Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC D/B/A 

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v. 

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES USA 

INC. ET AL.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-533-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-534-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-535-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-536-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-537-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-538-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-539-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-540-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-541-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-542-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-543-ADA

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-CV-544-ADA

JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION STATEMENT

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Pursuant to the scheduling orders in these cases, the Parties jointly submit this claim 

construction statement. 

A. -533, -535, -540, and -543 Cases

-533 Case, United States Patent No. 6,882,627 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“performing a SRG (shared 

risk group) topology 

transformation of the network 

topology into a virtual 

topology that discourages the 

use of network resources” 

(claims 1, 29, 30)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “performing a transformation 

of links and/or nodes of a 

SRG (shared risk group) of 

the network into a virtual 

topology that discourages the 

use of network resources”

“second code means adapted 

to, for at least one shared risk 

group, determine if any of the 

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6 

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 1 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 2

-533 Case, United States Patent No. 6,882,627 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

at least one shared risk group 

includes any of the first 

sequence of network 

resources” / “means adapted 

to, for at least one shared risk 

group, determine if any of the 

at least one shared risk group 

includes any of the first 

sequence of network 

resources” (claims 29, 30)

[Proposed by Both]

Function: determine if any of 

the at least one shared risk 

group includes any of the first 

sequence of network 

resources

Structure: processing 

platform-readable medium, 

and equivalents thereof 

(claim 29) / a network 

management platform, and 

equivalents thereof (claim 30)

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 2:13-54, 3:54-4:15, 4:45-

5:33, 6:23-37, 6:52-7:52, 

9:18-23, 12:46-50 Figs. 3A, 

3B, 6B, and equivalents 

thereof

Function: determine if any of 

the at least one shared risk 

group includes any of the first 

sequence of network 

resources

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclose sufficient 

corresponding structure

“third code means for 

performing a SRG (shared 

risk group) topology 

transformation of the network 

topology into a virtual 

topology which discourages 

the use of network resources” 

/ “means for performing a 

SRG (shared risk group) 

topology transformation of 

the network topology into a 

virtual topology which 

discourages the use of 

network resources” (claims 

29, 30)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: performing a SRG 

(shared risk group) topology 

transformation of the network 

topology into a virtual 

topology which discourages 

the use of network resources

Structure: processing 

platform-readable medium, 

and equivalents thereof 

(claim 29) / a network 

management platform, and 

equivalents thereof (claim 30)

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: performing a SRG 

(shard risk group) topology 

transformation of the network 

topology into a virtual 

topology which discourages 

the use of network resources

Structure: A network 

management platform 

comprising algorithms for 

link and node transformations 

such as those described in 

Figures 3C, 3D, 4A, and 4B, 

and the corresponding 

embodiments disclosed in 

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 2 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 3

-533 Case, United States Patent No. 6,882,627 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 2:31-3:18, 6:49-7:52, 

7:63-8:28, 8:30-9:35, Figs. 2, 

3A-3D, 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B, 6A6E, and equivalents thereof

6:49-7:52, and equivalents 

thereof.

-535 Case, United States Patent No. 7,508,755 (Not Contested) 1

Claim Term/Phrase Uncontested Construction

“means for receiving the switch over message” 

(Claims 8, 25)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶6

Function: receiving the switch over message

Structure: merging network device, and 

equivalents thereof

“[means for] receiving a switch over message 

along the alternative path in the forward 

direction” (Claim 23)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶6

Function: receiving a switch over message 

along the alternative path in the forward 

direction

Structure: merging network device, and 

equivalents thereof

Algorithm (if required): see e.g., 2:7-32, 2:43-

60, 3:13-36, Figs. 1, 2, 3

1 WSOU identifies two means-plus-function terms as terms with constructions that are not 

contested. While Defendants chose not to brief these two terms given the limits imposed by the 

Court and OGP 3.2, Defendants contend that WSOU’s identification of structure is incorrect. 

See Case No. 6:20-cv-535, Dkt. No. 46 at 28 n. 20.

