`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 10, 2013
`
`
`
`PATENT: 8,532,867
`
`INVENTOR: HAGENBUCH
`
`FILED: APRIL 16, 2013
`
`TITLE: APPARATUS FOR TRACKING TRIAL NO.: UNASSIGNED
`AND RECORDING VITAL SIGNS AND
`TASK-RELATED INFORMATION OF A
`VEHICLE TO IDENTIFY OPERATING
`PATTERNS
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DAVID MCNAMARA
`
`
`1.
`
`I, David McNamara, make this declaration in connection with a second
`
`petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,532,867 (“the ‘867 patent”;
`
`Exhibit 1101 to the petition). All statements herein made of my own knowledge
`
`are true, and all statements herein made based on information and belief are
`
`believed to be true. I am over 21 and otherwise competent to make this
`
`declaration. Although I am being compensated for my time in preparing this
`
`declaration, the opinions herein are my own, and I have no stake in the outcome of
`
`the inter partes review proceeding.
`
`2.
`
`Attachment A to this declaration is my curriculum vitae. As shown in my
`
`curriculum vitae, I have devoted my career to the field of automotive electronics. I
`
`
`
`1
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 1
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 1
`
`
`
`earned my Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from the
`
`University of Michigan in 1973 and my Master of Engineering degree in Solid
`
`State Physics from the University of Florida in 1976.
`
`3.
`
`Further, as shown in my curriculum vitae, I have professional and academic
`
`experience in the field of automotive electronics and transportation systems
`
`acquired over a career spanning 36 years. In particular, during this period, I have
`
`worked and otherwise interacted with professionals and students of various
`
`experience and expertise levels in the automotive electronics field. Yet,
`
`throughout, my primary focus has related to identifying, demonstrating, testing,
`
`and manufacturing new automotive and transportation systems embodied in
`
`complex hardware and software products. For example, I have been involved in
`
`the development and integration of various motor vehicle technologies, such as:
`
`embedded vehicle controllers; sensors and actuators as key elements in an engine
`
`control system; diagnostic/maintenance algorithms; multiplexes (or buses) to
`
`reduce wiring, provide a test/diagnostic capability, and to provide control for new
`
`convenience features (e.g., power seat controls); and user interface hardware and
`
`software to implement voice-driven features/technology, audio systems, digital
`
`media and wireless communications. I also have conducted extensive research on
`
`motor vehicle interfaces to permit the safe and easy integration of new electronic
`
`devices within a motor vehicle environment. Recently, I have worked on vehicle
`
`
`
`2
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 2
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 2
`
`
`
`diagnostic systems that monitor a wide range of vehicle parameters and estimate
`
`useful component life, commonly called prognostics. More specifically, I have
`
`worked on modifying existing vehicle diagnostic systems to add the capability of
`
`predicting component life and providing the data to engineers who are managing
`
`fleets of hydrogen-fueled vehicles from a remote base station.
`
`4.
`
`I am currently a consultant for McNamara Technology Solutions LLC and
`
`work with clients in active safety (e.g., mmWave radar based systems), automotive
`
`electrical/electronics architecture, and automotive wireless technology.
`
`5.
`
`I also am an active member of the Society of Automotive Engineers and the
`
`Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and I have been an invited
`
`speaker to various conferences, including the Telematics Update Events
`
`(www.telematicsupdate.com), at which I interact with various members of the
`
`technical community. I participate in the annual Telematics Update Events-
`
`sponsored conferences called “Insurance Telematics,” during which I am apprised
`
`of recent developments in vehicle diagnostics, such as new monitoring approaches
`
`as applied to vehicle performance and driver behavior. I periodically publish
`
`reports on observed trends in automotive electronics, and also co-authored an
`
`invited paper for the Proceedings of the IEEE along with former Ford Research
`
`colleagues. I have contributed articles to the Intelligent Transport System (ITS)
`
`International Magazine (www.itsiternational.com), on Diagnostics/Prognostics and
`
`
`
`3
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 3
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 3
`
`
`
`on the 2009 Consumer Electronics Show (CES). I report on consumer trends and
`
`sensor technology impacting the automotive industry as part of my annual CES
`
`report, which has been published since 2007.
`
`6.
`
`I am a named inventor on five U.S. patents (U.S. Patent No. 4,377,851; U.S.
