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. 7,650,210
`Filing Date: August 14, 2006
`Issue Date: January 19, 2010
`Title: REMOTE VEHICLE DIAGNOSTIC MANAGEMENT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. Unassigned
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF CHRISTOPHER WILSON
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S.
`PATENT NO. 7,650,210
`
`
`
`Page 1 of 31
`
`Hyundai Exhibit 1006
`
`

`
`I, 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 U.S. 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 31
`
`

`
`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 31
`
`

`
`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 U.S. Patent No. 7,650,210 (“the ‘210 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 ‘210 patent. Specifically, I have been asked to provide my
`
`Page 4 of 31
`
`

`
`opinion regarding (i) the level of ordinary skill in the art to which the ‘210 patent
`
`pertains and (ii) the patentability of claims 1-3, 5, 7-9, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 19.
`
`13. The opinions expressed in this declaration are not exhaustive of my
`
`opinions on the patentability of claims 1-3, 5, 7-9, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 19.
`
`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 ‘210 patent, and its prosecution history, and the
`
`papers in Case IPR2013-00415, 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 ‘210 patent:
`
`a)
`
`Japanese Unexamined Patent Application Publication JP-A-
`
`H01-197145 to Ishihara et al. (“Ishihara”) (Exs. 1003 and 1004
`
`(English translation)); and
`
`b)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,561,610 to Schricker et al. (“Schricker”) (Ex.
`
`1005)
`
`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.
`
`17.
`
`I understand that this hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art is
`
`Page 5 of 31
`
`

`
`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 ‘210 patent would have had: 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 ‘210 patent.
`
`IV. BACKGROUND OF 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 deployment of electronic systems on vehicles, electronic sensors were
`
`Page 6 of 31
`
`

`
`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-90s, 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.
`
`The development of “Smart Airbags,” which manage the deployment of airbags
`
`Page 7 of 31
`
`

`
`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 1960s, 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
`
`PDA all rolled into one. The year 1994 saw a doubling in mobile phone usage, and
`
`Page 8 of 31
`
`

`
`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., ‘210 patent, Ex. 1001, 34:46-50 (“Although the
`
`invention described herein is related to land vehicles, many of these advances are
`
`equally applicable to other vehicles such as airplanes and even, in some cases,
`
`Page 9 of 31
`
`

`
`homes and buildings. The invention disclosed herein, therefore, is not limited to
`
`automobiles or other land vehicles.”).)
`
`27.
`
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art as of June 1995
`
`would have considered Ishihara and Schricker to be within the same technical field
`
`as the subject matter set forth in the ‘210 patent. Further, both of these references
`
`would be considered highly relevant prior art to the claims of the ‘210 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
`
`in dependent form, in which case they incorporate all of the limitations of the
`
`Page 10 of 31
`
`

`
`claim(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.
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`Page 11 of 31
`
`

`
`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 “display,” I have applied the
`
`definition “a screen for showing information.”
`
`34. For the purposes of my opinion, for the phrase “diagnostic system
`
`arranged on the vehicle,” I have applied the plain and ordinary meaning of the
`
`phrase, and have interpreted the phrase to not exclude “the possibility that the
`
`diagnostic system may acquire instructions, data, or commands from a remote
`
`source” or that “an additional diagnostic system is located remotely from the
`
`vehicle.”
`
`35. For the 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
`
`‘210 patent.
`
`36.
`
` With respect to the other terms in the ‘210 patent’s claims, I have
`
`applied the plain and ordinary meaning of those claim terms when comparing the
`
`claims to the prior art.
`
`VII. PATENTABILITY ANALYSIS
`
`Page 12 of 31
`
`

`
`A.
`Ishihara Anticipates Claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 13, 15, and 19 of the
`‘210 Patent
`
`37.
`
`In my opinion, Ishihara discloses all limitations described in claims 1,
`
`2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 13, 15, and 19. Claim charts identifying specific portions of Ishihara
`
`that disclose all of the elements of claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 13, 15, and 19 of the ‘210
`
`patent are provided below.
`
`‘210 Patent -
`Claim 1
`1. A vehicle,
`comprising:
`
`a. a plurality of
`components;
`
`b. a diagnostic
`system arranged on
`the vehicle to
`determine whether
`any of said
`components is
`operating non-
`
`Ishihara (Exhibits 1003 & 1004)
`
`See, e.g., Title (“Failure Diagnosis Apparatus for a
`Vehicle.”); p. 1, col. 1 (“The present invention relates to a
`failure diagnosis apparatus for a vehicle . . . .”).
`p. 2, col. 2 (“The failure diagnosis apparatus 1 is configured
`to include an on-board apparatus 2.... The on-board apparatus
`2 is configured to include a control unit 4 that controls
`various devices or systems on board and detects failures
`thereof….”);
`p. 2, col. 2 (“To the [control] unit 4 are connected a vehicle
`speed sensor 11 that detects vehicle speed, a throttle sensor
`12 that detects the degree of throttle opening of the engine, a
`turbine sensor 13 that detects turbine rotational frequency of
`a torque converter, and an idle switch 14 that detects idle
`status of the engine, and output signals 11a, 12a, 13a, and 14a
`from these sensors 11, 12, 13, and 14 are input to a computer
`16 in the control unit 4 via an input processing circuit 15.”);
`p. 4, col. 2 (“[T]he present idea may be applied to other
`control systems on board a vehicle, such as an antiskid
`braking system 48 and an electronic fuel injection system 49,
`for example.”).
`See, e.g., p. 2, col. 1(“The configuration, which has a failure
`detection unit that detects a failure of an on-board device and
`a transmitting unit that transmits, at an occurrence of the
`failure, an output signal from the failure detection unit to a
`failure diagnosis station outside the vehicle, . . .”);
`p. 2, col. 2 (“The failure diagnosis apparatus 1 is configured
`to include an on-board apparatus 2. The on-board apparatus
`
`Page 13 of 31
`
`

