throbber
IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`In re U.S. Patent No. 7,268,703
`
`Filed:
`
`September 18, 2003
`
`Issued:
`
`September 11, 2007
`
`Inventors: Darrin W. Kabel; Steven J. Myers
`
`Assignee: Garmin Ltd.
`
`Title:
`
`Methods, Systems, and Devices for Cartographic Alerts
`
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. MICHAEL S. BRAASCH
`
`I, Dr. Michael S. Braasch, make this declaration at the request of FLIR
`
`Systems, Inc. and FLIR Maritime US, Inc. in connection with the petition for inter
`
`partes review submitted by Petitioners for U.S. Patent No. 7,268,703 (“the 703
`
`Patent”). All statements made herein of my own knowledge are true, and all
`
`statements made herein based on information and belief are believed to be true.
`
`Although I am being compensated for my time in preparing this declaration, the
`
`opinions articulated herein are my own, and I have no stake in the outcome of this
`
`FLIR-1003.001
`
`

`

`proceeding or any related litigation or administrative proceedings.
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have reviewed the relevant
`
`portions of the following documents:
`
`FLIR-1001
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,268,703 to Kabel et al. (“703 Patent”)
`
`FLIR-1002
`
`Prosecution File History of U.S. Patent No. 7,268,703
`
`FLIR-1004
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Michael S. Braasch
`
`FLIR-1005 W.J. de Jong, Automated Route Planning – A Network-Based
`Route Planning Solution for Marine Navigation, University of
`Nottingham (December 2001) (“de Jong”)
`
`FLIR-1006
`
`FLIR-1007
`
`FLIR-1008
`
`FLIR-1009
`
`FLIR-1010
`
`FLIR-1011
`
`L. Tetley et al., Electronic Navigation Systems, 3d Ed.
`(Butterworth-Heinemann 2001) (“Tetley”)
`
`B. Brogdon, Boat Navigation for the Rest of Us, 2d Ed.,
`Introduction (McGraw-Hill 2001) (“Brogdon”)
`Fernão Vaz Dourado, Map of West Africa Waterways (1571)
`
`National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Nautical
`Chart 25664 (1976)
`
`National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Nautical
`Chart 12283-02 (1990)
`
`International Maritime Organization, Resolution A.817(19),
`Performance Standards for Electronic Chart Display and
`Information Systems (ECDIS) (Dec. 15, 1996)
`
`FLIR-1012
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,356,837 to Yokota et al. (“Yokota”)
`
`FLIR-1013 Wan Xiaoxia et al., Electronic chart display and
`information system, Geo-spatial Information Science, 5:1, 7-11
`(Mar. 5, 2002) (“Xiaoxia”)
`
`2
`
`FLIR-1003.002
`
`

`

`FLIR-1017
`
`FLIR-1018
`
`FLIR-1019
`
`FLIR-1021
`
`Hein Sabelis, Voyage Planning in ECDIS, International
`Hydrographic Review, Monaco, LXXVI(2) (September 1999)
`
`Nathaniel Bowditch, The American Practical Navigator,
`National Imagery and Mapping Agency, U.S. Government
`(2002 Bicentennial Edition) (“Bowditch”)
`
`Encyclopedia of Electronics, 2d. Ed. (McGraw-Hill 1990)
`(excerpts)
`
`Complaint filed in Garmin Switzerland GmbH and Garmin
`Corp. v. FLIR Maritime US, Inc. (f/k/a Raymarine, Inc.), Case
`No. 16-2806 (D. Kansas)
`
`FLIR-1022
`
`Garmin’s Opposition to FLIR’s Motion to Dismiss the
`Complaint, Case No. 16-2806, D.I. 24 (D. Kansas Feb. 8, 2017)
`
`2.
`
`The opinions I have formed as explained herein are informed by and
`
`based on my consideration of the documents listed above, as well as my own
`
`knowledge and experience based upon my work in the relevant field of technology,
`
`as discussed below.
`
`3.
`
`The application that led to the issuance of the 703 Patent was filed on
`
`September 18, 2003. I am familiar with the technology described therein and am
`
`aware of the state of the art around September 2003. It is my opinion that a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art would include someone who has a Bachelor’s degree in
`
`Electrical Engineering (or related discipline) and 3 to 5 years of experience in
`
`navigation engineering. A person holding a more advanced degree but less
`
`experience (e.g., a Master’s degree and 1 to 2 years of experience) would also
`
`3
`
`FLIR-1003.003
`
`

