`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`Case CBM2013-00004
`Patent 8,090,598
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF IVAN ZATKOVICH
`
`
`Progressive Exhibit 2013
`Liberty Mutual v. Progressive
`CBM2013-00004
`
`
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 1
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF IVAN ZATKOVICH
`
`
`
`
`
`I, Ivan Zatkovich, hereby declare under penalty of perjury:
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`A.
`
`Scope of Assignment
`
`1.
`
`I was retained by the law firm of Jones Day, on behalf of the
`
`Progressive Casualty Insurance Company (“Progressive”), to render opinions
`
`regarding support in U.S. Patent Application No. 09/571,650 (the “’650
`
`application”) for certain terms in the claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,090,598 (the
`
`“’598 patent”).
`
`B.
`
`Scope of Declaration
`
`2.
`
`The following are materials discussed in this declaration:
`
`a. The ’598 patent.
`
`b. The ’650 application.
`
`3.
`
`I have been asked, with regard to the priority date of the ’598 patent
`
`claims, to opine if the ’650 application discloses the subject matter of the
`
`independent claims of the ’598 patent.
`
`C. Background and Experience
`
`4.
`
`The following is a summary of my professional experience and
`
`qualifications. My complete curriculum vitae is provided as Exhibit 2014.
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 2
`
`
`
`• I have more than 4 years experience designing and implementing vehicle
`
`telematics systems and have designed and implemented ecommerce
`
`computer systems for the insurance industry, such as for Geico and
`
`Hartford.
`
`• I have over thirty-one years experience in computer science, network
`
`communications, and software development, which includes eight years
`
`of experience in the design and development of financial and insurance
`
`business applications including development of claims processing
`
`systems, policyholder systems, financial network products, and electronic
`
`transaction products.
`
`• I received a Bachelor’s degree in Computer Science, with a minor in
`
`Electrical Engineering Digital Circuit Design, from the University of
`
`Pittsburgh in 1980. I completed a master’s thesis in Computer Networks.
`
`• In addition to a master’s thesis, my other publications include articles on
`
`network design in Byte Magazine and programming techniques and
`
`tutorials in Sync Magazine. I also presented a paper concerning High
`
`Volume Web Content at the Momentum conference in August 2003. I
`
`have given presentations on ICGS Computer Graphic Standards at the
`
`Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) SigGraph
`
`Conference, as well as on Internet publishing standards at the Momentum
`
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 3
`
`
`
`Conference.
`
`• My professional memberships include IEEE, International Internet
`
`Society, and Association for Computing Machinery.
`
`• I have served as a committee member for ISO and ANSI standards
`
`organizations where I had the responsibility of defining disk and network
`
`communication standards.
`
`• My certifications include IBM Websphere Certified Solutions Expert,
`
`Capability Maturity Model (CMM), and Project Management
`
`Professional (PMP).
`
`5.
`
`Specific systems that I have designed and developed include:
`
`• Utility Partners – Customized Wireless Telematics Systems for Gas and
`
`Electric utility companies. These systems contained:
`
`o Wireless communications between the field service trucks and the
`
`remote central dispatch system.
`
`o Monitoring of the status of the field service representatives and
`
`truck location.
`
`o Wireless transmission and receiving of work order information and
`
`status to and from the field service truck.
`
`• GEICO – Designed and developed eCommerce website for GEICO
`
`Policyholders to:
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 4
`
`
`
`o Allow policyholders to retrieve policy information, coverage and
`
`premium information.
`
`o Recommend and change policy parameters and re-estimate
`
`premiums.
`
`o Provide on-line policy quotes to new visitors.
`
`• Hartford Insurance – Designed and developed eCommerce website for
`
`Policyholders and Claims adjusters for:
`
`o Online submission of auto insurance claims.
`
`o Automation of claims processing.
`
`o Performing subrogation application to determine the share of
`
`settlements for multiple policy coverage.
`
`• Smith Barney – Developed remote access network infrastructure &
`
`wireless PDA financial system.
`
`6.
