DECLARATION OF SCOTT ANDREWS
`
`I, Scott Andrews, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I hold a B.Sc. degree in Electrical Engineering from University of
`
`California–Irvine and a M.Sc. degree in Electronic Engineering from Stanford
`
`University. In various positions at, among others, TRW and Toyota, I have been
`
`responsible for research and development projects relating to, among others,
`
`numerous remote vehicle control devices and vehicle information systems. My
`
`qualifications are further set forth in my curriculum vitae (Exhibit A). I have been
`
`retained by Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. in connection with its petition for
`
`inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 6,542,076 (“the ’076 patent”). I have over
`
`25 years of experience in fields relevant to the ’076 patent, including remote
`
`vehicle control systems.
`
`2.
`
`I have reviewed the ’076 patent, as well as its prosecution history and the
`
`prior art cited during its prosecution. I have also reviewed the prosecution history
`
`of the ex parte reexamination of the ’076 patent, Reexamination Control No.
`
`90/013,302 (“the ’302 reexamination”), and
`
`the prior art cited
`
`in
`
`the
`
`reexamination. I have also reviewed U.S. Patent No. 6,072,402 (“Kniffin”), U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,113,427 (“Ryoichi”), U.S. Patent No. 5,732,074 (“Spaur”), U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,726,984 (“Kubler,”), U.S. Patent No. 5,808,566 (“Behr”), and U.S.
`
`Patent No. 4,602,127 (“Neely”).
`
`- 1 -
`
`VWGoA - Ex. 1002
`Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Petitioner
`
`1
`
`
`
`I, Scott Andrews, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I hold a B.Sc. degree in Electrical Engineering from University of
`
`California–Irvine and a M.Sc. degree in Electronic Engineering from Stanford
`
`University. In various positions at, among others, TRW and Toyota, I have been
`
`responsible for research and development projects relating to, among others,
`
`numerous remote vehicle control devices and vehicle information systems. My
`
`qualifications are further set forth in my curriculum vitae (Exhibit A). I have been
`
`retained by Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. in connection with its petition for
`
`inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 6,542,076 (“the ’076 patent”). I have over
`
`25 years of experience in fields relevant to the ’076 patent, including remote
`
`vehicle control systems.
`
`2.
`
`I have reviewed the ’076 patent, as well as its prosecution history and the
`
`prior art cited during its prosecution. I have also reviewed the prosecution history
`
`of the ex parte reexamination of the ’076 patent, Reexamination Control No.
`
`90/013,302 (“the ’302 reexamination”), and
`
`the prior art cited
`
`in
`
`the
`
`reexamination. I have also reviewed U.S. Patent No. 6,072,402 (“Kniffin”), U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,113,427 (“Ryoichi”), U.S. Patent No. 5,732,074 (“Spaur”), U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,726,984 (“Kubler,”), U.S. Patent No. 5,808,566 (“Behr”), and U.S.
`
`Patent No. 4,602,127 (“Neely”).
`
`- 1 -
`
`VWGoA - Ex. 1002
`Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Petitioner
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`The ’076 Patent
`
`3.
`
`The ’076 patent relates to a remote-controlled control, monitoring, and/or
`
`security apparatus, linked to various vehicle systems like alarms, horns, power
`
`door locks, video recording devices, phones, or vehicle recovery systems. Col. 4,
`
`ll. 43-63. A remote transmitter system 2, such as a touch tone telephone, transmits
`
`signals to a receiver 3, such as a beeper or pager system. Col. 18, l. 64-col. 19, l. 2;
`
`col. 19, ll. 57-61; col. 19, l. 66–col. 20, l. 1. A CPU 4 receives signals from the
`
`receiver 3 and controls vehicle systems by activating or deactivating the vehicle
`
`systems. Col. 20, ll. 61–67; col. 21, l. 46–col. 22, l. 37; 24, l. 66–col. 25, l. 3.
`
`4.
`
`The claims of the ’076 patent describe the above-described sequence of
`
`control among three devices. One control device is located at a vehicle, another
`
`control device is located remote from the vehicle, and another control device is
`
`located remote from the other remote control device and remote from the vehicle.
