Page 3
`
`Page 1
`·1· · IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`·2· · · · · · · · · ____________________
`·3· · · · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`·4· · · · · · · · · ____________________
`·5· · · · · · · · · ·TOYOTA MOTOR CORP.,
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner,
`·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·vs.
`·8· · · · · · · · · ·LEROY G. HAGENBUCH,
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · Patent Owner.
`10· · · · · · · · · ·___________________
`11· · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2013-00683
`12· · · · · · · · · · Patent 8,014,917
`13
`14· · · · · · · Administrative Patent Judges
`15· · · Jameson Lee, Michael W. Kim and Adam V. Floyd
`16
`17· · · · · · · DEPOSITION OF DAVID McNAMARA
`18· · · · · · · · ·Tuesday, July 1, 2014
`19· · · · · · · · · Alexandria, Virginia
`20· · · · · · · · · · · ·9:00 a.m.
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25· ·Reported by:· Laurie Bangart, RPR, CRR
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · A P P E A R A N C E S
`·2· ·ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
`·3· · · · · · ·Oblon, Spivak, McClelland,
`·4· · · · · · ·Maier & Neustadt
`·5· · · · · · ·1940 Duke Street
`·6· · · · · · ·Alexandria, Virginia 22314
`·7· · · · · · ·(703)412-6466
`·8· · · · · · ·By:· Robert Mattson, Esq.
`·9· · · · · · · · · rmattson@oblon.com
`10· · · · · · · · · Thomas C. Yebernetsky, Esq.
`11· · · · · · · · · tyebernetsky@oblon.com
`12· ·ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNER:
`13· · · · · · ·Freeborn & Peters, LLP
`14· · · · · · ·311 South Wacker Drive
`15· · · · · · ·Suite 3000
`16· · · · · · ·Chicago, Illinois 60606
`17· · · · · · ·(312)360-6000
`18· · · · · · ·By:· Jonathan Hill, Esq.
`19· · · · · · · · · jhill@freeborn.com
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 2
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · ·Deposition of
`·2· · · · · · · · · · ·DAVID McNAMARA
`·3
`·4· ·Held at the offices of:
`·5· · · · · · ·Oblon, Spivak, McClelland,
`·6· · · · · · ·Maier & Neustadt
`·7· · · · · · ·1940 Duke Street
`·8· · · · · · ·Alexandria, Virginia 22314
`·9· · · · · · ·(703)412-6466
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18· · · · · · · · · Taken pursuant to notice, before
`19· · · · Laurie Bangart, Registered Professional
`20· · · · Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter, and
`21· · · · Notary public in and for the Commonwealth of
`22· · · · Virginia.
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 4
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION INDEX
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`·3· ·EXAMINATION BY MR. HILL . . . . . . . . . . . . .· · 5
`·4
`·5
`·6
`·7
`·8· · · · · · · · · · ·E X H I B I T S
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · ·(None)
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`OWNER Ex. 2059, page 1
`
`

`

`Page 5
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · P R O C E E D I N G S
`·2· · · · · · · · · · ·DAVID McNAMARA,
`·3· · · · having been first duly sworn, testified
`·4· ·upon his oath as follows:
`·5· · · · ·EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR PATENT OWNER
`·6· ·BY MR. HILL:
`·7· · · · Q· · Good morning.
`·8· · · · A· · Good morning.
`·9· · · · Q· · I know this is not your first deposition,
`10· ·but if I could remind you to keep your responses
`11· ·verbal for the sake of the court reporter, and if we
`12· ·could try not to talk over one another, that would
`13· ·also make for a clearer record.
`14· · · · · · ·Fair enough?
`15· · · · A· · Yes.
`16· · · · Q· · Okay.· Just some preliminary matters.· If I
`17· ·use the phrase "EDR," will you understand that I'm
`18· ·referring to an event data recorder?
`19· · · · A· · Yes.
`20· · · · Q· · Now, if I use the term "ACN," will you
`21· ·understand that I'm referring to automatic collision
`22· ·notification?
`23· · · · A· · Yes.
`24· · · · Q· · Okay, great.
`25· · · · · · ·I'm going to give you some documents that
`
`Page 6
`·1· ·you can refer to as need be.· This is the Steiner
`·2· ·patent.· The familiar Aohanagi reference.· This is
`·3· ·your declaration from this particular IPR proceeding.
