received calibration signal and determining the I-Q gain settings,

ACPCE circuit 118 updates QMCSP 102 and QDCSP 112 to vary the differential

I-Q gain the transmit and receive chains independently. EX1004, 96; supra

VI.B.4. QMCSP 102 and QDCSP 112 apply the gains digitally to the digital

representations of the transmit and receive baseband signals, respectively. Id.

G. Claim 6 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner

Warner both anticipates and renders obvious claim 6 for the same reasons as

claim 5. EX1004, 97; supra VI.F. Claim 6 is like claim 5, except that claim 6

recites varying the differential I-Q gain in the imbalanced chain. Although there

is no antecedent basis for the imbalanced chain, it must be referring to either the

49
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

transmit chain or the receive chain, and as explained, Warner discloses varying the

differential I-Q gain in both the transmit and receive chains independently. Id.

H. Claim 7 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner

Warner both anticipates and renders obvious claim 7 for substantially the

same reasons as claims 1, 3, and 5. EX1004, 98-121; supra VI.B, D, F.

Claim 7 recites substantially the same limitations as claim 1, except that it also

requires a direct-conversion subsystem in the transmit and receive chains (as in

claim 3) and a channel gain adjuster for varying the differential I-Q gain in the

transmit and receive chains independently (as in claim 5). Claim 7 also recites

known, conventional elements of prior-art transmit and receive chains. EX1004,

98.

1. A transceiver system comprising:

To the extent the preamble is considered limiting, Warner discloses [a]

transceiver system. EX1004, 99; supra VI.B.1.

2. [2a] A. a transmit chain including: [2b] a signal

generator for generating a baseband transmit signal;
[2c] baseband I-Q amplification subsystem for
providing baseband amplification of the baseband
transmit signal; [2d] a direct-conversion subsystem for
converting the baseband transmit signal to an RF
transmit signal, and [2e] an RF transmit signal port;
Warner both discloses and renders obvious these limitations, which consist

of known, conventional elements of a direct-conversion transmitter, as illustrated

50
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

for example in prior-art Figure 1a of the 313 patent. EX1004, 100-06; supra

IV.A.1, VI.B.2.

[2a] Warner discloses a transmit chain. EX1004, 101; supra VI.B.2.

[2b]-[2e] As explained below, Warner both discloses and renders obvious

these remaining elements. EX1004, 102. As an initial matter, the specification

of the 313 Patent only mentions these elements in a verbatim recitation of the

claims (e.g., EX1001, 2:39-44), but does not disclose or limit the recited elements

to any particular structure. Thus, under the broadest reasonable interpretation,

Warner discloses and renders them obvious because the elements were, at the time

of the invention, conventional featuresknown and predictableof an RF

transmitter in a direct-conversion transceiver for digital communication. EX1004,

102.

[2b] Warner both discloses and renders obvious a signal generator for

generating a baseband transmit signal, including for example baseband transmit

input signals 122, 124, which are generated by the baseband processor, as in any

conventional transceiver. EX1004, 103; supra VI.B.2.

[2c] Warner discloses a baseband I-Q amplification subsystem for

providing baseband amplification of the baseband transmit signal, including for

example QMCSP 102. EX1004, 104; supra VI.B.2, 4-5. As explained,

Warner applies the gains (or amplification) digitally to the digital representations
51
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

of the transmit I-Q baseband input signals 122, 124 by updating the parameters in

QMCSP 102 (EX1003, 8:1-16, FIG. 1), like in the alternative embodiment of

the 313 Patent (supra IV.A.2).

[2d] Warner discloses a direct-conversion subsystem for converting the

baseband transmit signal to an RF transmit signal, including for example

AQMS 104 configured to convert directly from I-Q baseband signals to RF at

AQM 138. EX1004, 105; supra VI.D.

[2e] Warner both discloses and renders obvious an RF transmit signal port,

including for example at the output of AQMS 104 or AQMS output signal 140.

