`Filed on behalf of Apple Inc.
`By:
`Michelle K. Holoubek
`
`Michael D. Specht
`
`Mark J. Consilvio
`
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`
`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. 8,942,776
`
`
`
`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. 8,942,776
`
`I. 
`II. 
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 
`Identification of challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)) ........................................ 3 
`A. 
`Statutory grounds .................................................................................. 3 
`B. 
`Citation of prior art ................................................................................ 4 
`III.  The ’776 Patent ................................................................................................ 4 
`A.  Overview ............................................................................................... 4 
`B. 
`Summary of the prosecution history ..................................................... 5 
`C. 
`Level of ordinary skill in the art ............................................................ 6 
`D. 
`Claim construction ................................................................................ 7 
`1. 
`“monitoring” (claim 1) ................................................................ 7 
`2. 
`“free end surface” (claim 1) ........................................................ 7 
`3. 
`“directly into/from the body” (claim 1) ...................................... 8 
`4. 
`“engage” (claim 1) ...................................................................... 9 
`IV.  Ground 1: Claim 1 is unpatentable under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`as being obvious over Numaga. ....................................................................... 9 
`A.  Overview of Numaga ............................................................................ 9 
`B. 
`Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 11 
`V.  Ground 2: Claims 2-4 are unpatentable under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`§ 103(a) over Numaga in view of Vetter. ...................................................... 19 
`A.  Overview of Vetter .............................................................................. 20 
`B. 
`Claim 2 ................................................................................................ 22 
`C. 
`Claim 3 ................................................................................................ 26 
`D. 
`Claim 4 ................................................................................................ 28 
`E. 
`Claim 8 ................................................................................................ 30 
`VI.  Ground 3: Claim 5 is unpatentable under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`over Numaga in view of Vetter and in further view of Dekker .................... 32 
`A.  Overview of Dekker ............................................................................ 32 
`B. 
`Claim 5 ................................................................................................ 33 
`
`- i -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`VII.  Ground 4: Claim 1 is unpatentable under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
`as being anticipated by Fraden. ..................................................................... 36 
`A.  Overview of Fraden ............................................................................. 36 
`VIII.  Ground 5: Claims 2-5 and 8 are unpatentable under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`§ 103(a) over Fraden in view of Fricke. ........................................................ 44 
`A.  Overview of Fricke .............................................................................. 45 
`B. 
`Claim 2 ................................................................................................ 46 
`C. 
`Claim 3 ................................................................................................ 49 
`D. 
`Claim 4 ................................................................................................ 51 
`E. 
`Claim 5 ................................................................................................ 52 
`F. 
`Claim 8 ................................................................................................ 54 
`IX.  Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 55 
`X.  Grounds for standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)) .............................................. 57 
`XI.  Mandatory notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1)) .................................................. 57 
`
`- ii -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Federal Cases
`
`Anderson’s–Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co.,
`396 U.S. 57 (1969) ............................................................................ 23, 27, 47, 49
`
`
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee,
`__ US__, 136 S.Ct. 2131, 2142 (2016) .................................................................. 7
`
`
`In re Nilssen,
` 851 F.2d at 140 .............................................................................................. 36, 55
`
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
`550 U.S. 398 (2007) ..................................................................................... passim
`
`
`Sakraida v. Ag Pro, Inc.,
`425 U.S. 273 (1976) ...................................................................................... 23, 47
`
`
`Federal Statutes
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102 .......................................................................................................... 3
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) .................................................................................................4, 9
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(e) ..................................................................................................... 4
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 ......................................................................................................3, 4