`

`qualify. Consistent with my opinion, I understand that Patent Owner has identified
`
`in litigation involving the 703 Patent that the related art is “computer-assisted
`
`navigation.” FLIR-1022.012, fn. 5. I held at least the qualifications of a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art as of September 2003. My analyses and opinions herein
`
`are given from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art as of
`
`September 2003, unless stated otherwise.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS AND COMPENSATION
`
`4.
`
`I am currently a Professor with tenure in the School of Electrical
`
`Engineering and Computer Science at Ohio University.
`
`5.
`
`I received my Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in
`
`Electrical Engineering from the Ohio University in 1988 and 1989 respectively. In
`
`1992, I received a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering also from Ohio University.
`
`During that time, my post-baccalaureate and doctoral work focused on aircraft
`
`navigation systems with an emphasis in GPS.
`
`6.
`
`From 1989 to 1993, I was a research engineer in the Avionics
`
`Engineering Center at Ohio University. I became an adjunct assistant professor in
`
`the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Ohio University in 1993
`
`and have been on the faculty at Ohio University since that time. I have held the
`
`title of Professor in the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
`
`since 2003 and was appointed as the Thomas Professor of Electrical Engineering in
`
`4
`
`FLIR-1003.004
`
`

`

`2004. As a professor of Electrical Engineering, I have taught courses in navigation
`
`and real-time positioning including courses specifically on the use of GPS.
`
`7.
`
`I am a Licensed Professional Engineer (P.E.) in the State of Ohio. In
`
`my professional career, I have specialized in the areas of electronic navigation
`
`receiver design, electronic navigation system engineering, satellite-based
`
`navigation systems, inertial navigation systems, and integrated navigation systems.
`
`8.
`
`Since the mid 1980s, I have been involved with research related to
`
`navigation and transportation systems including navigation system computer
`
`modeling and validation; characterization of GPS error sources and development
`
`of mitigation strategies; design, development and testing of software-defined GPS
`
`receiver architectures; design, development and flight testing of advanced cockpit
`
`displays; and analysis of safety-certification issues in unmanned aerial vehicle
`
`operations. I have been the recipient of over 65 research grants and contracts,
`
`including awards from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation
`
`Administration, Air Force Office of Scientific Research and NASA. In 1992 I
`
`received the RTCA (formerly known as the Radio Technical Commission for
`
`Aeronautics) William E. Jackson Award in recognition of an outstanding aviation
`
`electronics publication.
`
`9.
`
`I have published over 80 journal articles, book chapters, conference
`
`papers, and workshop papers, most of which were related to navigation systems. I
`
`5
`
`FLIR-1003.005
`
`

`

`have authored or co-authored over 20 academic publications in the areas of
`
`graphical display systems, electronic navigation system engineering, satellite-based
`
`navigation systems with emphasis in GPS, and integrated navigation systems.
`
`These publications include book chapters in Global Positioning System: Theory
`
`and Applications, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
`
`Washington, D.C. (1996). A complete list of my publications is included in my
`
`curriculum vitae [FLIR-1004].
`
`10.
`
`I have given numerous presentations at various conferences and
`
`universities worldwide on these topics. In particular, I have been invited speak and
`
`publish in connection with conference proceedings on the navigation systems at
`
`venues around the world. Additional contributions of mine to the field are set forth
`
`in my current curriculum vitae [FLIR-1004].
`
`11.
`
`In addition to gaining expertise via my academic training, professional
`
`experiences, and research accomplishments described above, I have kept abreast of
`
`various sub-disciplines within the field of navigation systems (such as marine
`
`navigation) by reading technical literature, attending and presenting at conferences,
`
`and attending and presenting at symposia. I have been invited to participate in the
`
`peer review process for various technical journals, and conferences, and have
`
`reviewed manuscripts submitted by other engineers relating to navigation system
`
`technology. Furthermore, I have collaborated with or have communicated with
`
`6
`
`FLIR-1003.006
`
`