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 3 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 4

-535 Case, United States Patent No. 7,508,755 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“switch over message” 

(claims 1, 5, 8, 10, 13, 16, 18, 

20, 23, 25)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “a message which instructs a 

device to perform a switch 

over to the alternate path and 

which is not a message that 

indicates a fault has occurred 

in the network”

“originating network device” 

(claims 1, 3, 20)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “a network device of a 

primary LSP which is not 

asource network device of the 

same primary LSP”

“means for re-routing 

traffic traveling along the 

bi-directional LSP in the 

backwards direction to the 

alternate path in the 

backwards direction based 

on the switch over 

message” (claim 8)

/“means for re-routing traffic 

traveling along a bidirectional LSP in a 

backwards direction to an 

alternate path in the 

backwards direction based 

on the switch over message” 

(claim23) /“means for rerouting traffic traveling 

along the bi-directional LSP 

in a backwards direction to 

the same alternate path in 

the backwards direction 

based on the switch over 

message” (claim 25)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: re-routing traffic 

traveling along the bidirectional LSP in the 

backwards direction to the 

alternate path in the 

backwards direction based on 

the switch over 

message(Claim 8)

re-routing traffic traveling 

along a bi-directional LSP in 

a backwards direction to an 

alternate path in the 

backwards direction based on 

the switch over message 

(Claim 23)

re-routing traffic traveling 

along the bi-directional LSP 

in a backwards direction to 

the same alternate path in the 

backwards direction based on 

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: re-routing traffic 

traveling along the bidirectional LSP in the 

backwards direction to the 

alternate path in the 

backwards direction based on 

the switch over message 

(Claim 8)

Function: re-routing traffic 

traveling along a bidirectional LSP in a 

backwards direction to an 

alternate path in the 

backwards direction based on 

the switch over message 

Claim 23)

Function: re-routing traffic 

traveling along the bidirectional LSP in a 

backwards direction to the 

same alternate path in the 

backwards direction based on 

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 4 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 5

-535 Case, United States Patent No. 7,508,755 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

the switch over

message(Claim 25)

Structure: merging network 

device, and equivalents 

thereof

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 2:7-32, 2:43-60, 3:13-36, 

Figs. 1, 2, 3

the switch over message 

(Claim 25)

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclose sufficient 

corresponding structure.

“means for transmitting a 

switch over message along 

the alternate path in the 

forward direction to a 

merging network device 

responsive for re- routing 

traffic traveling along the 

bi- directional LSP in a 

backward direction to the 

alternate path in the 

backward direction” 

(claim 20)

“means for transmitting a 

switch over message, along 

the alternate path in the 

forward direction, for rerouting traffic traveling along 

the bi- directional LSP in a 

backward direction” (claim 

25)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: transmitting a 

switch over message along 

the alternate path in the 

forward direction to a 

merging network device 

responsive for re-routing 

traffic traveling along the bidirectional LSP in a 

backward direction to the 

alternate path in the backward 

direction (Claim 20)

transmitting a switch over 

message, along the alternate 

path in the forward direction, 

for re-routing traffic traveling 

along the bi-directional LSP 

in a backward direction” 

(Claim 25)

Structure: originating 

network device, and 

equivalents thereof

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function (Claim 20): 

transmitting a switch over 

message along the alternate 

path in the forward direction 

to a merging network device 

responsible for re-routing 

traffic traveling along the bidirectional LSP in a 

backward direction to the 

alternate path in the backward 

direction

Function (Claim 25): 

transmitting a switch over 

message, along the alternate 

path in the forward direction, 

for re-routing traffic traveling 

along the bi-directional LSP 

in a backwards direction

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclose sufficient 

corresponding structure.

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 5 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 6

-535 Case, United States Patent No. 7,508,755 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 1:51-56, 2:7-32, 2:43-60, 

3:9-36, Figs. 1, 2, 3

“means for re-routing traffic 

traveling along a bidirectional LSP in a forward 

direction to an alternate path 

in the forward direction” 

(claims 20, 25)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: re-routing traffic 

traveling along a bidirectional LSP in a forward 

direction to an alternate path 

in the forward direction

Structure: originating 

network device, and 

equivalents thereof

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 1:51-56, 2:7-32, 2:43-60, 

Figs. 1, 2, 3

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: re-routing traffic 

traveling along a bidirectional LSP in a forward 

direction to an alternate path 

in the forward direction

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclose sufficient 

corresponding structure.