`
`Federal Regulations
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(a) ................................................................................................. 58
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) ................................................................................................ 7
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ............................................................................................... 57
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) ................................................................................................ 3
`
`
`- iii -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1) .............................................................................................. 57
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .............................................................................................. 58
`
`
`- iv -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776 to LeBoeuf et al., issued January 27,
`2015
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776 File History
`
`Declaration of Dr. Majid Sarrafzadeh
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Majid Sarrafzadeh
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,608,562 to Kimura et al., issued August 19, 2003
`
`1007-1011
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`John Allen, “Photoplethysmography and its application in clinical
`physiological measurement,” Physiological Measurement 28
`(2007); pp. R1-R39
`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
`U.S. Patent No. 3,704,706 to Herczfeld et al., issued December 5,
`1972
`J.G. Webster, Design of Pulse Oximeters, Institute of Physics
`Publishing (1997)
`International Patent Application Publication No. 2007/013054 to
`Schwartz, published February 1, 2007
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0186387 to Kosuda
`et al., published September 23, 2004
`U.S. Patent No. 5,297,548 to Pologe, issued March 29, 1994
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,575,284 to Athan et al., issued November 19,
`1996
`
`- v -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`1028
`
`1029
`
`1030
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1037
`
`1038-1149
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,503,016 to Koen, issued April 2, 1996
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0154098 to Morris et
`al., published June 26, 2008
`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 et
`al., published July 24, 2008
`U.S. Patent No. 5,807,267 to Bryars et al., issued September 15,
`1998
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0054291 to Schulz et
`al., published March 18, 2004
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0209516 to Fraden,
`published September 22, 2005
`U.S. Patent No. 5,906,582 to Kondo et al., issued May 25, 1999
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0081972 to
`Debreczeny, published April 3, 2008
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0084879 to Nazarian
`et al., published April 20, 2006
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0065269 to Vetter et
`al., published April 3, 2003
`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); pp. 1581-1584
`U.S. Patent No. 5,243,992 to Eckerle et al., issued September 14,
`1993
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0105556 to Fricke et
`al., published April 23, 2009
`U.S. Patent No. 4,955,379 to Hall, issued September 11, 1990
`
`International Patent Application Publication No. WO 2007/122375
`to Crowe et al., published November 1, 2007
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`
`
`- vii -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`
`1150
`
`1151
`
`1152
`
`1153
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,209,775 to Bae et al., issued April 24, 2007
`
`Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2005040261, to
`Numaga, published February 17, 2005
`English-language translation of Japanese Patent Application
`Publication No. 2005040261 to Numaga, published February 17,
`2005
`U.S. Patent No. 7,107,088 to Aceti, issued September 12, 2006
`
`1154-1175
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`1176
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,702,752 to Dekker, issued March 9, 2004
`
`
`
`- viii -
`
`

`

`Apple Inc. requests inter partes review of claims 1-5 and 8 of U.S. Patent
`
` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`No. 8,942,776 (“the ʼ776 Patent”) (Ex. 1001).
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`In the 40 years prior to the purported invention of the ’776 Patent, artisans
`
`had developed and continued to improve sensor modules for optically detecting
`
`and measuring physiological information, such as heart rate. Ex. 1003, ¶¶26-34. As
`
`shown below, a small heart rate monitor included a light source to emit light
`
`directly into the body of a subject and a photodetector to collect light directly from
`
`the body. See Herczfeld, Ex. 1016, 2:60-3:22, FIG. 1 (annotated and reproduced
`
`below); see also Ex. 1003, ¶¶29-30. A detected periodic waveform was known to
`
`represent a volume of the circulating blood synchronized to each heartbeat. Ex.
`
`Ex. 1016, FIG. 1.
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`1003, ¶30. This pulsatile waveform was known as a photoplethysmographic (PPG)
`
`signal or pulse wave. Id.
`
`Because PPG sensors use optical means to make their measurements, such
`
`optical sensors were susceptible to optical noise and interference. Id. at ¶¶37-39,
`
`45-49. Ideally, all light from an emitter would reach a targeted tissue region and
`
`only light reflected from that target area would reach a detector. In practice,
`
`however, many factors result in losses before reaching the detector. Id.
`
`A well-known technique, well prior to the alleged invention of the ’776
`
`Patent, utilized optical components, such as light guides, to couple light from an
`
`emitter directly into the body, and likewise directly from the body to a detector, to
`
`reduce reflections at the tissue surface. Id. at ¶¶37-39, 42; see also Ex. 1151, FIG.
