DECLARATION OF PHILIP E BONTRAGER
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
` PAGE
`
`
`
`2
`5
`7
`14
`
`20
`22
`24
`27
`30
`31
`38
`40
`40
`43
`48
`50
`52
`
`56
`57
`63
`75
`82
`
`86
`86
`
`92
`
`96
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Declarant’s Professional Background…………………………………………………....
`Company Background…………………………………………………………………………….
`Patent US 8,585,136………………………………………………………………………………
`Strategic Context for the Invention…………………………………………………………..
`
`ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION OF THE ‘136 PATENT……………………………………………
`Combination of Chair & Stool Base………………………………………………………..
`Stool Base………………………………………………………………………………………………
`Saddle…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
`Latch……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
`Manually Operable Means……………………………………………………………………..
`Pedestal…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
`Chair………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
`Lower Portion………………………………………………………………………………………….
`Base Legs………………………………………………………………………………………………..
`Simultaneous Use……………………………………………………………………………………
`Claims 13 & 14………………………………………………………………………………………..
`Definition of User…………………………………………………………………………………….
`
`PETITIONER’S ASSERTIONS OF ANTICIPATION & OBVIOUSNESS……………………………….
`Mackey: Anticipation………………………………………………………………………………
`Pollack I & II: Obviousness………………………………………………………………………
`Yu & Clark: Obviousness…………………………………………………………………………
`Yu, Clark, & Kassai: Obviousness……………………………………………………………
`
`OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE………………………………………………………………………………….….
`
`Media Recognition, Awards, & Praise…………………………………………………………
`
`Commercial Success………………………………………………………………………………..
`
`A Competitor’s Response……………………………………………………………………….
`
`
`
`Page 1 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF PHILIP E. BONTRAGER
`
`I, Philip E. Bontrager, declare on the basis of personal knowledge, or where indicated, on
`information and belief, as follows:
`
`
`
`DECLARANT’S PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
`
`I am the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Sauder Manufacturing Company, 930 West
`Barre Road, Archbold, Ohio, 43502. I have served in this role from October 2005 to the present.
`
`From June 2003 to October 2005, I served as the Vice President, Business Strategy for the
`Sauder Woodworking Co., the corporate parent of Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`
`Prior to joining the Sauder organization, my professional roles included the following:
`
`(cid:120) From 2001 to 2003 I worked as an independent business consultant. My primary client
`was a denominational publisher of printed religious materials where I served as the
`interim CEO, developing and implementing a business re-structuring and financial turn-
`around.
`
`(cid:120) From 1999 to 2002 I was the President of Gardens Alive! Inc., a privately-held
`manufacturer of organic lawn and garden products based in Lawrenceburg, Indiana.
`
`(cid:120) From 1983 to 1999 I served in a variety of business leadership roles of increasing
`responsibility in business strategy and general management for the Hill-Rom Company
`and its publicly traded parent corporation, Hillenbrand Industries, Inc. At that time, the
`Hill-Rom Company annually exceeded $1.2 billion in global revenue from its hospital
`
`
`
`Page 2 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`patient room furniture business; Hillenbrand Industries, Inc. generated more than $2.1
`billion in annual revenue.
`
`(cid:120) My key roles included Vice President & General Manager, Architectural Products (1997 –
`1999) with global responsibility for Hill-Rom’s medical gas products and equipment
`business, Vice President & General Manager, Europe (1993 – 1997), where I had overall
`business leadership responsibility for Hill-Rom’s therapy bed business in Europe, and
`Vice President, Business Strategy (1986 – 1993) where I had responsibility for Hill-Rom’s
`global business strategy for hospital furniture and medical devices.
`
`(cid:120) Prior to these leadership roles, from 1983 to 1986 I worked as a strategy manager and
`analyst for Hill-Rom’s parent corporation, Hillenbrand Industries, Inc.
`
`(cid:120) And from 1982 – 1983 I worked as a financial analyst for the Eli Lilly Company.
`
`I hold a Master’s in Business Administration with Distinction from the Ross Graduate School of
`Business, The University of Michigan (1982) and a Bachelor of Arts, Economics from Goshen
`College (1979).
