`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION
`
`Petitioner
`
`
`
`Patent No. 6,738,697
`Issue Date: May 18, 2004
`Title: TELEMATICS SYSTEM FOR VEHICLE DIAGNOSTICS
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF SCOTT ANDREWS
`
`Case No. IPR2013-00413
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`IPR2013-00413 - Ex. 1106
`Toyota Motor Corp., Petitioner
`
`
`
`I, Scott Andrews, hereby declare and state as follows:
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`
`1.
`
`I am currently a consultant for Cogenia Partners, LLC, focusing on
`
`systems engineering, business development and technical strategy supporting
`
`automotive and information technology. I have been in this position since 2001. In
`
`one of my active engagements, I serve as a co-principal investigator in a research
`
`program funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), called Integrated
`
`Advanced Transportation System. I also serve as a technical consultant in multiple
`
`FHWA projects with ARINC and Booz Allen related to connected vehicle technology
`
`research.
`
`2.
`
`I have over 30 years of professional experience in the field automotive
`
`technologies and systems, including vehicle information systems and vehicle safety
`
`and control systems. Further, I have authored numerous published technical papers
`
`and am a named inventor on 11 U.S. and foreign patents.
`
`3.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from
`
`University of California, Irvine in 1977 and a Master of Science degree in Electronic
`
`Engineering from Stanford University in 1982.
`
`4.
`
`From 1977 to 1979, I worked at Ford Aerospace where I designed,
`
`tested and delivered microwave radar receiver systems.
`
`5.
`
`From 1979 to 1983, I worked at Teledyne Microwave, where I
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`developed high reliability microwave components and developed CAD tools.
`
`6.
`
`From 1983 to 1996, I worked at TRW, Inc., having held various
`
`positions. From 1983 to 1993, I was a Manager of MMIC (monolithic-microwave-
`
`integrated-circuit) Products Organization. In this role, I developed business strategy
`
`and managed customer and R&D programs. During this time, I also developed the
`
`first single chip 94 GHz Radar, used for automotive cruise control and anti-collision
`
`systems. In 1993 I transferred to the TRW Automotive Electronics Group, and
`
`managed about 30 engineers in the Systems Engineering and Advanced Product
`
`Development organization. In this role, I managed advanced development programs
`
`such as automotive radar, adaptive cruise control, occupant sensing, automatic crash
`
`notification systems, in-vehicle information systems, and other emerging
`
`transportation products.
`
`7.
`
`From 1996 to 2000, I was a Project General Manager in the R&D
`
`Management Division at Toyota Motor Corporation in Japan. In that role, I
`
`developed multimedia and new technology products and services for Toyota’s future
`
`generations of passenger vehicles for the United States and Europe. I also established
`
`the Automotive Multimedia Interface Collaboration, under the direction of Toyota’s
`
`board members.
`
`8.
`
`In 2000, I founded Cogenia, Inc. to develop enterprise class data
`
`management software systems. I served as the company’s Chief Executive Officer
`
`until 2001, when I created Cogenia Partners, my current consulting firm.
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`9.
`
`A copy of my curriculum vitae is attached hereto, and it includes a listing of
`
`my prior experience in litigation matters as an expert.
`
`II. ASSIGNMENT AND MATERIALS REVIEWED
`
`10.
`
`I submit this declaration in support of the Petition for Inter Parties
`
`Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,738,697 (“the ’697 patent”), No. IPR2013-00413.
`
`11.
`
`I am not an employee of Toyota Motor Corporation (“Toyota”) or any
`
`affiliate or subsidiary thereof.
`
`12.
`
`I am being compensated for my time at a rate of $425 per hour. My
`
`compensation is in no way dependent upon the substance of the opinions I offer
`
`below, or upon the outcome of Toyota’s petition for inter partes review (or the
`
`outcome of such an inter partes review, if a trial is initiated).
`
`13.
`
`I have been asked to provide certain opinions relating to the patentability
`
`of the ’697 patent. Specifically, I have been asked to provide my opinion regarding (i)
`
`the level of ordinary skill in the art to which the ’697 patent pertains and (ii) the
`
`patentability of claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 17-21, 26, 27, 32, 40, and 61.
`
`14. The opinions expressed in this declaration are not exhaustive of my
`
`opinions on the patentability of claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 17-21, 26, 27, 32, 40, and 61.