`
`One of the remote control devices sends a control signal to the other remote control
`
`device, which responds by sending a control signal to the control device in the
`
`vehicle. In response, the control device in the vehicle activates or deactivates a
`
`vehicle component.
`
`5.
`
`The claims of the ’076 patent recite the above-described sequence of control
`
`signals among three control devices. The claims vary, however, in the naming of
`
`the control devices. In independent claims 3 and 73, and their dependent claims,
`
`- 2 -
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`the “first control device” is located at a vehicle, and is responsive to signals from
`
`the “second control device,” which is in turn responsive to signals from the “third
`
`control device.” In independent claim 205, the “third control device” is located at
`
`the vehicle, and is responsive to signals sent from the “second control device,”
`
`which in turn is responsive to signals sent from the “first control device.” Thus, my
`
`understanding of the claims and the disclosure of the prior art documents is
`
`independent of these naming conventions.
`
`6.
`
`According to my understanding of the prosecution of the ’076 patent,
`
`application claim 47, which would eventually issue as claim 3 of the ’076 patent,
`
`recited the chain of three control devices:
`
`47. A control apparatus, which comprises:
`a first control device, wherein said first control device at least one of
`generates a first signal and transmits a first signal for at least one of
`activating, deactivating, enabling, and disabling, at least one of a
`vehicle at least one of system, equipment system, subsystem, device,
`component, and appliance, and a vehicle, wherein said first control
`device is located at the vehicle,
`wherein said first control device at least one of generates the first
`signal and transmits said first signal in response to a second signal,
`wherein the second signal is at least one of generated by a second
`control device and transmitted from a second control device, wherein
`the second control device is located at a location which is remote from
`the vehicle, and further wherein the second control device at least one
`
`- 3 -
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`7.
`
`of generates the second signal and transmits the second signal in
`response to a third signal,
`wherein the third signal is at least one of generated by a third control
`device and transmitted from a third control device, wherein the third
`control device is located at a location which is remote from the
`vehicle and remote from the second control device.
`After Joao cancelled several claims, added new claims, and submitted a
`
`terminal disclaimer over the parent patent U.S. Patent No. 5,917,405, and a related
`
`patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,549,130, a Notice of Allowance was issued on May 30,
`
`2001. The Examiner provided the following reasons for allowance, identifying the
`
`chain of three control devices:
`
`[T]here are no references teaching of a control apparatus for
`controlling of at least one of activating, deactivating, enabling and
`disabling of at least one of a vehicle and a premises having at least
`one of system, subsystem, component, equipment and appliance,
`wherein the first control device is responsive to a second signal and
`the second signal is at least generated by a second control device
`which is located remote from the vehicle and the premises. And
`further wherein the second control device is responsive to a third
`signal which is generated by a third control device which is located at
`a location remote from the vehicle and the premises and remote from
`the second control device.
`
`- 4 -
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`8.
`
`It is my understanding that, while prosecution continued after this allowance
`
`with a series of claim additions, cancellations, and minor amendments, the chain of
`
`control devices remained recited.
`
`9.
`
`I further understand
`
`that
`
`the ’076 patent
`
`is currently subject
`
`to
`
`reexamination, and that during the reexamination, the Examiner determined that
`
`Kniffin and Ryoichi, for example, raise substantial new questions of patentability
`
`affecting claim 3. I further understand that claim 3 currently stands rejected on
`
`several grounds, including being rejected as anticipated by Ryoichi.
`
`Kniffin – Claims 3, 18, 65, 67, 68, 70, 73, 91, 103, 116, 119, 120, and 205
`
`10. Kniffin discloses all of the limitations of claims 3, 18, 65, 67, 68, 70, 73, 91,
`
`103, 116, 119, 120, and 205, including the sequence of control signals passed
`
`among three control devices, which was the basis for allowance of the ’076 patent.
`
`11. Kniffin describes a secure entry system 10, including telephone 22,
`
`communications link 16, clearinghouse 18 connected to RF transmission system
`
`26, and access control devices 12 or 64 having RF receiver 14. Col. 2, ll. 25-53,
`
`col. 8, ll. 11-14.
