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 No. 8,036,788
`Filing Date: August 9, 2007
`Issue Date: October 11, 2011
`Title: VEHICLE DIAGNOSTIC OR PROGNOSTIC MESSAGE
`
`TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS AND METHODS
`
`Inter Partes Review No. Unassigned
`
`DECLARATION OF CHRISTOPHER WILSON IN SUPPORT OF
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF US. PATENT N 0.
`
`8,036,788
`
`Page 1 of 33
`
`Hyundai Exhibit 1008
`
`Page 1 of 33
`
`Hyundai Exhibit 1008
`
`

`

`1, Christopher Wilson, hereby declare and state as follows:
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`
`1.
`
`I am currently the CEO of Vehicle Data Science Corporation and an
`
`independent consultant on topics related to vehicle telematics, the collection and
`
`processing of vehicle data, and applications derived from processed vehicle data. I
`
`started my consulting business in January of 2012, my clients are insurance
`
`companies, government projects, and automotive suppliers. I founded Vehicle
`
`Data Science in 2013 with a National Science Foundation grant in order to build
`
`large-scale databases of driving behaviors in support of vehicle safety and
`
`automation.
`
`2.
`
`I have over 30 years of professional experience in the field of
`
`automotive technologies, primarily those fields related to telematics. My technical
`
`expertise is in the areas of communications, positioning and mapping, and I have
`
`been one of the industry leaders in the development of several technologies and
`
`initiatives working with many members of the automotive industry and state and
`
`federal governments. I am a named inventor on seven issued US. patents and on
`
`three patent applications.
`
`3.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Arts degree in physics from Princeton
`
`University in 1981 and attended graduate school in astrophysics the following year.
`
`Page 2 of 33
`
`Page 2 of 33
`
`

`

`4.
`
`From 1983 to 1986, I worked for GTE Government Systems on
`
`various reconnaissance programs and telemetry analysis, then I moved to TRW Inc.
`
`(“TRW”) where spent I five years working on satellite telemetry and control
`
`systems and artificial intelligence programs. I then moved from the aerospace side
`
`of TRW to the automotive side in order to apply aerospace technology to
`
`automotive markets. During the next five years I designed and built various
`
`telematics systems including one of the first Automatic Collision Notification
`
`systems, an off-board navigation system, and a Traffic Management System.
`
`5.
`
`After 10 years I left TRW and spent a brief time as a director at
`
`Information Access Inc., a startup company attempting to integrate Personal
`
`Digital Assistants into vehicles for various traffic and safety applications.
`
`6.
`
`In 1996 I was hired by Mercedes-Benz (Daimler) to develop
`
`telematics for vehicle safety applications. During the next 12 years I held positions
`
`of increasing responsibility ending as the VP of Intelligent Transportation Systems
`
`Programs and Strategy. During this time I held key roles within Daimler in
`
`developing key telematics technologies including mapping, positioning and
`
`communications technology in automobiles and trucks for Mercedes-Benz,
`
`Freightliner, and Chrysler, and also within various industry consortia. For several
`
`years I led the industry’s interaction with state and federal government on the
`
`development and deployment of short range communications technology, working
`
`Page 3 of 33
`
`Page 3 of 33
`
`

`

`with all the major automotive companies, Federal Highways Administration, the
`
`National Highway Transportation Safety Administration and other key players.
`
`7.
`
`In 2008 I left Mercedes-Benz and joined TeleAtlas where I was the
`
`Director of Research. As TeleAtlas was acquired by TomTom, I moved to the role
`
`of Director of Products and Programs for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems.
`
`8.
`
`A copy of my curriculum vitae is attached.
`
`II.
`
`ASSIGNMENT AND MATERIALS REVIEWED
`
`9.
`
`I submit this declaration in support of the Petition for Inter Partes
`
`Review of US. Patent No. 8,036,788 (“the ‘788 patent”).
`
`10.
`
`I am not currently, and have not previously been, an employee of
`
`Hyundai Motor Company or any of its affiliates or subsidiaries, including Hyundai
`
`Motor America, Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC, Kia Motors
`
`Corporation, Kia Motors America, Inc., and Kia Motors Manufacturing Georgia,
`
`Inc.
`
`11.
`
`I am being compensated for my time at a rate of $325 per hour. My
`
`compensation is in no way dependent upon the substance of the opinions I offer
`
`below, or upon the outcome of Hyundai’s petition for inter partes review (or the
`
`outcome of such an inter partes review, if a trial is initiated).
`
`12.
`
`I have been asked to provide certain opinions relating to the
`
`patentability of the ‘788 patent. Specifically, I have been asked to provide my
`
`Page 4 of 33
`
`Page 4 of 33
`
`