`
`I have 35 years of experience leading senior executive teams and aligning organizations’
`resources to effectively implement business and product strategies.
`
`Since 2003, I have served in senior executive positions in the Sauder organization, a privately-
`owned company that is among the largest wooden furniture manufacturers in North America.
`In my role since 2005 as President and Chief Executive Officer of one of its wholly-owned
`subsidiaries, Sauder Manufacturing Company (“SMC”), I have gained knowledge and experience
`in the design, structure, function, and manufacture of institutional seating.
`
`I regularly interact with SMC’s customers and potential customers in each of our markets, often
`in their place of business around the United States. I regularly visit each of SMC’s
`manufacturing plants to review performance and interact with leaders and production
`
`
`
`Page 3 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`operators in their work environment. And I regularly visit SMC’s product design and engineering
`facilities to review product research and development activity. This is in addition to the
`regularly scheduled performance and status updates conducted with the senior leadership of
`SMC.
`
`The last 10 years (2005 – 2015) as President & CEO at Sauder Manufacturing Company in its
`institutional furniture business combined with 16 years of experience (1983 – 1999) as a senior
`executive of the Hill-Rom Company’s hospital patient room furniture business, I have gained
`significant experience in the design and manufacture of institutional furniture.
`
`I do not have an engineering degree; however, since 1983, my professional career has been
`spent primarily working for companies that design and manufacture innovative products in the
`institutional furniture industry.
`
`Since 2005, serving as the President and Chief Executive Officer of a designer and manufacturer
`(i.e. SMC) of institutional seating with more than 500 employees, I participate on a daily basis in
`the diverse spectrum of activities, opportunities, and challenges that provides.
`
`I have a good comprehension of United States Patent “US 8,585,136 – CHAIR WITH COUPLING
`COMPANION STOOL BASE” (the patent under review), and of the prior art patents involved in
`the two petitions for an Inter Partes Review that are currently underway.
`
`As a result of my experience, I believe I am a person having at least an ordinary level of skill,
`knowledge, and conventional wisdom, in the art of institutional seating.
`
`
`
`Page 4 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`COMPANY BACKGROUND
`
`Founded in 1945, the Sauder Manufacturing Company is a wholly-owned, independently
`operated subsidiary of the Sauder Woodworking Co., North America’s largest manufacturer of
`ready-to-assemble residential furniture.
`
`With more than 2,100 employees, Sauder Woodworking Co. sells products to consumers via
`major retailers, e.g. Wal-Mart, Target, Office Depot, Staples, and Amazon. The company also is
`a primary manufacturer of wood furniture products for IKEA in North America.
`
`Sauder Manufacturing Company (“SMC”) designs, develops, manufactures, and sells configure-
`to-order furniture for customers in the institutional furniture markets in healthcare (i.e.
`hospitals), in higher education (i.e. colleges & universities), in human services, and in churches.
`
`SMC’s products are primarily in the seating category, e.g. chairs, recliners, sleep sofas, church
`pews, and similar items.
`
`In higher education, SMC develops, manufactures, and sells chairs for student dorm rooms and
`lounges in university residence halls, i.e. the “education market”.
`
`Given similar user demographics (age, life style, etc.) and the similar environment in residential
`facilities for enlisted members of the armed services, selected SMC products sold to the
`education market also have application in housing for enlisted personnel on military bases. This
`is commonly referred to in the trade as the “GSA Market.”
`
`SMC’s products are sold through our national network of dedicated sales representatives in
`each market we serve. SMC’s sales representatives call on individual customers to assess their
`needs, demonstrate products, and determine with the customer the appropriate product
`configuration for each order.
`
`Traditional media advertising (e.g. television, ads in printed journals and newspapers, etc.) does
`not play a major role in promoting SMC’s products to customers.
`
`
`
`
`Page 5 of 102
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`To supplement the promotional efforts of individual sales representatives, SMC regularly
`exhibits at relevant trade shows in each market we serve. In the education market, the primary
`trade show for SMC’s furniture products is hosted by the Association of College and University
`Housing Officers (ACUHO). Each year, ACUHO hosts one national event, along with a series of
`smaller regional events around the country.
