`
`
`Filed on behalf of Apple Inc.
`By:
`Michelle K. Holoubek
`
`Michael D. Specht
`
`Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox PLLC
`
`1100 New York Avenue, NW
`
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`Tel: (202) 371-2600
`
`
`Fax: (202) 371-2540
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`VALENCELL, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_____________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,652,040
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`I.
`II.
`
`Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
`Identification of Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)) ....................................... 3
`A.
`Summary of the Grounds of Unpatentability ........................................ 3
`B.
`Citation of Prior Art .............................................................................. 4
`III. The ’040 Patent ................................................................................................ 5
`A. Overview ............................................................................................... 5
`B.
`Summary of the Prosecution History .................................................... 7
`C.
`Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ....................................................... 11
`D.
`Claim Construction.............................................................................. 11
`1. “physiological information” ....................................................................... 12
`2. “selectively remove … unwanted signals from footsteps” ........................ 13
`3. “secondary optical energy” ........................................................................ 14
`4. “real time” .................................................................................................. 15
`5. “potentially erroneous data” ....................................................................... 15
`IV. 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. ...................................................... 16
`A. Overview of Aceti ............................................................................... 16
`B.
`Overview of Dettling ........................................................................... 19
`C.
`Overview of Stivoric ........................................................................... 20
`D. Motivation to Combine Aceti, Dettling, and Stivoric ......................... 21
`E.
`Independent claim 1 ............................................................................ 25
`[1.P] An earpiece module .................................................................................. 25
`[1.1] an earpiece fitting adapted to be positioned within an ear of a person .... 26
`[1.2] the earpiece fitting comprising: a speaker configured to provide sound
`transmission from a source ........................................................................ 26
`[1.3] the earpiece fitting comprising … an optical emitter, optical detector, and
`acoustic sensor ........................................................................................... 27
`[1.4] wherein the optical emitter is configured to direct optical energy to a
`region of the ear of the person ................................................................... 27
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`[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 .................................. 28
`[1.6] wherein the acoustic sensor is configured to sense footsteps of the
`person ......................................................................................................... 31
`[1.7] the earpiece fitting comprising … a first signal processor configured to
`receive and process signals produced by the optical detector ................... 32
`[1.8] a second signal processor configured to process signals produced by the
`first signal processor, and by the acoustic sensor ...................................... 33
`[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 ......................................................................................................... 34
`[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 ............................................................... 35
`F.
`Claim 2 ................................................................................................ 36
`G.
`Claim 3 ................................................................................................ 37
`H.
`Claim 11 .............................................................................................. 38
`I.
`Claim 12 .............................................................................................. 39
`J.
`Claim 13 .............................................................................................. 39
`K.
`Claim 14 .............................................................................................. 40
`L.
`Claim 15 .............................................................................................. 40
`M. Claim 16 .............................................................................................. 41
`N.
`Claim 17 .............................................................................................. 42
`O.
`Claim 18 .............................................................................................. 42
`P.
`Claim 19 .............................................................................................. 43
`Q.
`Claim 20 .............................................................................................. 43
`R.
`Claim 21 .............................................................................................. 43
`S.
`Claim 23 .............................................................................................. 43
`T.
`Claim 24 .............................................................................................. 44
`U.
`Claim 25 .............................................................................................. 44
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`Claim 27 .............................................................................................. 45
`V.
`W. Claim 29 .............................................................................................. 45
`X.
`Claim 30 .............................................................................................. 46
`Y.
`Claim 31 .............................................................................................. 47
`Z.
`Claim 32 .............................................................................................. 48
`AA. Claim 34 .............................................................................................. 48
`BB. Claim 35 .............................................................................................. 50
`CC. Claim 36 .............................................................................................. 50
`DD. Claim 37 .............................................................................................. 51
`EE. Claim 38 .............................................................................................. 51
`FF. Claim 39 .............................................................................................. 51
`GG. Claim 40 .............................................................................................. 53
`HH. Claim 43 .............................................................................................. 54
`II.
`Claim 44 .............................................................................................. 55
`JJ.
`Claim 45 .............................................................................................. 55
`KK. Claim 46 .............................................................................................. 55
`LL. Claim 48 .............................................................................................. 56
`MM. Claim 49 .............................................................................................. 57
`NN. Claim 50 .............................................................................................. 57
`OO. Claim 51 .............................................................................................. 58
`PP. Claim 52 .............................................................................................. 58
`QQ. Claim 53 .............................................................................................. 59
`Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 59
`V.
`VI. Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)) .................................................................. 60
`VII. Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1)) ................................................. 60
`
`
`
`
`- iii -
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Federal Cases
`
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee,
`579 US__, 136 S. Ct. 2131 (2016) .......................................................................11
`
`
`DyStar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C. H. Patrick Co.,
`464 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2006) ............................................................................24
`
`
`In re Am. Acad. Of Sci. Tech Ctr.,
`367 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2004) ............................................................................12
`
`
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
`550 U.S. 398 (2007) ..................................................................................... passim
`
`
`Federal Statutes
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ..................................................................................................... 5
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 .......................................................................................................... 4
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ...................................................................................................16
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112 .......................................................................................................... 4
`
`Federal Regulations
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) ..............................................................................................11
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ...............................................................................................60
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) ................................................................................................ 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1) ..............................................................................................60
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ..............................................................................................60
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for 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
`Declaration of Dr. Majid Sarrafzadeh
`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
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0116314 to Grilliot et
`al., published May 24, 2007
`
`
`
`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
`
`1052
`
`
`
`- v -
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`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
`
`1053
`
`1054
`1055
`
`1056
`
`1057-1065
`1066
`
`1067
`
`1068
`
`1069-1143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- vi -
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`Apple Inc. requests inter partes review of claims 1-3, 11-21, 23-25, 27, 29-
`
`32, 34-40, 43-46, and 48-53 of United States Patent No. 8,652,040 (“the ʼ040
`
`Patent”) (Ex. 1001).
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`The ’040 Patent includes only one independent claim (claim 1), which is
`
`directed towards a wearable earpiece module that includes optical and acoustic
`
`sensors for monitoring both the environment and physiological information about
`
`the wearer. Sarrafzadeh Declaration, Ex. 1003, ¶26. Such monitoring via a wearable
`
`sensing device is not new and has been described in numerous publications for
`
`years preceding the earliest priority date of the ’040 patent. Ex. 1003, ¶26. Claim 1
`
`was heavily amended during prosecution to include a myriad of disparate features
`
`in an attempt to specifically circumvent the art provided by the Office during
`
`prosecution of the application that issued as the ’040 Patent. Although this tactic
`
`was successful in initially allowing the patent, none of the added features provide a
`
`patentable concept as will be explained in more detail herein.
`
`Providing optical sensors in a wearable monitoring device was not a new
`
`concept at the time the ’040 Patent was filed. For example, it was very common for
`
`wearable monitors to include an optical sensor for performing pulse oximetry (also
`
`known as photoplethysmography, hereafter referred to as ‘PPG’). Ex. 1003, ¶27-31.
`
`PPG is an optical technique whereby light is projected into living tissue, and the
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`reflected light is detected after its interaction with the skin, blood, and other tissue.
`
`Id. at ¶¶28-29. The intensity of the reflected light depends on the volume of blood.
`
`Id. The volume of blood fluctuates proportionally with the cardiac cycle. As a
`
`result, a PPG sensor detects a time-varying pulsatile waveform, or pulse wave, that
`
`is synchronized with each heartbeat. Id.
`
`In recent decades, the desire for small, reliable, low-cost and simple-to-use
`
`noninvasive (cardiovascular) assessment techniques were key factors that propelled
`
`the use of PPG. Id. at ¶32. As this technology became ever smaller and more robust,
`
`PPG sensors were integrated into wearable technology such as wristwatches,
`
`earphones, headsets, etc. Id.
`
`Providing acoustic sensors in a wearable monitoring device was also not a
`
`new concept at the time the ’040 patent was filed. Using a microphone to detect
`
`sounds from the body (also known as auscultatory sensing) had been performed for
`
`years prior to the filing date of the ’040 patent. Ex. 1003, ¶33. 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. Ex. 1003, ¶33. These sounds are known as
`
`“Korotkoff sounds” and are still used by physicians today. Ex. 1003, ¶33.
`
`Many wearable devices have been described that perform auscultatory
`
`sensing. U.S. Patent No. 4,672,976 (Ex. 1045), issued in 1987, describes a heart
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`sound sensing device that is designed to be worn on the body and includes an
`
`acoustic transducer for sensing sound waves generated in the patient’s body. Ex.
`
`1003, ¶34. More recently, another U.S. Patent No. 7,539,533 (Ex. 1046), issued in
`
`2009 but filed in 2006, describes how body sounds are detected using a microphone
`
`integrated into a patch worn on the body. Ex. 1003, ¶35.
`
`Claim 1 of the ’040 patent also recites that the earpiece module includes a
`
`speaker, a signal processor configured to remove unwanted noise from the collected
`
`signals, and a transmitter to transmit signals to a remote device. But all of these
`
`additional features are well established concepts that have been implemented in
`
`wearable monitoring devices for years before the earliest priority date of the ’040
`
`patent. Ex. 1003, ¶¶36, 59, 68. Each of these features in combination with the above
`
`mentioned optical and acoustic sensors in an earpiece device are taught in the prior
`
`art as evidenced by the disclosures of Aceti (U.S. Patent Publication No.
`
`2005/0059870, Ex. 1047), Dettling (U.S. Patent No. 5,954,644, Ex. 1048), and
`
`Stivoric (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0039254, Ex. 1049).
`
`II.
`
`Identification of Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))
`A.
`Apple requests review of claims 1-3, 11-21, 23-25, 27, 29-32, 34-40, 43-46,
`
`Summary of the Grounds of Unpatentability
`
`and 48-53 on the following ground:
`
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`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
`
`
`
`B. Citation of Prior Art
`The ’040 Patent claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No.
`
`60/905,761 filed March 8, 2007, U.S. Provisional Patent Application No.
`
`60/876,128 filed December 21, 2006, and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No.
`
`60/875,606 filed December 19, 2006. Each of the following prior art documents
`
`applied in the grounds of unpatentability qualify as prior art before the earliest
`
`possible priority date, December 19, 2006.1
`
`In support of the grounds of unpatentability cited above, Petitioner relies on
`
`the following prior art references:
`
`
`1 Petitioner does not concede that any claim of the ’040 Patent has support under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 112 such that it is entitled to the benefit of priority of any earlier-filed
`
`application. Petitioner expressly reserves the right to challenge any benefit claim
`
`should Patent Owner attempt to antedate any art.
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`• U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0059870 (“Aceti”),
`
`published March 17, 2005. (Ex. 1047).
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,954,644 (“Dettling”), issued September 21, 1999.
`
`(Ex. 1048).
`
`• U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0039254 (“Stivoric”),
`
`published February 26, 2004. (Ex. 1049).
`
`All references were published more than one year prior to the earliest possible
`
`priority date and therefore qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`III. The ’040 Patent
`A. Overview
`The ’040 patent is generally directed to wireless health and environmental
`
`monitors. ’040 Patent, Ex. 1001, 1:16-18. More specifically, the ’040 patent
`
`describes the integration of compact sensors within an earpiece housing to function
`
`as a physiological monitor, an environmental monitor, and a wireless personal
`
`communicator. Ex. 1001, 1:54-56.
`
`FIG. 1 of the ’040 patent illustrates an example earpiece module that includes
`
`at least one physiological sensor 101, at least one environmental sensor 102, at least
`
`one signal processor 103, and a transmitter/receiver 104 within an earpiece housing
`
`108. Ex. 1001, 10:5-14.
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`Ex. 1001, FIG. 1
`
`
`
`The physiological sensors 101 may include an acoustic transducer to measure
`
`physiological sounds from the body that travel through the ear canal. Ex. 1001,
`
`22:11-14, 30-42. The signal processor 103 may be configured to take in sounds
`
`received from the physiological sensors 101 and external sounds received from
`
`around the wearer in order to digitally filter out the unwanted sounds from around
`
`the wearer of the device. Ex. 1001, 21:48-57, 22:14-29.
`
`The physiological sensors 101 also include optical detectors for extracting
`
`physiological information from the wearer. Ex. 1001, 23:15-20, 25:3-17. The optical
`
`detector may be used to perform pulse oximetry using visible and infrared
`
`wavelengths of light emitted into the ear region. Ex. 1001, 30:23-43.
`
`The ’040 patent does not explicitly define what sensors constitute the
`
`environmental sensors 102. FIG. 4 of the ’040 patent illustrates the use of a plurality
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`of external environmental sensors 402, 403, and 404 to sense external energy from
`
`the environment around the wearer of the device. Ex. 1001, 21:25-32.
`
`Ex. 1001, FIG. 4
`
`
`
` The energy collected from the various external environmental sensors is
`
`described as being “any physical energy, such as electrical, magnetic,
`
`electromagnetic, atomic, gravity, mechanical, acoustic, and the like.” Ex. 1001,
`
`21:40-42. As such, the ’040 patent implicitly suggests the inclusion of nearly any
`
`kind of sensor for measuring some form of energy from the environment.
`
`Summary of the Prosecution History
`
`B.
` The application that ultimately issued as the ’040 patent endured a lengthy
`
`prosecution, during which the claims underwent extensive amendment. A total of
`
`four office actions were issued on the merits between 2009 and 2013. Valencell
`
`amended the claims after each office action, and ultimately provided numerous,
`
`disparate amendments in response to the last of the four office actions, which
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`ultimately lead to an allowance of the application. Since claim 1 was the only
`
`pending independent claim during prosecution (and is similarly the only issued
`
`independent claim), only claim 1 is discussed in this section.
`
`The first office action was issued on April 16, 2009, rejecting independent
`
`claim 1 as being anticipated by either U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0076972 to
`
`Dorogusker et al. (Ex. 1050) or U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0004547 to Appelt
`
`et al. (Ex. 1051) ’040 Patent Prosecution History, Ex. 1002, pp. 105-120. Claim 1 at
`
`the time of the first office action was broadly directed towards a personal
`
`monitoring apparatus having a housing attached to the body of a person, a
`
`physiological sensor, an environmental sensor, a signal processor, and a transmitter.
`
`Ex. 1002, pp. 111-112. In response to the Office Action, Valencell amended the
`
`claim to recite that the housing must be attached to the ear of a person. Ex. 1002, p.
`
`133.
`
`The second office action was issued on November 27, 2009, rejecting
`
`independent claim 1 as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No.
`
`2007/0116314 to Grilliot et al. (Ex. 1052) or as being obvious over Appelt in view
`
`of Grilliot. Ex. 1002, pp. 219-233. In response to the second Office Action,
`
`Valencell amended the claim to recite that the signal processor is configured to
`
`extract environmental effects from signals produced by the physiological sensor and
`
`to extract physiological effects from signals produced by the environmental sensor
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`in order to produce a final processed signal. Ex. 1002, p. 238. Valencell did not
`
`provide any explanation for what it means to extract “physiological effects from
`
`signals produced by an environmental sensor.”
`
` The third office action was issued on May 11, 2010, rejecting independent
`
`claim 1 as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0242976 to Abreu
`
`(Ex. 1053), or as being obvious over Grilliot in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,853,005 to
`
`Scanlon (Ex. 1054), or as being obvious over Applet in view of Scanlon. Ex. 1002,
`
`pp. 272-282. In response to the third Office Action, Valencell amended the claim to
`
`recite that the apparatus includes an optical emitter, optical detector, and acoustical
`
`sensor to detect optical and acoustical energy emanating from the ear region. The
`
`claim was also amended to remove the previous amendment directed to the
`
`extraction of environmental/physiological effects and to replace it with an
`
`amendment stating that the processor selectively removes unwanted signals
`
`produced by the various detectors/sensors. Ex. 1002, p. 290.
`
`The fourth and final office action was issued on June 10, 2013 and rejected
`
`independent claim 1 as being obvious over U.S. Patent Publication No.
`
`2009/0131761 to Moroney III et al. (Ex. 1055) in view of U.S. Patent Publication
`
`No. 2006/0064037 to Shalon et al. (Ex. 1056) Ex. 1002, pp. 333-342. In response to
`
`the fourth Office Action, Valencell heavily amended claim 1 to include a multitude
`
`of various and seemingly disparate limitations, which include:
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`- adding a speaker to provide sound transmission;
`
`- configuring the optical detector to detect energy from the ear region and to
`
`sense an environmental condition;
`
`- configuring the acoustic sensor to sense footsteps of the person;
`
`- splitting the initial signal processor into two separate signal processors,
`
`where the first processor processes signals from the optical detector while the
`
`second processor processes signals from the acoustic sensor and from the first signal
`
`processor; and
`
`- using the second signal processor to remove both unwanted environmental
`
`signals and unwanted signals from footsteps. Ex. 1002, p. 351.