`

`opinion regarding (i) the level of ordinary skill in the art to which the ‘788 patent
`
`pertains and (ii) the patentability of claims 1-7, 13, and 20.
`
`13.
`
`The opinions expressed in this declaration are not exhaustive of my
`
`opinions on the patentability of claims 1-7, 13, and 20. Therefore, the fact that I do
`
`not address a particular point should not be understood to indicate any agreement
`
`on my part that any claim otherwise complies with the patentability requirements.
`
`14.
`
`I have reviewed the ‘788 patent, its prosecution history, and the
`
`papers in Case IPR2013-00417, currently pending before the Patent Trial and
`
`Appeal Board, in forming my opinions in this declaration.
`
`15.
`
`I have reviewed the following prior art to the ‘788 patent:
`
`a)
`
`b)
`
`US. Patent No. 5,157,610 to Asano et al. (“Asano”) (Ex. 1004);
`
`US. Patent No. 4,675,675 to Corwin et a1. (“Corwin”) (Ex.
`
`1006); and
`
`c)
`
`Japanese Unexamined Patent Application Publication No. JP-A-HOl-
`
`197145 to Ishihara et a1. (“Ishihara”) (Exs. 1009 and 1010 (English
`
`translation)).
`
`III. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`16.
`
`I understand that a patent must be written such that it can be
`
`understood by a “person of ordinary skill” in the field of the patent.
`
`Page 5 of 33
`
`Page 5 of 33
`
`

`

`17.
`
`I understand that this hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art is
`
`considered to have the normal skills and knowledge of a person in the technical
`
`field at issue. I understand that factors that may be considered in determining the
`
`level of ordinary skill in the art include: (1) the education level of the inventor; (2)
`
`the types of problems encountered in the art; (3) the prior art solutions to those
`
`problems; (4) rapidity with which innovations are made; (5) the sophistication of
`
`the technology; and (6) the education level of active workers in the field.
`
`18.
`
`It is my opinion that in June of 1995, a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art relevant to the ‘788 patent would have had: (1) at least a Bachelor’s degree in
`
`Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Computer Science/Engineering,
`
`Physics, or another related technical field, as well as several years of work
`
`experience researching or working with vehicle telematics or vehicle diagnostics
`
`systems.
`
`19.
`
`Based on my experience and education, I consider myself to have
`
`been a person of at least ordinary skill in the art as of June 1995 (and through today)
`
`with respect to the field of technology implicated by the ‘788 patent.
`
`IV. BACKGROUND ON THE STATE OF THE ART
`
`20.
`
`In the years leading up to June 1995, vehicles went from primarily
`
`mechanical devices to ones having significant electronics and microprocessor-
`
`based systems, such as engine control and airbag operation. As part of the
`
`Page 6 of 33
`
`Page 6 of 33
`
`