EX1004, 106; supra VI.B.2.

3. [3a] B. a receive chain including: [3b] an RF receive

port for receiving an RF receive signal; [3c] a direct-
conversion subsystem for converting the RF receive
signal to a baseband receive signal; [3d] a baseband I-
Q amplification subsystem for providing amplification
of the baseband receive signal;
Warner both discloses and renders obvious this limitation, which consists of

known, conventional elements of a direct-conversion receiver, as illustrated in

prior-art Figure 1b of the 313 patent. EX1004, 107-12; supra IV.A.1,

VI.B.3.

[3a] Warner discloses a receive chain. EX1004, 108; supra VI.B.3.

52
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

[3b]-[3d] As explained below, Warner both discloses and renders obvious

these remaining elements. EX1004, 109-12. The specification of the 313

Patent only mentions these elements in a verbatim recitation of the claims (e.g.,

EX1001, 2:44-49), but does not disclose or limit the recited elements to any

particular structure. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, Warner

discloses and renders them obvious because the elements were, at the time of the

invention, conventional featuresknown and predictableof an RF receiver in a

direct-conversion transceiver for digital communication. EX1004, 109.

[3b] Warner both discloses and renders obvious an RF receive port for

receiving an RF receive signal, including for example at the input of AQDS 110

or observation signal 148. EX1004, 110; supra VI.B.3.

[3c] Warner both discloses and renders obvious a direct-conversion

subsystem for converting the RF receive signal to a baseband receive signal,

including for example AQDS 110 configured to convert directly from RF to

baseband I and Q signals at AQD 150. EX1004, 111; supra VI.D.

[3d] Warner both discloses and renders obvious a baseband I-Q

amplification subsystem for providing amplification of the baseband receive

signal, including for example QDCSP 112. EX1004, 112; supra VI.B.3-5.

As explained, Warner applies the gains (or amplification) digitally to the digital

representations of the received I-Q baseband signals 160, 162 by updating the
53
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

parameters in QDCSP 112 (EX1003, 8:1-16, FIG. 1), like in the alternative

embodiment of the 313 Patent (supra IV.A.2).

4. a processor for processing of the baseband receive

signal as required for the normal function of the
transceiver
Warner both discloses and renders obvious a processor for processing of

the baseband receive signal as required for the normal function of the transceiver.

EX1004, 113-14; supra VI.A. The specification of the 313 Patent mentions

a processor in a verbatim recitation of the claims (e.g., EX1001, 2:49-51), but

does not identify any particular algorithm for processing baseband receive signals

during normal operation. EX1004, 113. Under the broadest reasonable

interpretation, Warner discloses and renders this limitation obvious because such a

processor is a conventional featureknown and predictableof a transceiver for

digital communication. Id. Warner discloses examples of processors, including

microprocessors, application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), and digital signal

processors (DSPs), all of which can process the baseband receive signal. EX1003,

3:18-23, 7:53-67, 12:14-17, 16:65-17:2, 23:45-24:25, 25:10-22 (disclosing

applications such mobile devices), 29:4-22, FIG. 15; EX1004, 113.

To the extent that Warner does not disclose these processors as processing

signals during normal functioning of the transceiver, the use of a processor to

process baseband receive signals for normal functioning would have been well

54
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

known and common sense to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the

invention. EX1004, 114. One of ordinary skill in the art would know that the

demodulated baseband signals in Warner would need to be processed byand

would therefore be motivated to implementa conventional processor to perform

the elements of the protocol required by embodiments in Warner, such as existing

cellular systems, W-CDMA, IMT-2000, UMTS-2000, and in industries such as

satellite, cable broadcast, and terrestrial broadcast. EX1003, 5:55-60

(Embodiments of the present invention are well-suited to demanding applications

such as wide-band third generation cellular base-station designs, e.g., wide-band

CDMA (W-CDMA).), 23:45-46 (typical telecommunications application, such

as W-CDMA), 29:4-22 (The techniques can also apply relatively broadly to the

satellite, cable broadcast and terrestrial broadcast industries . . . .; W-CDMA,

IMT-2000, UMTS-2000); EX1004, 114.

