Filed on behalf of UUSI LLC
`Monte
`By
`Falcoff mlfalcoff@hdp.com
`Nye mnye@hdp.com
`Michael
`HARNESS DICKEY
`PIERCE P.L.C
`545 Corporate Drive Ste 200
`Troy Ml 48098
`Telephone 248 641-1600
`Facsimile 248 641-0270
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`BROSE NORTH AMERICA INC
`and
`BROSE FAHRZEUGTEILE GMBH
`
`CO KG HALLSTADT
`
`Petitioner
`
`UUSI LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Case 1PR2014-00416
`Patent 8217612
`
`DECLARATION OF DR MARK EHSANI
`
`IN SUPPORT OF PATENT OWNER RESPONSE
`
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 1
`
`
`Monte
`By
`Falcoff mlfalcoff@hdp.com
`Nye mnye@hdp.com
`Michael
`HARNESS DICKEY
`PIERCE P.L.C
`545 Corporate Drive Ste 200
`Troy Ml 48098
`Telephone 248 641-1600
`Facsimile 248 641-0270
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`BROSE NORTH AMERICA INC
`and
`BROSE FAHRZEUGTEILE GMBH
`
`CO KG HALLSTADT
`
`Petitioner
`
`UUSI LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Case 1PR2014-00416
`Patent 8217612
`
`DECLARATION OF DR MARK EHSANI
`
`IN SUPPORT OF PATENT OWNER RESPONSE
`
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 1
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr MarkEhsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`EDUCATION AND BACKGROUND
`
`My name is Mark Ehsani
`
`SUMMARY
`l.A
`have been retained by Patent Owner UUSI
`
`LLC to testify as an engineering expert at the hourly rate of $600 through
`
`Thomson Reuters My compensation in this matter is not affected in any way by
`
`the opinions
`
`reach or the outcome of this matter
`
`submit this Declaration in support of Patent Owners Response
`
`regarding the inter partes review of U.S Patent No 8217612 the 612 Patent
`
`filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Brose
`
`consider myself an expert in the field of electrical and computer
`
`engineering specifically within the motor vehicle realm and have been an expert
`
`in this field since before 1992 That expertise includes specific expertise in the
`
`areas of body control systems sensorless and Hall effect-based motor control
`
`microprocessor-based and discrete circuit logic design and programming and
`
`safety systems all with applications in the field of motor vehicles
`
`copy of my curriculum vitae is provided as Exhibit 2002 to this
`
`Declaration and provides
`
`comprehensive description of my relevant experience
`
`including academic and employment history publications conference
`
`participation and patenting activity
`
`of 42
`Page
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 2
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`Based on my review of the 612 Patent the prior art cited in the
`
`Petition the additional documents listed below my understanding of the
`
`applicable legal standards and my knowledge of the art it
`
`is my expert opinion
`
`that the claims of the 612 Patent are not anticipated or rendered obvious in view
`
`of the references cited by Petitioner Brose
`
`EDUCATION
`l.B
`Doctor of Philosophy degree in Electrical Engineering from the
`
`have
`
`University of Wisconsin-Madison 1981
`
`have Masters of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from the
`
`University of Texas at Austin 1974
`
`have
`
`Bachelors of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from the
`
`University of Texas at Austin 1973
`
`BACKGROUND
`l.C
`For the past 33 years my research work has been in power electronics
`
`10
`
`motor drives hybrid vehicles and their control systems am Professor of
`electrical engineering at Texas AM University College Station Texas
`
`am
`
`Director of the Advanced Vehicle Systems Research Program and the Power
`Electronics and Motor Drives Laboratory at Texas AM University
`
`of 42
`Page
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 3
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`of Dr Mark Ehsani
`Declaration
`IPR2O14-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`11
`
`am the co-author of sixteen books on automobile power electronics
`
`motor drives and advanced vehicle systems including Vehicular Electric Power
`
`Systems Marcel Dekker
`
`Inc 2003 identifying pages attached as Exhibit 2006
`
`and Modern Electric Hybrid Vehicles and Fuel Cell Vehicles
`
`Fundamentals
`
`Theory and Design CRC Press 2004 am the author of over 350 publications in
`
`motor drives advanced vehicle systems pulsed-power supplies high-voltage
`
`engineering and power electronics
`
`am an inventor on more than 30 granted or
`
`pending US and EU patents related to automotive power and propulsion systems
`
`and their subsidiary technologies
`
`12
`
`In 2005 was elected as
`
`Fellow of the Society of Automotive Engineers
`
`SAE was selected for the IEEE Vehicular Society 2001 Avant Garde Award for
`
`Contributions to the theory and design of hybrid electric vehicles In 2004 was
`
`elected to the Robert
`
`Kennedy endowed Chair in Electrical Engineering at