`

`deployment of electronic systems on vehicles, electronic sensors were also
`
`deployed to monitor various vehicle components. These technology changes were
`
`required in order to meet federal and California mandates for fuel economy and
`
`emissions, as well as safety requirements. The proliferation of electronic sensors
`
`throughout vehicles led to the development of an integrated electronic architecture
`
`for a vehicle, including the Controller Area Network (CAN) data bus, enabling
`
`data to be passed freely between electronic control units. Through the late 1980s
`
`and continuing through the mid-905, there was significant research and
`
`development work on self-diagnostic capabilities for vehicles. By the mid-90s,
`
`every vehicle sold in the United States had some self-diagnostic capability and the
`
`ability to report standardized fault codes over a standard interface. The CAN
`
`standard was one of five options mandated for On—Board diagnostics in all light
`
`vehicles built since 1996. Many vehicles had much greater self-reporting
`
`capabilities than required by the mandate.
`
`21.
`
`Sophisticated electronic architectures contributed to several advances
`
`in vehicle safety and vehicle diagnostics such as, for example, the “Electronic
`
`Stability Program” (ESP) produced by Mercedes in 1995. ESP and similar-type
`
`systems collect data from multiple vehicle sensors to determine the state of the
`
`vehicle and if the vehicle is going where the driver is steering. If not, it can apply
`
`the brakes to individual wheels, letting the driver regain control of the vehicle.
`
`Page 7 of 33
`
`Page 7 of 33
`
`

`

`The development of “Smart Airbags,” which manage the deployment of airbags
`
`based on occupant position and size, also requires integration of data from multiple
`
`sensors throughout the vehicle.
`
`22. Outside of the automotive mass market, one of the major trends was
`
`the development of wireless communications for use with vehicle diagnostics.
`
`Wireless communications had been used for years in high value applications—in
`
`particular, military, aviation, freight, and even in some specialized cars in the
`
`1950s and 19603, but it was nowhere near the price point required for mass
`
`adoption. In 1988, Boeing introduced the 747-400, with an integrated diagnostic
`
`system using a telematics link to coordinate sensors in an aircraft with maintenance
`
`and support services on the ground, leading to improved operations and aircraft
`
`utilization. Similar activities were taking place in the railroad and maritime
`
`industries, and even for commercial trucking and specialty vehicles which could
`
`afford relatively high costs for wireless services.
`
`23.
`
`For the American public, the first cellular telephone service was
`
`launched in Chicago in 1983, and in 1989 Motorola introduced the flip phone, the
`
`first mobile phone that could easily fit in a pocket. In 1992, the second generation
`
`of cellular technology (2G) was introduced. This was based on a digital signal and
`
`had the capability to transmit limited data. Arguably, the first smartphone was the
`
`IBM Simon introduced in 1993; this was a mobile phone, pager, fax machine and
`
`Page 8 of 33
`
`Page 8 of 33
`
`

`

`PDA all rolled into one. The year 1994 saw a doubling in mobile phone usage, and
`
`the beginning of its exponential growth phase.
`
`24. Another factor key to the development of telematics was the
`
`deployment of the Global Positioning System. This system was available for use
`
`at least as late as the Gulf War in 1990 and went fully operational in 1995. For the
`
`first time in history humans had the capability for accurate positioning at an
`
`affordable cost.
`
`25.
`
`In early 1996, Ford and GM almost simultaneously announced
`
`production of RESCU and OnStar respectively. Both systems used GPS and
`
`cellular communications to provide several services to drivers, in particular,
`
`emergency notification services when the vehicle network determined there had
`
`been an accident. Services quickly expanded to include vehicle recovery,
`
`automatic door unlock and remote diagnostics. These systems took years to set up
`
`prior to their introduction, as one of the primary limitations was how to link to
`
`public emergency response services.
`
`26.
`
`The scope and content of the prior art as of June 1995 would have
`
`broadly included vehicle electronics, diagnostics, and communications (including
`
`automobile, truck, airplane, train, and other vehicle electronics, diagnostics, and
`
`communications.) (See, e.g., ‘788 patent, Ex. 1001, 31:28-30 (“Although the
`
`Page 9 of 33
`
`Page 9 of 33
`
`