`
`12. The chain of three control devices described by Kniffin includes an access
`
`control device 64 (located in the vehicle), clearinghouse 18 or 66 (located remote
`
`from the vehicle), and communications link 16 and telephone 22 (located remote
`
`from the vehicle and the clearinghouse). A user may establish communication via
`
`- 5 -
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`communications link 16, from a cellular or conventional telephone 22, to
`
`clearinghouse 18 or 66, and, after an authorization check, the clearinghouse 18 or
`
`66 transmits radio signals over RF transmission system 26 to access control device
`
`12 or 64, via RF receiver 14. Col. 2, ll. 25-53, col. 8, ll. 11-14. In the vehicle
`
`embodiment, access control device 64 controls door locks on a truck 62. Col. 8, ll.
`
`11-14, 46-48; Fig. 4.
`
`13.
`
`In describing its system in the context of the delivery truck 62, Kniffin
`
`describes that a delivery company will send a schedule of deliveries to
`
`clearinghouse 66. Clearinghouse 66 verifies the schedule, and transmits the
`
`schedule to truck access control device 64. The schedule is then stored in memory
`
`68. Col. 8, ll. 15-24. That is, the truck access control device 64, i.e., the first
`
`control device located in the vehicle, is responsive to signals from clearinghouse
`
`66, i.e., the second control device located remote from the vehicle. See also, col. 8,
`
`ll. 61-67. The lock 12 includes a lock microprocessor CPU 30 that instructs a lock
`
`mechanism 32 to unlock. Col. 8, ll. 46-48; col. 3, l. 64-col. 4, l. 3.
`
`14. Because Kniffin describes a first device, located at a vehicle (access control
`
`device 12 or 64), controlling a vehicle component (door lock or memory),
`
`responsive to a signal from a second control device, located remote from the
`
`vehicle (clearinghouse 18 or 66), which is in turn responsive to a signal from a
`
`third control device (telephone 22 and communications link 16), located remote
`
`- 6 -
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`from the vehicle and from the second control device, Kniffin addresses the
`
`Examiner’s reasons for allowing the claims of the ’130 patent.
`
`15. As noted above, the claims of the ’076 patent vary in naming the three
`
`control devices. That is, the “first control device” in claims 3 and 73 corresponds
`
`to the “third control device” in claim 205. The “second control device” recited by
`
`claims 3 and 73 corresponds to the “second control device” in claim 205, while the
`
`“third control device” in claims 3 and 73 corresponds to the “first control device”
`
`in claim 205. As further noted above, my understanding of the claims and the
`
`disclosure of the prior art documents is independent of the naming conventions
`
`applied in the various claims.
`
`16. Kniffin further describes the use of an identification means 28 that allows a
`
`user to identify himself to the lock. For example, Kniffin describes a keypad
`
`associated with the lock through which the user can enter a PIN number or other
`
`identifying data, and also describes entering this information into a key and
`
`coupling the key to the lock. Col. 3, ll. 50-56. Once this identification is made, the
`
`lock microprocessor CPU 30 instructs the lock mechanism 32 to unlock. Col. 3, ll.
`
`64-66.
`
`17. Kniffin discloses that the access control device 64 is adapted to secure the
`
`doors of the truck 62 and guard against unauthorized opening. Col. 8, ll. 11-14 and
`
`46-48. Further, the access control device 64 includes a lock mechanism adapted to
`
`- 7 -
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`secure the doors of the truck 62, and the lock 12 includes a lock microprocessor
`
`CPU 30 that instructs a lock mechanism 32 to unlock. Col. 8, ll. 46-48; see also
`
`col. 3, l. 64-col. 4, l. 3.
`
`18. Kniffin further discloses that the clearinghouse 66 transmits the schedule to
`
`the truck access control device 64, where the schedule is stored in memory 68. Col.
`
`8, ll. 15-24. The access control device 64 then senses for an identification device
`
`70 at each delivery stop, and if one is detected that corresponds to the first
`
`programmed stop, the access control devices unlocks the truck. Col 8, ll. 25-33.