`Texas AM University In 2003 was selected for the IEEE Undergraduate
`
`Teaching Award For outstanding contributions to advanced curriculum
`
`development and teaching of power electronics and drives
`
`13
`
`am the founder of the IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference
`
`VPPC which is an annual
`
`international conference that has been held
`
`continuously for the past 15 years all over the world and brings together experts
`
`of 42
`Page
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 4
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`and technologies related to vehicle power systems and propulsion systems and
`
`their components
`
`am also the founding chairman of the IEEE Vehicular
`
`Technology Society VTS Vehicle Power and Propulsion Committee which is the
`
`organizing committee of the VPPC
`
`14
`
`In 2002 was elected to the Board of Governors of the Vehicular
`
`Technology Society VTS serve on the editorial board of several
`
`technical
`
`journals and am the associate editor of IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics
`
`and IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology
`
`am Fellow of IEEE an IEEE
`
`Industrial Electronics Society and Vehicular Technology Society Distinguished
`
`Speaker and an IEEE Industry Applications Society and Power Engineering Society
`
`Distinguished Lecturer
`
`am registered professional engineer
`
`in the State of
`
`Texas
`
`am the recipient of the Prize Paper Awards in Static Power Converters and
`
`motor drives at the IEEE-Industry Applications Society 1985 1987 and 1992
`
`Annual Meetings
`
`15
`
`have reviewed
`
`INFoRMATIoN RELIED ON
`II
`variety of documents in preparing this Declaration
`
`and have relied on the following for my opinion
`
`U.S Patent No 8217612 Ex 1005 the 612 Patent
`
`U.S Patent No 7579802 Ex 2007 the 802 Patent
`
`of 42
`Page
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 5
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`U.S Patent No 4870333 Ex 1007 Itoh
`
`U.S Patent No 4468596 Ex 1008 Kinzl
`
`U.S Patent No 5069000 Ex 1009 Zuckerman
`
`U.S Patent No 3888047 Ex 2005 Chikaraishi
`
`The corrected Brose petition for the 612 Patent Paper 005 of 1PR2014-
`
`00416 referred to as the 612 Petition and associated exhibits
`
`The corrected Brose petition for the 802 Patent Paper 006 of lPR2014-
`
`00417 referred to as the 802 Petition and associated exhibits
`
`The deposition transcript of Dr
`
`Arthur MacCarley Ex 2004
`
`The declaration of Dr MacCarley with respect to the 612 Patent Ex 1001
`
`of 1PR2014-00416 and associated exhibits
`
`The declaration of Dr MacCarley with respect to the 802 Patent Ex 1001
`
`of lPR2014-00417 and associated exhibits
`
`UUSI Priority document U.S Patent No 5334876 Ex 1020 the 876
`
`Patent
`
`Application and drawings as filed for application 07/872190 which issued
`
`as the 876 Patent Ex 2011
`
`UUSI Priority document U.S Patent No 6064165 Ex 1010 the 165
`
`Patent
`
`Page 6of42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 6
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`Plungis Jeff Feds to Tighten Window Rules available at
`
`http//www.autosafety.org/feds-tighten-window-rules
`
`Ex 2010
`
`16
`
`have spoken at length with John Washeleski
`
`inventor of the 612
`
`Patent and the 802 Patent Mr Washeleski described the state of the art in 1992
`
`the level of ordinary skill
`
`in the art in 1992 and the design challenges confronted
`
`and overcome by the inventions described in the 612 Patent and the 802 Patent
`
`Mr Washeleski showed me photographs of the window lift mechanisms and
`
`controls for systems existing prior to 1992 and the evolution of window lift
`
`mechanisms and controls subsequent
`
`to 1992
`
`Ill STATE OFTHE ART
`
`lll.A
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`17
`
`Based on my conversation with John Washeleski and Consistent with my
`
`understanding of the state of the art the subject matter of the 1992 priority
`
`application to which the challenged patents claim priority represented
`
`significant
`
`improvement over systems then existing in production automobiles
`
`18
`
`In the 1980s power windows were transition ing from simply hand
`
`operated crank windows to those with an electric motor attached to essentially
`
`the same mechanical window lift mechanism instead of
`
`hand-operated crank
`
`of 42
`
`Page
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 7
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`These prior window lift mechanisms were of
`
`bulky sector-gear and scissor arm
`
`design as shown here
`
`Fig
`PRIOR ART
`
`7/
`
`Chikaraishi Ex 2005 at FIG
`
`In the mid-1990s changing the lift mechanism to
`
`cable-operated mechanism allowed cheaper motors to be used
`
`19
`
`There were no explicit safety features built
`
`into the motor Instead the
`
`motor simply had
`
`certain stall torque and once the stall
