[00:00:00] Speaker 02:
2014, 1612, and 1655.

[00:00:05] Speaker 02:
Mr. Donner, when you are ready.

[00:00:23] Speaker 02:
If you were there, we've lost sight of you.

[00:00:28] Speaker 01:
I apologize for the delay.

[00:00:51] Speaker 01:
Good morning and may it please the Court.

[00:00:54] Speaker 01:
The infringement issues in this case are

[00:00:58] Speaker 01:
essentially factual.

[00:01:00] Speaker 01:
And so the question is, is there substantial evidence, was there substantial evidence in the case to support Parker Vision's infringement position and the jury's verdict in its favor?

[00:01:13] Speaker 01:
The question is not whether or not Qualcomm can find snippets of evidence to support its position.

[00:01:22] Speaker 01:
I'll do my best to show that there was substantial evidence and moreover,

[00:01:27] Speaker 01:
I will do my best to show that the district court's infringement decision was based on basically a misunderstanding of the technology in this case.

[00:01:37] Speaker 01:
Let me deal first with the generating limitation.

[00:01:40] Speaker 01:
Both sides agree.

[00:01:41] Speaker 01:
We don't agree on a lot of things, but we do agree on one thing.

[00:01:44] Speaker 00:
Before you get into the merits of that argument, could I get a couple of things clarified in my own mind as to where the parties are in this?

[00:01:53] Speaker 00:
First of all, I take it that no one disputes.

[00:01:56] Speaker 00:
that the Qualcomm accused devices are current mode devices, not voltage mode devices, and that the patent, well, the patent is very broad, but in any event, the specification is a voltage mode.

[00:02:09] Speaker 00:
Is that fair to say?

[00:02:12] Speaker 00:
I don't think that... As to the Qualcomm, all the accused devices are current mode devices, correct?

[00:02:19] Speaker 01:
I think both parties, I think Razavi, their expert, said that the

[00:02:25] Speaker 01:
The baseband is created by voltage across the capacitor.

[00:02:30] Speaker 00:
Well, he was talking about the Parker Vision invention.

[00:02:33] Speaker 00:
He wasn't talking about Qualcomm used devices.

[00:02:36] Speaker 01:
He was talking about the baseband signal is based on the measurement of voltage across the capacitor.

[00:02:43] Speaker 00:
In the Parker Vision, he's talking about validity, and there he's talking about the Parker Vision device.

[00:02:51] Speaker 00:
So why is it, well, let me make sure that we're on the same page here.

[00:02:57] Speaker 00:
The Qualcomm, initially Qualcomm's devices that were accused included both voltage mode and current mode devices.

[00:03:06] Speaker 00:
As I read the record, the ultimate decision was to strike all of the voltage mode devices and go only with current mode devices.

[00:03:17] Speaker 00:
Is that your understanding?

[00:03:19] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, my understanding is

[00:03:21] Speaker 01:
that it's all based on voltage.

[00:03:23] Speaker 01:
There obviously is a current.

[00:03:26] Speaker 01:
Power is a function of voltage and current.

[00:03:31] Speaker 01:
Razavi at page 11189 was asked, how is the baseband signal measured?

[00:03:38] Speaker 01:
He said the baseband signal is measured as a voltage across the capacitor.

[00:03:42] Speaker 01:
I think that applies to the Q's devices.

[00:03:45] Speaker 01:
It applies generally.

[00:03:47] Speaker 01:
And our position, I know they've taken the position

[00:03:50] Speaker 01:
that theirs is a current mode device and therefore does not infringe, but I have to disagree with you, Your Honor, on that point.

[00:04:01] Speaker 00:
You mean you think that the accused devices are not limited to current mode devices?

[00:04:09] Speaker 01:
That's exactly right.

[00:04:15] Speaker 01:
OK.

[00:04:15] Speaker 01:
So both parties agree that the issue on generating means

[00:04:20] Speaker 01:
is whether Qualcomm's products generate a baseband signal from energy stored in the capacitors.

[00:04:27] Speaker 01:
There is testimony by Dr. Prusnow, Parker Visions expert, and I'm reading from 11057, it's very short.

[00:04:37] Speaker 01:
The energy from the carrier signal is transferred through the switch, it's accumulated by the capacitor, and that energy is then used to generate the baseband signal following the capacitor.

[00:04:49] Speaker 01:
I submit

[00:04:50] Speaker 01:
that that alone is substantial evidence that should have ended the inquiry.

[00:04:54] Speaker 01:
What page was that again?

[00:04:55] Speaker 01:
I'm sorry.

[00:04:56] Speaker 01:
I missed the page number.

[00:04:58] Speaker 01:
11057.

[00:04:59] Speaker 01:
And that should have been enough, and I submit is enough, but the district court held that because Dr. Prusnall made a concession, it wasn't enough.

[00:05:12] Speaker 01:
And what was the concession?

[00:05:14] Speaker 01:
In the district court's words on A27,

[00:05:17] Speaker 01:
that the baseband was created prior to the storage capacitor.

[00:05:21] Speaker 01:
And therefore, the baseband signal could not have been generated from energy stored in the capacitors.

[00:05:29] Speaker 01:
There are two problems with that holding.

[00:05:32] Speaker 01:
One is, it's a mischaracterization of Dr. Prusenow's testimony.

[00:05:39] Speaker 01:
And secondly, he made no such concession.

[00:05:42] Speaker 01:
And secondly, the district court's position is inconsistent with the evidence

[00:05:46] Speaker 01:
that actually comes from Qualcomm's files.

[00:05:49] Speaker 01:
And let me deal with that evidence, which is really kind of critical.

[00:05:53] Speaker 01:
If you look at the yellow brief, pages seven and eight, you will see three schematics.

[00:05:59] Speaker 01:
And the first schematic on page seven is a high-level schematic.

[00:06:03] Speaker 01:
And the next two are lower-level schematics.

[00:06:07] Speaker 01:
It's sort of like a map with a country and a state and a city and then a neighborhood.

[00:06:12] Speaker 03:
Sorry, what page?

[00:06:15] Speaker 03:
I'm sorry, what page?

[00:06:16] Speaker 01:
Yellow, seven and eight.

