Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 1 of 55 Page ID #:415
`
`Ryan E. Hatch (SBN 235577)
`rhatch@linerlaw.com
`Jason L. Haas (SBN 217290)
`jhaas@linerlaw.com
`LINER LLP
`1100 Glendon Avenue, 14th Floor
`Los Angeles, California 90024.3518
`Telephone: (310) 500-3500
`Facsimile:
`(310) 500-3501
`Attorneys for Plaintiff SIGNAL IP, INC.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SIGNAL IP, INC., a California
`corporation,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO.,
`INC., a California corporation;
`HONDA OF AMERICA MRG, INC.,
`an Ohio corporation,
`Defendant.
`
`AND RELATED CASES
`
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`(Related to 2:14-cv-02962-JAK
`(JEMx); SA CV14-00497-JAK (JEMx);
`8:14-cv-00491-JAK (JEMx); 2:14-cv-
`02963 JAK (JEMx); 2:14-cv-02457-
`JAK (JEMx); 2:14-cv-03106-JAK
`(JEMx); 2:14-cv-03111-JAK (JEMx);
`LA CV14-03109 JAK (JEMx); 2:14-cv-
`03105-JAK (JEMx); 2:14-cv-03107-
`JAK (JEMx); 2:14-cv-03113-JAK
`(JEMx); 2:14-cv-03108-JAK (JEMx);
`2:14-cv-03114-JAK (JEMx))
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`Markman Hearing: March 16, 2015
`Time:
` 10:00 a.m.
`Crtrm.: 750
`The Hon. John A. Kronstadt
`Trial Date:
`TBD
`
`IPR2016-01382 - Ex. 1008
`Toyota Motor Corp., Petitioner
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:20)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 2 of 55 Page ID #:416
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`II.
`
`Page
`CONSTRUCTION OF TERMS UPON WHICH PARTIES AGREE .............1
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF EACH DISPUTED CLAIM
`TERM AND IDENTIFICATION OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE................3
`A.
`‘927 Patent ..............................................................................................3
`B.
`‘375 Patent ............................................................................................11
`C.
`‘486 Patent ............................................................................................18
`D.
`‘601 Patent ............................................................................................20
`E.
`‘007 Patent ............................................................................................30
`F.
`‘374 Patent ............................................................................................39
`G.
`‘775 Patent ............................................................................................42
`IDENTIFICATION OF MOST SIGNIFICANT TERMS..............................46
`A.
`Signal’s Statement.................................................................................46
`B.
`Defendants’ Statement ..........................................................................46
`IV. ANTICIPATED LENGTH OF TIME NECESSARY FOR THE
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING .........................................................48
`A.
`Signal’s Statement.................................................................................48
`B.
`Defendants’ Statement ..........................................................................48
`V. DESCRIPTION OF EXPERT WITNESS PROPOSED TESTIMONY ........48
`A.
`Signal’s Statement.................................................................................48
`B.
`Defendants’ Statement (not including VWGoA and Bentley) .............48
`C.
`VWGoA and Bentley Statement...........................................................49
`
`III.
`
`i
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:21)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 3 of 55 Page ID #:417
`
`Pursuant to Standing Patent Rule (“S.P.R.”) 3.4 and the Court’s Minute Order
`of September 15, 2014 (Dkt. 38 in Case No. 2:14-cv-02454) (“Minute Order”)
`Plaintiff Signal IP, Inc. (“Signal”) and Defendants American Honda Motor Co. and
`Honda of America Mfg., Inc. (collectively “Honda”), Nissan North America, Inc.
`(“Nissan”), Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc. (“Mitsubishi”), Mazda Motor of
`America, Inc. (“Mazda”), Subaru of America, Inc. (“Subaru”), Kia Motors America,
`Inc. (“KMA”), BMW of North America, LLC (“BMWNA”), Volvo Cars of North
`America, LLC (“Volvo”), Mercedes-Benz USA LLC (“MBUSA”), Volkswagen
`Group of America (“VWGoA”) and Bentley Motors, Inc. (“Bentley”), Jaguar Land
`Rover North America, LLC (“JLRNA”), and Porsche Cars North America, Inc.
