`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. MAJID SARRAFZADEH
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`Apple Inc.
`APL1003
`U.S. Patent No. 8,923,941
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`V. 
`
`Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 
`I. 
`II.  Qualifications ................................................................................................... 3 
`III.  Legal Principles ............................................................................................... 6 
`IV.  Background and State of the Art ................................................................... 11 
`A.  Wearable Technology ............................................................................. 17 
`B.  Communication ....................................................................................... 18 
`C.  Noise Artifacts ......................................................................................... 21 
`D.  Adaptive Filtering Techniques ................................................................ 25 
`The ’941 Patent .............................................................................................. 28 
`A.  Overview ................................................................................................. 28 
`B.  Summary of the prosecution history ....................................................... 29 
`C.  Level of ordinary skill in the art .............................................................. 31 
`D.  Claim construction .................................................................................. 32 
`1.  “physiological information” ............................................................ 32 
`2.  “application-specific interface (API)” ............................................. 33 
`3.  “the application” .............................................................................. 34 
`VI.  Ground 1: Claims 1–3, 9, and 11–13 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35
`U.S.C. § 103(a) over Luo in view of Craw. .................................................. 34 
`B.  Overview of Luo ..................................................................................... 34 
`C.  Overview of Craw ................................................................................... 39 
`D.  Claim 1 .................................................................................................... 43 
`[1.P] A method of generating data output containing physiological and
`motion-related information .............................................................. 43 
`[1.1] sensing physical activity and physiological information from a
`subject via a single monitoring device attached to the subject ....... 44 
`[1.2] the monitoring device comprising at least one motion sensor for
`sensing the physical activity ............................................................ 45 
`[1.3] the monitoring device comprising at least one
`photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor for sensing the physiological
`information ...................................................................................... 46 
`
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`[1.4] processing signals from the at least one motion sensor and signals
`from the at least one PPG sensor via a processor of the monitoring
`device into a serial data output of physiological information and
`motion-related information .............................................................. 47 
`[1.5] the serial data output is configured such that a plurality of subject
`physiological parameters comprising subject heart rate and subject
`respiration rate can be extracted from the physiological information
`and such that a plurality of subject physical activity parameters can
`be extracted from the motion-related information .......................... 49 
`E.  Claim 2 .................................................................................................... 52 
`F.  Claim 3 .................................................................................................... 52 
`G.  Claim 9 .................................................................................................... 53 
`H.  Claim 11 .................................................................................................. 53 
`I.  Claim 12 .................................................................................................. 54 
`J.  Claim 13 .................................................................................................. 54 
`V.  Ground 2: Claims 4–5 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`over Luo in view of Craw and Wolf. ............................................................. 56 
`A.  Overview of Wolf .................................................................................... 56 
`B.  Rationale to combine the teachings of Luo, Craw, and Wolf ................. 58 
`VI.  Ground 3: Claims 6 and 8 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`§ 103(a) over Luo in view of Craw and Fricke. ............................................ 59 
`A.  Overview of Fricke.................................................................................. 59 
`B.  Rationale to Combine the Teachings of Luo, Craw, and Fricke ............. 64 
`VII.  Ground 4: Claim 7 is unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`Luo in view of Craw, Fricke, and Comtois. .................................................. 69 
`A.  Overview of Comtois .............................................................................. 70 
`B.  Rationale to Combine the Teachings of Luo, Craw, Fricke, and Comtois
` ................................................................................................................. 73 
`VII.  Ground 5: Claim 10 is unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`Luo in view of Craw and Aceti. .................................................................... 73 
`A.  Overview of Aceti ................................................................................... 74 
`B.  Rationale to Combine the Teachings of Luo, Craw, and Aceti .............. 75 
`VIII.  Ground 6: Claims 1, 2, 9, and 11–12 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35
`U.S.C. § 103(a) over Mault in view of Al-Ali............................................... 76 
`- iii -
`
`
`
