Filed on behalf of: Hyundai Motor Company
`By:
`Edward J. Naidich
`Christopher M. Kurpinski
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow,
` Garrett & Dunner, LLP
`901 New York Ave.
`Washington, DC 20001
`Phone: 202-408-4000
`Fax: 202-408-4400
`E-mail: ed.naidich@finnegan.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`HYUNDAI MOTOR COMPANY
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`AMERICAN VEHICULAR SCIENCES, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`Patent 7,976,060
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF PRIYA PRASAD, PH.D.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`Hyundai Exhibit 1015
`
`Page 1 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`I, Priya Prasad, Ph.D., have been retained in my personal capacity by
`
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett, and Dunner as an expert for Petitioner
`
`Hyundai Motor Company. I submit the following Declaration pertaining to the
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of United States Patent No. 7,976,060 (“the ’060
`
`Patent”). In particular, my Declaration provides an explanation of the reasons why
`
`all of the claims of the ’060 patent are unpatentable in view of the discussed prior
`
`art.
`
`2.
`
`As explained in this declaration, the technology disclosed and claimed
`
`by the ’060 patent relates to controlling deployment of a vehicle occupant restraint
`
`system based on an interior monitoring system that classifies an occupant based on
`
`several characteristics including the occupant’s weight and position on a vehicle’s
`
`seat.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`I earned a BS in Mechanical Engineering from Bihar College of
`3.
`
`Engineering in 1965, an MS in Mechanical Engineering from Wayne State
`
`University in 1968, and a Ph.D. in Bio-Mechanics from Wayne State University in
`
`1973. I taught mechanics at Lawrence Institute of Technology for 7 years from
`
`1976-1983.
`
`2
`
`Page 2 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`4.
`
`I worked at Ford Motor Company from 1973 to July 2008, in the areas
`
`of occupant protection and vehicle safety, as discussed in detail in the attached CV.
`
`As a Technical Fellow in Safety Research and Development (1994 – 2008), I
`
`reported directly to the Chief Technical Officer of the Company and the Vice-
`
`President of Research and Advanced Engineering. I have also received Ford Motor
`
`Company’s highest scientific prize, the Henry Ford Technology Award, twice. I
`
`was responsible for directing the research, development and implementation of
`
`active and passive safety technologies worldwide. I was a key player in the
`
`development of restraint system technologies that help protect vehicle occupants in
`
`various crash modes, CAE technologies for crashworthiness, and technologies that
`
`further improve compatibility between heavier and lighter vehicles. I was a leader
`
`in designing de-powered airbags as well as side airbags that provide protection to
`
`the head and chest in side impacts. I developed a deploying door-trim system that
`
`enhances protection in side impacts. Now in place in many Ford vehicles, the
`
`system has earned four US patents.
`
`5.
`
`I am the author of over 100 articles related to biomechanics and
`
`automobile safety, as discussed in detail in the attached CV. I am a listed inventor
`
`on 7 patents covering side impact restraint, external airbags and accident avoidance
`
`technologies.
`
`
`
`3
`
`Page 3 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`6. My awards include the National Highway Safety Administration
`
`(NHTSA) Engineering Excellence Award for Safety in 1991 and 2009 and the US
`
`Department of Transportation National Award for the Advancement of Motor
`
`Vehicle Research and Development in 1994. I am the first person honored by the
`
`U.S. Department of Transportation for contributions to the Advancement of Motor
`
`Vehicle Research and Development. I am also a member of the National Academy
`
`of Engineering, a Fellow member of the Society of Automotive Engineers and a
`
`Fellow of the American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineering.
`
`Additional awards are listed in my attached CV.
`
`7. My leadership positions on national and international forums include
`
`advising governments, such as Canada, Australia and the U.S., on the development
`
`of relevant crash regulations, including the 1998 modification of FMVSS 208,
`
`which succeeded in minimizing unintended side effects of first generation airbags
`
`and as Chairman and Member of the Biomechanics and Crashworthiness Sub-
`
`Committee of the Motor Vehicle Safety Research Advisory Committee of the
`
`NHTSA. Additional leadership positions are listed in my attached CV.
`
`8.
`
`In 2008, I founded Prasad Consulting LLC, a consulting company that
`
`consults in the areas of biomechanics and automobile safety.
`
`
`
`4
`
`Page 4 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`9.