`(“PCNA”) (collectively, “Defendants”) hereby submit their Joint Claim
`Construction and Prehearing Statement for U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,714,927 (“the ‘927
`Patent”), 5,732,375 (“the ‘375 Patent”), 6,434,486 (“the ‘486 Patent”), 6,775,601
`(“the ‘601 Patent”), 6,012,007 (“the ‘007 Patent”), 5,463,374 (“the ‘374 Patent”),
`and 5,954,775 (“the ‘775 Patent”) (Collectively “Patents-in-Suit” or “Asserted
`Patents”).
`CONSTRUCTION OF TERMS UPON WHICH PARTIES AGREE1
`I.
`The below chart reflects the constructions agreed to between Signal and the
`Defendants accused of infringing the patents and claims noted in the first column of
`the chart. Defendants take no position on (and do not agree to any construction for)
`claims that are not asserted in their particular cases.
`
`1 Defendants VWGoA and Bentley take no position on the constructions offered in
`this Section I. VWGoA and Bentley contend only that certain terms in the asserted
`patents are indefinite, as set forth in Section II below. VWGoA and Bentley further
`contend that the other terms in the patents asserted against them require no
`construction other than “plain and ordinary meaning.” Rather than repeat the phrase
`“plain and ordinary meaning” in each section below, VWGoA and Bentley simply
`note their position here. VWGoA and Bentley reserve the right to contend that any
`specific construction proposed below by any party is incorrect.
`1
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:22)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 4 of 55 Page ID #:418
`
`Terms (& Claims)
`
`Agreed Construction
`
`“blind spot”
`
`(‘927 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`
`
`“relative vehicle speed”
`
`(‘927 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`“alert signal”
`
`(‘927 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`An area on a side or on a side and to the rear
`of the host vehicle not visible to the driver
`through the mirrors
`Speed in relation to another vehicle.
`
`A signal for alerting the driver
`
`“detecting target vehicle
`presence and producing an alert
`command”
`
`Detecting that the target vehicle is present at
`least partially in the blind spot and producing
`an alert command
`
`(‘927 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`“total threshold force”
`
`(‘375 Patent, Claim 1)
`
`A minimum force that allows airbag
`deployment based on the total force sensed by
`the entire sensor array
`
`“providing an alarm”
`
`Providing a warning for the driver
`
`(‘486 Patent, Claims 21 & 28)
`
`“traction motor”
`
`An electric motor used to propel a vehicle2
`
`(‘601 Patent, Claims 8, 10-11,
`15, 17)
`
`“force”
`
`(’375 Patent, claim 1)
`
`Pressure that is indicative of weight
`
`“vehicle torque demand”
`
`Torque requested by the driver
`
`(’601 Patent, claim 8)
`
`“means for storing
`identification codes from the
`
`Function:
`
`2 BMWNA agrees to the construction of “traction motor,” but takes no position on
`the constructions of the terms agreed upon by Signal and the other defendants.
`2
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:23)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 5 of 55 Page ID #:419
`
`Terms (& Claims)
`
`Agreed Construction
`
`transmitted sign up messages
`for comparison with
`subsequently transmitted data
`messages to differentiate data
`transmitted from various tire
`locations”
`
`(‘374 Patent, Claim 3)
`
`“yaw rate sensor”
`
`(’486 Patent, Claims 27, 34)
`
`“storing identification codes from the
`transmitted sign-up messages for comparison
`with subsequently transmitted data messages
`to differentiate data transmitted from various
`tire locations”
`
`Structure:
`
`the processor 24 and its associated non-
`volatile memory.
`
`Sensor that measures a vehicle’s deviation
`from a straight course
`
`II.
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF EACH DISPUTED CLAIM TERM
`AND IDENTIFICATION OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
`A.