`
`
`
`Page 6 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`PATENT US 8,585,136
`
`Sauder Manufacturing Company is the owner of United States Patent US 8,585,136 – CHAIR
`WITH COUPLING COMPANION STOOL BASE (i.e. “136”). I have personal knowledge of the
`personnel and the circumstances involved in the product development efforts and the
`marketing programs leading up to and including the successful commercialization of SMC’s
`invention.
`
`The following is convincing evidence that the product developed by SMC and described in
`United States Patent US 8,585,136 – CHAIR WITH COUPLING COMPANION STOOL BASE – is
`indeed the Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair, a product conceived, invented, and designed by
`SMC; since November 2006, Trey® is manufactured and commercialized by SMC.
`
`1. Trey® (# 78940227) is a registered trademark of Sauder Manufacturing Company,
`registered by the USPTO on September 25, 2007.
`
`2. The Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair on SMC’s website1 prominently displays US Patent #
`8,585,136 along with photographs and descriptions of Trey®. These depictions are
`consistent with the product as included in SMC’s promotional literature (Attachment 1
`and Attachment 2), a promotional video on YouTube2, and the specifications of the ‘136
`patent.
`
`3. Promotional literature created by SMC in 20063 and 20134 entitled “Trey Multi-Function
`Task Chair” closely follows the patent specifications, depicts what the ‘136 patent
`describes, and is supported by public media descriptions. This information is
`summarized in Table 1 on the following pages.
`
`
`1 Exhibit 2009, Sauder Education Page
`2 Exhibit 2010, Trey Chair Video; also available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tifTOsaXFAQ
`3 Exhibit 2011, Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair, © 2006
`4 Exhibit 2012, Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair, © 2013
`
`
`
`Page 7 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`
`Public Media Material
`PC Gamer Magazine5
`“Now you’ve got two pieces of furniture”
`Wall Street Journal6
`“The Trey Chair: The seat can be lifted off to
`create a low rocking chair and the base used as a
`computer table or stool.”
`Award: Plastic Parts Innovation7
`“The chair can be used as a standard chair, or the
`user can lift the seat from its base… [making] it a
`rocking chair when it is placed on the floor, while
`the flat base can be used as a table or a stool.”
`
`
`
`
` ‘136 Patent Language
`
`Patent Figure
`
`TABLE 1
`SMC Promotional Material
`
`
`
`
`
`‘136 Patent – Figure 18
`
`Trey Sales Literature – Attachment 1
`
`“combination of a chair and a stool
`base portion”
`
`Claim 1, line 23
`
`
`5 Exhibit 2013, PC Gamer Magazine, January 2008
`6 Exhibit 2014, Wall Street Journal, September 15, 2007
`7 Exhibit 2015, Plasticnews.com, April 9, 2007
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 8 of 102
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
` ‘136 Patent Language
`
`Patent Figure
`
`Table I (continued)
`SMC Promotional Material
`
`
`
`
`
`‘136 Patent - Figure 1
`
`Trey Sales Literature –
`Attachment 1
`
`in a first configuration…sitting
`portion being positioned above…”
`Claim 1, lines 32 - 34
`
`
`
`
`
`Public Media Material
`
`PC Gamer Magazine8
`“The Trey appears to be an ordinary
`armless office chair.”
`GIZMODO9
`“The chair looks like a normal office
`chair…”
`PC World10
`“Trey looks like a normal desk chair.
`It rests on a telescoping base that
`adjusts for height and swivels 360
`degrees.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8 Exhibit 2013, PC Gamer Magazine, January 2008
`9 Exhibit 2016, GIZMODO, May 8, 2007
`10 Exhibit 2017, PC World
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 9 of 102
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`Public Media Material
`
`PC World11
`“use the chair’s base as a stool”
`
`
`
`‘136 Patent Language
`
`Patent Figure
`
`Table I (continued)
`SMC Promotional Material
`
` “stool base portion…comprising a
`saddle”
`
`Claim 1, lines 22, 29 – 30
`
` “the base portion includes a
`pedestal that extends …generally
`upward to the saddle”
`Claim 9, lines 22 -23
`
`“the base portion… and includes a
`connector that operatively connects
`the saddle with the
`pedestal…whereby the saddle tilts
`relative to the pedestal…[and]
`swivels relative to the pedestal.”