`
`Based on my education, training, knowledge of the literature, and
`
`professional experience, I believe I am fully competent to opine regarding the
`
`subject matter described and claimed in the ’060 Patent.
`
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`In forming the opinions expressed in this declaration, I have relied on
`10.
`
`my own experience and have considered the following materials:
`
`(1) U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060 (Ex 1001)
`
`(2) File History of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060 (Ex 1002)
`
`(3) DE 38 09 074 C2 (DE ’074) (Ex 1003)
`
`(4) Protze et al. (US 4,285,545) (Ex 1004)
`
`(5) JP 3-19929 U (Ex 1005)
`
`(6) Steffens, Jr. et al. (US 5,413,378) (Ex 1006)
`
`(7) Schousek (US 5,474,327) (Ex 1007)
`
`(8) Mazur et al. (US 5,454,591) (Ex 1008)
`
`(9) JP 9-150662 A (Ex 1009)
`
`(10) Mehney et al. (US 6,039,344) (Ex 1010)
`
`IV. ANTICIPATION AND OBVIOUSNESS
`I understand that a claim is unpatentable if it is anticipated or obvious.
`11.
`
`12.
`
`I understand that a claim is anticipated if every element of the claim is
`
`disclosed expressly or inherently in a single prior art reference.
`
`
`
`5
`
`Page 5 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`13.
`
`I further understand that a claim is obvious if a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the relevant art, at the time the invention was made, would have found it
`
`obvious. In analyzing obviousness, I understand that it is important to understand
`
`the scope of the claims, the level of skill in the relevant art, the scope and content
`
`of the prior art, the differences between the prior art and the claims, and any
`
`secondary considerations. I understand that secondary considerations can include
`
`evidence of commercial success caused by an invention, evidence of a long-felt
`
`need that was solved by an invention, evidence that others copied an invention, or
`
`evidence that an invention achieved a surprising result. I am not aware of any
`
`secondary considerations, but I reserve the right to consider such evidence and
`
`supplement my declaration if necessary.
`
`14.
`
`I understand that claims in an inter partes review are given their
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation that is consistent with the patent specification.
`
`The words of the claim are to be given their plain and ordinary meaning unless that
`
`meaning is inconsistent with the specification.
`
`15.
`
`I also understand that the patentee has indicated that the effective
`
`filing date of the ’060 patent is November 17, 1998. See Ex 1002, Amendment
`
`dated May 11, 2011 at page 3.
`
`
`
`6
`
`Page 6 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`V. ONE OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`16. A person of ordinary skill in this art would have been an electrical or
`
`mechanical engineer, having the equivalent of a post-graduate education, such as a
`
`master’s degree or equivalent education in electrical or mechanical engineering,
`
`and several years of experience in the design of vehicle occupant restraint control
`
`systems.
`
`VI. EXPLANATION OF THE ’060 PATENT
`17. The ’060 patent is directed to a method and apparatus for controlling
`
`deployment of an occupant restraint system based on an interior monitoring system
`
`that classifies an occupant based on several characteristics including the occupant’s
`
`weight and position on a vehicle’s seat. The ’060 patent’s monitoring system
`
`includes detecting an object and determining its characteristics, such as whether
`
`the object is a rear facing child seat or an adult that is “out of position relative to
`
`the air bag.” The monitoring system controls the deployment of an airbag based on
`
`the characteristics of the detected object. See Ex 1001, ’060 patent at col. 8 ll. 15-
`
`27.
`
`18. As shown in FIG. 9 of the ’060 patent, a neural network system 65
`
`receives data from several sensors, including weight sensors 6, 7, seat track 74 and
`
`seat back angle sensors 57, and ultrasonic transducers 6, 8, 9, and 10, and uses this
`
`data to classify whether the seat is VACANT (occupied by inanimate object or
`
`
`
`7
`
`Page 7 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`pet); RFCS (rear facing child seat) or ASP or OOPA (abnormally seated
`
`passenger); or normally seated passenger (NSP or FFA) or a forward facing child
`
`seat (FFCS).
`
`19. A gate circuit 77 differentiates between the rear facing child seat or
`
`abnormally seated passenger; and between the normally seated passenger and the
`
`forward facing child seat. See Ex 1001, ’060 Patent at col. 86 l. 19-col. 87 l. 35.
`
`The airbag deployment system controls deployment of the airbag based on this
`
`occupant classification. See Ex 1001, ’060 Patent at col. 90 ll. 12-35.
