UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TRACBEAM, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Patent No. 7,764,231
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. _____________
`
`
`DECLARATION OF KEVIN S. JUDGE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TRACBEAM, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Patent No. 7,764,231
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. _____________
`
`
`DECLARATION OF KEVIN S. JUDGE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`I, Kevin S. Judge, make this declaration in connection with the proceeding
`
`identified above.
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained by counsel for Apple Inc. (“Petitioner”) as a
`
`technical expert in connection with the proceeding identified above. I submit this
`
`declaration in support of Apple, Inc.’s Petition for Inter Partes Review of United
`
`States Patent No. 7,764,231 (“the ’231 patent”) (“the Petition”).
`
`2.
`
`I am being paid at an hourly rate for my work on this matter. I have
`
`no personal or financial stake or interest in the outcome of the present proceeding.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`
`3.
`
`I am currently employed as a senior engineer at John Deere in the
`
`Advanced Engineering group designing the next generation of Global Navigation
`
`Satellite System (GNSS) receivers for precision farming. I hold a Bachelor of
`
`Science degree in Mathematics, and I am the owner of Judge Software Systems,
`
`Inc., which provides consulting services for wireless communication and location.
`
`4.
`
`I have been designing and implementing systems for wireless
`
`communication and location for the past 25 years.
`
`5.
`
`In particular, from 1987 to 1993 I was a programmer and analyst at
`
`Magnavox Advanced Products Division designing and implementing 1990’s core
`
`1
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 2
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`GPS software. As part of my role I worked on the navigation Kalman filter and the
`
`receiver tracking control system.
`
`6.
`
`From 1993 to 1995, I was a software engineer and analyst at Interstate
`
`Electronics Corporation, where I was responsible for the design and development
`
`of the navigation processor for an aircraft navigation management system. My
`
`responsibilities included writing the requirements for and participating in the
`
`design, coding, and testing of all aspects of the GPS navigation code.
`
`7.
`
`From 2000 to 2004, I was the Senior Vice President of Software and
`
`Systems at In-Sync Interactive management Company, where I designed and
`
`managed the creation of a complete wireless TDMA data network, including
`
`Internet client/server software and the base station and endpoint modems. I also
`
`designed the wireless protocol for robust communication.
`
`8.
`
`From 1996 to 2009, at Greenfield Associates, I designed and managed
`
`the development of a GPS traffic preemption system, including the development of
`
`a low cost differential base station and a TDMA scheme for data transfer. I also
`
`implemented a precise golf ranging system using locally broadcast differential
`
`corrections.
`
`9.
`
`From 2004 to 2009, I was an Engineering Manager at NorBelle, LLC,
`
`where I designed and contributed to the implementation of a real time mobile-to-
`
`mobile tracking application for assisted GPS mobile phones. The system included
`
`2
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 3
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`an Internet based back-end server over which a proprietary messaging system was
`
`hosted. I designed the accuracy enhancing technology using GPS and cellular
`
`trilateration critical to the usability of the application.
`
`10. From 1999 to 2012, I represented SiRF Technology, Inc. in the 3GPP
`
`and 3GPP2 standards committees helping to shape the standards for location
`
`services in CDMA and GSM/UMTS. I also served as the chairman for CDMA
`
`location services standards committee. The 3GPP2 standards body, a sub-working
`
`group for Location Services, is an international consortium of individuals
`
`representing companies interested in developing standards for mobile location
`
`technology. As chairman I oversaw the development of the IS-801 A-1
`
`specification used today by all CDMA mobile phones to receive location assistance
`
`for both regulatory and commercial systems.
`
`11. From 2008 to 2012, I was one of the three founding members of
`
`Integrated Positioning, LLC, where I designed, built, and integrated a location
`
`platform for a WiMax Network. I designed the backend systems to facilitate the
`
`needs of the location platform to seed AGPS solutions for E-911 integration.