`
`19. Kniffin also discloses that the clearinghouse 18 reports back to the user
`
`regarding the action taken on the user’s request; for example, Kniffin describes the
`
`use of a voice synthesizer to inform the user whether access permission is granted
`
`and information about any access window period. In addition, Kniffin also states
`
`that the clearinghouse can relay any status information, whether it is lock-specific
`
`information or information relating to the administration of the lock system. Col. 2,
`
`l. 54-col. 3, l. 12; see also col. 9, ll. 5-8.
`
`20. Kniffin further describes that the truck access control device 64 monitors for
`
`the presence or absence of identification devices 70 at delivery locations. Col. 8, ll.
`
`25-27 and 40-43. Kniffin describes the transmission of data by the access control
`
`device as identifying identification devices encountered by the truck so the central
`
`station can track the truck through its route. Col. 9, ll. 5-8. According to Kniffin,
`
`- 8 -
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`this reporting can be done in real-time as accesses occur, or when the number of
`
`accesses exceeds a given threshold. Col. 4, ll. 52-65.
`
`21. Kniffin discloses that the clearinghouse 18 can relay any status information
`
`regarding the lock 12 to the user through the communications link 16, such as a
`
`person’s approach. Col. 2, l. 62-col. 3, l. 6. According to Kniffin, it is often
`
`desirable to confirm the entry of a person into a secured area using a sensor (the
`
`monitoring device) and log this fact into an access log memory. Col. 4, ll. 15-19.
`
`As shown in Figure 1, the lock 12 includes a memory 34 and a sensor 36, and
`
`Kniffin describes forwarding access data in real-time or after a threshold number
`
`of entries is reached using a paging system, a cellular telephone service, or other
`
`RF carrier. Col. 4, ll. 52-65; see also col. 2, ll. 46-51. And the truck access control
`
`device 64 monitors for identification devices 70 at delivery locations and reports
`
`the identification devices encountered by on the truck’s route. Col. 8, ll. 25-27 and
`
`40-43; col. 9, ll. 5-8.
`
`Kniffin – Claims 94 and 110
`
`22. Claims 94 and 110 are obvious in view of Kniffin.
`
`23. Kniffin describes an access control device 64 (the in-vehicle control device)
`
`managing access to the doors of a delivery truck 62 based on a schedule received
`
`from clearinghouse 66. Col. 3, l. 64-col. 4, l. 3. Clearinghouse 66 includes a
`
`computer and an RF transmission system for transmitting the verified schedule of
`
`- 9 -
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`stops to the access control device, and Kniffin discloses that this transmission may
`
`be made by a paging system, and cellular telephone system or other RF carrier
`
`depending upon the type of receiver equipped with the lock. Col. 2, ll. 35-38 and
`
`44-51; col. 8, ll. 21-24 and 46-48.
`
`24. Claim 94 describes that “the apparatus is utilized on or over at least one of
`
`the Internet and the World Wide Web,” and claim 110 describes that “the third
`
`control device [which is located remote from the vehicle and remote from the
`
`second control device] at least of activates, de-activates, disables, re-enables,
`
`control an operation of, and monitors an operation of, the at least one of a vehicle
`
`system, a vehicle component, a vehicle device, a vehicle equipment, a vehicle
`
`equipment system, and a vehicle appliance, via the second control device [which is
`
`remote from the vehicle] and the first control device [which is located at the
`
`vehicle] on or over at least one of the Internet and the World Wide Web.”
`
`25. The use of the Internet or World Wide Web in vehicle control systems was
`
`well-known at the time the ’076 patent was filed, as evidenced, for example, by
`
`Spaur, Behr, and Kubler.