`
`20.
`
`In one embodiment, the weight sensors include strain gauge
`
`transducer 180 which measures the weight of the occupant. See Ex 1001, ’060
`
`Patent at col. 53 ll. 35-42. In one embodiment, the strain gauge transducer 180 is
`
`mounted on the seat structure as discussed in more detail below.
`
`21. The structure of the seat described in the ’060 patent is “a typical
`
`manually controlled seat structure . . . and described in U.S. Patent No. 4,285,545.”
`
`See Ex 1001, ’060 Patent at col. 53 l. 43-44. The ’545 patent is mentioned in the
`
`’060 patent, but it was not considered by the Examiner. FIG. 20 of the ’060 patent
`
`and FIG. 4 of the ’545 patent are reproduced below. As shown by the comparison
`
`below, the structures of the vehicle seats in the ’060 patent and the prior art ’545
`
`patent are virtually identical.
`
`
`
`8
`
`Page 8 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`
`
`22.
`
`In the FIG. 20 embodiment of the ’060 patent, a vehicle seat 191 is
`
`attached to a pair of slide mechanisms 192 via respective support members 193. A
`
`strain gauge transducer 180 is mounted on one of the support members 193. When
`
`an occupying item is provided on the seat, the support members 193 are deformed
`
`or strained. This strain is measured by transducer 180 to determine the weight of
`
`the item occupying the seat. See Ex 1001, ’060 Patent at col. 53 ll. 43-65. This
`
`determined weight is then used as a factor in controlling a vehicular component
`
`such as an air bag. See Ex 1001, ’060 Patent at col. 54 ll. 4-6.
`
`VII. SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE PRIOR ART
`23. The claims of the ’060 patent indicate that a force measuring device is
`
`attached to a “support member” that is coupled to a slide mechanism and to a
`
`bottom portion of the seat. Several prior art references that I have considered,
`
`including DE ’074, JP ’662, and Mehney, describe these features.
`
`
`
`9
`
`Page 9 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`24.
`
`In addition, the claims mention an occupant classification system that
`
`determines an occupant classification based on an occupant weight and occupant
`
`position. Several prior art references that I have considered including DE ’074,
`
`Mehney, Steffens, Schousek and Mazur all describe such features.
`
`A. DE ’074
`25. As shown in FIG. 1 of DE ’074 (reproduced below), DE ’074
`
`describes a vehicle seat support including guide rails 8 (i.e. track) that are fastened
`
`to the vehicle floor 5 and runners 7, which are guided along the guide rails 8 to
`
`adjust the position of the seat. See Ex 1003, DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 6-11. Each of the
`
`runners 7 is connected to the seat 2 and has a force sensor 11, 12 mounted on it.
`
`See Ex 1003, DE ’074 at page 2 ll. 7-11.
`
`26. The guide rails 8 (i.e., track) are mounted to the vehicle floor 5. See
`
`Ex 1003, DE ’074 at page 2 l. 11 (English translation). Each of the runners 7 is
`
`connected to the seat 2 and has a force sensor 11, 12 mounted on it. See Ex 1003,
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`Page 10 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`DE ’074 at page 2 ll. 7-11. The runner 7 corresponds to the “support member” of
`
`claim 1. That is, each runner (1) has “at least one force sensing device attached to”
`
`it, and (2) is “coupled to the” seat 2 (i.e., bottom portion). DE ’074 teaches
`
`allowing the seat and the runners 7 to slide with respect to the guide rails 8 (i.e.,
`
`track). See Ex 1003, DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 6-8. Because DE ’074’s runner 7 slides
`
`with respect to the track 8, DE ’074 has a “slide mechanism” that is coupled to the
`
`runner 7. Moreover, the runner 7 is coupled to the bottom of the seat 2. See Ex
`
`1003, DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 6-8.
`
`27. DE ’074 also describes a control circuit 14 that determines whether
`
`the occupant is at a forward or normal/rearward position (i.e., classified as forward
`
`or normal/rearward) by comparing forces F1, F2 detected by force sensors 11, 12
`
`mounted on the runners 7 at locations that are approximately the same distance
`
`from the center of gravity of the seat. The sensors 11, 12 are used to determine
`
`weight (F1 + F2) and position (comparing F1 vs. F2). The deployment of a
`
`collision protection cushion 20 is controlled based on this classification. See Ex
`
`1003, DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 11-17 & 36-40.
