`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_______________
`
`AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CRUISE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES LLC
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case: IPR2014-00289
`
`Patent 6,324,463
`_______________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,324,463
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`I. MANDATORY NOTICES ........................................................................... 1
`
`II.
`
`PAYMENT OF FEES ................................................................................... 4
`
`III. STANDING .................................................................................................... 4
`
`IV. REQUEST TO INVALIDATE CLAIMS 1-5, 12-15, 18-20, 25-28, and
`34-36 OF THE ’463 PATENT ...................................................................... 5
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`The Alleged Invention Of The ’463 Patent ...................................... 5
`
`Summary Of The Prosecution History Of The ’463 Patent ........... 6
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 7
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`Standards For Claim Construction .................................................. 7
`1.
`Broadest Reasonable Construction ......................................... 7
`“engaging the system” (claim 1) ....................................................... 8
`
`“activating the cruise control system” (claims 12 and 15), and
`“deactivated” (claims 12, and 13) ..................................................... 8
`
`“unset status of the preset speed” (claim 15) .................................. 9
`
`“enabling” (claims 1 and 2), and “enabled” (claims 2 and 4) ........ 9
`
`VI. PRIOR ART TO THE ’463 PATENT FORMING THE BASIS FOR
`THIS PETITION ......................................................................................... 10
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Prior Art Documents ....................................................................... 10
`
`Admitted Prior Art .......................................................................... 11
`
`Summary of Invalidity Arguments ................................................ 12
`
`VII. GROUNDS FOR INVALIDITY OF EACH CLAIM .............................. 15
`
`A. Claims 13, 18, 25 And 26 Are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
`As Being Anticipated by Yoshimitsu .............................................. 15
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`
`
`
`B. Ground 2: Claims 1, 2, 12, 14, 15, 27 And 34-36 Are Invalid
`Under 35 U.S.C. §103 As Obvious Over Yoshimitsu In View Of
`The 1984 Nissan 300zx Owner’s Manual ....................................... 25
`
`C. Ground 3: Claims 19 And 20 Are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. §103
`As Obvious Over Yoshimitsu In View Of Nagashima ............... ...38
`
`D. Ground 4: Claims 12 And 13 Are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. §
`102(b) As Being Anticipated By Yagihashi.................................... 43
`
`E. Ground 5: Claims 1-5, 14, 26-28, And 34-36 Are Invalid Under 35
`U.S.C. § 103(a) As Being Obvious Over Yagihashi In View Of
`The Admitted Prior Art And/Or Yoshimitsu ................................ 47
`
`VIII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 60
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`CASES
`In re Zletz,
`893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989) .............................................................................. 7
`
`Page(s)
`
`STATUTES
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102 ................................................................................1, 5, 9, 10, 15, 48
`
`35 U.S.C. §103 ..................................................................................... 1, 5, 24, 46, 57
`
`35 U.S.C. §112 ....................................................................................................... 5, 6
`
`35 U.S.C. § 311 .......................................................................................................... 1
`
`CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8 ..................................................................................................... 1, 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(a) ................................................................................................... 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) ................................................................................................ 6
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.103 ..................................................................................................... 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ..................................................................................................... 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`
`
`
`PETITIONERS’ EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 6,324,463 (“the ’463 Patent”).
`Complaints filed in Related District Court Cases
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 6,324,463
`JP-A-H09-505-82 (“Yagihashi”)
`Certified translation of JP-A-H09-505-82 (“Yagihashi”)
`JP-S60-161226 (“Yoshimitsu”)
`Certified translation of JP-S60-161226 (“Yoshimitsu”)
`1984 Nissan 300zx Manual (“300zx Manual”)
`JP-4-102059 (“Nagashima”)
`Certified translation of JP-4-102059 (“Nagashima”)
`Powers of Attorney
`Declaration of David A. McNamara (“McNamara Decl.”)
`
`Exhibit #
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`1011
`1012
`
`
`
`iv
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 311, Petitioners hereby respectfully request inter
`
`partes review of claims 1-5, 12-15, 18-20, 25-28, and 34-36 of Ex. 1001, U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,324,463 (“the ’463 Patent”) which issued on November 27, 2001.
`
`The challenged claims are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 over the
`
`prior art publications identified and applied in this Petition.