`‘927 Patent
`The ‘927 Patent is asserted in these actions against defendants Honda, KMA,
`Mazda, Nissan, Volvo, JLRNA, MBUSA, BMWNA, VWGoA, and PCNA.
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`Defendants’ Position
`
`1.
`
`“In a radar system
`wherein a host
`vehicle uses radar
`to detect a target
`vehicle in a blind
`spot of the host
`vehicle driver, a
`method of
`improving the
`perceived zone of
`coverage response
`of automotive
`radar comprising
`the steps of”
`
`Signal is of the view that
`this term does not require a
`construction by the Court,
`and should be given its
`plain and ordinary
`meaning. However, if the
`Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the
`following:
`
`The preamble is limiting.
`
`Evidence: ‘927 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 1 and 3-7;
`
`KMA, Mazda, Nissan,
`Volvo, JLRNA, MBUSA,
`PCNA, BMWNA: The
`preamble is limiting.
`
`Honda: Preamble does not
`limit claim to radar.
`
`Field of the Invention;
`Abstract; Figs. 3d, 4, cols.
`2:28-32; 2:62-65; 3:52 –
`4:21; 4:35:44; claim 1.
`
`3
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:24)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 6 of 55 Page ID #:420
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`2.
`
`“variable sustain
`time”
`
`(Claims 1 and 2)
`
`1:23-27, 31-39, 45-67; 2:1-
`6, 15-34, 41-59, 62-65; 3:2-
`13, 41-51, 57-4:21; 4:22-
`49; 4:56-61; 5:1-25,
`Claims.
`
`Prosecution history of the
`‘927 Patent, e.g. at Notice
`of Allowance
`(SIG00001331 –
`SIG00001333), e.g. p. 6.
`
`Dictionary definitions of
`Blind Spot, SIG000001704.
`
`Dictionary definitions of
`Radar, SIG000001710.
`
`Signal is of the view that
`this term does not require a
`construction by the Court,
`and should be given its
`plain and ordinary
`meaning. However, if the
`Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the
`following:
`
`A variable period of time
`for which the alert signal
`persists
`
`Evidence: ‘927 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 1 and 3-7;
`1:23-27, 31-39, 45-67; 2:1-
`6, 15-34, 41-59, 62-65; 3:2-
`13, 41-51, 57-4:21; 4:22-
`49; 4:56-61; 5:1-25,
`Claims.
`
`Honda, JLRNA, KMA
`Mazda, MBUSA, Nissan,
`PCNA, Volvo: “a variable
`period of time for which the
`alert signal persists after a
`target vehicle is no longer
`detected”
`
`Additional clarifying
`statement: The ’927 Patent
`distinguishes “variable
`sustain time” from a
`separate concept of “hold”
`time. A “hold” time is the
`minimum time for which
`the signal persists after a
`target vehicle is no longer
`detected. The “variable
`sustain time” is used when
`the alert signal time has
`been equal to or greater
`than the threshold time. The
`minimal “hold” time is
`
`4
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:25)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 7 of 55 Page ID #:421
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`Prosecution history of the
`‘927 Patent, e.g. at Notice
`of Allowance
`(SIG00001331 –
`SIG00001333), e.g. p. 6.
`
`used when the alert signal
`time is less than the
`threshold time.
`
`Abstract; Figs. 2, 3a-3d, 4,
`5, 7; cols. 1:45-55; 2:1-6;
`2:15-34; 3:52 – 4:44, 5:1-
`16; claims 1, 7-12.
`
`File History: Notice of
`Allowance at 2.
`
`Deposition Transcript of
`Dr. Petros Ioannou
`(Rough). See, e.g., 41:7-
`11, 45:17-22, 47:6-14,
`49:2-50:19, 88:22-94:14.
`
`IBM Dictionary of
`Computing, p. 728 (1994)
`(“variable . . . (9) Contrast
`with constant.”); The IEEE
`Standard Dictionary of
`Electrical and Electronics
`Terms, p. 1174 (6th Ed.
`1996) (“variable . . . (3) A
`quantity or data item whose
`value can change . . .