`
`12. From 2011 to 2013, at Level8, I designed, implemented, and
`
`administered a Rails 3 server to facilitate a mobile-to-mobile tracking application.
`
`3
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 4
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`13. From 2012 to 2014, I represented Broadcom in the Indoor Location
`
`Alliance (ILA), 3GPP, and OMA, drafting the architecture for indoor location
`
`standardization. I was elected to the board of directors for the ILA.
`
`14. As discussed, I was recently a charter board member of the Indoor
`
`Location Alliance, and in the early 2000’s, I was the Chairman of the location
`
`services sub-committee of the 3GPP2 telecommunications organization during the
`
`drafting of the IS-801A-1 specification that defines how GPS and cellular location
`
`operate on CDMA networks. I have also spent years as a contributing member of
`
`location standards in the 3GPP organization that largely parallels 3GPP2, but for
`
`GSM, UMTS, and now LTE networks. Attached as Appendix A is a copy of my
`
`curriculum vitae.
`
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`
`15.
`
`In preparing this declaration, I have reviewed, among other things, the
`
`following materials: (a) the ’231 patent (Ex. 1001 to the Petition) and its
`
`prosecution history; (b) U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/025,855 (Ex. 1041 to
`
`the Petition); (c) U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/044,821 (Ex. 1042 to the
`
`Petition); (d) U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/056,590 (Ex. 1043 to the
`
`Petition); (e) U.S. Patent No. 5,926,133 to Green, Jr. (Ex. 1034 to the Petition);
`
`(f) U.S. Patent No. 6,999,779 to Hashimoto (Ex. 1035 to the Petition); (g) U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,026,304 to Hilsenrath et al. (Ex. 1036 to the Petition); (h) U.S. Patent
`
`4
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 5
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`No. 6,208,290 to Krasner (Ex. 1037 to the Petition); (i) U.S. Patent No. 5,844,522
`
`to Sheffer et. al. (Ex. 1038 to the Petition); (j) PCT Publication No. WO/97/23785
`
`(Ex. 1039 to the Petition); and (k) the Petition for Inter Partes Review of the ’231
`
`patent to which my declaration relates.
`
`IV. DEFINITIONS AND STANDARDS
`
`16.
`
`I have been informed and understand that claims are construed from
`
`the perspective of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed
`
`invention, and that during inter partes review, claims are to be given their broadest
`
`reasonable construction consistent with the specification.
`
`17.
`
`I have also been informed and understand that the subject matter of a
`
`patent claim is obvious if the differences between the subject matter of the claim
`
`and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been
`
`obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the
`
`art to which the subject matter pertains. I have also been informed that the
`
`framework for determining obviousness involves considering the following
`
`factors: (i) the scope and content of the prior art; (ii) the differences between the
`
`prior art and the claimed subject matter; (iii) the level of ordinary skill in the art;
`
`and (iv) any objective evidence of non-obviousness.
`
`18.
`
`I have been informed and understand that the claimed subject matter
`
`would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art if, for example, it
`
`5
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 6
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`results from the combination of known elements according to known methods to
`
`yield predictable results, the simple substitution of one known element for another
`
`to obtain predictable results, use of a known technique to improve similar devices
`
`in the same way, applying a known technique to a known device ready for
`
`improvement to yield predictable results, or pursuing known options within one’s
`
`technical grasp in response to a design need or market pressure to solve a problem.
`
`I have also been informed that the analysis of obviousness may include recourse to
`
`logic, judgment, and common sense available to the person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art that does not necessarily require explication in any particular reference.
`
`19.
`
`I have also been informed and understand that to obtain the benefit of
`
`a parent application’s filing date, the invention claimed in the later-filed
`
`application must be disclosed in the parent application in the manner provided by
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112. I have also been informed and understand that to satisfy this
`
`requirement, the claims of the later-filed application must be supported by the
`
`written description in the parent in sufficient detail that one skilled in the art could
`
`have can clearly concluded that the inventor invented and was in possession of the
`
`claimed invention as of the filing date sought. I have also been informed and
`
`understand that entitlement to a filing date extends only to subject matter that is
`
`disclosed, not to that which may have been obvious.