`Claim 9, lines 21 - 27
`
`“stool base…comprises a plurality of
`chair legs radiating outwardly”
`Claim 13, lines 23 – 24
`
`“top surface [of the saddle] faces
`upward and defines at least one of a
`working surface, a writing surface
`and a sitting surface.”
`Claim 8, lines 17 – 19
`
`
`11 Exhibit 2017, PC World
`
`
`
`
`
`Stool Base ‘136 Patent, Fig 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Trey Sales Literature –
`Attachment 1
`
`‘136 Patent – Figure 23
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 10 of 102
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`
`
` ‘136 Patent Language
`
`Patent Figure
`
`Table I (continued)
`SMC Promotional Material
`
`‘136 Patent – Figure 19
`
`
`Trey® Sales Literature –
`Attachment 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`‘136 Patent – Figure 19
`
`Trey Sales Literature – Attachment 1
`
`
`
`
`
`“second configuration [where the]
`chair still functioning as a chair for
`said first user, and stool functioning
`so that said saddle is accessible … as
`a work surface”
`Claim 1, lines 36 – 40
`
` “two base legs extend arcuately
`downward from a lower portion left
`side…and…right side…with the base
`legs defining rockers.
`Claim 4, lines 63 – Col 12, line 3
`
`“rockers define protective rails”
`Claim 5, line 5
`
`
`12 Exhibit 2017, PC World
`13 Exhibit 2016, GIZMODO, May 8, 2007
`14 Exhibit 2013, PC Gamer Magazine, January 2008
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 11 of 102
`
`Public Media Material
`
`PC World12
`“…use the stand to work on a laptop
`computer while sitting near the
`floor.”
`GIZMODO13
`“…you can detach the back or the
`bottom in order to turn it into a
`stool, a rocking chair, a tray, a tiny
`chair, or a foot rest.”
`
`
`PC Gamer Magazine14
`“…a low-rise rocker”
`PC World8
`“Two built-in rails provide the chair
`with balance… In its converted form
`you can watch TV, or play video
`games and use the base as a stand
`for refreshments… while sitting near
`the floor.”
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`
`
`‘136 Patent Language
`
`Patent Figure
`
`SMC Promotional Material
`
`Public Media Material
`
`Table I
`(continued)
`
`PC Gamer Magazine16
`“…releases a catch that allows you to
`effortlessly lift the top portion away from
`the base. Now you’ve got two pieces of
`furniture”
`PCWorld17
`“...release latch enables you to pull the seat
`off the stand, and the seat and back frame
`become a stand-alone ‘floor rocker’ style
`chair,…use the chair’s base as a stool.”
`Treehugger.com18
`“with the push of a button hidden
`underneath, the Trey Chair …transforms”
`
`Attachment 1 – page 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` A
`
` promotion video published by
`SMC on Youtube.com in March 2007
`depicts the “manually operable
`means for releasably engaging” the
`chair to the saddle.15
`
`
`
`‘136 Patent – Fig 9
`
`
`
` “sitting portion including manually
`operable means for releasably
`engaging said chair and said base
`portion…[and] chair is releasably
`coupled to said saddle by said
`engaging means”
`Claim 12, lines 4 – 8
`
`“manually convertible …without
`requiring any manual manipulation
`of bolts, screws, nuts, or the use of
`any tools”
`
`Claim 10, lines 30 – 33
`
`
`15 Exhibit 2010, Trey Chair Video; also available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tifTOsaXFAQ
`16 Exhibit 2013, PC Gamer Magazine, January 2008
`17 Exhibit 2017, PC World
`18 Exhibit 2018, Treehugger.com, August 21, 2007
`
`
`
`Page 12 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`Table I
`(continued)
`
` ‘136 Patent Language
`
`Patent Figure
`
`SMC Promotional Material
`
`Public Media Material
`
`“…chair and said stool base portion
`are disconnected, said chair is
`supported by said base legs, and
`said base portion is positioned so as
`to serve as a side table or a work
`surface …[and] base legs function as
`rockers.”