`Contrast: constant.”);
`American Heritage
`Dictionary ((variable): 1b.
`Inconstant; 3. Mathematics
`Having no fixed
`quantitative value); Oxford
`Dictionary ((variable): Not
`consistent); Collins
`Dictionary ((variable): “1.
`Liable to or capable of
`change; 2. Lacking
`constancy; 3. Having a
`
`5
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:26)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 8 of 55 Page ID #:422
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`range of possible values; 6.
`(of an electrical component
`or device) designed so that
`a characteristic property,
`such as resistance, can be
`varied”); Cambridge
`Dictionary ((variable):
`“likely to change, or
`showing change or
`difference as a
`characteristic”); Oxford
`Amer. Eng. Dictionary
`((sustain): “cause to
`continue or be prolonged
`for an extended period or
`without interruption”);
`American Heritage
`Dictionary ((sustain): “to
`keep in existence; maintain,
`continue, or prolong”)
`Collins Dictionary
`((sustain): “to maintain or
`prolong”); Cambridge
`Amer. Dictionary
`((sustain): “to cause or
`allow something to
`continue for a period of
`time”).
`
`Deposition Transcript of
`Dr. Petros Ioannou
`(Rough), 39:19-42:24;
`49:7-50:19; 81:16-84:18.
`
`BMWNA: “the length of
`time for which an alert is
`sustained once the alert
`lasts longer than a threshold
`time. The length of the
`sustain time varies with the
`
`6
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:27)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 9 of 55 Page ID #:423
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`relative speed between the
`host and target vehicles”
`
`Claims 1, 2
`Abstract
`Figs. 3a-3d, 4, 5
`Col. 2, ll. 15-34
`Col. 4, ll. 4-21, 32-49
`Col. 5, ll. 1-44
`
`Expert Deposition
`Transcript of Dr. Petros
`Ioannou (Rough), 25:10-
`94:12.
`
`Honda, Mazda, Nissan,
`Volvo, JLRNA, MBUSA,
`PCNA: Indefinite under
`§ 112, paragraph 2.
`
`Expert Declaration of Azim
`Eskandarian, D.Sc.
`Cols. 2:32-34; 4:4-7; 4:8-
`21; 5:17-25.
`
`Declaration of Dr. Petros
`Ioannou; Deposition
`Transcript of Dr. Petros
`Ioannou (Rough), 25:10-
`94:12
`
`Honda: Alternatively,
`“wherein the alert signal
`remains active when a
`target vehicle is beyond the
`range that the object
`detection system can
`detect”
`
`3.
`
`“wherein the zone
`of coverage
`appears to
`increase
`according to the
`variable sustain
`time”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Not indefinite.
`
`Signal is of the view that
`this term does not require a
`construction by the Court,
`and should be given its
`plain and ordinary
`meaning. However, if the
`Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the
`following:
`
`Wherein the zone of
`coverage as perceived by
`the vehicle driver appears
`to increase according to a
`variable sustain time.
`
`Evidence: ‘927 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 1 and 3-7;
`1:23-27, 31-39, 45-67; 2:1-
`6, 15-34, 41-59, 62-65; 3:2-
`13, 41-51, 57-4:21; 4:22-
`49; 4:56-61; 5:1-25,
`
`7
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`(cid:28)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 10 of 55 Page ID #:424
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`Claims.
`
`Prosecution history of the
`‘927 Patent, e.g. at Notice
`of Allowance
`(SIG00001331 –
`SIG00001333), e.g. p. 6.
`
`Expert Declaration of Dr.
`Petros Ioannou, e.g. at ¶¶
`20-25; Eskandarian Decl., ¶
`25; ‘927 Patent, 2:32-34,
`4:4-7.
`
`Expert Deposition
`Transcript of Dr. Petros
`Ioannou (Rough), 25:10-
`94:12.
`
`4.
