disclose each element of claim 8. The following claim chart demonstrates, in further detail, how
`
`each element is disclosed by this combination.
`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`
`
`eme o accor ing 0 c aim
`.
`
`further including the steps of:
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`C One OT ITIOTC
`C CI‘I'l’l1I'11I'1g 1
`elements indicate one or more
`
`3. 3.
`
`predetermined triggering events,
`
`?.,...,,..,,.,,..,;..,,.,
`
`
`
`.....................................................,.......................,
`
`K,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,
`
`riggering events at 3:24-26; 3:31-36:
`‘[T]he system is programmed to analyze the stored performance
`variables over a period of time and compute an evaluation code
`corresponding to an assessment as to how the vehicle is being
`driven. .
`. Evaluation codes may define a plurality ofselect driving
`patterns including, for example, erratic or otherwise hazardous
`driving. Other evaluation codes may correspond to other driving
`s\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\s\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\s\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \x\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
`‘patterns such as deviation from aplanned course oftrave .”
`Lemelson discloses correlating data to a triggering event if
`determination is positive at 3:39-44; 3:50-54; 3:63-4:2:
`“When an evaluation code is computed which indicates an erratic
`or otherwise hazardous driving pattern or condition, the system is
`programmed to warn [the] driver .
`.
`. The system may also be
`programmed to transmit an alert signal to a remote monitor station
`when an evaluation code is computed which corresponds to erratic
`or otherwise hazardous driving. .
`.
`. Also provided are a vehicle
`brake controller 27 and acceleration controller 29. . .[that] can be
`used to prevent the vehicle from being driven at an unsafe speed or
`may be used to disable the vehicle from being driven. The brake and
`acceleration controllers may be activated by the programming of the
`system 10 itself when a hazardous driving pattern is detected. . .”
`J!
`
`\\\s\\\\\\s\\\s\\\\\\s\\\s\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\s\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\‘
`
`where if the determination is positive,
`correlating the one or more data elements to
`one or more types of triggering events
`stored in a third memory;
`
`and, storing or transmitting a signal
`corresponding to the determined triggering
`event to a receiving system.
`
`1.................................................................................................................................................................,.
`
`,.............................
`
`“transmit an alert
`Determining whether to “warn the driver,
`signal to a remote monitor station, ” “prevent the vehicleflom being
`driven at an unsafe speed” or "disable the vehiclefrom being
`driven ” based on “hazardous driving” inherently discloses
`correlating the data elements to multiple types ofpredetermined
`trigger events (e. g. hazardous driving events merely requiring a
`warning versus hazardous driving events requiring disabling the
`vehicle). Aperson ofordinary skill would have understood this
`disclosure to teach that these types ofpredetermined trigger events
`are stored in a third memory or region ofmemory separate from
`group data values stored in thefirst memory or region ofmemory
`and preset drivingpatterns stored in the second memory or region
`."..".,..."..".,..."..".,...".,...\‘..".,...\‘..".,...\‘..".\‘..".,...\‘..".....\‘..\‘.....\‘.....".."....."..".....\‘..".\‘..".,..."..".,..."..".,...".,..."..".,..."..".,..."..".,‘..".c...‘““““.“““““.““.
`ofmemory so that they can be compared with each other.
`Lemelson discloses transmitting a signal corresponding to the
`determined triggering event to a receiving system at 3:51-57:
`“The system may also be programmed to transmit an alert signal to
`a remote monitor station when an evaluation code is computed
`
`,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,4..,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,,.,...,,..,/
`
`-105-
`
`Page 002815
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`(i)
`
`Dependent Claim 10
`
`169. An overview of the reasons for rejection of claim 10 in light of Lemelson
`
`in view of Dorweiler is set forth below. A more detailed explanation is provided in the claim
`
`chart included at the end of this section.
`
`170. Dependent claim 10 recites that “The method according to claim 6, further
`
`comprising the steps of‘ using safety or other actuarial standard values as the preset values;
`
`and, generating an adjusted insurance cost as the output data value.” As discussed above, supra
`
`at Section III.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the art at the time would have been motivated to
`
`combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together disclose the method according to claim 6.
`
`171.