`·4· · · · · · · · · MR. MATTSON:· I brought my copy of
`·5· · · · that.
`·6· · · · · · · · · MR. HILL:· You did?· Wonderful.
`·7· ·BY MR. HILL:
`·8· · · · Q· · I also have the Hagenbuch '917 patent in
`·9· ·case we need to take a look at that.
`10· · · · A· · Thank you.
`11· · · · Q· · Am I correct that all of your opinions
`12· ·concerning the claims of the '917 patent rest, at
`13· ·least in part, on what the Aohanagi reference
`14· ·discloses?
`15· · · · A· · Did you say all my opinions?
`16· · · · Q· · On the claims of the '917 patent, correct.
`17· · · · A· · I looked at other materials that are listed
`18· ·in my report, not just that one patent.
`19· · · · Q· · Well, they depend at least in part on
`20· ·Aohanagi?
`21· · · · A· · In part, yes.
`22· · · · Q· · Exactly, okay, and is it fair to say that
`23· ·the skilled artisan, in deciding whether and how to
`24· ·modify Aohanagi, would be motivated by design
`25· ·incentives?
`
`Page 7
`·1· · · · A· · Can you explain what you mean by "design
`·2· ·incentives."
`·3· · · · Q· · Sure.· Well, actually, if you refer to
`·4· ·paragraph 47 of your declaration, you can see design
`·5· ·incentives there.
`·6· · · · A· · "Accordingly, in view of the design
`·7· ·incentives based on the benefits of automatically
`·8· ·sending a wireless distress signal from the vehicle in
`·9· ·response to detecting a collision, it would have been
`10· ·obvious to a person skilled in the art at the time of
`11· ·the '917 patent's priority date to combine the
`12· ·teaching of Aohanagi and Oishi to create a predictable
`13· ·variation."
`14· · · · Q· · And by "design incentives," you're referring
`15· ·to some benefit to making a modification?
`16· · · · A· · In this case the benefits -- yes, the
`17· ·benefits of automatically sending a wireless distress
`18· ·signal.
`19· · · · Q· · And considering whether or not to modify
`20· ·Aohanagi, the skilled artisan would take into
`21· ·consideration the benefits of any such modification,
`22· ·correct?
`23· · · · A· · Benefits and I think there's other factors
`24· ·that would motivate.· Having seen it done before,
`25· ·there's other factors, but benefits, of course, are a
`
`Page 8
`
`·1· ·significant aspect of why you would want them
`·2· ·modified.
`·3· · · · Q· · By having seen it done before, what do you
`·4· ·mean?
`·5· · · · A· · In practice you've seen it commercially
`·6· ·done, wireless communications used on other devices.
`·7· ·You know, I talk about the, the ***OmniTrak system in
`·8· ·my report that uses wireless communications.
`·9· · · · Q· · Okay.
`10· · · · A· · So you understand the benefits, and then you
`11· ·say I've seen it in practice.
`12· · · · Q· · Okay, but the benefits of the modification
`13· ·would be at least one consideration?
`14· · · · A· · That's correct.
`15· · · · Q· · And is it, is it fair to say that the
`16· ·skilled artisan designing an event data recorder would
`17· ·try to make it as simple as possible?
`18· · · · A· · Can you repeat the question again.
`19· · · · Q· · Sure.· Is it fair to say that the skilled
`20· ·artisan designing an event data recorder will try to
`21· ·make that event data recorder as simple as possible?
`22· · · · A· · And what do you mean by "simple"?
`23· · · · Q· · Well, let's refer to your declaration again.
`24· · · · A· · Sure.
`25· · · · Q· · Paragraph 38B.
`
`OWNER Ex. 2059, page 2
`
`

`

`Page 9
`
`·1· · · · · · ·Here you make a statement.· I'm going to
`·2· ·start midstream, but you say, "It would have been
`·3· ·obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at
`·4· ·the time of the '917 patent's priority date to make a
`·5· ·straightforward modification to Aoyanagi's brake
`·6· ·monitoring method to create a simpler system that only
`·7· ·monitors the braking system for an on or off status."
`·8· · · · · · ·You make reference to a simpler system
`·9· ·there, and I'm asking you if simplifying a device
`10· ·would be one reason to make a modification to a
`11· ·device.