`

`many of the engineers in the field of navigation systems.
`
`12. A copy of my curriculum vitae is found at Exhibit FLIR-1004.
`
`13.
`
`I am being compensated for my time expended in connection with this
`
`matter at the rate of $450 per hour, plus reimbursement of any expenses I incur. I
`
`have no financial stake in the outcome of this matter, and my compensation is not
`
`contingent upon the outcome of this matter.
`
`III. RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`14.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether certain
`
`claims of the 703 Patent are anticipated or rendered obvious by the prior art.
`
`15.
`
`I understand that in order for prior art to anticipate a claim under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102, the reference must disclose every limitation contained in the claim.
`
`16.
`
`I understand that a claimed invention is not patentable under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 103 if the differences between the invention as claimed 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 of ordinary skill in the art. I also understand that
`
`an analysis of obviousness considers the level of ordinary skill in the art, the scope
`
`and content of the prior art, the differences between the prior art and the claimed
`
`subject matter, and any secondary considerations which may suggest that the
`
`claimed invention was not obvious.
`
`17.
`
`I have learned through legal counsel that the courts have recognized
`
`7
`
`FLIR-1003.007
`
`

`

`several rationales for combining references or modifying a reference to show the
`
`obviousness of claimed subject matter. I understand these include: combining
`
`prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; the
`
`substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; use of
`
`a known technique to improve a similar device in a known way; applying a known
`
`technique to a known device to yield predictable results; choosing from a finite
`
`number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of
`
`success; and some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would
`
`have led a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the prior art reference or to
`
`combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
`
`IV. BACKGROUND OF THE TECHNOLOGY
`
`18.
`
`The following analysis regarding the use of known technology such as
`
`computers and GPS receivers in marine navigation applications is based on prior
`
`art to the 703 Patent and my understanding of and experience with such
`
`technology.
`
`19.
`
`The 703 Patent is directed to plotting and calculating maritime
`
`navigation courses that avoid dangerous or difficult conditions, such as obstacles,
`
`shallow water, or inclement weather. The concept underlying the 703 Patent is
`
`centuries old. Relying on nautical charts showing graphic representations of a
`
`maritime area and adjacent coastal regions, sailors for many hundreds of years
`
`8
`
`FLIR-1003.008
`
`

`

`plotted a course from starting point to destination that would avoid hazards or
`
`impediments along the way. While the 703 Patent describes the use of modern-era
`
`technology to accomplish this, such technology was well-known to be used in the
`
`maritime industry well before the filing date of the 703 Patent. In the following
`
`paragraphs I discuss this in more detail.
`
`A. Marine Navigation Background
`
`20. As the inventors acknowledged in the Background of the Invention
`
`section of the 703 Patent, “[s]afe boating…requires common sense and the ability
`
`to remain alert to the prevailing boating conditions.” FLIR-1001 at 1:12-14.
`
`Boaters have available to them “a variety of equipment” that the boater can use in
`
`“planning and navigating a course for the boat.” Id. at 1:14-19. Still, there is
`
`“quite a bit of information for the boater to consider in planning and navigating a
`
`course for the boat.” Id. at 1:21-23. This runs the risk that a boater “may
`
`inadvertently overlook one or more hazards in planning their course.” Id. at 1:25-
`
`26.
`
`21.
`
`The inventors of the 703 Patent were not the first to recognize the
`
`problems and dangers associated with boating and the ways to avoid them. Indeed,
`
`before the filing date of the 703 Patent, whole books had been written on the
`
`subject. See Brogdon (FLIR-1007) at .012 (“[s]truggling with navigation, getting
`
`lost, or going aground seriously detracts from the fun of owning a boat…. This
`
`9
`
`FLIR-1003.009
`
`