`
`Patent No. 4,446,447; U.S. Patent No. 5,060,156; U.S. Patent No. 5,003,801; and
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,175,803) that resulted from the development of products for
`
`high-volume production. Of these, U.S. Patent No. 4,377,851 and U.S. Patent No.
`
`4,446,447 relate to pressure sensors used in Ford vehicles, and U.S. Patent No.
`
`5,060,156 relates to the oil change detection system used by Ford in high-volume
`
`production for several years.
`
`Understanding of the Law
`
`7.
`
`For the purposes of this declaration, I have been informed about certain
`
`aspects of the law that are relevant to my analysis and opinions, as set forth in this
`
`section of my declaration.
`
`8.
`
`I understand that “claim construction” is the process of determining a patent
`
`claim’s meaning. I also have been informed and understand that the proper
`
`construction of a claim term is the meaning that a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`(i.e., the technical field to which the patent relates) would have given to that term
`
`at the patent’s filing date. My opinion and analysis with respect to claim
`
`construction are provided from the viewpoint of one of ordinary skill in the art to
`
`
`
`4
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 4
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 4
`
`
`
`which the ‘867 patent pertains at the earliest priority date for the ‘867 patent,
`
`which I have been informed to be February 15, 1994.
`
`9.
`
`I understand that claims in inter partes review proceedings are to be given
`
`their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, which is what I
`
`have done when performing my analysis in this declaration.
`
`10.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is unpatentable as obvious if the subject
`
`matter of the claim as a whole would have been obvious to a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art 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 difference or
`
`differences, if any, between the scope of the claim of the patent under
`
`consideration and the scope of the prior art; and (3) the level of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time the patent was filed.
`
`11.
`
`I understand that prior art references can be combined to reject a claim under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 when there was an apparent reason for one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art, at the time of the invention, to combine the references, which includes, but is
`
`not limited to (A) identifying a teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine
`
`prior art references; (B) combining prior art methods according to known methods
`
`to yield predictable results; (C) substituting one known element for another to
`
`obtain predictable results; (D) using a known technique to improve a similar device
`
`
`
`5
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 5
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 5
`
`
`
`in the same way; (E) applying a known technique to a known device ready for
`
`improvement to yield predictable results; (F) trying a finite number of identified,
`
`predictable potential solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success; or (G)
`
`identifying that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it
`
`for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or
`
`other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art.
`
`12. 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. I am not aware of any
`
`objective indicia of non-obviousness for the ‘867 patent.
`
`Materials Considered
`
`13.
`
`I have read the ‘867 patent and its prosecution history. I have also reviewed
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,939,652 to Steiner (“Steiner”; Exhibit 1106 to the petition); U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,430,432 to Camhi et al. (“Camhi”; Exhibit 1107 to the petition);
`
`
`
`6
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 6
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 6
`
`
`
`Japanese Patent Publication No. H03-085412 to Aoyanagi (“Aoyanagi”; Exhibit
`
`1102 to the petition); and International Patent Publication No. WO 90/03899 to
`
`Vollmer et al. (“Vollmer”; Exhibit 1104 to the petition) along with their
`
`corresponding certified translations (Exhibit 1103 and Exhibit 1105, respectively).
`
`Additionally, I have read Fincham et al., “A Transient Recorder for Road
`
`Accidents,” Automotive Electronics, 1991, Eighth International Conference on
`
`Automotive Electronics, pp. 135–39, Oct. 28–31, 1991 (“Fincham”; Exhibit 1108
`
`to the petition), G.B. Hamilton & M. Kirshenblatt, Real-Time Vehicle Systems
`
`Monitoring, 3 Microcomputers in Civil Engineering 45 (1988) (Exhibit 1111);
`
`Trevor O. Jones & Wallace K. Tsuha, Fully Integrated Truck Information and
`
`control Systems (TIACS), SAE Technical Paper 831775 (1983) (Exhibit 1112);
`
`Daniel Sellers & Thomas J. Benard, An Update on the OmniTRACSr Two-Way
`
`Satellite Mobile Communications System and its Application to the Schneider
`
`National Truckload Fleet, Proceedings of the 1992 International Congress on
`
`Transportation Electronics, Society of Automotive Engineers, Dearborn, MI, SAE
`
`P-260 (1992) (Exhibit 1113); and LeRoy G. Hagenbuch, Truck/Mobile Equipment
`
`Performance Monitoring Management Information Systems (MIS), SAE Technical
`
`Paper 861249 (1992) (Exhibit 1114).