`
`28. DE ’074 at FIG. 1 describes sensors 11, 12 for measuring pressure
`
`forces but does not specify the sensor type.
`
`29.
`
`It is my opinion based on my experience as an engineer, that one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would have used strain gauge sensors as the sensors 11, 12
`
`
`
`11
`
`Page 11 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`of DE ’074 because strain gauge sensors are an industry standard way of
`
`determining the weight applied by the seat occupant to a deformable body, such as
`
`DE ’074’s runner that supports a seat.
`
`30. For example, the ’060 patent itself acknowledges that strain gauges
`
`are a “conventional” force measuring device. See Ex 1001, ’060 Patent at col. 51 ll.
`
`65-66.
`
`31. Moreover, JP ’929 describes that strain gauges are bonded on upper
`
`and lower surfaces of elastic bodies 9, which are part of load detectors 6 attached
`
`to a lower portion of an automobile driver’s seat 26 to determine the weight of the
`
`seat’s occupant. See Ex 1005, JP ’929 at page 9, ll. 15-21& page 6, l. 15 – page 7,
`
`l. 7.
`
`JP ’929 and conventional strain gauges
`
`B.
`32. At the time of the ’060 patent, it was well known to use strain gauges
`
`to determine a load applied to structural element. Strain gauges were widely used
`
`because they were a precise and inexpensive way to determine a load. In fact, the
`
`’060 patent itself refers to strain gauges as a “conventional” force measuring
`
`device. See Ex 1001, ’060 Patent at col. 51 ll. 65-66.
`
`33.
`
`JP ’929 describes the use of multiple strain gauges provided on a
`
`single member in the support structure of a seat to determine the load on the
`
`support structure. JP ’929 describes elastic bodies 9 of load detectors 6 attached to
`
`
`
`12
`
`Page 12 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`a lower portion of an automobile driver’s seat 26. Each load detector 6 has multiple
`
`strain gauges 8 bonded on upper and lower surfaces of the elastic bodies. See Ex
`
`1005, JP ’929 at page 6, ll. 15-24 & page 9, ll. 18-21.
`
`34. Providing multiple strain gauges, measurements from different
`
`locations on the runner allow for a more accurate force measurement. For example,
`
`one skilled in the art would have understood that by providing the gauges at
`
`opposite sides of a support structure, both a tension strain and a compression strain
`
`are measured, thereby providing for a more accurate force measurement.
`
`Protze
`
`C.
`35. Protze at FIGs. 1 and 6 (reproduced below along with enlarged partial
`
`views thereof) shows a passenger seat for a motor vehicle including a seat 2
`
`supported on rear side legs 11 in tracks 12 fastened to the floor of the vehicle such
`
`that the seat can move forward or backward relative to the floor. See Ex 1004,
`
`Protze at col. 4 ll. 16-21 & ll. 39-41.
`
`36. As shown in the enlarged partial figure, the leg 11 of Protze is coupled
`
`to an unlabeled feature that slides with respect to the track 12 when the seat 2
`
`slides forward. This sliding is shown by the dashed lines of slider and leg 11 at a
`
`forward position). See Ex 1004, Protze at col. 4 ll. 5-21.
`
`
`
`13
`
`Page 13 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`Page 14 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`Page 15 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`37. As shown above, Protze’s leg or support member 11 is coupled to
`
`both the structure for sliding in rails and to the bottom of the seat, and therefore
`
`corresponds to the “support member” of the ’060 patent claims.
`
`JP ’662
`
`D.
`38. FIG. 2 of JP ’662 (reproduced below) shows a strain gauge 8 (force
`
`measuring device) attached to a bracket 5 (support member) that is coupled to both
`
`the frame 32 of a vehicle seat (bottom portion of the seat) and to the movable
`
`upper rail 12 (slide mechanism). See Ex 1009, JP ’662 at col. 6 ll. 4-22 (English
`
`translation).
`
`
`
`39. FIG. 1 of JP ’662 (reproduced below) shows an upper rail 12 (slide
`
`mechanism) that slides with respect to a lower rail 11 (track), which is anchored to
`
`the vehicle floor via brackets 2. See Ex 1009, JP ’662 at col. 6 ll. 10-19.
`
`
`
`16
`
`Page 16 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`
`
`Steffens Jr.
`
`E.