`
`Examples of cases where I have previously testified are:
`
`• Swapalease v. Sublease Exchange.com (Patent Litigation)
`
`Opined on the infringement of eCommerce systems and online exchange
`
`of auto lease contracts, and the provision or transfer of auto insurance for
`
`auto lease requirements.
`
`• ABC inc. v. Cisco WebEx (Patent Litigation)
`
`Opined on the use and transmission of data from a remote module to a
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 5
`
`
`
`central location for the purposes of viewing information from that remote
`
`module and sending back control commands.
`
`• Ronald A. Katz v. Fifth Third Bank (Patent Litigation)
`
`Opined on Call center systems, automated processing of Banking,
`
`Mortgage, and credit cards transactions.
`
`7.
`
`Exhibit 2014 details my experiences with these companies. Based on
`
`my years of hands-on experience with wireless transmission of data, including
`
`vehicle data, and the processing of calculation of insurance premiums, I am very
`
`familiar with technology associated with the ’598 patent.
`
`8.
`
`Unless noted otherwise, my statements and opinions reflect the
`
`understanding as of May 2000 of a person of ordinary skill in the art, as defined by
`
`Petitioner, as follows: The field of art relevant to the ’598 patent is insurance, and
`
`more particularly determining the risk of insuring a vehicle operator based on
`
`telematics data; a person of ordinary skill in the art (a “POSITA”) concerning the
`
`vehicle telematics aspects pertinent to the ’598 Patent (apart from the insurance
`
`risk aspects), as of January 1996, would have at least a B.S. degree in electrical
`
`engineering, computer engineering, computer science or the equivalent thereof and
`
`at least one to two years of experience with telematics systems for vehicles.
`
`9.
`
`eComp Consultants is being compensated at a rate of $350 per hour
`
`for my services.
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 6
`
`
`
`
`
`II. Materials Reviewed
`
`The following materials were reviewed in preparation for forming my opinion.
`
`• ’598 patent.
`
`• ’650 application.
`
`
`
`III. Opinions On Priority Date For ’598 Claims
`
`A. Applicable Legal Standard to Establish a Claim to Priority
`
`10.
`
`I understand that the applicable legal standard to establish a claim of
`
`priority is as set forth in the Board’s March 15, 2013 Decision to Institute this
`
`proceeding, namely that a patent claim is entitled to the benefit of the filing date of
`
`an earlier filed application only if the disclosure of the earlier filed application
`
`provides support for the patent claim. As explained by the Board in its Decision,
`
`the test is whether the disclosure of the earlier filed application reasonably conveys
`
`to those skilled in the art that the inventor had possession at that time of the
`
`claimed subject matter. I have applied this legal standard in rendering my opinions
`
`as set forth herein.
`
`
`
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 7
`
`
`
`B. The ’650 Application Discloses Each of the Limitations of the
`
`Independent Claims
`
`a) Preambles of the Independent Claims. The ’650 application discloses the
`first paragraph of all of the independent claims (e.g., a risk management
`system).
`
`11. All of the ’598 independent claims recite in their respective preambles
`
`“a risk management system.” The ’650 application discloses a risk management
`
`system. The ’650 application is primarily directed towards managing risk involved
`
`in ensuring a person or vehicle. This is shown throughout the specification of the
`
`’650 application, such as in Figure 2 where the insured is labeled as a “unit of
`
`risk.” The computer and communications system shown in Figure 2 handles and
`
`manages data from the unit of risk so that the system can perform insurance rating,
`
`billing, and claims processing. As another example, the ’650 application discloses
`
`a risk management system at page 1, lines 11-15: “The present invention relates to
`
`data acquisition, processing and communicating systems, and particularly to a
`
`system for acquiring and handling relevant data for an insured unit of risk for
`
`purposes of providing a more accurate determination of cost of insurance for the
`
`unit of risk and for communicating or quoting the so determined cost to an owner
`
`of the unit of risk.” The ’650 further shows this by the system monitoring and
`
`communicating risk data in order to obtain increased amounts of data relating to
`
`the safety or risk of use. (See ’650 application at 1:18-24.)
