[00:00:00] Speaker 02:
HTC Corporation versus cellular communications equipment.

[00:00:04] Speaker 02:
Again, Mr. Moore.

[00:00:16] Speaker 00:
Good morning, your honor.

[00:00:17] Speaker 00:
If it please the court.

[00:00:19] Speaker 00:
We believe the board committed three distinct errors in this case.

[00:00:23] Speaker 00:
Again, the board has given us an implicit construction of the term message that we believe to be an error.

[00:00:29] Speaker 00:
They didn't describe, excuse me, the second error is we believe that that construction was misapplied with respect to Baker.

[00:00:39] Speaker 00:
And then the board's analysis.

[00:00:41] Speaker 02:
Did the parties request construction of the term message?

[00:00:45] Speaker 00:
No.

[00:00:45] Speaker 00:
In fact, this came up in the first instance during oral argument.

[00:00:49] Speaker 00:
So we didn't have, we didn't believe that it needed to be construed.

[00:00:53] Speaker 00:
It's a fairly common term.

[00:00:55] Speaker 00:
But in the oral argument, the patent owner raised the issue

[00:00:58] Speaker 00:
and provided no less than five different constructions during the argument.

[00:01:05] Speaker 00:
We didn't believe it needed to be construed, and today we don't, but the limitations that they imported into message in their analysis of the prior art illustrate that they adopted a construction that's completely inappropriate, specifically.

[00:01:24] Speaker 00:
The board relied on the patent owner's statement about what messages are in the concept of single frame messages versus multi frame messages.

[00:01:33] Speaker 00:
And that indicates the hard work what the argument here is.

[00:01:39] Speaker 00:
So the any construction of message that would exclude a single frame message is inappropriate.

[00:01:49] Speaker 00:
Um, I don't think that's what they did.

[00:01:51] Speaker 00:
No, they didn't.

[00:01:51] Speaker 03:
They just, they just said it is not the case that every frame is always a message.

[00:01:59] Speaker 03:
Absolutely.

[00:01:59] Speaker 03:
There can't be single frame messages.

[00:02:01] Speaker 03:
Absolutely.

[00:02:02] Speaker 03:
And, and all that, and as I remember, tell me if I'm wrong, that what they said about Baker is that Baker shows something happening at the beginning of a frame.

[00:02:12] Speaker 03:
Absolutely.

[00:02:12] Speaker 03:
But it doesn't either say or necessarily require under inherency.

[00:02:17] Speaker 03:
for that frame to be a message.

[00:02:19] Speaker 00:
Yes, and that's at the heart of the error that they're making here in claim construction, because it isn't relevant what happens at the beginning of the fourth frame of the 15-frame message.

[00:02:31] Speaker 00:
That has no bearing on the claims whatsoever.

[00:02:34] Speaker 00:
Now, the teaching of specification also indicates that a message can be a continuous transmission of data at appendix 31, column 3, lines 8 through 11.

[00:02:47] Speaker 00:
Messages are described as beginning at definite transmission intervals in a UMTS system, and that's at frame boundaries.

[00:02:58] Speaker 00:
And, I mean, all the parties agree that UMTS messages begin at frame boundaries.

[00:03:04] Speaker 00:
But nothing in the specification would support this notion of it having a definite beginning, a definite ending, and being... There's no ending requirement, right?

[00:03:15] Speaker 02:
It's just a beginning requirement.

[00:03:17] Speaker 00:
Yes, one of the definitions that was offered by the patent owner at the oral argument included in ending.

[00:03:24] Speaker 00:
We completely agree.

[00:03:26] Speaker 00:
That shouldn't be a concept here.

[00:03:27] Speaker 02:
I don't see that the board required an ending.

[00:03:30] Speaker 02:
It just talked about a beginning, what happens at the beginning of a message.

[00:03:33] Speaker 00:
Absolutely.

[00:03:34] Speaker 00:
And the beginning of the message, Your Honors, is the only time period that matters.

[00:03:38] Speaker 00:
And by their analysis of, and I'll quote, at appendix 11 and 12,

[00:03:46] Speaker 00:
The board specifically relied on this analysis when it said, specifically, the patent owner identifies evidence indicating that a message transmission may include multiple frames and time slots.