`12· · · · A· · Yes, one reason, and simpler could be being
`13· ·more flexible, could be reducing cost, it could --
`14· ·simpler could mean a lot of things.
`15· · · · Q· · Would it mean avoiding -- strike that.· You
`16· ·mentioned flexibility and reducing cost.· Can you
`17· ·think of any other, any other ways you might simplify
`18· ·a system?
`19· · · · A· · Not offhand.· I think I would have to think
`20· ·about it a little bit more.
`21· · · · Q· · Okay.· Is it also fair to say that the
`22· ·skilled artisan designing an event data recorder would
`23· ·try to minimize the amount of memory required?
`24· · · · A· · I think the designer would have many
`25· ·considerations when it came to memory.· I'm thinking
`
`Page 10
`·1· ·from my experience.· One would be, yes, of course, the
`·2· ·memory, that would be, the size of the memory, but
`·3· ·also the type of the memory, the cost of the memory,
`·4· ·the speed of the memory.· So there's, you know, there
`·5· ·would be many different considerations in making a
`·6· ·decision over the design and the actual selection of
`·7· ·the memory components.
`·8· · · · Q· · Okay, but generally speaking, is it fair to
`·9· ·say that minimizing the size of memory is a desirable
`10· ·characteristic of an event data recorder?
`11· · · · A· · It can be important.
`12· · · · Q· · And is it fair to say that it would be
`13· ·desirable in designing an event data recorder to
`14· ·eliminate the unnecessary and wasteful use of storage
`15· ·resources?
`16· · · · A· · I think an event data recorder has many
`17· ·considerations, and memory size is one, but also
`18· ·retention of the data and the speed in which to access
`19· ·the data.· So it's -- like I said, size would be one
`20· ·of many considerations.
`21· · · · Q· · Okay.
`22· · · · · · ·Generally speaking, the less memory that's
`23· ·required by an event data recorder, the lower cost of
`24· ·that memory; is that correct?
`25· · · · A· · Actually, no.· It's, it's -- I was faced
`
`Page 11
`·1· ·with this problem in my career with embedded control
`·2· ·systems.· It's really picking standard sizes.· 2K, 4K,
`·3· ·6K, 8K, 64K now, but in the day of embedded
`·4· ·controllers, you were trying to pick commercially
`·5· ·available sizes that were high volume that were used
`·6· ·in other industries that were also -- how do I put it?
`·7· ·Needing specifications of speed and from proven
`·8· ·suppliers.
`·9· · · · Q· · So would 32K, 63K be standard sizes?
`10· · · · A· · I would have to look.· In the day and age of
`11· ·that particular time, we were thinking in terms of
`12· ·buying memory sizes that were commercially available.
`13· ·I would have to think.· I think you could generally
`14· ·say that you might be paying a little bit more for a
`15· ·64 over 32, but when you're going from a 64 to 128 or
`16· ·one gig, you would have, of course, a very significant
`17· ·price, but we were always looking for what is, what is
`18· ·commercially available and can we get the best price
`19· ·from our suppliers for that, that memory chip.
`20· · · · Q· · But generally speaking, in the universe of
`21· ·commercially available, what you would call standard
`22· ·size memories, the larger the memory, the higher the
`23· ·cost; is that fair?
`24· · · · A· · If there was a significant difference, yes.
`25· · · · Q· · And if an event data recorder -- strike
`
`Page 12
`
`·1· ·that.
`·2· · · · · · ·What, in your view, would be the benefits of
`·3· ·minimizing the amount of data that needs to be
`·4· ·recorded by an EDR?
`·5· · · · A· · Well, our concern was actually making sure
`·6· ·we've got the right data.· I think that's the primary
`·7· ·concern.· If you're looking for an aoristic of how do
`·8· ·you approach the design, your first consideration is
`·9· ·that you collect the right data, and then, of course,
`10· ·as you suggest in your question, you know, the
`11· ·efficient way, an accurate way and retention of that
`12· ·data, those are what I would call the three major, you
`13· ·know, top of the, top of the list kind of
`14· ·considerations.
`15· · · · Q· · I'm sorry.· The first would be getting the
`16· ·right data?
`17· · · · A· · The right data.
`18· · · · Q· · And the second would be?