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 8
`
`
`
`b) Server Receiver Elements. The ’650 application discloses the Server
`Receiver elements, which are present in independent claims 1, 31, 33,
`and 78.
`
`12.
`
`Independent claims 1, 31, 33, and 78 include a (server) receiver
`
`limitation. The Board analyzed claim 1 as representative of the other independent
`
`claims with respect to the “server receiver” element. According to claim 1, a
`
`server receiver has the capability to wirelessly receive selected onboard vehicle
`
`data. Secondly, the selected onboard vehicle data is required to have been
`
`monitored by an in-vehicle data monitoring device within a vehicle. I find that
`
`both of the server receiver aspects are disclosed in the ’650 application for the
`
`following reasons.
`
`13. First, the ’650 application describes the operations control center 416
`
`as having the wirelessly receiving capability recited for this element of claim 1:
`
`“The vehicle is linked to an operation control center 416 by a communications link
`
`418, preferably comprising a conventional cellular telephone interconnection, but
`
`also comprising satellite transmission, magnetic or optical media, radio frequency
`
`or other known communication technology.” (’650 application at 12:9-12.) The
`
`communications link 428 of Figure 4 is a wireless communications link (e.g.,
`
`“cellular telephone interconnection”).
`
`14. For the control center 416 to receive a wireless communication over
`
`the link 418, the control center 416 must necessarily have a wireless
`
`
`
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 9
`
`
`
`communications receiving device, such as the server receiver mentioned in claim
`
`1. Because of this, a POSITA would find that the ’650 application inherently
`
`discloses that at least one wireless transmitter exists on the vehicle side of the
`
`communications link and at least one wireless server receiver exists at the control
`
`center side of the link.
`
`15. Second, the ’650 application also makes clear that the wireless
`
`transmission associated with the operations control center 416 contains the selected
`
`onboard vehicle data as monitored by an in-vehicle data monitoring device. To a
`
`POSITA, Figure 4, especially when read alongside Figures 2 and 5, shows the on-
`
`board device 300 in communication with a variety of sensors (412, 414) with a
`
`wireless communications link to communicate event data 500 and stored sensor
`
`data 502 to the control center 416.
`
`16. More specifically, Figure 4 depicts the communication link 418
`
`between an on-board data logging device 300 and an operation control center 416.
`
`Device 300 of Figure 4 is shown in Figure 4 as interfacing with the vehicle databus
`
`and/or sensors 412. Device 300’s onboard monitoring operations are also
`
`described at page 11, lines 9-11: “[a]n on-board computer 300 monitors and
`
`records various sensors and operator actions to acquire the desired data for
`
`determining a fair cost of insurance.” Figure 4 further depicts device 300 receiving
`
`data from vehicle databus and/or sensors 412 through communication link 418 in
`
`
`
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 10
`
`
`
`order to provide the sensor data information to the operations control center 416.
`
`This discloses that the selected onboard vehicle data (from vehicle databus and/or
`
`sensors 412 and device 300) is wirelessly transmitted (via communications link
`
`418) to a server receiver (operations control center 416) as shown in Figure 4.
`
`Accordingly, Figure 4 and its associated description identifies the type of data
`
`being communicated over the wireless communications link 418 as the data from
`
`the on-board data logging and/or communication device 300. Additionally, the
`
`selected data elements are data monitored by an in-vehicle data monitoring device
`
`(i.e., the vehicle data bus and/or sensors 412).