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`C.  Overview of Mault .................................................................................. 76 
`D.  Overview of Al-Ali ................................................................................. 78 
`A.  Claim 1 .................................................................................................... 81 
`[1.P] A method of generating data output containing physiological and
`motion-related information .............................................................. 81 
`[1.1] sensing physical activity and physiological information from a
`subject via a single monitoring device attached to the subject ....... 81 
`[1.2] the monitoring device comprising at least one motion sensor for
`sensing the physical activity ............................................................ 83 
`[1.3] the monitoring device comprising at least one
`photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor for sensing the physiological
`information ...................................................................................... 83 
`[1.4] processing signals from the at least one motion sensor and signals
`from the at least one PPG sensor via a processor of the monitoring
`device into a serial data output of physiological information and
`motion-related information .............................................................. 84 
`[1.5] the serial data output is configured such that a plurality of subject
`physiological parameters comprising subject heart rate and subject
`respiration rate can be extracted from the physiological information
`and such that a plurality of subject physical activity parameters can
`be extracted from the motion-related information .......................... 87 
`B.  Claim 2 .................................................................................................... 89 
`C.  Claim 9 .................................................................................................... 90 
`D.  Claim 11 .................................................................................................. 90 
`E.  Claim 12 .................................................................................................. 90 
`IX.  Ground 7: Claim 3 is unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`Mault in view of Al-Ali and Lee. .................................................................. 90 
`A.  Overview of Lee ...................................................................................... 91 
`B.  Rationale to combine Mault, Al-Ali, and Lee ......................................... 93 
`X.  Ground 8: Claims 4–5 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`over Mault in view of Al-Ali and Behar. ...................................................... 94 
`A.  Overview of Behar .................................................................................. 94 
`B.  Rationale to combine the teachings of Mault, Al-Ali, and Behar ........... 95 
`
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`XI.  Ground 9: Claims 6-8 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`over Mault in view of Al-Ali and Han. ......................................................... 96 
`A.  Overview of Han ..................................................................................... 96 
`B.  Rationale to Combine the Teachings of Mault, Al-Ali, and Han .........101 
`XII.  Ground 10: Claim 10 is unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`Mault in view of Al-Ali and Numaga. .........................................................101 
`A.  Overview of Numaga ............................................................................102 
`B.  Rationale to Combine the Teachings of Mault, Al-Ali, and Numaga ..103 
`XIII.  Ground 11: Claim 13 is unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`Mault in view of Al-Ali and Ali. .................................................................104 
`A.  Overview of Ali .....................................................................................105 
`B.  Rationale to Combine the Teachings of Mault, Al-Ali, and Ali ...........105 
`XIV.  Conclusion ...................................................................................................106 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- v -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`Exhibit No.
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`1004
`1006
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1016
`
`1018
`
`1019
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1027
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,923,941 to LeBoeuf et al., issued December 30,
`2014
`U.S. Patent No. 8,923,941 File History
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Majid Sarrafzadeh
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0209516 to Fraden,
`published September 22, 2005
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0081972 to
`Debreczeny, published April 3, 2008
`Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2005/040261 A to
`Numaga et al., published February 17, 2005
`Certified English-language translation of Japanese Patent
`Application Publication No. 2005/040261 A to Numaga et al.,
`published February 17, 2005
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0065269 to Vetter et
`al., published April 3, 2003
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0105556 to Fricke et
`al., published April 23, 2009
`U.S. Patent No. 3,704,706 to Herczfeld et al., issued December 5,
`1972
`U.S. Patent No. 5,297,548 to Pologe, issued March 29, 1994
`Med. Sci. Series, Int’l Fed’n for Med. and Biological Eng’g and the
`Int’l Org. for Med. Physics, Design of Pulse Oximeters (J.G.
`Webster ed., Inst. of Physics Publ’g 1997)
`John Allen, Photoplethysmography and its application in clinical
`physiological measurement, Physiological Measurement 28 (2007)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0132798 to Hong et
`al., published June 5, 2008
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0177162 to Bae,
`published July 24, 2008
`U.S. Patent No. 5,807,267 to Bryars et al. issued September 15,
`1998
`Hyonyoung Han et al., Development of a wearable health
`monitoring device with motion artifact reduced algorithm,
`International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems,
`IEEE (2007)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0186387 to Kosuda
`- vi -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`Exhibit No.