`
`Therefore, the fact that I do not address a particular point should not be understood
`
`to indicate any agreement on my part that any claim otherwise complies with the
`
`patentability requirements.
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`15.
`
`In forming my opinions, I have reviewed (i) the ’697 patent and its
`
`prosecution history; and (ii) prior art to the ’697 patent, including:
`
`(a) U.S. Patent No. 5,334,974 to Simms et al. (“Simms”); and
`
`(b) U.S. Patent No. 4,897,642 to DiLullo et al. (“DiLullo”).
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ’697 PATENT
`
`16. The ’697 patent names David S. Breed as its sole inventor. It is entitled
`
`“Telematics System for Vehicle Diagnostics.” The ’697 patent states that it was filed
`
`on July 3, 2002, and issued May 18, 2004. The ’697 patent also identifies itself as a
`
`continuation-in-part of numerous other applications, the earliest of which is U.S. App.
`
`No. 08/476,077, which was filed June 7, 1995 and issued as U.S. Patent No.
`
`5,809,437.
`
`17. The ’697 patent generally relates to a diagnostic system and method on a
`
`vehicle that diagnoses the state of the vehicle or the state of a component of the
`
`vehicle, generates an output representative of the diagnosis, and then employs a
`
`communications device to automatically connect to a remote facility in order to
`
`wirelessly transfer the output to the remote facility. (’697 patent, col. 1, ll. 37-42; col.
`
`2, ll. 16-37; col. 11, ll. 26-67; col. 13, ll. 34-42; col. 13, ll. 54-58; col. 14, ll. 14-33; col.
`
`14, l. 66 – col. 15, l. 7.)
`
`18. The diagnosed “state of the vehicle” is a “diagnosis of the condition of
`
`the vehicle with respect to its stability and proper running and operating condition.”
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`(’697 patent, col. 10, ll. 29-32.) This can include “excessive angular inclination,” “a
`
`crash,” or “skidding.” (’697 patent, col. 10, ll. 32-41; see also col. 14, ll. 35-38.)
`
`19. According to the ’697 patent, the system and method can also determine
`
`if “one of the parts of the vehicle, e.g., a component, system or subsystem, is
`
`operating abnormally.” (’697 patent, col. 10, ll. 39-42.)
`
`20. The ’697 patent provides a variety of examples of components that can
`
`be monitored and diagnosed by the vehicle’s monitoring system. These components
`
`include, for example:
`
`Engine; transmission; brakes and associated brake assembly; tires; wheel;
`steering wheel and steering column assembly; water pump; alternator;
`shock absorber; wheel mounting assembly; radiator; battery; oil pump;
`fuel pump; air conditioner compressor; differential gear; exhaust system;
`fan belts; engine valves; steering assembly; vehicle suspension including
`shock absorbers; vehicle wiring system; and engine cooling fan assembly.
`
`(’697 patent, col. 30, l. 58 – col. 31, l. 23.)
`
`21. According to the ’697 patent, in some cases the system can employ a
`
`processor and sensors. (’697 patent, col. 13, ll. 8-14.) A variety of different types of
`
`sensors can be used, including:
`
`Airbag crash sensor; accelerometer; microphone; camera; antenna,
`capacitance sensor or other electromagnetic wave sensor; stress or strain
`sensor; pressure sensor; weight sensor; magnetic field sensor; coolant
`thermometer; oil pressure sensor; oil level sensor; air flow meter;
`voltmeter; ammeter; humidity sensor; engine knock sensor; oil turbidity
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`sensor; throttle position sensor; steering wheel torque sensor; wheel
`speed sensor; tachometer; speedometer; other velocity sensors; other
`position or displacement sensors; oxygen sensor; yaw, pitch and roll
`angular sensors; clock; odometer; power steering pressure sensor;
`pollution sensor; fuel gauge; cabin thermometer; transmission fluid level
`sensor; gyroscopes or other angular rate sensors including yaw, pitch and
`roll rate sensors; coolant level sensor; transmission fluid turbidity sensor;
`brake pressure sensor; tire pressure sensor; tire temperature sensor, and
`coolant pressure sensor.
`
`(’697 patent, col. 31, l. 24 - col. 32, l. 11.)
`22. The system also includes a communications device, such as a “cellular
`
`telephone system” or “satellite” system that allows the output of the diagnostic system
`
`to be automatically transmitted to a remote location. (See id. at col. 13, ll. 35-43.) The
`
`remote location may be, for example, a “repair facility” or “emergency response
`
`station.” (Id. at col. 1, ll. 53-60.)