`

`book is meant to help all navigators steer around the shoals and eddies of
`
`inappropriate methods and learn to navigate easily, accurately, and without fuss”);
`
`Tetley (FLIR-1006) .096(“[e]ver since man first went to sea there has been a
`
`requirement for some form of recognition of the sea-going environment to assist in
`
`the safe passage to the required destination. Knowledge of the coastline, safe
`
`channels for navigation which avoid wrecks, sandbanks etc., and tidal information
`
`all play their part in assisting the navigator”); Bowditch (FLIR-1018) at
`
`.007(“since antiquity, mariners have gathered available navigation information and
`
`put it into a text for others to follow”). The 703 Patent inventors were also not the
`
`first to recognize that computers could beneficially assist with marine navigation.
`
`Tetley’s entire book (FLIR-1006, titled “Electronic Navigation Systems”) is
`
`devoted to the subject. Tetley wrote in 2001 that the “past decade has seen huge
`
`advantages in technology and no more so than in marine navigation….
`
`[S]pearheading this technological advance has been the computer. It has become as
`
`common on board ships as in our normal lives.” FLIR-1006 at .012.
`
`22.
`
`The 703 Patent states that it is directed generally to “marine
`
`navigational methods, systems, and devices.” FLIR-1001 at 1:45-46. Brogdon
`
`gives a succinct explanation of what constitutes marine navigation:
`
`Navigation is the art and science of finding where we are and of
`
`finding our way safely to our destination. We usually start at a known
`
`10
`
`FLIR-1003.010
`
`

`

`position, such as the seaward end of a channel, and go to another
`
`position a number of miles away – a buoy, a place where we change
`
`course, or a fishing spot. Our fundamental questions are: What is the
`
`direction to our destination? When will we arrive? Are there any
`
`hazards along the way? After we have traveled for a while, another
`
`question may arise: Where are we now?
`
`FLIR-1007.015(Chapter 1).
`
`23. A critical component of safe and successful marine navigation is the
`
`use of nautical “charts.” Nautical charts are to boaters what road maps are to
`
`drivers. As Brogdon puts it:
`
`We use charts to identify aids to navigation and landmarks, to avoid
`
`shoals and other hazards, and to find or show the boat’s position.
`
`Using a chart, we can find the direction and distance from the boat’s
`
`position to a destination. We can see the depths along the way. It can
`
`help us determine where we are long after leaving the last known
`
`position. A chart is like a road map, but with a gridwork of latitude
`
`and longitude lines instead of cross streets.
`
`FLIR-1007.015 (Chapter 1).
`
`24. Nautical charts have been in existence for hundreds of years.
`
`Bowditch states:
`
`11
`
`FLIR-1003.011
`
`

`

`A nautical chart represents part of the spherical earth on a plane
`
`surface. It shows water depth, the shoreline of adjacent land,
`
`prominent topographic features, aids to navigation, and other
`
`navigational information. It is a work area on which the navigator
`
`plots courses, ascertains positions, and views the relationship of the
`
`ship to the surrounding area. It assists the navigator in avoiding
`
`dangers and arriving safely at his destination. Originally hand-drawn
`
`on sheepskin, traditional nautical charts have for generations been
`
`printed on paper.
`
`Bowditch (FLIR-1018) at .021.
`
`25.
`
`Tetley likewise noted that “[p]aper charts giving information about
`
`particular areas have been around for centuries and hydrographers from various
`
`countries have explored the world’s oceans to produce up-to-date charts which are
`
`an invaluable aid to the seafarer….” FLIR-1006.096.
`
`26.
`
`For example, the image below is of a nautical chart dated 1571 by
`
`Portuguese cartographer Fernão Vaz Dourado depicting the water ways around
`
`West Africa, including the Strait of Gibraltar (FLIR-1008):1
`
`1 See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fern%C3%A3o_Vaz_Dourado.
`
`12
`
`FLIR-1003.012
`
`