[00:03:57] Speaker 00:
Thus, according to the patent owner, the boundary of the frame or time slot immediately proceeding to the ACNAC in Baker is not necessarily the start of a message transmission.

[00:04:07] Speaker 00:
And they explicitly agreed with that analysis.

[00:04:10] Speaker 00:
And that is the heart of the error.

[00:04:12] Speaker 00:
It doesn't matter what happens interior

[00:04:15] Speaker 00:
to a multipart message.

[00:04:17] Speaker 00:
It merely matters what happens at the beginning of a message transmission.

[00:04:22] Speaker 00:
And Baker explicitly teaches that the determination is made at the beginning of every frame boundary, which necessitates that if messages begin at frame boundaries and all the parties agree they do, then Baker teaches the beginning of a message transmission.

[00:04:44] Speaker 00:
And this can be

[00:04:45] Speaker 00:
seen at appendix 909 and 910 with reference to figure 4.

[00:04:52] Speaker 00:
The discussion about UMTS messages and messages generally starting at frame boundaries can be found at appendix 716, lines 16 through 20, 720, lines 15 through 18, and the patent owner's initial response at page 25.

[00:05:09] Speaker 00:
So the real central issue here is I believe the board just

[00:05:14] Speaker 00:
got derailed by a persuasive argument made by Patent Owner that said, multi-frame messages, what happens in the interior frames?

[00:05:25] Speaker 00:
And since Baker doesn't really describe that, then it doesn't anticipate.

[00:05:30] Speaker 03:
And again, I think I've heard you say, and I may get this wrong, that Baker teaches

[00:05:42] Speaker 03:
I guess it's setting the, what's it, the headroom?

[00:05:45] Speaker 03:
Is that the- Making the determination.

[00:05:47] Speaker 03:
Making the determination at the beginning of every single frame?

[00:05:51] Speaker 00:
It makes a determination at every time slot.

[00:05:54] Speaker 00:
And because- Also not at every frame.

[00:05:56] Speaker 00:
Because every frame begins with a time slot and Baker explicitly states time slot or frame boundary in Baker, then it does make the determination of whether or not there will be an adjustment at every frame boundary.

[00:06:21] Speaker 00:
So moving on just briefly to the teachings of Reed, unless your honors have further questions.

[00:06:27] Speaker 00:
With respect to Reed, the analysis really turns on whether or not that Reed describes the use of a single headroom for the device, or it teaches multiple headrooms.

[00:06:40] Speaker 00:
Now, the patent owner argued that this is a teaching away once again, and we believe that the board kind of latched on and adopted that.

[00:06:48] Speaker 00:
Unfortunately,

[00:06:49] Speaker 00:
That's just not what Reed teaches.

[00:06:52] Speaker 00:
So Reed teaches that with two streams, you have an additional degree of freedom where one stream can be deprioritized with respect to the other.

[00:07:03] Speaker 00:
That deprioritization is always a comparison.

[00:07:07] Speaker 00:
One is more important than the other.

[00:07:09] Speaker 00:
And you can find this at appendix 906, column 14 through 21.

[00:07:17] Speaker 00:
So back to the key issue, is there a single headroom for the device and this deep prioritization is happening within that headroom?

[00:07:24] Speaker 00:
And we believe that that's exactly what Reid is teaching.

[00:07:27] Speaker 00:
If we look at the same appendix, column 59 through 65, it says after the base station obtains the mobile station available transmit power, the base station determines the data rate for the mobile station based on the headroom.

[00:07:44] Speaker 00:
Now, I have a couple of ellipses in there that's

[00:07:47] Speaker 00:
taken pieces of that quote, but it is within context.

[00:07:53] Speaker 00:
And the mobile station is the headroom, singular, is determined by the base station based on the mobile station's headroom.

[00:08:06] Speaker 00:
Again, at same column, lines six through eight, the mobile station is capable of modifying its headroom.

[00:08:13] Speaker 00:
We think that the only reasonable reading of this

[00:08:16] Speaker 00:
is the mobile station has a headroom.

