UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`___________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________
`
`TOYOTA MOTOR NORTH AMERICA, INC., SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC., FORD MOTOR
`COMPANY, JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC, and VOLVO CARS OF
`NORTH AMERICA, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CRUISE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`___________
`
`Case IPR2014‐00280
`Patent 6,324,463 B1
`___________
`
`Patent Owner’s Demonstrative Exhibits for Oral Hearing
`
`1
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`___________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________
`
`TOYOTA MOTOR NORTH AMERICA, INC., SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC., FORD MOTOR
`COMPANY, JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC, and VOLVO CARS OF
`NORTH AMERICA, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CRUISE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`___________
`
`Case IPR2014‐00280
`Patent 6,324,463 B1
`___________
`
`Patent Owner’s Demonstrative Exhibits for Oral Hearing
`
`1
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Instituted Anticipation Grounds
`• Ground A: Diamante Owner’s Manual (“Diamante”)
`anticipates claims 1‐3, 5, 12‐16, 21, 25, 26 and 28;
`• Ground D: Watanabe anticipates claims 18 and 19; and
`• Ground E: CelsiorOwner’s Manual (“Celsior”)
`anticipates claims 2‐5, 26‐28 and 34‐36.
`
`2
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Diamante’s “cruise control” system
`
`Ex. 1004, p. 52
`
`Ex. 1004, p. 86
`
`Ex. 1004, p. 87
`
`3
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Diamante’s “preview distance control” system
`
`Ex. 1004, p. 88
`
`Ex. 1004, p. 88
`
`Ex. 1004, p. 91
`
`4
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Anticipation Allegations Are All Based On Cruise
`Control System and Preview Distance Control
`
`Pet. at 18-19 (cites to “cruise control” system of
`Diamante)
`
`5
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Anticipation Allegations Are All Based On Cruise
`Control System and Preview Distance Control
`
`Pet. at 19-20 (cites to “preview distance control” system of
`Diamante)
`
`6
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`(a) a speed controller for automatically maintaining the vehicle at a
`substantially constant cruising speed selected by the operator;
`
`‘463 Patent –Claim 2
`2. A cruise control system for a variable speed vehicle controlled by a human
`operator, comprising:
`(b) a cruise control enable switch associated with the controller for enabling and
`disabling the controller;
`(c) a set speed input in communication with the controller for selecting the
`cruising speed of the vehicle when the controller is enabled;
`(d) a memory that stores information representative of the selected cruising
`speed; and
`(e) a feedback system that substantially continuously communicates the selected
`cruising speed information to the operator of the vehicle until either the operator
`selects a subsequent cruising speed or the controller is disabled.
`
`7
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Petition’s allegations regarding the claimed “speed
`controller”
`• Cites to allegations regarding “speed controller” of claim 1
`
`• Petitioner equates the preamble “cruise control system” with the
`“speed controller” claim element
`• This interpretation would improperly render express claim language
`superfluous. Stumbo v. Eastman Outdoors, 508 F.3d 1358, 1362 (Fed.
`Cir. 2007)
`
`8
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`‘463 Patent –Claim 25
`25. A method for indicating to a human operator of a vehicle having
`a cruise control system a preset speed for which the cruise control
`system is set, the method comprising:
`setting the preset speed;
`displaying to the operator a symbol indicative of the preset speed;
`accelerating the vehicle to a speed above the preset speed; and
`
`maintaining the display of the symbol indicative of the preset
`speed while the vehicle is at the speed above the preset speed.
`
`9
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Petition refers to situations when vehicle speed is
`below, not “above” the preset speed
`• First cited sentence –no mention of any speed display
`• Second cited sentence –“While vehicle‐to‐vehicle distance
`control is on or while accelerating tothe preset speed…”
`
`10
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`‘463 Patent –Claims 18 and 19
`
`18. A method for indicating to a human operator of a vehicle having a cruise control system a preset speed
`for which the cruise control system is set, the method comprising:
`setting the preset speed;
`displaying to the operator a symbol indicative of the preset speed while maintaining the vehicle speed at
`substantially the preset speed;
`maintaining the display of the symbol indicative of the preset speed;
`braking the vehicle;
`upon braking the vehicle, discontinuing maintaining the vehicle speed at substantially the preset speed
`while keeping data corresponding to the preset speed in a memory device; and
`at a time after braking and during which time the vehicle is not being maintained at substantially the
`preset speed, displaying to the operator a symbol indicative of the preset speed.