`
`17. Figure 5 also discloses the type of data being transmitted from the unit
`
`of risk 200 (vehicle) to the insurer. Figure 5 shows the communication of event
`
`data 500 and stored sensor data 502 from the unit of risk 200 (e.g., vehicle) to the
`
`insurer which is performing the operations starting at begin block 506.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 11
`
`
`
`VEHICLE
`
`EVENT/SENSOR DATA
`
`INSURER
`
`
`
`
`
`18. As illustrated by the annotations above, Figure 5 depicts the vehicle
`
`providing event data 500 and stored sensor data 502 to the insurer. Such
`
`information is communicated through a wireless communications link 418: “[t]he
`
`communications link to a central control station [(i.e., the insurer]] is accomplished
`
`through the cellular telephone, radio, satellite or other wireless communication
`
`system 314.” (’650 application at 11:20-22; see also id. at 18:30–19:1.) This is
`
`also shown in the ’650’s discussion of the second category of trigger events – i.e.,
`
`those “necessary for proper billing of insurance.” (Id. at 17:8-9.) As expressly
`
`
`
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 12
`
`
`
`stated in the ’650, such trigger events “may result in a surcharge or discount during
`
`the insurance billing process” and “would be recorded in the in-vehicle recording
`
`device for future upload.” (Id. at 16:30–17:1; see also id. at 18:5, emphasis
`
`added.) The ’650 application discloses wireless uploading to a remote location
`
`such as through communications link 418 to the operations control center 416.
`
`(See, e.g., id. at 12:9-12; see also id. at 17:1-2.) Accordingly, a POSITA would
`
`understand that “future uploading” (as referenced on page 16, line 30 – page 17,
`
`line 1) refers to wireless uploading from the vehicle via communications link 418
`
`to a remote location (e.g., operations control center 416). Lastly, an example of a
`
`trigger event resulting in a surcharge (as mentioned above in the passage from page
`
`16, line 30 – page 17, line 1) includes: “[n]on-use of turn signals . . . [where] [l]ow
`
`use could result in surcharge.” (Id. at 18:14.)
`
`19. Figure 5 and its associated description identifies the type of data
`
`(stored sensor data) being wirelessly communicated to the insurer (i.e., via the
`
`operations control center 416). Additionally, the selected data elements (stored
`
`sensor data) are data monitored by an in-vehicle data monitoring device as
`
`indicated by event data 500 and “stored sensor data” 502. Examples of data that
`
`can be monitored and recorded on the vehicle are given in the ’650 application.
`
`(Id. at 10:26–11:7; id. at 12:15–14:26.) These data elements are communicated to
`
`the computer 300 via a cable that connects the computer to the vehicle data bus.
`
`
`
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 13
`
`
`
`(Id. at 11:13-15.) These data are monitored through various sensors 412 that are
`
`connected to a vehicle data bus. (Id. at 12:5-8.) Calculated and derived data
`
`elements may be generated and added to the recorded raw data elements. (Id. at
`
`7:16-19.) Computer 300 is part of the configuration of devices in a vehicle and is
`
`therefore the in-vehicle monitoring device. (Id. at Figures 3 and 4 and 11:9-11.)
`
`20. Still further, the ’650 application describes with respect to Figure 2
`
`that the insured 206 can communicate with the insurer 208 either through the
`
`communications link 418 or over the Internet. (See, e.g., id. at 16:30–17:1; id. at
`
`18:5; id. at 18:30–19:1.) This is respectively shown on Figure 2 by the two secure
`
`data communications symbols connecting unit of risk 200 with insurer 208. To
`
`handle the communications link 408, a POSITA would understand that the insurer
`
`208 on Figure 2 must necessarily have a server receiver for wirelessly receiving
`
`over communications link 408 the vehicle data being transmitted by the unit of risk
`
`200.
`
`21. A POSITA would conclude that when vehicle data is communicated
`
`(e.g., wirelessly transmitted) from a recording device on a vehicle to another
`
`location via a single communications link, that a server and an associated server
`
`receiver necessarily are used to receive the incoming selected onboard vehicle data
`
`and store it for processing. A POSITA would know that at least a transmitter and
`
`receiver pair is required for wireless communications to take place. Therefore, a
`
`
`
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 14
`
`
`
`server receiver must necessarily exist to allow the network server system to receive
`
`any transmissions from vehicle transmitter 314 over link 418.
`
`22. For these reasons, I find that the ’650 application discloses all of the
`
`subject matter associated with the server receiver limitations of independent claims
`
`1, 31, 33, and 78.
`
`
`
`c) Network Server System and Computer System Limitations. The ’650
`application discloses the Network Server limitations, which are present
`in independent claims 1, 48, and 78. The ’650 application discloses the
`Computer System elements, which are present in independent claims 31,
`32, and 33.