`
`“a threshold time”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Signal is of the view that
`this term does not require a
`construction by the Court,
`and should be given its
`plain and ordinary
`meaning. However, if the
`Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the
`following:
`
`Cols. 4:18-20; Fig. 4. See
`generally Declaration and
`Deposition Transcript of
`Dr. Petros Ioannou
`(Rough).
`
`VWGoA/Bentley:
`Indefinite
`
`The claim term fails to
`inform those skilled in the
`art of the scope of the
`claimed invention with
`reasonable certainty. There
`is an absence of any
`intrinsic evidence that
`would support construction
`of this term.
`
`For example, the term as
`used in claim 1 is
`inherently subjective, and
`depends on the perception
`of the user. The patent fails
`to define when or how the
`claimed zone of coverage
`“appears to increase
`according to the variable
`sustain time.”
`JLRNA and Mazda:
`
`“amount of time that must
`be exceeded or equaled to
`trigger the variable sustain
`time”
`
`Abstract; Figs. 5, 6; cols.
`2:15-34, 4:22-64; 5:1-16;
`claims 7-12.
`
`8
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:19)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 11 of 55 Page ID #:425
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`Amount of time that must
`be exceeded or equaled
`
`Evidence: ‘927 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 1 and 3-7;
`1:23-27, 31-39, 45-67; 2:1-
`6, 15-34, 41-59, 62-65; 3:2-
`13, 41-51, 57-4:21; 4:22-
`49; 4:56-61; 5:1-25,
`Claims.
`
`Prosecution history of the
`‘927 Patent, e.g. at Notice
`of Allowance
`(SIG00001331 –
`SIG00001333), e.g. p. 6.
`
`Dictionary definitions of
`Threshold, SIG000001712.
`
`File History: Notice of
`Allowance at 2.
`
`Deposition Transcript of
`Dr. Petros Ioannou
`(Rough). See, e.g., 88:22-
`94:14.
`
`Oxford Dictionary
`((threshold): “2. The
`magnitude or intensity that
`must be exceeded for a
`certain reaction,
`phenomenon, result, or
`condition to occur or be
`manifested”); American
`Heritage Dictionary
`((threshold): “4. The point
`that must be exceeded to
`begin producing a given
`effect or result or to elicit a
`response.”); Collins English
`Dictionary ((threshold): “5.
`a level or point at which
`something would happen,
`would cease to happen, or
`would take effect, become
`true, etc.; 6. The minimum
`intensity or value of a
`signal, etc., that will
`produce a response or
`specified effect”);
`MacMillan Dictionary
`((threshold): “1. A limit at
`which an arrangement
`changes. For example a tax
`threshold is the level of
`income or profit at which
`you start to pay a tax; 1.a. a
`level at which something
`
`9
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:20)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 12 of 55 Page ID #:426
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`happens. For example, you
`hearing threshold is the
`level of sound that you can
`hear, and you pain
`threshold is the level of
`pain that you can feel
`without suffering or
`complaining”); Merriam-
`Webster Dictionary
`((threshold): “a level, point,
`or value above which
`something is true or will
`take place and below which
`it is not or will not”)
`
`Honda, Mazda, Nissan,
`Volvo, JLRNA, MBUSA,
`PCNA:
`
`Indefinite under § 112,
`paragraph 2.
`
`Expert Declaration of Azim
`Eskandarian, D.Sc.
`
`Cols. 2:32-34; 4:4-7; 4:8-
`21; 5:17-25.
`
`Declaration of Dr. Petros
`Ioannou; Deposition
`Transcript of Dr. Petros
`Ioannou (Rough). See, e.g.,
`25:10-94:12
`
`VWGoA/Bentley:
`Indefinite
`
`The claim term fails to
`inform those skilled in the
`art of the scope of the
`claimed invention with
`
`5.
`
`“improving the
`perceived zone of
`coverage”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Not indefinite.
`
`Signal is of the view that
`this term does not require a
`construction by the Court,
`and should be given its
`plain and ordinary
`meaning. However, if the
`Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the
`following:
`
`Improving the perceived
`zone of coverage,
`compared to an
`interrupted signal.