`19· · · · A· · Be the performance, being able to access,
`20· ·you know, get the data to the memory, which is part of
`21· ·a larger embedded control system design problem of
`22· ·buses and types of memory.· And then retention.· Am I
`23· ·keeping it under all conditions, you know, battery
`24· ·backup, especially in EDRs.
`25· · · · Q· · Okay.· I think you've already touched on
`
`OWNER Ex. 2059, page 3
`
`

`

`Page 13
`·1· ·this, but when a skilled artisan is designing an event
`·2· ·data recorder, there would be a motivation to try and
`·3· ·collect the right data, the data that's important for
`·4· ·analysis of a collision, correct?
`·5· · · · A· · Mm-hmm.
`·6· · · · Q· · Okay, and in so doing, the skilled artisan
`·7· ·would have a reason to try and collect the data that
`·8· ·provides a good picture of the cause of the accident,
`·9· ·correct?
`10· · · · A· · Generally, yes.· I think the cause of the
`11· ·accident, the circumstance of the accident, and I
`12· ·think importantly the, uh, one of the important
`13· ·considerations would be the availability of the data
`14· ·under the crash backup.· Do you have power, do you
`15· ·have power when you need it so that sensors are active
`16· ·during the crash and after the crash.
`17· · · · Q· · Okay, and would you agree that high
`18· ·resolution recording would be a desirable
`19· ·characteristic of an event data recorder?
`20· · · · A· · High resolution recording would be one of
`21· ·the considerations, yes.
`22· · · · Q· · It would be a beneficial feature?
`23· · · · A· · Yes.
`24· · · · Q· · And just so we're clear, the phrase "high
`25· ·resolution," does that connote that for a given data
`
`Page 14
`·1· ·type, you have more data points per unit time?
`·2· · · · A· · I would say more data points and accurate
`·3· ·data points.· I think sampling rates and also
`·4· ·precision of the A to D and integrity of the sensor
`·5· ·again.· Is the sensor acting erratically under crash
`·6· ·or is it providing accurate data.
`·7· · · · Q· · And just for the record, you said "A to D."
`·8· ·Does that mean analog to digital?
`·9· · · · A· · Yes, yes, and clarification, resolution can
`10· ·apply to the time domain as well as the measurand
`11· ·domain.
`12· · · · Q· · Now, would you agree that in 1994, the
`13· ·skilled artisan would not look to design an EDR that
`14· ·stores each and every vehicle parameter that could
`15· ·possibly be monitored?
`16· · · · · · · · · MR. MATTSON:· Objection.· Form.
`17· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Can you repeat the
`18· · · · question again.· It was a little lengthy, so
`19· · · · I was trying to follow it.
`20· · · · · · · · · MR. HILL:· It was long.
`21· · · · · · · · · Could you read that back, please.
`22· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· Sure.
`23· · · · · · · · · (Whereupon, reporter reads
`24· · · · · · · · · requested material.)
`25· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I think the skilled
`
`Page 15
`
`·1· · · · artisan in 1994 was, like the industry,
`·2· · · · learning what was important to, to monitor.
`·3· · · · Therefore, within the constraints of their
`·4· · · · system, they were looking to capture as much
`·5· · · · data as they could within the limitations of
`·6· · · · their design.
`·7· · · · · · · · · It wasn't until much later that we
`·8· · · · had some consensus through the EDR working
`·9· · · · group over the 15 parameters that we should
`10· · · · be measuring, and learning about important
`11· · · · considerations, like getting the data out of
`12· · · · the EDR in a uniform way.· So it wasn't -- so
`13· · · · I would say back in 1994, as I mentioned, we
`14· · · · were learning and we would want to have the
`15· · · · most capable system within the limitations of
`16· · · · cost and timing.
`17· ·BY MR. HILL:
`18· · · · Q· · So given the limitations of technology,
`19· ·capabilities, cost, one skilled in the art would need
`20· ·to discriminate which parameters ought to be monitored
`21· ·and recorded by an EDR.
`22· · · · · · ·Is that fair to say?
`23· · · · A· · They would make judgments, yes.
`24· · · · Q· · Okay.· They couldn't record everything in
`25· ·the universe, right?
`
`Page 16
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · MR. MATTSON:· Objection.· Form.
`·2· ·BY MR. HILL:
`·3· · · · Q· · Yeah, I'll strike that.