[00:08:19] Speaker 00:
When it's going to be transmitting multiple data streams, it can de-prioritize one data stream in favor of another within that headroom.

[00:08:29] Speaker 00:
The headroom can be assigned from the base station, as described, or the mobile station can modify its headroom.

[00:08:37] Speaker 00:
But again, both of these instances, headroom is in the singular, not in the plural.

[00:08:42] Speaker 00:
A lot of the patent owners teaching away argument is that Reed doesn't disclose

[00:08:47] Speaker 00:
The max power associated with two codes is often less than one, and you can find that at appendix 498 and 99.

[00:08:56] Speaker 00:
This really isn't relevant to the claims.

[00:08:59] Speaker 00:
There's no express, excuse me, there's an express definition of headroom at column 2, 19 through 23, and it makes no mention of reaching max power when two codes are used.

[00:09:12] Speaker 00:
The claims make no mention of reaching max power for the two codes.

[00:09:16] Speaker 00:
And the specification specifically states that this phenomenon is not universal.

[00:09:21] Speaker 00:
And you can find that at column five, one through five.

[00:09:24] Speaker 00:
So the assertion that Reed teaches away from a single headroom for the device is just inaccurate.

[00:09:34] Speaker 00:
In fact, it's the only reasonable interpretation of Reed is that the mobile station has a headroom that can be set by either the base station or the mobile.

[00:09:43] Speaker 00:
And within that headroom,

[00:09:46] Speaker 00:
the mobile station is going to prioritize or deprioritize individual streams relative to each other when a high-priority data stream is to be sent.

[00:09:59] Speaker 00:
Do you have any further questions?

[00:10:02] Speaker 02:
Do you want to save the rest of your time?

[00:10:04] Speaker 02:
Thank you.

[00:10:06] Speaker 02:
Mr. Bumgartner?

[00:10:41] Speaker 01:
I'm pleased to report Barry Bumgardner here for CCE.

[00:10:45] Speaker 01:
Let me just pick off.

[00:10:48] Speaker 02:
So when Baker discloses adjusting the power at the beginning of a frame, and the beginning of a frame is a message, would that infringe this patent?

[00:11:04] Speaker 01:
No, it would not, Your Honor.

[00:11:05] Speaker 02:
Why not?

[00:11:07] Speaker 01:
So what Baker discloses, and I'll get to your question,

[00:11:11] Speaker 01:
you can make power adjustments at the time slot boundary before an ACNAC message.

[00:11:17] Speaker 01:
And understanding that a frame boundary is just every 15 time slots, there's an artificial demarcation that that's the beginning of a frame as well.

[00:11:27] Speaker 01:
So just like minutes on a clock, every 60th minute is also the beginning of an hour, but it's also the top of the hour as well, but it's the beginning of a new minute.

[00:11:37] Speaker 01:
So with respect to your honor's question about the beginning of a frame,

[00:11:41] Speaker 01:
The beginning of a frame is not necessarily the beginning of a message.

[00:11:45] Speaker 02:
No, it's not necessarily.

[00:11:47] Speaker 02:
But my question is, when it is the beginning of a message, would it infringe?

[00:11:55] Speaker 01:
If there was a message that was at the beginning of a frame, yes, I think that would be within the scope of the claims.

[00:12:06] Speaker 01:
But having to look at the rest of the limitations of the claims,

[00:12:10] Speaker 01:
But the key here is at the beginning of a message.

[00:12:14] Speaker 01:
That's what is completely missing in Baker about any disclosure of the beginning of a message.

[00:12:19] Speaker 02:
The concept of... But everybody agrees that these time slots in Baker include, what is it, 10 milliseconds?

[00:12:28] Speaker 02:
And everybody agrees, and the patent itself says that messages can be 10 milliseconds long, right?

[00:12:35] Speaker 01:
That's correct, Your Honor.

[00:12:36] Speaker 02:
So why doesn't

[00:12:39] Speaker 02:
Baker disclosed making adjustments with respect to messages that are 10 milliseconds long.

[00:12:45] Speaker 01:
But Baker discloses that you can make these adjustments really at any time.

[00:12:49] Speaker 01:
It doesn't disclose.

[00:12:51] Speaker 01:
So it's like you can make this power adjustment at any time.

