Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D. (Exhibit 1026)
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`GOOGLE INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`LOCATIONET SYSTEMS LTD.
`Patent Owner
`
`Covered Business Method Review No. Unassigned
`Patent No. 6,771,970
`
`DECLARATION OF ODED GOTTESMAN, PH.D.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`GOOGLE 1026
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Background ........................................................................................... 1
`
`Qualifications ........................................................................................ 2
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Summary of Education ............................................................... 2
`
`Summary of Knowledge, Skill, Experience and Training ......... 3
`
`Specific Projects Related to Geographical and Location
`Information ................................................................................. 6
`
`II.
`
`LIST OF DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED IN FORMULATING MY
`OPINIONS ...................................................................................................... 7
`
`III. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND AND STATE OF THE ART AT
`THE TIME OF THE ALLEGED INVENTION ............................................. 9
`
`A. Vehicle Location Determination ......................................................... 10
`
`B. Mobile Device Location Determination ............................................. 11
`
`C. Mobile Device Location Technologies ............................................... 14
`
`IV. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................ 16
`
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE ’970 PATENT .......................................................... 17
`
`VI. THE CLAIMS OF THE ‘970 PATENT ....................................................... 20
`
`VII. LEGAL STANDARDS ................................................................................. 21
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Requirements of a Covered Business Method Patent ......................... 21
`
`Obviousness ........................................................................................ 21
`
`VIII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 26
`
`IX. ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 29
`
`A.
`
`Requirements of a Covered Business Method Patent ......................... 29
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Claim 4 ..................................................................................... 29
`
`Claims 14–17 and 19 ................................................................ 32
`
`Summary of Invalidity Analysis ......................................................... 42
`
`Claims 14, 16, and 19 Are Not Innovative in View of Maass
`and Roel-Ng (Ground 1), Maass and Rackley (Ground 2), and
`Maass, Roel-Ng, and Rackley (Ground 3) ......................................... 43
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`1. Maass ........................................................................................ 43
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`Roel-Ng .................................................................................... 45
`
`Rackley ..................................................................................... 46
`
`Combination of Maass with Roel-Ng and/or Rackley ............. 48
`
`Claim 14: Preamble ................................................................. 55
`
`Claim 14: Element (a) ............................................................. 60
`
`Claim 14: Element (b) ............................................................. 62
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`Ground 1: Maass + Roel-Ng ......................................... 63
`
`Ground 2: Maass + Rackley .......................................... 66
`
`Ground 3: Maass + Roel-Ng + Rackley ........................ 70
`
`Claim 14: Element (c) ............................................................. 71
`
`Claim 14: Element (d) ............................................................. 73
`
`10. Claim 14: Element (e) ............................................................. 75
`
`11. Claim 16 ................................................................................... 76
`
`12. Claim 19 ................................................................................... 81
`
`D.
`
`Claims 15 and 17 Are Not Innovative in View of Maass, Roel-
`Ng, and Shah (Ground 4), Maass, Rackley, and Shah (Ground
`5), and Maass, Roel-Ng, Rackley, and Shah (Ground 6) ................... 84
`
`1.
`
`Shah .......................................................................................... 84
`
`2. Motivation to Combine ............................................................ 85
`
`3.
`
`Claims 15 and 17 ...................................................................... 87
`
`X.
`
`CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 92
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`I, Oded Gottesman, hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`A. Background
`
`1. My name is Oded Gottesman. I am a researcher and consultant
`
`working in areas related to digital signal processing, telecommunications,
`
`networks, and location and positioning systems.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained to act as an expert witness on behalf of Google
`
`Inc. (“Petitioner”) in connection with the above captioned Petition for Covered
`
`Business Method Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,771,970 (“Petition”). I understand
`
`that this proceeding involves U.S. Patent No. 6,771,970 (“the ’970 Patent”), titled
`
`“Location Determination System.” The ’970 Patent is provided as Exhibit 1001.
`
`3.