`
`Claim 12, lines 11 – 16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`‘136 Patent – Figure 19
`
`
`Trey® Sales Literature –
`Attachment 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 13 of 102
`
`
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`STRATEGIC CONTEXT FOR THE INVENTION
`
`After joining Sauder Woodworking Company as Vice President, Business Strategy in 2003, I was
`asked to collaborate with senior executives across the company and its subsidiaries to address
`specific business challenges. One of my key assignments was to consult with the Executive
`Team at Sauder Manufacturing Company.
`
`SMC was experiencing competitive pressure in the market. From 2000 to 2005, the unit volume
`of bent plywood chairs sold by SMC into student dorm rooms declined by 25%; dollar sales
`volume declined by 18%; and profit declined by 40%.
`
`Student dorm room chairs were generally considered to be commodity products with no
`meaningful differentiation in design or function.19
`
`
`
`
`19 Exhibit 2019, Wood Chairs (depicting examples of wood and bent plywood chairs sold by SMC and its
`competitors for student dorm room seating during this timeframe. These images were compiled as part of the
`business case that precipitated the inventions in the Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair)
`
`
`
`Page 14 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`SMC owned US Patent US D 329,340 that covered the design of SMC’s bent plywood “3-position
`chair”. The 3-position chair generated 22% more profit per unit sold than simpler versions of
`other bent plywood chairs sold by SMC into student dorm rooms.
`
`Patent US D 329,340 was expiring in 2006 and SMC’s Executive Team anticipated an
`unfavorable impact on the company’s profitability.
`
`In response, SMC initiated market research to identify areas of opportunity within university
`residence halls generally, and within the student room specifically.
`
`The events and conclusions associated with the research I describe in the following pages, up to
`and including page 18 of this declaration, are derived primarily from information shared with
`me by other persons. This information is consistent with the written and electronic records
`available to me at SMC. I believe them to be true.
`
`In August 2003, SMC retained ELEVEN, LLC20, a Boston-based design and engineering consulting
`firm, to assist SMC’s research and development efforts.
`
`Benjamin Beck, David Harting, and Thomas Hagerty from ELEVEN participated in the
`collaborative research and the collaborative development efforts with SMC.
`
`The research efforts included visiting student residence halls on university campuses,
`interviewing students and residence life housing officers, and observing student activities in
`student rooms.
`
`During this same time period, several SMC customers and sales representatives in the
`education market were expressing dissatisfaction with the bent plywood chairs for the student
`room offered by SMC and its competitors. As an alternate solution, some customers began
`purchasing traditional office desk chairs from office supply stores. But these, too, were not
`
`
`20 http://www.eleven.net/; see also David Harting Declaration Exhibit
`
`
`
`Page 15 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`optimal solutions for student room seating. The durability and the price of desk chairs from
`office supply stores were not satisfactory.
`
`So to bolster its deteriorating performance in student chairs in residence halls, in 2003, SMC
`elected to narrow the research effort with ELEVEN to a product development initiative focused
`on the chair used by students in their on-campus dorm room.
`
`The research revealed that seating-related needs in student dorm rooms included more than
`merely a place to sit while studying at a desk.
`
`Students liked to relax in their rooms; the use of technology was rapidly changing; students
`were sitting more casually when they studied with a laptop computer; students had televisions,
`gaming stations, and DVD players for entertainment and relaxation in the dorm room; students
`were bringing in “bean bag” chairs to provide more comfortable seating.
`
`However, physical space remained limited and the “image” of the student residence hall
`environment was a strong influence in the student’s decision of where to attend college.
`
`Students were participating in a broad range of activities and tasks in the dorm room, physical
`space limitations made traditional furniture solutions impractical; yet, student dorm room
`seating had remained largely unchanged for decades.