`
`Description
`
`et al., published September 23, 2004
`U.S. Patent Application No. 2009/0287067 to Dorogusker et al.,
`published November 19, 2009
`U.S. Patent Application No. 2005/059870 to Aceti, published
`March 17, 2005
`G. Comtois & Y. Mendelson, A Comparative Evaluation of
`Adaptive Noise Cancellation Algorithms for Minimizing Motion
`Artifacts in a Forehead-Mounted Wearable Pulse Oximeter, IEEE
`(2007)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0059236 to
`Margulies et al., published March 25, 2004
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0016086 to Inukai et
`al., published January 18, 2007
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0236647 to Yoon et
`al., published December 25, 2003
`International Patent Application Publication No. 2007/013054 to
`Schwartz, published February 1, 2007
`U.S. Patent No. 5,575,284 to Athan et al., issued November 19,
`1996
`U.S. Patent No. 5,503,016 to Koen, issued April 2, 1996
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0027367 to Oliver et
`al., published February 1, 2007
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0197881 to Wolf et
`al., published August 23, 2007
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0075542 to
`Goldreich, published April 7, 2005
`International Patent Application Publication No. WO2007/004089
`to Moroney et al., published January 11, 2007
`G. Sen Gupta et al., Design of a Low-cost Physiological Parameter
`Measurement and Monitoring Device, Instrumentation and
`Measurement Technology Conference, IEEE (2007)
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0084879 to Nazarian
`et al., published April 20, 2006
`U.S. Patent No. 5,243,992 to Eckerle et al., issued September 14,
`1993
`U.S. Patent No. 4,955,379 to Hall, issued September 11, 1990
`International Patent Application Publication No. WO 2007/122375
`
`- vii -
`
`1028
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1037
`
`1038
`
`1039
`1041
`
`1042
`
`1043
`
`1044
`
`1045
`
`1046
`
`1047
`
`1048
`1049
`
`
`
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`Exhibit No.
`
`Description
`
`1055
`
`1056
`
`1057
`1058
`
`1059
`
`1061
`
`1064
`1065
`
`1066
`
`
`
`to Crowe et al., published November 1, 2007
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0200774 to Luo,
`published August 21, 2008
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0133699 to Craw et
`al., published June 5, 2008
`U.S. Patent No. 6,513,532 to Mault et al., issued February 4, 2003
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0181798 to Al-Ali,
`published September 25, 2003
`R.G. Lee et al., A Mobile Care System With Alert Mechanism, IEEE
`Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, Vol. 11,
`Issue 5 (2007)
`International Patent Application Publication No. 2006/009830 to
`Behar et al., published January 26, 2006
`U.S. Patent No. 6,996,427 to Ali et al., issued February 7, 2006
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0154098 to Morris et
`al., published June 26, 2008
`International Patent Application Publication No. 00/44274 to
`Johnson, published August 3, 2000
`
`
`
`
`
`- viii -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`I, Dr. Majid Sarrafzadeh, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I am currently a distinguished professor of computer science at the
`
`University of California at Los Angeles (“UCLA”), director of the UCLA
`
`Embedded and Reconfigurable Computing Laboratory (“ER Lab”), and a co-
`
`director of the UCLA Center for SMART Health. I have been actively engaged in
`
`research of Wearable Systems for 16 years and Embedded Systems, Design and
`
`Analysis of Algorithms, and Health Analytics for about 29 years.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained on behalf of Apple Inc. to provide expert
`
`opinions in connection with a petition for Inter Partes Review before the United
`
`States Patent and Trademark Office. I understand that this declaration involves my
`
`expert opinions and expert knowledge related to U.S. Patent No. 8,923,941 (“the
`
`’941 patent”), titled “Methods and Apparatus for Generating Data Output
`
`Containing Physiological and Motion-Related Information,” and its field of
`
`endeavor.
`
`3.
`
`In preparing this declaration, I have reviewed and am familiar with the
`
`’941 Patent (Ex. 1001) and its file history (Ex. 1002). The ’941 Patent relates to a
`
`“physiological monitoring apparatus” and describes “a method of generating a data
`
`string containing physiological and motion-related information.” Ex. 1001, 1: 21,
`
`Abstract. I am familiar with the technology and the state of the art described in the
`
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`’941 Patent as of its February 19, 2014 filing date, as well as the technology and
`
`state of the art as of its claimed February 25, 2009 priority date.
`
`4.
`
`I have reviewed and am familiar with each exhibit cited herein. I
`
`confirm that to the best of my knowledge the accompanying exhibits are true and
`
`accurate copies of what they purport to be, and that an expert in the field would
`
`reasonably rely on them to formulate opinions such as those set forth in this
`
`declaration.
`
`5.