`·4· · · · · · ·It wouldn't be pragmatic for the skilled
`·5· ·artisan to, at that time, record every vehicle
`·6· ·parameter that happens to be connected to a sensor?
`·7· · · · A· · We were striving to do so, because we had,
`·8· ·as taught in Trevor Jones' paper I refer to, we had
`·9· ·vehicle network buses.· We had access to sensors
`10· ·through the network.· When we thought it was
`11· ·important, we would add sensors like accelerometers.
`12· ·So we were highly motivated to add as many sensors as
`13· ·possible.
`14· · · · Q· · My question was a little bit different,
`15· ·though.· It wasn't about adding sensors.· If a sensor
`16· ·is available on a given vehicle, would the skilled
`17· ·artisan in 1994 try to design an EDR that would
`18· ·capture and record data from every sensor on the
`19· ·vehicle?
`20· · · · A· · Like I mentioned, we had access to a lot of
`21· ·the sensors on the vehicle through the data network,
`22· ·and we would, if we thought it was important, we would
`23· ·add sensors.· As we did with accelerometers, we felt
`24· ·it was important to add the new restraint system,
`25· ·accelerometers in the direction of where we thought
`
`OWNER Ex. 2059, page 4
`
`

`

`Page 17
`·1· ·crashes would come.· So we added sensors when we
`·2· ·thought it was important.
`·3· · · · Q· · Okay.
`·4· · · · · · ·What sort of things would the skilled
`·5· ·artisan in 1994 have considered in trying to determine
`·6· ·what vehicle data would be most important for an EDR
`·7· ·to record?
`·8· · · · A· · Well, first of all, in that time frame,
`·9· ·"EDR" was emerging as a term.· Okay?· I think that's
`10· ·my recollection.· It was, it was not widely used.· It
`11· ·was -- you know, like I mention later, when we started
`12· ·having government regulations and guidelines of what
`13· ·is exactly an EDR, but if, if we look at diagnostic
`14· ·systems and safety systems which I'm familiar with, my
`15· ·career has been around collecting data from sensors
`16· ·for safety and body and infotainment systems.· Power
`17· ·train, safety, infotainment, driver information and
`18· ·power train.· So I might have mentioned power train
`19· ·twice there, but, you know, I was involved in
`20· ·diagnostic systems, and your question I think was
`21· ·directed to the considerations about designing that
`22· ·system.
`23· · · · · · ·Maybe I forgot your question.
`24· · · · Q· · Well, the question -- and maybe I need to
`25· ·phrase this more broadly, but for a system that's
`
`Page 18
`·1· ·designed to capture data in response to detecting a
`·2· ·collision, what would the skilled artisan consider in
`·3· ·deciding what parameters ought to be recorded by the
`·4· ·device?
`·5· · · · A· · Okay.
`·6· · · · · · ·First of all, we would be working with, as I
`·7· ·would, you know, a vehicle design group, saying, you
`·8· ·know, what problem are you trying to solve at the
`·9· ·vehicle level, and the first consideration in safety
`10· ·systems was deployment correctly, the airbag system
`11· ·deployment correctly.· Does the system got enough
`12· ·information to perform its job correctly, and if not,
`13· ·warn the driver to an indicator that the system was
`14· ·not operational.· And in my early part of my career,
`15· ·that was the focus of my career, a diagnostic module
`16· ·that would do that.
`17· · · · · · ·Then, of course, once you perform the
`18· ·mission, primary mission of safety robustly, then we
`19· ·started to look at what, what else could we do with
`20· ·the data which would help in the development of better
`21· ·vehicles.· And a lot of our work that I was involved
`22· ·in with Formula One racing at Ford was using flight
`23· ·recorders for collecting data.· You know, can we make
`24· ·this vehicle, race car more safer, you know, with, you
`25· ·know, by collecting data.
`
`Page 19
`
`·1· · · · Q· · Would that be continuous --
`·2· · · · A· · Excuse me.· I just want to finish.
`·3· · · · · · ·The third thought was then that turned to
`·4· ·can we use that information to help get the kind of
`·5· ·assistance that the person who's in the accident
`·6· ·needs, which is, you know, accident notification,
`·7· ·collecting data, and I was involved in my career, of
`·8· ·course, with telematics and broadcasting the location
`·9· ·of the accident.· So, you know, we were looking at
`10· ·data from those different viewpoints and looking at
`11· ·designing the system from those viewpoints.