`
`I understand that Petitioner challenges the validity of Claims 14–17
`
`and 19 of the ’970 Patent (the “challenged claims”).
`
`4.
`
`I have reviewed and am familiar with the ’970 Patent as well as its
`
`prosecution history. The ’970 prosecution history is provided as Exhibit 1003.
`
`Additionally, I have reviewed materials identified in Section III.
`
`5.
`
`As set forth below, I am familiar with the technology at issue as of the
`
`October 4, 1999 filing of Provisional Patent Application No. 60/157,643, Exhibit
`
`1002. I have been asked to provide my technical review, analysis, insights, and
`
`opinions regarding the prior art references that form the basis for the Petition. In
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`forming my opinions, I have relied on my own experience and knowledge, my
`
`review of the ’970 Patent and its file history, and of the prior art references cited in
`
`the Petition.
`
`6. My opinions expressed in this Declaration rely to a great extent on my
`
`own personal knowledge and recollection. However, to the extent I considered
`
`specific documents or data in formulating the opinions expressed in this
`
`Declaration, such items are expressly referred to in this Declaration.
`
`7.
`
`I am being compensated for my time in connection with this covered
`
`business method review at my standard consulting rate, which is $475 per hour.
`
`My compensation is not contingent upon and in no way affects the substance of my
`
`testimony.
`
`B. Qualifications
`
`8.
`
`In this section, I have summarized my education, knowledge, skill,
`
`experience and training. My curriculum vitae contains further details on my
`
`education, experience, publications and other qualifications. A copy is provided as
`
`Exhibit 1027.
`
`1.
`
`Summary of Education
`
`9.
`
`I earned a Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the
`
`University of California of Santa Barbara in 2000 and have subsequently
`
`performed post-doctoral research at the University of Santa Barbara as well. In
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`1992, I earned a Master’s Degree in Electrical Engineering from Drexel University
`
`in Philadelphia, PA. In 1988 I graduated with distinction with a B.Sc. in Electrical
`
`and Computer Engineering from Ben-Gurion University in Israel.
`
`2.
`
`Summary of Knowledge, Skill, Experience and Training
`
`10.
`
`I have run a small technology company that develops
`
`telecommunication and other algorithms and software products and provides DSP,
`
`hardware, and software related services. I have been involved with research,
`
`development, and implementation of algorithms for the past 28 years.
`
`11.
`
`I have performed extensive learning and research of the subject of
`
`GPS and location measurement (including triangulation). My background and
`
`research include dynamic programming, recursive algorithms, computer graphics
`
`algorithms, numerous industry standards including telephony networks, computer
`
`networks and messaging, databases, and web programming languages.
`
`12.
`
`I have been working with and have written programs for personal
`
`computers since around 1986. Initially on DOS, and later on Windows 3.1,
`
`Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows
`
`7, MacOS, iOS, Android, Unix, and Linux. My programming included such areas
`
`as Digital Signal Processing, communication interfaces, protocols, cellphone,
`
`wireless devices, user interfaces, embedded systems, Web programming, and
`
`databases. I have learned and used such language as C, C++, Pascal, Fortran, and
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`different Assembly languages. I am also self-educated in various subjects in
`
`programming, including databases, SQL, C#, Java, HTML, XML, GPX, etc.
`
`13. Since 2001, I have been running a small startup company for
`
`outsourcing, including Telecommunications/DSP, R&D and implementation, and
`
`licensing intellectual property. I have contributed to a speech coding algorithm
`
`that subsequently has been adopted for secure voice communication for the U.S.
`
`Department of Defense & NATO. Currently I am still supporting this standard,
`
`and perform subsequent projects for the U.S. DoD, and NATO members’ vendors.
`
`Some of the contracts I was performing for the Department of Defense
`
`(DoD)/NSA was related to secure voice networks, implemented in the C and DSP
`
`Assembly languages. I also perform R&D and implementation of
`
`Telecommunications and DSP projects, for cellular and wireless applications,
`
`mainly using C language and DSP Assembly language.