“means for means for [sic] 

receiving traffic traveling 

along a bi-directional LSP in 

a forward direction to an 

alternate path in the forward 

direction” (claims 23)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: receiving traffic 

traveling along a bidirectional LSP in a forward 

direction to an alternate path 

in the forward direction

Structure: merging network 

device, and equivalents 

thereof

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 2:7-32, 2:43-60, 3:13-36, 

Figs. 1, 2, 3

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: re-routing traffic 

traveling along a bidirectional LSP in a forward 

direction to an alternate path 

in the forward direction

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclose sufficient 

corresponding structure.

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 6 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 7

-540 Case, United States Patent No. 8,417,112 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“determining whether said 

collected BER values worsen 

over time” (claims 1, 11)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “determining whether said 

collected BER values worsen 

over time by comparing one 

or more of said recent ones of 

said collected BER values 

with said other collected BER 

values”

-543 Case, United States Patent No. 6,999,727 (Not Contested) 2

Claim Term/Phrase Uncontested Construction

“means for receiving blocks of data” (Claims 

4, 5)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶6 

Function: receiving blocks of data

Structure: telecommunication network 

management system, and equivalents thereof

“means for obtaining data through the Forward 

Error Correction function carried out on the 

blocks of received data” (Claims 4, 5)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶6 

Function: obtaining data through the Forward 

Error Correction function carried out on the 

blocks of received data

Structure: network node performing Forward 

Error Correction function, and equivalents 

thereof

2 WSOU identifies two means-plus-function terms as terms with constructions that are not 

contested. While Defendants chose not to brief these two terms given the limits imposed by the

Court and OGP 3.2, Defendants contend that WSOU’s identification of structure is incorrect. 

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 7 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 8

-543 Case, United States Patent No. 6999727 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“a number of corrected errors 

(BCE) in a non-SCS base 

reference time period”

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “the number of background 

corrected errors that have 

been corrected within a base 

reference time period which 

is different than the base 

reference time period used to 

detect uncorrected blocks”

“means for implementing a 

Performance Monitoring 

function based on data 

retrieved through a Forward 

Error Correction function” 

(claims 4,5)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6 

Function: implementing a 

Performance Monitoring 

function based on data 

retrieved through a Forward 

Error Correction function

Structure: telecommunication 

network management system, 

and equivalents thereof

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 1:63-2:21, 2:36-4:54, 

Fig. 1, and equivalents 

thereof

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: implementing a 

Performance Monitoring

function based on data 

retrieved through a Forward 

Error Correction function

Structure: Algorithm 

disclosed in Figure 1, and 

equivalents thereof

“means for classifying 

said blocks as either 

corrected or uncorrected 

through the Forward Error 

Correction Function” 

(claims 4, 5)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6 

Function: classifying said 

blocks either as corrected or 

uncorrected through the 

Forward Error Correction 

function

Structure: network node 

performing Forward Error 

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: classifying said 

blocks either as corrected or 

uncorrected through the 

Forward Error Correction 

function

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclosure sufficient 

corresponding structure

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 8 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 9

-543 Case, United States Patent No. 6999727 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

Correction function, and 

equivalents thereof

“means for calculating the 

Performance Monitoring 

function by implementing a 

correlation of the information 

regarding said corrected and 

uncorrected blocks” (claims 

4, 5)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6 

Function: calculating the 

Performance Monitoring

function by implementing a 

correlation of the information 

regarding said corrected and 

uncorrected blocks

Structure: telecommunication 

network management system, 

and equivalents thereof

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 1:63-2:21, 2:36-4:54, 

Fig. 1, and equivalents 

thereof

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: calculating the 

Performance Monitoring

Function by implementing a 

correlation of the information 

regarding said corrected and 

uncorrected blocks.

Structure: Algorithmic 

structure:

And equivalents thereof.