[00:06:17] Speaker 01:
Seven and eight, okay, thank you.

[00:06:19] Speaker 01:
And so, at seven, you will see the high-level schematic, and it shows a passive mixer on the left, a TX filter on the right, and the energy signal is coming in from the left.

[00:06:33] Speaker 01:
The second schematic, which is a lower-level schematic at the top of page eight, is a picture, a schematic showing the mixer.

[00:06:45] Speaker 01:
Mix IQ.

[00:06:47] Speaker 01:
And right below it is something called W mixer IQ split.

[00:06:53] Speaker 01:
And Dr. Proust now said that the lower level mixer, the one with the one, two, and the three on it is the mixer's internal circuitry.

[00:07:03] Speaker 01:
Everything in that lower level is inside of the box was his words.

[00:07:08] Speaker 03:
And Qualcomm disputes that, right?

[00:07:10] Speaker 01:
Qualcomm disputes that.

[00:07:13] Speaker 01:
And they dispute it because

[00:07:15] Speaker 01:
If you look at A1330, which is the Jamal picture of this 123 drawing, it's labeled at the top.

[00:07:27] Speaker 01:
One is the mixer, two is the baseband, and three are the capacitors.

[00:07:32] Speaker 01:
But Dr. Prusnell said everything in this picture is in the mixer, everything, and it's labeled W mixer.

[00:07:39] Speaker 01:
So their argument is that because the baseband signal is under two,

[00:07:45] Speaker 01:
Therefore, it was generated before the capacitor, which is inconsistent with our position, if that were correct.

[00:07:54] Speaker 00:
Well, it's inconsistent with your position, but why isn't it necessarily the case that, at least assume for a moment that we're talking about current mode mixers, why is it not the case that if the baseband

[00:08:09] Speaker 00:
is created and is present on the circuit at BPOP and BPOM number 2 in that diagram, that that necessarily means that the baseband is not being generated by the capacitors.

[00:08:23] Speaker 01:
Because Dr. Razavi said at 11320 that the baseband signal is observed at every point along the wire

[00:08:38] Speaker 01:
since all points along the wire are one and the same point.

[00:08:42] Speaker 01:
This is generated instantaneously across the entire wire.

[00:08:47] Speaker 01:
The showing of the baseband signals under two.

[00:08:50] Speaker 03:
Mr. Dunner, your side didn't bring up this theory, though, of infringement below at trial, right?

[00:08:57] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, what we did bring up was we brought up the position that Dr. Pruess now

[00:09:06] Speaker 01:
said that the baseband signal is generated by the capacitors and that the location shown in these drawings was not inconsistent with that.

[00:09:15] Speaker 03:
I thought Dr. Pusnall was really focused on the capacitors relating to the TX filter and then maybe in very, very quick passing made reference to these two or maybe four capacitors related to the mixer.

[00:09:33] Speaker 03:
Maybe it's inside the mixer, maybe it's outside the mixer.

[00:09:36] Speaker 03:
Is that a fair characterization of what happened below and what was really Parker Vision's infringement theory?

[00:09:42] Speaker 01:
That's a fair characterization of what the district court concluded, and it's a fair characterization of what Falcom is arguing, but it's not a fair characterization of what happened below.

[00:09:52] Speaker 03:
Okay, so where did Parker Vision come forward with evidence or testimony about this one point on the line is the same as every other point on the line?

[00:10:06] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, the point I was going to make, and I apologize, I didn't finish it, is that Dr. Pusnall made the point that the capacitors generate the baseband signal and that that was consistent with the argument about location of the baseband signal.

[00:10:27] Speaker 01:
And the case law says, Supreme Court case law, that you can add additional arguments in support of an argument you made below.

[00:10:36] Speaker 01:
I'm saying the argument was made below that the location of the baseband signal is compatible with the capacity generating the baseband signal.

[00:10:47] Speaker 01:
And this is another argument reinforcing that point.

[00:10:51] Speaker 00:
Now, when you raised Dr. Razavi's testimony on 11320, you were raising that in support, as I understand it, of the argument that he was testifying as to the accused device.

[00:11:05] Speaker 00:
and saying that every point is the same as every other point on the circuit, right?

[00:11:12] Speaker 00:
Because I'm reading Razavi's testimony as being directed to the Weisskopf prior art as part of the invalidity case.

[00:11:22] Speaker 00:
He specifically addresses Weisskopf.

[00:11:24] Speaker 00:
He's not talking about the accused device at that point.

[00:11:28] Speaker 00:
So I don't see why Razavi helps you.

[00:11:31] Speaker 01:
It came up in the context of Weisskopf.

[00:11:34] Speaker 01:
But it was a general statement.

[00:11:36] Speaker 01:
It was not restricted to only Weisskopf.

[00:11:39] Speaker 01:
It is a fact that when the baseband signal is generated, it is generated instantaneously across the entire wire.

[00:11:48] Speaker 01:
Voltage, but not the current.

[00:11:51] Speaker 00:
Right?

[00:11:51] Speaker 00:
I mean, it's a matter of electrical... That's correct.

[00:11:55] Speaker 00:
So if this is a current-based system, a current-mode system, then that proposition doesn't apply, right?

[00:12:04] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, I don't know when you say a current mode system excludes the concept of voltage creating the baseband signal.

[00:12:16] Speaker 01:
I don't know that something being called a current mode system, there is voltage and there's current.

[00:12:24] Speaker 01:
And when the carrier signal is generated and goes in through the switches and into the capacitor,

[00:12:31] Speaker 01:
there is a voltage element and there's a current element and the power is a function of both voltage and current.

[00:12:41] Speaker 00:
Right, but if the signal, if the baseband signal is being expressed in terms of current as opposed to variations in voltage, it would seem to me that the voltage and the proposition that all voltage on the circuit is the same ceases to have significance.

[00:13:02] Speaker 00:
That's my problem with your argument about the nature of Dr. Razavi's testimony and the other testimony about the voltage mode devices as applied to what looks to be current mode devices in the accused system.

[00:13:19] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, my answer to you would be that the voltage plays a role in this system.

[00:13:28] Speaker 01:
The baseband signal is

[00:13:30] Speaker 01:
is created, is measured through voltage across the capacitor.