`
`14. Since 2001, I have also been providing technology expert services in
`
`patent dispute matters to law firms.
`
`15.
`
`In 1989-90, I worked as DSP Engineer of Trilogue voice mail system
`
`for Efrat Future Technology, Israel (later called Comverse Technology), where I
`
`worked on, among other things, algorithms for voicemail systems using PC.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`16. From 1991 to 1995, I worked as DSP Consultant for Vibration
`
`Specialty Corp., Philadelphia, PA. My work included programming in C language
`
`and DSP Assembly Language.
`
`17. From 1990 to 1992, I was engaged with work on my M.Sc. in
`
`Electrical and Computer Engineering at Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA.
`
`18.
`
`In 1992, I worked as DSP Consultant for AT&T Bell Labs, Murray
`
`Hill, where I conducted my M.Sc. degree research, and thesis writing, in the Signal
`
`Processing Research Department. As a part of my work, I have implemented that
`
`algorithm in DSP Assembly Language on two DSPs running in parallel.
`
`19.
`
`In 1993, I worked as Audio Group Manager for Optibase (later called
`
`VCON), Israel. My work included C Language and DSP Assembly Language
`
`programming.
`
`20. From 1994 to 1995, I worked as Speech Coding Group Leader for
`
`DSP Communications, a manufacturer of chipsets for cellular phones. My work
`
`included research, development and implementation of both in-standard and
`
`proprietary algorithms. I also held a management position within a group
`
`developing chipset for cellular phones. That work included implementing a voice
`
`multi-rate speech coder and modem & protocols in the C and DSP Assembly
`
`languages and code review.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`21. From 1995 to 2000, I was engaged with my Ph.D. study at the
`
`University of California at Santa Barbara. The algorithms that I wrote and
`
`developed during the course of my Ph.D. research were written in tens of
`
`thousands of code lines in the C Language, developed on a PC, and compiled using
`
`Microsoft Visual C++ Compiler.
`
`
`
`3.
`
`Specific Projects Related to Geographical and Location
`Information
`
`22. My experience and training have included substantial exposure to the
`
`field of Geographic Information Systems. For example, from 1981-1984, I worked
`
`for the Israeli army to develop improved navigation methods using topographical
`
`maps, aerial photos of geographic areas, and three dimensional derivations of aerial
`
`photos.
`
`23. From 1987-1988, I developed an iterative algorithm, based on
`
`dynamic programming, for searching for the best route on a time grid, that was
`
`used to warp waveforms, as part of my project of implementing a time-warping
`
`speech recognition system. Each such route, or time-warping function, was
`
`associated with a cost function that was minimized through the search process
`
`yielding the optimal route or warping function.
`
`24.
`
`In the late 1980s, while at Comverse Technology, I developed a
`
`continuously updatable database system using the “Magic” application generator. I
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`designed the system to provide businesses with geographic location of relevant
`
`resources, such as suppliers or particular commodities.
`
`25. More recently, I worked for DARPA on a “survivor device” that was
`
`designed to aid a stranded soldier to communicate with many different types of
`
`equipment over any type of terrain. The device addressed the difficulties of
`
`communicating over various types of terrain depending on the location of the
`
`survivor.
`
`26. My testimony work has also specifically related to location
`
`determination. For example, I testified at trial concerning the infringement of a
`
`system that used trilateration (specifically TDOA “Time Difference of Arrival”) to
`
`geo-locate cell phone users and then store the location of those users in a
`
`geographic database so that they could be indicated on a geographic map display.
`
`II. LIST OF DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED IN FORMULATING MY
`OPINIONS
`
`27.
`
`In formulating my opinions, I have reviewed and considered all of the
`
`following documents:
`
`EXHIBIT NO.
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`
`1007
`
`
`
`DESCRIPTION
`U.S. Patent No. 6,771,970 to Dan.
`U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/157,643.
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 6,771,970.
`Final Written Decision from IPR2014-00199.