`12· · · · Q· · And at what time were you involved with
`13· ·accident notification?
`14· · · · A· · From '95 to 2000.
`15· · · · Q· · Who was your employer at the time?
`16· · · · A· · That was Ford, and it was, I would say more
`17· ·accurate, I would say '98/'99 my team was supporting
`18· ·the Ford Wingcast program, telematics program.
`19· ·Wingcast.· It was Ford's answer, for a better term, to
`20· ·GM's OnStar.
`21· · · · · · ·And then as I retired from Ford in 2006, I
`22· ·worked with an OEM who was very interested in adapting
`23· ·OnStar to one of their vehicles, so I did some work
`24· ·more recently on helping them think through how to
`25· ·design the system that would do ACN, the benefits of
`
`Page 20
`
`·1· ·that, especially the benefits of that versus using
`·2· ·your phone.
`·3· · · · · · ·I was very familiar with E911 at Ford, which
`·4· ·was using your cell phone as the radio to communicate
`·5· ·externally the car, a canned message that you had an
`·6· ·accident.· So the system, car would detect that you
`·7· ·had an accident.· It would tell your phone to send a
`·8· ·text message to the PSAPs, the phone numbers that will
`·9· ·take emergency calls.
`10· · · · Q· · Okay.
`11· · · · A· · There's a set of numbers that will receive
`12· ·an emergency call.· So your phone would know that and
`13· ·would send the text message saying you need help.· So
`14· ·we were comparing whether to build in that kind of
`15· ·system in a module in a car which I was very familiar
`16· ·with, and not only was comparing it to using your cell
`17· ·phone for the same purpose.
`18· · · · Q· · Let me just clarify.· Was Ford using for its
`19· ·automatic collision notification a mobile cellular
`20· ·phone?
`21· · · · A· · Yes, Ford Sync 2008.
`22· · · · Q· · How would the vehicle communicate with the
`23· ·cellular phone?· Would that be a hard wire connection?
`24· · · · A· · No.· Bluetooth.
`25· · · · Q· · And what would, what would be the trigger
`
`OWNER Ex. 2059, page 5
`
`

`

`Page 21
`·1· ·for the, for the system to know that the cell phone
`·2· ·needs to send a distress signal?
`·3· · · · A· · Airbag going off.· So the chain of events
`·4· ·would be -- once again, the importance of the vehicle
`·5· ·network giving you access to all the sensors on the
`·6· ·car, we were -- I would say my colleagues, because I
`·7· ·had left Ford in 2006, but I worked with this in
`·8· ·research when I was still there is that you would use
`·9· ·the airbag to send the message to the network, and the
`10· ·network would send a message through Bluetooth to the
`11· ·phone, and the phone would send the canned message.
`12· · · · Q· · Do you recall, at least on a Ford system
`13· ·that you were involved with, what the trigger for
`14· ·airbag deployment was?
`15· · · · A· · No, I do not remember the exact trigger.· I
`16· ·was more aware of the system design.
`17· · · · Q· · Okay.
`18· · · · · · ·Do you know if the, if the Fords that you
`19· ·worked on, did those also have event data recorders?
`20· · · · A· · I believe so.· I believe the event data
`21· ·recorder was part of the restraint safety module.
`22· · · · Q· · So the EDR was integrated with the system
`23· ·that would determine that an airbag deployment is
`24· ·necessary?
`25· · · · A· · Yes.
`
`Page 22
`
`·1· · · · Q· · I see.
`·2· · · · · · ·Then you mentioned work on Formula cars
`·3· ·where you had a, I want to say a black box on those;
`·4· ·is that correct?
`·5· · · · A· · I'll clarify a couple things.· I was on
`·6· ·staff at that time.· I was not directly responsible
`·7· ·for that work.· I monitored the work and reported on
`·8· ·the work to my, the executives of our division, and
`·9· ·then we were very excited that we could collect data
`10· ·about crashes.· We were learning.· We were using
`11· ·Formula One racing as a development tool.
`12· · · · Q· · Okay.· So these devices on the Formula cars
`13· ·would record information in response to collision
`14· ·detection?