`
`2 is configured to include a control unit 4 that controls
`optimally, is
`various devices or systems on board and detects failures
`expected to fail or
`thereof….”);
`has failed and
`p. 2, col. 2 (“The control unit 4 controls an automatic
`generate an output
`indicative or
`transmission mounted in the vehicle. To the unit 4 are
`
`representative of the connected a vehicle speed sensor 11 that detects vehicle
`determination of the
`speed, a throttle sensor 12 that detects the degree of throttle
`non-optimal
`opening of the engine, a turbine sensor 13 that detects turbine
`operation, expected
`rotational frequency of a torque converter, and an idle switch
`failure or actual
`14 that detects idle status of the engine, and output signals
`failure of any of
`11a, 12a, 13 a, and 14a from these sensors 11, 12, 13, and 14
`said components;
`are input to a computer 16 in the control unit 4..”);
`and
`p. 3, col. 1 (“The computer 16 is configured to include a
`control section 16a and failure detection section 16b. Based
`on input signals 11a to 14a from each of the above sensors 11
`to 14 and a predetermined program saved in the memory 17,
`the control section 16a outputs control signals 18a to 20a via
`an output processing circuit 21 to a first transmission
`solenoid 18, a second transmission solenoid 19, and a
`solenoid for lock-up 20, thereby controlling operation of the
`automatic transmission. The failure detection section 16b
`determines whether or not abnormality exists in the input
`signals 11a to 14a from each of the above sensors 11 to 14
`and the control signals 18a to 20a in light of data or a
`program saved in the memory 17 to detect the occurrence of
`a failure in the automatic transmission or its control system.
`For a predetermined abnormality, a warning lamp 22 is
`turned on via the output processing circuit 21 at the time of
`its occurrence.”);
`p. 4, col. 1 (“[I]n Step S1, the input signals 11a to 14a from
`each of the sensors 11 to 14 and control signals 18a to 20a
`output to each of the solenoids 18 to 20 used for controlling the
`automatic transmission are input to the failure detection
`section 16b of the computer 16, and whether or not a failure
`exists is detected based on a program saved in memory 17.
`If it is determined in Step S2 that there is a failure, an
`identification code for failure content is appended in front of
`the failure data.”);
`See also Fig. 1 (showing a vehicle with an on-board “control
`unit”); Fig. 2 (showing control unit 4, with a “controller” and
`
`Page 14 of 31
`
`

`
`“failure detector” that receive signals from various
`“sensor[s]” and provide output to a “memory” and
`“transmitted/received data processing circuit”).
`
`c. a communications See, e.g., p. 2, col. 1 (“An objective of the present invention
`device coupled to
`is to provide a failure diagnosis apparatus for a vehicle that
`said diagnostic
`transmits to a failure diagnosis station outside the vehicle all
`
`system and arranged data related to a failure….”);
`to direct a
`p. 2, col. 1 (“The configuration, which has a failure detection
`transmission of the
`unit that detects a failure of an on-board device and a
`output of said
`transmitting unit that transmits, at an occurrence of the
`
`diagnostic system to failure, an output signal from the failure detection unit to a
`a remote location
`failure diagnosis station outside the vehicle, . . .”);
`such that the output
`p. 2, col. 1 (“[A]ll data is automatically transmitted to the
`indicative or
`failure diagnosis station outside the vehicle….”);
`
`representative of the p. 2, col. 2 (“The failure diagnosis apparatus 1 is configured
`determination of the
`to include an on-board apparatus 2 and a failure diagnosis
`non-optimal
`station 3 that is outside of vehicle. The on-board apparatus 2
`operation, expected
`is configured to include a control unit 4 that controls various
`failure or actual
`devices or systems on board and detects failures thereof, a
`failure of any of
`display apparatus 5 that is connected to the control unit 4, a
`said components
`communication control unit 6 that controls the
`generated by said
`communication between the control unit 4 and the failure
`diagnostic system is
`diagnosis station 3 outside the vehicle, and an antenna 7 that
`transmitted to the
`transmits and receives a communication signal to/from the
`remote location.
`unit 6.”);
`p. 3, col. 1- 2 (“The communication control circuit 6 is
`configured to include ... a transmitted data buffer 28 that
`stores a failure data signal output from the control unit 4, a
`transmitted data modulation circuit 29 that converts the data
`signal into an easily transmittable signal, and a transmitting
`circuit 30 that transmits the modulated failure data signal to
`the failure diagnosis station 3 via the antenna 7. The
`communication control unit 6 is provided with a
`communication control circuit 31 that controls flow between
`the received signal and the transmitted signal as described
`above to pass the signals from/to the transmitted-received data
`processing circuit 23 in the control unit 4.”);
`p. 4, col. 1 (“If it is determined in Step S2 that there is a
`failure, an identification code for failure content is appended
`in front of the failure data.. Next in Step S5, the above failure
`
`Page 15 of 31
`
`