[00:12:56] Speaker 02:
But it discloses making the adjustment at the beginning of a 10 millisecond time slot, right?

[00:13:03] Speaker 01:
It discloses that you can make an adjustment at a time slot boundary, which every 15th time slot boundary is the beginning of a frame boundary as well.

[00:13:12] Speaker 02:
So why isn't that disclosing making an adjustment at the beginning of a message that corresponds to a 10 millisecond time slot?

[00:13:23] Speaker 01:
that frame there, that period when Baker's making an adjustment, there is no message involved in, I think, the best reading.

[00:13:32] Speaker 02:
What do you mean there's no message involved?

[00:13:33] Speaker 02:
Some messages are 10 milliseconds.

[00:13:35] Speaker 02:
So when you have a 10 millisecond time slot, that's a message, right?

[00:13:42] Speaker 01:
No, that's not correct, Your Honor.

[00:13:44] Speaker 01:
What I'm hearing you saying, Your Honor, is that every 10 millisecond frame is a message.

[00:13:51] Speaker 02:
No, I'm not saying that.

[00:13:53] Speaker 02:
I'm saying that when a message is 10 milliseconds long, Baker makes an adjustment at the beginning of the message.

[00:14:04] Speaker 02:
Correct?

[00:14:06] Speaker 01:
I would say you're incorrect, with all due respect, Your Honor.

[00:14:10] Speaker 02:
Well, why am I incorrect?

[00:14:11] Speaker 01:
Because there are no messages in Baker.

[00:14:16] Speaker 02:
You mean because it doesn't use the word message?

[00:14:19] Speaker 01:
Not because it doesn't use the word message, because there are no messages.

[00:14:23] Speaker 01:
It's simply picking an arbitrary point in time to make a power adjustment.

[00:14:28] Speaker 01:
Sometimes it says it can be at the beginning of a frame or at any other time slot.

[00:14:32] Speaker 01:
So it doesn't have to be at the beginning of a frame.

[00:14:35] Speaker 01:
It could be the first or second or third time slot.

[00:14:37] Speaker 02:
No, but it talks about doing it at the beginning of a frame.

[00:14:40] Speaker 02:
And there are messages, maybe many of them, which are 10 millisecond messages.

[00:14:49] Speaker 02:
In those circumstances, it makes an adjustment at the beginning of a message, right?

[00:14:58] Speaker 01:
And that's where it doesn't... Baker does say, Ron, I'm trying to address this, Baker does say that you can make adjustments at any time, including at the beginning of a frame.

[00:15:10] Speaker 01:
I agree with that.

[00:15:11] Speaker 01:
But what Baker does not disclose or teach to anyone is why you would make that adjustment.

[00:15:18] Speaker 01:
And so

[00:15:19] Speaker 02:
If a message... What does the claim have to do with why you're doing it?

[00:15:24] Speaker 02:
It has to do with doing it.

[00:15:27] Speaker 01:
At the beginning of a message transmission.

[00:15:30] Speaker 02:
So when there's a beginning of a message transmission in Baker, there's an adjustment made at the beginning of the message.

[00:15:36] Speaker 02:
And I understood you to say earlier that that would be an infringement.

[00:15:41] Speaker 01:
If there was a message to be transmitted in Baker, but that's where it's like,

[00:15:46] Speaker 01:
It's doing it when a message is to be transmitted.

[00:15:50] Speaker 01:
That's the key in what we think is missing in Baker.

[00:15:53] Speaker 01:
At Baker, we say, yes, it says it can do it really at any point in time.

[00:15:59] Speaker 01:
It can do it at frame boundaries or any of the 14 time slot boundaries after that frame boundary until the next frame boundary.

[00:16:06] Speaker 01:
It can do it at any time before there's an act and act transmission.

[00:16:11] Speaker 01:
So what we say is,

[00:16:12] Speaker 02:
But that just picking the arbitrary point in time doesn't disclose this claim limitation where it says... But why does it have to be searching, why does it have to say it's doing it because that's the beginning of the message when in fact it is doing it at the beginning of the message?