“implementing a Performance 

Monitoring function based on 

data retrieved through a 

Forward Error Correction 

function” (claims 6, 7)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: implementing a 

Performance Monitoring

function based on data 

retrieved through a Forward 

Error Correction function

Structure: Algorithm 

disclosed in Figure 1, and

equivalents thereof.

“classifying said blocks as 

corrected or uncorrected 

through the Forward Error 

Plain and ordinary meaning Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 9 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 10

-543 Case, United States Patent No. 6999727 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

Correction function” (claims 

6, 7)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Function: classifying said 

blocks as corrected or 

uncorrected through the 

Forward Error Correction 

function

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclosure sufficient 

corresponding structure

B. -534, -536, -538 and -542 Cases

-534 Case, United States Patent No. 7,095,713 (No Disputed Terms)

-536 Case, United States Patent No. 7,515,546 (No Disputed Terms)

-538 Case, United States Patent No. 7,872,973 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“a message to the upstream 

device to reduce a rate at 

which packets are sent to the 

queuing device to prevent the 

queue from filling” (claims 1, 

9)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning a message instructing the 

upstream device to reduce a 

rate at which packets are sent 

to the queuing device to 

prevent the queue from 

filing”

“the message” (claims 1, 9)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning Indefinite

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 10 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 11

-538 Case, United States Patent No. 7,872,973 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“a module for sending the 

message from the e stream 

device to an upstream 

network device to thereby 

control a rate at which the 

upstream device receives 

packets from the upstream 

network device” (claim 9)

Plain and ordinary meaning

except that the phrase “e 

stream” should be “upstream”

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6 

Function: sending the 

message from the e stream 

device to an upstream 

network device to thereby 

control a rate at which the 

upstream device receives 

packets from the upstream 

network device

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclose sufficient 

corresponding structure

“a module for, if the depth of 

the queue passes a 

predetermined threshold, 

sending a message to the 

upstream device to reduce a 

rate at which packets are sent 

to the queuing device to 

prevent the queue from 

filling, thereby preventing 

packet discarding and loss by 

the queuing device” (claim 9)

Plain and ordinary meaning Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6 

Function: sending a message 

to the upstream device to 

reduce a rate at which packets 

are sent to the queuing device 

to prevent the queue from 

filling, thereby preventing 

packet discarding and loss by 

the queuing device

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclose sufficient 

corresponding structure

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 11 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 12

-538 Case, United States Patent No. 7,872,973 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“a module for sending a 

message reporting the depth 

of the queue to the upstream 

device to thereby enable the 

upstream device to determine 

whether to reduce or increase 

the rate at which the upstream 

device sends packets to the 

queuing device” (claim 9)

Plain and ordinary meaning Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6 

Function: sending a message 

reporting the depth of the 

queue to the upstream device 

to thereby enable the 

upstream device to determine 

whether to reduce or increase 

the rate at which the upstream 

device sends packets to the 

queuing device

Structure: Indefinite for 

failure to disclose sufficient 

corresponding structure

-542 Case, United States Patent No. 8,249,446 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“output indicator” (claims 1, 

15)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “indicator indicating an 

optical output being 

transmitted ”

“output [indicator] threshold” 

(claims 1, 15)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “time length or a percentage 

of a total time window 

duration”

“[A method of /Apparatus 

for] regulating rogue behavior 

in an [optical network 

component comprising an 

optical transmitter/optical 

Plain and ordinary meaning “[A method of/Apparatus for] 

regulating rogue behavior by 

a subscriber-based [optical 

network component 

comprising an optical 

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 12 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 13

-538 Case, United States Patent No. 7,872,973 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

transmission device]” (claims 

1 and 15)

[Proposed by Defendant]

transmitter/optical 

transmission device]”

C. -537 and -539 Cases

-537 Case, United States Patent No. 7,860,512 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“capacity” (claims 1-18, 21-

24, 27)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning load

-539 Case, United States Patent No. 8,200,224 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“selecting a first candidate 

base station using said 

evaluation of said signal 

quality from said first 

measurement report” (claim 

1)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning selecting a single candidate 

base station using said 

evaluation of said signal 

quality from said first 

measurement report”

“executable program means 

for causing a base station to 

perform the method when the 

program is run on the base 

station” (claim 15)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning

and does not invoke 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶6. 

