UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC.
`
`Petitioner
`
`Patent No. 8,296,146
`Issue Date: October 23, 2012
`Title: COMPUTERIZED INFORMATION PRESENTATION APPARATUS
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,296,146
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 312 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`
`Case No. IPR2016-00156
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`I. 
`II. 
`III. 
`
`B. 
`C. 
`D. 
`E. 
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8) ........................................................... 1 
`Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)) ............................................... 2 
`Identification of Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1)-(3)) and Relief
`Requested (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1)) .............................................................. 2 
`A. 
`Background of the ’146 Patent ............................................................. 2 
`1. 
`The ’146 Patent .......................................................................... 2 
`2. 
`Prosecution History of the ’146 Patent ...................................... 4 
`Patents and Printed Publications Relied On ......................................... 6 
`Statutory Grounds for Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1)-(2) ......... 8 
`Claim Construction (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3)) ................................... 8 
`Explanation of Differences Between Challenged Independent
`Claims ................................................................................................. 12 
`the Challenged Claims Are Unpatentable (37 C.F.R. §
`IV.  How
`42.104(b)(4)-(5)) ........................................................................................... 12 
`A. 
`Claims 1, 10, 11, 18, 27, and 30 are Obvious in View of the
`Disclosures of Drury and Lind ........................................................... 12 
`1. 
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 15 
`2. 
`Claim 10 ................................................................................... 22 
`3. 
`Claim 11 ................................................................................... 23 
`4. 
`Claim 18 ................................................................................... 24 
`5. 
`Claim 27 ................................................................................... 34 
`6. 
`Claim 30 ................................................................................... 35 
`7. 
`Obviousness in View of Drury and Lind ................................. 37 
`8. 
`The Level of Skill in the Industry ............................................ 40 
`Claim 19 is Obvious in View of the Disclosures of Drury, Lind,
`and Ito ................................................................................................. 41 
`1. 
`Claim 19 ................................................................................... 42 
`2. 
`Obviousness in View of Drury, Lind, and Ito ......................... 47 
`Claim 17 is Obvious in View of the Disclosures of Drury, Lind,
`Class, and Ito ...................................................................................... 48 
`
`B. 
`
`C. 
`
`i
`
`