[00:16:29] Speaker 01:
And that's, and Your Honor, I'm really not trying to be difficult, but it's, we feel it's very important to our case that

[00:16:38] Speaker 01:
It's Baker says you can do it at any time and so to the extent that a message is being transmitted at a particular time and then you do this, you set a power headroom, then okay you're getting closer to the claim but this is an anticipation and the claim discloses you have to make an adjustment at the beginning of a message.

[00:17:00] Speaker 01:
And in Baker there's no discussion about transmitting messages.

[00:17:04] Speaker 01:
And we said just picking an arbitrary point in time doesn't get you to the particular point of time disclosed in the patent where you make this adjustment at the beginning of a message transmission.

[00:17:15] Speaker 01:
There has to be a message to be being transmitted, not just some arbitrary point in time.

[00:17:21] Speaker 01:
And that's what we feel the key element missing in Baker is.

[00:17:24] Speaker 01:
It just says you can do it whenever before this act and act that they never allege to be a message.

[00:17:30] Speaker 01:
You just pick a time and you can do it.

[00:17:32] Speaker 01:
That's very different in our view

[00:17:34] Speaker 01:
of saying, when you have a message to transmit, and the pat explains why it's important to do it at the beginning of the message, but when you have a message to transmit, that's when you do it, not just whenever.

[00:17:54] Speaker 01:
Go ahead.

[00:17:58] Speaker 01:
It's a somewhat nuanced point, Your Honor, but I think it's very important.

[00:18:03] Speaker 01:
With respect to opposing counsel, some of his points, the errors he believes, the message construction, it's certainly our view that the board never construed message.

[00:18:14] Speaker 01:
They didn't construe message.

[00:18:16] Speaker 01:
What they found was, and I believe it was read, and this is on A-12, thus according to patent owner, the boundary of a frame or time slot immediately preceding an act or an act is not necessarily the start of a message transmission.

[00:18:30] Speaker 01:
We agree with patent owner.

[00:18:32] Speaker 01:
So the board, I don't believe the board was construing message here.

[00:18:37] Speaker 01:
There's certainly no formal construction in it as late as the argument in front of the board.

[00:18:41] Speaker 01:
The board specifically asked petitioner, do you need a construction of message?

[00:18:46] Speaker 01:
They said no, we don't need that construction.

[00:18:49] Speaker 01:
And I don't believe there's any construction set out here.

[00:18:52] Speaker 01:
What they said was that the point in time they pointed to in Baker, in figure four of Baker,

[00:18:59] Speaker 01:
at that point in time is not necessarily the beginning of a message.

[00:19:03] Speaker 02:
Because, again, as we keep saying, as I... But it would infringe when it is the beginning of a message.

[00:19:12] Speaker 01:
And that's where we get into the claims.

[00:19:14] Speaker 01:
If you're making an adjustment at the beginning of a message transmission, then yes, that starts to fall within the claims.

[00:19:20] Speaker 01:
But Baker, again, in anticipation, it never discloses the start of a message transmission.

[00:19:29] Speaker 01:
That's what we believe is missing.

[00:19:31] Speaker 01:
It says you can make this adjustment at any time, but it doesn't recognize the importance and it doesn't disclose that you do this at this specific time when you have a message to transmit.

[00:19:44] Speaker 03:
And that's not inherent?

[00:19:46] Speaker 01:
No.

[00:19:47] Speaker 01:
No, Your Honor.

[00:19:48] Speaker 03:
So it's the difference between the anticipation world in which something needs to be expressly taught or be inherent and, on the other hand, a particular

[00:19:59] Speaker 03:
instance that might be covered by the prior art could infringe, but if the aspect of that instance is neither taught nor inherent, it's not anticipatory.

[00:20:14] Speaker 01:
That was certainly the board's rationale, Your Honor, to say maybe sometimes it is, maybe sometimes it isn't.

[00:20:22] Speaker 01:
But that's not inherency.

[00:20:24] Speaker 01:
Again, to get from A to C, for B to be inherent, you necessarily have to pass through B. And they say that's not what's shown here, that maybe sometimes the beginning of a frame is the beginning of a message.

[00:20:40] Speaker 01:
That's not maybe, that it is sometimes the beginning of a message.