If the court finds the term 

invokes § 112, ¶6, however, 

then:

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6.

Function: causing a base 

station to perform the 

method when the program 

is run on the base station.

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 13 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 14

-539 Case, United States Patent No. 8,200,224 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

Function: causing a base 

station to perform the method 

of claim 1.

Structure: executable 

program code configured 

when executed to cause the 

base station to perform the 

method of claim 1; the 

example flowchart shown 

in Fig. 1 and its 

accompanying written 

description; example 

signaling described with 

reference to Figs. 2−4; the 

example selecting process 

described with reference to 

Fig. 5; the base station 

described with reference 

to Fig. 6; and equivalents 

of any of the foregoing

Structure: The flow chart of 

Figure 1, and its 

accompanying written 

description, and 

equivalents thereof.

D. -541 and -544 case

-541 Case, United States Patent No. 9,084,199 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“associated with a quality of 

the received CQI” / 

“associated with a quality of 

the received channel quality 

indicator (CQI)” (claims 1, 9, 

15)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “associated with a quality of 

received CQI channel”

“dynamically adjust a CQI 

channel configuration based 

Plain and ordinary meaning “a closed-loop process 

which dynamically adjusts a 

CQI channel configuration 

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 14 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 15

-541 Case, United States Patent No. 9,084,199 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

on the comparison” (claims 1, 

9)

[Proposed by Defendant]

based upon the comparison of 

the short term or long term 

quality metrics”

“generated by filtering frame 

based quality metrics over a 

plurality of frames” (claim 

1) /

“generated by filtering frame 

based quality metrics over a 

period of more than one 

frame” (claim 9)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “created by processing frame

based quality metrics over a 

plurality of frames in order to 

reject those long-term soft 

decision quality metrics that 

are unwanted”

“means for generating soft 

decision quality metrics from 

a decoding process for a 

received channel quality 

indicator (CQI)” (claim 9)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6.

Function: “generating soft 

decision quality metrics from 

a decoding process for a 

received channel quality 

indicator (CQI)”

Structure: CQI 

recovery/decoding unit; CQI 

metric generation unit;

and equivalents thereof 3

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6.

Function: “generating soft 

decision quality metrics from 

a decoding process for a 

received channel quality 

indicator (CQI)”

Structure: a base station that 

includes a CQI 

recovery/decoding unit, CQI 

metric generation unit using 

the algorithm(s) of 13:58-

3 The structure identified here is intended to encompass relevant descriptions appearing throughout 

the specification. In disclosures served on opposing counsel prior to the instant brief, WSOU had 

identified the following exemplary disclosure of the ’199 patent as relevant to the understanding 

of the corresponding structure for this term: Fig. 1 (rake receiver 28, CQI recovery/decoding unit 

30, and a CQI metric generation unit 32); Fig. 8; 4:57−5:13; 5:17−21; 6:13−49; 10:17−11:45; 

12:4−53; 13:58−15:38; 16:42−46; 16:47−49, etc.

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 15 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 16

-541 Case, United States Patent No. 9,084,199 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

15:38 and equivalents 

thereof.

“means for comparing at least 

one of the quality metrics to a 

quality setting” (claim 9)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6.

Function: “comparing at least 

one of quality metrics to a 

quality setting”

Structure: decision making 

unit 34, and equivalents 

thereof4

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6

Function: “comparing at least 

one of the quality metrics to a 

quality setting”

Structure: decision making 

unit 34, and algorithm for 

performing the function, and 

equivalents thereof

means for determining 

whether to dynamically adjust 

a CQI channel configuration 

based on the comparison” 

(claim 9)

[Proposed by Both]

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6.

Function: “determining 

whether to dynamically adjust 

a CQI channel configuration 

based on the comparison”

Structure: decision making 

unit 34, and equivalents 

thereof 5

Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, 

¶6.