`15· · · · A· · And other sensors on the car.· RPM.· I throw
`16· ·that out, because I know that one for sure, and then
`17· ·we would actually have telemetry.· I think this was
`18· ·1980, early '80s.· We would have telemetry from the
`19· ·race car back to the "pit," for lack of a better term,
`20· ·so that the -- I guess a simple way of looking at it
`21· ·was that the crew in the pit could replicate the dash
`22· ·of the driver and also warn the driver of impending
`23· ·failure, saying you need to make a pit stop at the
`24· ·next, next turn.
`25· · · · Q· · So a real time --
`
`Page 23
`
`·1· · · · A· · Yeah, real time data, so we were very
`·2· ·excited about that capability, and from Ford's
`·3· ·viewpoint, the early '80s was our, for lack of a
`·4· ·better term again, "learning experience."
`·5· · · · Q· · Was the data being transmitted in real time
`·6· ·also concurrently recorded on the vehicle?
`·7· · · · A· · Don't know for sure.· I would expect, you
`·8· ·know, the designer would, of course, realize that if
`·9· ·there was a crash, that the telemetry might be broken,
`10· ·but I don't know that for sure.
`11· · · · Q· · Okay.
`12· · · · · · ·Now, am I correct that if an EDR prior art
`13· ·patent mentioned it's recording a particular
`14· ·parameter, that that in and of itself does not mean
`15· ·that there is a reason that the skilled artisan would
`16· ·design an EDR that records that particular parameter?
`17· · · · · · ·You might want to read that back.
`18· · · · · · · · · (Whereupon, reporter reads
`19· · · · · · · · · requested material.)
`20· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Well, first, I don't
`21· · · · know if I understand the question.· Could you
`22· · · · rephrase it a little bit different?
`23· ·BY MR. HILL:
`24· · · · Q· · Yeah.· If a prior art patent mentions
`25· ·recording a particular parameter, does that in and of
`
`Page 24
`·1· ·itself give the skilled artisan a reason to say, hey,
`·2· ·that's important, I need to record it in the EDR that
`·3· ·I'm designing?
`·4· · · · A· · Well, I think there would be many
`·5· ·considerations.· I think the skilled artisan would
`·6· ·consider it as, of course, an option and be aware of
`·7· ·it and say, you know, they're aware of the art, like I
`·8· ·was, and very interested in what people have done in
`·9· ·the past.· So they would consider it and become one of
`10· ·the design alternatives they would consider.
`11· · · · Q· · That may or may not find its way --
`12· · · · A· · It's hard to answer that question.
`13· · · · Q· · Well, I agree.· You need to consider
`14· ·circumstances and exercise judgment, correct?
`15· · · · A· · I think you would definitely consider it and
`16· ·think it's important, yes.
`17· · · · Q· · Is that an important thing to consider or
`18· ·just an important parameter simply because it's
`19· ·mentioned?
`20· · · · A· · I don't know how to parse "necessary" or
`21· ·"significant," but I would say it's, it's -- you're
`22· ·aware of it, and like I said earlier, it becomes an
`23· ·important consideration in designing the next system
`24· ·of whatever, yeah.
`25· · · · Q· · Okay, but ultimately the skilled artisan
`
`OWNER Ex. 2059, page 6
`
`

`

`Page 25
`·1· ·designing an event data recorder needs to exercise
`·2· ·judgment in deciding whether or not the EDR design
`·3· ·ought to record a particular parameter?
`·4· · · · A· · I think back then, when we didn't have
`·5· ·federal regulation, EDR was, first of all, flight
`·6· ·recorders, and EDRs were in the mind of the designer
`·7· ·what was important, based on the OEM's mission, which
`·8· ·I would, you know, have answered the question giving
`·9· ·some considerations, getting the airbag deployed
`10· ·correctly, being primary.
`11· · · · · · ·And then you would have other
`12· ·considerations, and you would approach it like any
`13· ·other design project, diagnostic system.· You need to
`14· ·accurately collect data, store it, and retain it.· I
`15· ·think that before the designer would be the
`16· ·consideration of losing power and crash and do we have
`17· ·the resolution of the right data.
`18· · · · · · ·So there would be many things going through
`19· ·the mind of the designer, and I think every OEM at
`20· ·that time period probably approached the problem a
`21· ·little bit differently.