`
`torque was reached
`
`the motor could not apply any further force to the window The closing speed of
`
`the motor was not very fast because
`
`higher closing speed would require more
`
`of 42
`Page
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 8
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`IPR2O14-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`torque which would then increase the stall torque of the motor and allow the
`
`motor to apply more force to anything trapped between the moving window and
`
`the window seal Even with limited torque these mechanisms would apply
`
`350 Newtons
`
`400 Newtons of force which could snap or strangle the neck of
`
`toddler or cut off
`
`childs finger
`
`20
`
`Adding motor control circuitry which may be able to detect an
`
`obstruction before the motor reaches its stall current would allow for more
`
`powerful motors and therefore faster window closing cycles More importantly
`
`the motor control circuitry would ideally be able to limit
`
`the amount of force
`
`applied to an obstruction thereby limiting or eliminating the risk of injury In the
`
`years leading up to 1992 automotive suppliers were unable to bring motor
`
`control circuitry to market due to excessive false positives or excessive false
`
`negatives or sometimes both
`
`21
`
`false positive is when an obstruction is detected which may cause the
`
`window to stop and/or
`
`reverse even though there is in fact no obstruction
`
`present This is
`
`nuisance and
`
`significant concern to original equipment
`
`manufacturers concerned with perceived quality False positives may also have an
`
`impact on safety such as by distracting
`
`driver from operating the vehicle when
`
`determining why the window has not responded as expected
`
`false negative is
`
`of 42
`Page
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 9
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`when an obstruction that is actually present
`
`is not detected This may lead to
`
`damage to the window the motor the lift mechanism or worse to
`
`person
`
`whose body part is caught between the window and the window seal
`
`22
`
`According to
`
`1997 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
`
`NHTSA Technical Report Ex 2003
`
`conservative Ex 2003 at
`
`estimate of
`
`power window injuries was 437 injuries per year Ex 2003 at 30 Table 17 These
`
`injuries were estimated for the 1-year period from October 1993 through
`
`September 1994 and include injuries caused by the closing of
`
`power window
`
`The majority of these injuries were to children under the age of 15 Ex 2003 at
`
`32 Table 21
`
`23
`
`The 1992 priority application is the practical development of
`
`system
`
`that in real world scenarios exhibits
`
`very low false positive rate and an even
`
`lower false negative rate For example only real world scenarios may include
`
`conditions experienced by many moving object systems such as mechanical wear
`
`and friction changes in response to heat The conditions may also include
`
`situations more specific to motor vehicles such as ice buildup fluctuating power
`
`supply voltage from the alternator and/or battery or static pressure changes due
`
`to for example ventilation changes Static pressure changes may change the
`
`amount of force the window applies against the seal and therefore change the
`
`Page 10 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 10
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 10
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`amount of friction experienced by the window Further the conditions may
`
`include conditions unique to
`
`vehicle in motion such as wind buffeting
`
`24
`
`The 1992 priority application achieves these results by among
`
`number
`
`of inventive details concurrently using multiple obstacle detection algorithms
`
`The obstacle detection algorithms are selected to detect different forms of
`
`obstacles such as hard obstacles for example
`
`bone and soft obstacles for
`
`example
`
`persons throat Each obstacle detection algorithm may be set with
`
`less aggressive parameters than if the obstacle detection algorithm were the only
`
`one in use thereby reducing false positives By using multiple obstacle detection
`
`algorithms the various obstacle types can each be detected more accurately
`
`according to the parameters that characterize them respectively reducing false
`
`negatives
`
`25
`
`For example see
`
`processing for hard and soft obstruction
`
`detection is divided into two separate equations weighting the various terms
`
`depending upon magnitude of importance and processing time requirements
`
`The 612 Patent at 2228-31 An example embodiment of hard obstruction
`
`detection essentially compares immediate average current with immediately
`
`prior average current and immediately prior average pulse period... The 612
`