`

`1571 Nautical Chart of West Africa (FLIR-1008)
`
`27.
`
`Jumping ahead four centuries, below is reproduced a portion of a
`
`nautical chart of the coastline of Puerto Rico from 1976 (FLIR-1009) provided by
`
`the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a branch of the U.S.
`
`Government. The National Ocean Service (NOS), a division of the National
`
`Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), publishes charts for United
`
`States coastal and Great Lakes waters. It maintains a rich database of all charts
`
`produced by Government agencies dating back to 1807. See
`
`https://historicalcharts.noaa.gov/; see also Brogdon (FLIR-1007) at .025.
`
`13
`
`FLIR-1003.013
`
`

`

`NOAA Nautical Chart 25664_1976 (Excerpt) (FLIR-1009)
`
`See https://historicalcharts.noaa.gov/historicals/preview/image/25664-3-1976.
`
`28.
`
`The information provided on nautical charts is essential to safe
`
`boating, as it provides not only directional information, but also information
`
`regarding hazards. See Brogdon (FLIR-1007) at .025 (“[i]t is essential to use the
`
`chart not only to find your way but also to avoid hazards”); Bowditch (FLIR-1018)
`
`at .021.
`
`29.
`
`For example, charts may depict coastline details, hazards (rocks,
`
`jetties, etc.), lighthouses and buoys, harbors, bridges, water depths, and data on
`
`tides and currents, among other things. Brogdon provides examples of charts
`
`depicting, among other things, water depth, marsh and sand areas, bridges, buoys,
`
`14
`
`FLIR-1003.014
`
`

`

`lighthouses, riprap (boulders), beacons, land, and coastlines. FLIR-1007 at .032 -
`
`.036. As another example, Exhibit FLIR-1010 reproduces NOAA chart 12283-02-
`
`1990, which is a chart of the Annapolis Harbor in Maryland as of 1990. The charts
`
`are printed in very high resolution so that the details are clear. On this particular
`
`chart, one can see the water depths labeled very clearly. Below is an excerpt from
`
`NOAA chart 12283-02-1990:
`
`NOAA Nautical Chart 12283-02-1990 (Excerpt) (FLIR-1010)
`
`See https://historicalcharts.noaa.gov/historicals/preview/image/12283-2-1990.
`
`30. Nautical charts are such an integral part of safe boating that, starting
`
`in 1983, the U.S. Coast Guard required that they be present on all vessels in U.S.
`
`waters. See 33 C.F.R. §§ 164.30, 164.33.
`
`B.
`
`31.
`
`Electronic Nautical Charts Became Commonplace
`
`The rapid development of computer processing technology in the past
`
`15
`
`FLIR-1003.015
`
`

`

`half century, and its adoption by mariners, meant that it was inevitable that nautical
`
`charts, like road maps, would be converted to and implemented in electronic
`
`formats. As Tetley wrote in 2001, “over the past few years electronics has moved
`
`into the sphere of charting and now digital chart data is becoming more popular
`
`and is likely to be the mainstay product … in the years to come.” FLIR-1006
`
`at.097; see also Bowditch (FLIR-1018) at .021 (“[e]lectronic charts consisting of a
`
`digital data base and a display system are in use and are replacing paper charts
`
`aboard many vessels”).
`
`32.
`
`The advantages of electronic charts are obvious and many. To begin
`
`with, a vast number of electronic charts may be stored in a computer memory,
`
`thereby reducing the need to keep voluminous paper copies of such charts on
`
`board.2 Electronic charts are also easier and more efficient to update and maintain.
`
`Furthermore, electronic charts may be used with appropriate navigation software to
`
`enable a mariner to plot courses efficiently. As Tetley put it:
`
`2 This is not a trivial issue. Full-size NOAA charts range in size from
`
`approximately three to five feet in length and are either 36 or 42 inches wide. See
`
`http://www.oceangrafix.com/resources/faqs. Oceangrafix is the exclusive printer
`
`of NOAA charts. See http://www.oceangrafix.com/about/company.
`
`16
`
`FLIR-1003.016
`
`