`
`1(a) (annotated and reproduced below); Ex. 1152, ¶¶0009-0011.
`
`Ex. 1151,
`FIG. 1(a) (annotated)
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`PPG measurements were also quite sensitive to motion artifacts. Ex. 1003,
`
`¶¶45-52. To reduce the impact from such motion, motion cancellation techniques
`
`were developed to remove motion artifacts from the detected signal. Id. at ¶¶46-
`
`49. One successful technique utilized a motion sensor, which would provide a
`
`motion reference signal to the signal processor. Id. at ¶¶50-52. The signal
`
`processor would then adaptively filter the detected PPG signal to remove the
`
`motion contribution present in the sensed PPG signal. Id. at ¶¶50-52.
`
`II.
`
`Identification of challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b))
`A.
`Apple requests review of claims 1-5 and 8 on the following grounds:
`
`Statutory grounds
`
`Ground
`
`Reference(s)
`
`Statutory Basis Claim(s)
`Challenged
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`Numaga
`
`Numaga & Vetter
`
`Numaga, Vetter, Dekker
`
`Fraden
`
`Fraden & Fricke
`
`§ 103
`
`§ 103
`
`§ 103
`
`§ 102
`
`§ 103
`
`1
`
`2-4, 8
`
`5
`
`1
`
`2-5, 8
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`B. Citation of prior art
`The ’776 Patent claims priority benefit to February 25, 2009. Apple relies on
`
`the following prior art references:
`
` JP Patent Publication No. 2005/040261 A (Numaga et al.)
`
` US Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0065269 (Vetter et al.)
`
` US Patent No. 6,702,752 (Dekker)
`
` U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0209516 (Fraden)
`
` U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0105556 (Fricke et al.)
`
`All references were published more than one year prior to the earliest possible
`
`priority date (with the exception of Fricke) and therefore qualify as prior art under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b). Even if the challenged claims were entitled to the earliest
`
`claimed date, which Apple does not concede, Fricke qualifies as prior art as of its
`
`filing date under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`III. The ’776 Patent
`A. Overview
`The ’776 Patent is directed to a method for monitoring a subject. Ex. 1001,
`
`Abstract; Ex. 1003, ¶53. FIGs. 24A-24B, 25A-25B, and 34-40 illustrate headsets
`
`10 using one or more light guides 119 optically coupled with one or more optical
`
`emitters and optical detectors. Ex. 1001, 35:9-18; Ex. 1003, ¶53. “The distal end
`
`119a of each light guide 119 has an exposed end surface 119c that is configured to
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`engage (or be positioned adjacent) a portion of an ear of a subject.” Ex. 1001,
`
`35:39-41; Ex. 1003, ¶53.
`
`The ’776 Patent also discloses “an adaptive noise cancelation scheme 200
`
`for extracting a physiological signal from noise.” Ex. 1001, 28:25-27; Ex. 1003,
`
`¶54. Figure 13 of the ’776 Patent illustrates the basic configuration of an adaptive
`
`noise cancellation scheme 200 for calculating a physiological signal. Ex. 1001,
`
`28:25-30:7; Ex. 1003, ¶54. For example, the ’776 Patent discloses that an adaptive
`
`filter scheme may be used in conjunction with an accelerometer that provides an
`
`inertial noise reference. Ex. 1001, 29:3-24; Ex. 1003, ¶54.
`
`Ex. 1001, FIGs. 24a
`and 25a (annotated)
`
`Summary of the prosecution history
`
`B.
`The brief prosecution history contains a single prior art rejection of original
`
`independent claims based on U.S. Patent No. 7,107,088 (hereinafter Aceti) (Ex.
`
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`1153). See ’776 Patent File History, Ex. 1002, pp. 134-37; see also Ex. 1153, FIG.