`
`Lemelson teaches a system that is programmed to “compute an evaluation
`
`code corresponding to an assessment as to how the vehicle is being driven,” and that the
`
`“evaluation codes may define a plurality of select driving patterns,” including “erratic or
`
`otherwise hazardous driving,” and “deviation from a planned course of travel.” Ex. E at Col.
`
`3:24-26; Col. 3:31-36. Dorweiler proposes that certain hazard information, including safety
`
`values monitored using “devices” like the system devices in Lemelson, would be useful for
`
`generating a cost of insurance for the vehicle. See Ex. F at 321. For example, Dorweiler
`
`discloses that, in the case of vehicle insurance, driver “habits” and “speed” may be 1lS6fi1l for
`
`determining insurance rates.
`
`Id. at 337. Dorweiler further teaches that the insurance cost
`
`determined is for the selected time period monitored by disclosing that using certain hazard
`
`media in premium “rate making” requires making “a final adjustment which would be
`
`determined retrospectively.” Id. at 339.
`
`172. As discussed above, supra at Section III.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time would have been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together
`
`-106-
`
`Page 002816
`
`

`
`disclose each element of claim 10. The following claim chart demonstrates, in further detail,
`
`how each element is disclosed by this combination.
`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`Claim Element
`
`l0. The method according to claim 6, further
`comprising the steps of:
`
`.............................!:§.'I¥.‘?.!§92.EX!933.929.9EYE?ifif......................,...........i
`,,,,
`_ As discussed in the claim chart above, the combination of
`Lemelson and Dorweiler discloses the method as defined in
`' claim 6.
`
`
`
`using safet
`
`as the preset values at 3:24-
`
`
`
`i i
`
`i i
`
`i i i i i i i
`
`.
`
`:
`;
`3
`
`i
`f
`%
`
`f
`i
`
`i i i i i
`
`Lemelson disclos
`26; 3:31-36:
`“[T]he system is programmed to analyze the stored
`performance variables over a period of time and compute an
`evaluation code corresponding to an assessment as to how the
`vehicle 1S being driven. .
`. Evaluation codes may define a
`plurality of select driving patterns including, for example,
`erratic or otherwise hazardous driving. Other evaluation
`77
`codes may correspond to other driving patterns such as
`E5
`
`
`4.12! ' zz..:.’r.
`g
`
`, g
`g
`5
`er p
`pose
`,
`output data value.
`certain safety values monitored using devices like the
`devices in Lemelson (e.g., driver habits, speed), would be
`useful for generating an adjusted insurance cost at 337.
`
`.,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,z,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,..,,.,,,.,,.4,,.,,,.,,..,,.
`
`
`
`Dorweiler discloses that hazard media may be useful for
`determining insurance premiums at 321:
`“Obviously, the premiums collected are to be proportional to
`the hazard which is measured by the losses. The medium
`selected for measuring the exposure is the most important
`factor in making the premium collections in accordance with
`the probable loss incidence.”
`
`Dorweiler discloses that, in the case of vehicle insurance, a
`number of factors may be used as the hazard media (e.g.,
`driver habits, speed) at 337:
`“Some of the critical conditions that contribute to the hazard
`covered by Automobile Public Liability Insurance or that cause
`deviations in this hazard are: l. The car—age, condition, etc.;
`2. HighWays—road beds, curves, visibility, etc.; 3. Traffic
`density; 4. Laws, regulations, and their enforcement; 5.
`Efficiency of diiver—age, experience, habits, impairments,
`etc.; 6. Mileage; 7. Speed; 8. Weather conditions; 9. Seasonal
`use of car; and 10. Day and/or night use of car.”
`
`Dorweiler discloses that using certain hazard media
`requires making an adjustment to the insurance cost
`retrospectively at 339:
`“The introduction of a mileage, car-hour, or fuel-consumption
`exposure into rate making would require the prior
`development of experience on these media. The car—year is the
`only one of the enumerated media which measures the
`exposure prospectively, the others requ
`
`.
`.
`d
`
`-107-
`
`Page 002817
`
`; using safety or other actuarial standard values as
`= the preset values;
`‘
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`(j)
`
`Dependent Claim 11
`
`173. An overview of the reasons for rejection of claim 11 in light of Lemelson
`
`in view of Dorweiler is set forth below. A more detailed explanation is provided in the claim
`
`chart included at the end of this section.