`I. MANDATORY NOTICES
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.8, Petitioners provide the following mandatory
`
`disclosures:
`
`A. Real Parties-In-Interest. Petitioner, American Honda Motor Co., Inc., is
`
`a real party-in-interest for the instant petition, in addition to Petitioners Toyota
`
`Motor North America, Inc., Nissan North America, Inc., LLC, Ford Motor
`
`Company, Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC, Subaru of America, Inc., and
`
`Volvo Cars of North America, LLC (Collectively, “Petitioners”). Other real-
`
`parties-in-interest are Honda Motor Co., Ltd., Honda Patents and Technologies
`
`N.A., LLC, Fuji Heavy Industries, Ltd., and Toyota Motor Corporation.
`
`B. Related Matters. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2), Petitioners submit
`
`that the ’463 Patent is the subject of a series of patent infringement lawsuits
`
`brought by the Patent Owner, Cruise Control Technologies, LLC (see Ex. 1002),
`
`each of which may affect, or be affected by, a decision in this proceeding:
`
`Description
`
`Docket Number
`
`Filed
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`Description
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Hyundai Motor America
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Nissan North America Inc.
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Toyota Motor North America Inc.
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Volkswagen Group of America Inc.
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v. Audi
`of America LLC
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v. BMW
`of North America LLC
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Chrysler Group LLC
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v. Ford
`Motor Company
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`General Motors LLC
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Jaguar Land Rover North America LLC
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Mercedes-Benz USA LLC
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Porsche Cars North America Inc.
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v.
`Subaru of America Inc.
`
`Docket Number
`D. Del. 1:13cv82
`
`Filed
`01/15/2013
`
`D. Del. 1:13cv84
`
`01/15/2013
`
`D. Del. 1:13cv85
`
`01/15/2013
`
`D. Del. 1:13cv86
`
`01/15/2013
`
`D. Del. 1:13cv87
`
`01/15/2013
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1753 12/21/2012
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1754 12/21/2012
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1755 12/21/2012
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1756 12/21/2012
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1757 12/21/2012
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1758 12/21/2012
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1759 12/21/2012
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1760 12/21/2012
`
`D. Del. 1:12cv1761 12/21/2012
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Description
`Cruise Control Technologies LLC v. Volvo
`Cars of North America LLC
`
`Filed
`Docket Number
`D. Del. 1:12cv1762 12/21/2012
`
`The ’463 Patent is the subject to an Ex Parte Reexamination No.
`
`90/012,841.
`
`C. Lead and Back-up Counsel.
`
`Petitioners provide the following designation of counsel:
`
`LEAD COUNSEL
`John M. Caracappa (Reg. No. 43,532)
`
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`Tremayne M. Norris (Reg. No. 58,683)
`
`(jcaracap@steptoe.com)
`
`tnorris@steptoe.com
`
`Steptoe & Johnson LLP
`
`Steptoe & Johnson LLP
`
`1330 Connecticut Ave. NW
`
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`T: 202-429-6267, F: 202-261-0597
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`William H. Mandir (Reg. No. 32,156)
`
`1330 Connecticut Ave. NW
`
`
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`
`T: 202-862-5766, F: 202-429-3902
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`Matthew D. Satchwell (Reg. No. 58,870)
`
`(wmandir@sughrue.com)
`
`(matthew.satchwell@dlapiper.com)
`
`Sughrue Mion PLLC
`
`DLA Piper LLP (US)
`
`2100 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
`
`203 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1900
`
`Washington, DC 20037
`
`Chicago, Illinois 60601
`
`T: 202-293-7060, F: 202-293-7068
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`
`T: 312-368-2111, F: 312-630-6352
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Wab Kadaba (Reg. No. 45,865)
`
`Matthew J. Moore (Reg. No. 42,012)
`
`(wkadaba@kilpatricktownsend.com)
`
`(matthew.moore@lw.com)
`
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`
`Latham & Watkins LLP
`
`1100 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 2800
`
`555 Eleventh St., N.W., Suite 1000
`
`Atlanta, GA 30309-4528
`
`Washington, D.C. 20004
`
`T: 404-532-6959, F: 404-541-3258
`
`
`
`T: 202-637-2278, F: 202-637-2201
`
`D. Service Information. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(4), Petitioners
`
`identify the following service information: John M. Caracappa, Paul D. Lall,
`
`Tremayne M. Norris, and Stephanie L. Schonewald, Steptoe & Johnson LLP, 1330
`
`Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20036, Tel: 202-429-6267, Fax: 202-261-
`
`0597. Please direct all correspondence regarding this proceeding to lead counsel at
`
`jcaracappa@steptoe.com with a courtesy copy sent to HondaIPR@steptoe.com.