`Patent at 2247-49 An example embodiment of soft obstruction detection is
`
`Page 11 of42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`
`Page 11
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 11
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`described as Soft obstruction detection is not nearly as time sensitive as is hard
`
`obstruction detection thus additional terms can be computed in the time allowed
`
`before the slow increase in entrapment force exceeds maximum allowable
`
`values The 612 Patent at 2262-65
`
`26
`
`Therefore it
`
`is my understanding and belief that production
`
`automobiles prior to April of 1992 did not employ any control
`
`logic that sensed or
`
`monitored hard and soft obstacle detection while practically accounting for real-
`
`world operating conditions including wind buffeting cold versus hot temperature
`
`effects on the window weatherstrips vehicular voltage variations G-forces while
`
`hitting holes in the road and the like Unfortunately even after the inventions
`
`described in the 612 Patent and the 802 Patent regulations still allowed unsafe
`
`older mechanisms to be used in vehicles For example in 2004 Exhibit 20t0
`
`describes
`
`NHTSA meeting with Patent Owner UUSI and specifically John
`
`Washeleski
`
`inventor on the 612 Patent and the 802 Patent to discuss mandating
`
`the safer systems developed by UUSI
`
`In 2004 alone watchdog group had
`
`documented
`
`children being killed by power window mechanisms Ex 2010
`
`Page 12 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 12
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 12
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`IV LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`IV.A OVERVIEW
`
`27
`
`In preparing this report
`
`have been provided With certain legal
`
`principles Which
`
`have included below have formed my opinions With these
`
`legal principles in mind If
`
`it
`
`is determined that any other legal principles apply
`
`reserve the right to modify and/or supplement
`
`the opinions expressed herein
`
`IV.B ANTICIPATION/NOVELTY
`Because of its filing prior to March 16 2013 understand the condition
`
`28
`
`for novelty for the 612 Patent
`
`is governed by the following version of 35 U.S.C
`
`102a and
`
`person shall be entitled to
`
`patent unless
`
`the invention was known or used by others in this country or
`
`patented or described in
`
`printed publication in this or
`
`foreign
`
`country
`
`before the invention
`
`thereof by the applicant
`
`for
`
`patent or
`
`the
`
`invention
`
`was
`
`patented
`
`or described
`
`in
`
`printed
`
`publication in this or
`
`foreign country or in public use or on sale in
`
`this country more than one year prior to the date of application
`
`for patent
`
`in the united States..
`
`29
`
`For
`
`claim to be anticipated under Section 102a or
`
`understand
`
`that each claim element must be disclosed either expressly or inherently in
`
`single prior art reference and the claimed arrangement or combination of those
`
`Page 13 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 13
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 13
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`elements must also be disclosed either expressly or inherently in that same prior
`
`art reference
`
`30
`
`understand that
`
`concept of inherent disclosure does not alter
`
`the requirement
`
`that all elements must be disclosed in an anticipatory reference
`
`in the same way as they are arranged or combined in the claim and that
`
`anticipation
`
`by inherent disclosure is appropriate only when the reference
`
`discloses prior art that must necessarily include the unstated limitation Thus to
`
`rely on inherent disclosure to support an argument of anticipation the limitation
`
`inherently disclosed must be necessarily present not merely potentially present
`
`31
`
`In terms of non-obviousness or obviousness and again because of the
`
`IV.C OBVIOUSNESS/NONOBVIOUSNESS
`
`filing date of the 612 Patent prior to March 16 2013 understand the following
`
`version of 35 U.S.C 103a governs
`
`patent may not be obtained
`
`though
`
`the invention
`
`is not
`
`identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this
`
`title if
`
`the differences between the subject matter sought
`
`to be
`
`patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as
`
`whole would have been obvious at
`
`the time the invention was
`
`made to
`
`person having ordinary skill
`
`in the art to which the said
`
`subject matter pertains Patentability shall not be negated by the
`
`manner in which the invention was made
`
`Page 14 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 14
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 14
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`32
`
`In order to determine obviousness under Section 103 it
`
`is my
`
`understanding that four factual
`
`inquiries must be made concerning