[00:13:36] Speaker 01:
And to call it a current mode system does not exclude what I am suggesting is the case here.

[00:13:46] Speaker 01:
I know that Qualcomm disagrees with us on that point, but that is our position.

[00:13:50] Speaker 00:
Well now, Dr. Prucknell, if that's the right pronunciation, testified that the capacitor did not

[00:14:00] Speaker 00:
affect the baseband current.

[00:14:05] Speaker 00:
The capacitor affected the high-frequency current.

[00:14:09] Speaker 00:
That's why it's a low-pass filter.

[00:14:11] Speaker 00:
And why is that not inconsistent with what you just said that the voltage, the signal, is determined by the voltage across the capacitor?

[00:14:20] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, I apologize.

[00:14:21] Speaker 01:
I was reading a note.

[00:14:22] Speaker 01:
Could you please repeat that?

[00:14:23] Speaker 00:
Sure.

[00:14:24] Speaker 00:
Dr. Prochnold said that the way the

[00:14:28] Speaker 00:
the capacitor works with a high frequency and a low frequency signal is that, in effect, the capacitor serves as if it has a closed switch for the high frequency signal and an open switch for the low frequency signal.

[00:14:43] Speaker 00:
In effect, the capacitor is blind to the low frequency signal, which is why the TX filter works the way it does.

[00:14:51] Speaker 00:
But why does that not answer the question as to whether the baseband

[00:14:56] Speaker 00:
is being generated by the capacitor in the negative.

[00:15:03] Speaker 01:
I have two comments to make with respect to that.

[00:15:06] Speaker 01:
First of all, there are multiple capacitors.

[00:15:10] Speaker 01:
There are capacitors in the mixer and there are capacitors in the TX filter and each one generates, each one contributes to the baseband signal.

[00:15:22] Speaker 01:
The first one that contributes

[00:15:25] Speaker 01:
is the capacitor in the mixer.

[00:15:27] Speaker 01:
It does so, it would do so even alone, even independently of the TX filter.

[00:15:34] Speaker 01:
And a note that was passed up to me say, the parties were focused on energy in the accused products, not the current.

[00:15:41] Speaker 01:
Both parties agreed that the energy is related to voltage.

[00:15:46] Speaker 01:
And I have sites A2443 and 2433.

[00:15:51] Speaker 03:
But didn't Dr. Prisnell also point to this BBOP and BBOM as being the baseband signal?

[00:16:01] Speaker 01:
He did, Your Honor, but the answer is that since everything in this drawing is in the mixer, everything, this is just a schematic.

[00:16:12] Speaker 01:
I say Dr. Razavi's testimony is relevant to this point.

[00:16:16] Speaker 01:
because that BPOP could have been drawn anyplace along this line.

[00:16:21] Speaker 01:
It could have been drawn... The capacitor is not after the mixer.

[00:16:26] Speaker 01:
Their argument is that the capacitor is after the mixer.

[00:16:30] Speaker 01:
The capacitor is in the mixer.

[00:16:32] Speaker 03:
It was your infringement theory that this device by Qualcomm, it's discharging energy from these capacitors and that

[00:16:44] Speaker 03:
discharged energy generates a baseband signal.

[00:16:47] Speaker 03:
Is that right?

[00:16:48] Speaker 03:
That's correct.

[00:16:49] Speaker 03:
How does that work exactly?

[00:16:51] Speaker 03:
How do you take the dis... Why is it that the discharged energy necessarily results in a down-converted signal?

[00:17:00] Speaker 01:
Well, I can only tell you my understanding is that the carrier signal goes into a switch.

[00:17:08] Speaker 01:
When the switch is open, it doesn't go through.

[00:17:12] Speaker 01:
When it's closed,

[00:17:14] Speaker 01:
energy passes through the switch into the capacitor and it opens and closes in order to get a discontinuous signal, which is the sampling concept.

[00:17:25] Speaker 01:
And then energy is discharged from the capacitor every time the switch is open.

[00:17:33] Speaker 01:
Energy discharges out of the capacitor.

[00:17:36] Speaker 03:
And that results in a lower frequency signal?

[00:17:39] Speaker 01:
That results in a lower frequency signal.

[00:17:41] Speaker 03:
Is there any

[00:17:43] Speaker 03:
introduction of a control signal that mixes with that incoming carrier signal in order to lower the frequency to the point where you have a baseband signal?

[00:17:56] Speaker 01:
The control signal operates the switches, opens and closes the switches in accordance with a certain time scheme, and when the switch closes,

[00:18:09] Speaker 01:
energy flows through.

[00:18:11] Speaker 03:
Right, but I guess I'm just trying to understand how you get from a high frequency signal to a low frequency signal.

[00:18:17] Speaker 03:
I understand the prior art as relying on mixing the high frequency signal with some control low frequency signal.

[00:18:27] Speaker 01:
The baseband signal is a lower frequency signal compared to the carrier signal and it just happens.

[00:18:37] Speaker 01:
I don't think there's any disagreement

[00:18:39] Speaker 01:
that the lower signal, the district court asks the question, show me why the baseband signal going out is at a lower frequency than the baseband signal going in.

[00:18:50] Speaker 01:
That's not the issue.

[00:18:51] Speaker 01:
The issue is, is the baseband signal going out at a lower frequency than the carrier signal?

[00:18:58] Speaker 01:
I don't think there's any disagreement on that point.

[00:19:01] Speaker 03:
As I understand the claimed invention, it doesn't rely on a second signal being mixed with the carrier.

[00:19:08] Speaker 03:
signal in order to produce a baseband signal.

[00:19:12] Speaker 03:
It seems like this Qualcomm mixer is necessarily mixing the carrier signal with some lower frequency signal to ultimately produce the baseband signal.

[00:19:25] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, I think it's doing exactly what the patent calls for.

[00:19:28] Speaker 01:
It is injecting a carrier high frequency signal.

[00:19:35] Speaker 01:
It uses switches.

[00:19:37] Speaker 01:
They open and close.

[00:19:40] Speaker 01:
And when it's closed, the energy flows through.

[00:19:45] Speaker 01:
When it's open, it discharges.