`Institution Decision from IPR2014-00920.
`Ex Parte Reexamination Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No.
`6,771,970.
`Reexamination Certificate of U.S. Patent No. 6,771,970.
`
`7
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`1008
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`1012
`
`1013
`1014
`
`1015
`1016
`
`1017
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1028
`1029
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,724,521 to Dedrick.
`Henning Maass, Location-Aware Mobile Application Based on
`Directory Services, 3 MOBILE NETWORKS AND APPLICATIONS 157
`(1998).
`PCT International Publication No. WO 99/46947 to Roel-Ng et
`al.
`U.S. Patent No. 5,636,122 to Shah et al.
`Claim Construction Order, Callwave Communications, LLC v.
`AT&T Mobility, LLC, No. 1:12-cv-01701-RGA (D. Del.) Docket
`No. 227, December 23, 2014.
`Patent Owner Response in IPR2014-00920, March 3, 2015.
`Robert L. French, The Evolving Roles of Vehicular Navigation,
`34 NAVIGATION 212 (1987).
`U.S. Patent No. 4,742,357 to Rackley.
`Goran Swedberg, Ericsson’s Mobile Location Solution,
`ERICSSON REV., no. 4, 1999 at 214.
`U.S. Patent No. 5,652,570 to Lepkofker.
`Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Digital Library
`Binder Facility, ACM(BLACKBERRY) 00000001–13.
`Deposition Transcript of Bernard Rous on behalf of Association
`for Computing Machinery (ACM) and Exhibits, March 17, 2016.
`T.S. Rappaport et al., Position Location Using Wireless
`Communications on Highways of the Future, IEEE COMMC’NS
`MAG., Oct. 1996, at 33.
`James J. Caffery, Jr. & Gordon L. Stuber, Overview of
`Radiolocation in CDMA Cellular Systems, IEEE COMMC’NS
`MAG., Apr. 1998, at 38.
`U.S. Patent No. 5,664,948 to Dimitriadis et al.
`ITU-T Recommendation Z.100, “Specification and Description
`Language SDL,” ITU-T Geneve, 1993.
`L-Commerce Poised for Big Splash, GPS WORLD, July 2000, at
`50.
`Claim Chart concerning Google Mobile Search included in
`Callwave’s Final Infringement Contentions for U.S. Patent No.
`6,771,970 in Callwave Commun’cs, LLC v. AT&T Mobility, LLC
`and Google Inc., No. 1:12-cv-1701 (D. Del.), dated January 11,
`2016 (excerpts).
`Patent Owner Response in IPR2014-00920, March 3, 2015.
`Declaration of David Kotz, Ph.D. in Support of Callwave
`
`8
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`1030
`
`1031
`
`1032
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`Communications, LLC’s Opening Claim Construction Brief.
`Webster’s New World Dictionary (Victoria Neufeldt ed., 1995)
`(excerpt).
`W. Yeong, et al., Lightweight Directory Access Protocol, IETF,
`RFC 1777 (Mar. 1995), http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1777.
`U.S. Patent No. 5,874,914 to Krasner.
`Redacted version of Letter from Suparna Datta, J.D., Ph.D.,
`Counsel for Callwave to Christopher J. Gaspar, Esq., Counsel for
`Google, dated March 17, 2016 (excerpts).
`Second Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement, Callwave
`Commc’ns v. AT&T Mobility, LLC and Google Inc., No. 1:12-cv-
`1701 (D. Del.), May 3, 2013.
`First Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement, Callwave
`Commc’ns v. AT&T Mobility, LLC and Google Inc., No. 1:12-cv-
`1701 (D. Del.), Jan. 24, 2013.
`Complaint for Patent Infringement, Callwave Commc’ns v.
`AT&T Mobility, LLC and Google Inc., No. 1:12-cv-1701 (D.
`Del.), Dec. 12, 2012.
`
`28.
`
`I have reviewed and am familiar with the Petition for covered
`
`business method review submitted with this Declaration and I agree with the
`
`technical analysis that underlies the positions set forth in the Petition.