`19. The method of claim 18, wherein the symbol indicative of the preset speed displayed at the time after
`braking and during which time the vehicle is not being maintained at substantially the preset speed, is
`distinguishable by the operator from the symbol indicative of the preset speed while the vehicle is being
`maintained at substantially the preset speed.
`
`11
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Petition’s allegations regarding Watanabe are
`entirely conclusory
`• Petition generally refers to whole claims, without
`specifying how Watanabe meets each claim element
`
`12
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Petition’s allegations regarding Watanabe are
`entirely conclusory
`• Petition generally refers to whole claims, without specifying
`how Watanabe meets each claim element (Pet. at 41‐43)
`
`13
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Petition fails to address “memory device”
`limitation of claim 18
`• Claim 18 requires “upon braking the vehicle, discontinuing maintaining
`the vehicle speed at substantially the preset speed while keeping data
`corresponding to the preset speed in a memory device”
`• Petition never addresses this limitation
`In Reply, Petitioner cites Fig. 5 and para. 25 of Watanabe (Rep. at 12)
`• Para. 25: “At that time [vehicle speed in cruise range and no preceding
`vehicle detected], the present vehicle speed VS is stored as the set vehicle
`speed Vmin the ECU 2”
`• No relevance to “braking the vehicle”
`In Reply, Petitioner cites Green at para. 37 (Petition only cites paras. 48‐
`51)
`• Para. 37 relates solely to the Diamante Owner’s Manual (“One skilled in the
`art would understand that the Diamante Owner's Manual inherently includes
`a memory to store the pre‐set speed (claims 1, 2, 26, and 34) by virtue of
`controlling the vehicle according to a pre‐set speed and continuously
`displaying the pre‐set speed.”)
`
`•
`
`•
`
`14
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`(a) a speed controller for automatically maintaining the vehicle at a
`substantially constant cruising speed selected by the operator;
`
`‘463 Patent –Claim 2
`2. A cruise control system for a variable speed vehicle controlled by a human
`operator, comprising:
`(b) a cruise control enable switch associated with the controller for enabling and
`disabling the controller;
`(c) a set speed input in communication with the controller for selecting the
`cruising speed of the vehicle when the controller is enabled;
`(d) a memory that stores information representative of the selected cruising
`speed; and
`(e) a feedback system that substantially continuously communicates the selected
`cruising speed information to the operator of the vehicle until either the operator
`selects a subsequent cruising speed or the controller is disabled.
`
`15
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Petition’s allegations regarding Celsiorand the
`claimed “speed controller”
`• Unexplained citation to Celsior
`
`• Petitioner equates the preamble “cruise control system”
`with the “speed controller” claim element
`• This interpretation would improperly render express
`claim language superfluous. Stumbo v. Eastman Outdoors,
`508 F.3d 1358, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2007)
`
`16
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`‘463 Patent –Claims 26 and 27
`
`26. A cruise control system for a variable speed vehicle controlled by a human operator, comprising:
`a speed controller for automatically maintaining the vehicle at a substantially constant preset speed;
`a set speed input in communication with the controller for selecting the preset speed;
`a memory device operable to store information representative of the preset speed;
`first visual display apparatus operable to display the indicative of the actual speed of the vehicle; and
`second visual display apparatus operable to display the visual information indicative of an operation
`status of the speed controller, wherein the visual information displayable by the second visual display
`apparatus includes visual information indicative of the preset speed.
`27. The cruise control system of claim 26, wherein the visual information displayed by the second visual
`display apparatus includes information reflecting whether the speed controller is operating to
`maintain the vehicle at the cruising speed at the time the display is made.
`
`17
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`“Preset speed” does not indicate whether speed
`controller is maintaining cruising speed
`• Petitioner asserts that “preset speed” is “information reflecting whether
`the speed controller is operating to maintain the vehicle at the cruising
`speed at the time the display is made” (Pet. at 55, citing Green ¶54
`(“the display of preset speed indicates that ‘the speed controller is
`operating to maintain the vehicle at the cruise speed’”)
`
`18
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`“Preset speed” does not indicate whether speed
`controller is maintaining cruising speed
`• Preset speed display is maintained even when
`radar system detects a vehicle ahead and
`reduces actual speed (Celsior, p. 130)
`• Preset speed display does not indicate that
`vehicle is being maintained “at the cruising
`speed”
`• In Reply (not in Petition), Petitioner asserts that
`“vehicle detected ahead” display is the claimed
`“information”
`• Vehicle ahead merely indicates a vehicle is in range,
`has no relation to whether speed controller is
`maintaining a cruising speed
`
`19
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`John Kasha, Kasha Law
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC - Exhibit
`2004 - Toyota v. CCT - IPR2014-00280
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