`
`2 and ; Ex. 1003, ¶55. In response to the rejection, Valencell amended claim 1,
`
`arguing that Aceti’s “distal ends of the first, second and third light channels 232,
`
`236 and 242 terminate within the optically transparent material 224a, 224b of the
`
`device 200 and do not have free end surfaces that engage the ear canal tissue of a
`
`subject.” Ex. 1002, p. 177 (emphasis in original); see also Ex. 1003, ¶56. Similar
`
`amendments and argument regarding positioning were advanced for claim 17. Ex.
`
`1002, p. 179; Ex. 1003, ¶¶56, 58.
`
`Amendments and arguments regarding claim 9 focused on the light path
`
`direction and location: “the Aceti sensor 200 cannot deliver light in a direction
`
`away from the ear canal … and cannot collect light in a direction away from the
`
`ear canal.” Ex. 1002, pp. 178-79; Ex. 1003, ¶57.
`
`Claims 1 and 4-20 were thereafter allowed. Ex. 1002, pp. 257-63. No
`
`reasons for allowance were provided. See Ex. 1002, p. 262.
`
`C. Level of ordinary skill in the art
`Based on the disclosure of the ’776 Patent, a person having ordinary skill in
`
`the art (“POSA”) at the relevant time would have had at least a four-year degree in
`
`electrical engineering, computer engineering, or related field of study, or
`
`equivalent experience, and at least two years of experience in studying or
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`developing physiological sensors. Ex. 1003, ¶60. A POSA would also have been
`
`familiar with optical system design and signal processing. Ex. 1003, ¶60.
`
`D. Claim construction
`Claim terms of the ʼ776 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, __ US__, 136 S.Ct. 2131, 2142 (2016).1 Other
`
`than the exceptions noted below, the terms of the ’776 Patent are given their plain
`
`and ordinary meaning as understood by a POSA. Ex. 1001, 14:10-20; see also Ex.
`
`1003, ¶¶61-66. The ʼ776 Patent provides definitions for the following terms:
`
`“monitoring” and “engage.”
`
`“monitoring” (claim 1)
`
`1.
`The specification defines the term “monitoring” as the “act of measuring,
`
`quantifying, qualifying, estimating, sensing, calculating, interpolating,
`
`extrapolating, inferring, deducing, or any combination of these actions.” Ex. 1001,
`
`14:53-60; Ex. 1003, ¶62.
`
`“free end surface” (claim 1)
`
`2.
`The term “free end surface” is used in the ’776 Patent with reference to
`
`surface 119c of light guide 119 in Figure 31. Ex. 1001, 38:48-50; ; Ex. 1003, ¶63.
`
`1 Petitioner reserves the right to present different constructions in another
`
`forum where a different claim construction standard applies.
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`Variations of the term appear with reference to surface 119c, viz. “exposed end
`
`surface” (35:39-41, 38:38-41), “exposed surface” (35:43), “distal end exposed
`
`surface” (36:15, 36:17-18), and “free end” (37:44). Ex. 1003, ¶63. The “free end
`
`surface” and similar terminology is consistently linked to a distal end of a light
`
`guide, which is “exposed” or otherwise “free” to engage (or be positioned adjacent
`
`to) a portion of a body of a subject. See Ex. 1001, 38:33-50; Ex. 1003, ¶63. This
`
`“free end surface” stands in contradistinction to the proximal end of the light
`
`guide, which is optically coupled to either an optical emitter or detector. Ex. 1003,
`
`¶63.
`
`Accordingly, the term “free end surface” should be construed as a surface at
`
`the distal end of a light guide that is exposed or otherwise free to be used with
`
`many different parts of the body. Ex. 1003, ¶64.
`
`“directly into/from the body” (claim 1)
`
`3.
`Regarding the term “directly,” the ’776 Patent states that “when a feature or
`
`element is referred to as being “directly connected”, directly attached” or “directly
`
`coupled” to another feature or element, there are no intervening features or
`
`elements present.” Ex. 1001, 13:14-34; Ex. 1003, ¶65. Accordingly, the phrases
`
`“directly into the body via the distal end free end surface of the first light guide” or
`
`“directly from the body via the distal end free end surface of the second light
`
`guide” would have been understood to mean that there are no intervening features
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`or elements present between the body and the respective distal end free end
`
`surfaces of the first or second light guide.