`
`174. Dependent claim 11 recites that “The method according to claim 10,
`
`further comprising the steps of: using location and time as the one or more data elements which
`
`are compared to the safety or other actuarial standard values to generate the adjusted insurance
`
`cost.” As discussed above, supra at Section IlI.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the art at the time
`
`would have been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together disclose the
`
`method according to claim 10.
`
`175.
`
`Lemelson teaches “performance variables,” which include the vehicle’s
`
`“location,” that are continually stored in memory “along with an associated time and date code.”
`
`Ex. E at Col. 1:17-18; Col. 3:21. Lemelson fi1I‘1Zl1€I' discloses that the system is programmed to
`
`“analyze the stored performance variables” and “compute an evaluation code corresponding to
`
`an assessment as to how the vehicle is being driven,” and that the “evaluation codes may define a
`9
`
`plurality of select driving patterns,’
`
`including “erratic or otherwise hazardous driving,” and
`
`“deviation from a planned course of travel.” Id. at Col. 3:24-26; Col. 3:31-36.
`
`176. Dorweiler proposes that certain hazard information that can be monitored
`
`by devices, including data monitored by the system devices in Lemelson, would be useful for
`
`generating an adjusted insurance cost. See Ex. F at 321, 337. For example, Dorweiler discloses
`
`that, in the case of vehicle insurance, “day and/or night use of car” may be useful for determining
`
`insurance rates.
`
`Id. at 337. Dorweiler further teaches that the insurance cost determined is for
`
`the selected time period monitored by disclosing that using certain hazard media in premium
`
`“rate making” requires making “a final adjustment which would be determined retrospectively.”
`
`-108-
`
`Page 002818
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`Id. at 339. Dorweiler and Lemelson’s focus on similar data elements would have motivated
`
`someone of skill in the art to extend Lemelson’s use of vehicle data to adjust insurance costs.
`
`177. As discussed above, supra at Section llI.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time would have been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together
`
`disclose each element of claim ll. The following claim chart demonstrates, in further detail,
`
`how each element is disclosed by this combination.
`
`
`K As discussed in the claim chart above, theiiicombination of
`ll. The method according to claim l0,
`.
`Lemelson and Dorweiler discloses the method as defined in
`further comprising
`................................................................................................\ ...................................................................................................................................................,
`.
`K
`:
`i
`the steps of:
`using location and time as the one or more
`data elements which are compared to the
`safety or other actuarial standard values to
`generate the adjusted insurance cost.
`
`Lemelson discloses using location as a data element at 1:17-18:
`“Such performance variables include the vehicle’s speed, direction,
`and location
`
`Lemelson discloses storing the location of vehicle along with
`corresponding time at 3:21:
`“Performance variables are continually stored in memory as they are
`computed along with an associated time and date code.”
`
`i
`
`‘
`
`Lemelson discloses comparing location (performance variables)
`and time to safety values at 3:24-26; 3:31-36:
`“[T]he system is programmed to analyze the stored performance
`variables over a period of time and compute an evaluation code
`corresponding to an assessment as to how the vehicle is being
`driven. .
`.
`Evaluation codes may define a plurality of select driving patterns
`including, for example, erratic or otherwise hazardous driving.
`Other evaluation codes may correspond to other driving patterns
`such as deviation from a planned course of travel.”
`
`Dorweiler proposes that hazard information, including certain
`data parameters monitored by the system in Lemelson (e.g.,
`day/night use of car) may be useful for generating an adjusted
`insurance cost at 337.
`
`Dorweiler discloses that hazard media may be useful for
`determining insurance premiums at 321:
`“Obviously, the premiums collected are to be proportional to the
`hazard which is measured by the losses. The medium selected for
`measuring the exposure is the most important factor in making the
`premium collections in accordance with the probable loss
`incidence.”
`
`Dorweiler discloses that, in the case of vehicle insurance, a
`number of factors may be used as the hazard media (e.g.,
`day/night use of car) at 337:
`“Some of the critical conditions that contribute to the hazard
`
`Page 002819
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`\.