`

`invention described herein is related to land vehicles, many of these advances are
`
`equally applicable to other vehicles such as airplanes.”).)
`
`27.
`
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art as of June 1995
`
`would have considered Asano, Corwin, and Ishihara to be within the same
`
`technical field as the subject matter set forth in the ‘788 patent. Further, all of
`
`these references would be considered highly relevant prior art to the claims of the
`
`‘788 patent.
`
`V.
`
`LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`28.
`
`I have been informed and I understand that a patentability analysis is
`
`performed from the viewpoint of a hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art. I
`
`understand that “the person of ordinary skill” is a hypothetical person who is
`
`presumed to be aware of the universe of available prior art as of the time of the
`
`invention at issue.
`
`29.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is unpatentable as anticipated when a
`
`single piece of prior art describes every element of the claimed invention, either
`
`expressly or inherently, and arranged in the same way as in the claim. For inherent
`
`anticipation to be found, it is required that the missing descriptive material is
`
`necessarily present in the prior art. I understand that, for the purpose of an inter
`
`partes review, prior art that anticipates a claim can include both patents and printed
`
`publications from anywhere in the world. I understand that some claims are written
`
`Page 10 of33
`
`Page 10 of 33
`
`

`

`in dependent form, in which case they incorporate all of the limitations of the
`
`c1aim(s) on which they depend.
`
`30.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is unpatentable as obvious if the
`
`subject matter of the claim as a whole would have been obvious to a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art as of the time of the invention at issue. I understand that the
`
`following factors must be evaluated to determine whether the claimed subject
`
`matter is obvious: (1) the scope and content of the prior art; (2) the difference or
`
`differences, if any, between the scope of the claim of the patent under
`
`consideration and the scope of the prior art; and (3) the level of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time the patent was filed. Unlike anticipation, which allows
`
`consideration of only one item of prior art, I understand that obviousness may be
`
`shown by considering more than one item of prior art. Moreover, I have been
`
`informed and I understand that so—called objective indicia of non-obviousness, also
`
`known as “secondary considerations,” like the following are also to be considered
`
`when assessing obviousness: (1) commercial success; (2) long-felt but unresolved
`
`needs; (3) copying of the invention by others in the field; (4) initial expressions of
`
`disbelief by experts in the field; (5) failure of others to solve the problem that the
`
`inventor solved; and (6) unexpected results. I also understand that evidence of
`
`objective indicia of non—obviousness must be commensurate in scope with the
`
`claimed subject matter.
`
`Page 11 of33
`
`Page 11 of 33
`
`

`

`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`31.
`
`I understand that in an inter partes review, claim terms are to be
`
`construed according to the broadest reasonable construction of those terms.
`
`32.
`
`For purposes of my opinion, for the term “component,” I have applied
`
`the definition “a part or an assembly of parts, less than the whole.”
`
`33.
`
`For purposes of my opinion, for the term “sensor,” I have applied the
`
`plain and ordinary meaning of the term, and have interpreted the term to include at
`
`least each of the sensors particularly identified in the specification of the ‘788
`
`patent.
`
`34.
`
`For purposes of my opinion, for the term “triggering event,” I have
`
`applied the definition “an event that starts or causes something to happen.”
`
`35.
`
`For purposes of my opinion, for the phrase “diagnostic or prognostic
`
`message” I have applied the definition “diagnostic or prognostic information
`
`related to actual or potential failure of a componen .”
`
`36. With respect to the other terms in the ’788 patent’s claims, I have
`
`applied the plain and ordinary meaning of those claim terms when comparing the
`
`claims to the prior art.
`
`Page 12 0f33
`
`Page 12 of 33
`
`