`
`
`
`7
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 7
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 7
`
`
`
`Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`14.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinion regarding the “level of ordinary
`
`skill in the art” at the time of the invention, which I have been told is February 15,
`
`1994.
`
`15.
`
`I understand that the 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. 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 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.
`
`16.
`
`In view of the factors above, it is my opinion that, in February 1994, a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art would have had one of the following: (1) a
`
`bachelor’s degree in electrical, mechanical or computer science/engineering (or a
`
`closely related field) with at least four years of experience working with
`
`automotive electronics, (2) a master’s degree in electrical, mechanical or computer
`
`science/engineering (or a closely related field) with at least two years of experience
`
`working with automotive electronics, or (3) a PhD in electrical, mechanical or
`
`
`
`8
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 8
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 8
`
`
`
`computer science/engineering (or a closely related field) focused on automotive
`
`electronic systems.
`
`17. Based on my experience and education, I consider myself to be a person of
`
`at least ordinary skill in the art with respect to the field of technology implicated by
`
`the ‘867 patent (as of 1994). Unless stated otherwise, my opinions herein are
`
`provided from the viewpoint of one of ordinary skill in the art in February 1994,
`
`i.e., at the time of the earliest priority date for the ‘867 patent.
`
`Background on the State of the Art
`
`18.
`
`It is my experience that since the 1980s as capable and affordable embedded
`
`systems and sensors became available, augmented by wireless communications;
`
`these new capabilities were applied to the transportation industry. As reported by
`
`the researchers G.B. Hamilton and M. Kirshenblatt of Sypher: Mueller
`
`International Inc. in their 1988 paper, “Real-time Vehicle Systems Monitoring,”
`
`(Exhibit 1111). “The use of computer-based systems to monitor and display
`
`vehicle location is currently an area of strong interest, and a number of
`
`organizations have developed such systems…. Our requirement for vehicle data
`
`acquisition systems (DAS) was to monitor and store data on driving cycle,
`
`temperatures, pressures, engine stoichiometry, etc. In the course of working with
`
`fleets, it became clear that if vehicle systems data could be transmitted to a base
`
`station in real time, could be interpreted by base station software to provide a
`
`
`
`9
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 9
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 9
`
`
`
`diagnostic capability, and could be combined with a map location display
`
`capability, then it would be of interest to a large number of fleets.” (Id. at 45).
`
`The figure below taken from the 1988 Hamilton paper contains all the elements of
`
`a modern fleet tracking and diagnostic system with communications capability.
`
`
`
`(Id. at Fig. 3 (annotated)).
`19. The seminal paper published by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
`
`in 1983 titled, “Fully Integrated Truck Information and Control Systems (TIACS)”
`
`by Trevor O. Jones and Wallace K. Tsuha of TRW Inc. (Exhibit 1112) “identifies
`
`the current, near term, and long range system requirements and suggests ideas for a
`
`fully integrated Truck Information And Control System (TIACS)….” (Ex. 1112,
`
`1). The industry recognized the benefits of applying embedded systems and sensor
`
`
`
`10
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 10
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 10
`
`
`
`technology to commercial vehicles for “optimizing asset utilization,” “improving
`
`productivity” and “reducing operating cost.” (Id.). Additionally, the industry
`
`recognized “the need to implement a recording and monitoring capability for
`
`improved asset management and reduction of diagnostic and maintenance costs.”
`
`(Id. at 7). In my opinion, this seminal paper represents the “state of the art”
`
`describing the need and approach to monitoring and recording production-related
`
`and vital sign parameters. As shown below, the elements (e.g., performance or
`
`task and maintenance or vital sign monitoring and recording) of a modern
`
`commercial fleet system are described.
`
`(Id. at Fig. 11).
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 11
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 11
`
`
`
`FIfiFflNfl-flltl MDHITDFI'
`
`AH DEFLEfiTflH tflH'I'FIDI.