`

`With this new technology the seafarer is provided with a means of
`
`viewing a chart using a monitor that can display, in colour, all the
`
`information present on a paper chart. The chart information is
`
`contained on a memory device such as a CD-ROM and can be stored
`
`on a computer hard disk. Suitable navigation software can enable the
`
`chart data to be viewed for the purpose of ‘safe and efficient
`
`navigation’. The electronic chart is one where chart data is provided
`
`as a digital charting system and is capable of displaying both
`
`geographical data and text to assist the navigator.
`
`FLIR-1006 at.097.
`
`33.
`
`Electronic charts may also be used in conjunction with location
`
`finders, such as GPS or Loran-C receivers, and the two may be integrated together
`
`through a combination of hardware and software to provide a navigator with the
`
`ability to see the boat’s current location on an electronic chart. As was known well
`
`before the 703 Patent filing date, GPS stands for “global positioning system.” GPS
`
`receivers use information received from satellites to calculate their current position
`
`in either two (latitude and longitude) or three (with the addition of altitude)
`
`dimensions. See, e.g., Brogdon (FLIR-1007) at .079 - .081. Loran-C is another
`
`type of locator system that uses land-based transmitters to transmit pulses. Id. at
`
`.082 - .084 (“How Loran-C Works”). Numerous types of GPS and Loran-C
`
`17
`
`FLIR-1003.017
`
`

`

`receivers were available to and in use by boaters prior to the 703 Patent filing date.
`
`See id. at .054 - .067; at .064 (GPS “receivers are reasonably priced and come in a
`
`wide variety of sizes, and with many variations in capabilities”); see also Tetley
`
`(FLIR-1006) at .015 - .054; at .043 (“[t]here is a huge selection of GPS equipment
`
`available from a large number of manufacturers”).
`
`34. Brogdon described the obvious advantages of using electronic charts
`
`in conjunction with location data from GPS or Loran-C receivers:
`
`electronic chart displays are a big step up in capability. They show
`
`nearly all of the features displayed on a paper chart, such as aids to
`
`navigation, shorelines, channel edges, and depth contours. You can
`
`add courses, waypoints, and other data. When a chart plotter is
`
`interfaced with the boat’s GPS or Loran-C receiver, the navigator can
`
`watch the progress of the boat across an electronic representation of
`
`the chart.
`
`FLIR-1007.054.
`
`35.
`
`In 1995, the International Maritime Organization (“IMO”)3 approved
`
`3 The IMO is the United Nations specialized agency with responsibility for the
`
`safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine pollution by ships.
`
`See http://www.imo.org/en/About/Pages/Default.aspx.
`
`18
`
`FLIR-1003.018
`
`

`

`as a standard the “Electronic Chart Display and Information System” (“ECDIS”).
`
`Tetley (FLIR-1006) at .106 - .107; see also IMO Resolution A817 (19) (FLIR-
`
`1011). ECDIS “is a navigational information system comprising hardware, display
`
`software and official vector charts and must conform to the ECDIS performance
`
`standards; amongst other aspects these performance standards govern chart data
`
`structure, minimum display requirements and minimum equipment specifications.”
`
`Tetley (FLIR-1006) at .107. Electronic charts approved for use in an ECDIS are
`
`called Electronic Navigational Charts, or “ENCs.” Tetley (FLIR-1006) at .102; see
`
`also IMO Resolution A817 (19) (FLIR-1011) at .003.
`
`36. When used, ECDIS “should ‘assist the mariner in route planning and
`
`route monitoring and, if required, display additional navigation-related
`
`information.’” Id., quoting IMO resolution A817 (19) (FLIR-1011); see also id. at
`
`.003 (“Use of ECDIS should reduce the navigational workload as compared to use
`
`of a paper chart. It should enable the mariner to execute in a convenient and timely
`
`manner all route planning, route monitoring and positioning currently performed
`
`on paper charts. It should be capable of continuously plotting the ship’s position”).
`
`37. Among some of the many minimum requirements of ECDIS is the
`
`ability of the system to show the “ship’s position on the display. Such a position is
`
`the result of positional input data received from suitable sensors and should be
`
`continuously updated in the display.” Tetley (FLIR-1006) at .108. Such “suitable
`
`19
`
`FLIR-1003.019
`
`