`

`Claim 17 ................................................................................... 49 
`1. 
`Obviousness in View of Drury, Lind, Class, and Ito ............... 57 
`2. 
`Conclusion .................................................................................................... 58 
`
`
`
`V. 
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Exhibit 1001
`
`Exhibit 1002
`
`Exhibit 1003
`
`
`Exhibit 1004
`
`Exhibit 1005
`
`
`Exhibit 1006
`
`Exhibit 1007
`
`Exhibit 1008
`
`Exhibit 1009
`
`
`Exhibit 1010
`
`
`Exhibit 1011
`
`
`Exhibit 1012
`
`
`Exhibit 1013
`
`LISTING OF EXHIBITS
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,296,146 to Gazdzinski
`
`Declaration of Scott Andrews
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0104842 to
`Drury et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,707,421 to Drury et al.
`
`The Network Vehicle - A Glimpse into the Future of
`Mobile Multi-Media, by R. Lind et al., The 17th DASC –
`The AIAA/IEEE/SAE Digital Avionics Systems
`Conference – Bellevue, WA – Oct. 31-Nov. 7, 1998 –
`Proceedings
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,230,132 to Class et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,249,740 to Ito et al.
`
`Redline Comparison of Challenged Independent Claims
`
`AUTOMOTIVE ELECTRONICS HANDBOOK, Ronald Jurgen
`(ed.), Chapter 11
`
`David Flynn, IBM’s Corporate High Flier, THE SYDNEY
`MORNING HERALD, September 29, 1997
`
`Suzanne Kantra Kirschner, Wired Wheels, POPULAR
`SCIENCE, March 1998
`
`“Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant West View Research,
`LLC’s Revised Disclosure of Asserted Claims and
`Infringement Contentions, Pursuant to Patent L.R. 3.1
`and the June 10, 2015 Court Order,” dated June 26, 2015
`
`U.S. Copyright Registration No. TX 4-900-822, “1998
`IEEE/AIAA 17th Digital Avionics Systems Conference -
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Oct 31, 1998 - Bellevue, WA - (98CH36267),” dated
`December 8, 1998
`
`Library of Congress Public Catalog Information, 17th
`DASC: The AIAA/IEEE/SAE Digital Avionics Systems
`Conference: Proceedings:
`[Electronics
`in motion]:
`Bellevue, WA, Oct. 31-Nov. 7, 1998
`
`MARC Tags corresponding to Library of Congress
`Public Catalog
`Information, 17th DASC: The
`AIAA/IEEE/SAE Digital Avionics Systems Conference:
`Proceedings: [Electronics in motion]: Bellevue, WA, Oct.
`31-Nov. 7, 1998
`
`The Network Vehicle - A Glimpse into the Future of
`Mobile Multi-Media, by R. Lind et al., SAE Technical
`Paper Series 982901
`
`U.S. Copyright Registration No. TX 5-149-812,
`“November 1998 Quarterly Technical Papers on
`Microfiche (MICQ-N98),” dated June 2, 2000
`
`U.S. Copyright Office Public Catalog Information,
`“Quarterly technical papers on microfiche,” ISSN 0148-
`7191
`
`Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), Abstract, “The
`Network Vehicle - A Glimpse into the Future of Mobile
`Multimedia,” Paper No. 982901, http://papers.sae.org/
`982901/
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0201748 to
`Hasek et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,845,084 to Rangnekar
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`Exhibit 1014
`
`
`Exhibit 1015
`
`
`Exhibit 1016
`
`
`Exhibit 1017
`
`
`Exhibit 1018
`
`
`Exhibit 1019
`
`
`Exhibit 1020
`
`
`Exhibit 1021
`
`
`
`

`

`I. Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8)
`Real Party-in-Interest: Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (“VWGoA”), which is
`
`a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG.
`
`Related Matters: The following judicial matter may affect, or may be affected by, a
`
`decision in this inter partes review: West View Research, LLC v. Audi AG, et al.,
`
`No. 3:14-cv-02668-BAS-JLB (S.D. Cal.), naming as defendants: VWGoA d/b/a
`
`Audi of America, Inc., Volkswagen AG (which, as indicated above, is the parent of
`
`VWGoA), and Audi AG (which is a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG). In this
`
`litigation, West View has accused, for example, an “Audi Q7 with Smart Display
`
`Integration” as infringing the claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,296,146 (“the ’146
`
`patent”). See Ex. 1012.
`
` The following judicial matters in the Southern District of California may affect,
`
`or may be affected by, a decision in this inter partes review: West View Research,
`
`LLC v. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG, et al. (3:14-cv-02670); West View
`
`Research, LLC v. Hyundai Motor Company, Ltd., et al. (3:14-cv-02675); West
`
`View Research, LLC v. Nissan Motor Company, Ltd., et al. (3:14-cv-02677); and
`
`West View Research, LLC v. Tesla Motors, Inc. (3:14-cv-02679).
`
` The following administrative matters may affect, or may be affected by, a
`
`decision in this inter partes review: IPR2015-01941; IPR2016-00123; IPR2016-
`
`00124; IPR2016-00125; IPR2016-00137; IPR2016-00146; IPR2016-00177; U.S.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Patent Nos. 8,301,456; 8,117,037; 7,711,565; 7,093,693; 6,988,071; 6,615,175;
`
`and 8,065,156.
`
`Lead Counsel: Michael J. Lennon (Reg. No. 26,562).
`
`Backup Counsel: Clifford A. Ulrich (Reg. No. 42,194) and Michelle Carniaux
`
`(Reg. No. 36,098).
`
`Service: VWGoA agrees to electronic service at the following email addresses:
`
`mlennon@kenyon.com, culrich@kenyon.com, and mcarniaux@kenyon.com.
`
`Service may be made at the following address: Kenyon & Kenyon LLP, One
`
`Broadway, New York, NY 10004 (Tel.: 212-425-7200; Fax: 212-425-5288).
`
`II. Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
` VWGoA certifies that the ’146 patent is available for inter partes review and
`
`that it is not barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review challenging
`
`the patent claims on the grounds identified in this petition.
`
`III. Identification of Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1)-(3)) and Relief
`Requested (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1))
` VWGoA challenges claims 1, 10, 11, 17, 18, 19, 27, and 30 of the ’146 patent
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), and cancelation of these claims is requested.
`
`A. Background of the ’146 Patent
`1. The ’146 Patent
` The ’146 patent issued on October 23, 2012, from U.S. Patent Application
`
`Serial No. 13/404,980 (“the ’980 application”), filed February 24, 2012. The ’146
`
`patent claims to be a continuation or division of a number of prior applications, the
`
`2
`
`