`
`23. The ’697 patent explains that, in addition to transmitting diagnostic
`
`information, a display or a warning system may also provide the vehicle occupants
`
`with information regarding the diagnosis. (’697 patent, col. 13, ll. 25-34; col. 14, ll. 39-
`
`44; col. 38, ll. 51-59; col. 41, ll. 9-19; col. 53, ll. 23-27; col. 82, l. 64 – col. 83, l. 1; Fig.
`
`8).
`
`24. Additionally, the system can further include a location determining
`
`system, including a GPS based system. This allows vehicle location information to be
`
`transmitted to the remote facility along with the diagnostic information. (Id. at col.
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`13, ll. 54-58.)
`
`25. As noted above, I have also reviewed the prosecution history of the ’697
`
`patent.
`
`IV. CLAIMS OF THE ’697 PATENT
`
`26. The ’697 patent includes 62 claims. Claims 1 and 21 are independent.
`
`27.
`
`I understand that claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 17-21, 26, 27, 32, 40, and 61 are at
`
`issue in this inter partes review. These claims are reproduced below for reference:
`
`1. A vehicle, comprising:
`a diagnostic system arranged on the vehicle to diagnose the state of the
`vehicle or the state of a component of the vehicle and generate an
`output indicative or representative thereof; and
`a communications device coupled to said diagnostic system and arranged
`to automatically establish a communications channel between the
`vehicle and a remote facility without manual intervention and
`wirelessly transmit the output of said diagnostic system to the remote
`facility.
`
`2. The vehicle of claim 1, wherein said diagnostic system comprises a
`plurality of vehicle sensors mounted on the vehicle, each of said
`sensors providing a measurement related to a state of said sensor or a
`measurement related to a state of the mounting location and a
`processor coupled to said sensors and arranged to receive data from
`said sensors and process the data to generate the output indicative or
`representative of the state of the vehicle or the state of a component
`of the vehicle.
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`5. The vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a display arranged in the
`vehicle in a position to be visible from the passenger compartment,
`said display being coupled to said diagnostic system and arranged to
`display the diagnosis of the state of the vehicle or the state of a
`component of the vehicle.
`
`10. The vehicle of claim 1, wherein said diagnostic system comprises a
`plurality of sensors mounted at different locations on the vehicle,
`each of said sensors providing a measurement related to a state of
`said sensor or a measurement related to a state of the mounting
`location and a processor coupled to said sensor systems and arranged
`to diagnose the state of the vehicle or the state of the component of
`the vehicle based on the measurements of said sensors.
`
`17. The vehicle of claim 2, wherein said processor is arranged to control
`at least one part of the vehicle based on the output indicative or
`representative of the state of the vehicle or the state of a component
`of the vehicle.
`
`18. The vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a warning device coupled
`to said diagnostic system for relaying a warning to an occupant of the
`vehicle relating to the state of the vehicle or the state of the
`component of the vehicle as diagnosed by said diagnostic system.
`
`19. The vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a location determining
`system
`for determining
`the
`location of
`the vehicle, said
`communications device being coupled to said location determining
`system and arranged to transmit the determined location of the
`vehicle to the remote facility.
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`20. The vehicle of claim 19, wherein said location determining system
`uses GPS technology.
`
`21. A method for monitoring a vehicle, comprising the steps of:
`diagnosing the state of the vehicle or the state of a component of the
`vehicle by means of a diagnostic system arranged on the vehicle;
`generating an output indicative or representative of the diagnosed state
`of the vehicle or the diagnosed state of the component of the vehicle;
`and
`transmitting the output indicative or representative of the diagnosed
`state of the vehicle or the diagnosed state of the component of the
`vehicle from the vehicle to a remote location.
`
`26. The method of claim 21, further comprising the steps of:
`arranging a display in the vehicle in a position to be visible from the
`passenger compartment; and
`displaying the state of the vehicle or the state of a component of the
`vehicle on the display.
`
`27. The method of claim 21, further comprising the step of relaying a
`warning to an occupant of the vehicle relating to the state of the
`vehicle.
`
`32. The method of claim 21, wherein the step of diagnosing the state of
`the vehicle or the state of the component of the vehicle comprises
`the steps of mounting a plurality of sensors on the vehicle, measuring
`a state of each sensor or a state of the mounting location of each
`sensor and diagnosing the state of the vehicle or the state of a
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`component of the vehicle based on the measurements of the state of
`the sensors or the state of the mounting locations of the sensors.