`

`VII. PATENTABILITY ANALYSIS
`
`A.
`
`Asano Anticipates Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the ‘788 Patent
`
`37.
`
`In my opinion, Asano discloses all limitations described in claims 1-7.
`
`Claim charts identifying specific portions of Asano that disclose all of the elements
`
`of claims 1-7 of the ‘7 88 patent are provided below.
`
`
`
`See, e.g., 2:9-15 (“According to one aspect of this invention
`there
`
`is provided a method of load sharing processing operations
`between a vehicle mounted station and a stationary base
`station including the steps of said vehicle mounted station
`detecting operating conditions of the vehicle, transmitting
`data representative of the detected operating conditions to
`the base
`
`. .”).
`.
`station .
`See, e.g., 3:10-11 (“In a feature of the invention the vehicle
`mounted station is arranged to detect an abnormality
`.”);
`3:59-63 (“Advantageously the detecting means is adapted to
`detect at least one of water temperature, air/fuel ratio, air
`flow quantity, battery voltage, throttle valve opening angle,
`engine speed, transmission gear position and suspension
`setting”);
`8:65-9:14 (“FIG. 6 shows an example of a failure
`diagnosis .
`.
`.
`. This embodiment is based on the concept of
`having the vehicle- mounted computer make a basic
`abnormal diagnosis and transmit the data to the host
`computer. .
`.
`. In step 6a, the diagnostic mode
`starts. This is carried out in parallel with the general
`program and for example, is repetitive at predetermined
`intervals of about 60
`
`ms. In step 6b, a decision on whether any abnormality exists
`is made based on the diagnosis results”);
`9215-1 8 (“When an abnormality exists, the abnormal code is
`transmitted to the host com .uter on the dealer side throu
`
`(1 .pre) A method
`for providing
`status data for
`
`vehicle
`
`maintenance,
`comprising:
`
`(1.a) monitoring fo
`a triggering event
`on a vehicle
`
`having a wireless
`communications
`
`unit, the triggering
`event relating to a
`diagnostic or
`prognostic
`analysis of at least
`one of a
`
`plurality of
`different
`
`components or
`subsystems of the
`vehicle; and
`
`Page 13 of33
`
`Page 13 of 33
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the transmitter-receivers 5 and 11.”);
`
`9:46-55 (“‘FIG. 7 shows an example regarding life prediction
`
`or failure prediction in accordance with data collected
`
`through sampling over a long period of time .
`.
`.
`. In step 7a,
`
`the vehicle- mounted computer carries out data sampling at
`
`every predetermined interval to detect abnormalities.
`
`Detection of abnormalities in this case is a very simple
`
`
`detection of abnormalities and a high-level failure diagnosis
`is carried out by the host computer.”).
`
`See also Fis. 6 and 7.
`
`
`
`(1 .b) initiating a
`. transmitting data representative of
`See, e.g., 2:14-15 (“. .
`
`
`Wireless
`the detected operating conditions to the base station .
`.
`. .”);
`
`
`
`3:10-13 (“In a feature of the invention the vehicle mounted
`
`
`station is arranged to detect an abnormality and to transmit
`
`
`
`data indicative thereof to said base station .
`.
`. .”);
`
`
`
`5 :36-40 (“[I]nformation is transmitted between a vehicle and
`
`
`
`a host computer located, for example, at a stationary, ground
`
`
`
`based dealership location through a telecommunications
`
`
`
`network”);
`
`
`
`5:46-54 (“A transmitter-receiver 5 for transmitting and/or
`
`
`
`receiving information to and from the host computer 18 is
`
`
`
`provided within processor 105. A telecommunication path
`
`
`
`10 which may be wired or wireless, e.g. a radio link
`
`
`
`interconnects the vehicle side located processor 105 with a
`
`
`
`stationary host computer station 25 including a transmitter-
`
`
`
`receiver 11 on the host computer station side of the path”);
`
`
`
`9:15-18 (“When an abnormality exists, the abnormal code is
`
`
`
`transmitted to the host computer on the dealer side through
`component or
`
`
`
`subsystem.
`the transmitter-receivers 5 and 11.”);
`
`
`
`9:5 5-59 (“In step 7b, an existence of abnormalities is
`
`
`confirmed and in step 7c, the vehicle-mounted computer
`transmits the necessary data including sampling values to
`the host computer through the transmitter-receivers 5, 11
`and completes the flow process”).
`
`
`See also Figs. 1 (showing “communication pa ” between
`
`“vehicle” and “host com uuter”), 6, 7
` The method of
`
`transmission
`
`between the
`
`communications
`
`unit and a remote
`
`site separate and
`apart from the
`vehicle in response
`to the triggering
`event, the
`transmission
`
`including a
`diagnostic or
`prognostic
`message about the
`at least one
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`See, e. ., 5:36-40 (“ I nformatlon 1s transmltted between a
`
`Page 14 of33
`
`Page 14 of 33
`
`