`40. Steffens describes occupant restraint systems that control the amount
`
`of inflation of an air bag based on the occupant’s weight. Steffens describes a
`
`method and apparatus for controlling a restraining device not only based on the
`
`occupant’s weight, but also on the occupant’s position. See Ex 1006, Steffens, Jr.
`
`at col. 1 ll. 13-50.
`
`41. As shown in FIG. 3 of Steffens (reproduced below), both occupant
`
`weight and position are used to classify the occupant according to one of 16
`
`different “occupant characterization blocks” A-P, which are determined based the
`
`occupant’s weight and position. See Ex 1006, Steffens, Jr. at col. 5 ll. 55-65. Each
`
`
`
`17
`
`Page 17 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`of these characterization blocks corresponds to an “occupant classification” of the
`
`’060 patent.
`
`42. Steffens describes that the work to restrain an occupant during a crash
`
`event is equal to the force imparted on the restraint system (weight) and the
`
`distance over which the force is imparted (position). The matrix in FIG. 3
`
`considers both weight and distance of the occupant and establishes three different
`
`air bag pressures based on the occupant’s classification. By selecting a desired air
`
`bag pressure based upon the weight and position made prior to a crash event, the
`
`venting device can be adjusted accordingly.
`
`43. Specifically, Steffens describes sixteen occupant classifications A-P
`
`based on the occupant’s position and weight. Variables of both position and weight
`
`are divided into four categories. For example, if the occupant is against the door of
`
`the air bag assembly, the occupant’s position is classified as the first position I. In
`
`contrast, if the occupant is far away from the air bag, the occupant’s position is
`
`classified as position IV. Similar classifications apply to weight with low weights
`
`receiving a classification of weight I. The positions and weights classifications I-
`
`IV correspond to occupant classifications A-P as shown in the matrix below. See
`
`Ex 1006, Steffens, Jr. at col. 6 ll. 13-24. For example, when an occupant’s weight
`
`is low and the occupant is close to the air bag, the occupant is classified as being in
`
`
`
`18
`
`Page 18 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`a low control zone 150 (classifications D, H, L, P, and O) and the venting device
`
`vents about 50% of the possible gas.
`
`
`
`44. Steffens also discloses that a seat position sensor 30 and a seat incline
`
`sensor 36 are used to determine the occupant’s position. See Ex 1006, Steffens at
`
`col. 4 ll. 15-23.
`
`Schousek
`
`F.
`45. Schousek describes an airbag restraint system including two sets 38,
`
`42 of pressure sensors 28 on a bottom of a bucket seat cushion. In addition to the
`
`occupant’s weight, the occupant’s center of weight distribution is determined based
`
`on the measured sensor responses. See Ex 1007, Schousek at FIG. 2 and col. 3 l.
`
`64- col. 4 l. 22. If the total weight as determined by the sensors 28 is greater than a
`
`
`
`19
`
`Page 19 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`maximum infant seat threshold, then the microprocessor determines at <72> that
`
`an adult is present (i.e., classification as adult), and the air bag is deployed. See Ex
`
`1007, Schousek at FIG. 5A and col. 5 ll. 32-35. If the total weight as determined by
`
`the sensors 28 is less than a minimum infant seat threshold, then the
`
`microprocessor determines at <76> that the seat is empty (i.e., classification as
`
`empty), and the air bag is not deployed. See Ex 1007, Schousek at FIG. 5A & col.
`
`5 ll. 36-39. If the total weight as determined by the sensors 28 is between the
`
`minimum and maximum infant seat thresholds, then the microprocessor determines
`
`at <80> that a small child or an occupied infant seat is present. See Ex. 1007, col. 5
`
`ll. 42-44. If the center of weight distribution is in front of a reference line <82>, a
`
`rear facing infant seat is detected and it is determined that a rear facing infant seat
`
`is present, and the airbag is not allowed to be deployed <84>. See Ex. 1007, col. 5
`
`ll. 44-47. If the center of weight distribution is not in front of the reference line, a
`
`forward facing infant seat is detected and the airbag is allowed to be deployed
`
`<86>. See Ex. 1007, col. 5 ll. 47-50.