`
`covered by Automobile Public Liability Insurance or that cause
`deviations in this hazard are: l. The car—age, condition, etc.; 2.
`HighWays—road beds, curves, visibility, etc.; 3. Traffic density; 4.
`Laws, regulations, and their enforcement; 5. Efficiency of driVer—
`age, experience, habits, impairments, etc.; 6. Mileage; 7. Speed; 8.
`Weather conditions; 9. Seasonal use of car; and 10. Day and/or
`night use of car.”
`
`Dorweiler discloses that using certain hazard media requires
`making an adjustment to the insurance cost retrospectively at
`339:
`“The introduction of a mileage, car—hour, or fue1—consumption
`exposure into rate making would require the prior development of
`experience on these media. The car-year is the only one of the
`enumerated media which measures the exposure prospectively, the
`others require afinal adjustment which would be determined
`retrospectively.”
`
`‘s
`
`‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘“
`
`(k)
`
`Dependent Claim 12
`
`178.
`
`An overview of the reasons for rejection of claim 12 in light of Lemelson
`
`in view of Dorweiler is set forth below. A more detailed explanation is provided in the claim
`
`chart included at the end of this section.
`
`179. Dependent claim 12 recites that “The method according to claim 11
`
`wherein.‘
`
`the adjusted insurance cost can be for a prospective or retrospective basis.” As
`
`discussed above, supra at Section IlI.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the art at the time would have
`
`been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together disclose the method
`
`according to claim 1 1.
`
`180. Dorweiler discloses that the adjustment to the insurance cost may be made
`
`prospectively or retrospectively depending on the hazard media. For example, the “introduction
`
`of a mileage, car—hour, or fuel-consumption exposure into rate making” would require “a final
`
`adjustment which would be determined retrospectively,” while “car-year” would “measure[] the
`
`exposure prospectively.” Dorweiler and Lemelson’s focus on similar data elements would have
`
`-110-
`
`Page 002820
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`motivated someone of skill in the art to extend Lemelson’s use of vehicle data to adjust insurance
`
`costs.
`
`181. As discussed above, supra at Section III.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time would have been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together
`
`disclose each element of claim l2. The following claim chart demonstrates, in further detail,
`
`how each element is disclosed by this combination.
`»»»~»~m»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~m»»»~m»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~»»»»~»~m»»»»»~»~m»»»»»~»;m»»»»m»»»»»~»~m»»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~m»»»m»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~m»~»~m»»»»~»~m»»»»~»~m»»»»~»;
`
`___________________________.£2!=.%.i!1!_E!_9_!1!_e.!!_t___________________________
`12. The method according to claim 11
`wherein:
`
`3
`
`___________________________________!_a_¢_!!1<2_1§~_9a.in_fl9n:.9£R9r:r§!§r__________________________________
`As discussed in the claim chart above, the combination of
`Lemelson and Dorweiler discloses the method as defined in
`claim 11.
`
`‘
`
`
`
`the adjusted insurance cost can be for a
`prospective or
`retrospective basis.
`
`Dorweiler discloses that the adjustment to the insurance cost
`may be made prospectively or retrospectively depending on the
`hazard media at 339:
`
`“The introduction of a mileage, car-hour, or fuel-consumption
`exposure into rate making would require the prior development of
`experience on these media. The car—year is the only one of the
`enumerated media which measures the exposure prospectively, the
`others require a final adjustment which would be determined
`__....._\..__....._\..__....._\..__._\..__..._._\..__..._._\.._...._._......_\.._......_\.._....\._\.._.._\.._
`._\.._.....
`.__..._._...._._c.._...._._\.._...._._\.._.._\.._......_\.._......_\.._......_\....._\.._......_\.._......_\.._...:
`3 retros “ectivel‘y_.”
`
`(1)
`
`Dependent Claim 13
`
`182. An overview of the reasons for rejection of claim 13 in light of Lemelson
`
`in View of Dorweiler is set forth below. A more detailed explanation is provided in the claim
`
`chart included at the end of this section.