`

`claim 1, wherein
`the remote site is
`
`a dealer of the
`
`
`
`
`vehicle and a host computer located, for example, at
`a stationary, ground based dealership location
`
`
`through a telecommunications network”);
`
`
`
`
`5:60-63 (“The host computer side apparatus may be
`installed at the vehicle dealership or at a vehicle
`information service center.”
`
`vehicle.
`
`s ows an examp e o a a1 ure
`.
`(
`.
`See, e. g., 8.
`The method of
`. This embodiment is based on the concept
`.
`.
`diagnosis .
`claim 1, wherein
`the triggering event of having the vehicle-mounted computer make a basic
`is a failure,
`abnormal diagnosis and transmit the data to the host
`predicted failure or
`computer. .
`. .);
`fault code
`9:10-18 (“In step 6a, the diagnostic mode starts. This is
`generation of the at
`carried out in parallel with the general program and for
`least one
`example, is repetitive at predetermined intervals of about
`component or
`60 ms. In step 6b, a decision on whether any abnormality
`subsystem.
`exists is made based on the diagnosis results. When no
`abnormality exists, the process ends. When an abnormality
`exists, the abnormal code is transmitted to the host
`computer on the dealer side through the transmitter-
`receivers 5 and 11. ”).
`See also Fig. 6 (showing “diagnostic mode” and
`
`.
`
`See, e. g., 3:34—42 (“[T]here is provided a system for load
`(4.pre) A system
`for providing status sharing
`data for vehicle
`processing operations between a vehicle mounted station and
`maintenance,
`a stationary base station, said vehicle mounted station
`comprising:
`including detecting means for detecting operating conditions
`of the vehicle,
`first transmitting means for transmitting data
`representative of the detected operating conditions to the
`base station.
`See, e.g, 3. 10-11 (“In a feature ofthe invention the vehicle
`(4.a) a diagnostic
`module includin; mounted station is arran; ed to detect an abnormali
`
`Page 15 of33
`
`Page 15 of 33
`
`

`

`at least one sensor
`
`components or
`subsystems of the
`vehicle, said
`diagnostic module
`being arranged to
`analyze.
`monitormg data
`prov1ded by 531d
`at least one sensor
`
`and detect a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`for monitoring a
`
`plurality of
`
`different
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3:59-63 (“Advantageously the detecting means is
`adapted to detect at least one of water temperature,
`
`air/fuel ration, air flow quantity, battery voltage, throttle
`
`valve opening angle, engine speed, transmission gear
`
`position and suspension setting”);
`
`8:65-9:14 (“FIG. 6 shows an example of a failure
`
`diagnosis .
`.
`.
`. This embodiment is based on the concept of
`
`having the vehicle- mounted computer make a basic
`
`abnormal diagnosis and transmit the data to the host
`
`computer. .
`.
`. In step 6a, the diagnostic mode starts. This is
`
`carried out in parallel with the general program and for
`
`example, is repetitive at predetermined intervals of about
`
`60 ms. In step 6b, a decision on Whether any abnormality
`exists is made based on the diagnosis results”);
`triggering event
`
`9:15-18 (“When an abnormality exists, the abnormal code is
`relating to a
`transmitted to the host computer on the dealer side through
`
`diagnostic or
`the transmitter-receivers 5 and 11.”);
`
`prognostlc
`9:46-55 (“FIG. 7 shows an example regarding life
`analysrs of at least
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`
`pred1ct10n or fallure predlctlon 1n accordance With data
`
`one of the
`lurality of
`collected through sampling over a long period of
`
`
`fiifferent
`time.
`.In step 7a, the vehicle- mounted computer
`carriesout data sampling at every predetermined interval
`
`
`
`components or
`to detect abnormalities. Detection of abnormalities in this
`subsystems of the
`
`case is a very simple detection of abnormalities and a
`
`vehicle; and
`
`high-level failure diagnosis is carried out by the host
`
`computer.”).
`
`See also Fi s. 6 and 7.
`
`
`
`
`(4b) a wireless
`See, e.g., 2: 14- 15 (“.. .transmitting data representative of th
`
`communications
`detected operating conditions to the base station.
`..”);
`
`3: 10-13 (“In a feature of the invention the vehicle
`
`mounted station is arranged to detect an abnormality and
`
`to transmit data
`indicative
`thereof
`to said base
`station .
`_
`_ .”);
`
`5:36-40 (“[I]nformation is transmitted between a vehicle
`
`
`
`and a host computer located, for example, at a stationary,
`unit being coupled
`ground based dealership location through a
`
`
`to said diagnostic
`telecommunications network”);
`
`
`5:46-54 (“A transmitter-receiver 5 for transmitting and/or
`W94“? and _
`
`
`1n1t1at1ng a Wireless receiving information to and from the host computer 18 is
`
`
`transmrssmn
`
`
`rovided within rocessor 105. A telecommunication ath
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`unit arranged to
`interface with a
`
`wireless
`communications
`HCtWOI'k, said
`communications
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 16 of33
`
`Page 16 of 33
`
`