`
`Evidence: ‘927 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 1 and 3-7;
`1:23-27, 31-39, 45-67; 2:1-
`6, 15-34, 41-59, 62-65; 3:2-
`13, 41-51, 57-4:21; 4:22-
`49; 4:56-61; 5:1-25,
`
`10
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:21)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 13 of 55 Page ID #:427
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`Claims.
`
`Prosecution history of the
`‘927 Patent, e.g. at Notice
`of Allowance
`(SIG00001331 –
`SIG00001333), e.g. p. 6.
`
`Expert Declaration of Dr.
`Petros Ioannou, e.g. at ¶¶
`20-25; ‘927 Patent, Fig. 3c,
`3d, 3:52-4:7.
`
`Expert Deposition
`Transcript of Dr. Petros
`Ioannou (Rough), 25:10-
`94:12.
`
`reasonable certainty. There
`is an absence of any
`intrinsic evidence that
`would support construction
`of this term.
`
`For example, the term as
`used in claim 1 is
`inherently subjective, and
`depends on the perception
`of the user. The patent fails
`to define when or how the
`claimed “perceived” zone
`of coverage is improved.
`
`‘375 Patent
`B.
`The ‘375 Patent is asserted in these actions against defendants Honda, KMA,
`Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, BMWNA, and VWGoA.
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`6.
`
`“force
`distribution”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Signal is of the view that this
`term does not require a
`construction by the Court, and
`should be given its plain and
`ordinary meaning. However,
`if the Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the following:
`
`Honda, Mazda,
`Mitsubishi, Nissan:
`
`“a pattern of pressure
`distribution measured by
`sampling a plurality of
`seat sensors”
`
`Cols. 1:59-2:3; Abstract.
`
`A distribution of force or
`pressure on the seat
`Evidence: ‘375 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 2-9; 1:44-2:21,
`63-3:10; 3:21-47; 3:51-4:17;
`4:18-29, 30-5:37, Claims.
`Prosecution history of the ‘375
`Patent, e.g. at First Office
`11
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:22)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 14 of 55 Page ID #:428
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`Honda, KMA, Mazda,
`Mitsubishi, Nissan:
`
`“on the top surface of the
`seat, just under the seat
`cover”
`
`Abstract; Fig. 2; cols.
`1:59-61; 2:4-6; 2:8;
`3:21-32; 4:65-5:8; 5:31-
`33.
`
`‘007 patent, col. 1:31-45.
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`Action (SIG00000492 –
`SIG00000499), e.g. p. 40;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 25;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 26;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 27;
`Notice of Allowability
`(SIG00000723), e.g. p. 10;
`Reasons for Allowance
`(SIG00000724 –
`SIG00000727), e.g. p. 6.
`Signal is of the view that this
`term does not require a
`construction by the Court, and
`should be given its plain and
`ordinary meaning. However,
`if the Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the following:
`
`“on the passenger
`seat”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Located such that weight on
`the passenger seat can be
`detected.
`Evidence: ‘375 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 2-9; 1:44-2:21,
`63-3:10; 3:21-47; 3:51-4:17;
`4:18-29, 30-5:37, Claims.
`‘007 Patent, 1:39-43. ‘007
`Patent, 1:31-42, citing U.S.
`Pat. No. 5,474,327; U.S. Pat.
`No. 5,474,327, 4:37-5:3.
`Prosecution history of the ‘375
`Patent, e.g. at First Office
`Action (SIG00000492 –
`SIG00000499), e.g. p. 40;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 25;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 26;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 27;
`Notice of Allowability
`(SIG00000723), e.g. p. 10;
`Reasons for Allowance
`(SIG00000724 –
`SIG00000727), e.g. p. 6.
`
`7.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`12
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:23)
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 15 of 55 Page ID #:429
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`8.
`
`“seat area”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`9.
`
`“sensor array”/
`“array of force
`sensors”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Signal is of the view that this
`term does not require a
`construction by the Court, and
`should be given its plain and
`ordinary meaning. However,
`if the Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the following:
`
`Area of the seat.