`

`earliest of which was filed on June 10, 1999.1 The ’146 patent describes an
`
`information system for use in an elevator, although it states that the disclosed
`
`systems and methods may also be useful in other similar types of personnel
`
`transport devices (i.e., devices that transport large numbers of people and
`
`equipment between two locations on a routine basis) such as trams, shuttles, and
`
`moving walkways. Ex. 1001, 6:49-50; 6:38-41; 2:1-3; Figs. 1 and 2.
`
` The system responds to verbal commands. Id., 7:35-39. Signals captured by a
`
`microphone 118 as part of a speech recognition module 104 are digitized by an
`
`analog to digital converter 141 and processed using a speech recognition algorithm
`
`to produce digital representations of
`
`the user’s speech. Id. The digital
`
`representations are compared to a speech library to identify matching known words
`
`and the desired functionality is implemented. Id., 7:39-45. Input to and output from
`
`the system may be by a display device 113. Ex. 1001, 6:65-7:3; 8:21-23.
`
`One function of the display device includes accessing a network via a network
`
`interface 300 which permits the user to rapidly access updated information on a
`
`variety of predetermined topics of interest. Id., 11:13-19. Examples of such
`
`information include URLs for news headlines, weather, sports scores, financial
`
`data, directions to local airports or public transportation, etc. Id., 11:19-26.
`
`1 VWGoA does not concede that any claim of the ’146 patent is entitled to a filing
`
`date earlier than the February 24, 2012 filing date of the ’980 application.
`
`3
`
`

`

` Of the challenged claims, claims 1, 17, 18, 19, and 27 are independent.
`
`Challenged claims 10 and 11 ultimately depend from claim 1, and challenged
`
`claim 30 depends from claim 27.
`
`2. Prosecution History of the ’146 Patent
` Claim 19 of the ’146 patent issued from claim 68 of the ’980 application. Claim
`
`68 was added by amendment dated August 23, 2012, in which Mr. Gazdzinski
`
`stated that claim 68 relates “generally and without limitation or estoppel to the
`
`objected-to subject matter Claim 59.” Aug. 23, 2012 Amendment, p. 10. Claim 59
`
`of the ’980 application as presented in an Amendment filed June 13, 2012 is
`
`reproduced below:
`
`59. The apparatus of claim 57, wherein the provision of at least a
`portion of the accessed information relating to the directions to the
`business or entity via at least one of: (i) a touch screen input and
`display device of the computerized system; and/or (ii) a speech
`synthesis apparatus, comprises provision of at least a map graphic
`showing the location of the business or entity and other businesses or
`entities proximate thereto, the map graphic further comprising an
`arrow graphic differentiated at least in color from the map graphic so
`as to guide the user from a current location to the business or entity.
`
` Thus, based on the prosecution of the ’980 application, claim 19 was allowed
`
`because it includes the limitations set forth above from application claim 59,
`
`whereas the remaining limitations were found to be in the prior art cited by the
`
`4
`
`