[00:20:45] Speaker 01:
Sometimes it is.

[00:20:48] Speaker 01:
We've said that messages are

[00:20:51] Speaker 01:
they begin to be transmitted at the beginning of a frame.

[00:20:55] Speaker 01:
But not every frame is the beginning of a message.

[00:20:59] Speaker 01:
And we showed examples.

[00:21:01] Speaker 01:
I mean, a message can, messages aren't always transmitted.

[00:21:04] Speaker 01:
Messages may not, you know, you may go some period of time with no messages being transmitted and Baker performing its power adjustments anyways to transmit an act or an act.

[00:21:14] Speaker 01:
A message can be, the message is disclosed in the pack, can be eight frames long.

[00:21:18] Speaker 01:
So it's, we,

[00:21:20] Speaker 01:
use the example, 8 frames is 120 time slots.

[00:21:24] Speaker 01:
So only one out of 120 time slots will be the beginning of the message.

[00:21:29] Speaker 03:
The other... When there's no message being transmitted, and this is, I guess, more of a, kind of, how does this work question about Baker, what's the, what's being act or an act?

[00:21:39] Speaker 01:
It would have been a previously transmitted message, but that's not really, that's what you're, you're acknowledging the receipt of a downstream message.

[00:21:48] Speaker 01:
to say, tell the base station I received the message or I did not.

[00:21:54] Speaker 01:
So, but it's, it's this, it's to inherency that just any given time slot or any given frame boundary is not necessarily the beginning of the message and I think sort of the big picture view is that, you know, one of ordinary skill looking at Baker doesn't come away with any appreciation of why or how or the reasons that you want to make this

[00:22:18] Speaker 01:
power adjustment at the beginning of a message.

[00:22:21] Speaker 02:
To me, what Baker says is you can make... But the claims don't say what there's a purpose requirement.

[00:22:27] Speaker 01:
You're correct, Your Honor, and I'm not trying to read something into the claims.

[00:22:30] Speaker 01:
I'm just, again, the big picture is there's no teaching about why or anything about doing something at the beginning of a message.

[00:22:40] Speaker 01:
It's just, it's basically, you can do this at any time, and the board

[00:22:44] Speaker 01:
The board's analysis reflects that.

[00:22:46] Speaker 01:
They say it doesn't explicitly disclose, because there's nothing in there about messages, and then it doesn't inherently disclose.

[00:22:55] Speaker 01:
The board recognized that sometimes the beginning of a frame may line up with the beginning of a message, but not necessarily.

[00:23:03] Speaker 01:
It's not always, and that's not enough mere probabilities or possibilities.

[00:23:08] Speaker 01:
That doesn't get you to inherently.

[00:23:14] Speaker 01:
So with respect to Reed, and I'll move on to that, Reed I think it's, we just have different readings of the disclosure of Reed.

[00:23:25] Speaker 01:
I think that's a very factual, just dispute here as to what the teachings of Reed are.

[00:23:32] Speaker 01:
Patent owner and the board have one view.

[00:23:35] Speaker 01:
Petitioner has, appellant has another.

[00:23:39] Speaker 01:
And I'll note just that the board did find that

[00:23:43] Speaker 01:
petitioner's expert took different positions on this.

[00:23:47] Speaker 01:
That on one hand, in his first declaration, he said each of these data streams has different head rooms or, you know, can be adjusted independently.

[00:23:56] Speaker 01:
In a second declaration, he said, well, they're really managed together.

[00:24:01] Speaker 01:
So when we start looking at substantial evidence, their expert itself is offering different views on this key aspect of Baker.

[00:24:11] Speaker 01:
And then with respect to some of the portions cited by opposing counsel from Reed about a single headroom, the board specifically found that those discussions were a different embodiment, a different embodiment of the invention discussed in Reed.

[00:24:28] Speaker 01:
The embodiment where there was two data streams that was specifically called out as a different embodiment.

[00:24:34] Speaker 01:
So I think we're mixing apples and oranges there when we look at certain sections of Reed to say,

[00:24:39] Speaker 01:
It discusses a single headroom, single headroom.