`

`sensors” include GPS or Loran-C, among others. See id. at .109 (Fig. 7.4).
`
`38. As part of the requirement that ECDIS “assist the user to plan a route
`
`and monitor the route under way,” id. at .108, the following functions in ECDIS
`
`are enabled:
`
`Route Planning. The mariner should be able to undertake the
`
`planning of a suitable route, including the provision of waypoints
`
`which should be capable of being amended as required. It should be
`
`possible for the mariner to specify a limit of deviation from the
`
`planned route at which activation of an automatic off-track alarm
`
`occurs.
`
`Route Monitoring. ECDIS should show own ship’s position when
`
`the display covers the area involved. The user should be able to
`
`‘look-ahead’ while in this mode but be able to restore own ship’s
`
`position using a ‘single operator action’. The data displayed should
`
`include continuous indication of ship’s position, course and speed and
`
`any other information, such as time-to-go, past track history, etc.,
`
`considered necessary to the user. Indication/alarms should feature
`
`using parameters set by the mariner.
`
`Indication/Alarm. ECDIS is required to give information about the
`
`condition of the system or a component of the system; an alarm
`
`20
`
`FLIR-1003.020
`
`

`

`should be provided when a condition requires urgent attention. An
`
`indication could be visual whereas an alarm could be visual but must
`
`also be audible. Indications should include, among others,
`
`information overscale, different reference system, route planned over
`
`a safety contour etc. Alarms should include, among others, system
`
`malfunction, deviation from a route, crossing safety contour etc.
`
`Tetley (FLIR-1006)at .108.
`
`39.
`
`Furthermore, at least as early as 1999, the enhancement of ECDIS to
`
`provide ‘automated support tools for voyage planning’ was known. As described
`
`by Sabelis:
`
`This formal description of the voyage planning process … is meant to
`
`provide the basis for development of automated tools to support the
`
`voyage planning process … The following paragraphs provide an
`
`outline description of voyage planning support as envisaged by
`
`ECDIS … Cycle-1: Route planning … The aim here is to select the
`
`best route fulfilling the mission within the constraints as prescribed …
`
`The result is an overview of feasible route options with their specific
`
`characteristics in terms of distance, time, economy, and environmental
`
`factors, providing the necessary information to make an initial route
`
`selection.
`
`21
`
`FLIR-1003.021
`
`

`

`Sabelis (FLIR-1017) at .005 - .006.
`
`40.
`
`Thus, before the September 2003 filing date of the 703 Patent, use of
`
`electronic navigation systems that took advantage of electronic charts, GPS
`
`receivers, and displays to allow a user to set waypoints, plot a route, see the boat’s
`
`planned route and current location on the chart, and provided visual or audible
`
`alarms when the boat veered off-course or approached a dangerous condition were
`
`well-known. And as I explain further herein, it was also known to have the
`
`computer not only plot a route, but automatically select non-user identified
`
`waypoints as part of the route.
`
`C.
`
`The 703 Patent and its Claims
`
`1.
`
`The 703 Specification
`
`41.
`
`The 703 Patent issued from an application (no. 10/667,026 (“the 026
`
`Application”)), filed on September 18, 2003. The 703 Patent describes an
`
`“electronic marine navigation device with marine course calculation capabilities
`
`[that] includes a processor connected to a memory that includes cartographic data.”
`
`FLIR-1001 at Abstract.
`
`42.
`
`It is noted in the Background of the Invention portion of the 703
`
`Patent that boats may be “equipped with radios, radar systems, cameras, and
`
`sensors for providing a variety of information to the boater. The boater can then
`
`use the information from these devices in planning and navigating a course for the
`
`22
`
`FLIR-1003.022
`
`