`22· · · · Q· · Well, how would the -- I apologize if I'm
`23· ·asking you to repeat yourself, but how would the
`24· ·skilled artisan back in 1994 determine the most
`25· ·important data that ought to be recorded in a device
`
`Page 26
`
`·1· ·that stores data in response to collecting --
`·2· ·detecting a collision?
`·3· · · · A· · Well, there's two dimensions of that, how
`·4· ·being the process, and I mentioned from a development
`·5· ·process viewpoint is working with, as I did, with the
`·6· ·vehicle system engineer saying this is the problem.
`·7· ·We need to know -- well, let me, let me clarify.· We
`·8· ·need to make sure the airbag system and the other
`·9· ·systems work properly.· We need to collect the data
`10· ·that will help us ensure that we alert the driver if
`11· ·they're not.
`12· · · · · · ·And then, I think back then, not knowing
`13· ·that there were other requirements coming from the
`14· ·federal government, we were going, what are some of
`15· ·our other wants, such as being able to understand
`16· ·crashes, near crashes, being able to collect a rich
`17· ·set of data to understand better how to design our
`18· ·systems.
`19· · · · Q· · And back in the 1994 time frame, what were
`20· ·the -- "the skilled artisan" is an artificial
`21· ·construct, what, what in general were engineers
`22· ·regarding to be the most important data that would
`23· ·better enable the reconstruction of a crash?
`24· · · · A· · Once again, you know, every OEM would have
`25· ·their thoughts at that time about what was important
`
`Page 27
`
`·1· ·data, but I think we would all agree, in the area of
`·2· ·the accelerometer, we were all working on more capable
`·3· ·accelerometers that could capture data more accurately
`·4· ·over time, and we had available, fortunately, new and
`·5· ·better accelerometers.· We were taking advantage of
`·6· ·that.
`·7· · · · · · ·So obviously I think it's a focus on data
`·8· ·directly associated with the crash, and then, based on
`·9· ·what was available on that particular vehicle as far
`10· ·as the vehicle network and the sensors, we would find
`11· ·that we had a lot of opportunities to add other data,
`12· ·which can change OEM by OEM what those opportunities
`13· ·are.
`14· · · · Q· · Do you recall any specifics as to what any
`15· ·event data recorder as of 1994 was actually recording?
`16· · · · A· · I would have to think about it.· It's been a
`17· ·while.
`18· · · · Q· · Is it fair to say that an objective of
`19· ·minimizing the memory requirements of an event data
`20· ·recorder is intention with an objective of collecting
`21· ·comprehensive data for accident reconstruction?
`22· · · · A· · Excuse me.· Maybe I missed a word.· Is an
`23· ·intention?· Is it an intention?
`24· · · · Q· · Is intention that the goal of minimizing
`25· ·data can or does conflict with the goal of collecting
`
`Page 28
`·1· ·as much data as you can to reconstruct a collision.
`·2· · · · A· · It can be.· I mean it can be that you want
`·3· ·higher resolution under a period of time.· You want to
`·4· ·have accuracy, as I mentioned.· You may be more
`·5· ·concerned about the integrity of the power and the
`·6· ·accuracy than memory sizes.· I could, I could have
`·7· ·those design considerations, because it's a very
`·8· ·important piece of data, and I want to capture as much
`·9· ·data as possible.
`10· · · · · · ·I might find that in many instances -- and
`11· ·that's been true of my career -- that we really want
`12· ·to filter the data at the sensor.· We want the sensor
`13· ·to be the filter, and we really don't need to collect
`14· ·and be broadcasting data every, you know, pressure
`15· ·pulses from a pressure sensor every one millisecond.
`16· ·We really don't need that.· We need data from a
`17· ·pressure sensor in the manifold every 30 to 50, 60,
`18· ·maybe 100 milliseconds.· So it really depends on the
`19· ·application.
`20· · · · Q· · So sensor accuracy would be an example of
`21· ·something that could influence the skilled artisan
`22· ·designing an event data recorder?
`23· · · · A· · Right.
`24· · · · · · · · · MR. HILL:· You guys want to take a
`25· · · · break?
`
`OWNER Ex. 2059, page 7
`
`

`

`Page 29
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Sure.
`·2· · · · · · · · · (Whereupon, a short recess was
`·3· · · · · · · · · taken.)
`·4· ·BY MR. HILL:
`·5· · · · Q· · Okay.· The skilled artisan at the time of
`·6· ·the claimed invention, which