`
`29.
`
`I may consider additional documents as they become available or
`
`other that are necessary to form my opinions. I reserve the right to revise,
`
`supplement, or amend my opinions based on new information and on my
`
`continuing analysis.
`
`III. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND AND STATE OF THE ART AT THE
`TIME OF THE ALLEGED INVENTION
`
`30. Location-determination services were available years before the ’970
`
`Patent’s earliest priority date. Location determination has been used in a wide
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`range of applications, including automobile-location services and mobile-phone-
`
`tracking services. Location tracking technologies and systems were used for
`
`location determination of both vehicles and mobile phones.
`
`A. Vehicle Location Determination
`
`31. The automotive industry developed various vehicle navigation, fleet
`
`management, and intelligent-vehicle-highway systems (IVHS) using wireless
`
`remote location technology in the 1980s. See Robert L. French, The Evolving
`
`Roles of Vehicular Navigation, 34 NAVIGATION 212 (1987), Ex. 1014.
`
`32. Obtaining location information from a plurality of remote tracking
`
`systems also was well-known before the ’970 Patent’s priority date. Numerous
`
`prior art references describe systems that integrate multiple remote tracking
`
`systems. For example, systems using various technologies for locating stolen
`
`objects, such as vehicles, have been known since the 1980s. See, e.g., U.S. Patent
`
`No. 4,742,357 to Rackley (“Rackley,” Ex. 1015). One system for locating stolen
`
`vehicles used four possible location-tracking systems, including radio-frequency-
`
`triangulation and long-range-navigation (LORAN). Id. at 3:48–5:61. In the
`
`Rackley system, a unit mounted within the stolen vehicle could communicate with
`
`a base station and the four remote location-tracking systems that allowed an
`
`operator in communication with the base station to determine where to find the
`
`vehicle. Id. at 3:31–47, 8:19–48. Each of the location tracking systems
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`comprised a set of receivers and transmitters located remotely from the vehicle unit
`
`and the base station. Id. at 3:48–5:61, Figs. 2–4. The Rackley system also
`
`included a routine for determining which location tracking system is available to
`
`be used for locating a particular vehicle. Id. at 15:40–47, Fig. 15. The routine
`
`allowed for the use of an available location tracking system even if other systems
`
`were inoperative. Id. at 2:56–59.
`
`B. Mobile Device Location Determination
`
`33. Using various wireless remote location technologies for mobile
`
`devices was known. The growth of cellular infrastructure and widespread use of
`
`handheld wireless phones allowed for locating technologies that used cellular base
`
`stations. T.S. Rappaport et al., Position Location Using Wireless Communications
`
`on Highways of the Future, IEEE COMMC’NS MAG., Oct. 1996, at 33 (Ex. 1020).
`
`Known cellular location technologies included Angle of Arrival (AOA), Time of
`
`Arrival (TOA), Time Difference of Arrival (TDOA), Enhanced Observed Time
`
`Difference (E-OTD), among others. Id. at 34–35; see James J. Caffery, Jr. &
`
`Gordon L. Stuber, Overview of Radiolocation in CDMA Cellular Systems, IEEE
`
`COMMC’NS MAG., Apr. 1998, at 38, 39 (Ex. 1021). For instance, by the mid-
`
`1990s, Raytheon had demonstrated cellular-frequency based location
`
`determination of mobile devices by combining AOA estimates from multiple base
`
`stations and TDOA estimates between multiple base stations. Ex. 1020 at 34–35.
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`Additionally, advances in Global Positioning System (GPS) technology included
`
`incorporation of a map database in GPS processing to allow location determination
`
`by using GPS data from as few as three satellites. Id. at 34.
`
`34.