`Evidence: ‘375 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 2-9; 1:44-2:21,
`63-3:10; 3:21-47; 3:51-4:17;
`4:18-29, 30-5:37, Claims.
`Prosecution history of the ‘375
`Patent, e.g. at First Office
`Action (SIG00000492 –
`SIG00000499), e.g. p. 40;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 25;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 26;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 27;
`Notice of Allowability
`(SIG00000723), e.g. p. 10;
`Reasons for Allowance
`(SIG00000724 –
`SIG00000727), e.g. p. 6.
`‘007 Patent, 1:39-43. ‘007
`Patent, 1:31-42, citing U.S.
`Pat. No. 5,474,327; U.S. Pat.
`No. 5,474,327, 4:37-5:3.
`Signal is of the view that this
`term does not require a
`construction by the Court, and
`should be given its plain and
`ordinary meaning. However,
`if the Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the following:
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`Honda, KMA, Mazda,
`Mitsubishi, Nissan:
`
`“area of the bottom seat
`cushion”
`
`Abstract; Figs. 2, 4, 7, 8;
`cols. 1:59 – 2:3; 2:12-21;
`3:21-32; 3:48-67; 4:17-
`5:33; Mar. 27, 1997
`Examiner Office Action;
`July 3, 1997 Applicant
`Amendment and
`Response; Sept. 10, 1997
`Notice of Allowance;
`U.S. Patent No.
`5,474,327; U.S. Patent
`No. 6,012,007.
`
`Honda, KMA, Mazda,
`Mitsubishi, Nissan:
`
`“an ordered or
`symmetrical grouping of
`[force] sensors arranged
`in rows and columns”
`
`Ordered grouping of [force]
`sensors.
`Evidence: ‘375 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 2-9; 1:44-2:21,
`63-3:10; 3:21-47; 3:51-4:17;
`13
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:24)
`
`Abstract; Figs. 1-4, 7, 8;
`cols. 1: 59 – 2:20; 3:21-
`47; 3:66-4:2; 4:17 –
`5:11; Mar. 27, 1997
`Examiner Office Action;
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 16 of 55 Page ID #:430
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`4:18-29, 30-5:37, Claims.
`Prosecution history of the ‘375
`Patent, e.g. at First Office
`Action (SIG00000492 –
`SIG00000499), e.g. p. 40;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 25;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 26;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 27;
`Notice of Allowability
`(SIG00000723), e.g. p. 10;
`Reasons for Allowance
`(SIG00000724 –
`SIG00000727), e.g. p. 6.
`Dictionary definitions of
`Array, SIG000001703.
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`July 3, 1997 Applicant
`Amendment and
`Response; Sept. 10,
`1997 Notice of
`Allowance; U.S. Patent
`No. 5,474,327; U.S.
`Patent No. 5,570,903.
`
`Webster’s II New
`College Dictionary
`(1999), pg. 62 ((array):
`“a rectangular
`arrangement of
`quantities in rows and
`columns, as in a
`matrix”); Merriam-
`Webster’s School
`Dictionary (1999), pg.
`48 ((array): “Regular
`order or arrangement;
`An imposing group:
`large number; A group
`of mathematical
`elements (as numbers or
`letters) arranged in rows
`and columns.”)
`
`10. “seat area
`threshold force”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Signal is of the view that this
`term does not require a
`construction by the Court, and
`should be given its plain and
`ordinary meaning. However,
`if the Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the following:
`
`Honda and Mazda: “A
`minimum force different
`than the total threshold
`force that allows airbag
`deployment based on the
`forces measured by the
`sensors in only one of
`the seat areas.”
`
`A minimum force that allows
`airbag deployment based on
`the forces in one of the seat
`14
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:25)
`
`Abstact; Figs. 2-9; Cols.
`3:48-67; 4:1-16; 5:12-
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 17 of 55 Page ID #:431
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`30; Claims; Prosecution
`History at Response
`(SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g., p.
`SIG00000706.