`
`183. Dependent claim 13 recites that “The method according to claim 6, further
`
`comprising the steps of: using safety or other actuarial standard values as the preset values;
`
`and, generating an adjusted underwriting cost as the output data value.” As discussed above,
`
`supra at Section III.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the art at the time would have been motivated
`
`to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together disclose the method according to claim 6.
`
`184.
`
`Lemelson teaches a system that is programmed to “compute an evaluation
`
`code corresponding to an assessment as to how the vehicle is being driven,” and that the
`
`-111-
`
`Page 002821
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`“evaluation codes may define a plurality of select driving patterns,” including “erratic or
`
`otherwise hazardous driving,” and “deviation from a planned course of travel.” Ex. E at Col.
`
`3:24-26; Col. 3:31-36. Dorweiler proposes that certain hazard information, including safety
`
`values monitored using “devices” like the system devices in Lemelson, would be useful for
`
`generating a cost of insurance for the vehicle. See Ex. F at 321. For example, Dorweiler
`
`discloses that driver “habits” and “speed” may be useful for determining insurance rates.
`
`Id. at
`
`337. Dorweiler further teaches that the insurance cost determined is for the selected time period
`
`monitored by disclosing that using certain hazard media in premium “rate making” requires
`
`making “a final adjustment which would be determined retrospectively.”
`
`Id. at 339. A person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that determining an insurance cost would
`
`entail determining an underwriting cost. Dorweiler and Lemelson’s focus on similar data
`
`elements would have motivated someone of skill in the art to extend Lemelson’s use of vehicle
`
`data to underwriting costs.
`
`185. As discussed above, supra at Section III.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time would have been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together
`
`disclose each element of claim 13. The following claim chart demonstrates, in further detail,
`
`how each element is disclosed by this combination.
`
`,
`
`
`
`,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
`,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
`,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
`13. The method according to claim 6, further
`As discussed in the claim chart above, the combination of
`comprising the steps of:
`Lemelson and Dorweiler discloses the method as defined in
`,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
`,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2
`Lemelson discloses using safety as the preset values at 3:24-
`using safety or other actuarial standard values as
`26; 3:31-36:
`the preset values;
`“[T]he system is programmed to analyze the stored
`performance variables over a period of time and compute an
`evaluation code corresponding to an assessment as to how the
`vehicle is being driven. .
`. Evaluation codes may define a
`plurality of select driving patterns including, for example,
`erratic or atherwise hazardous driving. Other evaluation
`codes may correspond to other driving patterns such as
`noggjrpm l{131a
`
`ed course oftra
`
`
`
`Page 002822
`
`

`
`
`
`ce
`
`
`Lemelson (e.g., driver habits, speed), would be useful for
`generating an adjusted insurance cost at 337.
`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`nan"..n.«,.«..n.«,.«.404,04".404,04".404,04".404,04".404,04".404,04".404,04"..n.«,.,n.n.,n.«..n.«,.«..n.«,.«..n.«,.,n.n.«,.«.404,04"..n.«,.,n404,04"..n.«,.«..n5z»n/
`
`Dorweiler discloses that hazard media may be useful for
`determining insurance premiums at 321:
`“Obviously, the premiums collected are to be proportional to
`the hazard which is measured by the losses. The medium
`selected for measuring the exposure is the most important
`factor in making the premium collections in accordance With
`the probable loss incidence.”
`
`Dorweiler discloses that, in the case of vehicle insurance, a
`number of factors may be used as the hazard media (e.g.,
`driver habits, speed) at 337:
`“Some of the critical conditions that contribute to the hazard
`
`covered by Automobile Public Liability Insurance or that
`cause deviations in this hazard are: l. The car—age, condition,
`etc.; 2. Highways—road beds, curves, visibility, etc.; 3. Traffic
`density; 4. Laws, regulations, and their enforcement; 5.
`Efficiency of d1iver—age, experience, habits, impairments,
`etc.; 6. Mileage; 7. Speed; 8. Weather conditions; 9. Seasonal
`use of car; and 10. Day and/or night use of car.”
`
`Dorweiler discloses that using certain hazard media
`requires making an adjustment to the insurance cost
`retrospectively at 339:
`“The introduction of a mileage, car-hour, or fuel-consumption
`exposure into rate making would require the prior
`development of experience on these media. The car-year is the
`only one of the enumerated media which measures the
`exposure prospectively, the others require afinal adjustment
`which would be determined retrospectively.”