`
`I have been asked to provide my independent technical review,
`
`analysis, insights, and opinions regarding the ’941 Patent and the references that
`
`form the basis for the four grounds of unpatentability set forth in the Petition for
`
`Inter Partes Review of the ’941 Patent.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ground
`
`References
`
`Basis
`
`Claims Challenged
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`Luo and Craw
`
`§ 103 1–3, 9, and 11–13
`
`Luo, Craw, and Wolf
`
`§ 103 4–5
`
`Luo, Craw, and Fricke
`
`§ 103 6 and 8
`
`- 2 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`Luo, Craw, Fricke, Comtois
`
`§ 103 7
`
`Luo, Craw, and Aceti
`
`§ 103 10
`
`Mault and Al-Ali
`
`§ 103 1, 2, 9, and 11–12
`
`Mault, Al-Ali, and Lee
`
`§ 103 3
`
`Mault, Al-Ali, and Behar
`
`§ 103 4–5
`
`Mault, Al-Ali, and Han
`
`§ 103 6–8
`
`Mault, Al-Ali, and Numaga
`
`§ 103 10
`
`Mault, Al-Ali, and Ali
`
`§ 103 13
`
`
`
`II. Qualifications
`6.
`As indicated in my curriculum vitae (filed as Ex. 1004), I am
`
`currently a professor of computer science at UCLA and have been in that position
`
`for the last sixteen years. I am also the director of the UCLA Embedded and
`
`Reconfigurable Computing Laboratory (“ER Lab”), a co-director of the UCLA
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`Center for SMART Health, a co-director of the BRITE Center on Minority Health
`
`Disparities, and a co-founder of UCLA Wireless Health Institute.
`
`7.
`
`I earned a Bachelor of Science, Master of Science, and Ph.D. degrees
`
`from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in Electrical and Computer
`
`Engineering in 1982, 1984, and 1987, respectively.
`
`8.
`
`I became an Assistant Professor of Electrical and Computer
`
`Engineering at Northwestern University in 1987, earned tenure in 1993, and
`
`became a Full Professor in 1997.
`
`9.
`
`In 2000, I joined the Computer Science Department at UCLA as a
`
`Full Professor. In 2008, I co-founded and became a director of the UCLA Wireless
`
`Health Institute. I currently teach two core undergraduate courses (involving
`
`implementing digital logic designs and advanced digital design techniques), a
`
`course on Algorithms and Complexity, and a series of graduate courses in the area
`
`of embedded systems and Wireless Health.
`
`10.
`
`I have experience as a system designer, circuit designer, and software
`
`designer. This experience includes positions as a design engineer at IBM and
`
`Motorola and a test engineer at Central Data Corporation. I was the main architect
`
`of an Electronic Design Automation (“EDA”) software tool for Monterey Design
`
`Systems, Inc. (“Monterey”). I co-founded and managed the technical team at
`
`Hierarchical Design, Inc. (“Hier Design”), an EDA company that specialized in
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`reconfigurable Field-Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) systems. Hier Design was
`
`acquired by Xilinx in 2004. I have cofounded MediSens Wireless, Bruin
`
`Biometrics, and WANDA Health.
`
`11.
`
`I am a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
`
`Inc. (“IEEE”) for my contributions to “Theory and Practice of VLSI Design.” I
`
`have served on the technical program committees of numerous conferences in the
`
`area of system design. I cofounded the International conference on Wireless Health
`
`and have served in various committees of this conference.
`
`12.
`
`I have published approximately 500 papers, and have received a
`
`number of best paper and distinguished paper awards. I am a co-author of the book
`
`“Synthesis Techniques and Optimizations for Reconfigurable Systems” (2003 by
`
`Springer) and a co-author of the papers such as:
`
` Adaptive Electrocardiogram Feature Extraction on Distributed
`
`Embedded Systems, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed
`
`Systems special issue on High Performance Computational Biology
`
`(2006);
`
` A Remote Patient Monitoring System for Congestive Heart Failure,
`
`Journal of Medical Systems (2011);
`
` SmartFall: An Automatic Fall Detection and Cause Identification
`
`System, IEEE Sensors Journal (2013); and
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

` Designing a Robust Activity Recognition Framework for Health and
`
`Exergaming using Wearable Sensors, IEEE Journal of Biomedical
`
`and Health Informatics (2013).
`
`13. A more detailed account of my work experience and qualifications,
`
`including a list of all publications authored in the previous 10 years, can be found
`
`in my curriculum vitae, which is identified as Ex. 1004.
`
`14.
`
`I am being compensated at my standard rate of $650 per hour for my
`
`work on this case. My compensation is not dependent upon my opinions or
`
`testimony or the outcome of this case.
`
`III. Legal Principles
`15.