`
`Honda:
`
`“comparing the pressure
`in each seat area to
`identify if pressure is
`concentrated in one
`area”
`
`Abstract; Figs. 4, 7, 8;
`cols. 1:59 – 2:3; 2:12-21;
`3:21-32; 3:48-67; 4:17 –
`5:30; Mar. 27, 1997
`Examiner Office Action;
`July 3, 1997 Applicant
`Amendment and
`Response; Sept. 10, 1997
`Notice of Allowance.
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`areas.
`Evidence: ‘375 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 2-9; 1:44-2:21,
`63-3:10; 3:21-47; 3:51-4:17;
`4:18-29, 30-5:37, Claims.
`Prosecution history of the ‘375
`Patent, e.g. at First Office
`Action (SIG00000492 –
`SIG00000499), e.g. p. 40;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 25;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 26;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 27;
`Notice of Allowability
`(SIG00000723), e.g. p. 10;
`Reasons for Allowance
`(SIG00000724 –
`SIG00000727), e.g. p. 6.
`Dictionary definitions of
`Threshold, SIG000001712.
`Signal is of the view that this
`term does not require a
`construction by the Court, and
`should be given its plain and
`ordinary meaning. However,
`if the Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the following:
`
`11. “determining the
`existence of a
`local pressure
`area when the
`calculated total
`force is
`concentrated in
`one of said seat
`areas”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Determining if pressure is
`concentrated in one seat area
`
`Evidence: ‘375 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 2-9; 1:44-2:21,
`63-3:10; 3:21-47; 3:51-4:17;
`4:18-29, 30-5:37, Claims.
`
`‘375 Patent, 4:18-29.
`
`Prosecution history of the ‘375
`Patent, e.g. at First Office
`Action (SIG00000492 –
`SIG00000499), e.g. p. 40;
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`15
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:26)
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 18 of 55 Page ID #:432
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`12. “calculating the
`total force of the
`sensor array”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 25;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 26;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 27;
`Notice of Allowability
`(SIG00000723), e.g. p. 10;
`Reasons for Allowance
`(SIG00000724 –
`SIG00000727), e.g. p. 6.
`
`Dictionary definitions of
`Local, SIG000001708.
`
`Signal is of the view that this
`term does not require a
`construction by the Court, and
`should be given its plain and
`ordinary meaning. However,
`if the Court determines that a
`construction is necessary,
`Signal proposes the following:
`
`Calculating the total force
`sensed by the entire sensor
`array.
`
`Evidence: ‘375 Patent,
`Abstract; Figs. 2-9; 1:44-2:21,
`63-3:10; 3:21-47; 3:51-4:17;
`4:18-29, 30-5:37, Claims.
`
`‘375 Patent, 4:9-15.
`
`Prosecution history of the ‘375
`Patent, e.g. at First Office
`Action (SIG00000492 –
`SIG00000499), e.g. p. 40;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`
`Mazda, Mitsubishi,
`Nissan:
`
`“calculating the total
`force sensed by the
`entire sensor array”
`
`Honda:
`
`“calculating based on the
`value from each sensor
`in the entire sensor
`array”
`
`Cols. 1:65-2:3; 3:48-50;
`Fig. 4.
`
`16
`Case No. 2:14-cv-02454-JAK (JEMx)
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
`(cid:20)(cid:27)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-02454-JAK-JEM Document 46 Filed 01/30/15 Page 19 of 55 Page ID #:433
`
`Terms & Claims Plaintiff’s Position
`
`Defendants’ Position
`
`13. “concentrated”
`
`(Claim 1)
`
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 25;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 26;
`Response (SIG00000695 –
`SIG00000712), e.g. p. 27;
`Notice of Allowability
`(SIG00000723), e.g. p. 10;
`Reasons for Allowance
`(SIG00000724 –
`SIG00000727), e.g. p. 6.
`Signal is of the view that this
`term does not require a
`construction by the Court, and
`should be given its plain and
`ordinary meaning.
`
`‘375 Patent, Abstract; Figs. 2-
`9; 1