[00:19:46] Speaker 01:
I don't think it's doing anything different.

[00:19:48] Speaker 03:
Is it fair to say that just looking at this circuit diagram, it doesn't look any different in any meaningful way from figures 78A and 78B of the patent, which show the prior art design?

[00:20:05] Speaker 03:
Just looking at the schematic,

[00:20:07] Speaker 03:
No, there's a switch.

[00:20:11] Speaker 03:
There's a sampling signal.

[00:20:12] Speaker 03:
There's a capacitor.

[00:20:13] Speaker 00:
Everybody agrees that the structure is the same.

[00:20:28] Speaker 00:
It's just that what Parker Vision claims to have invented is new values at a higher, I'm sorry, lower impedance.

[00:20:36] Speaker 00:
a higher value for the capacitor and a larger aperture for the switch.

[00:20:41] Speaker 00:
And that produced the invention, as I understand it.

[00:20:44] Speaker 00:
But if you look at the diagrams themselves, you see the same structure.

[00:20:48] Speaker 00:
It's just that the difference comes with the values.

[00:20:51] Speaker 00:
Isn't that a fair summary of the situation?

[00:20:54] Speaker 01:
I think you summarized it correctly.

[00:20:55] Speaker 01:
It's a lower impedance.

[00:20:58] Speaker 01:
It is a different, creating a discontinuous signal.

[00:21:05] Speaker 01:
So if I understood your question correctly, that's basically correct.

[00:21:11] Speaker 01:
And that's what the accused structures do.

[00:21:13] Speaker 01:
Now, Judge Shen, you asked me a question, wasn't everything focused on the TX filter?

[00:21:18] Speaker 01:
And the answer is no, because there's testimony, the capacitors were in the mixer, and I cite 108, 03, and 04, and 107, 58, and 59.

[00:21:34] Speaker 01:
They're also in the TX filter 11058 and 11054, but the testimony was not about capacitors in the TX filter.

[00:21:44] Speaker 01:
That's what got the district board confused.

[00:21:49] Speaker 01:
There are capacitors in the TX filter.

[00:21:52] Speaker 01:
They contribute to the baseband signal.

[00:21:54] Speaker 01:
They augment the baseband signal, but they are not alone responsible for the baseband signal, which is a product of the capacitors

[00:22:04] Speaker 01:
coming out of the mixer initially.

[00:22:07] Speaker 02:
Mr. Donner, why don't we hear from Qualcomm and we'll give you your three minutes of rebuttal time.

[00:22:46] Speaker 04:
Thank you, Your Honor.

[00:22:48] Speaker 04:
May it please the court?

[00:22:49] Speaker 04:
Most of the argument we just heard this morning wasn't presented to the district court.

[00:22:54] Speaker 04:
Most of the arguments weren't presented at J-Mall, and most of the arguments weren't presented at trial.

[00:23:01] Speaker 04:
And I would direct the panel to the Sage v. Devin case from 1997 that says that new infringement arguments, new theories can't be introduced on appeal.

[00:23:12] Speaker 04:
They're citing a Supreme Court case that I think had to do with

[00:23:16] Speaker 04:
property disputes and takings has nothing to do with a patent case.

[00:23:19] Speaker 04:
Sage v. Devin 1997 is the one you want to look at.

[00:23:22] Speaker 04:
You can't raise new infringement arguments and new infringement theories on appeal.

[00:23:27] Speaker 04:
What do the capacitors do in your mixer?

[00:23:31] Speaker 04:
There are no capacitors in the mixer.

[00:23:32] Speaker 03:
Okay, well, that's disputed.

[00:23:34] Speaker 03:
The capacitors are labeled number three on page eight of the yellow brief.

[00:23:39] Speaker 04:
Those capacitors are actually part of the TX filter, and I can go through Dr. Proustall's testimony that shows exactly

[00:23:46] Speaker 04:
why that's the case.

[00:23:47] Speaker 03:
Well, what do they do?

[00:23:49] Speaker 04:
Those capacitors are there to attenuate the TX jammer.

[00:23:53] Speaker 04:
So you have a massive TX jammer signal and that's created only because we're both transmitting and receiving at the same time in CDMA.

[00:24:00] Speaker 04:
Trying to filter out the high frequency transmit.

[00:24:03] Speaker 04:
Exactly.

[00:24:03] Speaker 04:
There's a high frequency transmit jammer and that's what they're trying to get rid of.

[00:24:07] Speaker 00:
The capacitors are open, in this case with the switches in effect closed to the high frequency, but open, that is to say,

[00:24:15] Speaker 00:
shut to the low frequency, right?

[00:24:18] Speaker 00:
And the low frequency, in your theory, just goes flying right by.

[00:24:21] Speaker 04:
That is precisely correct, and that's how they're designed.

[00:24:24] Speaker 04:
So you can have a capacitor do two different things.

[00:24:27] Speaker 04:
You could use a capacitor as a sampler, like they do in their invention, or the Prior Art Weisskopf, where you use that capacitor to generate a voltage baseband signal.

[00:24:37] Speaker 04:
You could do that.

[00:24:38] Speaker 04:
That's one thing you could do with a capacitor.

[00:24:40] Speaker 04:
Another different thing you can do with a capacitor is use it as part of a low-pass filter.

[00:24:44] Speaker 04:
And that's exactly what we do.

[00:24:46] Speaker 04:
So in the testimony that we cite in our brief, for example, Mr. Sorrell says, having a down converter followed by a filter known since the antiquities.

[00:24:55] Speaker 04:
Dr. Prusnall testified that having a double-bounce mixer followed by just a low-pass filter, if it's just a low-pass filter, that's not infringing either.

[00:25:04] Speaker 00:
So to summarize this case in one sentence, I guess, you would say that the difference between the Parker-Vision invention and Qualcomm's

[00:25:14] Speaker 00:
implementation, Qualcomm's accused devices, is simply that, sure, Qualcomm uses capacitors, but they don't use capacitors to generate the baseband signal.

[00:25:26] Speaker 00:
End of discussion.

[00:25:26] Speaker 00:
That's your... That's precisely correct.