`I understand that my analysis requires an understanding of the scope
`
`of the ’941 Patent claims. I understand that the disclosures of the ’941 Patent and
`
`the prior art are judged from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`at the time of the purported invention. For the purposes of this declaration, I have
`
`been instructed to consider the time of the purported invention of the ’941 Patent to
`
`be February 25, 2009 for each challenged claim unless noted otherwise. I will note,
`
`however, that my opinions would not change even if all the relevant disclosures
`
`were judged from a later time period.
`
`16.
`
`I understand that terms of the ’941 Patent claims are, by rule, given
`
`the broadest reasonable construction in light of its specification. Unless otherwise
`
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`noted, I have generally given the claim terms their plain and ordinary meaning as
`
`understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of purported
`
`invention.
`
`17.
`
`I understand that a claim is invalid if it is anticipated or obvious. My
`
`opinions here relate to both anticipation and obviousness as detailed below.
`
`18.
`
`I understand that anticipation of a claim requires that every element of
`
`a claim is expressly or inherently disclosed in a single prior art reference. I
`
`understand that an anticipating reference need not use the exact terms of the
`
`claims, but must describe the patented subject matter with sufficient clarity and
`
`detail to establish that the claimed subject matter existed in the prior art and that
`
`such existence would be recognized by persons of ordinary skill in the field of the
`
`purported invention. I also understand that an anticipating reference must enable
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art to reduce the purported invention to practice without
`
`undue experimentation.
`
`19.
`
`I understand that an obviousness analysis involves comparing a claim
`
`to the prior art to determine whether the claimed invention would have been
`
`obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention in view
`
`of the prior art and in light of the general knowledge in the art as a whole. I also
`
`understand that obviousness is ultimately a legal conclusion based on underlying
`
`facts of four general types, all of which must be considered: (1) the scope and
`
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`content of the prior art; (2) the level of ordinary skill in the art; (3) the differences
`
`between the claimed invention and the prior art; and (4) any objective indicia of
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`20.
`
`I also understand that obviousness may be established by combining
`
`or modifying the teachings of the prior art. Specific teachings, suggestions, or
`
`motivations to combine any first prior art reference with a second prior art
`
`reference can be explicit or implicit, but must have existed before the date of
`
`invention. I understand that prior art references themselves may be one source of a
`
`specific teaching or suggestion to combine features of the prior art, but that such
`
`suggestions or motivations to combine art may come from the knowledge of a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art. Specifically, a rationale to combine the teachings
`
`of references may include logic or common sense available to a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art.
`
`21.
`
`I understand that a reference may be relied upon for all that it teaches,
`
`including uses beyond its primary purpose. I understand that though a reference
`
`may be said to teach away when a person of ordinary skill, upon reading the
`
`reference, would be discouraged from following the path set out in the reference,
`
`the mere disclosure of alternative designs does not teach away.
`
`22.
`
`I further understand that whether there is a reasonable expectation of
`
`success from combining references in a particular way is also relevant to the
`
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`analysis. I understand there may be a number of rationales that may support a
`
`conclusion of obviousness, including:
`
` Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield
`
`predictable results;
`
` Substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable
`
`results;
`
` Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or
`
`products) in the same way;
`
` Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product)
`
`ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
`
` “Obvious to try” – choosing from a finite number of identified,
`
`predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success;
`
` Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use
`
`in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or
`
`other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art; or
`
` Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have
`
`led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine
`
`prior art teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
`
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`23.
`
`I understand that it is not proper to use hindsight to combine
`
`references or elements of references to reconstruct the invention using the claims
`
`as a guide. My analysis of the prior art is made from the perspective of person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the purported invention.
`
`24.
`
`I understand that so-called objective considerations may be relevant to
`
`the determination of whether a claim is obvious should the Patent Owner allege
`
`such evidence. Such objective considerations can include evidence of commercial
`
`success caused by an invention, evidence of a long-felt need that was solved by an
`
`invention, evidence that others copied an invention, or evidence that an invention
`
`achieved a surprising result. I understand that such evidence must have a nexus, or
`
`causal relationship to the elements of a claim, in order to be relevant to the
`
`obviousness or non-obviousness of the claim. I am unaware of any such objective
`
`considerations having a nexus to the claims at issue in this proceeding.
`
`25.
`
`I understand that for a reference to be used to show that a claim is
`
`obvious, the reference must be analogous art to the claimed invention. I understand
`
`that a reference is analogous to the claimed invention if the reference is from the
`
`same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, even if it addresses a different
`
`problem, or if the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the
`
`inventor, even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. I
`
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`understand that a reference is reasonably pertinent based on the problem faced by
`
`the inventor as reflected in the specification, either explicitly or implicitly.