`II.
`
`PAYMENT OF FEES
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.103, $24,600 is being paid at the time of filing
`
`this petition, charged to Deposit Account 19-4293. Should any further fees be
`
`required by the present Petition, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) is
`
`hereby authorized to charge the above referenced Deposit Account.
`
`III. STANDING
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a), Petitioners certify that the patent sought
`
`for review, U.S. Patent No. 6,324,463, is available for inter partes review and that
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`Petitioners are not barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review of the
`
`patent.
`
`IV. REQUEST TO INVALIDATE CLAIMS 1-5, 12-15, 18-20, 25-28, AND
`34-36 OF THE ’463 PATENT
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b), Petitioners request that the Board
`
`invalidate claims 1-5, 12-15, 18-20, 25-28, and 34-36 of the ’463 Patent. Such
`
`relief is justified as the alleged invention of the ’463 Patent was described by
`
`others prior to the effective filing date of the ’463 Patent.
`A. The Alleged Invention Of The ’463 Patent
`The ’463 Patent discloses a system and method for displaying the speed at
`
`which a standard cruise control system maintains a vehicle (“PRESET SPEED
`
`DISPLAY” in Fig. 1 below) in addition to displaying the actual speed of a vehicle
`
`(“MAIN DISPLAY” in Fig. 1 below). In some instances, the preset speed display
`
`is digital (as in Figure 1 above) and, in other instances, it is represented by the
`
`portion of lit LEDs in an array of LEDs arranged around a traditional, analog
`
`speedometer (Fig. 2).
`
`’463 Patent Fig. 1
`
`’463 Patent Fig. 2
`
`The limited scope of the alleged invention—display of a preset speed at which the
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`cruise control is set—is demonstrated by the scope of the Admitted Prior Art (see
`
`Section VI(B), infra), which covers every other aspect of cruise control systems
`
`recited in the claims of the ’463 Patent.
`B.
`Summary Of The Prosecution History Of The ’463 Patent
`In the first and only Office Action of September 7, 2000, various claims
`
`were objected to for informalities, and rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112, second
`
`paragraph as being indefinite. Ex. 1003, pp. 89–90. Additionally, claims 1–11 and
`
`25–35 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(e) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent
`
`No. 5,949,346 to Suzuki, while claims 12–24 and 36 were rejected under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§103(a) as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,332,284 to
`
`Tomecek. Id., pp. 90–96.
`
`
`
`In response to the Office Action, the Applicant amended claims 2, 6, 7, 12,
`
`22, 24, 26, and 34 to address the claim objections and the rejection under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§112, second paragraph. Id., pp. 100–104. In response to the prior art rejections,
`
`the Applicant traversed the rejections on the grounds that Suzuki relates to the
`
`display of actual speed information and speed limit information, but in no way
`
`suggests a cruise control system or a display of cruise control speed indicator. Id.,
`
`pp. 105–107. The Applicant also clarified the scope of the alleged invention:
`
`Applicant’s inventive system and every system and method claim in
`
`the pending application, on the contrary, are directed only to the
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`
`
`
`specific problem of providing preset cruise control speed information
`
`to the driver of a vehicle. . . . . The pending claims only address the
`
`display of the speed of the vehicle as it was when the cruise control
`
`was set as a constant indicator/reminder to the driver of the speed to
`
`which the vehicle will resume after the cruise control speed is
`
`temporarily overridden (i.e. due to acceleration or deceleration).
`
`Id., p. 105 (emphasis added). Notably, unlike the prior art references presented in
`
`this Petition, the Suzuki reference was not drawn to a cruise control system, a
`
`distinction the patentee raised in traversing the rejection. Id., pp. 105–107. The
`
`limited scope of the alleged invention is consistent with the scope of the Admitted
`
`Prior Art, which covers every other aspect of cruise control systems recited in the
`
`claims of the ’463 Patent. The Examiner allowed all claims in view of the
`
`Applicant’s amendments and arguments; however, the statement of reasons for
`
`allowance provided by the Examiner included a recitation of various limitations,
`
`drawn from various independent claims rather than from any single independent
`
`claim. Id., p. 147. The ’463 Patent issued on November 27, 2001.