`
`“engage” (claim 1)
`
`4.
`The specification defines the term “engage” as “contact[ing] the skin of a
`
`person or may be closely adjacent the skin of a person.” Ex. 1001, 36:6-10; Ex.
`
`1003, ¶66.
`
`IV. Ground 1: Claim 1 is unpatentable under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
`being obvious over Numaga.
`A. Overview of Numaga
`JP publication no. 2005-040261 (Ex. 1151) is a Japanese patent application
`
`that was published in Japan on February 17, 2005, and thus constitutes prior art
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). A certified English-language translation of Ex. 1151 is
`
`attached hereto as Ex. 1152. For ease of explanation, the discussion herein will
`
`generally refer to this English-language translation.
`
`Numaga discloses a wrist-worn pulse wave sensor 20 that emits infrared
`
`light directly onto the wrist 10 of a subject, and detects the pulse waves of the
`
`subject from the light that is reflected by the red corpuscles within the arteries. Ex.
`
`1152, ¶0001; Ex. 1003, ¶68. The pulse wave sensor 20 includes an optical emitter
`
`(light emitting device 21) and an optical detector (light receiving device 22)
`
`enclosed and supported by a housing (sensor case 23 and a shell supporting
`
`member 29). Ex. 1152, Abstract; Ex. 1003, ¶68. The sensor also includes a first
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`Ex. 1152, FIG. 2(a)
`light guide (light guide 21b) from the optical emitter to direct infrared light to the
`
`subject, and a second light guide (light guide 22b) to the optical detector to capture
`
`light from the subject. Ex. 1152, Abstract, ¶0009; Ex. 1003, ¶68. The light guides
`
`21b and 22b project from shell supporting member 29 and engage wrist 10, such
`
`that a distal end of the first light guide (light emitting surface 21s) and a distal end
`
`of the second light guide (light receiving surface 22s) are pressed against wrist 10.
`
`Ex. 1152, Abstract, ¶0009; Ex. 1003, ¶68.
`
`The part of the pulse wave sensor that excludes the light emitting surface
`
`21s and the light receiving surface 22s is covered with a shell supporting member
`
`29. Ex. 1152, ¶¶0010-0011; Ex. 1003, ¶68. The rear sides of light emitting device
`
`21 and light receiving device 22 are further coated with an enclosure adhesive 28
`
`having a light blocking property, so that unnecessary light from the outside of the
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`sensor will not come into light emitting device 22. Ex. 1152, Abstract, ¶¶0010-
`
`0011; Ex. 1003, ¶68.
`
`Ex. 1152, FIG. 1(a)
`
`B. Claim 1
`Numaga discloses or suggests each and every element of claim 1 as
`
`
`
`discussed in further detail below. See Ex. 1003, ¶¶70-85.
`
`Numaga provides two sets of figures. FIGs. 1(a) and 1(b) illustrate the
`
`alleged invention of Numaga, while FIGs. 2(a) and 2(b) illustrate Numaga’s
`
`characterization of the prior art at that time. As discussed below, FIG. 1(a) is
`
`nearly identical to claim 1 of the ’776 patent. While reference is made below to
`
`text discussed in the context of FIG. 2(a) of Numaga, Petitioner notes that
`
`Numaga, when referring to FIGs. 1(a) and (1)b, states that “like symbols [in the
`
`invention] are assigned to like portions in the conventional example, and
`
`descriptions thereof are omitted.” Ex. 1152, ¶0009. A POSA would have
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`understood that, unless otherwise indicated, the description of the conventional
`
`pulse wave sensor 20A is equally applicable the description of pulse wave sensor
`
`20. See, e.g., Ex. 1003, ¶70, n. 2.