[00:25:28] Speaker 00:
Now, tell me why, what's the evidence that shows, as you assert, that Qualcomm's devices are pure current mode devices, and not, as Mr. Dunner was arguing,

[00:25:42] Speaker 00:
dependent in part on voltage variation, as I understood his argument.

[00:25:48] Speaker 04:
That's a great question.

[00:25:49] Speaker 04:
And we cite a lot of that evidence on page 60, I believe, and 61 of our brief indicating that our devices are current mode devices.

[00:26:01] Speaker 04:
And all of the design documents we discussed describe, for example, A2308.

[00:26:07] Speaker 04:
This is cited on page 60 of our brief.

[00:26:10] Speaker 04:
the incoming RF signals are converted into current, and then the down-converted baseband current describes what they're doing there.

[00:26:18] Speaker 04:
This argument, by the way, was not made at the district court.

[00:26:21] Speaker 04:
They never argued that our devices were voltage mode devices.

[00:26:24] Speaker 04:
They dropped all the claims against voltage mode devices, as we noted, I believe, footnote 23 of page 61.

[00:26:32] Speaker 04:
And they dropped all of those claims because those particular devices didn't have capacitors at all.

[00:26:38] Speaker 04:
didn't need them because they didn't have the TX jammer problem.

[00:26:41] Speaker 04:
The only reason we have the capacitors in the TX filter is because we have the TX jammer.

[00:26:47] Speaker 04:
That's why we have them there.

[00:26:49] Speaker 00:
So if you look at... It means that you're doing transmitting and receiving from the same device and therefore you've got to get rid of the noise coming from the... Absolutely correct.

[00:26:56] Speaker 04:
There's this massive TX jammer signal that comes around through and that's what the TX filter and all those capacitors are there to get rid of.

[00:27:04] Speaker 04:
So when you don't have that in the other devices that they drop the claims against?

[00:27:07] Speaker 03:
Before you go any further, I thought they were pointing to capacitors in the TX filter, and then they were pointing to an additional set of capacitors that, in their view, related to Qualcomm's mixer.

[00:27:21] Speaker 03:
So are you trying to say, no, every single capacitor that they're pointing to, whether it's on this side or that side of the TX filter box, they're all actually inside the TX filter?

[00:27:33] Speaker 04:
Yeah, that's right.

[00:27:34] Speaker 04:
And this is a new argument they raised on appeal.

[00:27:36] Speaker 04:
And they flushed it out for the first time.

[00:27:38] Speaker 04:
Well, they were pointing to these very capacitors before.

[00:27:41] Speaker 04:
That's right.

[00:27:42] Speaker 04:
And Dr. Prusnall very clearly indicated, after looking at the schematic, that those capacitors are part of the TX filter.

[00:27:50] Speaker 04:
So he didn't say that the capacitors under 3 in the figure on, I think it's page 46 of our red brief,

[00:28:00] Speaker 04:
He never said that those capacitors are part of the mixture and not part of the TX filter.

[00:28:06] Speaker 04:
He, in fact, identified them as part of the TX filter.

[00:28:09] Speaker 04:
Where did he say that?

[00:28:10] Speaker 04:
It's right at A10806-23 through 108-072.

[00:28:19] Speaker 04:
And here's the question.

[00:28:20] Speaker 04:
He's just walked through all the schematics.

[00:28:22] Speaker 04:
So he's just walked through the schematic that we show on page 46 of our red brief.

[00:28:27] Speaker 04:
And here's the question.

[00:28:28] Speaker 04:
And this is on direct.

[00:28:29] Speaker 04:
Now, Dr. Prusnal, where in this figure, and now he's looking at the figure that shows the TX filter, the one they have on A7.

[00:28:38] Speaker 04:
Having gone through the schematics, he's asked, where in this figure are the energy storage devices that you showed us with respect to the schematic pages?

[00:28:47] Speaker 04:
Schematic pages refers back to what we see on page 46.

[00:28:51] Speaker 04:
Answer, the energy storage devices follow the mixers, and they're inside this box labeled TX filter.

[00:28:59] Speaker 04:
That box labeled TX filter.

[00:29:01] Speaker 04:
Then he's asked the question again as well, looking at the same filter, the same figure, this figure here on yellow seven.

[00:29:09] Speaker 04:
And he's discussing the 342 patent claim 18.

[00:29:12] Speaker 04:
And he says, the capacitors are located in the TX filter right here.

[00:29:17] Speaker 04:
And the district court was right there.

[00:29:20] Speaker 04:
He cited that testimony.

[00:29:22] Speaker 04:
He cited the first passage I referred you to.

[00:29:25] Speaker 04:
And this, by the way, the second one is at A10873.

[00:29:28] Speaker 04:
The district court referred to that testimony at page 24 of his opinion.

[00:29:34] Speaker 04:
He was right there.

[00:29:35] Speaker 04:
He heard Dr. Prusnall say they're in the TX filter right there.

[00:29:40] Speaker 04:
And that's what he understood.

[00:29:42] Speaker 04:
That's why they didn't raise the argument at the JMAW hearing.

[00:29:46] Speaker 04:
They didn't raise the argument in their papers because they knew the district court would shoot it down.

[00:29:51] Speaker 04:
He was there.

[00:29:51] Speaker 04:
He heard that testimony.

[00:29:53] Speaker 04:
and he heard and saw exactly what Dr. Prusnall was pointing to.

[00:29:57] Speaker 00:
Now there was some discussion at trial of exhibits.

[00:30:00] Speaker 00:
We've been talking about what originated as the exhibits at 6,989 to 6,992.1 in the Joint Appendix, right?

[00:30:10] Speaker 00:
Right.

[00:30:11] Speaker 00:
These are extractions from those exhibits.

[00:30:15] Speaker 00:
There was a discussion of the capacitors at 6,992.1, which are downstream from what

[00:30:23] Speaker 00:
was otherwise identified as the mixer or the mixer and the TX filter.

[00:30:28] Speaker 00:
What perform, what serve, do they serve, what role do they serve?

[00:30:32] Speaker 04:
They're also part of the TX filter.

[00:30:34] Speaker 04:
So the TX filter is implemented with multiple capacitors.

[00:30:38] Speaker 04:
They don't just have one capacitor.