`
`40. The method of claim 21, further comprising the steps of:
`determining the location of the vehicle; and
`transmitting the determined location of the vehicle to the remote
`location in conjunction with the output.
`
`61. The method of claim 21, wherein the step of transmitting the output
`to the emote [sic] facility comprises the step of automatically
`establishing a communications channel between the vehicle and the
`remote facility without manual intervention to thereby enable the
`output to be transmitted from the vehicle to the remote facility.
`
`V.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`28.
`
`In rendering the opinions set forth in this declaration, I have considered
`
`what one of ordinary skill in the art would consider to be the broadest reasonable
`
`construction of the ’697 patent’s claim terms.
`
`29.
`
`I note that the ’697 patent provides express definitions for five claim
`
`terms.
`
`
`
`“Component,” part of claims 1 and 21, is defined to mean “any
`
`part or assembly of parts which is mounted to or a part of a
`
`motor vehicle and which is capable of emitting a signal
`
`representative of its operating state.” (’697 patent, col. 30, l. 58 –
`
`col. 31, l. 22.)
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`
`
`“Part,” part of claim 17, is defined to mean “any component,
`
`sensor, system or subsystem of the vehicle such as the steering
`
`system, braking system, throttle system, navigation system, airbag
`
`system, seatbelt retractor, air bag inflation valve, air bag inflation
`
`controller and airbag vent valve, as well as those listed below in
`
`the definitions of ‘component’ and ‘sensor.’” (’697 patent, col. 10,
`
`ll. 51-57.)
`
`
`
`“Sensor,” part of claims 2, 10, and 32, is defined to mean “any
`
`measuring, detecting or sensing device mounted on a vehicle or
`
`any of its components including new sensors mounted in
`
`conjunction with the diagnostic module in accordance with the
`
`invention.” (’697 patent, col. 31, l. 24 – col. 32, l. 11.)
`
`
`
`“Sensor system,” part of claim 10, is defined to mean “any of the
`
`sensors listed below in the definition of ‘sensor’ as well as any
`
`type of component or assembly of components which detect,
`
`sense or measure something.” (’697 patent, col. 10, ll. 58-61.)
`
`
`
`“State of the vehicle,” part of claims 1 and 21, is defined to mean
`
`“diagnosis of the condition of the vehicle with respect to its
`
`stability and proper running and operating condition.” (’697
`
`patent, col. 10, ll. 30-33.)
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`I have applied these definitions when assessing the ’697 patent in view of the prior art.
`
`30.
`
` With respect to the other terms in the ’697 patent’s claims, I have
`
`applied the plain and ordinary meaning of those claim terms when comparing the
`
`claims to the prior art.
`
`VI.
`
`INVALIDITY ANALYSIS
`
`31.
`
`In my opinion, claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 17-21, 26, 27, 32, 40, and 61 of the ’697
`
`patent are all unpatentable and invalid as either anticipated by or obvious over the
`
`prior art.
`
`32.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is anticipated when a single piece of
`
`prior art describes every element of the claimed invention, either expressly or
`
`inherently arranged in the same way as in the claim. For inherent anticipation to be
`
`found, it is required that the missing descriptive material is necessarily present in the
`
`prior art. I understand that, for the purpose of an inter partes review, prior art that
`
`anticipates a claim can include both patents and printed publications from anywhere
`
`in the world.
`
`33.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is unpatentable and invalid if the subject
`
`matter of the claim as a whole would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art of the claimed subject matter as of the time of the invention at issue. I
`
`understand that the following factors must be evaluated to determine whether the
`
`claimed subject matter is obvious: (1) the scope and content of the prior art; (2) the
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`difference or differences, if any, between each claim of the patent and the prior art;
`
`and (3) the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time the patent was filed. Unlike
`
`anticipation, which allows consideration of only one item of prior art, I understand
`
`that obviousness may be shown by considering more than one item of prior art.
`
`Moreover, I have been informed and I understand that so-called objective indicia of
`
`non-obviousness, also known as “secondary considerations,” like the following are
`
`also to be considered when assessing obviousness: (1) commercial success; (2) long-
`
`felt but unresolved needs; (3) copying of the invention by others in the field; (4) initial
`
`expressions of disbelief by experts in the field; (5) failure of others to solve the
`
`problem that the inventor solved; and (6) unexpected results. I also understand that
`
`evidence of objective indicia of non-obviousness must be commensurate in scope
`
`with the claimed subject matter.