`
`SMC perceived an opportunity …and believed it was significant.
`
`What began as an effort to bolster the deteriorating performance of SMC’s bent plywood chairs
`in the dorm room, i.e. “a new chair,” evolved into pursuing a concept much broader than “just
`another new chair,” a concept that was expected to require new, but not yet known,
`inventions.
`
`The persons charged with developing “a new bent plywood chair” began to reach beyond their
`original task, seeking to understand and explore unmet furniture needs in university dorm
`
`
`
`Page 16 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`rooms. They focused their research on potentially innovative solutions to problems not
`addressed by traditional seating.
`
`In the research, SMC and ELEVEN identified several key attributes needed in a new, proposed
`student chair for the dorm room. These attributes included:
`
`1. Provide multiple solutions to the seating and task needs of the active student life style
`within the limited physical space of a student dorm room. This included being able to:
`
`a. function as a traditional “desk” or “task” chair while the student is studying or
`working at their desk in the traditional posture and position21,
`
`b. function as a “sit-low,” floor-based chair with a cooperating work surface
`accessible while seated in the casual postures observed during the field research,
`
`c. provide additional seating for other guests or visitors to the student room,
`
`2. The durability to withstand the harsh conditions and abuse residence hall furniture is
`subjected to by university students,
`
`3. A design that was contemporary, intuitive, and simple to use:
`
`a. One person could change between multiple configurations without using any
`tools,
`
`b. Each separable item constituted an independently-functioning item of furniture
`without any additional parts and pieces to store or lose when not in use,
`
`4. Maximize product safety to minimize the risk of user injury, and
`
`5. Provide a solution to customers at a competitive price.
`
`
`21 “Desk chair” and “task chair” generally are considered synonymous terms.
`
`
`
`Page 17 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`The overall objective of SMC’s development project was to meet the active lifestyle needs of
`young adults living in the confined space of a college dorm room.
`
`As part of my strategy consulting role with the SMC Executive Team during 2004 – 2005, I was
`generally aware of the on-going product development effort for SMC’s new chair for the
`student dorm room, internally code-named “FLASK” (Floor and Task Chair).
`
`In mid-2005, then President and CEO of Sauder Manufacturing, Virgil Miller, was anticipating
`retirement following 40+ years of service with the company. I was asked to transition from my
`position as Vice President, Business Strategy at Sauder Woodworking Co. and assume the role
`of President and Chief Executive Officer of Sauder Manufacturing Company.
`
`I was named President and Chief Executive Officer of SMC in October 2005. Soon thereafter, I
`requested and I received an extensive review of the FLASK project – the research that had been
`conducted, the learnings and conclusions from the same, sales and profit projections, the
`project costs already incurred, the anticipated remaining development costs, and any remaining
`engineering , manufacturing, or marketing challenges.
`
`In April 2006, I approved the last significant remaining expenditure necessary to commercialize
`the FLASK chair: more than $600,000 to purchase tooling to manufacture the injection-molded
`plastic chair frame and the associated components.
`
`In November 2006, SMC introduced the Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair to its sales
`representatives for the education market.
`
`SMC’s development effort for the Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair lasted more than 3 years
`(August 2003 to November 2006), during which time SMC expended more than $1.2 million in
`external costs to research, design, engineer, and test the product. This does not include the
`internal costs such as the compensation of SMC employees working on the project.
`
`
`
`Page 18 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`Even with SMC’s extensive experience designing and manufacturing seating for contract
`furniture markets since 1945 and with its experience designing and manufacturing chairs
`specifically for the education market since 198322, the solutions invented by SMC to overcome
`the design, engineering, and manufacturing challenges encountered on the path to perfecting
`the chair were not obvious. SMC encountered multiple obstacles to successfully inventing and
`commercializing SMC’s Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair. These obstacles were overcome with
`the significant effort and collaboration of both SMC’s internal resources and contracted
`external resources.