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`A.
`Standards For Claim Construction
`1.
`Broadest Reasonable Construction
`A claim subject to inter partes review is given its “broadest reasonable
`
`construction in light of the specification of the patent in which it appears.” 37
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`
`
`
`C.F.R. § 42.100(b). This means that the words of the claim are given their plain
`
`meaning from the perspective of one of ordinary skill in the art unless that meaning
`
`is inconsistent with the specification. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321 (Fed. Cir.
`
`1989). Petitioners submit, for the purposes of inter partes review only, that the
`
`claim terms are presumed to take on their broadest reasonable interpretation in
`
`light of the specification of the ’463 Patent.
`
`“engaging the system” (claim 1)
`
`B.
`The ’463 Patent uses numerous terms to describe various states of the cruise
`
`control system. Among them, the term “engaged” is used throughout the
`
`specification to specifically describe an operating state of the cruise control system
`
`to control the speed of vehicle to the preset speed. See, e.g., ’463 Patent, FIG. 4.
`
`For example, at column 5, lines 13-15, the ’463 Patent discloses that when the
`
`cruise control “is engaged,…the automobile accelerates to the preset speed.”
`
`Furthermore, at column 1, lines 46-48, the ’463 Patent describes a system
`
`“engaged at a set speed” to mean “the car’s speed is automatically controlled at the
`
`memorized speed.” Thus, based on its plain meaning in light of the specification,
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art would consider “engaging the system” (claim 1) to
`
`mean “operating the cruise control system to automatically control the vehicle at
`
`the preset speed.”
`
`C.
`
`“activating the cruise control system” (claims 12 and 15), and
`“deactivated” (claims 12 and 13)
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Both claims 12 and 15 recite an “activating” of the cruise control system,
`
`with claim 15 clearly using this term to mean a turning on of the cruise control
`
`system (“before setting the preset speed, activating the cruise control system“).
`
`’463 Patent, claim 15. Furthermore, the specification utilizes the term “activated”
`
`to also refer to a turning on of the system (“When the cruise control system is first
`
`activated, the preset display 16 will blink the number zero indicating an ‘unset’
`
`state of the cruise control”). Id., 4:4-6. Accordingly, in light of the specification
`
`and the plain meaning of this term, “activating the cruise control” means “turning
`
`on the cruise control” and “activating the cruise control device” means “turning on
`
`the cruise control device.” For similar reasons, “deactivated” as recited in claims
`
`12 and 13 means “turned off.”
`
`“unset status of the preset speed” (claim 15)
`
`D.
`The terms “status” and “state” are used interchangeably in the claims and
`
`are, therefore, synonymous in the ’463 Patent. See, e.g., id. at claims 15 and 21.
`
`As such, “unset state” and “unset status” of the preset speed have the same
`
`meaning for purposes of this proceeding; i.e., a state or status in which there is no
`
`preset speed for the cruise control system.
`
`“enabling” (claims 1 and 2), and “enabled” (claims 2 and 4)
`
`E.
`The claims distinguish an “enabling” of the cruise control system from an
`
`“engaging,” which is construed above. See, e.g., ’463 Patent, claim 1. For
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`
`
`
`example, according to claim 1, the cruise control system is “enabl[ed]” by an
`
`enable switch and “engag[ed]” by a set speed input. Furthermore, in claim 4, the
`
`controller is “initially enabled” and, in claim 2, the cruising speed is selected
`
`“when the controller is enabled.” The specification clearly uses the term “enabled”
`
`to mean a “system on” state for the cruise control system. See id., 4:39-46. Thus,
`
`“enabling” means “turning on” and “enabled” means “turned on.” For similar
`
`reasons, “disabling” as recited in claim 2 means “turning off.”
`
`VI. PRIOR ART TO THE ’463 PATENT FORMING THE BASIS FOR
`THIS PETITION
`A.