`
`
`
`
`THE-III- HIFHFGEFIHTIDH I'm-Dunne
`
`
`
`
`
`
`\\F‘II'TH 'I'ullllll'. MEIR-LIP Ash-ET
`TIRE MESH-1|” HUMTflH
`\l'x, T'flflfiLlI-I'Mnl'l! I.” SEE‘IIEIH-E Mfllfll'l'ljfl
`TRAILER .Iflljrl: “3515-1
`"‘1
`Eiifi‘fllflfltfl- FL'IEL HtHIGEHEH'I'
`
`'-
`
`m 3113mm ETEI'EM tDr-H'I'IDLE
`
`
`[HQ-I'll WUHB EDH'I'H-DL
`
`15 - Vehicle perfermenee meniters and
`Fig.
`central
`systems
`ennnEttEd
`tn
`the
`TIRE-5
`Serial. Cemunitet 113115 Link.
`
`
`
`(Id. at Fig. 15).
`(Id. at Fig. 15).
`
`DIAGHEIE'I'IDWJAWHTT “HITCH
`
` Humming: Mum-ma
`
`FEEL TAIL HEtEIFIDIFI
`
`11
`
`- Vehicle maintenance
`Fig.
`systems
`eenueeted
`tn:
`neetie
`Satial Bmunieatiene Link
`
`and diag—
`the
`TIHES
`
`
`
`(Id. at Fig. 14).
`(Id. at Fig. 14).
`
`
`
`12
`
`12
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 12
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 12
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 12
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 12
`
`
`
`
`
`(Id. at Fig. 18).
`20. Those skilled in the art were aware of the need to combine data transmission
`
`with recording systems and, therefore, would have been motivated to do so. An
`
`example is the Qualcomm OmniTRACSr product first launched in 1988. It is my
`
`experience that from 1988 -1992 companies, such as Qualcomm, first developed
`
`and expanded the capability of on-board embedded systems to include two-way
`
`communications such as emergency messaging. The Qualcomm OmniTRACSr
`
`product for heavy trucks is an example and is described in the 1992 Proceedings of
`
`the International Congress on Transportation Electronics, “An Update on the
`
`
`
`13
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 13
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 13
`
`
`
`OmniTRACSr Two-Way Satellite Mobile Communications System and its
`
`Application to the Schneider National Truckload Fleet”, Daniel Sellers of
`
`Schneider National and Thomas J. Benard Qualcomm, October 1992. (Exhibit
`
`1113). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have also known that
`
`those types of sensors were commonly used in systems to monitor vehicle-
`
`operating parameters, provide external signals when certain conditions were
`
`reached, and that wireless technology could be used to transmit data and alert
`
`others of those conditions.
`
`The ‘867 Patent
`
`21. The ‘867 patent (Ex. 1101) describes a system for monitoring production-
`
`related (e.g., vehicle speed) and vital sign (e.g., crash detection) parameters,
`
`detecting a collision, automatically sending a distress signal if a collision is
`
`detected, and recording pre-collision production-related parameters and post-
`
`collision vital sign parameters. (Id. at 6:30–8:25).
`
`22. Figure 2A of the ‘867 patent illustrates the hardware architecture for the
`
`claimed system. The system is controlled by processor 41, which receives
`
`production-related inputs 67 and vital sign inputs 73. (Id. at 7:51–53, Fig. 2B). As
`
`noted in the ‘867 patent specification, a system for monitoring production-related
`
`and vital sign parameters was well-known at the time of the ‘867 patent’s priority
`
`date:
`
`
`
`14
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 14
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 14
`
`
`
`Recently, it has become increasingly common for heavy-duty vehicles
`such as the vehicle 11 in FIG. 1A to include a plurality of sensors
`distributed about the vehicle for the purpose of monitoring certain
`important performance and vital sign parameters.
`
`(Id. at 6:1–5).
`
`23. Likewise, the ‘867 patent specification acknowledges that the enumerated
`
`production-related and vital sign sensors were all well-known at the time of the
`
`‘867 patent’s priority date:
`
`Each of the foregoing vital sign and production-related sensors 73 and
`67 is a well known sensor that is commercially available.
`
`(Id. at 6:37–7:1).
`
`24. Regarding the system’s method for collision detection, the ‘867 patent
`
`specification describes only one method:
`
`[T]he system recognizes a crash when the value of the data sampled
`from the accelerometer 73L exceeds a pre-programmed critical value
`116.