`
`[1.P.1] A method of monitoring a subject via a sensor module
`
`Numaga discloses that a conventional pulse wave sensor 20A “measures the
`
`pulse waves of [a] subject under test by detecting the movement of red corpuscles
`
`in the arteries of the wrist.” Ex. 1152, ¶0002. Likewise, Numaga discloses pulse
`
`wave sensor 20 (i.e., a sensor module) configured such that “the light emitted from
`
`the light emitting device and reflected from the arterial movement of the wrist of
`
`the test subject is detected by the light receiving device” for accurate detection of
`
`pulse waves and calculation of pulse rate. Ex. 1152, ¶¶0002, 0007. Thus, Numaga
`
`teaches a method of measuring pulse waves from a subject (i.e., monitoring a
`
`subject) via a sensor module. Ex. 1152, ¶¶0001-0002, 0007-0010; Ex. 1003, ¶70.
`
`[1.P.2] wherein the sensor module includes at least one optical
`emitter and at least one optical detector
`
`Numaga discloses that pulse wave sensor 20 includes light emitting chips
`
`(i.e., at least one optical emitter) and light receiving chips (i.e., at least one optical
`
`detector). Ex. 1152, ¶¶0002, 0009, FIG. 1(a); Ex. 1003, ¶71.
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`[1.P.3] a first light guide having a proximal end optically coupled
`to the at least one optical emitter and an opposite distal end with a
`free end surface
`
`Numaga discloses a light guide part 21b (i.e., a first light guide) of the light
`
`emitting device 21. Ex. 1152, ¶¶0002, 0009, FIG. 1(a); Ex. 1003, ¶72. In reference
`
`to FIG. 2(a), Numaga states that:
`
`The tips of the light guide parts 21b and 22b that project
`from the pedestals 21a and 22a become the respective
`light emitting surface 21s of the light emitting device 21
`and the light receiving surface 22s of the light receiving
`device 22.
`
`Ex. 1152, ¶0002. Numaga illustrates a similar arrangement with respect to FIG.
`
`1(a) using identical part numbers. See Ex. 1152, ¶0009 (indicating that “like
`
`symbols are assigned to like portions” in conventional pulse wave sensor 20A
`
`(FIG. 2(a)) and pulse wave sensor 20 (FIG. 1(a)), though corresponding
`
`descriptions of the latter are omitted). Thus, Numaga teaches light guide part 21b
`
`has a proximal end projecting from pedestal 21a (having light emitting chips
`
`embedded in the pedestal) and an opposite distal end with a light emitting surface
`
`21s (i.e., a free end surface). See Ex. 1152, ¶¶0002, 0009, FIG. 1(a); Ex. 1003, ¶72.
`
`In this way, Numaga’s arrangement leaves light emitting surface 21s “exposed to
`
`the sensor’s exterior” or thus “free” to abut a portion (wrist 10) of a body of a
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`subject. Ex. 1152, ¶¶0009-0010, FIG. 1(a); see also Claim Construction Section
`
`(“free end surface”) (Section III.D.2); Ex. 1001, 35:9-14; Ex. 1003, ¶¶63, 72.
`
`Further, Numaga teaches that the light emitted from the light emitting chips
`
`is transmitted through the light guide part 21b. Ex. 1152, ¶¶0007, 0010; Ex. 1003,
`
`¶73. While Numaga does not explicitly state that the light guide part 21b is
`
`“optically coupled” to the light emitting chip in pedestal 21a, a POSA would have
`
`understood that in order for Numaga’s pulse sensor to properly emit into the
`
`subject, the lights guide 21b would transmit light from the light emitting chips by
`
`passing though light guide part 21b. Ex. 1003, ¶74. Accordingly, it would have
`
`been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to optically couple light guide
`
`part 21a and the light emitting chips, so that the near infrared light emitted by
`
`emitter 21 would propagate from the light emitting chip in pedestal 21a through
`
`light guide part 21b to emitting surface 21s. Ex. 1003, ¶74. Such an arrangement
`
`would make it “possible to inject near infrared rays from the light emitting device
`
`21 very effectively to the wrist 10.” Ex. 1152, ¶0011; Ex. 1003, ¶74.