`Prior Art Documents
`JP-S60-161226 (“Yoshimitsu”)1 (Ex. 1006; Ex. 1007 (Certified English
`
`Translation)) was published on August 22, 1985. As a result, Yoshimitsu is
`
`available as prior art against all claims of the ’463 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`The 1984 Nissan 300zx Manual (“300zx Manual”) (Ex. 1008) was published
`
`in the United States at least in 1984. As a result, the 300zx Manual is available as
`
`prior art against all claims of the ’463 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`JP-4-102059 (“Nagashima”) (Ex. 1009; Ex. 1010 (Certified English
`
`Translation)) Nagashima was published on September 3, 1992. As a result,
`
`Nagashima is available as prior art against all claims of the ’463 Patent under 35
`
`1 Citations in the Petition to the Japanese patent documents refer to the
`
`corresponding certified English translations.
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`
`
`
`U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`JP-A-H09-505-82 (“Yagihashi”) (Ex. 1004; Ex. 1005 (Certified English
`
`Translation)) was published on February 18, 1997. Therefore, Yagihashi is
`
`available as prior art against all claims of the ’463 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`None of the references relied upon in this Petition were cited as a reference
`
`or considered during prosecution of the application of the ’463 Patent.
`B. Admitted Prior Art
`The ’463 Patent discusses the following functionality of prior art cruise
`
`control systems, which were “found in many automobiles”’463 Patent, 1:12-11.
`
`(“Admitted Prior Art” or “APA”):
`
`(1) a cruise control system with a controller (’463 Patent, 1: 47-55)
`that can be turned “on” or “off” (id., 1:43-45);
`
`(2) a button that “turn[s] on the cruise control system” (id., 1:18-20);
`
`(3) a cruise control system that is either engaged or not engaged (id.,
`1:45-47);
`
`(4) a button that “engage[s], or set[s], the cruise control” (id., 1:23-
`25);
`
`(5) a “memory function that stores the set control speed” (id., 1:26-
`27);
`
`(6) “applying the brakes to temporarily slow down temporarily
`disengages the cruise control function” (id., 1:28-29);
`
`(7) a “resume” button to resume cruise control after disengaging it
`(id., 1:30-32);
`
`(8) a system that allows the vehicle to be accelerated without
`disengaging the cruise control (id., 1:32-37; 4:6-10 (“Further, if
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`
`
`
`in the engaged state, the operator steps on the accelerator to
`momentarily (or longer) increase vehicular speed (for passing
`another vehicle or any other reason), the cruise control will
`remain engaged as is true of all systems today.” (emphasis
`added));
`
`(9) a system that switches modes (e.g., on/off or engaged/not-
`engaged) “based on human or machine intervention” (id., 1:42-
`60);
`
`(10) “visual feedback indicating whether the cruise control system is
`enabled” (id., 1:63-64);
`
`(11) A main display or speedometer showing actual speed (id., 2:13-
`30 (discussing operator’s knowledge of actual speed); and
`
`(12) Providing information to a driver (operator) about the operation
`of the cruise control system (id., 1:14-18 (“That is, while the
`cruise control feature offers the operator of a vehicle the benefit
`of speed control (machine) automation, it also requires
`significant human interface for its proper and safe operation.”)).
`
`
`
`C.
`Summary Of Invalidity Arguments
`According to the ’463 Patent, the essential feature of the alleged invention is
`
`limited to a visual display of the desired speed, or “preset speed” at which a cruise
`
`control system is set (’463 Patent, 2:38-43), and an indication of whether the speed
`
`of the vehicle is under cruise control (see, e.g., id., 4:4-6). The inventor sought to
`
`avoid driver confusion as to which mode of the cruise control system was active at
`
`a given time. Id., 1:61-2:32. The ’463 Patent describes two examples that
`
`illustrate this problem. In the first example, a driver accelerates a vehicle to a
`
`higher speed (70 mph) sufficiently above a preset speed (60 mph), such that the
`
`cruise control stops adjusting the speed of the vehicle; the driver maintains the
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`
`
`
`vehicle at the higher speed (70 mph) for several miles before deciding to slow the
`
`vehicle to a lower speed (40 mph), without using the brake, in response to heavy
`
`traffic; and the driver forgets that the cruise control system is engaged, such that—
`
`unbeknownst to the driver—it will not allow the vehicle to slow down below the
`
`preset speed (60 mph). Id., 2:12-25. In the second example, a driver disengages
`
`the cruise control by depressing the brake pedal, allows time to elapse, and then
`
`forgets the preset speed at which the cruise control will resume when the “resume”
`
`button is pressed. Id., 2: 25-32. The inventor concluded that “there is a definite
`
`safety driven need to provide useful, visual feedback to operators of automobiles
`
`with cruise control of the preset speeds at which they are set.” Id., 2:33-35.