`
`the scope
`
`and content of the prior art
`
`the level of ordinary skill
`
`in the art
`
`the
`
`differences between the claimed invention and the prior art and
`
`secondary
`
`considerations of nonobviousness
`
`such as commercial success long-felt but
`
`unresolved need failure of others copying and unexpected results
`
`33
`
`understand that it
`
`is not enough that all of the elements may be found
`
`in
`
`combination of prior art references rather
`
`party seeking to invalidate
`
`patent as obvious must demonstrate that
`
`skilled artisan would have had reason
`
`to combine the teaching of the prior art references to achieve the claimed
`
`invention
`
`further understand hindsight analysis is inappropriate because
`
`obviousness must be assessed at the time the invention was made and from the
`
`perspective of one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art
`
`34
`
`understand that
`
`in view of the level of ordinary skill
`
`in the art some
`
`modifications to the teachings of the prior art may be considered obvious design
`
`choices However when
`
`structure in the prior art and
`
`structure of the claimed
`
`invention achieve different purposes modifying the structure of the prior art to
`
`arrive at the structure of the claimed invention would not be considered an
`
`obvious design choice
`
`Page 15 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 15
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 15
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`35
`
`further understand that
`
`reference must enable one of ordinary skill
`
`in
`
`the art at least as of the effective filing date of
`
`later invention to make and use
`
`the later invention in order for the reference to render the later invention
`
`obvious
`
`understand that enablement
`
`requires no undue experimentation
`
`which can be assessed by weighing factors including the quantity of
`
`experimentation necessary the amount of direction or guidance presented the
`
`presence or absence of working examples the nature of the invention the state
`
`of the prior art the relative skill of those in the art and the predictability of the
`
`art
`
`36
`
`person of ordinary skill
`
`in the pertinent art at the time of invention
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`would likely be an individual with Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical or
`
`Electronics Engineering with at
`
`least
`
`year of practical experience At the time of
`
`invention however there were many individuals working in the pertinent art
`
`without an engineering Bachelors degree but with an aptitude for electronics and
`
`multiple years of hands-on experience developing electronic motor control
`
`systems and programming microcontrollers
`
`Page 16 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 16
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 16
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`VI PRIOR ART
`
`37
`
`VI.A ITOH
`have read and understand Itoh which describes an automatic opening
`
`and closing device for window Itoh Abstract The device controls motor
`
`based on measuring the commutation ripple current induced in the motor current
`
`by motor rotation Itoh makes obstacle detection decisions based on the time
`
`between rising edges of motor commutation current pulses Each measurement
`
`of rising edge to rising edge is called Tp See FIG of Itoh
`
`TIMER INTERRUPTION
`SIGNAL
`
`MOTOR PULSE SIGNAL
`HIGH SPEED
`
`MOTOR PULSE SIGNAL____
`LOW SPEED
`
`ii
`
`Tp O.lmsec
`
`38
`
`An integer number
`
`of prior Tp values are stored See FIG of Itoh
`
`Page 17 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 17
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 17
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`IPR2O14-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`11
`
`Tpn
`
`Tpn1
`
`Tpn2
`
`TP2
`
`Tpl
`
`Tp
`
`SPEED DATA OF THE LAST TIME BUT ONE
`
`SPEED DATA OF THE LAST TIME
`
`SPEED DATA OF THE PRESENT TIME
`
`39
`
`The
`
`prior Tp values are averaged to create an average value Tm Itoh
`
`at 1037-44 The ratio of Tp and Tm is compared to
`
`fixed threshold parameter
`
`The threshold parameter can assume one of two values depending on which
`
`control regime Itoh is operating in In
`
`first regime when the window is opening
`
`the threshold parameter is J3 See decision diamonds 116 and 110 of FIG of Itoh
`
`In
`
`second regime when the window is closing and is nearly closed within
`
`range of closed position the threshold parameter for obstacle detection is f3
`
`See decision diamond 112 of FIG of Itoh In
`
`third regime when the window is
`
`closing but is not nearly closed out of range of closed position the threshold
`
`parameter for obstacle detection is
`
`See decision diamond 108 of FIG of Itoh
`
`40
`
`In response to the ratio exceeding the threshold parameter
`
`Itoh
`