`
`26. Spaur describes communicating with a vehicle using a remote computer
`
`terminal via the Internet and World Wide Web. Col. 2, ll. 42-48; col. 3, ll. 13-20;
`
`col. 7, ll. 40-47; col. 12, ll. 51-54. For example, Spaur describes a CD-ROM unit as
`
`a vehicle device 50 having an Internet Protocol (IP) address, which is recognized
`
`- 10 -
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`by a controller 30 (the control device that is located at the vehicle). The controller
`
`30 includes an applet associated with the IP address, and the controller 30 sends
`
`this applet via the Internet 68 to a user’s web browser 72 on a computer terminal
`
`60 (the control device that is remote from the vehicle and remote from the middle
`
`control device). Col. 11, ll. 49-52. In Spaur’s system, a remote CDPD network
`
`modem 76 constitutes the middle control device located remote from the vehicle;
`
`the computer terminal 60 is remote from the CDPD network modem 76. See, e.g.,
`
`Figure 2. Spaur states that the computer terminal 60 displays buttons representing
`
`the CD-ROM unit’s controls and that the user can “click on” these buttons shown
`
`on the computer terminal 60 to cause certain operations with the CD-ROM unit in
`
`the vehicle. Col. 11, ll. 52-57. Spaur thus describes the chain of three control
`
`devices as claimed in the ’130 patent.
`
`27.
`
`In addition, Behr describes an electronic navigation system in which a base
`
`unit provides route guidance, tracking information, and other information to a
`
`remote unit over wireless, wireline, or optical devices. Abstract, col. 1, ll. 19-26.
`
`This communication may take place over one or more wireless or wireline
`
`communication networks, such as CDPD (cellular digital patent data) or TCP/IP
`
`(transmission control protocol/Internet Protocol). Col. 9, ll. 38-42. According to an
`
`example in Behr, a mobile unit may be located in an armored vehicle transporting
`
`valuables along a specified route. A control unit monitoring the mobile unit may
`
`- 11 -
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`request tracking information from the base unit, and if the mobile unit in the
`
`vehicle varies from the specified route by a predetermined amount, the control unit
`
`can sound an alarm or trigger another action. Col. 9, ll. 48-56.
`
`28. Further, Kubler describes a hierarchical communication system in which
`
`wired and wireless networks, including the Internet, are used to communicate
`
`between stationary and roaming devices, such as a vehicle-mounted computer
`
`terminal. Abstract, col. 8, ll. 25-59.
`
`29. At the time the ’076 patent was filed, the use of the Internet or World Wide
`
`Web to communicate with a vehicle would have been obvious at least because the
`
`Internet provides an infrastructure and signal transmission capabilities that are
`
`superior to the RF transmission capabilities described by Kniffin.
`
`The Combination of Kniffin and Neely – Claim 96
`
`30. The combination of Kniffin and Neely discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 96.
`
`31. Neely describes a vehicular diagnostic system employing a portable
`
`communications control station. Col. 1, ll. 12-15. As shown in Figure 1 below, the
`
`diagnostic system 10 includes a portable communications control station 12 and
`
`remote data processing station 14. The control station 12 is adapted to be employed
`
`in connection with a vehicle 16 having an on-board computer 17 with access to one
`
`or more of the operating parameters. Col. 3, ll. 40-66. The control station 12 also
`
`- 12 -
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`includes a telephone 36, which permits both voice and data communication
`
`between the control station 12 and the data processing station 14, and the use of the
`
`telephone system allows for the diagnosis of a vehicle at any location remote from
`
`the station 14. Col. 4, l. 42-col. 5, l. 10. The diagnostic system further includes a
`
`call indicator light 70 used to switch between data communication and voice
`
`communication, which, according to Neely, is advantageous because it permits the
`
`station operator to convey the diagnosis of a vehicle problem immediately after the
`
`data parameter has been analyzed. Col. 6, ll. 44-56.
`
`
`
`32. As noted above, Kniffin states that the clearinghouse 18 can relay any status
`
`information regarding the lock 12 to the user through the communications link 16,
`
`and that the truck access control device 64 monitors for the presence or absence of
`
`identification devices 70 at delivery locations. Col. 2, l. 62-col. 3, l. 6; col. 8, ll. 25-
`
`27 and 40-43. Neely describes a vehicular diagnostic system using a telephone for
`
`voice and data communication to convey diagnostic information. Col. 4, l. 42-col.
`
`5, l. 10; col. 6, ll. 44-56.