`
`The problems discussed above, however, were well known at the time of the
`
`alleged invention, and had already been solved. For instance, Yagihashi
`
`recognized the need to display “variously-changing set conditions” when a driver
`
`has place a vehicle in cruise control mode. Yagihashi, ¶ 0009. Yagihashi solved
`
`the problem, in one aspect, by disclosing display indicators that illuminate when
`
`the cruise control system is engaged. Id., ¶ 0063.
`
`Indeed, the visual displays claimed by the ’463 Patent were well known and
`
`widely disclosed. For instance, Yagihashi discloses in Figure 6, using a digital
`
`display to indicate both the actual speed (see element 55) and the preset speed (see
`
`element 57) (shown next to the digital display of the ’463 Patent):
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Yagihashi Fig. 6
`
`’463 Patent Fig. 1
`
`
`
`
`The remaining limitations claimed in the ’463 Patent are drawn to standard
`
`cruise control functionality, including that disclosed in the Admitted Prior Art,
`
`(e.g., a speed controller maintaining the vehicle at a preset speed, a switch for
`
`enabling/engaging cruise control, determining the vehicle’s actual speed, a display
`
`indicating that cruise control is set/active or unset/inactive, storing preset speed in
`
`memory, temporarily disengaging cruise control when the brake pedal is
`
`depressed, digital and analog displays, use of blinking numbers such as “0”, use of
`
`LEDs, or allowing a user to change the preset speed, displaying the preset speed
`
`digitally or using one or more LEDs, maintaining that display through acceleration
`
`or deceleration of the vehicle, and/or combining multiple display types).
`
`In short, the ’463 Patent claims no inventive matter and discloses no novel
`
`cruise control technology or technique for displaying information related to the
`
`same. Instead, the ’463 Patent claims matter that was already well-known to those
`
`of skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention. To the extent that any
`
`element can be argued as “novel,” it is a predictable and obvious application of
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`
`
`known techniques disclosed in the closely-related field of cruise control systems
`
`and control/display interfaces in vehicles for precisely the same purposes disclosed
`
`in that art, namely displaying modes of operation to a driver and allowing the
`
`driver to control systems in the vehicle.
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art of control systems and their display
`
`capabilities at the time of the alleged invention would have had a bachelor’s degree
`
`in engineering or equivalent coursework and at least two years of experience in
`
`automotive control systems and user interfaces for vehicles. In light of the
`
`disclosures detailed below, the ’463 Patent is invalid because at least four
`
`references anticipates or renders obvious one or more claims.
`
`VII. GROUNDS FOR INVALIDITY OF EACH CLAIM
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 13, 18, 25, 26 And 27Are Invalid Under 35
`U.S.C. § 102(b) As Being Anticipated By Yoshimitsu
`The features in claims 13, 18, 25, 26 and 27 were described nearly fifteen
`
`years earlier in Yoshimitsu. The alleged novelty of claim 13 is maintaining the
`
`display of the preset speed until the cruise control system is deactivated or a new
`
`preset speed is selected. The purported novelty of the methods in claims 18 and 25
`
`is the maintenance of the display of a symbol indicative of the preset speed at times
`
`when the vehicle is not traveling at the preset speed (e.g., braking and
`
`accelerating). The allegedly novel feature in claim 26 is the use of two displays –
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`
`
`
`one indicative of the current traveling speed and one display indicative of the
`
`preset speed.
`
`Like the ’463 Patent, an objective of Yoshimitsu is to provide information
`
`regarding the preset speed to a driver when the cruise control system is not
`
`engaged (e.g., during braking and acceleration). See Yoshimitsu, p. 3, ll. 33-36.
`
`To achieve this objective, the display device of Yoshimitsu includes a first display
`
`section, which displays travel speed, and a second display section, which displays
`
`the constant travel speed set by the setting manipulation of the occupant (preset
`
`speed). See, e.g., id., p. 3, ll. 38-41; see also id., Figure 3 (reproduced below). The
`
`preset speed remains displayed in the second display section even after temporary
`
`release of the cruise control by braking and while the vehicle is accelerated to a
`
`speed above the preset speed. Id., p. 3, ll. 19-22, 33-36; p. 6, ll. 4-7.