[00:24:42] Speaker 01:
Again, the board specifically found in its decision that that was a different embodiment than the embodiment they cited to for the proposition that there are two data streams.

[00:24:56] Speaker 01:
I think this is a good time to stop, unless your honors have any additional questions.

[00:25:01] Speaker 02:
Okay, thank you, Mr. Bumgarner.

[00:25:03] Speaker 02:
Mr. Moore?

[00:25:16] Speaker 00:
Just a few points your honor.

[00:25:19] Speaker 00:
Something came up during the last argument about Baker and specifically the patent owner stated that Baker doesn't teach messages.

[00:25:28] Speaker 00:
Baker doesn't teach messages.

[00:25:30] Speaker 00:
Now this goes back again to the understanding of what a message is and the board's implicit construction message.

[00:25:39] Speaker 00:
What Baker teaches is this and this can be found at column three I believe from memory

[00:25:44] Speaker 00:
about line 30 through 40, what Baker teaches is that the control channel is transmitted at all times continuously.

[00:25:53] Speaker 00:
Now, control messages would be put into the appropriate time slots as the control channel is being transmitted.

[00:26:00] Speaker 00:
The data channel is only transmitted when there is data descent.

[00:26:04] Speaker 00:
And the reason that's important is it goes back to what is a message.

[00:26:08] Speaker 00:
The 174 teaches that a message can be a continuous transmission of data.

[00:26:15] Speaker 00:
Baker teaches a continuous transmission of data in its data channel.

[00:26:25] Speaker 00:
So I think that's important.

[00:26:27] Speaker 00:
Now if we go to this concept that was fairly determinative at the board of single message transmission of a single duration or multiple frame durations, with multiple frame durations there are obviously two embodiments, right?

[00:26:44] Speaker 00:
That frame is either the start of a message or it isn't.

[00:26:48] Speaker 00:
The board's analysis completely read out the embodiment of the instance where it is, just as your honor noted.

[00:26:56] Speaker 00:
There are instances, this isn't a probability, this is a certainty.

[00:27:00] Speaker 00:
All messages in UMTS begin at frame boundaries.

[00:27:04] Speaker 00:
Baker makes a determination, sometimes it'll adjust, sometimes it won't, at all frame boundaries.

[00:27:10] Speaker 00:
It's a certainty that Baker teaches

[00:27:13] Speaker 00:
adjusting at-message transmission timeframes.

[00:27:18] Speaker 00:
Now, with respect to the argument made in response to Reed, one of the things that I think is really compelling here is a statement that council made that it teaches two streams.

[00:27:33] Speaker 00:
Two streams, one headroom.

[00:27:37] Speaker 00:
This is all that we're saying, is that Baker explicitly teaches two data streams

[00:27:42] Speaker 00:
and the device has one headroom.

[00:27:44] Speaker 00:
Now, with the board's finding in Dr. Williams, I do need to address this because I believe this is a little out of context.

[00:27:51] Speaker 00:
What they found was that in Dr. Williams' initial discussion in his declaration, he talked about independently adjusting the headrooms on these different data streams relative to each other.

[00:28:09] Speaker 00:
And then he went on in his next declaration to refer to it as a coordinated effort.

[00:28:15] Speaker 00:
We don't believe that to be inconsistent at all.

[00:28:17] Speaker 00:
In fact, we believe that exactly to be the teaching here.

[00:28:20] Speaker 00:
That the deprioritization of one data stream over the other that is taught in the specification is exactly what we're talking about.

[00:28:32] Speaker 00:
Yes, each one is going to be transmitted at a different power.

[00:28:35] Speaker 00:
And yes, one is going to be more important than the other.

[00:28:38] Speaker 00:
But there's an explicit teaching that the device has one headroom.

[00:28:43] Speaker 00:
And within the scope of that headroom is how these transmission powers are managed.

[00:28:53] Speaker 02:
Okay.

[00:28:53] Speaker 02:
Anything else?

[00:28:54] Speaker 00:
If the court has no further questions, I'll see you at the time.

[00:28:57] Speaker 02:
Okay.

[00:28:57] Speaker 02:
Thank you, Mr. Moore.

[00:28:58] Speaker 02:
I'll counsel the cases.