`performs an action based on the present control regime In the first
`
`regime the
`
`ratio exceeding the threshold parameter causes Itoh to assume the window is
`
`fully opened and resets
`
`pulse counter to
`
`reference value In the second
`
`Page 18 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 18
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 18
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`regime the ratio exceeding the threshold parameter causes Itoh to assume the
`
`window is fully closed and clear the pulse counter to zero In the third regime the
`
`ratio exceeding the threshold parameter causes Itoh to assume the window has
`
`encountered an obstacle and open the window fully
`
`41
`
`In real-world situations Itoh would be prone to experiencing false
`
`positives
`
`that is detecting obstacles that do not in fact exist Itoh declares an
`
`obstacle whenever
`
`the ratio of Tp to Tm is greater than
`
`threshold Tp is
`
`single
`
`measurement however
`
`If Itoh misses reading
`
`single pulse which can be caused
`
`by any number of electrical nonidealities or the influence of external
`
`forces such
`
`as noise the resulting value of Tp will be approximately doubled As
`
`result the
`
`ratio of Tp to Tm would be doubled even though this represented only
`
`single
`
`erroneous reading If parameter
`
`is less than two which seems likely this single
`
`bad reading would lead to
`
`false obstacle detection and
`
`nuisance opening
`
`Increasing the parameter
`
`such as to be greater than two would cause actual
`
`obstacles to be less likely to be detected and to take longer to be detected and
`
`therefore does not represent
`
`viable alternative As
`
`result my opinion is that
`
`the obstacle detection features of Itoh require undue experimentation and are
`
`not enabling to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art as of 1992
`
`Page 19 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 19
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 19
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`VI.B KINZL
`have read and understand Kinzl which discloses controlling window
`
`42
`
`drive motor Kinzl uses
`
`sensor such as Hal effect sensor to detect motor
`
`speed and control
`
`the motor accordingly Kinzl discloses three zones of operation
`
`zone
`
`zone
`
`and zone
`
`See FIG of Kinzl
`
`ZONE
`
`43
`
`Zone
`
`corresponds to the window being at
`
`least approximately half
`
`open Kinzl at 641-42 Zone
`
`corresponds to the window being less than
`
`approximately half open but not almost fully closed Kinzl at 642-44 Zone
`
`corresponds to the window being almost fully closed Kinzl at 645-46
`
`44
`
`Kinzl executes
`
`single detection algorithm in each zone In zone
`
`Kinzl
`
`only executes
`
`blocking counter process which determines how long of
`
`period
`
`of time has elapsed since
`
`change was observed in the sensor signal Kinzl at 38-
`
`16 If the blocking counter exceeds
`
`predetermined period of time meaning that
`
`no changes in the sensor signal have been observed for that predetermined
`
`Page 20 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 20
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 20
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`period of time the window motor is turned off Kinzl at513-14 The
`
`predetermined period is described as variable with an example value of 500
`
`milliseconds Kinzl at 354
`
`45
`
`In zone
`
`Kinzl compares
`
`present signal related to
`
`present speed of
`
`the motor to
`
`threshold value The threshold value is set equal to the time
`
`between two rising edges of the sensor signal or to the time between two falling
`
`edges of the sensor signal Kinzl at 340-42 The threshold value is set once at the
`
`time the closing window transitionsfrom zone
`
`to zone
`
`Kinzl at 425-27 The
`
`threshold value is used unchanged
`
`for the remainder of the windows travel
`
`through zone
`
`Kinzl at 429-30 If the threshold value is exceeded meaning that
`
`the window speed is slowing down an emergency opening of the window is
`
`performed Kinzl at 430-32 In zone
`
`Kinzl again executes the blocking counter
`
`process Kinzl at 32-10
`
`46
`
`In real-world situations Kinzl would be prone to experiencing false
`
`positives
`
`that is detecting obstacles that do not in fact exist Kinzl declares an
`
`obstacle whenever
`
`threshold timing value is exceeded As explained above that
`
`threshold timing value is determined at the time the window transitions from
`
`zone
`
`to zone
`
`In other words throughout zone
`
`Kinzl declares an obstacle
`
`any time the windows speed decreases below the speed achieved at the
`
`Page 21 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`
`Page 21
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 21
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`transition between zones
`
`and
`
`This is an exacting requirement meaning that
`