`

`Examiner, i.e., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0104842 (“Drury
`
`’842”, Ex. 1003).
`
` Claim 27 of the ’146 patent issued from claim 76 of the ’980 application. Claim
`
`76 was added by the August 23, 2012 Amendment, in which Mr. Gazdzinski stated
`
`that claim 68 relates “generally and without limitation or estoppel to the objected-
`
`to subject matter Claim 61.” Aug. 23, 2012 Amendment, p. 11. Claim 61 of the
`
`’980 application as presented in the June 13, 2012 Amendment is reproduced
`
`below:
`
`61. The apparatus of claim 57, wherein said computerized logic is
`further configured to enable an ad hoc communication link with a
`portable electronic device of a user of the transport apparatus, the ad
`hoc link being configured to transfer data between the computerized
`information system and the portable electronic device.
`
` Thus, based on the prosecution of the ’980 application, claim 27 was allowed
`
`because it includes the limitations set forth above from application claim 61,
`
`whereas the remaining limitations were found to be in the prior art cited by the
`
`Examiner, i.e., Drury ’842.
`
`5
`
`

`

`B. Patents and Printed Publications Relied On
`1. U.S. Patent No. 6,707,421 (“Drury,” Ex. 1004), which was filed on February
`
`18, 1999 and therefore constitutes prior art against the ’146 patent under at least 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(e).2
`
`2. The Network Vehicle - A Glimpse into the Future of Mobile Multi-Media, by R.
`
`Lind, et al. (“Lind,” Ex. 1005), published by the Institute of Electrical and
`
`Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and presented at the 1998 IEEE/AIAA 17th Digital
`
`Avionics Systems Conference on October 31, 1998, bearing a copyright notice
`
`dated 1998 (see Ex. 1005, p. ii, “Copyright © 1998 by the Institute of Electrical
`
`and Electronics Engineers, Inc.”), bearing a Library of Congress and Copyright
`
`Office date stamp of December 8, 1998 (see Ex. 1005, page after p. xv), registered
`
`with and deposited in the U.S. Copyright Office on December 8, 1998 (see Ex.
`
`1013, also stating October 31, 1998 as the date of first publication in the U.S.),
`
`constitutes prior art against the ’146 patent under at least 35 U.S.C. § 102(a).3
`
`
`2 Drury ’842 (Ex. 1003) states that it is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application
`
`Serial No. 09/252,432, i.e., the application from which Drury (Ex. 1004) issued.
`
`3 Page ii of Ex. 1005 states a Library of Congress Control Number (LCCN) of 98-
`
`86916. The U.S. Library of Congress’s online catalog record, Ex. 1014, for this
`
`LCCN demonstrates that Lind was indexed under LC Classification and Call No.
`
`“TL693 .D55 1998” and under Dewey Class No. 629.135. According to Ex. 1015,
`
`6
`
`

`

`3. U.S. Patent No. 6,230,132 (“Class,” Ex. 1006), which was filed on March 10,
`
`1998 and therefore constitutes prior art against the ’146 patent under at least 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`4. U.S. Patent No. 6,249,740 (“Ito,” Ex. 1007), filed January 21, 1999 and issued
`
`June 19, 2001, constitutes prior art against the ’146 patent under at least 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 102(e).
`
` Lind, Class, and Ito were not cited by Mr. Gazdzinski or the Examiner during
`
`prosecution of the ’146 patent.
`
`
`the Library of Congress record for Lind was last updated on April 16, 1999 at
`
`3:16:32.8 p.m. (MARC Tag 005 specifies the date and time of the latest record
`
`transaction in the format yyyymmddhhmmss.f (see http://www.loc.gov/marc/
`
`authority/ad005.html); the MARC Tag 005 field for Lind is 19990416151632.8,
`
`which translates to April 16, 1999 at 3:16:32.8 p.m.). Lind was also published
`
`(with minor differences) in 1998 by the Society of Automotive Engineers as SAE
`
`Technical Paper Series 982901, Ex. 1016. Ex. 1017 is the U.S. Copyright
`
`Registration for Ex. 1016, stating a November 1998 date of first publication in the
`
`U.S., Ex. 1018 is the U.S. Copyright Office’s public catalog record for Ex. 1016,
`
`stating November 1998 date of publication of Ex. 1016, and Ex. 1019 is the SAE’s
`
`abstract for Ex. 1016, stating a November 1998 date of publication of Ex. 1016.
`
`7
`
`