`
`(Id. at 25:14–16).
`
`25. Likewise, the wireless distress signal sent automatically in the event of a
`
`collision is only mentioned once in the specification of the ‘867 patent:
`
`[A] crash event sensed by the processor 41 as explained hereinafter
`may automatically key the transceiver 55 to download the data in the
`RAM 47 and also serve to broadcast a distress signal, which serves to
`
`
`
`15
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 15
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 15
`
`
`
`alert other personnel (e.g., at a central station) that immediate aid may
`be required.
`
`(Id. at 7:44–49).
`
`26. Figure 2B of the ‘867 patent provides a functional diagram of the system.
`
`(Id. at Fig. 2B, 7:50–51). As illustrated in Figure 2B, the processor receives data
`
`from both production-related and vital sign sensors at periodic sampling intervals.
`
`(Id. at 7:51–53). The data received by the processor 41 is then stored inside the
`
`RAM 47, which includes chronology memory 83 and diagnostic memories 85, 87,
`
`89. (Id. at Fig. 2B, 7:58–64). At periodic sampling intervals, processor 41 stores
`
`all production-related parameters into chronology memory 83. (Id. at 7:53–57,
`
`11:22–25). Additionally, the processor 41 updated the diagnostic memory 87 if
`
`any of the vital sign parameters is “one of the historical ten highest or lowest
`
`readings” such that the diagnostic memory 87 maintains “the ten most extreme
`
`readings from each of the vital sign sensors 73.” (Id. at 8:9–24).
`
`27. Diagnostic memories 85 and 89 are used to store data if any one of the vital
`
`sign sensor 73 readings exceed a pre-determined critical value. (Id. at 7:65–8:9).
`
`Specifically, when the system detects a collision, see supra at ¶ 24, processor 41
`
`stores all the production-related parameters stored in chronology memory 83 into
`
`diagnostic memory 85. (Id. at 7:65–8:1, 11:66–12:3, 25:16–20). Likewise, if any
`
`of the vital sign sensors exceeds a pre-determined value, processor 41 stores the
`
`
`
`16
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 16
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 16
`
`
`
`identity of the vital sign sensor, the value of the vital sign sensor, and a pre-
`
`determined amount of production related data into diagnostic memory 89. (Id. at
`
`8:1–7).
`
`28. The ‘867 patent specification also “contemplates continuing to gather data
`
`and store the data to the memories 85 and 89 so long as the value of the vital sign
`
`parameter exceeds the critical value 116.” (Id. at 25:22–24). Accordingly, the
`
`‘867 patent specification contemplates recording both production-related and vital
`
`sign parameters after a collision. (Id. at 25:21–36).
`
`Claim Construction
`
`29.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinion regarding the claim terms:
`
`“monitoring production-related parameters,” “monitoring vital signs,” and “a
`
`second memory.” I understand that, prior to the expiration of the patent, the terms
`
`appearing in the claims are to be interpreted according to their “broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation in light of the specification of the patent in which it
`
`appears.” After the patent expires, the terms appearing in the claims are to be
`
`interpreted according to the standard applied in a district court. I further
`
`understand that under the standard applied in the courts, claims generally are given
`
`their ordinary and customary meanings to a person of ordinary skill in the art in
`
`question at the time of the invention, i.e., as of the effective filing date of the patent
`
`application. I am informed by counsel that in construing claims, courts look first
`
`
`
`17
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 17
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 17
`
`
`
`and primarily to intrinsic evidence, which includes the claims themselves, the
`
`patent specification, and the prosecution history of the patent. I am further
`
`informed by counsel that the court will rely heavily on the written description, or
`
`specification, of the patent at issue for guidance as to the meaning of its claims,
`
`and that the specification is the best guide to the meaning of a disputed term and is
`
`usually dispositive. With this understanding in mind, I interpret the phrases
`
`“monitoring production-related parameters,” “monitoring vital signs,” and “a
`
`second memory.” Under either standard my construction is the same.