`
`A.
`34.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`I understand that a patent must be written such that it can be
`
`understood by a “person of ordinary skill” in the field of the patent.
`
`35.
`
`I understand that this hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art is
`
`considered to have the normal skills and knowledge of a person in a certain technical
`
`field, as of the time of the inventions at issue. I understand that factors that may be
`
`considered in determining the level of ordinary skill in the art include: (1) the
`
`education level of the inventor; (2) the types of problems encountered in the art; (3)
`
`the prior art solutions to those problems; (4) rapidity with which innovations are
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`made; (5) the sophistication of the technology; and (6) the education level of active
`
`workers in the field. I also understand that “the person of ordinary skill” is a
`
`hypothetical person who is presumed to be aware of the universe of available prior
`
`art.
`
`36.
`
`In my opinion, in June of 1995, a person with ordinary skill in the art
`
`with respect to the technology disclosed by the ’697 patent would have at least a
`
`Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, or
`
`another technical field as well as two to three years of work experience in connection
`
`with automobile electronics and telematics.
`
`37. Based on my experience and education, I consider myself (both now and
`
`as of June 1995) to be a person of at least ordinary skill in the art with respect to the
`
`field of technology implicated by the ’697 patent.
`
`B.
`Scope and Content of the Prior Art
`38. The scope and content of the prior art as of June 1995 would have
`
`broadly included vehicle electronics, diagnostics, and communications (including
`
`automobile, truck, airplane, train, and other vehicle electronics, diagnostics, and
`
`communications).
`
`39.
`
`In my opinion, one of ordinary skill in the art as of June 1995 would
`
`have considered Simms and DiLullo to be within the same technical field as the
`
`subject matter set forth in the ’697 patent. Further, both of these references would be
`
`considered highly relevant prior art to the claims of the ’697 patent.
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`C.
`
`40.
`
`Simms Anticipates Claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 17-21, 26, 27, 32, 40, and 61 of
`the ’697 patent
`
`Simms issued on Aug. 2, 1994, and was filed Feb. 6, 1992. As a result, I
`
`understand that Simms is prior art to the ’697 patent pursuant to both 35 U.S.C. §
`
`102(a) because it was published prior to the earliest June 1995 filing date listed on the
`
`face of the ’697 patent, and 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) because it was filed before that June
`
`1995 date.
`
`41.
`
`Simms is not listed on the face of the ’697 patent. Further, based on my
`
`review of the patent’s prosecution history, I note that Simms was not referenced or
`
`relied on by the examiner in rejecting or analyzing the claims.
`
`42.
`
`Simms generally relates to a “fully automatic personal security system”
`
`that can be used with a vehicle. (Simms, Abstract; col. 3, ll. 31-36.) The system
`
`monitors “remote sensors” to diagnose vehicle emergencies including a fire, theft,
`
`collision, airbag activation, or vehicle breakdown. (Simms, col. 1, ll. 33-34; col. 6, ll.
`
`19-30.)
`
`43.
`
`In my opinion, Simms discloses all the elements of claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 17-
`
`21, 26, 27, 32, 40, and 61 of the ’697 patent.
`
`
`1.
`
`Simms Discloses All the Elements of Claim 1
`
`44.
`
`Simms discloses a “vehicle.” In particular, Simms explains that its
`
`system “can be employed with any type of vehicle, including boats and planes.”
`
`(Simms, col. 4, ll. 35-41; see also id. at col. 5, ll. 7-10.) Figure 1 of the patent also shows
`
`-16-
`
`
`
`application of the system to an automobile:
`
`
`
`45.