`
`6
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 7
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`20.
`
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art pertaining to the
`
`’231 patent at the relevant date discussed below would have been a person with a
`
`bachelor’s degree in mathematics, electrical engineering, computer engineering, or
`
`computer science and 3-5 years of experience with wireless location and/or
`
`navigation systems. However, I recognize that someone with less technical
`
`education but more experience, or more technical education but less experience,
`
`could have also met this standard.
`
`21.
`
`I understand that the ’231 patent claims priority to three provisional
`
`applications: (i) Provisional Appl. No. 60/025,855 (“the ’855 provisional”), filed
`
`September 9, 1996; (ii) Provisional Appl. No. 60/044,821 (“the ’821 provisional”),
`
`filed April 25, 1997; and (iii) Provisional Appl. No. 60/056,590 (“the ’590
`
`provisional”), filed August 20, 1997. I have also been informed and understand
`
`that, based in part on my opinions set forth below, the ’231 patent is not entitled to
`
`priority of any of these provisional applications. Therefore, I have been informed
`
`that the relevant date for considering the patentability of the claims of the ’231
`
`patent is September 8, 1997, which was the actual filing date of the ’231 patent. I
`
`have analyzed obviousness as of the 1997 date or somewhat before, and I have
`
`analyzed the disclosure in the provisional applications as of their respective filing
`
`dates. Depending on the context, I may refer to either time frame as the “relevant
`
`date” or the “relevant time frame.”
`
`7
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 8
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`22. Based on my education and experience in the field of wireless
`
`location systems set forth above, I believe I am qualified to provide opinions about
`
`how one of ordinary skill in the art by the relevant dates would have interpreted
`
`and understood the ’231 patent, the provisional applications, and the prior art
`
`discussed below.
`
`V. THE ’231 PATENT
`
`23. The ’231 patent generally discloses a network-based system and
`
`method for locating a wireless mobile station (e.g., a handset / mobile phone). The
`
`system is intended to be readily incorporated into existing commercial wireless
`
`telephony systems with few, if any, modifications to a typical infrastructure. As
`
`described by the patent, the wireless network infrastructure includes a plurality of
`
`mobile stations and a plurality of base stations. The system provides the mobile
`
`station location capabilities using the measurements from wireless signals
`
`communicated between mobile stations and a network of base stations. The
`
`communication standard or protocol used for location is the same as that used by
`
`the network of base stations for providing wireless communications with mobile
`
`stations for other purposes such as voice communication.
`
`24.
`
`In the system and method disclosed in the ’231 patent, multiple
`
`location estimates are obtained using different techniques, which the patent refers
`
`to as “location hypothesizing first order models” or “FOMs.” The patent includes
`
`8
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 9
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`descriptions of various types of first order models, including distance first order
`
`models, coverage area first order models, location base station first order models,
`
`stochastic first order models, statistically-based pattern recognition first order
`
`models, and adaptive/trainable first order models. Using the multiple location
`
`estimates obtained using the various first order models, a most likely mobile
`
`station position estimate is determined.
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`25.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinion about whether the
`
`challenged claims, when accorded their broadest reasonable interpretation as
`
`understood by one of ordinary skill in the art and consistent with the disclosure in
`
`the specification, encompass the use of GPS receivers in handsets in making
`
`location determinations. I have reviewed the claims of the ’231 patent challenged
`
`in the Petition, and it is my opinion that at least one location technique of every
`
`claim is sufficiently broad that it could be met by the use of GPS in a handset. In
`
`fact, every independent claim challenged in the Petition includes a specific
`
`limitation involving using satellite signals received at or by the mobile station.
`
`One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that these limitations
`
`encompass use of GPS in a handset, because GPS signals are received at or by a
`
`handset that includes a GPS receiver.