`
`A person ofordinary skill in the art would have understood
`that determining an insurance cost would entail determining
`\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
`an underwriting cost.
`
`(m)
`
`Dependent Claim 14
`
`186. An overview of the reasons for rejection of claim 14 in light of Lemelson
`
`in view of Dorweiler is set forth below. A more detailed explanation is provided in the claim
`
`chart included at the end of this section.
`
`187. Dependent claim 14 recites that “The method according to claim 13,
`
`further comprising the steps of: using location and time as the one or more data elements which
`
`are compared to the safety or other actuarial standard values to generate the adjusted
`
`-113-
`
`Page 002823
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`underwriting cost.” As discussed above, supra at Section III.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`at the time would have been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together
`
`disclose the method according to claim 13.
`
`188.
`
`Lemelson teaches “performance variables,” which include the vehicle’s
`
`“location,” that are continually stored in memory “along with an associated time and date code.”
`
`EX. E at Col. 1:17-18; Col. 3:21. Lemelson further discloses a system that is programmed to
`
`“analyze the stored performance variables” and “compute an evaluation code corresponding to
`
`an assessment as to how the vehicle is being driven,” and that the “evaluation codes may define a
`9
`
`plurality of select driving patterns,’
`
`including “erratic or otherwise hazardous driving,” and
`
`“deviation from a planned course of travel.” Id. at Col. 3:24-26; Col. 3:31-36.
`
`189. Dorweiler proposes that certain hazard information,
`
`including safety
`
`values monitored using “devices” like the system devices in Lemelson, would be useful for
`
`generating an adjusted insurance cost. See Ex. F at 321; 337. For example, Dorweiler discloses
`
`that, in the case of vehicle insurance, “day and/or night use of car” may be useful for determining
`
`insurance rates.
`
`Id. at 337. Dorweiler further teaches that the insurance cost determined is for
`
`the selected time period monitored by disclosing that using certain hazard media in premium
`
`“rate making” requires making “a final adjustment which would be determined retrospectively.”
`
`Id. at 339. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that determining an
`
`insurance cost would entail determining an underwriting cost.
`
`190. As discussed above, supra at Section III.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time would have been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together
`
`disclose each element of claim 14. The following claim chart demonstrates, in further detail,
`
`how each element is disclosed by this combination.
`
`-114-
`
`Page 002824
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`14. The method according to claim 13, further
`comprising the steps of:
`
`Ir
`S
`
`using location and time as the one or more data
`elements Which are compared to the safety or
`other actuarial standard values to generate the
`adjusted underwriting cost.
`
`Lemelson and Dorweiler discloses the method as defined in
`. claim 13.
`
`Lemelson discloses
`18:
`
`sing location as a data element at 1:17-
`
`“Such performance variables include the vehicle’s speed,
`direction, and location.”
`
`"1
`
`,./,..,,..,,..,..,,
`
`Lemelson discloses storing the location of vehicle along
`with corresponding time at 3:21:
`“Performance variables are continually stored in memory as
`they are computed along with an associated time and date
`code.”
`
`Lemelson discloses comparing location (performance
`variables) and time to safety values at 3:24-26; 3:31-36:
`“[T]he system is programmed to analyze the stored
`performance variables over a period of time and compute an
`evaluation code corresponding to an assessment as to how the
`vehicle is being driven. .
`. Evaluation codes may define a
`plurality of select driving patterns including, for example,
`erratic or otherwise hazardous driving. Other evaluation
`codes may correspond to other driving patterns such as
`deviation from a planned course oftravel "
`
`Dorweiler proposes that hazard information, including
`certain data parameters monitored by the system in
`Lemelson (e.g., day/night use of car) may be useful for
`generating an adjusted insurance cost at 337.
`
`Dorweiler discloses that hazard media may be useful for
`determining insurance premiums at 321:
`“Obviously, the premiums collected are to be proportional
`to the hazard which is measured by the losses. The medium
`selected for measuring the exposure is the most important
`factor in making the premium collections in accordance
`with the probable loss incidence.”