`
`Valencell stated that support for all of these amendments could be particularly
`
`found at FIG. 12 and ¶¶[0020], [0105], [0127], [0128], [0146], [0149] of the
`
`originally filed application. Ex. 1002, p. 363. However, nothing in the application
`
`appears to relate specifically to the optical detector being configured to detect both
`
`energy from the ear region and to sense an environmental condition, and to the
`
`inclusion of two separate processors. Despite the lack of support from the
`
`specification, the claims were allowed in a notice of allowance mailed October 8,
`
`2013. Ex. 1002, pp. 428-29.
`
`In the notice of allowance, the Examiner specifically noted that “the noise
`
`reduction feature of Shalon et al. focuses on noises adjacent to the in-the-ear
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`monitoring device such as chewing, swallowing, and biting, and does not remotely
`
`suggest processing acoustic signals such as the user's footsteps to produce cleaner
`
`physiological signals.” Ex. 1002, p. 429. But as will be discussed herein, processing
`
`acoustic footstep signals to produce cleaner physiological signals was, in fact, well
`
`known as evidenced by Stivoric.
`
`C. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`Based on the disclosure of the ’040 Patent, a person having ordinary skill in
`
`the art (herein referred to as a “POSA”) at the relevant time would have had at least
`
`a four-year degree in electrical engineering, computer science, computer
`
`engineering, or related field of study, or equivalent experience, and at least two
`
`years of experience in studying or developing physiological sensors. Ex. 1003, ¶ 44.
`
`A POSA would also be familiar with wearable sensors and signal processing. Id.
`
`D. Claim Construction
`Claim terms of the ʼ040 Patent are interpreted according to their broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation (BRI) in light of the specification. 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b);
`
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 579 US__, 136 S. Ct. 2131, 2142 (2016). Under
`
`BRI, claim terms are given their ordinary and customary meaning as understood by
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art, unless the patentee “demonstrate[s] an intent to
`
`deviate from the ordinary and accustomed meaning of a claim term by including in
`
`the specification expressions of manifest exclusion or restriction, representing a
`
`clear disavowal of claim scope.” In re Am. Acad. Of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359,
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`1365 (Fed. Cir. 2004).2
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`
`“physiological information”
`
`1.
`Claim 1 of the ’040 patent recites that the second processor is configured to
`
`“remove unwanted environmental signals and unwanted signals from footsteps to
`
`produce processed signals containing cleaner physiological information from the
`
`person….” The ’040 patent does not explicitly define the term “physiological
`
`information.” However, the ’040 patent does provide an exhaustive list of different
`
`types of physiological information. Ex. 1001, 2:30-60.
`
`The term “physiological information” is also used in U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,923,941, (Ex. 1066, hereafter “the ’941 patent”), which is co-owned by Valencell
`
`and includes the exact same inventive entity as the ’040 patent. Like the ’040 patent,
`
`the ’941 patent is directed to a sensor module worn over the ear for detecting or
`
`measuring physiological information from the wearer. Ex. 1066, Abstract. The ’941
`
`patent also states that “[t]he term ‘physiological’ refers to matter or energy of or
`
`from the body of a creature (e.g., humans, animals, etc.) … the term “physiological”
`
`is intended to be used broadly, covering both physical and psychological matter and
`
`energy of or from the body of a creature.” Ex. 1066, 10:9-14. This definition is
`
`
`2 Petitioner reserves the right to present different constructions in another
`
`forum where a different claim construction standard applies.
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,652,040
`consistent with the list of different types of physiological information provided in
`
`the ’040 patent. Ex. 1003, ¶47.
`
`Accordingly, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “physiological
`
`information” should be “information about physical and/or psychological matter and
`
`energy of or from the body of a creature.” Ex. 1003, ¶47.
`
`“selectively remove … unwanted signals from footsteps”
`
`2.
`Claim 1 of the ’040 patent recites that the second signal processor is
`
`configured to “selectively remove unwanted environmental signals and unwanted
`
`signals from footsteps to produce processed signals containing cleaner
`
`physiological information from the person.” According to the plain language of the
`
`