Function: “determining 

whether to dynamically adjust 

a CQI channel configuration 

based on the comparison”

Structure: decision making 

unit 34, and equivalents 

thereof

4 The structure identified here is intended to encompass, though not necessarily require, relevant 

descriptions of example embodiments appearing throughout the specification. See, e.g., Fig. 1 

(decision making unit 34); Figs. 2−9; 5:17−21; 6:50−57; 7:6−11; 7:15−18; 7:25−45; 7:51−61; 

8:13−36; 8:64−67; 9:29−34; 9:64−66; 10:13−16; 11:46−56; 13:12−35; 15:20−38; 16:28−41; 

16:47−49; etc. 5 The structure identified here is intended to encompass, though not necessarily require, relevant 

descriptions of example embodiments appearing throughout the specification. See, e.g., Fig. 1 

(decision making unit 34); Figs. 2−13; 5:17−21; 6:55−7:5; 7:11−14; 7:45−50; 7:61−65; 8:26−33; 

9:34−44; 10:11−13; 11:57−60; 15:20−38; 16:47−49; etc.

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 16 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 17

-544 Case, United States Patent No. 8,429,480 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendant’s Construction

“hybrid automatic repeat 

request process” (claims 1, 2, 

5, 6, 7, 9, 11-19)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning “process implementing a 

stop and wait protocol and 

soft combining where in 

the uplink a UE adjusts the 

PUSCH transmission 

according to PDCCH 

and/or PHICH information 

as detected by the UE”

“the resources are persistently 

allocated for transmitting the 

new uplink packet 

transmission” (claim 2)

[Proposed by Defendant]

Plain and ordinary meaning Indefinite

DATED: April 5, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Ryan S. Loveless 

Mark D. Siegmund

State Bar No. 24117055

mark@waltfairpllc.com

Law Firm of Walt, Fair PLLC.

1508 North Valley Mills Drive 

Waco, Texas 76710

Telephone: (254) 772-6400

Facsimile: (254) 772-6432

James L. Etheridge

Texas State Bar No. 24059147

Ryan S. Loveless

Texas State Bar No. 24036997

Travis L. Richins

Texas State Bar No. 24061296

Brett A. Mangrum

Texas State Bar No. 24065671

Jeffrey Huang

ETHERIDGE LAW GROUP, PLLC

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 17 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 18

2600 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 120 / 324

Southlake, Texas 76092

Telephone: (817) 470-7249

Facsimile: (817) 887-5950

Jim@EtheridgeLaw.com

Ryan@EtheridgeLaw.com

Travis@EtheridgeLaw.com

Brett@EtheridgeLaw.com

JeffH@EtheridgeLaw.com

Counsel for Plaintiff WSOU Investments, LLC

DATED: April 5, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Jason W. Cook

Jason W. Cook

Texas Bar No. 24028537 

Shaun W. Hassett

Texas Bar No. 24074372

McGuireWoods LLP

2000 McKinney Avenue, Suite 1400

Dallas, TX 75201

Telephone: (214) 932-6400 

jcook@mcguirewoods.com

shassett@mcguirewoods.com

Tyler T. VanHoutan

Texas Bar No. 24033290 

McGuireWoods LLP 600 

Travis St., Suite 7500

Houston, TX 77002

Telephone: (713) 571-9191 

tvanhoutan@mcguirewoods.com

J. Mark Mann

Texas Bar No. 12926150

G. Blake Thompson Texas 

Bar No. 24042033

MANN | TINDEL | THOMPSON

300 West Main Street 

Henderson, Texas 75652

Telephone: (903) 657-8540 

mark@themannfirm.com

blake@themannfirm.com

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 18 of 19
Joint Claim Construction Statement Page | 19

Counsel for Defendants Huawei Technologies Co., 

Ltd., Huawei Technologies USA, Inc., Huawei 

Device Co. Ltd. (f/k/a Huawei Device (Dongguan) 

Co.), Huawei Device (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (f/k/a 

Huawei Device Co. Ltd.) and Huawei Device USA

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 54 Filed 04/05/21 Page 19 of 19