`
`Dorweiler discloses that, in the case of vehicle insurance, a
`number of factors may be used as the hazard media (e.g.,
`day/night use of car) at 337:
`“Some of the critical conditions that contribute to the hazard
`covered by Automobile Public Liability Insurance or that
`Cause deviations in this hazard are: l. The car—age, condition,
`etc.; 2. Highways—road beds, curves, visibility, etc.; 3. Traffic
`density; 4. Laws, regulations, and their enforcement; 5.
`Efficiency of driver—age, experience, habits, impairments,
`etc.; 6. Mileage; 7. Speed; 8. Weather conditions; 9. Seasonal
`use of car; and 10. Day and/or night use of car.”
`
`Dorweiler discloses that using certain hazard media
`requires making an adjustment to the insurance cost
`retrospectively at 339:
`51
`
`
`-115-
`
`Page 002825
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`
`p exposure into rate making would require the prior
`development of experience on these media. The car-year is the
`only one of the enumerated media which measures the
`exposure prospectively, the others require afinal adjustment
`which would be determined retrospectively.”
`
`A person ofordinary skill in the art would have understood
`that determining an insurance cost would entail determining
`‘\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
`\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
`an underwriting“cost.
`
`(n)
`
`Dependent Claim 15
`
`191. An overview of the reasons for rejection of claim 15 in light of Lemelson
`
`in view of Dorweiler is set forth below. A more detailed explanation is provided in the claim
`
`chart included at the end of this section.
`
`192. Dependent claim 15 recites that “The method according to claim 14
`
`wherein: the adjusted underwriting cost can be for a prospective or retrospective basis.” As
`
`discussed above, supra at Section III.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the art at the time would have
`
`been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together disclose the method
`
`according to claim 14.
`
`193. Dorweiler discloses that the adjustment to the insurance cost may be made
`
`prospectively or retrospectively depending on the hazard media. For example, the “introduction
`
`of a mileage, car—hour, or fuel—consumption exposure into rate making” would require “a final
`
`adjustment which would be determined retrospectively,” while “car-year” would “measure[] the
`7
`exposure prospectively.’ A person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that
`
`determining an insurance cost would entail determining an underwriting cost. Dorweiler and
`
`Lemelson’s focus on similar data elements would have motivated someone of skill in the art to
`
`extend Lemelson’s use of vehicle data to adjusting underwriting costs.
`
`-116-
`
`Page 002826
`
`

`
`Re quest for Ex Parte Reexamination
`U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970
`
`194. As discussed above, supra at Section IlI.B(3), one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time would have been motivated to combine Lemelson and Dorweiler, which together
`
`disclose each element of claim 15. The following claim chart demonstrates, in further detail,
`
`how each element is disclosed by this combination.
`
`
`
`
`
`Determining an adjusted insurance premium inherently
`x‘.,..."..".,..."..".,...".."."..".,..."..".,..."..".,...".‘..."..‘““.“““““.“““““..‘ .. ‘
`‘ .. ‘
`‘ .. ‘ .. ‘
`‘ .. ‘
`‘ .. ‘
`‘ ‘
`‘ .. ‘
`‘ .. ‘
`‘ .. ‘ .. ‘ ‘“..“.“““.““““‘
`,éz191_r_écZe£ £ée.!e.rzm§n_ézzg
`€."Q§f:‘.’.e_.‘.l__”’_?‘_l.e_’."”’_.’_’..”.11<_%f §tz.s!_~,_
`
`5.
`
`Claim 9 Should be Rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as Obvious in
`Light of Lemelson in View of Dorweiler and the Admitted Prior Art
`
`195.
`
`Claim 9 of the ‘970 patent is rendered obvious by Lemelson in view of
`
`Dorweiler and the Admitted Prior Art.
`
`196. Dependent claim 9 recites that “[t]he method as defined in claim 6 wherein
`
`the output data value is additionally usedfor computing an insurance ratingfor the vehicle for a
`
`future data collection period.” As described above in Section lII.B(4)(i), the combination of
`
`Lemelson and Dorweiler teaches, explicitly, inherently or implicitly, all of the elements of claim
`
`6. The Admitted Prior Art reveals that it was well known to utilize vehicle and op