`
`Simms discloses “a diagnostic system arranged on the vehicle to
`
`diagnose the state of the vehicle or the state of a component of the vehicle and
`
`generate an output indicative or representative thereof.” In particular, Simms explains
`
`that its system includes a “mobile unit 32” located on the vehicle that receives signals
`
`from “a plurality of remote sensors 41.” (Simms, col. 6, ll. 7-11.) The sensors can
`
`include “smoke or heat detectors for detecting a fire within the vehicle, a tamper
`
`switch or motion detector for detecting a possible theft of the vehicle, an impact
`
`detector for detecting a collision, a sensor for detecting activation of a vehicle air-bag,
`
`and any of numerous other sensor types for automatically detecting a wide variety of
`
`-17-
`
`
`
`personal security situations.” (Simms, col. 6, ll. 19-30.) The “mobile unit” includes “a
`
`microcontroller 310.” (Simms, col. 8, ll. 16-25.) The “mobile unit 32” “continuously
`
`polls remote sensors 41 to detect vehicular security conditions.” (Simms, col. 7, ll. 3-
`
`8.) Various vehicle conditions can be diagnosed, including an “accident” or “vehicle
`
`breakdown.” (Simms, col. 1, ll. 33-34.) If a “personal security situation” is detected, a
`
`“personal security system message” is output by the system. (Simms, col. 11, l. 65 –
`
`col. 12, l. 11.) This message includes a “digital code corresponding to the alarm
`
`condition” that was generated by the system’s processor in view of its diagnosis.
`
`(Simms, col. 4, ll. 13-18.) These features are also shown in Simms’ figures. Figure 4
`
`shows a “microcontroller” that receives input from “remote sensors” and generates
`
`diagnostic outputs as a result:
`
`The flowchart of Figure 6A shows that the “microcontroller” “poll[s] remote sensors
`
`41” to determine if a “personal security situation” exists:
`
`
`
`-18-
`
`
`
`
`Simms discloses “a communications device coupled to said diagnostic
`
`46.
`
`system and arranged to automatically establish a communications channel between the
`
`vehicle and a remote facility without manual intervention and wirelessly transmit the
`
`output of said diagnostic system to the remote facility.” In particular, Simms explains
`
`that its system includes a “cellular telephone or other communication device (such as
`
`a communication satellite) connected to the processor through a first communication
`
`circuit which communicates the digital code to a central dispatch station via the
`
`cellular phone.” (Simms, col. 4, ll. 18-24; see also id. at col. 3, ll. 48-54; col. 6, ll. 7-11.)
`
`This communication device allows Simms’ system to “automatically summon an
`
`-19-
`
`
`
`emergency response in accordance with the specific personal needs of the mobile
`
`person.” (Simms, col. 3, ll. 31-36.) More particularly, Simms explains that “if a
`
`personal security situation is detected …, then the program continues to step 521
`
`where microcontroller 310 attempts to transmit the personal security system message.
`
`At step 522, the microcontroller 310 begins to time a redial interval. At step 524, the
`
`microcontroller 310 causes adapter module 360 to seize control of the cellular
`
`telephone 60. This is done even if the cellular phone was already in use. At step 526,
`
`the microcontroller 310 dials the central dispatch station 40. … [I]f the central
`
`dispatch station 40 answers, then at step 528 the microcontroller 310 again polls
`
`position locator 70 for new latitude and longitude coordinate data and the personal
`
`security system message is formatted for transmission to the central dispatch station
`
`40. At step 529, the personal security system message is transmitted.” (Simms, col.
`
`12, ll. 7-29; see also id. at col. 5, ll. 15-23; col. 7, ll. 23-30.) This is also depicted in
`
`Figure 6A, which shows that, after the “microcontroller” detects a “personal security
`
`situation,” the “personal security message” is sent to a “central dispatch station” via a
`
`“cellular telephone”:
`
`-20-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.
`Simms Discloses All the Elements of Claim 2
`47. Claim 2 of the ’697 patent depends on claim 1 and further requires “a
`
`plurality of vehicle sensors mounted on the vehicle, each of said sensors providing a
`
`measurement related to a state of said sensor or a measurement related to a state of
`
`the mounting location.” Simms discloses this element. In particular, Simms explains
`
`that its system includes “a plurality of remote sensors 41 each connected to the
`
`mobile unit 32.” (Simms, col. 6, ll. 7-11.) According to Simms, these sensors can
`
`include “smoke or heat detectors for detecting a fire within the vehicle, a tamper
`
`switch or motion detector for detecting a possible theft of the vehicle, an impact
`
`-21-
`
`
`
`detector for detecting a collision, a sensor for detecting activation of a vehicle air-bag,
`
`and any of numerous other sensor types for automatically detecting a wide variety of
`
`personal security situations.” (Simms, col. 6, ll. 19-30.) The sensors are shown in
`
`Figure 4:
`
`
`48. Claim 2 also requires “a processor coupled to said sensors and arranged
`
`to receive data from said sensors and process the data to generate the output
`
`indicative or representative of the state of the vehicle or the state of a component of
`
`the vehicle.” Simms also discloses this element. In particular, Simms explains that its
`
`system includes a “mobile unit 32” located on the vehicle that receives signals from
`
`the “plurality of remote sensors 41.” (Simms, col. 6, ll. 7-11.) The “mobile unit”
`
`includes “a microcontroller 310.” (Simms, col. 8, ll. 16-25.) The “mobile unit 32”
`
`“continuously polls remote sensors 41 to detect vehicular security conditions.”