`
`- 13 -
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`33. At the time the ’076 patent was filed, it would have been obvious to combine
`
`the secure entry system described by Kniffin with the vehicular diagnostic system
`
`described by Neely, at least because both describe the communication of
`
`information regarding the operation of vehicle components from the vehicle to
`
`remotely located devices, and Neely describes a system for voice and data
`
`communication of the status information relayed by Kniffin. Kniffin, col. 2, l. 62-
`
`col. 3, l. 6; Neely, col. 4, l. 42-col. 5, l. 10; col. 6, ll. 44-56. In addition, Kniffin
`
`discloses equipping delivery trucks and “retrofitting [access control devices] into
`
`existing applications and installations,” and Neely’s portable communications
`
`control station is “capable of servicing a variety of vehicle models over a number
`
`of model years.” Kniffin, col. 8, ll. 11-14 and col. 9, ll. 49-52; Neely, col. 2, ll. 31-
`
`34.
`
`Ryoichi – Claims 3, 18, 65, 67, 70, 73, 91, 103, 116, 119, and 205
`
`34. Ryoichi discloses all of the limitations of claims 3, 18, 65, 67, 70, 73, 91,
`
`103, 116, 119, 120, and 205, including the sequence of control signals passed
`
`between three control devices, which was the basis for allowance of the ’076
`
`patent.
`
`35. Ryoichi describes a vehicle device control system including a personal radio
`
`paging unit 9 (located at the vehicle), a fixed radio station St (located remote from
`
`the vehicle), and a telephone unit TEL (located remote from the fixed radio station
`
`- 14 -
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`St and located remote from the vehicle). Ryoichi provides for the control of an
`
`“automobile-mounted device” in which the telephone unit sends information
`
`related to controlling a device to a paging center, which subsequently sends paging
`
`signals containing the control information over the paging network. These are
`
`received by the paging unit in the vehicle, and are used to control various vehicle
`
`components. As examples, Ryoichi describes the control of door locks, engine
`
`ignition, headlights, etc. Abstract, col. 5, l. 16-col. 6, l. 9; col. 8, l. 1-col. 10, l. 27;
`
`Figs. 5-7).
`
`36. The chain of three control devices described by Ryoichi includes: personal
`
`radio paging unit 9 (located at the vehicle); fixed radio station St (located remote
`
`from the vehicle); and telephone unit TEL (located remote from the vehicle and the
`
`fixed radio station St).
`
`37. To send a control signal to the vehicle, a user of Ryoichi’s system inputs the
`
`telephone number for personal radio paging unit 9 in the telephone unit TEL. The
`
`user then enters a number into the telephone key pad, the number operating as a
`
`code corresponding to a particular control program that the user would like to
`
`initiate in the vehicle. The telephone unit TEL communicates with radio station St,
`
`and radio station St subsequently radiates a paging signal representing the coded
`
`number. The radio paging unit 9 receives the radiated paging signals representing
`
`the coded number. Col. 7, l. 60-col. 8, l. 1. In response to this signal, radio paging
`
`- 15 -
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`unit 9, located in the vehicle, generates audible tones representing the coded
`
`number, and those tones are detected by a sensor 10. As described by Ryoichi, the
`
`sensor 10 converts the detected tones into an electric signal, a code converter 11
`
`converts the signal into a digital code signal, and a control unit S reads the digital
`
`code signal to execute a program corresponding to the coded number entered by
`
`the user. Col. 8, ll. 1-22; see also col. 5, ll. 16-22, col. 4, l. 57-col. 5, l. 15; Fig. 2.
`
`Ryoichi identifies several control programs, including unlocking the doors (col. 8,
`
`l. 51-col. 9, l. 17), turning on the headlights (col. 9, ll. 18-64), or starting the engine
`
`(col. 10, ll. 9-12), and further states that “various control programs for remotely
`
`controlling other devices in the automobile” are possible (col. 10, ll. 22-27). That
`
`is, radio paging unit 9, i.e., the first control device located at the vehicle, is
`
`responsive to signals from fixed radio station St, i.e., the second control device
`
`located remote from the vehicle, which is responsive to signals from the telephone
`
`unit TEL, i.e., the third control device located remote from the vehicle and remote
`
`form the second control device.