`
`
`
`
`
`In light of the above, the table below demonstrates how each limitation of
`
`claims 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27 of the ’463 Patent is disclosed by Yoshimitsu.
`
`Claim Element
`13. A method for
`indicating to a human
`operator of a vehicle
`
`Citations to Yoshimitsu
`“Setting vehicle speed display device for a cruise
`control unit characterized by being provided with a
`display surface having the first display section which
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Claim Element
`having a cruise control
`system a preset speed
`for which the cruise
`control system is set,
`the method comprising:
`
`Citations to Yoshimitsu
`displays travel speed and the second display section
`having a plurality of display elements arranged in an
`array in the vicinity of this display section and
`displaying constant travel speed set by the setting
`manipulation of the occupant…” Claim 1. See also
`Claim 2; p. 3, ll. 23-36; p. 3, ll. 38-41; p. 6, ll. 7-8; p. 7,
`ll. 10-13; and p. 7, ll. 16-20.
`Figure 3, below:
`
`13a. setting the preset
`speed;
`
`13b. displaying to the
`operator a symbol
`indicative of the preset
`speed;
`
`13c. maintaining the
`display of the symbol
`
`
`
`“Setting vehicle speed display device for a cruise
`control unit characterized by being provided with a
`display surface having the first display section which
`displays travel speed and the second display section
`having a plurality of display elements arranged in an
`array in the vicinity of this display section and
`displaying constant travel speed set by the setting
`manipulation of the occupant…” Claim 1. See also
`Claim 2; p.3, ll. 23-24; p. 3, ll. 38-43; p. 5, ll. 8-9; p. 7,
`ll. 28-31; p. 7, l. 36-p. 8, l. 3.; and p. 9, ll. 1-4.
`“Setting vehicle speed display device for a cruise
`control unit characterized by being provided with a
`display surface having the first display section which
`displays travel speed and the second display section
`having a plurality of display elements arranged in an
`array in the vicinity of this display section and
`displaying constant travel speed set by the setting
`manipulation of the occupant…” Claim 1. See also
`Claim 2; p. 3, ll. 23-36; p. 3, ll. 38-41; p. 6, ll. 7-8; p. 7,
`ll. 10-13; and p. 7, ll. 16-20.
`Figure 3, supra, Reference Number 32.
`“When timer (10) stops operation, the sustained signal
`forming circuit (13) starts to be in on state. However,
`
`17
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Claim Element
`indicative of the preset
`speed; and
`
`13d. discontinuing
`display of the symbol
`indicative of the preset
`when the cruise control
`system is deactivated
`or a new preset speed is
`selected.
`
`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,
`
`
`
`Citations to Yoshimitsu
`one side of the input logic of the AND gate (12)
`becomes “0” so that output logic also becomes “0.”
`Therefore, by the output signal (e) of circuit (3),
`radiator (32b) sustains lighting, thus sustaining the
`display of the set vehicle speed.
`This sustained state finishes by the reset signal provided
`to the sustained signal forming circuit (13) by the
`resetting manipulation of the cruise control display
`device or cancel operation of the memory.
`To sum up the discussion, at the time of setting the
`cruise control unit, the display of the set speed flashes
`for a few seconds, and afterwards, the set speed lights
`constantly.” p. 7, l. 36-p. 8, l. 3.
`“When timer (10) stops operation, the sustained signal
`forming circuit (13) starts to be in on state. However,
`one side of the input logic of the AND gate (12)
`becomes “0” so that output logic also becomes “0.”
`Therefore, by the output signal (e) of circuit (3), radiator
`(32b) sustains lighting, thus sustaining the display of the
`set vehicle speed.
`This sustained state finishes by the reset signal
`provided to the sustained signal forming circuit (13) by
`the resetting manipulation of the cruise control display
`device or cancel operation of the memory.
`To sum up the discussion, at the time of setting the
`cruise control unit, the display of the set speed flashes
`for a few seconds, and afterwards, the set speed lights
`constantly.” p. 7, l. 36-p. 8, l. 3.
`
`“Setting vehicle speed display device for a cruise
`control unit characterized by being provided with a
`display surface having the first display section which
`displays travel speed and the second display section
`having a plurality of display elements arranged in an
`array in the vicinity of this display section and
`displaying constant travel speed set by the setting
`
`18
`
`

`