`

`C. Statutory Grounds for Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1)-(2)
`1. Claims 1, 10, 11, 18, 27, and 30 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view
`
`of Drury and Lind.
`
`2. Claim 19 is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of Drury, Lind, and Ito.
`
`3. Claim 17 is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of Drury, Lind, Class,
`
`and Ito.
`
`D. Claim Construction (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3))
` Generally, the claim terms in an unexpired patent should be given their broadest
`
`reasonable construction in view of the specification. 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). Claim
`
`terms are generally presumed to take on their ordinary and customary meaning.
`
`The specification of the ’146 patent does not present any special definition for any
`
`claim term, and the prosecution history of the ’146 patent does not include any
`
`claim construction arguments. Therefore, all claim terms should be given their
`
`broadest reasonable construction.
`
`
`
`Independent claims 18 and 27 recite an “ad hoc communication link.” An “ad
`
`hoc communication link,” for the purposes of this proceeding, should be construed
`
`to include “a data interface that is transient in nature, such as a wireless device
`
`(e.g., Bluetooth, IrDA, WiFi, 802.11), a local area wireless link (e.g., WiFi or
`
`Bluetooth), a serial bus interface (e.g., USB, IEEE 1394, FireWire, RS-232), or
`
`UART.” Although the specification does not mention “ad hoc communication
`
`links,” they include communication via, for example, Bluetooth, IrDA, and 802.11,
`
`8
`
`

`

`but are not limited to wireless devices. See, e.g., Ex. 1021, 1:23-30 (“[A] number
`
`of wireless technologies exist for supporting ad hoc networks including Bluetooth,
`
`IrDA, and 802.11. Ad hoc networks are not limited to wireless devices and some or
`
`all of the devices in an ad hoc network may use temporary plug-in connections that
`
`allow these devices to temporarily be part of the network, such as for the duration
`
`of a communication session, and communicate via wired or wireless
`
`connections.”). Additionally, ad hoc communication links include “a local area
`
`wireless link (e.g., WiFi or Bluetooth), serial bus interface (e.g., USB or IEEE Std.
`
`1394 ‘FireWire’), or other data interface that is transient in nature.” Ex. 1020, ¶
`
`[0051]. Consistent with a serial bus
`
`interface constituting an ad hoc
`
`communication link, the ’146 patent describes, for example, at 12:18-13:12, a
`
`personal electronic device (PED) 704 having an RS-232 serial connector 712 for
`
`connecting the PED 704 to a data terminal 702 of the information and control
`
`system 100 and electrically interfacing a processor 106 of the system 100 and the
`
`PED 704 using a universal asynchronous receiver/transmitter (UART) 117 or
`
`universal serial bus (USB).
`
` Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3), as to claims containing means-plus-
`
`function limitations, claim 18 recites four elements that include the term “means”:
`
`(1) “computerized means;” (2) “speech recognition means;” (3) “means for
`
`9
`
`