`any slowing of the window no matter how minor will cause an obstruction to be
`
`declared resulting in an immediate emergency opening of the window As
`
`result my opinion is that the obstacle detection features of Kinzl require undue
`
`experimentation and are not enabling to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art as of 1992
`
`47
`
`Vl.C ZUcKERMAN
`have read and understand Zuckerman which discloses
`
`sliding door
`
`assembly and control system that relies on an intricate pattern of limit switches to
`
`determine in which region the door is positioned Zuckerman discloses using
`
`analog computing to determine when an obstacle is detected and actuate
`
`reversing apparatus Specifically Zuckerman determines
`
`difference between
`
`voltage corresponding to
`
`present current value and
`
`voltage corresponding to
`
`threshold value Zuckerman then compares the difference to
`
`reference value
`
`See FIG 24 of Zuckerman excerpted here
`
`Page 22 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 22
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 22
`
`
`
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`IPR2O14-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`8v
`
`Regulated
`
`401
`
`20/C
`
`41
`
`10
`
`JJcj
`
`fit
`
`L_
`
`ii
`
`425
`
`Li
`
`422
`
`48
`
`The output of operational amplifier circuit 412 is
`
`representation of an
`
`average of motor current over approximately 500 ms Zuckerman 2019-22 The
`
`output of operational amplifier circuit 413 is
`
`representation of an average of
`
`motor current over approximately 15 ms Zuckerman 2022-27 The output of
`
`difference amplifier 419 represents
`
`difference between the average current
`
`from the operational amplifier circuit 412 and the instantaneous current from the
`
`operational amplifier circuit 413
`
`49
`
`The output of
`
`comparator amplifier 420 is active when the difference
`
`from the difference amplifier 419 exceeds
`
`threshold voltage from
`
`potentiometer 422 The output of comparator 420 drives
`
`relay-reversing circuit
`
`Page 23 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 23
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 23
`
`
`
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration of Dr Mark Ehsani
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`423 to reverse the motor In other words if
`
`the difference exceeds the reference
`
`value th motor is stopped and reversed Zuckerman 2034-39
`
`50
`
`Independent Claim recites identifying
`
`collision of the window or
`
`VII
`
`CLAIM
`
`panel with an obstacle and deactivate said motor in response to
`
`sensing of
`
`collision My understanding of this limitation of Claim is that two different
`
`collision detection algorithms are being used concurrently and my analysis below
`
`is based on this assumption In other words identifying
`
`collision requires
`
`first algorithm and sensing of
`
`collision requires
`
`second algorithm This would
`
`be
`
`logical
`
`interpretation for this claim to
`
`person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art in
`
`April of 1992 and is in harmony with the objective and embodiments disclosed in
`
`the 612 Patent
`
`51
`
`An exemplary description of two algorithms encompassed by Claim is
`
`supported by the Detailed Description of the 612 Patent as follows
`
`first
`
`algorithm is presented for hard obstruction detection The first algorithm is
`
`expressed as an inequality
`
`IF IRO/KlIRJ
`
`The 612 Patent 2235-38 1R0
`
`is an average of current values over
`
`small
`
`timeframe Range
`
`and is compared to an expression made up of constants K1
`
`Page 24 of 42
`UUSI Exhibit 2001
`Page 24
`
`BNA/Brose Exhibit 1067
`IPR2014-00417
`Page 24
`
`
`
`of Dr Mark Ehsani
`in Support of Patent Owner Response in
`Declaration
`1PR2014-00416 for U.S Patent 8217612
`
`K2 and K3
`
`pulse period quantity PPR1 and
`
`current quantity lRl If the
`
`inequality is satisfied
`
`hard obstruction style of collision is identified as being
`
`present The current quantity is an average of current values over the timeframe
`
`of Range
`
`The 612 Patent 1842-43 The pulse period quantity is an average of
`
`pulse periods over
`
`timeframe referred to as Range
`
`The 612 Patent 1853-54
`
`Range
`
`encompasses the most recent data readings which may be for example
`
`the most recent 4-8 data readings Range
`
`encompasses the most recent data
`
`readings immediately prior to Range
`
`and may for example be of
`
`similar
`
`length to Range
`
`The 612 Patent 1857-63
`
`52
`
`second algorithm is presented for soft obstruction detection The
`
`second algorithm is expressed as an inequality
`
`IF 1Rc1PFfthf1MRfJiLoMRbi4
`K7
`
`The 612 Patent 2257-60 RO is the average of current values over Range
`
`and is
`
`compared to an expression made up of constants K4 K5 K6 and K7
`
`pulse
`
`period quantity PPRb.4 a
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