[00:30:40] Speaker 04:
They have multiple capacitors all in a line.

[00:30:43] Speaker 04:
And so what they've done is they're looking at some of them in 6992.1.

[00:30:48] Speaker 04:
Those are some of the TX filter capacitors.

[00:30:50] Speaker 04:
And so are the ones in

[00:30:52] Speaker 04:
6991, the two capacitors that are shown there.

[00:30:55] Speaker 04:
What they've done is they've taken, this is the first time they've made this argument, they've taken this figure at 6989, and they've said that everything is on page 8 of their brief.

[00:31:06] Speaker 04:
They say there's this box that says mixer IQ, and everything in that box is a mixer, and that's what Dr. Prusnall was referring to as mixer.

[00:31:16] Speaker 04:
But we know from the testimony we just saw, that wasn't what he was referring to.

[00:31:19] Speaker 00:
Well, that's one piece of testimony.

[00:31:20] Speaker 00:
But I believe, if my recollection serves me, that in other places he did say that the capacitors that show up on 6991 just to the right of the BPOP and BPOM are part of the mixer box.

[00:31:38] Speaker 04:
Well, so... Is my recollection correct on that?

[00:31:42] Speaker 04:
The box that we have at 6991

[00:31:44] Speaker 04:
That box includes the TX filter and the mixers.

[00:31:50] Speaker 04:
So if you look at that, the actual native drawing that you'll have in the appendix, 6989, that whole drawing, there's no TX filter there because that box includes both the TX filter and the mixers.

[00:32:07] Speaker 04:
So anyway, then in his testimony, he repeatedly refers to the capacitors as being part of the TX filter.

[00:32:12] Speaker 04:
That's what the district court acknowledged.

[00:32:15] Speaker 04:
And then in his testimony, he says, the downconverted signal was created before the baseband hits the TX filter.

[00:32:23] Speaker 04:
And this whole argument about, are these capacitors really something we can call a mixer or not, is in some ways a red herring, because Dr. Prusnall agreed that the lower frequency baseband is created before, this is quote, before the current has reached the capacitor that we're talking about.

[00:32:40] Speaker 04:
This new argument that the

[00:32:43] Speaker 04:
capacitors are really somehow in the, quote, mixer is wrong.

[00:32:46] Speaker 04:
But it's also a red herring because Dr. Prusnall indicated that the bait band, the lower frequency signal, is created before the current has reached the capacitor we're talking about.

[00:32:57] Speaker 04:
And I believe Judge Chen pointed out the figure 6991.

[00:33:02] Speaker 04:
It shows high frequency RF going into the circle with the cross.

[00:33:06] Speaker 04:
That's a double-bounce mixer.

[00:33:08] Speaker 04:
And it's the low frequency BBOP going out.

[00:33:12] Speaker 04:
That happens before the current hits the mixer.

[00:33:15] Speaker 00:
Now, he does testify at one point, Dr. Furschnell?

[00:33:20] Speaker 04:
Dr. Furschnell, yeah.

[00:33:21] Speaker 00:
Furschnell, right.

[00:33:23] Speaker 00:
He testifies at one point that, and this is at 10947, cited several times in the blue and yellow briefs, that the actual baseband signal on the baseband path is created after the capacitor.

[00:33:37] Speaker 00:
He calls it a capacitor resistor.

[00:33:38] Speaker 00:
I'm not sure what that means.

[00:33:42] Speaker 00:
that presumably means the capacitor.

[00:33:44] Speaker 00:
Now why is that not evidence that supports the planus position?

[00:33:50] Speaker 04:
I'm glad you brought that up.

[00:33:52] Speaker 04:
Because that testimony, we were crossing him and we were crossing him on his simulations.

[00:33:57] Speaker 04:
And you'll recall that his simulations were of the Parker vision design, the Parker vision schematic.

[00:34:03] Speaker 04:
And so we were asking him questions about his simulation of the Parker vision design and then

[00:34:09] Speaker 04:
comparing it and juxtaposing it with our design and showing how the two are different.

[00:34:13] Speaker 04:
If you go through that Q&A, we're asking him about his schematic, and we're asking him to show where it is in his schematic.

[00:34:24] Speaker 00:
And we're saying... When you say his schematic, which schematic is that?

[00:34:27] Speaker 04:
This would have been in... It's not in the appendix now.

[00:34:30] Speaker 04:
It was in Appendix K of his report.

[00:34:33] Speaker 04:
We cite in our brief ad nauseum that he simulated the Parker Vision design, not ours.

[00:34:38] Speaker 00:
So you're saying that this is a discussion of the Parker Vision device, not the Amuse device?

[00:34:42] Speaker 00:
Yes.

[00:34:42] Speaker 04:
That capacitor resistor comment that he makes is a comment describing his simulation of the Parker Vision design, not the Qualcomm design.

[00:34:51] Speaker 04:
So if you go through the testimony, it's A10944 through 48.

[00:34:57] Speaker 04:
In those passages, when he's referring to the capacitor resistor,

[00:35:01] Speaker 04:
He's really pointing and looking at the schematic for the park revision design that he simulated.

[00:35:06] Speaker 04:
District court was there, knew that, saw that.

[00:35:08] Speaker 04:
But that was our cross, and that's what we were doing.

[00:35:10] Speaker 04:
That's a fundamentally different simulation than one of the Qualcomm design, which he never performed.

[00:35:16] Speaker 04:
He never performed a simulation of our double-balanced mixers, because you know what the result would have been.

[00:35:21] Speaker 04:
They even tried to exclude any cross on the simulation.

[00:35:27] Speaker 02:
Mr. Teeter, do you want to spend a few minutes on your cross appeal, validity?

[00:35:32] Speaker 04:
Just a few minutes, Your Honor.

[00:35:33] Speaker 04:
Yes, thank you.

[00:35:35] Speaker 04:
And then I'll save one minute for rebuttal.

[00:35:41] Speaker 04:
The disagreement regarding Weisskopf was really over the disagreement between Mr. Weisskopf and Mr. Sorrells about what values work best downstream.

[00:35:52] Speaker 04:
Mr. Sorrell thinks it's best to have a low impedance load

[00:35:57] Speaker 04:
downstream, Mr. Weisskopf thought it was best to have a high impedance.