`
`[1.P.4] a second light guide having a proximal end optically
`coupled to the at least one optical detector and an opposite distal
`end with a free end surface
`Numaga discloses a light guide part 22b (i.e., a first light guide) of the light
`
`receiving device 22. Ex. 1152, ¶¶0002, 0009, FIG. 1(a); Ex. 1003, ¶75. Numaga
`
`states that:
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`The tips of the light guide parts 21b and 22b that project
`from the pedestals 21a and 22a become the respective
`light emitting surface 21s of the light emitting device 21
`and the light receiving surface 22s of the light receiving
`device 22.
`
`Ex. 1152, ¶0002. Numaga illustrates a similar arrangement with respect to FIG.
`
`1(a) using identical part numbers. See Ex. 1152, ¶0009. Thus, Numaga teaches
`
`light guide part 22b has a proximal end adjacent to pedestal 22a (having light
`
`receiving chips embedded therein) and an opposite distal end with a light receiving
`
`surface 22s (i.e., a free end surface). Ex. 1152, ¶¶0002, 0009, FIG. 1(a); Ex. 1003,
`
`¶75. Numaga’s arrangement leaves light receiving surface 22s “exposed to the
`
`sensor’s exterior” or thus “free” to abut a portion (wrist 10) of a body of a subject.
`
`Ex. 1152, ¶¶0009-0010, FIG. 1(a); see also Claim Construction Section (“free end
`
`surface”) (Section III.D.2); Ex. 1001, 35:9-14; Ex. 1003, ¶¶63, 75.
`
`While Numaga does not explicitly state that the light guide part 22b is
`
`“optically coupled” with the light receiving chip in pedestal 22a, a POSA would
`
`have understood that in order for Numaga’s pulse sensor to properly receive light
`
`from the subject, the lights guide 22b would transmit light from the wrist to light
`
`receiving chips by passing though light guide part 22b. Ex. 1003, ¶76.
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to
`
`optically couple light guide part 22a and the light receiving chips, so that the light
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`received by receiving surface 21s would propagate through light guide part 22b to
`
`the light receiving chip in pedestal 22a. Ex. 1003, ¶77. Such an arrangement
`
`would allow the reflected light from the wrist 10 to efficiently reach the light
`
`receiving chips and thus “significantly improve sensor sensitivity.” Ex. 1152,
`
`¶0011; Ex. 1003, ¶77.
`
`[1.1] attaching the sensor module to a body of the subject such
`that the respective distal end free end surfaces of the first and
`second light guides engage respective portions of the body of the
`subject
`
`Numaga illustrates “a conventional pulse wave sensor 20A that is attached
`
`to a wrist 10.” Ex. 1152, ¶0002, FIG. 2(a) (annotated and reproduced below).
`
`Ex. 1152, FIG. 2(a)
`
`
`As discussed above, Numaga indicates that pulse wave sensor 20 has a
`
`similar arrangement. Ex. 1152, ¶0009; Ex. 1003, ¶79. Light emitting surface 21s
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`

`

` Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`U.S. Patent No. 8,942,776
`
`and light receiving surface 22s of pulse wave sensor 20 are configured to directly
`
`abut (and hence engage) respective portions of wrist 10 as shown below. Ex. 1152,
`
`¶¶0009-0010, FIG. 1(a) (excerpted and annotated below); Ex. 1003, ¶¶66, 79-80.
`
`Ex. 1152, FIG. 1(a) (annotated)
`
`
`
`Thus, Numaga teaches attaching the pulse wave sensor 20 (i.e., a sensor
`
`module) to a wrist (and hence a body of the subject) via belt 30 such that the
`
`respective light emitting surface 21s and light receiving surface 22s (i.e., distal end
`
`free end surfaces) of light guide parts 21b and 22b (i.e., first and second light
`
`guides) abut (and hence engage) respective portions of the wrist of the subject. Ex.
`
`1152, ¶¶0002, 0009-0011, FIGs. 1(a), 2(a); Ex. 1003,