`
`In addition, Ericsson disclosed a mobile-location solution designed to
`
`handle multiple tracking technologies. Goran Swedberg, Ericsson’s Mobile
`
`Location Solution, ERICSSON REV., no. 4, 1999 at 214, Ex. 1016. That system
`
`determined the geographic position of mobile subscribers to allow them to receive
`
`location-based services. Id. at 214, 220. As illustrated in Figure 6, reproduced
`
`below, the system included a Mobile Positioning Center (MPC) that communicated
`
`with multiple remote-positioning systems (e.g., cellular, GPS, etc.) for providing
`
`location information to location applications. Id. at 219. The MPC acted as a
`
`gateway for obtaining positioning information from the positioning systems and
`
`converting the data into location information for a location service client over a
`
`mobile network. Id.
`
`35.
`
`In addition to this solution, Ericsson disclosed other contemporaneous
`
`location systems and methods. See, e.g., PCT International Publication No.
`
`WO99/46947 to Roel-Ng et al. (“Roel-Ng,” Ex. 1010).
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`
`
`
`36. Additionally, middleware platforms suitable for integration with other
`
`platforms and mobility-management services used to determine and track location
`
`were known in the prior art. E.g., Henning Maass, Location-Aware Mobile
`
`Application Based on Directory Services, 3 MOBILE NETWORKS AND APPLICATIONS
`
`157 (1998) (“Maass,” Ex. 1009). One such system provided a generic locating
`
`platform that could be accessed by any type of application. Id. at 157–58. The
`
`platform supported location determination by interfacing with different location
`
`systems, such as radio-based, wireless network-based, and GPS-based location
`
`technologies. Id. at 160. Cellular networks are based on well-known Internet
`
`Protocols, which allow flexible data exchange among different network
`
`components. Servers and databases were also widely used and integrated with
`
`cellular networks at the time. The system allowed users to look up and obtain
`
`location information about objects and people without needing to know any
`
`specifics about the location tracking systems. Id. at 159–164.
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`C. Mobile Device Location Technologies
`
`37. At the time, mobile device location technologies included Timing
`
`Advance (TA), time of arrival (TOA), enhanced observed time difference (E-
`
`OTD), and Global Position System (GPS), among others.
`
`38. TA technology typically provided a location estimate based on data
`
`from a single cellular base station by measuring the distance from the mobile
`
`device to the base station. See Ex. 1016 at 217. The base station calculated an
`
`approximate distance by multiplying half of the round trip time of the signal
`
`between the mobile device and cellular tower with the speed of light. See id. A
`
`person of skill in the art would have known that TA technology was combined
`
`with cellular tower location information (cell-ID). If the cellular tower had
`
`sectorized antennae, it was possible to identify a sector of the radio cell area where
`
`the mobile device may be located. Id. at 217–18. It was known that the accuracy
`
`of this technology depends on distance from the base station and the sector size.
`
`Id. At the time, location accuracy was about ±550 meters. Id.
`
`39. TOA technology measured the time of arrival of a signal from a
`
`mobile device to at least three cellular towers and thus uses additional and different
`
`hardware than TA technology. Id. at 214, 217. If clocking was synchronized at
`
`the base stations and mobile device, the propagation time of a signal from mobile
`
`device to a base station provided a distance of the mobile device from each base
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`station. Id. at 217. A separate piece of hardware typically a measuring unit in
`
`communication with the cellular network or other equipment calculated a location
`
`estimate based on triangulation. Id. The intersection of the distance circles from
`
`each base station provided a location estimate of the mobile device. Id. A person
`
`of skill in the art would have known that TOA provided the potential for accuracy
`
`of within about 125 to 200 meters but the level of accuracy varied according to the
`
`environment and the number of base stations used. Id.
`
`40. With E-OTD technology, the mobile device measured the observed
`
`time difference between arrivals of signals from nearby pairs of base stations. Id.