`
`9
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 10
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`VII. GPS IN THE PROVISIONAL APPLICATIONS
`
`26.
`
`I have been asked my opinion as to whether a person of skill in the art
`
`would have understood from any of the above-referenced provisional applications
`
`that the inventors, at the time each provisional was filed, had invented and were in
`
`possession of an invention that encompassed the use of a GPS receiver in the
`
`handset in making location determinations. As discussed below, it is my opinion
`
`that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have had such an understanding.
`
`Each provisional application makes it abundantly clear that the mobile station
`
`location estimates are based on measurements of wireless signal communications
`
`between the mobile station and the base stations of a wireless telephony
`
`infrastructure, and that the invention described in the provisional applications (and
`
`possessed by the inventors) does not encompass using GPS receivers in the
`
`handset.
`
`27. The summary discussion in the provisional applications states that the
`
`invention uses wireless signal measurements characterizing the wireless signal
`
`communications between a particular mobile station and a networked wireless base
`
`station infrastructure to determine a most likely location estimate of a mobile
`
`station. (See, e.g., ’855 provisional at 14-15; ’821 provisional at 18-20; ’590
`
`provisional at 16-18.) A person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood
`
`from the provisional applications that these wireless signal communications
`
`10
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 11
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`between a mobile station and the base station infrastructure do not include GPS,
`
`but instead include only communications in a wireless telephony system.
`
`28. Each provisional application explicitly states that the signal
`
`measurements are “signal data measurements corresponding to wireless
`
`communications between an MS to be located (herein also denoted the ‘target
`
`MS’) and a wireless telephony infrastructure.” (See, e.g., ’855 provisional at 14;
`
`’821 provisional at 19; ’590 provisional at 16 (emphasis added).) Further, the ’821
`
`and ’590 provisionals define the term “infrastructure” as “the network of telephony
`
`communication services, and more particularly, that portion of such a network that
`
`receives and processes wireless communications with wireless mobile stations. In
`
`particular, this infrastructure includes telephony wireless base stations (BS) such as
`
`those for radio mobile communication systems based on CDMA, TDMA, and
`
`GSM wherein the base stations provide a network of cooperative communication
`
`channels with an air interface with the MS, and a conventional telecommunications
`
`interface with a Mobile Switch Center (MSC).” (’821 provisional at 17; ’590
`
`provisional at 15 (emphasis added).) Very similarly, the ’855 provisional defines
`
`the term “infrastructure” as “the network of telephony communication services;
`
`and more particularly, that portion of such a network that receives and processes
`
`wireless communications with wireless mobile stations. In particular, this
`
`infrastructure includes telephony wireless base stations (BS) such as those for
`
`11
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 12
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`radio mobile communication systems based on CDMA and TDMA, wherein the
`
`base stations provide a network of cooperative communication channels with an
`
`MS.” (’855 provisional at 14 (emphasis added).)
`
`29.
`
`It is clear from the above descriptions in the provisionals that the
`
`“infrastructure” in the described invention includes only wireless telephony
`
`communication services and does not disclose location estimates using GPS in the
`
`handset. One of ordinary skill in the art would not have considered GPS a wireless
`
`telephony communication service, GPS is not otherwise included amongst the
`
`listed communication systems, and GPS does not interface with a Mobile Switch
`
`Center, as required by the disclosed infrastructure.
`
`30. Further, the ’821 and ’590 provisionals explicitly define the term
`
`“wireless” as “digital radio signaling using one of standard digital protocols such
`
`as CDMA, TDMA and GSM, as one skilled in the art will understand.” (’821
`
`provisional at 17; ’590 provisional at 15.) One of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`have understood that this definition does not include GPS, as it is clearly a
`
`recitation of well-known wireless telephony standards, which GPS is not. This
`
`understanding is further supported by the fact that both provisionals list the same
`
`standards when referring to telephony base stations, as discussed above. (’821
`
`provisional at 17; ’590 provisional at 15.) Moreover, if GPS were to be considered
`
`among the wireless signals contemplated in the provisionals, one of ordinary skill
`
`12
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 13
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`in the art would have expected it to be listed, as it was and remains the most
`
`popular wireless signal for location determination.
`
`31. The ’855 and ’821 provisionals include a “mobile station description”
`
`that further makes clear to one of skill in the art that the mobile station does not
`
`include GPS. For example, each provisional includes a description of and a block
`
`diagram of the standard components of both a standard CDMA mobile station and
`
`a modified mobile station. (’855 provisional at 30-35, FIGS. MS-1, MS-2; ’821
`
`provisional at 36, 48-53, FIGS. 5, MS-1, MS-2.) Nothing in the description of the
`
`mobile station or the diagrams of a mobile station in either provisional includes
`
`any disclosure of including a GPS receiver in a mobile station. Similarly, nowhere
`
`in any of the three provisionals is there any disclosure of including a GPS in the
`
`handset; this further illustrates that the system and method disclosed in the
`
`provisional applications do not contemplate or show possession of use of GPS in
`
`handsets.
`
`32. Moreover, the disclosure in the provisional applications that does
`
`relate to GPS only bolsters that the provisionals do not disclose or contemplate
`
`GPS in the handset and that the inventors did not possess such an invention. In
`
`discussing prior attempts to develop a mobile station location system, each
`
`provisional application first indicates that GPS is “impractical in many
`
`applications” and discusses the issues that have led to the “limited success” of a
`
`13
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 14
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`GPS-enabled mobile station or handset. (’855 provisional at 2; ’821 provisional at
`
`2-3; ’590 provisional at 6.) One of ordinary skill in the art would have read this as
`
`additional support for an understanding that the invention described in each
`
`provisional application does not use GPS in the handset, but instead provides for a
`
`location estimation system based on measurements of wireless telephony signals.
`
`33. Each provisional application discloses use of a GPS receiver in a
`
`mobile base station, but a mobile base station is a base station, not a mobile
`
`station. Each application makes this clear when it states, for example, that the
`
`mobile base station “acts as a low cost, partially-functional, moving base station
`
`[BS].” (’855 provisional at 28; ’821 provisional at 45; ’590 provisional at 31.)
`
`Further, each provisional applications explains that the mobile base station’s
`
`location is determined using the included GPS so that an estimate of the location of
`
`the target mobile station may be determined. (’855 provisional at 21-22; ’821
`
`provisional at 27; ’590 provisional at 22). From this, one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art would have understood that a mobile base station is a base station that, like
`
`other base stations, is used to locate mobile stations.
`
`34. Moreover, though the mobile base station may include a mobile
`
`station and a separate GPS receiver, one of ordinary skill in the art would have
`
`understood that the GPS receiver and mobile station are separate components in
`
`the mobile base station. (’855 provisional at 21-22, FIG. 5.1; ’821 provisional at
`
`14
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 15
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`27, FIG. 5.1; ’590 provisional at 22, FIG. 5.1). This is still disclosure of GPS in a
`
`mobile base station, not GPS in a mobile station.
`
`35. From the above, one of ordinary skill in the art would have
`
`understood the disclosure of GPS in each of the provisional applications as
`
`applying to use of GPS only in mobile base stations, not GPS in mobile stations or
`
`handsets. To the contrary, if the inventors had contemplated and were in
`
`possession of GPS in a mobile station or handset, one of skill in the art would have
`
`expected them to have similarly included such disclosure in the applications as was
`
`included for GPS in the mobile base station.
`
`36. Finally, I have reviewed every reference to GPS in each of the
`
`provisional applications, and there is no disclosure of providing a GPS-equipped
`
`mobile station or handset. In particular, the references to GPS relate to:
`
` background information about failed location systems:
`o ’855 provisional at 2
`o ’821 provisional at 2-3
`o ’590 provisional at 6
`
` a GPS receiver in a mobile base station:
`o ’855 provisional at 22, 133, 136, 137, 138, 145, 146, 147, 150,
`
`159, FIGS. 5.1 and 5.3
`
`15
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 16
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`o ’821 provisional at 27, 45, 176, 179, 180, 182, 189, 190, 191,
`
`195, 203, FIGS. 5.1 and 5.3
`o ’590 provisional at 22, 31, 103, 105, 106, 107, 113, 114, 117,
`
`122, FIG. 5.1
`
` a GPS receiver in a base station:
`o ’855 provisional at 29, 89, FIG. DA-1
`o ’821 provisional at 47, 124, FIG. 5 (DA-1)
`o ’590 provisional at 32
`
` a GPS receiver to measure location signatures:
`o ’855 provisional at 50, 64
`o ’821 provisional at 80, 98
`o ’590 provisional at 44
`
`37. Based on the above, one of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time
`
`would have understood from each of the provisional applications that the inventors
`
`did not have possession of an invention using GPS-enabled mobile stations, and, in
`
`fact, intentionally did not include GPS in the handset because of perceived
`
`problems with GPS.
`
`VIII. ANALYSIS OF THE PRIOR ART
`
`38. U.S. Patent No. 5,926,133 to Green, Jr. is directed to a system and
`
`method for performing position location in a mobile communication network such
`
`16
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 17
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`as a cellular telephone network. (See, e.g., 1:8-14.) The system in Green includes
`
`a “rover” to be located (i.e., a handset, as shown in FIG. 4), a network of base
`
`stations, a number of “multipath calibration transponders” that have known
`
`locations, and a base station controller. (See, e.g., 4:66-5:8, FIGS. 3, 4, 6.) In
`
`Green, wireless signals received by the base stations from the rover and
`
`transponders are provided to the base station controller, which then determines a
`
`coarse position of the rover and transponders. The coarse position is determined
`
`using, for example, AOA, TOA, or TDOA techniques known in the art or a
`
`combination of these techniques. (See, e.g., 3:62-4:11, 7:19-44.) Green also
`
`discloses that whatever location technique used can be augmented with a GPS
`
`receiver in the rover. The GPS-enabled rover can provide positional GPS
`
`information in the normal manner, or it can relay a “snapshot” of the GPS data to
`
`the base station or other centralized facility for processing. (See, e.g., 7:45-54.)
`
`39. To provide a position determination that is largely unaffected by
`
`multipath propagation effects, the system in Green determines a multipath
`
`distortion vector by comparing the coarse and known transponder positions. The
`
`coarse position of the rover is then corrected according to the multipath distortion
`
`vector. (See, e.g., 4:3-11; 7:55-67.) As an alternative to using multipath
`
`transponders, Green also discloses that the multipath distortion vector can be
`
`17
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 18
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`determined using a previously compiled database of positional correction
`
`information. (See, e.g., 9:1-49.)
`
`40. U.S. Patent No. 6,999,779 to Hashimoto discloses a system for
`
`locating a “portable remote terminal.” The system uses a plurality of positioning
`
`systems and techniques based on, for example, GPS, portable-telephone, PHS base
`
`station, and radio marker systems. The system automatically switches between
`
`location determination techniques based on which are available and prioritizes the
`
`techniques attempted in decreasing precision. (See, e.g., Abstract; 3:21-41; 4:52-
`
`63.) Hashimoto discloses that the location determination system can be used for
`
`different applications, such as automobile tracking, searching for a child, and
`
`supervising a zone by setting time intervals. (See, e.g., Abstract, 1:11-29; 4:31-35;
`
`8:42-50; 12:4-26; 12:55-13:2.)
`
`41. U.S. Patent No. 6,026,304 to Hilsenrath et al. discloses a method and
`
`system for determining a radio transmitter’s location using a pattern recognition
`
`technique using direct and multipath signals. (See, e.g., Abstract; 4:36-39.)