`
`23.
`
`Independent claims 1, 48, and 78 recite network server limitations.
`
`Independent claims 31, 32, and 33 use a more general term “computer system.”
`
`Once again I will take up claim 1 as a representative claim because the Board did
`
`so. According to claim 1, a network server system is coupled to the server
`
`receiver. The network server system also provides an interface having
`
`functionality configured to establish relationships between the selected onboard
`
`vehicle data and levels of risk in a usage based insurance system. I find that both
`
`of these network server system aspects are disclosed in the ’650 application for the
`
`following reasons. For example, the ’650 application discloses that the network
`
`server is coupled to the server receiver because, inter alia, the vehicle data that is
`
`wirelessly communicated to the server receiver via communications link 418 is
`
`
`
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 15
`
`
`
`shown at 516 as being stored in the network server system’s database 518 on
`
`Figure 5. The ’650 application further discloses the second item mentioned above,
`
`namely the interface and its corresponding functionality. For example, the charges
`
`algorithm 530 uses an interface to access database 518 in order to make
`
`assignments to actuarial classes (e.g., levels of risk) based on the selected onboard
`
`vehicle data, thereby establishing the relationships discussed in this element.
`
`These statements about the two items of the network server system element are
`
`explained in greater detail below.
`
`24. With respect to the first item (i.e., the network server is coupled to the
`
`server receiver), the ’650 application discloses to a POSITA that a network server
`
`system is coupled to the server receiver. A POSITA would conclude this from the
`
`’650’s discussion of Figures 2 and 5. Figure 2 discloses a network server system at
`
`208 as item 208 contains the computer-based functionality for establishing the
`
`types of relationships described in the network server system element of claim 1.
`
`(The “relationship” functionality is further discussed below in ¶33.) Item 208 itself
`
`is described in the ’650 application as the “insurer.” A POSITA reading this
`
`disclosure would necessarily recognize that the components shown within insurer
`
`208 are computer-based components (e.g., computer hardware and/or computer
`
`software) because the names of the components and the symbols used so indicate.
`
`For example, insurer 208 includes web server 220, which is a readily
`
`
`
`
`-16-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 16
`
`
`
`identifiable/self-evident computer component. The web server is shown (as well
`
`as disclosed in the ’650’s specification) as accessing the data storage component
`
`contained in insurer 208. (See id. at 7:27-30.) Also, a POSITA would readily
`
`recognize that the symbol used for the data storage component within insurer 208
`
`in Figure 2 is a computer database. I am personally familiar with the flowchart
`
`symbols set forth in Exhibit 2014 during my work experience.) A POSITA would
`
`recognize from this disclosure that the “rating, billing, claims” functionality
`
`necessarily operates on a computer (i.e., a server) as it is, for example, interfacing
`
`with the computer database as shown by the bidirectional data transfer arrow
`
`within insurer 208. This system of interconnected computer components contained
`
`in insurer 208 is disclosed to operate within a “communication network design.”
`
`(’650 application at 9:8-9.) Because of this, a POSITA would conclude that the
`
`insurer 208 in the ’650 application necessarily includes a system containing one or
`
`more servers operating within a communication network, thereby disclosing an
`
`example of a “network server system.”
`
`25. The network server system is coupled to the server receiver as
`
`disclosed in the ’650 application. As mentioned in the previous paragraph with
`
`respect to Figure 2, insurer 208 is part of a “communication network design” with
`
`other components. (Id.) As part of the communication network design, the
`
`computer/server system components of the insurer 208 are disclosed as being
`
`
`
`
`-17-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 17
`
`
`
`coupled to the server receiver within the operations control center 416, because of
`
`the data communication pathway between the two. This is evident from the ’650’s
`
`disclosure: “Another important feature of FIG. 2 is that the insured 206 may . . .
`
`communicate with the insurer 208 through the communications link 418 (FIG.