`

`boat.” Id. at 1:16-20. But planning a route while considering all of this
`
`information can be a time-consuming process, as the boater must consider, for
`
`example, “which courses might be preferable, or even available, for the size and
`
`type of boat being used. In addition, a user may inadvertently overlook one or
`
`more hazards in planning their course.” Id. at 1:21-25.
`
`43.
`
`To purportedly address these concerns, the 703 Patent discloses use of
`
`an “electronic marine navigational device.” See id. at 1:33. This device contains
`
`generic computer components such as a processor, memory, and display screen.
`
`See, e.g., id. at 4:14-19; see also FIG. 3:
`
`FLIR-1001.005, Fig. 3
`
`44.
`
`The components identified in Fig. 3 of the 703 Patent were well-
`
`23
`
`FLIR-1003.023
`
`

`

`known, standard components used in computer systems in 2003. Although the
`
`specification does not describe these components as being part of the “background
`
`of the invention,” there is no doubt that these components were conventional and
`
`in use as part of navigation systems before the 703 Patent filing date. For example,
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,356,837 to Yokota (FLIR-1012) issued on March 12, 2002. It
`
`describes a navigation system for automobiles and shows in Fig. 2 the same types
`
`of components as those depicted in Fig. 3 of the 703 Patent:
`
`Fig. 2 of Yokota (FLIR-1012.003)
`
`Yokota describes the “position measurement equipment” labelled 13 as being, for
`
`example, a GPS receiver. Yokota (FLIR-1012) at 5:37-41.
`
`24
`
`FLIR-1003.024
`
`

`

`45.
`
`Similarly, Xiaoxia published a paper in March 2002 describing
`
`ECDIS and provided a block diagram of “the primary functional components of
`
`ECDIS,” FLIR-1013.003:
`
`Fig. 1 of Xiaoxia (FLIR-1013.003)
`
`As shown above, the components in Xiaoxia are largely the same as those shown
`
`in Fig. 3 of the 703 Patent, and are part of a prior art electronic maritime
`
`navigation device.
`
`46. Moreover, it is made clear in the specification of the 703 Patent that
`
`there is nothing unique or inventive about the specific hardware components
`
`described therein: “those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that an
`
`arrangement calculated to achieve the same techniques can be substituted for the
`
`specific embodiments shown.” FLIR-1001 at 12:36-38.
`
`47. Returning to Fig. 3 of the 703 Patent, the memory 330 may store
`
`information such as cartographic data, information regarding the boat, and
`
`25
`
`FLIR-1003.025
`
`

`

`information received from the various input devices (radios, radar systems,
`
`cameras, and sensors) used on the boat. See, e.g., id. at 4:25-42. The
`
`“cartographic data” includes what the 703 Patent refers to as “preselected
`
`conditions” by the user, such as “indications of land, water depth, rock(s),
`
`sandbars, shelves, tide condition, tidal data, wind conditions, weather conditions,
`
`ice, above-water obstacles (e.g., bridges), underwater obstacles (e.g., submerged
`
`wrecks), type of water bottom, and prohibited areas….” Id. at 4:38:42.
`
`48.
`
`In operation, the electronic marine navigation device receives as
`
`input, such as from the input devices or the user, information regarding “a first
`
`location, such as a present location or a waypoint location, or other waypoint
`
`locations, such as a destination location, that can be used in calculating and/or
`
`analyzing a course for a marine craft.” Id. at 4:49-54. A “marine route calculation
`
`algorithm” executed by the processor is t

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket