`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`VALENCELL, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_____________________
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. MAJID SARRAFZADEH
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Apple Inc.
`APL1003
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
`I.
`Qualifications ................................................................................................... 3
`II.
`III. Legal Principles ............................................................................................... 5
`IV. Background and State of the Art ...................................................................10
`A. Wearable Optical Sensors .......................................................................11
`B. Wearable Acoustic Sensors .....................................................................14
`C. Data Transmission from Wearable Sensors ............................................16
`IV. The ’040 Patent ..............................................................................................16
`A. Overview .................................................................................................16
`B. Level of ordinary skill in the art ..............................................................19
`C. Claim construction ..................................................................................19
`“physiological information” ............................................................19
`1.
`2. “selectively remove … unwanted signals from footsteps” .............20
`3. “secondary optical energy” .............................................................22
`4. “real time” .......................................................................................23
`5. “potentially erroneous data” ..................................................................... 24
`V. Ground 1: Claims 1-3, 11-21, 23-25, 27, 29-32, 34-40, 43-46, and 48-53 are
`unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Aceti in view of
`Dettling, and further in view of Stivoric. ......................................................24
`A. Overview of Aceti ...................................................................................24
`B. Overview of Dettling ...............................................................................28
`C. Overview of Stivoric ...............................................................................29
`D. Motivation to combine Aceti, Dettling, and Stivoric ..............................31
`E.
`Independent Claim 1 ...............................................................................36
`[1.P] An earpiece module .......................................................................36
`[1.1] an earpiece fitting adapted to be positioned within an ear of a
`person...............................................................................................36
`[1.2] the earpiece fitting comprising: a speaker configured to provide
`sound transmission from a source ...................................................38
`
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`[1.3] the earpiece fitting comprising … an optical emitter, optical
`detector, and acoustic sensor ...........................................................38
`[1.4] wherein the optical emitter is configured to direct optical energy to
`a region of the ear of the person ......................................................39
`[1.5] wherein the optical detector is configured to sense secondary
`optical energy emanating from the ear region and to sense at least
`one environmental condition in a vicinity of the person .................40
`[1.6] wherein the acoustic sensor is configured to sense footsteps of the
`person...............................................................................................43
`[1.7] the earpiece fitting comprising … a first signal processor
`configured to receive and process signals produced by the optical
`detector ............................................................................................45
`[1.8] a second signal processor configured to process signals produced
`by the first signal processor, and by the acoustic sensor.................46
`[1.9] second signal processor configured to … selectively remove
`unwanted environmental signals and unwanted signals from
`footsteps to produce processed signals containing cleaner
`physiological information from the person .....................................47
`[1.10] a transmitter responsive to the second signal processor that is
`configured to transmit the processed signals containing cleaner
`physiological information to a remote terminal ..............................48
`F. Claim 2 ....................................................................................................49
`G. Claim 3 ....................................................................................................50
`H. Claim 11 ..................................................................................................51
`I. Claim 12 ..................................................................................................52
`J. Claim 13 ..................................................................................................53
`K. Claim 14 ..................................................................................................53
`L. Claim 15 ..................................................................................................54
`M. Claim 16 ..................................................................................................55
`N. Claim 17 ..................................................................................................56
`O. Claim 18 ..................................................................................................57
`P. Claim 19 ..................................................................................................57
`Q. Claim 20 ..................................................................................................58
`
`- iii -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`R. Claim 21 ..................................................................................................58
`S. Claim 23 ..................................................................................................58
`T. Claim 24 ..................................................................................................59
`U. Claim 25 ..................................................................................................59
`V. Claim 27 ..................................................................................................60
`W. Claim 29 ..................................................................................................61
`X. Claim 30 ..................................................................................................62
`Y. Claim 31 ..................................................................................................63
`Z. Claim 32 ..................................................................................................64
`AA. Claim 34 ..................................................................................................65
`BB. Claim 35 ..................................................................................................66
`CC. Claim 36 ..................................................................................................67
`DD. Claim 37 ..................................................................................................68
`EE. Claim 38 ..................................................................................................68
`FF. Claim 39 ..................................................................................................69
`GG. Claim 40 ..................................................................................................71
`HH. Claim 43 ..................................................................................................72
`II. Claim 44 ..................................................................................................73
`JJ. Claim 45 ..................................................................................................74
`KK. Claim 46 ..................................................................................................74
`LL. Claim 48 ..................................................................................................75
`MM.
`Claim 49 ..........................................................................................76
`NN. Claim 50 ..................................................................................................77
`OO. Claim 51 ..................................................................................................78
`PP. Claim 52 ..................................................................................................79
`QQ. Claim 53 ..................................................................................................80
`Conclusion .....................................................................................................80
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`
`
`V.
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040 to LeBoeuf et al., issued February 18,
`2014
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040 File History
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Majid Sarrafzadeh
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`John Allen, Photoplethysmography and its application in clinical
`physiological measurement, Physiological Measurement 28 (2007)
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`J. G. Webster, ed., Design of Pulse Oximeters, IOP Publishing Ltd.,
`1997
`International Patent Application Publication No. WO 2007/013054
`to Schwartz, published February 1, 2007
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`U.S. Patent No. 5,297,548 to Pologe, issued March 29, 1994
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0132798 to Hong et
`al., published June 5, 2008
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`U.S. Patent No. 5,807,267 to Bryars et al., issued September 15,
`1998
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`U.S. Patent No. 4,672,976 to Kroll, issued June 16, 1987
`U.S. Patent No. 7,539,533 to Tran, issued May 26, 2009
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0059870 to Aceti,
`published March 17, 2005
`U.S. Patent No. 5,954,644 to Dettling et al., issued September 21,
`1999
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0039254 to Stivoric
`et al., published February 26, 2004
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0076972 to
`Dorogusker et al., published March 27, 2008
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0004547 to Appelt et
`al., published January 8, 2004
`
`- v -
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit No.
`1001
`
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005-1011
`1012
`
`1013-1016
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`1020
`1021-1023
`1024
`
`1025
`1026
`
`1027-1044
`1045
`1046
`1047
`
`1048
`
`1049
`
`1050
`
`1051
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`1052
`
`1053
`
`1054
`1055
`
`1056
`
`1057-1065
`1066
`
`1067
`
`1068
`
`1069-1143
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0116314 to Grilliot et
`al., published May 24, 2007
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0242976 to Abreu,
`published December 2, 2004
`U.S. Patent No. 5,853,005 to Scanlon, issued December 29, 1998
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0131761 to Moroney
`III et al., published May 21, 2009
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0064037 to Shalon et
`al., published March 23, 2006
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`U.S. Patent No. 8,923,941 to LeBoeuf et al., issued December 30,
`2014
`H. Harry Asada et al., “Mobile Monitoring with Wearable
`Photoplethysmographic Biosensors,” IEEE Engineering in
`Medicine and Biology Magazine, May/June 2003, pp. 28-40
`Yuri Shevchenko et al., “90th Anniversary of the Development by
`Nikolai S. Korotkoff of the Ascultatory Method of Measuring
`Blood Pressure,” Circulation, Vol. 94, No. 2, July 15, 1996; pp.
`116-118
`INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`
`- vi -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`I, Dr. Majid Sarrafzadeh, declare as follows:
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`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. 8,652,040 (“the
`
`’040 patent”), titled “Telemetric Apparatus for Health and Environmental
`
`Monitoring,” and its field of endeavor.
`
`3.
`
`In preparing this declaration, I have reviewed and am familiar with the
`
`’040 Patent (Ex. 1001) and its file history (Ex. 1002). The ’040 Patent relates to an
`
`“apparatus for monitoring various physiological and environmental factors” where
`
`“an earpiece functions as a physiological monitor, environmental monitor, and a
`
`wireless personal communicator.” Ex. 1001, 1:46-48, 1:54-56. I am familiar with
`
`the technology and the state of the art described in the ’040 Patent as of its June 12,
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`2007 filing date, as well as the technology and state of the art as of its earliest
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`claimed December 19, 2006 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 ’040 Patent and the references that
`
`form the basis for the ground of unpatentability set forth in the Petition for Inter
`
`Partes Review of the ’040 Patent.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ground
`
`References
`
`Basis
`
`Claims Challenged
`
`1
`
`Aceti, Dettling, & Stivoric
`
`§ 103 1-3, 11-21, 23-25, 27,
`
`29-32, 34-40, 43-46, 48-
`
`53
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`
`II. Qualifications
`As indicated in my curriculum vitae (filed as Ex. 1004), I am
`6.
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`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
`
`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.
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`10.
`
`I have experience as a system designer, circuit designer, and software
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`
`
`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
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`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
`
`• 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
`I understand that my analysis requires an understanding of the scope
`15.
`
`of the ’040 Patent claims. I understand that the disclosures of the ’040 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
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`
`been instructed to consider the time of the purported invention of the ’040 Patent to
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`be December 19, 2006 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 ’040 Patent claims are, by rule, given
`
`the broadest reasonable construction in light of its specification. Unless otherwise
`
`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.
`
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`19.
`
`I understand that an obviousness analysis involves comparing a claim
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`
`
`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
`
`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.
`
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`21.
`
`I understand that a reference may be relied upon for all that it teaches,
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`
`
`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
`
`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;
`
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`• 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.
`
`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.
`
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`25.
`
`I understand that for a reference to be used to show that a claim is
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`
`
`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
`
`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. The ’040 Patent describes and claims a wearable earpiece module that
`
`includes a variety of hardware components. These components include processors,
`
`an optical sensor, an acoustic sensor, a speaker, and a transmitter. But the
`
`incorporation of these components into a wearable device, such as an earpiece, is
`
`not a new concept and has been described in numerous publications for years prior
`
`to the December 19, 2006 priority date of the ’040 Patent. In the following
`
`sections, I will briefly describe the state of the art for wearable optical sensors,
`
`wearable acoustic sensors, and data transmission for wearable sensors during the
`
`time before the December 19, 2006 priority date of the ’040 Patent.
`
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`A. Wearable Optical Sensors
`27. One of the most common optical sensing technique employed in
`
`wearable devices for detecting physiological conditions is known as
`
`photoplethysmography (hereinafter also referred to as “PPG” or “pulse oximetry”).
`
`Hong, Ex. 1024, ¶17, FIG. 1; Bryars, Ex. 1026, FIGs. 1, 6, 7; Asada Article, Ex.
`
`1067, p. 28. The technique was introduced in 1937 and had become a ubiquitous
`
`part of physiological monitoring long before the ʼ040 Patent was filed. Allen, Ex.
`
`1012, § 2.3. By 2006, 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. 1012, § 2.3.
`
`28. 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,
`
`and other tissue. Ex. 1012, § 1. The intensity of the reflected light depends on the
`
`volume of blood. Id. The volume of blood fluctuates proportionally with the
`
`cardiac cycle. Id. As a result, a PPG sensor detects a time-varying pulsatile
`
`waveform, or pulse wave, that is synchronized with each heartbeat. Id.
`
`29. Hence, photoplethysmography (PPG) was an old, well-known optical
`
`measurement technique used to detect blood volume changes in living tissue. Ex.
`
`1012, § 1; Webster, Ex. 1017, pp. 240-241. The basic form of PPG technology
`
`requires only a few opto-electronic components: a light source (often red or near
`
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`
`infrared) to illuminate the tissue (commonly at the ear, wrist, or finger) and a
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`photodetector to measure the small variations in light intensity associated with
`
`changes in blood volume. Ex. 1012, §§ 1, 2.4; Ex. 1017, pp. 34-38.A simple,
`
`appropriately programmed signal processor can extract heart rate, respiratory rate,
`
`blood oxygen saturation (SpO2), and a variety of other physiological parameters.
`
`Ex. 1012, § 3; Schwartz, Ex. 1018, 5:5-9, 10:7-20.