55
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

5. [5a] C. a calibration subsystem including: [5b] a

calibration RF signal generator for generating a
calibration RF signal as a baseband transmit signal;
[5c] a signal path for injecting the calibration RF
signal from the RF transmit signal port to the RF
receive signal port; [5d] a processor for processing the
baseband receive calibration RF signal to form an
observable indicator of I-Q imbalance; and [5e] a
channel gain adjuster for varying the differential I-Q
gain in the transmit and receive chains independently
Warner both discloses and renders obvious these limitations for the same

reasons as claims 1 and 5. EX1004, 115-20; supra VI.B.4, F.

[5a] Warner discloses a calibration subsystem. EX1004, 116; supra

VI.B.4.

[5b] Warner discloses a calibration RF signal generator for generating a

calibration RF signal as a baseband transmit signal. EX1004, 117; supra

VI.B.4. As explained, in SID mode for example, ACPCE circuit 118 generates

test signals 180, 182 as a baseband transmit signal, which passes through the

transmit chain for conversion to a calibration RF signal at AQMS output signal 140.

EX1003, 6:20-65, 8:1-26, FIGS. 1, 5.

[5c] Warner discloses a signal path for injecting the calibration RF signal

from the RF transmit signal port to the RF receive signal port. EX1004, 118;

supra VI.B.4, H.2, 3.

56
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

[5d] Warner both discloses and renders obvious a processor for processing

the baseband receive calibration RF signal to form an observable indicator of I-Q

imbalance, including for example ACPCEwhich stands for adaptive control

processing and compensation estimationcircuit 118. EX1004, 119; supra

VI.B.4-5. As explained, to determine the I-Q gain settings for the transmit and

receive chains, ACPCE observes and processes the baseband receive calibration

signals 164, 166, which are derived from the calibration RF signal, to form an

observable indicator of I-Q imbalance. EX1003, 8:1-26.

[5e] Warner discloses a channel gain adjuster for varying the differential I-

Q gain in the transmit and receive chains independently. EX1004, 120; supra

VI.F.

6. wherein the calibration RF signal includes a

calibration cycle, and the calibration cycle determines
transmitter I-Q gain settings which minimize an
observable indicator while holding receive I-Q gain
settings constant, and which in turn determines receiver
I-Q gain settings which minimizes the observable
indicator while holding the transmit I-Q gain settings
constant.
Warner discloses this limitation for the same reasons as the identical

limitation in claim 1. EX1004, 121; supra VI.B.5.

57
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

I. Claim 15 Is Both Anticipated and Rendered Obvious by Warner

Warner both discloses and renders obvious the calibration RF signal

includes successive calibration cycles, and successive calibration cycles are used

to refine or maintain I-Q balance. EX1004, 122-24. Warner states,

Preferably, the ACPCE circuit 118 receives the burst data periodically to enable

the ACPCE circuit 118 to periodically update the compensation coefficients.

EX1003, 11:66-12:2 (emphases added). Warner recognizes that components can

be subject to temperature, aging, and other environmental effects, and often

require periodic recalibration. Id., 2:51-63; see id., 2:2-11.

Moreover, even if Warner did not disclose successive cycles, Warner

renders this limitation obvious. A person of ordinary skill in the art would

understand, as Warner teaches, that temperature, aging, and other environmental

effects will cause a shift in the impairments in the transceiver over time, and thus

one of skill would be motivated to recalibrate over successive calibration cycles to

maintain the accuracy of the transceiver in changing environments. EX1004, 124.

And a person of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success

in doing so because performing successive cycles to maintain I-Q balance requires

simply repeating the calibration process two or more timesthere is nothing about

a subsequent cycle that would yield an unpredictable result. Id.; EX1003, 2:2-11,

51-63, 11:66-12:2.