`

`
`between said
`communications
`
`
`
`10 which may be wired or wireless, e.g. a radio link
`interconnects the vehicle side located processor 105 with a
`
`stationary host computer station 25 including a transmitter-
`receiver 11 on the host computer station side of the path.”);
`
`9:15-18 (“When an abnormality exists, the abnormal code is
`
`transmitted to the host computer on the dealer side through
`
`the transmitter-receivers 5 and 11.”);
`
`9:5 5-59 (“In step 7b, an existence of abnormalities is
`
`confirmed and in step 7c, the vehicle-mounted computer
`transmits the necessary data including sampling values to
`
`the host computer through the transmitter-receivers 5, 11
`
`and completes the flow process”).
`
`See also Figs. 1 (showing “communication path” between
`
`one component or
`“vehicle” and “host computer”), 6, 7
`
`
`
`subs stern.
`
`unit and a remote
`
`site separate and
`apart from the
`vehicle in response
`to the triggering
`event, the
`transmission
`
`including a
`diagnostic or
`prognostic message
`about the at least
`
`
`
`The system of
`claim 4, wherein
`the remote site is a
`
`dealer of the
`
`vehicle.
`
`See, e.g., 5:36-40 (“[I]nformation is transmitted between a
`vehicle and a host computer located, for example, at a
`stationary, ground based dealership location through a
`telecommunications network”);
`5:60-63 (“The host computer side apparatus may be
`installed at the vehicle dealership or at a vehicle
`information service center.” .
`
`
`
`See, e.g., 8:65-9:6 (“FIG. 6 shows an example of a failure
`diagnosis .
`.
`.
`. This embodiment is based on the concept of
`having the vehicle-mounted computer make a basic abnormal
`diagnosis and transmit the data to the host computer. .
`. .);
`9:10-18 (“In step 6a, the diagnostic mode starts. This is
`carried out in parallel with the general program and for
`example, is repetitive at predetermined intervals of about 60
`ms. In step 6b, a decision on whether any abnormality exists
`is made based on the diagnosis results. When no abnormality
`exists, the process ends. When an abnormality exists, the
`abnormal code is transmitted to the host computer on the
`dealer side throu;
`the transmitter-receivers 5 and 11.”).
`
`The system of
`claim 4, wherein
`the triggering event
`is a failure,
`predicted failure or
`fault code
`
`generation of the at
`least one
`
`component or
`subsystem.
`
`Page 17 of33
`
`Page 17 of 33
`
`