`
`
`
`
`22 Exhibit 20, About Sauder; see also http://www.saudereducation.com/about_us/our_history.asp
`
`
`Page 19 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION OF THE ‘136 PATENT
`
`
`
`The Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the
`“Board”) issued two preliminary determinations in response to petitions for an Inter Partes
`Review of SMC’s ‘136 patent. The Board’s determinations are IPR2015-00958 (“IPR ‘958”) and
`IPR2015-00774 (“IPR ‘774”); both are dated August 24, 2015.
`
`I was asked to provide an opinion construing the ‘136 patent claim language by a person having
`ordinary skill in the art of institutional seating and within the context of the entire ‘136 patent
`specification.
`
`I have read and I have reviewed the ‘136 patent. I understand its terminology, its pictorial
`representations, and its descriptions of the invention.
`
`I believe the claims in the ‘136 patent accurately describe not only SMC’s Trey® Multi-Function
`Task Chair; they also accurately describe University Loft’s WAVE / VECTOR23.
`
`I understand patent claims are to be interpreted and understood within the context of the
`overall patent specification. These include the ABSTRACT, FIGURES, BACKGROUND OF THE
`INVENTION, BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION, BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS
`OF THE DRAWING, and the DETAILED DESCRIPTION.
`
`When interpreting the patent claims, particular weight is giv en to the terms also used in the
`specification to identify and describe in more detail particular components and / or functions.
`
`An initial, superficial reading of the ‘136 patent may fail to fully comprehend the robust
`complexity of the invention. A superficial reading, particularly by one having limited familiarity
`
`
`23 WAVE / VECTOR is a competitive product I will describe in greater detail later in this Declaration.
`
`
`
`Page 20 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`with the design, the functions, the structures, the engineering, and the manufacture of
`institutional seating, easily leads to false conclusions. This patent, after all, appears to be for
`“just a chair.”
`
`The development process for the Trey® Multi-Functional Task Chair by necessity created new
`structures and elements not found in existing products. New elements were invented to (1)
`achieve multiple functions valued by students using only simple, intuitive manipulations, (2)
`stay within the constraints of physical dimensions and cost, and (3) ensure user safety.
`
`There are elements of ‘136 that to the uninitiated appear common or ordinary; however, the
`Trey® Multi-Function Task Chair combines ordinary elements with new, unique inventions and
`integrates them into one innovative product.
`
`The Trey® chair includes the elements of a traditional task chair: (1) a seat, (2) a backrest, and
`(3) a pedestal base that supports the chair and allows the chair to tilt and swivel relative to the
`pedestal.
`
`The heart of the invention in Trey® lies at the intersection of the chair and the pedestal base:
`(1) a saddle on top of the pedestal base, (2) structures beneath the sitting portion of the chair
`that provide the releasably engaging means to lock the chair to the saddle, and (3) arcuate
`rocker legs straddling the saddle beneath the chair when in the first configuration.
`
`The commercial success since first introduced to customers provides objective evidence that
`Trey® Multi-Functional Task Chair is more than “just a chair.” The innovations that were
`conceived, and ultimately invented, provide solutions that traditional dorm room chairs do not.
`
`
`
`Page 21 of 102
`
`
`
`REDACTED Sauder Exhibit 2008
`JSquared Inc. v Sauder Manufacturing Co.
`IPR2015-00774
`
`

`
`COMBINATION OF A CHAIR AND A STOOL BASE
`
`Patent ‘136 begins with the phrase a combination of a chair and a stool base (‘136, Col 10, line
`22).
`
`The ‘136 patent describes an invention with two units of furniture: (1) a chair and (2) a stool
`base. This is a definitive statement: a combination of a chair and a stool base. There are only
`two units. It is not an open-ended statement.
`
`The claim language does not say, “A combination comprising a chair and a stool base” which
`allows for components in addition to the chair and the stool base.
`
`This definitive interpretation reflects the choice of claim language: “A combination of a chair
`and a stool base” (‘136, Col 10, line 22) (emphasis added), and is consistent with descriptions
`throughout the entire patent specification.
`
`The chair and the stool base can be placed into a first configuration (‘136, Claim 1, Col 10, line
`32) and into a second confi