`
`data is transmitted . from the communication control unit 6 to
`the failure diagnosis station 3 outside the vehicle, such as a
`service shop.”);
`Fig. 1 (showing a vehicle with both a “control unit” 4 and a
`“communications control unit” 6 with an antenna 8 that
`wirelessly transmits and receives communication signals
`from the vehicle.);
`Fig. 2 (showing communication control circuit 6 receiving a
`signal from control unit 4 for transmission to a remote site).
`
`‘210 Patent - Claim 2
`2. The vehicle of claim 1,
`wherein said
`communications device is
`arranged to automatically
`direct the transmission of
`the output of said diagnostic
`system to the remote
`location without manual
`intervention.
`
`Ishihara (Exhibits 1003 & 1004)
`See, e.g., p. 2, col. 1 (“The configuration, which
`has a failure detection unit that detects a failure of
`an onboard device and a transmitting unit that
`transmits, at an occurrence of the failure, an output
`signal from the failure detection unit to a failure
`diagnosis station outside the vehicle, . . .”);
`p. 2, col. 1 (“[A]ll data is automatically
`transmitted to the failure diagnosis station outside
`the vehicle….”).
`
`‘210 Patent - Claim 3
`3. The vehicle of claim 1,
`wherein said
`communications device is
`arranged to direct the
`transmission to a dealer
`of the vehicle or repair
`facility whereby the
`dealer of the vehicle or
`repair facility is situated
`at the remote location
`without manual
`intervention.
`
`Ishihara (Exhibits 1003 & 1004)
`p. 1, col. 2 (“[W]hen the occurrence of a failure is
`predicted, a failure warning is displayed on a failure
`warning display device disposed in the automobile,
`while the failure information is transmitted to a
`failure diagnosis computer of a service company
`using a telephone line of an automobile telephone
`provided in the automobile so that the computer
`performs a failure diagnosis.”);
`p. 4, col. 1 (“If it is determined in Step S2 that there is
`a failure, an identification code for failure content is
`appended in front of the failure data…. Next in Step
`S5, the above failure data is transmitted … from the
`communication control unit 6 to the failure diagnosis
`station 3 outside the vehicle, such as a service
`shop.”).
`
`‘210 Patent -
`
`Ishihara (Exhibits 1003 & 1004)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 16 of 31
`
`