`
`(Simms, col. 7, ll. 3-8.) Various vehicle conditions can be diagnosed, including an
`
`-22-
`
`
`
`“accident” or “vehicle breakdown.” (Simms, col. 1, ll. 33-34.) If a “personal security
`
`situation” is detected, a “personal security system message” is output by the system.
`
`(Simms, col. 11, l. 65 – col. 12, l. 11.) This message includes a “digital code
`
`corresponding to the alarm condition” that was generated by the system’s processor
`
`in view of its diagnosis. (Simms, col. 4, ll. 13-18.) These features are also shown in
`
`Simms’ figures. Figure 4 shows a “microcontroller” that receives input from “remote
`
`sensors” and generates diagnostic outputs as a result:
`
`Figure 6A shows that the “microcontroller” “poll[s] remote sensors 41” to determine
`
`if a “personal security situation” exists:
`
`
`
`-23-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3.
`Simms Discloses All the Elements of Claim 5
`49. Claim 5 of the ’697 patent depends on claim 1 and further requires “a
`
`display arranged in the vehicle in a position to be visible from the passenger
`
`compartment, said display being coupled to said diagnostic system and arranged to
`
`display the diagnosis of the state of the vehicle or the state of a component of the
`
`vehicle.” Simms discloses all the elements of this claim. In particular, Simms explains
`
`that “[m]obile unit 32 includes a display 34, which is preferably a liquid crystal display
`
`(LCD) for displaying messages to the mobile person” (i.e., the vehicle occupant).
`
`(Simms, col. 6, ll. 51-53.) A display located in the vehicle dashboard is shown in
`
`-24-
`
`
`
`Figure 2:
`
`
`
`
`
`Additionally, the display is also connected to Simms’ “microcontroller 310” via
`
`“CONTROL, DATA, and ADDRESS busses” to allow various outputs of the
`
`microcontroller to be displayed to the vehicle occupants. (Simms, col. 9, ll. 14-18.)
`
`This is shown in Figure 4:
`
`
`
`-25-
`
`
`
`In view of the above, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that
`
`Simms’ display would display diagnosed emergencies, and that this display, as shown
`
`in Figure 2 above, would be visible from the passenger compartment. Simms also
`
`explains that “data [from central dispatch station 40] may be interpreted by
`
`microcontroller 310 or it may be used to directly access and control any of the
`
`peripheral devices, including the display device 34.” (Simms, col. 9, ll. 6-10.)
`
`Similarly, after an emergency call has been made, “to provide assurance to the vehicle
`
`operator, the central dispatch station 40 must acknowledge receipt of the personal
`
`security system message. … The call-back confirmation is indicated on the
`
`alphanumeric display device 34.” (Simms, col. 12, ll. 30-35.)
`
`
`4.
`Simms Discloses All the Elements of Claim 10
`50. Claim 10 of the ’697 patent depends on claim 1 and further requires “a
`
`plurality of sensors mounted at different locations on the vehicle, each of said sensors
`
`providing a measurement related to a state of said sensor or a measurement related to
`
`a state of the mounting location.” In my opinion, Simms discloses this element for
`
`the same reasons I described above in connection with the “a plurality of vehicle
`
`sensors mounted on the vehicle, each of said sensors providing a measurement related
`
`to a state of said sensor or a measurement related to a state of the mounting location”
`
`element of claim 2.
`
`51. Claim 10 also requires “a processor coupled to said sensor systems and
`
`arranged to diagnose the state of the vehicle or the state of the component of the
`
`-26-
`
`
`
`vehicle based on the measurements of said sensors.” In my opinion, Simms discloses
`
`this element for the same reasons I described above in connection with the “a
`
`processor coupled to said sensors and arranged to receive data from said sensors and
`
`process the data to generate the output indicative or representative of the state of the
`
`vehicle or the state of a component of the vehicle” element of claim 2.
`
`
`5.
`Simms Discloses All the Elem