`
`IV. Background and State of the Art
`26. Photoplethysmography (hereinafter also referred to as ‘PPG’) 1 refers
`
`to the use of light to measure the changes in blood volume in the tissue of a living
`
`body. Ex. 1021 (Allen - Photoplethysmography and its application in clinical
`
`physiological measurement), § 1. The technique was introduced in 1937 and had
`
`become a ubiquitous part of physiological monitoring long before the ʼ941 Patent
`
`was filed. Ex. 1021, § 2.3. By 2009, the earliest claimed priority date, PPG
`
`technology was in widespread use and established as a simple, low-cost, readily-
`
`portable choice for both clinical and non-clinical physiological measurements. Ex.
`
`1021, § 2.3.
`
`27. PPG is an optical technique whereby light is projected into living
`
`tissue, and the reflected light is detected after its interaction with the skin, blood,
`
`
`1 Photoplethysmographic, photoplethysmogram, and photoplethysmography are all
`
`terms abbreviated PPG. Other abbreviations, however, such as PTG, are also
`
`occasionally used in the art. Ex. 1034 (Margulies – US 2004/0059236), ¶ 0054; Ex.
`
`1035 (Inukai – US 20070016086), ¶ 0027; Ex. 1036 (Yoon – US 2003/0236647), ¶
`
`0052.
`
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`
`
`and otheer tissue. EEx. 1021, §§ 1. The inttensity of tthe reflecteed light deppends on thhe
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`volume of blood. Ex. 1021, § 1. The volume of bblood flucttuates propportionally
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`with thee cardiac cyycle. Ex. 11021, § 1. AAs a resultt, a PPG seensor deteccts a time-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`varyingg pulsatile wwaveform,
`
`
`
`
`
`heartbeaat. Ex. 10221, § 1.
`
`
`
`
`
` or pulse wwave, that iis synchronnized withh each
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`228. A 19
`
`
`
`
`f a ponents of ional comphe conventimany of th72 patent iillustrates m
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`easure the nuously meue to continal techniqug an opticaonitor usingPPG heart rate mo
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`pulse off a subject.. Ex. 1018 (Herczfeldd - US 3,7004,706). AAs shown b
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`elow, the
`
`
`
`
`
`r of o the fingerirectly intomit light diource to emed a light sosmall prrobe housing include
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`a subjecct and a phhotodetectoor to collect light direectly from
`
`
`
`the finger.
`
`
`
` Ex. 1018,,
`
`
`
`2:60-3:222, fig. 1.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Light ssource
`
`Hoousing
`
`Incident
`light
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Phhotodetector
`
`Refleccted
`
`
`light
`
`
`
`
`
`annotation Ex. 1018, fig. 1 (a
`added).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`
`
`229.
`
`
`
`In opperation, thhe probe waas placed uupon the paatient’s finnger such thhat
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`blood fllowing in tthe finger’ss capillariees reflectedd incident rred light. EEx. 1018, 33:40-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`42, Fig. 1; Ex. 10220 (Websteer – Designn of Pulse
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Oximeterss), pp. 34-336. The
`
`
`
`
`
`he tional to thely proport be inversederstood to ht was undflected lighintensityy of the ref
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`For
`
`causing a
`
`
`
`amount of blood fflowing in the finger. Ex. 1018,, 3:42-55; EEx. 1020, ppp. 40-49.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`each he
`
`
`
`artbeat, bloood pumpeed into andd out of thee capillariees, thereby
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ase in the rand increaperiodicc decrease
`
`
`
`eflected ligght intensi
`
`
`
`5; ty. Ex. 10118, 3:42-55
`
`
`
`
`
`known to rrepresent aa
`
`
`
`
`
`1018, 3:42each hearttbeat. Ex. 1
`
`
`
`-55;
`
`
`
`Ex. 10220, pp. 40-449. The dettected periiodic waveeform was
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`volume of the circculating bloood synchrronized to
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`as a as known aveform waulsatile wav49. This puEx. 10220, pp. 40-4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`photopllethysmogrraphic pulsse wave. Exx. 1020, ppp. 13-18, 440-49; Ex.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1021, § 2.
`
`1.
`
`
`
`Ex. 10220, p. 47.
`
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`FITBIT, Ex. 1003
`
`

`

`30. Hence, photoplethysmography (PPG) was an old, well-known optical
`
`measurement technique used to d