`
`4)[.]” (Id. at 18:30-31.) In other words, the insurer 208 and one or more of its
`
`computer components (e.g., the network server system) must have a data
`
`connection to the server receiver system or otherwise, they would not be able to
`
`“communicate with the insurer 208 through the communications link 418” as
`
`stated in the ’650 application. (Id.) Figure 5 and its accompanying description
`
`also disclose that “[t]he insurer will acquire event data 508 [and] sensor data 510”
`
`and “[a]ll relevant data is stored 516 in a conventional data storage device 518.”
`
`(Id. at 19:21-24.) For this to occur, the network server system must necessarily
`
`have access to the selected onboard vehicle data (e.g., sensor data 510) that is
`
`transmitted over communications link 418 to the server receiver in the operations
`
`control center 416. Accordingly, the ’650 application discloses that the network
`
`server system is coupled to the server receiver.
`
`26. Second (i.e., with reference to the other features of the network server
`
`system element), the ’650 application discloses a network server system providing
`
`an interface having functionality configured to establish relationships between the
`
`selected onboard vehicle data and levels of risk in a usage based insurance system.
`
`
`
`
`-18-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 18
`
`
`
`27. A POSITA would understand that when two components of a
`
`computer system are connected together, as disclosed in the ’650 application, an
`
`interface must necessarily exist to enable interoperation of the two components or
`
`systems, whether they be hardware, software or human. Sometimes the interface is
`
`part of one of the components, other times the interface is a separate element
`
`joining the two components.
`
`28. The “network server system” disclosed in the ’650 application has
`
`such an interface that establishes relationships between two items: (1) selected
`
`onboard vehicle data; and (2) levels of risk in a usage based insurance system.
`
`29. The selected onboard vehicle data which is wirelessly transmitted and
`
`stored at 516 in data storage 518 in Figure 5 (id. at 19:21-24) is also depicted as the
`
`“data storage” in 208 in Figure 2.
`
`30. Levels of risk information are also maintained in database 518 in
`
`Figure 5 that is necessarily accessed by the charges algorithm 530 in order to
`
`produce periodic bills 532 for the insured customers. Therefore, both the selected
`
`onboard vehicle data and the levels of risk information are both stored and
`
`maintained in data storage 518, which is also depicted as the “data storage” in
`
`Figure 2.
`
`31. To a POSITA, the “interface” established by the “network server
`
`system” as called for in claim 1 is the interface that the “rating, billing, and claims”
`
`
`
`
`-19-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 19
`
`
`
`system 222 of Figure 2 must necessarily have in order to access and interoperate
`
`with the data storage shown in Figure 2. The “interface” of claim 1 is also
`
`disclosed in Figure 5 of the ’650 patent, where it is the interface that the charges
`
`algorithm 530 must necessarily have in order to access database 518. This
`
`interface allows access to the database 518 by the charges algorithm 530 so that the
`
`processing needed to generate an insurance premium. The ’650 application
`
`discloses the use of actuarial classes in setting insurance premiums. (Id. at 8:25-
`
`29.) Because of that, a POSITA would conclude that the charges algorithm of
`
`Figure 5 uses the interface to database 518 to retrieve information - selected
`
`onboard vehicle data - and level of risk information associated with actuarial class
`
`information for use in determining an insurance cost.
`
`32. The following ’650 passage (page 19, line 30 – page 20, line 1,
`
`emphasis added) illustrates the accessing or interface that the charges (billing)
`
`algorithm 530 has with respect to the database 518:
`
`The data or events which are stored in stored device 518
`
`are accessed by a billing algorithm 530 to generate a
`
`cost for the unit of risk in consideration of all the relevant
`
`data and events occurring in that period.
`
`
`
`33. The ’650 application describes database 518 as a “conventional data
`
`storage device.” (Id. at 19:24.) A POSITA would recognize that this necessarily
`
`
`
`
`-20-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 20
`
`
`
`discloses that an interface is used to allow a software application to access a
`
`conventional database. For example, a conventional database in 2000 was a
`
`relational database management system (RDBMS). In such a database system, an
`
`interface is used to allow database access commands (e.g., Structured Query
`
`Language statements) to perform operations upon the data, such as establishing
`
`relationships between data items. A retrieval-type access command is a
`
`fundamental operation of conventional database systems, namely to allow
`
`accessing of a database for establishing relationships between data. For example,
`
`the interface allows an application, such as charges algorithm 530, to access
`
`database 518 in order to establish relationships involving data (e.g., event/sensor
`
`data) stored in database 518. The involvement of event/sensor data as part of
`
`establishing relationships for insurance rating is further shown at page 8, lines 29-
`
`31: “The invention comprises an integrated system to extract via multiple sensors,
`
`screen, aggregate and apply for insurance rating purposes, data generated by the
`
`actual operation of the specific vehicle and the insured user/driver.” (emphasis
`
`added; see also, e.g., id. at 8:25-29.)