`
`30. PPG had also found widespread use in pulse oximeters. A major
`
`advance in the clinical use of PPG-based technology came with the introduction of
`
`the pulse oximeter as a non-invasive method for monitoring patients’ arterial
`
`oxygen saturation (SpO2). Ex. 1012, § 2.3; Ex. 1017, Preface. Oxygen saturation of
`
`the hemoglobin in arterial blood is determined by the relative proportions of
`
`oxygenated hemoglobin and reduced hemoglobin in the arterial blood. Pologe, Ex.
`
`1020, 1:20-56; Ex. 1017, pp. 34-38. A pulse oximeter uses PPG signals to
`
`determine the oxygen saturation of the hemoglobin by measuring the difference in
`
`the light absorption of these two forms of hemoglobin. Ex. 1020, 1:20-56, FIG. 1
`
`(displayed below).
`
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`

`

`31. The pulse oximeter typically includes a probe which contains two
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`
`
`light emitting diodes, one red and one infrared, and is placed in contact with the
`
`skin. Ex. 1020, 1:20-56; Ex. 1017, pp. 34-38. There were conventionally two types
`
`of probes for pulse oximetry: reflectance and transmittance. Ex. 1017, pp. 86-89.
`
`FIGs. 7.1 and 7.2 from Webster have been provided below to illustrate the
`
`differences between reflectance and transmittance pulse oximetry. Briefly, as the
`
`names suggest, reflectance oximetry transmits light that is reflected after passing
`
`through a portion of the body before being received by the detector, while
`
`transmittance oximetry transmits light completely through a portion of the body
`
`and the detector receives the light that has passed completely through the body. Ex.
`
`1017, pp. 87-88, FIGs. 7.1, 7.2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Reflectance Oximetry
`
`
`
`
`
`Transmittance Oximetry
`
`32.
`
`In recent decades, the desire for small, reliable, low-cost and simple-
`
`to-use noninvasive (cardiovascular) assessment techniques were key factors that
`
`have propelled the use of photoplethysmography. Ex. 1012, § 2.3. Advances in
`
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`
`opto-electronics and clinical instrumentation have also significantly contributed to
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`its advancement. Ex. 1012, § 2.3. The developments in semiconductor technology,
`
`light emitting diodes (LED), photodiodes, and phototransistors have made
`
`considerable improvements in the size, sensitivity, reliability and reproducibility of
`
`PPG probe design. Ex. 1012, § 2.3. As this technology became ever smaller and
`
`more robust, PPG sensors were integrated into wearable technology such as
`
`wristwatches, earphones, headsets, etc. See, for example, Ex. 1024, FIGs. 1-2,
`
`¶¶0024-0028 (integrating with headset); Ex. 1026, FIGs. 1, 6, 7; Ex. 1067, p. 30,
`
`FIG. 9; Aceti, Ex. 1047, FIGs, 1-3, ¶27.
`
`B. Wearable Acoustic Sensors
`33. Detecting sound from the body to determine various physiological
`
`parameters is known as “auscultatory sensing” and had been performed for years
`
`prior to the earliest priority date of the ’040 Patent. In fact, the use of sound to
`
`determine physiological parameters, such as blood pressure, dates back as early as
`
`1905 when Dr. Nikolai Korotkoff discovered a link between certain audible sounds
`
`and a patient’s blood pressure. Shevchenko, Ex. 1068. These sounds are known as
`
`“Korotkoff sounds” and are still used by physicians today.
`
`34. Many wearable devices had been described that perform auscultatory
`
`sensing. Even as early as 1987, devices were being developed that were worn on
`
`the body and used acoustic transducers for sensing sound waves generated in the
`
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`
`patient’s body. Kroll, Ex. 1045, Abstract. Kroll’s device includes a cylindrical
`
`Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`housing for retaining the sensing elements, and a securement belt for holding the
`
`housing against the body of a patient. Ex. 1045, 1:33-43. An illustration of the
`
`device is provided below and includes a diaphragm 21 that covers an aperture 20
`
`of the housing structure 15. Ex. 1045, 4:3-5. The diaphragm is placed directly in
`
`contact with the patient’s b