`
`Claim 5
`5. The vehicle of
`claim 1, wherein
`said diagnostic
`system comprises
`a plurality of
`vehicle sensors
`mounted on the
`vehicle, each of
`said vehicle
`sensors providing
`a measurement
`related to a state of
`said vehicle sensor
`or a measurement
`related to a state of
`a mounting
`location of said
`vehicle sensor and
`a processor
`coupled to said
`vehicle sensors
`and arranged to
`receive data from
`said vehicle
`sensors and
`process the
`received data to
`generate the
`output of said
`diagnostic system.
`
`See, e.g., p. 2, col. 1 (“[A] failure detection unit that detects
`failure of an on-board device..”);
`p. 2, col. 2 (“The failure diagnosis apparatus 1 is
`configured to include an on-board apparatus 2…. The
`on-board apparatus 2 is configured to include a control unit 4
`that controls various devices or systems on board and detects
`failures thereof..”);
`p. 2, col. 2 (“To the [control] unit 4 are connected a vehicle
`speed sensor 11 that detects vehicle speed, a throttle sensor
`12 that detects the degree of throttle opening of the engine, a
`turbine sensor 13 that detects turbine rotational frequency of
`a torque converter, and an idle switch 14 that detects idle
`status of the engine, and output signals 11a, 12a, 13a, and
`14a from these sensors 11, 12, 13, and 14 are input to a
`computer 16 in the control unit 4 via an input processing
`circuit 15.”);
`p. 3, col. 1 (“The computer 16 is configured to include a
`control section 16a and failure detection section 16b…. The
`failure detection section 16b determines whether or not
`abnormality exists in the input signals 11a to 14a from each
`of the above sensors 11 to 14 and the control signals 18a to
`20a in light of data or a program saved in the memory 17 to
`detect the occurrence of a failure in the automatic
`transmission or its control system.”);
`p. 3, col. 1 (“[A] transmitted data buffer 28 . stores a failure
`data signal output from the control unit 4….”);
`p. 4, col. 1 (“[I]n Step S1, the input signals 11a to 14a from
`each of the sensors 11 to 14 and control signals 18a to 20a
`output to each of the solenoids 18 to 20 used for controlling
`the automatic transmission are input to the failure detection
`section 16b of the computer 16, and whether or not a failure
`exists is detected based on a program saved in memory 17.
`If it is determined in Step S2 that there is a failure, an
`identification code for failure content is appended in front of
`the failure data.”);
`Fig. 1 (showing a vehicle with both a “control unit” 4 and a
`“communications control unit” 6 with an antenna 8 that
`transmits and receives communication signals from the
`vehicle); Fig. 2 (showing control unit 4, with a “controller”
`
`Page 17 of 31
`
`

`
`
`
`‘210 Patent -
`Claim 7
`7. The vehicle
`of claim 1,
`wherein the
`vehicle includes
`a passenger
`compartment,
`further
`comprising a
`display arranged
`in the vehicle in
`a position to be
`visible from the
`passenger
`compartment,
`said display
`being coupled to
`said diagnostic
`system and
`arranged to
`display an
`indication of the
`determination of
`the non-optimal
`operation,
`failure or
`expected failure
`of any of said
`components
`
`and “failure detector” that receive signals from various
`“sensor[s]” and provide output to a “memory” and
`“transmitted/received data processing circuit”).
`
`Ishihara (Exhibits 1003 & 1004)
`
`See, e.g., p. 2, col. 2 (“[A] display apparatus 5 ... is connected
`to the control unit 4,….”);
`p. 3, col. 1 (“For a predetermined abnormality, a warning
`lamp 22 is turned on via the output processing circuit 21 [of
`control unit 4’s computer 16] at the time of its occurrence.”);
`p. 3, col. 1 (“[C]ontrol unit 4” includes a “display selection
`circuit 24” that “controls the display apparatus 5 to selectively
`display diagnosis data from the failure diagnosis station 3,....”);
`See, e.g., p. 3, col. 2 (“The display apparatus 5 is configured to
`include …. a display device 33 comprised of a CRT, for
`example.”);
`p. 4, col. 1 (“If it is determined in Step S2 that there is a
`failure, an identification code for failure content is appended in
`front of the failure data, and whether or not a warning lamp
`22 needs to be turned on is determined based on the
`identification code in Step S3. ... Then, whether or not this
`information needs to be displayed on the display apparatus 5
`of the on-board apparatus 2 is determined based on the
`significance of the failure, while the diagnosis data is
`transmitted from the communication control unit 9 to the
`vehicle with an identification code appended thereto….
`[W]hether or not a diagnosis result of the failure needs to be
`displayed is determined based on the identification code
`appended in front of the diagnosis data in Step S9. If the result
`needs to be displayed, it is displayed on the display device 33
`provided in the vehicle in Step S10.”);
`p. 4, col. 2 (“Only a failure with high significance will be
`displayed on the display apparatus 5 on board the vehicle,….”);
`p. 4, col. 2-p. 5, col. 1 (“It prevents failures from unnecessarily
`being displayed and thereby causing anxiety to the person on
`board or creating a sense of distrust, and also prevents the
`person on board from becoming too familiar with displayed
`failures leading him/her to disregard highly significant failures,
`and therefore, it improvise the reliability of displayed
`
`Page 18 of 31
`
`

`
`
`
`‘210 Patent -
`Claim 9
`9. The vehicle
`of claim 1,
`further
`comprising a
`warning device
`coupled to said
`diagnostic
`system for
`relaying a
`warning to an
`occupant of the
`vehicle relating
`to the
`non-optimal
`operation,
`failure or
`expected failure
`of any of said
`components
`
`failures.”) Fig. 1 (showing a vehicle with a display apparatus
`5 located in the passenger compartment); Fig. 2 (showing a
`“display device” connected to the control unit 4).
`
`Ishihara (Exhibits 1003 & 1004)
`
`See, e.g., p. 2, col. 2 (“[A] display apparatus 5 … is connected
`to the control unit 4,….”);
`p. 3, col. 1 (“For a predetermined abnormality, a warning
`lamp 22