`
`34.
`
`I have been asked to assume the following:
`
`• Placement of a unit of risk (e.g., a vehicle) in an actuarial class
`
`establishes a relationship between the data that was used in such
`
`placement and a level of risk that is associated with the actuarial class.
`
`
`
`
`-21-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 21
`
`
`
`• An actuarial class is associated with a level of risk.
`
`• In a usage based insurance (“UBI”) system as described in the ’598
`
`patent, vehicle onboard data (e.g., acceleration data) is used to place
`
`an insured entity in a UBI-type actuarial class (e.g., a “high risk
`
`category or actuarial tier”). The placement of an insured entity in a
`
`UBI-based actuarial class results in establishing a relationship
`
`between the vehicle onboard data (e.g., acceleration data) and a level
`
`of risk (e.g., a “high risk category or actuarial tier”).
`
`35.
`
`In view of the information contained in the previous paragraph, in the
`
`system disclosed in Figure 5 of the ’650 application, a POSITA would understand
`
`that the charges algorithm necessarily must have access to selected onboard vehicle
`
`data and actuarial class data that are stored in database 518 in order to perform its
`
`operation of determining insurance charges since the processing of actuarial class
`
`data (e.g., actuarial class assignment) is dependent upon the selected onboard
`
`vehicle data. A POSITA would also understand that the data acquisition functions
`
`508, 510, 514 and 516, connected through the communications link to the server
`
`receiver, provide the path and processing to place the selected onboard vehicle data
`
`into the database so that when the premium charges need to be determined, the data
`
`is available to the charges algorithm. The connection between the database and the
`
`charges algorithm is explicit in Figure 5 and shown as a two-way arrow. This
`
`
`
`
`-22-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 22
`
`
`
`arrow indicates that the charges algorithm reads the selected onboard vehicle data
`
`and actuarial classes from the database, establishes the relationships by assigning
`
`the vehicle to an actuarial class based on the vehicle data, and then uses the
`
`interface to access the database in order to write the data back to the database.
`
`36. Based upon the foregoing, it is my opinion that a POSITA would
`
`conclude that the ’650 application discloses an interface for establishing
`
`“relationships between the selected onboard vehicle data and levels of risk in a
`
`usage based insurance system” as recited in claim 1 of the ’598 patent. Because of
`
`this disclosure, a POSITA would also conclude that the ’650 application discloses
`
`the network server elements of claims 48 and 78 as well as the computer system
`
`elements of claims 31, 32, and 33.
`
`
`
`d) Database. The ’650 application discloses the database element, which is
`present in all independent claims.
`
`37. All of the independent claims 1, 31, 33, and 78 include a database
`
`limitation. Claim 1 is again discussed below because the Board analyzed it as
`
`representative of the other independent claims with respect to the “database”
`
`limitation. According to claim 1, a database stores relationship data indicating the
`
`relationships established between the selected onboard vehicle data relating to one
`
`or more users and an insured’s monitored vehicle data. Further, the relationship
`
`data identifies, for an insured or other selected users, relationships between relative
`
`
`
`
`-23-
`
`
`
`Yamaha Corporation of America Exhibit 1020 Page 23
`
`
`
`levels of risk and the selected onboard vehicle data. The ’650 application discloses
`
`these items of the database element. For example, the database stores the
`
`relationship data as shown by the bidirectional data transfer arrow between
`
`functionality 222 and the database on Figure 2 and is further shown by the
`
`bidirectional data transfer arro
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