[00:36:01] Speaker 04:
But that had no real relevance because Mr. Weisskopf discussed both modes in his paper.

[00:36:08] Speaker 04:
He discussed both a low impedance load and a high impedance load.

[00:36:11] Speaker 04:
He did exactly what Mr. Sorrell did.

[00:36:14] Speaker 00:
Isn't the bigger point that the claims don't have any limitation relating to discharge and therefore it doesn't matter what the impedance is because that all relates to discharge?

[00:36:23] Speaker 04:
That's exactly correct and that was our argument below.

[00:36:26] Speaker 00:
And that's frankly, that and the emails probably... I'm not sure why the whole issue of whether he was disparaging the low impedance or not is really material if this charge isn't a limitation.

[00:36:42] Speaker 04:
It shouldn't have been material.

[00:36:43] Speaker 04:
And that's what we argued.

[00:36:44] Speaker 04:
And we tried to get the jury and the judge to say, look, whether it discharges or not, it's immaterial to all these claims.

[00:36:52] Speaker 04:
The judge understood that.

[00:36:53] Speaker 04:
The judge said, yes, it's immaterial.

[00:36:55] Speaker 04:
But they raised the argument anyway on closing.

[00:36:58] Speaker 04:
And apparently, it resonated with the jurors.

[00:37:00] Speaker 04:
But it is an immaterial argument.

[00:37:02] Speaker 04:
So that was one argument they made.

[00:37:04] Speaker 04:
And the other is just they said, well, it doesn't show generating a baseband using stored energy.

[00:37:09] Speaker 04:
But the figures in the text showed that.

[00:37:11] Speaker 04:
They flat out say it.

[00:37:13] Speaker 04:
If we look at figure one and figure five, figure one is for the high impedance.

[00:37:16] Speaker 04:
Figure five is for the low impedance.

[00:37:18] Speaker 04:
It shows generating a baseband.

[00:37:20] Speaker 04:
It's right there.

[00:37:21] Speaker 04:
That's the generation of the baseband.

[00:37:23] Speaker 04:
Now that's a voltage mode design.

[00:37:25] Speaker 04:
Weisskopf and the invention are both voltage mode.

[00:37:28] Speaker 04:
So was DeMont, voltage mode.

[00:37:30] Speaker 04:
Our devices, current mode.

[00:37:32] Speaker 04:
Fundamentally, different kinds of devices.

[00:37:34] Speaker 04:
And I'll save my last 20 seconds for Rubo.

[00:37:38] Speaker 03:
Is Weisskopf mixing signals?

[00:37:42] Speaker 04:
Weisskopf has a switch with the big storage capacitor behind it.

[00:37:47] Speaker 04:
So it's doing the exact same thing.

[00:37:48] Speaker 04:
They would call it an energy sampler.

[00:37:50] Speaker 04:
It doesn't have the mixer, so it's not

[00:37:52] Speaker 04:
It's not doing the kind of double down printing that we do.

[00:37:56] Speaker 02:
Thank you.

[00:37:58] Speaker 02:
Thank you, Mr. King and Mr. Donner has three minutes of rebuttal time.

[00:38:14] Speaker 01:
First of all, let me deal with the current voltage issue.

[00:38:19] Speaker 01:
Judge Bryson, you asked a lot of questions on that.

[00:38:22] Speaker 01:
I cited page A2433, which is a Qualcomm opposition to Parker-Vision motion for summary judgment.

[00:38:33] Speaker 01:
And it says, all invalidity experts identified by the parties agree that the energy stored in the capacitor manifests itself as a voltage.

[00:38:44] Speaker 01:
So I submit that the distinction between current mode and voltage mode

[00:38:51] Speaker 01:
does not resolve the questions on this appeal.

[00:38:55] Speaker 00:
But again, that is in a memorandum in opposition to some adjustment of no invalidity.

[00:39:01] Speaker 00:
So it was addressed to the devices, the Parker vision and Weisskopf devices, as I understand it, not addressing Qualcomm's device.

[00:39:13] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, this statement is a general statement.

[00:39:16] Speaker 01:
It is not restricted

[00:39:17] Speaker 01:
to Weisskopf or anything else as a general statement, and I think it's accurate.

[00:39:22] Speaker 01:
I think in general, without regard to Weisskopf, all the experts agree that the capacitor manifests itself as a voltage.

[00:39:29] Speaker 00:
Well, generally that's what capacitors do, is that they store charge by having differential voltage, as I understand, on either side of the capacitor.

[00:39:38] Speaker 00:
But that doesn't tell us anything, I don't think.

[00:39:42] Speaker 00:
about what the role of the capacitor in this case in the accused devices was vis-à-vis the generation of the baseband signal.

[00:39:51] Speaker 00:
That's my problem with using the general statements about what capacitors do.

[00:39:57] Speaker 01:
Well, Your Honor, we dealt with the voltage current issue in our briefs, and I think that the parties really focused on the voltage issue.

[00:40:11] Speaker 01:
And I submit that the Qualcomm accused products are no different from the patented claims in that sense.

[00:40:23] Speaker 01:
I think a voltage is generated, a voltage is measured in the form of energy.

[00:40:27] Speaker 01:
Energy is the key focus.

[00:40:31] Speaker 01:
The focus really is not so much on current or anything else.

[00:40:36] Speaker 01:
It is on energy.

[00:40:37] Speaker 01:
Energy is a function of voltage.

[00:40:39] Speaker 01:
Energy is also a function of current.

[00:40:41] Speaker 01:
And I don't think I can add any more to that.

[00:40:46] Speaker 01:
The point was made by Mr. Teeter that there are no capacitors in the mixer.

[00:40:51] Speaker 01:
That is just not so.

[00:40:55] Speaker 01:
Dr. Proustinal's testimony is replete with statements that there are capacitors in the mixer.

[00:41:01] Speaker 01:
I direct you again to 108.03 and 108.04, and he's asked about

[00:41:07] Speaker 01:
Have you already shown us some evidence that the accused products have the means for generating the baseband signal from the integrated energy?

[00:41:15] Speaker 01:
And his answer is yes.