`
`30. The phrase “monitoring production-related parameters” in claims 15–26
`
`should be construed to mean sampling data from sensors that provide indicia of the
`
`work done by a vehicle. The specification of the ‘867 patent supports this
`
`construction because the specification describes processor 41 which samples data
`
`from the production-related sensors 67 that measure parameters, such as engine
`
`RPM, throttle position, engine fuel consumption, distance traveled, ground speed,
`
`road incline, angle of turn, steering wheel, status of brake, vehicle direction, load,
`
`and dump. (Ex. 1101, 1:45–47, 2:67–3:3, 6:32–49, 7:50–57).
`
`31. The phrase “monitoring vital signs” in claims 15–26 should be construed to
`
`mean sampling data from sensors indicative of the state of health of the vehicle.
`
`The specification of the ‘867 patent supports this construction because the
`
`specification describes processor 41 which samples data from the vital sign sensors
`
`
`
`18
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 18
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 18
`
`
`
`73 that measure parameters, such as engine oil temperature, engine oil pressure,
`
`engine coolant level, engine crankcase pressure, engine fuel pressure, transmission
`
`oil temperature, transmission oil level, differential oil temperature, differential oil
`
`level, current amperes to drive motor, drive motor temperature, crash
`
`(acceleration), and tire air pressure. (Id. at 1:33–44, 6:30–32, 6:50–65, 7:50–53,
`
`7:60–62, 8:11–14).
`
`32. The phrase “a second memory” in claims 15–26 should be construed to
`
`mean any set of memory addresses separate from a first set of memory addresses.
`
`The specification of the ‘867 patent is consistent with this construction because it
`
`describes a single memory device, RAM 47, that contains multiple memories
`
`composed of “a number of address locations in the RAM 47.” (Id. at 7:11–28,
`
`7:58–64, 9:57–63, 12:44–46, Fig. 2A, Fig. 2B).
`
`Claim 15 is Obvious Over Aoyanagi in View of
`Vollmer and Steiner
`
`It is my opinion that claim 15 would have been obvious to one of ordinary
`
`33.
`
`skill in the art over Aoyanagi in view of Vollmer and Steiner. My analysis of the
`
`scope and content of the prior art references follows. Additionally, I have
`
`compared the prior art references with claim 15 of the ‘867 patent, noting
`
`differences, or lack thereof.
`
`34. Aoyanagi is directed to “a recording apparatus for vehicle running
`
`conditions, especially to a recording apparatus for vehicle running conditions
`19
`
`
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 19
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 19
`
`
`
`(hereinafter referred to as a recording apparatus) that records running data at the
`
`time when the vehicle has received shocks due to an accident or the like, while
`
`protecting those data from corruption.” (Ex. 1103, 70:2:3–9). Likewise, Vollmer
`
`teaches an emergency call device that monitors and captures vehicle operating
`
`parameters such as “number of passengers 47, seat positions 48 of the passengers,
`
`speed and deceleration measurement 49, speeding 40.” (Ex. 1105, 6:26–27).
`
`Furthermore, Vollmer’s emergency call device “sends an automatic emergency call
`
`in the event of danger, accident or breakdown.” (Id. at Abstract). As discussed in
`
`detail below, see infra ¶¶ 54–58, it would have been obvious to a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the ‘867 patent’s priority date to combine
`
`Vollmer’s automatic emergency distress call feature with Aoyanagi’s recording
`
`device to rapidly inform emergency personnel of the accident and facilitate a swift
`
`response. (Id. at 3:5–13, 6:21–23). Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art would have understood that the Aoyanagi recording apparatus in combination
`
`with Vollmer’s emergency call device would include “An apparatus for recording
`
`operation of a vehicle and facilitating emergency response in the event of a
`
`collision of the vehicle,” as recited in claim 15.
`
`35. The Aoyanagi recording apparatus monitors specific vehicle running
`
`parameters by using a variety of sensors. (Ex. 1103, 71:1:50–72:1:2).
`
`Specifically, Aoyanagi monitors the sensor data by “record[ing] data of the
`
`
`
`20
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 20
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 20
`
`
`
`running conditions of the vehicle from these sensors….” (Id. at 71:1:6–8).
`
`Vehicle running parameters detected at the sensors are recorded “every 0.1 to 0.2
`
`seconds” so “the recording apparatus can continuously store the latest running
`
`information for a total time period of about 1.5 minutes to a little over 3 minutes.”