`
`46. Schousek describes an “occupant classification” as being an adult, a
`
`rearward facing infant seat, not a rearward facing infant seat or empty. The
`
`deployment of the airbag is controlled based on this “occupant classification”. This
`
`protects an infant in a rearward facing infant seat, since otherwise the airbag can
`
`severely injure the infant due to its proximity to the rear facing infant seat. See Ex
`
`
`
`20
`
`Page 20 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`1007, col. 1 ll. 26-30. In the mid-90s, the industry was developing systems for
`
`accurately detecting the presence of rearward facing infant car seats. This is
`
`because the risk of injury is extremely high if an airbag deployed in such a
`
`situation.
`
`G. Mazur
`47. Mazur describes, see FIG. 1, an airbag control apparatus that receives
`
`signals from both a distance sensor 42 and a weight sensor 36. Mazur’s controller
`
`22 decides whether or not a rearward facing child seat is present based on the
`
`signals and disables the airbag when a rearward facing child seat is present. See Ex
`
`1008, Mazur at col. 5 ll. 14-31. This determination regarding whether or not a
`
`rearward facing child seat is present corresponds to the recited “occupant
`
`classification” of the ’060 patent.
`
`48. The occupant position, as discussed in Mazur, is especially important
`
`when considering a child seat that is placed rearwardly in the front seat. The
`
`infant’s head is extremely close to the deployed airbag, causing significant injury.
`
`Significant effort was directed to resolving such an issue.
`
`H. Mehney
`49. Mehney describes a seat 12 that is supported on a vehicle floor 16 by
`
`support structure 14 (shown in FIG. 1 of Mehney). The seat 12 includes a frame 30
`
`including a bottom portion 32 and a back portion 34. FIG. 2 of Mehney
`
`
`
`21
`
`Page 21 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`(reproduced below) shows that the support structure 14 includes a track assembly
`
`18. The track assembly 18 includes a pair of parallel tracks 50, each track 50
`
`including a fixed lower rail 52 (track) and a slidable upper rail 54 (slide
`
`mechanism). Mounting members 20 (support member) are mounted between the
`
`bottom of the seat 32 and the upper rail 54. See Ex 1010, Mehney at col. 2 ll. 50-
`
`62. Strain gauge assemblies 22 including strain gauges 81-84 are mounted on a
`
`flexible portion 68 of each mounting member 20. When an occupant sits on the
`
`seat, the weight of the occupant is transmitted through the frame 30 to the vehicle
`
`floor 16. Thus, the strain gauges 81-84 determine the weight of the occupant that is
`
`transmitted through the frame 30. See Ex 1010, Mehney at col. 3 ll. 31-55.
`
`
`
`50. An inflatable device 102 is controlled based on whether or not the
`
`weight of the occupant is determined to be high or low, i.e., classification as a
`
`lighter occupant or a heavier occupant. See Ex 1010, Mehney at col. 3 ll. 31-55.
`
`Mehney also describes that the weight of the individual strain gauge assemblies 22
`
`
`
`22
`
`Page 22 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`beneath the four corners of the seat 12 also be used to indicate the position of the
`
`occupant. See Ex 1010, Mehney at col. 4 ll. 46-49. The vehicle protection device
`
`(i.e., the inflatable device 102) is controlled based on a classification as to whether
`
`or not the occupant is out-of-position in a forward direction or not. See Ex 1010,
`
`Mehney at col. 4 ll. 49-56.
`
`VIII. COMPARISON OF CLAIMS AND PRIOR ART
`I have compared the claims of the ’060 patent to the above described
`51.
`
`prior art references, as set forth in the Tables below.
`
`A. Ground I: Claims 1 and 4 are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. §102(b)
`by DE ’074
`
`52. As indicated in the Table below, it is my opinion that all of the
`
`features of claims 1 and 4 of the ’060 patent are found in DE ’074.
`
`53. Claim 1 of ’060 patent
`
`DE ’074
`
`1. A vehicle including a floor at least in
`part defining a passenger compartment
`of the vehicle, comprising:
`
`a seat having a bottom portion and a
`back portion coupled at an angle to a
`rear portion of said bottom portion, said
`seat being adapted to support an
`occupant;
`a support structure adapted to support
`said seat on the floor, said support
`structure comprising a track coupled to
`the floor engaged with a slide
`mechanism configured to slide with
`
`See DE ’074 at page 2, l. 5. vehicle
`seating for vehicles having a floor that
`defines at least in part a passenger
`compartment of the vehicle.