[00:41:16] Speaker 01:
And that includes all these documents.

[00:41:18] Speaker 01:
It includes the oscillators.

[00:41:19] Speaker 01:
It includes the switches.

[00:41:22] Speaker 01:
It includes the capacitor structures.

[00:41:24] Speaker 01:
He refers to 999 and 2 and 00, which are the diagrams at

[00:41:34] Speaker 01:
a 6989, 6991, 6992.

[00:41:36] Speaker 01:
The 1999 is clearly a mixer.

[00:41:43] Speaker 01:
That's what his title is.

[00:41:46] Speaker 01:
If you go to 6992.1, that's the TX filter.

[00:41:52] Speaker 01:
And he goes on and talks about that document.

[00:41:55] Speaker 01:
So he's talking about capacitors in every device.

[00:41:58] Speaker 01:
And his testimony is substantial testimony.

[00:42:01] Speaker 01:
And that testimony supports the notion that the capacitors

[00:42:04] Speaker 01:
generate the baseband signal in the mixer.

[00:42:08] Speaker 01:
The TX filter capacitors serve two functions.

[00:42:12] Speaker 01:
One is for the TX jammer.

[00:42:14] Speaker 01:
But Dr. Prusnall said it also serves the function of generating a baseband signal.

[00:42:20] Speaker 03:
Donner, could you say a few things about validity?

[00:42:23] Speaker 03:
What is your best argument?

[00:42:25] Speaker 03:
These are broad claims.

[00:42:28] Speaker 01:
Our best argument on Weisskopf is that Dr. Weisskopf

[00:42:35] Speaker 01:
Dr. Razavi did not state, Weisskopf doesn't state whether the amount of energy transferred into the capacitor in the alternative embodiment is distinguished from noise.

[00:42:52] Speaker 01:
I don't think that Dr. Razavi's attempt to take something from the diagram, there wasn't any

[00:43:05] Speaker 01:
description in that document, and I would refer you to the 551 patent, page A467, column 63, lines 23 to 26, which states, the negligible amounts of energy transferred by the undersampling systems, which is what Weisskopf is disclosing, disclosed in section two may not be sufficient to distinguish received RF signals over noise,

[00:43:34] Speaker 01:
Razabi contradicted his testimony on two different occasions that he gave in his deposition.

[00:43:41] Speaker 01:
The jury did not have to accept his testimony on it, and I suggest there's a basic flaw in the Weisskopf evidence.

[00:43:52] Speaker 02:
Thank you, Mr. Donner.

[00:43:53] Speaker 02:
Mr. Teeter has a minute on rebuttal from across the field.

[00:44:10] Speaker 04:
Thank you, Your Honor.

[00:44:11] Speaker 04:
I'll just address real briefly the comments about Weisskopf and distinguishable from noise.

[00:44:17] Speaker 04:
The Weisskopf paper itself shows the baseband signal being generated in that voltage mode device.

[00:44:25] Speaker 04:
That's what it shows.

[00:44:27] Speaker 04:
There's nothing else that needs to be shown.

[00:44:29] Speaker 04:
There's no way for them to really argue, well, it's not distinguishable from noise.

[00:44:34] Speaker 04:
How can they say that when it's showing that the baseband

[00:44:37] Speaker 04:
is in fact created in that capacitor.

[00:44:39] Speaker 04:
That's what the Weisskopf paper is doing.

[00:44:42] Speaker 04:
The Weisskopf paper is down converting a high frequency signal to a low frequency signal using the energy in that capacitor.

[00:44:50] Speaker 04:
That's exactly what it's doing.

[00:44:51] Speaker 04:
And he says it's actually pretty efficient.

[00:44:54] Speaker 04:
We cite those passages in our briefs.

[00:44:56] Speaker 04:
This is just really an example of the inconsistency between their infringement and validity type arguments.

[00:45:03] Speaker 04:
So for validity here, Weisskopf flat out shows you

[00:45:06] Speaker 04:
the baseband being generated in that capacitor.

[00:45:09] Speaker 04:
They say that's not enough.

[00:45:11] Speaker 04:
For infringement, though, they say we don't have to test, we don't have to simulate, we don't have to do anything.

[00:45:15] Speaker 04:
All the documents say it's therefore a low-pass filter, but we can just say it's not, and that's good enough.

[00:45:22] Speaker 00:
Inconsistent.

[00:45:25] Speaker 00:
Claim 27 of the 518 patent does, I guess, have a form of discharge limitation, and therefore the argument that Weisskopf

[00:45:35] Speaker 00:
we can throw away the discharge method of Weisskopf doesn't apply to that claim.

[00:45:41] Speaker 00:
Is that right?

[00:45:43] Speaker 00:
Which claim was it?

[00:45:44] Speaker 00:
27 of the 518.

[00:45:56] Speaker 04:
Yeah, there is one claim.

[00:45:58] Speaker 00:
I think that's the one.

[00:46:00] Speaker 00:
There's one that relates to DeMau, and there's another one that has the discharge issue in it.

[00:46:04] Speaker 00:
That's right.

[00:46:04] Speaker 04:
There is one claim that has a discharge issue in it.

[00:46:07] Speaker 04:
I think that's the one.

[00:46:08] Speaker 04:
Claim 18342 is DeMau.

[00:46:09] Speaker 04:
And on DeMau, they had no response whatsoever.

[00:46:12] Speaker 04:
DeMau looks exactly like, I think it's figure 16H from the 342 pattern.

[00:46:17] Speaker 04:
It's dead on.

[00:46:18] Speaker 00:
They have no response.

[00:46:19] Speaker 00:
Claim 27 of the 518 is that.

[00:46:23] Speaker 00:
Is your answer to that the answer that you initially started with on your direct, that

[00:46:30] Speaker 00:
there's an alternative embodiment in effect in Weisskopf.

[00:46:34] Speaker 04:
That's right.

[00:46:35] Speaker 04:
Weisskopf says you can go ahead and use lower impedance at the end and how does that work?

[00:46:39] Speaker 04:
He shows you that.

[00:46:40] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:46:41] Speaker 00:
Thank you, Mr. Peter.

[00:46:42] Speaker 02:
The case will be taken under revised.