`

`networking;” and (4) “means for speech synthesis” / “speech synthesis means.”4
`
`When a claim term uses the word “means,” a rebuttable presumption that 35
`
`U.S.C. § 112(6) applies is created. Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d
`
`1339, No. 2013-1130, Slip Op. 13 (Fed, Cir. 2015) (citing Personalized Media
`
`Communications, LLC v. Int’l Trade Commission, 161 F.3d 696, 703-04 (Fed. Cir.
`
`1998)).
`
` The term “computerized means” is subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), since it is
`
`expressed as a means for performing the functions of: (a) receiving an input from
`
`the user; (b) causing utilization of a wireless interface and a means for networking
`
`in order to access information disposed on a remote server or database; (c)
`
`receiving the accessed information received via the wireless interface; and (d)
`
`providing the user with at least a portion of the accessed information relating to the
`
`directions to the business or entity, without reciting structure in support thereof.
`
`These functions are performed by the central processor 106. According to the ’146
`
`patent, the central processor “is optimally an Intel Pentium II®-based design,
`
`although others, such as the AMD K600-series processors, may be used in place of
`
`the Pentium II®.” Id., 7:51-55. Therefore, the structure corresponding to the
`
`computerized means of claim 18 is “a central processor, for example, an Intel
`
`4 The terms “means for speech synthesis” and “speech synthesis means” should
`
`be given the same meaning as they are used interchangeably in claim 18.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Pentium II®-based design or an AMD K600-series processor,” and equivalents
`
`thereof.
`
` The term “speech recognition means” is not subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), since
`
`claim 77 does not recite a function corresponding to the “means.” Cole v.
`
`Kimberly-Clark Corp., 102 F.3d 524, 531 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (the perfunctory
`
`addition of the word “means” does not render a claim subject to 35 U.S.C. §
`
`112(6).
`
` The term “means for networking” is subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112(6) since it is
`
`expressed as a means for performing a function, i.e., “networking,” without
`
`reciting structure in support thereof. The ’146 patent describes a wireless interface
`
`that is employed to transmit data between cars and the server 170 to “access
`
`external networks such as the Internet” and that a wireless link may be provided as
`
`the network interface between the server 170 and a LAN, intranet, or the Internet.
`
`Col. 12, lines 3 to 17. Therefore, the structure corresponding to the means for
`
`networking of claim 18 is “an external network, a LAN, an intranet, or the
`
`Internet” and equivalents thereof.
`
` The term “means for speech synthesis” is subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112(6) since it
`
`is expressed as a means for performing a function, i.e., “speech synthesis,” without
`
`reciting structure in support thereof. The ’146 patent describes a speech synthesis
`
`module 112, shown in Fig. 1, working in conjunction with processor 106 and
`
`11
`
`

`

`speaker 111 to convert a file to an analog audio representation of voice. Ex. 1001,
`
`9:29-34. Therefore, the structure corresponding to the means for speech synthesis
`
`of claim 18 is “a speech recognition module that converts a data file to an analog
`
`audio representation of voice” and equivalents thereof.
`
`E. Explanation of Differences Between Challenged Independent Claims
` The five challenged independent claims of the ’146 patent (claims 1, 17, 18, 19,
`
`and 27) are similar to one another. Each claims slightly different apparatuses that
`
`require the delivery of information from a remote database to an apparatus (such as
`
`an elevator), which contains a display for displaying that information. For ease of
`
`reference, a table showing the differences between all five claims is attached hereto
`
`as Exhibit 1008.
`
`IV. How the Challenged Claims Are Unpatentable (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4)-
`(5))
`A. Claims 1, 10, 11, 18, 27, and 30 are Obvious in View of the Disclosures
`of Drury and Lind
` As described in detail below, claims 1, 10, 11, 18, 27, and 30 are obvious in
`
`view of the disclosures of Drury and Lind, and are thus invalid under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`103(a).
`
` Drury discloses an information system for providing services including traffic,
`
`navigation, and other information services to a driver. Ex. 1004, Abstract. The
`
`information system is programmed to, e.g., (1) accept driver information
`
`commands entered by the user through the handset module, for example, by
`
`12
`
`