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 4-10: seat 2
`and seat back 3 wherein the seat back 3
`coupled at an angle to the seat 2
`
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 5-8: guide rail
`8 corresponds to a “track” and is
`fastened to the vehicle floor
`
`Because DE ’074’s runner 7 slides with
`
`
`
`23
`
`Page 23 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`respect to said track to enable said seat
`to move relative to the floor,
`
`further comprising a support member
`coupled to said slide mechanism and to
`a bottom portion of said seat;
`
`an occupant sensor system that obtains
`an indication of weight applied by the
`occupant to the seat and a position of
`the occupant, said occupant sensor
`system including a force measuring
`device attached to said support member
`for measuring force in said support
`member indicative of weight applied by
`the occupant to said seat;
`an occupant classification system that
`determines an occupant classification
`based on the occupant weight and the
`occupant position as provided by said
`occupant sensor system;
`an airbag positioned to deploy to
`provide protection to the occupant of
`said seat in a crash involving the
`vehicle;
`a crash sensor that detects when the
`vehicle has become involved in or is
`about to become involved in a crash;
`and
`
`a controller that determines that the
`crash detected by said crash sensor
`requires deployment of said airbag and
`controls deployment of said airbag
`based on the occupant classification
`determined by said occupant
`
`respect to the track 8, DE ’074 has a
`“slide mechanism configured to slide
`with respect to the track” that is coupled
`to the runner 7 (i.e., support member).
`See DE ’074 at page 2 ll. 6-8.
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 5-8: runner 7
`is part of the support for the vehicle seat
`2 and corresponds to a “support
`member” being moveably guided in
`guide rails 8
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 11-17 & 41-
`45: mounted on each runner 7 are
`sensors 11 and 12 for measuring forces
`F1 and F2; measurements from the
`sensors; sensors 11, 12 are used to
`determine weight and position.
`
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 41-49:
`determines classification as forward or
`normal/rearward occupant based on
`occupant weight F1 and F2 and position
`as provided by the sensors.
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 22-24:
`collision protection cushion 20 which
`inflates with deceleration of the vehicle.
`
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 22-24:
`deceleration of the vehicle is detected by
`sensors. Measuring deceleration is
`commonly used to sense that a crash has
`occurred, as in the ’060 patent.
`See DE ’074 at FIG. 2 and page 2, ll.
`31-49: a frontal collision is detected and
`a control circuit 14 controls ignition of
`collision protection cushion 20 based on
`whether occupant is present, forward or
`normal/rearward.
`
`
`
`24
`
`Page 24 of 98
`
`

`
`Declaration of Priya Prasad, Ph.D.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,976,060
`
`
`
`classification system.
`
`
`54. Claim 4 of ’060 patent
`
`DE ’074
`
`4. A method for protecting an occupant
`in a crash involving a vehicle,
`comprising:
`
`providing a seat having a bottom portion
`and a back portion coupled at an angle
`to a rear of the bottom portion;
`mounting the seat to a floor of the
`vehicle defining a passenger
`compartment of the vehicle via a
`support structure, the support structure
`comprising a track coupled to the floor
`engaged with a slide mechanism
`configured to slide with respect to the
`track to enable the seat to move relative
`to the floor,
`
`further comprising a support member
`coupled to the slide member and to a
`bottom portion of the seat;
`
`providing an occupant sensor system for
`obtaining an indication of weight
`applied by the occupant to the seat and a
`position of the occupant, the occupant
`sensor system including a force
`measuring device attached to the
`support member for measuring force in
`the support member indicative of weight
`applied by the occupant to the seat;
`determining an occupant classification
`using an occupant classification system
`based on the occupant weight and the
`occupant position as provided by the
`
`See DE ’074 at page 2, l. 5: vehicle
`seating for vehicles having a floor that
`defines at least in part a passenger
`compartment of the vehicle.
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 4-10: seat 2
`and seat back 3 wherein the seat back 3
`coupled at an angle to the seat 2.
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 5-8: guide rail
`8 corresponds to a “track” and is
`fastened to the vehicle floor
`
`Because DE ’074’s runner 7 slides with
`respect to the track 8, DE ’074 has a
`“slide mechanism configured to slide
`with respect to the track” that is coupled
`to the runner 7 (i.e., support member).
`See DE ’074 at page 2 ll. 6-8.
`See DE ’074 at page 2, ll. 5-8: runner 7
`is part of the support for the vehicle seat
`2 and corresponds to a “support
`me