`
`(Id. at 72:1:29–33). Aoyanagi discusses monitoring vehicle ground speed by
`
`using, for example, vehicle wheel speed sensors. (Id. at 71:1:65–71:2:2). As seen
`
`in Figure 2 reproduced below, Aoyanagi describes monitoring engine throttle
`
`position “by detecting the butterfly position of an intake manifold 22a activated by
`
`an accelerator 26 through a rotation angle sensor 24 mounted within the intake
`
`manifold 22a of the engine 22.” (Id. at 71:2:20–23, Fig. 2). Aoyanagi discusses
`
`monitoring the status of a passenger’s seatbelt by using “A seat belt fastened
`
`sensor (simply a switch)[, which] is mounted on seat belt fasteners.”. (Id. at
`
`71:2:62–64). Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have
`
`understood that the Aoyanagi recording apparatus would include “sensors for
`
`monitoring production-related parameters of the vehicle, where the parameters
`
`include ground speed of the vehicle, a position of a throttle for an engine of the
`
`vehicle,… and a status of a seat belt,” as recited in claim 15.
`
`
`
`21
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 21
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 21
`
`
`
`
`
`36. As seen in Figure 3 reproduced below, Aoyanagi discloses monitoring the
`
`status of the vehicle’s braking system by “detecting the hydraulic pressure of a
`
`hydraulic pressure cylinder brake 32 by a hydraulic pressure sensor 28 provided at
`
`the hydraulic pressure cylinder brake 32 activated by a brake 30.” (Id. at 71:2:28–
`
`35, Fig. 3). The brake pedal position is detected from the hydraulic pressure and
`
`recorded. (Id. at 71:1:6–9, 71:2:28–35).
`
`37. A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the ‘867 patent’s priority
`
`date would have understood that when no pressure is applied to the brake pedal,
`
`the hydraulic pressure sensor 28 would detect an amount of pressure that
`
`corresponds to an “off” state of the braking system, i.e. when no braking pressure
`
`is applied to the brake 30. On the other hand, when pressure is applied to the brake
`
`pedal, the hydraulic pressure sensor 28 would detect an increased amount of
`
`pressure that corresponds to an “on” state of the braking system.
`
`38. Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time of the ‘867 patent’s priority date to make a straight forward
`22
`
`
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 22
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 22
`
`
`
`modification to Aoyanagi’s brake monitoring method to create a simpler system
`
`that only monitors the braking system for an on or off status. A person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would have made Aoyanagi’s apparatus recognize the braking
`
`system as “off” when the hydraulic pressure was at its rest state (i.e., no pressure
`
`applied to the brake pedal). Conversely, the apparatus would recognize the system
`
`as “on” for all hydraulic pressure readings above the rest state pressure (i.e.,
`
`pressure is being applied to the brake pedal, or non-zero pressure is applied). A
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify
`
`Aoyanagi’s brake sensors to monitor only the on/off status in order to create a
`
`simpler system for applications that only need to record whether or not the brakes
`
`were applied. The Fincham reference, for example, supports this conclusion
`
`because it teaches using the on/off status of the brake light to record when and
`
`whether the brakes were applied before, during, and after a collision (Ex. 1108,
`
`135:1:52–54, 136:1:15, 136:2:32, Table 1, Fig. 2). Aoyanagi discusses using brake
`
`pedal position to detect vehicle acceleration/deceleration (i.e., a collision). (Ex.
`
`1103, 71:2:6–10). Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have
`
`understood that the Aoyanagi recording apparatus would include “sensors for
`
`monitoring production-related parameters of the vehicle, where the parameters
`
`include… an on/off status of a braking system of the vehicle,” as recited in claim
`
`15.
`
`
`
`23
`
`TOYOTA Ex. 1110, p. 23
`
`OWNER Ex. 2044, page 23
`
`
`
`
`
`39. The Aoyanagi recording apparatus monitors vital sign parameters of the
`
`vehicle. Specifically, the Aoyanagi apparatus monitors vehicle acceleration and
`
`deceleration. (Id. at 71:2:3). Acceleration and deceleration are changes in
`
`velocity. Additionally, Aoyanagi teaches using acceleration sensor 18 to measure
`
`impact force and direction of a collision. (Id. at 71:2:65–72:1:2). Alternatively,
`
`engine speed, accelerator pedal position, brake pedal position, and other sensors
`
`can be used in place of sensor 18 to measure acceleration/deceler