`

`speaking a command that is interpreted by a speech recognition system, (2) retrieve
`
`information through the wireless communication interface from the server in
`
`response to the driver information commands, and (3) present the retrieved
`
`information on the handset module, for example, by presenting the information on
`
`the display of the handset, or by playing the information on the audio device of the
`
`handset. Id., 1:65-2:36. Among the commands provided to the information system
`
`is a specification, by an operator of a vehicle, of a desired destination. Id., 5:1-6
`
`(“The navigation service … enable[s] an operator of a vehicle to specify a desired
`
`destination, and then to be guided by the system to that destination while driving
`
`the vehicle.”). The information system disclosed by Drury is shown in Fig. 2:
`
` Lind discloses an automobile, i.e., the Network Vehicle, that includes hardware
`
`and software that allows connections via an “off-board network” that wirelessly
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`connects to the Internet, for example. Ex. 1005, I21-2. The off-board network is
`
`shown in Fig. 3:
`
`
`
`
`
` Lind states that the system includes a speech recognition system that “allows
`
`the driver to access virtually all the vehicle’s features through voice commands.”
`
`Id., I21-3. Using the Network Vehicle’s advanced speech recognition system, “the
`
`driver can” “request travel directions and traffic updates from the Web or other
`
`sources.” Id. This information from the Web, as shown in Fig. 3, is received
`
`wirelessly. Id., I21-2.
`
` Lind also discloses that the Network Vehicle includes a touch screen LCD
`
`display provided in the center console, id., I21-3, which can display navigation
`
`information, as shown in Fig. 9:
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

` Additionally, Lind describes an ad hoc communication link that is established
`
`with a user’s portable device, and that it is possible to download to the portable
`
`device information received by the Network Vehicle from the Internet. For
`
`example, Lind describes that the IBM WorkPad PDA can be docked in a slot
`
`provided in the Network Vehicle. Ex. 1005, p. I21-5. Lind discloses that “E-mails
`
`and appointments can be downloaded to the docked WorkPad PDA.” Ex. 1005, p.
`
`I21-7.
`
` As described below, Drury and Lind disclose all of the limitations of claims 1,
`
`10, 11, 18, 27, and 30 of the ’146 patent.
`
`1. Claim 1
`i. “Computer readable apparatus”
` Drury discloses that the system may be a “computer that is coupled to the
`
`handset module and to the communication module is programmed to perform …
`
`functions,” and “processor 212 is also coupled to a static storage 222 which is a
`
`non-volatile storage used to store code and data for operation of the system.” Ex.
`
`1004, 2:10-13; 10:23-25; Ex. 1002, ¶ 7. Lind describes that “[t]he Network Vehicle
`
`is created by integrating existing hardware and software technologies including
`
`voice recognition, wireless communication, global positioning via satellite, head-
`
`up displays, JavaTM
`
`technology, microprocessors, Web access, and other
`
`Internet/intranet features.” Ex. 1005, I21-1-I21-2; Ex. 1002, ¶ 7.
`
`15
`
`

`

`ii. “a storage medium, said storage medium comprising at least one
`computer program with a plurality of instructions”
` Drury discloses that “processor 212 is … coupled to a static storage 222 which
`
`is a non-volatile storage used to store code and data for operation of the system.”
`
`Ex. 1004, 10:23-25; Ex. 1002, ¶ 8. Lind describes that “[t]he Network Vehicle is
`
`created by integrating existing hardware and software technologies including voice
`
`recognition, wireless communication, global positioning via satellite, head-up
`
`displays,
`
`JavaTM
`
`technology, microprocessors, Web access, and other
`
`Internet/intranet features.” Ex. 1005, I21-1-I21-2; Ex. 1002, ¶ 8. It was obvious, at
`
`the time the alleged invention of claim 1 was made, that computer code, software,
`
`and programs include a plurality of instructions. See, e.g., Ex. 1009, p. 11.6 (“The
`
`CPU is the circuitry within a microcontroller where instructions are executed and
`
`decisions are made”); p. 11.9 (“The Program Counter (PC) controls the sequencing
`
`of instructions to be executed”); see also pp. 11.12-11.14 (“Instruction Set”); Ex.
`
`1002, ¶ 8.
`
`iii. “the computer readable apparatus being part of a computerized
`information system disposed on or within a transport apparatus
`configured to transport at least one person from one location to
`another, the computerized information system being configured to
`adaptively provide a user with desired information relating to a
`plurality of topical areas”
` For example, Drury discloses that it “relates to an information system for motor
`
`vehicles,” and “each in-vehicle system 105 includes an onboard computer 210.”
`
`Ex. 1004, 1:13-14, 9:65-66, Figs. 1 and 2; Ex. 1002, ¶ 9. Drury discloses that “the
`
`16
`
`