`
`38. Because Ryoichi describes a first control device, located at a vehicle (radio
`
`paging unit 9), controlling a vehicle component (e.g., door locks, headlights,
`
`engine), responsive to a signal from a second control device, located remote from
`
`the vehicle (radio station St), which is in turn responsive to a signal from a third
`
`control device (telephone unit TEL), located remote from the vehicle and from the
`
`- 16 -
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`second control device, Ryoichi addresses the Examiner’s reasons for allowing the
`
`claims of the ’076 patent.
`
`39. As noted above, the claims of the ’076 patent vary in naming the three
`
`control devices. That is, the “first control device” in claims 3 and 73 corresponds
`
`to the “third control device” in claim 205. The “second control device” recited by
`
`claims 3 and 73 corresponds to the “second control device” in claim 205, while the
`
`“third control device” in claims 3 and 73 corresponds to the “first control device”
`
`in claim 205. As further noted above, my understanding of the claims and the
`
`disclosure of the prior art documents is independent of the naming conventions
`
`applied in the various claims.
`
`40. Further, I understand that Joao has argued, during the reexamination of the
`
`’076 patent, that the signal from telephone unit TEL to the radio station St is
`
`merely relayed, unchanged, when it is radiated in its radio wave form to radio
`
`paging unit 9. First, based on my understanding of the claims of the ’076 patent,
`
`none of the claims require that a signal communicated between the three control
`
`devices is modified in some way from the signals to which it is responding.
`
`Second, Ryoichi describes the input to the telephone unit TEL as dialing the
`
`“pushbuttons of a general wire telephone.” Col. 7, ll. 60-64. Such a general wire
`
`telephone sends wired signals to radio station St, as illustrated in Figure 1, below.
`
`The wired signals received by the radio station St are changed at least in that the
`
`- 17 -
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`wired signals are converted to radio waves, transmitted through the air. Moreover,
`
`the radio paging unit 9 generates acoustic signals in response to radio signals
`
`received from the paging system. Col. 5, ll. 16-25.
`
`
`
`41. Ryoichi discloses that the personal radio paging unit 9 (the first control
`
`device) generates sounds representing message signals, which are converted into
`
`code readable by the control unit S to execute a control program. Ryoichi lists
`
`several examples of such programs, including controlling the handbrake, unlocking
`
`the doors, turning on the headlights, or starting the engine. Col. 4, l. 57-col. 5, l.
`
`15, col. 8, ll. 1-22.
`
`- 18 -
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`42. Ryoichi also discloses that the system includes a memory M in which
`
`programs for remotely controlling other vehicle devices can be stored for execution
`
`by the control unit S. Col. 4, l. 57-col. 5, l. 15, col. 8, ll. 1-22
`
`43. Ryoichi further discloses that when the sensor 10 detects a calling sound
`
`generated by the paging unit 9, the sensor 10 issues a signal to the code converter
`
`11 and the control unit S. According to Ryoichi, the sensor 10 and code converter
`
`11 jointly constitute a detector D and provide a detectable signal to control unit S
`
`(the vehicle system). Col. 5, ll. 32-49.
`
`44. Ryoichi further describes an input port I that is supplied with signals
`
`indicating operating conditions
`
`from condition detectors monitoring
`
`the
`
`automobile devices, such as a brake level operation detector, a shift level/parking
`
`detector and an engine operation detector. According to Ryoichi, depending upon
`
`the control program to be executed, the control unit CPU corrects the control signal
`
`according to these operating condition signals. Col. 6, ll. 20-31. In addition,
`
`Ryoichi describes an interface 70 that receives detected signals from sensors in the
`
`automobile and, upon calculations by the arithmetic control circuit 68, displays
`
`vehicle status information such as a running speed and rotational speed. Col. 19, ll.
`
`43-51.
`
`Ryoichi – Claims 94 and 110
`
`45. Claims 94 and 110 and obvious in view of Ryoichi.