`

`_ See also Fig. 6 (showing “diagnostic mode” and “abnormality
`code” .
`
`
`
`The method of
`claim 1, wherein
`the step of
`monitoring for the
`triggering event
`comprises
`providing at least
`one sensor that
`monitors the at
`least one
`component or
`subsystem.
`
`See, e.g., 2:25-30 (“Advantageously the vehicle mounted
`station detected operating conditions are performed by a
`detecting means adapted to detect at least one of water
`temperature, air flow ratio air fuel quantity, battery
`voltage, throttle valve opening angle, engine speed,
`transmission gear position and suspension setting”);
`6:19-22 (“[S]ensors (of which only two are shown) sense
`the engine operating conditions, inter alia, the engine
`cooling water temperature (TWS) 32 and the air/fuel ratio
`(02$) 34.”).
`6:28-33 (“An inlet pipe air flow sensor (AFS) 51 has its
`value set in a register 54 after conversion in an A/D
`converter 52. An engine angle sensor (AS) 56 provides
`reference signals REF and angle position signals POS to an
`angle signal processing circuit 58.”);
`See also Fi. 2 (showin; sensors).
`
`B.
`
`Corwin Anticipates Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 13, and 20 of the ‘788
`Patent
`
`38.
`
`In my opinion, Corwin discloses all limitations described in claims 1,
`
`3, 4, 6, 7, 13, and 20. Claim charts identifying specific portions of Corwin that
`
`disclose all of the elements of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 13, and 20 of the ‘788 patent are
`
`provided below.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(1.pre) A method
`See, e. g., 1:4-8 ( Thls invention relates to fault reportlng
`
`for providing status
`and, more particularly, to an aircraft maintenance
`
`
`
`data for vehicle
`scheduling system by which fault-related data onboard an
`
`
`operational aircraft is processed through a communications
`
`
`
`channel to a round terminal.
`
`
`maintenance,
`com o risin ;:
`
`Page 18 0f33
`
`Page 18 of 33
`
`

`

`
`(1.a) monitoring
`for a triggering
`
`event on a vehicle
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`See, e. g., 2:43-57 (“It is a further object of the present
`invention to provide an automatic fault reporting system
`
`(AFRS) for maximizing the amount of data available for
`
`fault detection. . .. In accordance with a preferred
`
`embodiment of the present AFRS: (a) presently installed
`
`digital and analog system outputs are monitored; (b)
`
`presently programmed fault indications are detected; (c) by
`
`comparing all fault data, a most likely cause is determined
`
`and assigned a fault code (e.g. an eight digit alpha numeric
`
`code). . . .”);
`
`5:41-45 (“The AFRS provides automatic
`
`comparing/monitoring of various aircraft data parameters
`
`components or
`during flight, and supplies fault outputs when failures are
`subsystems of the
`detected to the ACARS for transmission to ground-based
`
`
`vehicle; and
`maintenance operations”);
`
`
`
`7:28-32 (“The
`AFRS monitor and compares outputs
`
`from various aircraft electronic units. Failure outputs are
`
`provided to the ACARS whenever faults or excessive
`
`
`differences are detected between monitored inuts.” .
`
`
`
`(1 .b) initiating a
`See, e. g., 2249—325 (“In accordance with a preferred
`
`wireless
`embodiment of the present AFRS: ...(b) presently
`
`
`transmission
`programmed fault indications are detected
`[and] a most
`between the
`likely cause is determined and assigned a fault code
`(d)
`communications
`a ‘send data’ discrete signal is awaited from the aircraft’s
`unit and a remote
`onboard FMC (Flight Management Computer); (6) on
`command, a ‘data present’ discrete signal is sent to the
`aircraft’s onboard ARINC Communications Addressing
`and Reporting System (ACARS) and a ‘transmission
`available’ discrete signal is awaited; (f) on command, the
`aforementioned fault code is sent to ACARS which
`transmits data via VHF communications to the ARINC
`network on the ground which, in turn, couples fault code
`Via land Wires to applicable airline. . . .”);
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`having a wireless
`communications
`
`unit, the triggering
`event relating to a
`diagnostic or
`prognostic analysis
`of at least one of a
`
`plurality of
`different
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`site separate and
`apart from the
`veh1cle in response
`to the tr1ggermg
`event, the.
`transmlssmn
`including a
`diagnostic or
`prognostic message
`about the at least
`
`one component or
`subsystem.
`
`Page 19 of33
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`. provides a ground-based digital
`.
`. ARINC— .
`.
`.
`
`
`air/ground communications network .
`.
`. .”);
`
`“The AFRS
` orovides automatic
`
`. Used for two way digital
`3:44-53 (“ACARS—. .
`communications from airplane to ground station Via
`ARINC communications network”)
`
`Page 19 of 33
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`comparing/monitoring of various aircraft data parameters
`
`during flight,