`

`navigation service of the vehicle information system as a whole … [is] provided
`
`through a combination of functions that are performed by server system 125 and by
`
`an in-vehicle system 105.” Ex. 1004, 5:1-7, Figs. 1 and 2; Ex. 1002, ¶ 10. Also,
`
`Drury discloses that a user is provided with, for example, traffic-related
`
`information and communication services. Ex. 1004, 6:1-7; Ex. 1002, ¶ 10. Lind
`
`describes that “[t]he Network Vehicle is created by integrating existing hardware
`
`and software technologies including voice recognition, wireless communication,
`
`global positioning via
`
`satellite, head-up displays,
`
`JavaTM
`
`technology,
`
`microprocessors, Web access, and other Internet/intranet features.” Ex. 1005, I21-
`
`1-I21-2; Ex. 1002, ¶ 9, 10. According to Lind, the Network Vehicle’s “voice
`
`recognition technology allows drivers and passengers to verbally request and listen
`
`to e-mail messages, locate a restaurant or hotel, ask for navigation help or for
`
`specific music or sports scores, and use voice-activated telephone services.” Ex.
`
`1005, I21-2; Ex. 1002, ¶ 10.
`
`iv. “said at least one program being configured to … receive a digitized
`representation of a speech input of the user of the transport
`apparatus via a speech recognition apparatus in communication
`with the computerized information system, the speech input relating
`to a desired function to be performed by the computerized
`information system, the desired function relating to at least one of
`the topical areas”
` Drury discloses that “the computer that is coupled to the handset module and to
`
`the communication module is programmed to perform the functions of …
`
`17
`
`

`

`accepting driver information command … for example … speaking a command
`
`that is interpreted by a speech recognition system,” and that the “onboard computer
`
`2310 processes the spoken commands, or alternatively, passes the speech signal to
`
`a remote server that performs all or some of the speech recognition function.” Ex.
`
`1004, 2:10-13, 2:19-22, 43:28-34; Ex. 1002, ¶ 11. Lind describes that “[t]he
`
`Network Vehicle is created by integrating existing hardware and software
`
`technologies
`
`including voice
`
`recognition, … Web access, and other
`
`Internet/intranet features.” Ex. 1005, I21-1-I21-2; Ex. 1002, ¶ 11. According to
`
`Lind, the Network Vehicle’s “voice recognition technology allows drivers and
`
`passengers to verbally request and listen to e-mail messages, locate a restaurant or
`
`hotel, ask for navigation help or for specific music or sports scores, and use voice-
`
`activated telephone services.” Ex. 1005, I21-2; Ex. 1002, ¶ 11. Lind discloses that
`
`by using the Network Vehicle’s advanced speech recognition system, “the driver
`
`can: … request travel directions and traffic updates from the Web or other sources,
`
`check e-mail and voicemail, request news, sports, and stock information.” Ex.
`
`1005, I21-3; Ex. 1002, ¶ 11. And, as West View has admitted, “all speech
`
`recognition systems inherently digitize the speaker’s analog voice.” Ex. 1012, 729.
`
`18
`
`

`

`v. “said at least one program configured to … cause wireless access of
`a remote server to access information necessary to perform the
`desired function”
` Drury discloses that its computer is programmed to perform the function of,
`
`e.g., “retrieving information through the wireless communication interface from
`
`the server in response to the driver information commands.” Ex. 1004, 2:10-13,
`
`2:22-24; Ex. 1002, ¶ 12. Drury also discloses that “in-vehicle systems 105 are
`
`coupled to server system 125 by wireless communication links” and that the in-
`
`vehicle system