`
`Specifically, signals from a mobile transmitter are sent to base stations of a
`
`wireless communication system such as a cell phone network. Based on the
`
`signals received, a location-dependent signal signature is determined. The location
`
`of the transmitter can then be determined by searching a database of signal
`
`18
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 19
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`signatures and corresponding locations to find the location with the closest
`
`matching signal signature. (See, e.g., Abstract; 4:35-67; 8:41-9:17; 9:53-10:10.)
`
`42. U.S. Patent No. 6,208,290 to Krasner discloses a hybrid location
`
`determination technique that uses GPS and the location of a cell site (i.e., terrestrial
`
`receiver) of cellular communications network. Specifically, the system in Krasner
`
`first determines an approximate location of a cell phone based on the location of
`
`the cell site with which the cell phone is communicating. This approximate
`
`location is then “used to derive an approximate Doppler relative to the various SPS
`
`satellites which are transmitting SPS signals to the GPS receiver in the cellular
`
`telephone.” The approximate Doppler is used by the GPS receiver in the cell
`
`phone to reduce processing time. (See, e.g., 3:16-32.)
`
`43. U.S. Patent No. 5,844,522 to Sheffer et al. discloses a network-based
`
`location system that used an existing wireless communication network to locate the
`
`position of a handset in emergency situations. (See, e.g., Abstract; 1:5-12; 2:29-
`
`60.) In the Sheffer system, multiple location estimates are calculated using the
`
`methods discussed at 14:59-18:56 and shown in FIGS. 8-12. Once the multiple
`
`approximate locations are determined, a confidence level is determined for each
`
`determined position, and the most likely location is displayed on a map with a red
`
`dot, with the size of the dot indicating the confidence level. (See, e.g., 18:57-
`
`19:41.)
`
`19
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 20
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`44. PCT Publication No. WO/97/23785 (“PCT ’785”) discloses a system
`
`for locating the position of a mobile radio-frequency transceiver (i.e., handset) in a
`
`communications system. (See, e.g., Abstract, 1:3-8, 3:1-7.) PCT ’785 also
`
`discloses use of a combined GPS and cellular network positioning system, noting
`
`that each technique had advantages in certain situations. (See, e.g., 17:17-18:2.)
`
`Further, PCT ’785 discloses that it is possible to use map data to improve the
`
`positions process using a map database and an algorithm that can be used to move
`
`the measured position to the nearest road. (See, e.g., 17:24-28.)
`
`45.
`
`I have reviewed the discussions and claim charts in the Petition
`
`regarding what the above-referenced prior art references disclose and identifying
`
`where each of the claim elements is disclosed in Green, Hashimoto, Hilsenrath,
`
`Krasner, Sheffer, and/or PCT ’785, and I agree with those discussions and
`
`identifications.
`
`46. Claims 1, 3, 7, 11, 17-18, 40, 42, 78, and 81 of the ’231 patent would
`
`have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on Green in view of
`
`Hashimoto. In particular, combining features disclosed in Hashimoto with the base
`
`system in Green is simply combining prior art elements according to known
`
`methods to yield predictable results. As discussed, both Green and Hashimoto
`
`disclose use of multiple location techniques, and Hashimoto discloses selecting
`
`between the plural location estimates based on precision. It would have been
`
`20
`
`
`Apple Inc. Exhibit 1002 Page 21
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USP 7,764,231
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 106840000511
`
`
`
`obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in Green the selection between
`
`multiple location estimates as disclosed in Hashimoto. A clear motive for
`
`combining the prior art elements as discussed is made clear in Hashimoto—
`
`increased precision of the location estimates.
`
`47. Claim 81 of the ’231 patent would have been obvious to one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art based on Green in view of Hashimoto. In particular, it
`
`would have been obvious that the system in Green could be used for different
`
`applications, as disclosed in Hashimoto. Hashimoto identifies exemplar
`
`applications for a location determination system, and one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`would have immediately understood that the similar system in Gr
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