`
`at 216. The time difference measurements between a pair of base stations describe
`
`a curve of constant difference (i.e., a hyperbola) along which the mobile device
`
`may be located. Id. For triangulation, the mobile device must obtain time
`
`difference measurements from at least three pairs of separate base transceiver
`
`stations. Id. The intersection of these hyperbolas provided a location estimate of
`
`the mobile device. Id. A person of skill in the art would have known that the
`
`mobile device reported these measurements to the network and a unit within the
`
`network calculated the location of the mobile device. Id. This was known as
`
`mobile station-assisted E-OTD, because the network calculated the location of
`
`mobile station. Id. It was known that E-OTD provided location accuracy of
`
`approximately 50–150 meters, i.e., comparable to or better than that possible with
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`TOA. Id. Thus, E-OTD used a different hardware from that needed for TA
`
`technology. See id.
`
`41. A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time would have also
`
`known that GPS technology included assisted GPS that was known at the time.
`
`Id.; see also Ex. 1032 at 3:22–26 (“One embodiment of the present invention
`
`provides a method for determining the position of a remote GPS receiver by
`
`transmitting GPS satellite information, including Doppler, to the remote unit or
`
`mobile GPS unit from a basestation via a data communication link.”). Assisted
`
`GPS established a GPS reference network connected with cellular infrastructure.
`
`Ex. 1016 at 216, Fig. 3. The reference network included GPS receivers with clear
`
`views of the sky that operated to monitor the real-time GPS satellite constellation
`
`status. Id. The GPS reference network thus provided precise data about each
`
`relevant GPS satellite at a particular time. Id.
`
`IV. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`42.
`
`I am informed that it is permissible to determine the level of ordinary
`
`skill in the art from a review of relevant prior art references. For purposes of this
`
`Declaration, I am relying on the October 4, 1999 date listed on the face of the ’970
`
`Patent for my analysis of the level of ordinary skill in the art appropriate to
`
`the ’970 Patent. My opinion of a person of ordinary skill in the art would not
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`change if claims 14–17 and 19 are not entitled to the October 4, 1999 date and are
`
`entitled to the October 2, 2000 date.
`
`43.
`
`In my view, the level of ordinary skill relevant to the ’970 Patent is
`
`evident from a review of the prior art references cited above.
`
`44.
`
`In particular, it is my opinion that a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`for the ’970 Patent would have had a bachelor of science degree in computer
`
`science, electrical engineering, physics, mathematics, or a comparable degree and
`
`at least two years of experience working with location based services or GPS and
`
`telecommunications technologies.
`
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE ’970 PATENT
`
`45. The ‘970 Patent relates to a system for the location tracking of mobile
`
`platforms. Ex. 1001 at 2:1–3. The specification makes clear that tracking systems
`
`were known and already adapted to “allow a vehicle, mobile telephone or other
`
`mobile entity to be located.” Id. at 1:13–21. The ’970 Patent generally discusses
`
`vehicles and mobile phones together as “mobile platforms.” Id. at 4:1–5. The ’970
`
`Patent identifies several tracking systems known in the art, including “Motorola’s
`
`MLU (Mobile Logic Unit),” “the Ituran VLU (Vehicle Logic Unit) or PAL
`
`(Personal Alarm and Location) or Nexus Telocation’s RMU (Remote Monitoring
`
`Unit).” Id. at 3:53–57. The ’970 Patent states that multiple location tracking
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Review of USPN 6,771,970
`Declaration of Oded Gottesman, Ph.D.
`
`
`technologies used by service providers were known in the prior art. See id. at
`
`1:60–67, 3:51–57.
`
`46. The specification acknowledges it was known to allow a human
`
`subscriber to directly access a tracking service through software: “An authorized
`
`member of an organization subscribing to one of the service providers is able to
`
`submit a request for a location of one of the organization’s vehicles to the service
`
`provider’s system. The location of the vehicle is determined and returned to the
`
`requestor.” Id. at 1:33–38. The ‘970 Patent states that client software systems for
`
`communicating with service providers already existed. Id. at 1:39–41. The
`
`specification explains that “the software is usually so complex that only a few
`
`trained personnel in every organization can operate the vehicle tracking software.”
`
`Id. at 1:49–52. The ’970 Patent pur