`
`- 19 -
`
`19
`
`
`
`
`
`46. As I noted above, Ryoichi describes that radio station St is responsive to
`
`signals from telephone TEL, and that paging unit 9 receives the radiated signals
`
`and generates a calling sound corresponding to the user’s message to execute a
`
`stored program. Col. 7, l. 60-col. 8, l. 8.
`
`47. The use of the Internet or World Wide Web in vehicle control systems was
`
`well-known at the time the ’076 patent was filed, as evidenced, for example, by
`
`Spaur, Behr, and Kubler.
`
`48. At the time the ’076 patent was filed, the use of the Internet or World Wide
`
`Web to communicate with a vehicle would have been obvious at least because the
`
`Internet provides an infrastructure and signal transmission capabilities that are
`
`superior to the telephone and radio transmission capabilities described by Ryoichi.
`
`The Combination of Ryoichi and Neely – Claims 68, 96, and 120
`
`49. The combination of Ryoichi and Neely discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claims 68, 96, and 120.
`
`50. As I noted above, Neely describes a vehicular diagnostic system employing
`
`a portable communications control station. Col. 1, ll. 12-15. Neely describes a
`
`vehicular diagnostic system using a telephone for voice and data communication to
`
`convey diagnostic information. Col. 4, l. 42-col. 5, l. 10; col. 6, ll. 44-56.
`
`According to Neely, the vehicle computer checks a variety of sensors that monitor
`
`- 20 -
`
`20
`
`
`
`
`
`operating parameters for control purposes and to assist on-board diagnosis. Col. 1,
`
`ll. 18-26.
`
`51. At the time the ’076 patent was filed, it would have been obvious to combine
`
`the vehicle device control system of Ryoichi with the vehicular diagnostic system
`
`of Neely, at least because both describe sending information regarding the
`
`operation of vehicle components from the vehicle to remotely located devices. See
`
`Ex. 1011, 7:60-8:22; Ex. 1018, 6:44-56. In addition, Ryoichi describes the display
`
`of status information on an interface 70, see 6:20-31, and which would incorporate
`
`voice communication as described by Neely, see 4:42-5:10; 6:44-56.
`
`
`
`I declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are true and
`
`that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true, and
`
`further that these statements were made with the knowledge that willful false
`
`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both,
`
`under §1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`7/31/2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Scott Andrews
`
`
`
`Dated:
`
`
`
`- 21 -
`
`21
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`22
`
`
`
`
`(650) 279-0242
`
`
`Scott Andrews
`
`915 Western Ave.
`Petaluma, CA 94952
`
`Summary
`Creative, energetic, and innovative internationally recognized executive experienced in
`general management, systems engineering, advanced product development, advanced
`technology, business development, strategic planning, and program management
`
` •
`
` Vehicle Electrical/Electronics Systems
`• Vehicle Information Systems
`• Communications Systems
`• ITS and Related Industries
`• Program and Project Management
`
`
`• Enterprise Software
`• Multimedia/Internet Computing
`• Vehicle Safety and Control Systems
`• Spacecraft Electronics
`• Mobile Information Technology
`
`Experience
`
`Consultant
`12/2001-Present
`Systems engineering, business development and technical strategy consulting supporting
`automotive and information technology.
`Current Engagements:
`• Technical consultant to ARINC for connected vehicle application systems
`engineering and development of high precision connected vehicle test bed for
`FHWA (Federal High Way Admin.)
`• Technical consultant to Booz Allen for connected vehicle performance measures
`development project for NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Admin.)
`• Technical consultant to Booz Allen for connected vehicle standards for FHWA
`• Technical consultant to American Association of State Highway Transportation
`Officials (AASHTO) for connected vehicle deployment analysis and strategy
`• Technical consultant to Michigan State DOT (Enterprise Pooled Fund) to develop
`a system architecture and deployment strategy for Rural ITS
`• Expert witness for Toyota in a case brought by American Vehicular Sciences
`(AVS)
`• Expert witness for Toyota in a patent case brought by Affinity Labs
`• Expert Witness for TomTom in a paten
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