58
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

intermediate frequency; conversion subsystem for converting the baseband

transmit signal at the intermediate frequency to an RF transmit signal, and a

receive chain including at least one stage of frequency conversion of the receive

signal to an intermediate frequency; a conversion subsystem for converting the RF

receive signal to a baseband receive signal. As explained, Warner discloses and

renders these limitations obvious. Supra VI.E.

The at least one stage of frequency conversion of the baseband transmit

signal to an intermediate frequency includes, for example, AQM 138 configured

to convert from baseband to IF (EX1003, 6:39-65, FIG. 1), and the conversion

subsystem for converting the baseband transmit signal at the intermediate

frequency to an RF transmit signal includes, for example, an up-conversion from

IF to RF in a separate stage (id., 7:7-15, 24:29-37). EX1004, 129. The at least

one stage of frequency conversion of the receive signal to an intermediate

frequency includes, for example, a down-conversion from RF to IF in a separate

stage, and a conversion subsystem for converting the RF receive signal to a

baseband receive signal includes, for example, AQD 150 configured to convert

from IF to baseband. EX1003, 6:39-65, 7:7-15, 24:29-37; EX1004, 129. In this

heterodyne configuration, the coupler is placed in the RF transmit data flow to

provide a path from the RF transmit output to the RF receive input. EX1004, 120;

EX1003, 7:4-6; supra VI.E.

61
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

claim 69 for the same reasons as claim 32 (supra VI.N); and claim 74 for the

same reasons as claim 37 (supra VI.O).

VII. CONCLUSION
For these reasons, the challenged claims 1-7, 15, 16, 21, 22, 30, 32, 37-44,

52, 53, 58, 59, 67, 69, and 74 are unpatentable, and Petitioner respectfully requests

that the Board grant this Petition and institute trial.

The required fees are submitted under 37 C.F.R. 41.103(a) and 42.15(a).

If any additional fees are due during this proceeding, the Office may charge such

fees to Deposit Account No. 06-0916.

Date: June 8, 2017 Respectfully Submitted,

/Lionel M. Lavenue/
Lionel M. Lavenue
Reg. No. 46,859
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow,
Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Two Freedom Square
11955 Freedom Drive
Reston, VA 20190-5675
Telephone: 571-203-2750
Facsimile: 202-408-4400
E-mail: lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com

C. Brandon Rash
Reg. No. 59,121
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow,
Garrett & Dunner, LLP
901 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001-4413
Telephone: 202-408-4475

67
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313

Facsimile: 202-408-4400
E-mail: brandon.rash@finnegan.com

Ashraf A. Fawzy
Reg. No. 67,914
Unified Patents Inc.
1875 Connecticut Ave. NW, Floor 10
Washington, D.C. 20009
Telephone: 202-871-0110
Email: afawzy@unifiedpatents.com

68
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313
CERTIFICATION UNDER 37 C.F.R. 42.24(d)
This Petition complies with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 42.24. As

calculated by the word count feature of Microsoft Word 2010 and manually

counted in the figures, it contains 13,547 words, excluding the words contained in

the following: Table of Contents, Table of Authorities, List of Exhibits, Mandatory

Notices, Certification Under 42.24(d), and Certificate of Service.

/Lionel M. Lavenue/
Lionel M. Lavenue, Lead Counsel
Reg. No. 46,859
 IPR2017-01490 Petition
U.S. Patent 7,346,313
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Petition for Inter Partes

Review, the associated Power of Attorney, and Exhibits 1001 through 1012 are

being served on June 8, 2017, by Express Mail at the following address of record

for the subject patent.

Patrick J. Finnan
EDELL, SHAPIRO & FINNAN, LLC
9801 Washingtonian Blvd.,
Suite 750
Gaithersburg, MD 20878

/Ashley F. Cheung/
Ashley F. Cheung
Case Manager
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP