`
`
`In re Patent of: Vidya Narayanan, et al.
`U.S. Patent No.:
`8,768,865 Attorney Docket No.: 39521-0042IP2
`Issue Date:
`July 1, 2014
`
`Appl. Serial No.: 13/269,516
`
`Filing Date:
`October 7, 2011
`
`Title:
`LEARNING SITUATIONS VIA PATTERN MATCHING
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. JAMES F. ALLEN
`
`1. My name is Dr. James Allen. I am the John H. Dessauer Professor of
`
`Computer Science for the University of Rochester, a position I have held since
`
`1992. I have been employed by the University of Rochester since 1978. I
`
`regularly teach undergraduate- and graduate-level courses in natural language
`
`understanding covering topics including English phrase structure, parsing,
`
`semantic analysis, speech acts, knowledge representation, and natural language
`
`system design. My curriculum vitae is provided (as Exhibit 1004).
`
`2.
`
`I received Bachelor of Science, Master of Science, and Doctor of
`
`Philosophy Degrees in Computer Science from the University of Toronto.
`
`3.
`
`I am an expert in the field of artificial intelligence. I served on the
`
`Editorial Board of AI Magazine for seven years and as Editor-in- Chief of the
`
`foremost journal in natural language processing, Computational Linguistics, for ten
`
`
`
`1
`
`APPLE 1021
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`years. I serve as Associate Director for the Florida Institute for Human and
`
`Machine Cognition, a position I have held since 2006. I also served on the
`
`Scientific Advisory Board for the Vulcan/Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence,
`
`a position I held from 2012 until the Board’s dissolution at the end of 2013.
`
`4.
`
`In addition, I have supervised 30 PhD dissertations in Artificial
`
`Intelligence and many of my students are now faculty at distinguished universities
`
`and occupy key positions in tech companies such as Google and IBM.
`
`5.
`
`Throughout my career I have received a variety of awards. I received
`
`one of the first Presidential Young Investigator Awards between 1984 and 1989. I
`
`am a Founding Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial
`
`Intelligence (AAAI) and delivered the keynote address at foremost conference on
`
`Artificial Intelligence in 1998. I also received the best paper award from the same
`
`conference in 2007. I was elected as a Fellow of the Cognitive Science Society in
`
`August 2014. I have received well over $30 million in research funding from
`
`agencies such as the National Science Foundation, the Defense Advanced Research
`
`Projects Agency, and the Office of Naval Research.
`
`6. My work is extensively cited in the field. Overall there are over
`
`50,000 citations to my work in leading journals and conferences. My paper
`
`"Maintaining Knowledge About Temporal Intervals" (CACM, 1983) is regularly
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`included in lists of the most-cited papers in Computer Science, and has received
`
`over 10,000 citations.
`
`7.
`
`I have made influential contributions in the field of Artificial
`
`Intelligence in a number of areas, including temporal reasoning, the representation
`
`of action and time, plan and intention recognition, and models of communication
`
`(e.g., plan-based models of conversation).
`
`8.
`
`I have been retained on behalf of Apple Inc. to offer technical
`
`opinions relating to U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865 (the ‘865 Patent), and prior art
`
`references relating to its subject matter. I have reviewed the ‘865 Patent and
`
`relevant excerpts of the prosecution history of the ‘865 Patent. Additionally, I
`
`have reviewed the following:
`
`a. Wang et al, “A Framework of Energy Efficient Mobile Sensing for
`
`Automatic User State Recognition”, Proceedings of the 7th
`
`international conference on Mobile systems, applications, and
`
`services, pp. 179-192 , Kraków, Poland — June 22 - 25, 2009
`
`(“Wang” or APPLE-1005);
`
`b. “Qualcomm Incorporated Compliant for Patent Infringement,” filed
`
`on November 29th, 2017, from Case No. 3:17-cv-02402-WQH-MDD
`
`filed in S.D. CA. (“Compliant” or APPLE-1006)
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`c. Exhibit 865 of “Qualcomm Inc.’s Patent Initial Infringement
`
`Contentions,” filed on March 2nd, 2018, from Case No. 3:17-cv-
`
`02402-WQH-MDD filed in S.D. CA. (“Infringement Contentions” or
`
`APPLE-1007)
`
`d. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0217533 to Nadkarni et
`
`al. (“Nadkarni” or APPLE-1008)
`
`e. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2008/0297513 to
`
`Greenhill et al. (“Greenhill” or APPLE-1009),
`
`f. Webpage of “Nokia N95 8GB - Full phone specifications”
`
`(Archive.org version dated 05/26/2009,
`
`http://web.archive.org/web/20090526054459/http://www.gsmarena.co
`
`m:80/nokia_n95_8gb-2088.php) (“Nokia N95” or APPLE-1010)
`
`g. U.S. Patent No. US 8,676,224 to Louch (“Louch” or APPLE-1011)
`
`h. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0066383 to Jangle et al.
`
`(“Jangle” or APPLE-1012)
`
`i. U.S. Patent No. 9575776 to De Andrade Cajahyba et al. (“De Andrade
`
`Cajahyba” or APPLE-1013)
`
`j. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0081634 to Kurata
`
`(“Kurata” or APPLE-1014)
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`k. Declaration of Mr. Chris Butler for Nokia N95 (APPLE-1015)
`
`l. Declaration of Mr. Scott Delman for Wang (APPLE-1016)
`
`m. Cohn, D., Caruana, R., & McCallum, A. Semi-supervised clustering
`
`with user feedback in Constrained Clustering: Advances in
`
`Algorithms, Theory, and Applications, CRC Press, pp17-32, (2009)
`
`(“Cohn” or APPLE-1017)
`
`n. Ruzzelli, A., Nicolas, C. Schoofs, A., O;”Hare, G. Real-time
`
`recognition and profiling of appliances through a single electricity
`
`sensor, Proc. 7th Annual IEEE Conference on Sensor Mesh (SECON),
`
`Boston. MA 2010 (“Ruzzelli” or APPLE-1018)
`
`o. Cilla, R., Particio, M., Garcia, J., Berlanga, A., and Molina, J.
`
`Recognizing Human Activities from Sensors Using Hidden Markov
`
`Models Constructed by Feature Selection, Algorithms 2009, 2: pp282-
`
`300 (“Cilla” or APPLE-1019)
`
`p. The seventh edition of the Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE
`
`Standards Terms (2000) (APPLE-1020)
`
`9.
`
`Counsel has informed me that I should consider these materials
`
`through the lens of a person having ordinary skill in the art related to the ‘865
`
`Patent at the time of the earliest purported priority date of the ‘865 Patent, and I
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`have done so during my review of these materials. I understand that the ‘865
`
`Patent claims priority to US Provisional Application No. 61/434,400, which was
`
`filed on January 19, 2011. It is therefore my understanding that the priority date of
`
`January 19, 2011 (hereinafter the “Critical Date”) represents the earliest possible
`
`priority date to which the ‘865 patent is entitled.
`
`10. A person having ordinary skill in the art as of the Critical Date
`
`(hereinafter “POSITA”) would have had a Bachelor of Science degree in either
`
`computer science or electrical engineering, together with at least two years of study
`
`in an advanced degree program in artificial intelligence, machine learning, or
`
`pattern recognition, or comparable work experience. I base this on my own
`
`practical and educational experiences, including my knowledge of colleagues and
`
`others at the time.
`
`11.
`
`I am familiar with the knowledge and capabilities of a POSITA as
`
`noted above. Specifically, my experience working with industry, undergraduate
`
`and post-graduate students, colleagues from academia, and designers and engineers
`
`practicing in industry has allowed me to become directly and personally familiar
`
`with the level of skill of individuals and the general state of the art.
`
`12.
`
`I have no financial interest in either party or in the outcome of this
`
`proceeding. I am being compensated for my work as an expert on an hourly basis,
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`for all tasks involved. My compensation is not dependent in any manner on the
`
`outcome of these proceedings or on the content of my opinions.
`
`13. My opinions, as explained below, are based on my education,
`
`experience, and background in the fields discussed above. Unless otherwise stated,
`
`my testimony below refers to the knowledge of a POSITA in the fields as of the
`
`Critical Date, which I understand to be January 19, 2011.
`
`
`
`Brief Overview of the Technology
`
`14. The technology in question involves activity recognition (sometimes
`
`called state recognition), namely, automatically identifying what a person (or
`
`device) is doing based on data acquired from a set of sensors. Activity recognition
`
`can be viewed as a specific example of pattern recognition technology, which
`
`involves recognizing patterns in data, where in this case the patterns are based on
`
`activities a person can perform. A common technique for activity/state/pattern
`
`recognition involves machine learning. A known application of this technology by
`
`the Critical Date includes creating more effective mobile devices (such as
`
`smartphones) that can adjust their behaviors based on what it recognizes the user is
`
`doing. For example, Wang, entitled “A Framework of Energy Efficient Mobile
`
`Sensing for Automatic User State Recognition,” is a publication of the 7th
`
`international conference on Mobile systems, applications, and services held in
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`Kraków, Poland on June 22-25, 2009. See APPLE-1016. Wang had implemented
`
`“an Energy Efficient Mobile Sensing System (EEMSS)” on a smartphone that can
`
`“automatically adjust the ring tone profile to appropriate volume … according to
`
`the surroundings.” APPLE-1005, Title, p1c2. Or, as another example, Louch
`
`discloses controlling a mobile phone “by the orientation and position of the mobile
`
`device.” Louch, Abstract. This technology had been used to enable a device to
`
`identify an activity or situation (e.g., the user is at work) from the available sensor
`
`data available to it (which might be, e.g., “Wifi, Bluetooth, audio, video, light
`
`sensors, accelerometers, and so on.” APPLE-1005, p1c2).
`
`15. As mentioned above, activity recognition involves mapping from a set
`
`of input signals (sensor data) to a high level description of some situation or
`
`activity that the user is engaged in. In developing a system to perform this task,
`
`underlying patterns in the data correspond to each activity/situation needs to be
`
`recognized. This is where machine learning comes in. Machine learning focuses on
`
`identifying underlying patterns in data that correspond to specified labels. There
`
`have been many different techniques, each useful for certain types of data,
`
`including Naïve Bayes, k-nearest neighbor, and Hidden Markov Models. For
`
`example, Cilla describes “building Hidden Markov Models to classify different
`
`human activities using video sensors.” APPLE-1019, Abstract. These general
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`models, however, are often too data and compute intensive to be usable on mobile
`
`devices (APPLE-1005, p8c2).
`
`16. Activity recognition systems start from raw signals coming from the
`
`sensors that may have a high degree of “noise”, which is a term for the
`
`uninformative variance in the signals that tend to mask the parts of the signal that
`
`are informative. Thus one of the typical first phases is to convert the raw signals
`
`into more abstract representations (often called features) that reduce or eliminate
`
`the noise. For instance, an acoustic signal coming from a microphone is a stream of
`
`measurements of the strength of the signal sampled at thousands of times a second.
`
`There are well known signal processing algorithms that can convert such signals
`
`into more useful information, such as the overall power of the signal which then
`
`might be used to recognize a “Background Sound” feature to have a value “silent”
`
`or “loud” as disclosed by Wang (APPLE-1005, p9c1). As another example, Louch
`
`notes “various functions of the mobile device may be implement … including in
`
`one or more signal processing … integrated circuits” APPLE-1011, 8:11-13. A
`
`simple example would be processing the signal from a accelerometers to determine
`
`if the device it still or moving , e.g., “sensing motion (e.g., acceleration above a
`
`threshold value)” APPLE-1011, 3:8-9. Cilla describes a wide range of features
`
`that they extract from video signals, including “bounding box properties” and “Hu
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`invariant moments … are shape descriptors” (APPLE-1019, p5-6). As another
`
`example, this first phase of processing might map raw GPS data into a Motion
`
`feature with values “still”, “moving slowly” or “moving fast” (APPLE-1005, p8c1
`
`and Table 1) .
`
`17. The next typical phase of activity recognition is mapping these
`
`features to possible activities being performed (often called classification). To
`
`accomplish this, each activity can be represented as a pattern of features that
`
`indicate the activity is underway (see APPLE-1005, Table 1). This is where
`
`machine learning typically comes into play as in general it is hard to hand-define
`
`these patterns. The typical process for learning the patterns involves assembling a
`
`set of training examples that provide the sensor data, together with a label that
`
`indicates the activity that was performed. For example, Wang states “With
`
`accelerometer as the main sensing source, activity recognition is usually
`
`formulated as a classification problem where the training data is collected with
`
`experimenters wearing one or more accelerometer sensors … Different kinds of
`
`classifiers can be trained and compared in terms of accuracy of classification”
`
`(APPLE-1005, p2c2). As another example, Louch states “in some
`
`implementations, the mobile device 100 “learns” particular characteristics or
`
`patterns of the state of the device.” APPLE-1011, 10:3-4.
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`18. Machine learning algorithms may define a model that can identify the
`
`patterns that statistically link the inputs to the activities. For instance, as a highly
`
`simplified example, if in most cases of some training examples, whenever I am
`
`walking the speed derived from a GPS signal typically indicates that I am moving
`
`between 1 and 3 miles per hour, then in a new circumstance, if my speed is 2 mph,
`
`then the algorithm will indicate that it is likely that I am walking. Of course, real
`
`examples are much more complex than this and often involve combinations of
`
`evidence from many different sensors.
`
`19. Another component in a typical activity recognition algorithm
`
`captures knowledge of how different activities relate to each other. For instance,
`
`Wang describes “a sensor management scheme which defined user states and
`
`state transitions” (APPLE-1005, p2c1). As another example, Jangle describes
`
`how elemental motions are combined into activities that are combined into
`
`behaviors (APPLE-1012, Figure 3). As an intuitive example, a device might learn
`
`that the activity of walking to work is typically following by the activity of buying
`
`a coffee. And when working, a typical activity is having a meeting. This
`
`transitional model of activities helps identify what is happening, especially when
`
`the evidence for the input signals is poor.
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`20. To make this more concrete, I prepared the below Figure 1 to
`
`graphically show the typical components of activity recognition using examples
`
`from Louch.
`
`
`
`21. Declaration-Figure 1: Typical Components of an Activity
`
`Recognition System (using Louch as an example)
`
`22.
`
`In this case, we have a set of sensors (e.g., “one or more sensors (e.g.,
`
`accelerometer, gyro, light sensor, proximity sensor) integrated into the mobile
`
`device 100.” APPLE-1011, 2:20-22.) that are processed to produce a set of feature
`
`values (called “sensor inputs” in Louch. APPLE-1011, 2:37, 67). These feature
`
`values are used as the input to a pattern matching process, which uses patterns
`
`associated with states, as well as transition information in an activity model or a
`
`state machine, to match the observations and draw some conclusion about what
`
`state the user is in.
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`23. Note that knowledge of what activities have been performed
`
`previously also serve as input to the pattern matching, identifying both what
`
`patterns are most relevant to match, and also what activities are expected next. For
`
`example, Louch discloses that “A state machine can track various combinations of
`
`inputs which can cause a state change to occur” APPLE-1011, 2:54-56. Figure 1
`
`shows a possible state of the processing once the system has recognized that the
`
`phone is at rest and the pattern shown in the activity model indicates that a likely
`
`next state is that the phone is picked up. APPLE-1011, 3:1-11. Additionally,
`
`Nadkarni discloses that “by knowing that the previous human activity was
`
`walking, certain signatures can intelligently be eliminated from the possible
`
`matches of the present activity that occurs subsequent to the previous human
`
`activity (walking)” APPLE-1008, ¶0035. Also, Wang discloses that “sensor
`
`management is achieved by assigning new sensors based on previous sensor
`
`readings in order to detect state transition” APPLE-1005, p4c1.
`
`24.
`
`I prepared the below Declaration-Figure 2 to illustrate an example
`
`architecture for a machine learning system. There are two main phases: in the
`
`training phase, data (“training data”) that provides examples of the task to be
`
`performed is processed using a learning algorithm that ultimately produces a
`
`statistical model of the data (“the model”). After the model is trained, then new
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`input can be processed and the model computes the most likely answer (i.e., the
`
`interpretation that statistically best matches the training data).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`25. Declaration-Figure 2: An Example Architecture of Machine
`
`
`
`Learning Systems
`
`26. Machine learning tasks are typically classified by characteristics of
`
`the data presented to the “training” of the model. While there are numerous
`
`references on machine learning in the literature prior to the Critical Date, broadly,
`
`there are three different methods common in the field, supervised learning,
`
`unsupervised learning, or a combination of the two. They are discussed as below:
`
`27. Supervised learning: The computer is presented with example inputs
`
`and their desired outputs based on a person’s opinion, and the goal is to learn a
`
`general rule that maps inputs to the correct outputs. See “supervised learning …
`
`takes a set of examples with class labels, and returns a function that maps examples
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`to class labels” (APPLE-1017, p18). See also “supervised methods build class
`
`models using labelled data” (APPLE-1019, p7). For instance, the learning system
`
`might be given some sensor data plus a label that identifies what was going on as
`
`the data was collected (e.g., the user is walking to work). As an example, Wang
`
`states “We collected accelerometer data in 53 different experiments … within each
`
`empirical interval, the person tags the ground truth of his/her activity information”
`
`APPLE-1005, p8c2. A learning algorithm then combines all the training examples
`
`tagged as, say, walking to work, and attempt to find characteristics that distinguish
`
`walking to work from all the other possible activities in the training set.
`
`28. Unsupervised learning: No labels are given to the learning algorithm,
`
`leaving it on its own to find structure from its sensor input. “unsupervised learning
`
`takes an unlabeled collection of data and, without intervention or additional
`
`knowledge, partitions it into sets of examples such that examples within clusters
`
`are more “similar” than examples between clusters” (APPLE-1017, p18).
`
`Unsupervised learning can be a goal in itself (discovering hidden patterns in data)
`
`or a means towards an end (feature learning). In general unsupervised learning
`
`requires considerably more data to produce effective results, and the patterns
`
`ultimately extracted might not be the ones that are relevant to one’s application. As
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`a result, purely unsupervised learning is rare in activity recognition work as
`
`supervised learning provides much better detection accuracy.
`
`29. There are variants that fall between supervised and unsupervised
`
`learning. A system might get partial labeling of some data to create an input model
`
`and then subsequently improve its models by training on additional unlabeled data
`
`(a method often called bootstrapping). Also note that models can be incrementally
`
`improved by allowing user feedback to identify incorrect classifications and/or
`
`identify the correct classification. For example, see “Our approach … assumes that
`
`the human user has in their mind the criteria that enable them to evaluate the
`
`quality of the clustering” and “The main goal … of semi-supervised clustering is to
`
`allow the human to “steer” the clustering process” (APPLE-1017, Abstract, p18).
`
`As another example, Ruzzeli in 2010 describes a machine learning system that
`
`“uses a .. feedback mechanism to improve the accuracy by allowing the user to
`
`notify the system of an incorrect guess” (APPLE-1018, p5c2-p6c1). In these cases,
`
`the system incrementally adds new labelled data to its training set to extend its
`
`learning.
`
`30. Using one or more of the above learning techniques, a model, namely,
`
`an instantiated computational system that can automatically classify new input, can
`
`be obtained. In other words, “Modeling” refers to building a model, often from
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`labelled data, which results in a “Model”, that is then used in “Classification” or
`
`“pattern matching,” namely, the labeling or recognition of patterns in new data.
`
`There are many types of models, but a quite common one at the Critical Date was
`
`Neural Networks. As an example, the system described by Ruzzeli involves “the
`
`user … generating a database of .. signatures” followed by “train[ing] an artificial
`
`neural network that is then employed to recognize … activities.” (APPLE-1018,
`
`Abstract).
`
`31. These techniques would have all be well known to a POSITA by the
`
`Critical Date. Furthermore, they would have known that when using a machine
`
`learning approach to pattern recognition, these techniques can be combined to
`
`improve the performance of the learning systems.
`
`
`
`Brief Overview of the ‘865 Patent
`
`32. The ‘865 patent relates to the use of machine learning to identify and
`
`recognize situations based on sensor data available on mobile communication
`
`devices such as smartphones. APPLE-1001, 1:20-24. The intended application of
`
`such technology is to enable mobile devices to better anticipate and response to
`
`user’s needs. The ‘865 Patent gives an example application of its purported
`
`invention:
`
`a mobile device may ring louder in response to an incoming call if a
`
`learned situation indicates a noisy ambient environment, or may
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`silence a ringer and route an incoming call to voice mail if a learned
`
`situation indicates that a user may not want to be disturbed, or may
`
`launch an application if a learned situation indicates a user’s intent to
`
`use the application, or the like.
`
`APPLE-1001, 8:61-66.
`
`
`
`33. The ‘865 patent acknowledges that this is a “popular and growing
`
`market trend in sensor-enabled technology” APPLE-1001, 1:42-47. The ‘865
`
`patent also acknowledges that this is not a new area and “continues to be an area of
`
`continuous development” APPLE-1001, 6:36-41.
`
`34. Prior to the Critical Date, there existed numerous products,
`
`publications, and patents that implemented or described the functionality claimed
`
`in the ‘865 patent. Thus, the methodology of the ‘865 patent was well-known in
`
`the prior art. Further, to the extent there was any problem to be solved in the ‘865
`
`patent, it had already been solved in the prior art systems before the Critical Date.
`
`35. A challenge that the patent claims to address is that “continually
`
`tracking or monitoring all or most varying parameters … of sensor information
`
`may be computationally intensive, resource-consuming, at times intractable,”
`
`especially for mobile devices, APPLE-1001,7:58-63. The ‘865 patent suggests that
`
`the device only monitor a subset of the parameters/sensor streams if it can identify
`
`what information is relevant in the current context.
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`36. By doing so, the ‘865 Patent alleges that “more tractable approach
`
`may facilitate or support machine learning … such that an appropriate action may
`
`be initiated by a mobile device in real time.” APPLE-1001, 8:54-60. To make this
`
`more concrete, I prepared the below Declaration-Figure 3 that graphically shows
`
`the ‘865 patent in the light of typical components of activity recognition, using an
`
`example from the ‘865 patent. APPLE-1001 7:22-36.
`
`
`
`37.
`
` Declaration-Figure 3: An illustration of the ‘865 patents in terms
`
`of a generic activity recognition framework
`
`38.
`
`In this case we have a set of sensors (“suite of sensors” APPLE-1001,
`
`7:25-28) that are processed to produce a set of features (“a relatively large number
`
`of varying parameters or variables associated with a multi-dimensional sensor
`
`information stream” APPLE-1001, 7:45-48). This information is then used by
`
`pattern matching to match the observations and draw some conclusion about what
`
`action is being performed (“Such … an event-related pattern may be fixed, for
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`example, by associating corresponding parameters or variables having a … pattern
`
`to represent the condition or event” APPLE-1001, 8:18-21).
`
`39.
`
` The ‘865 Patent attempts to address the problem that “because of the
`
`increased dimensionality of the information stream … finding exact or
`
`approximate matches to a template … may be rather difficult”. APPLE-1001, 7:40-
`
`45) and “continually tracking … all or most varying parameters … may be
`
`computationally intensive … at times intractable” (APPLE-1001, 7:58-62). The
`
`‘865 Patent proposes to consider “a subset ... of varying parameters … associated
`
`with a condition or event”. APPLE-1001, 8:12-14. As we will discuss below,
`
`however, this technique was known in prior art and is in fact expressly disclosed
`
`by Louch as well as some other references (e.g., Wang and Nadkarni).
`
`40. FIG. 4 (reproduced below) is a representative process 400 of the ‘865
`
`Patent and aligns with the claims (see comparison between claims and FIG. 4 of
`
`the ‘865 Patent below). The ‘865 Patent describes the representative process 400
`
`includes the following steps: At 402, one or more input signals (e.g., GPS, WiFi,
`
`microphone) associated with a mobile device are monitored. The “896 patent
`
`admits this is typical: “since typical pattern recognition approaches generally
`
`employ … algorithms that work with a fixed known number of information
`
`sources, pattern recognition with respect to a multi-dimensional information stream
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`acquired … via a suite of sensors may present a number of challenges” APPLE-
`
`1001, 7:3-8.
`
`41. At 404, at least one condition or event of interest is detected based on
`
`the monitored input signals. Note that the ‘865 Patent broadly defines the term
`
`“condition” to encompass almost any time, event, state, or action: “a condition or
`
`event of interest may include, for example, a time of day, day of week, state or
`
`action of a host application, action of a user operating a mobile device … or the
`
`like." APPLE-1001, 14:60-64. The step 404 of detecting such a time, event, state,
`
`or action based on at least one monitored input sensor signals would again be a
`
`routine, commonsensical technique, well within the knowledge of a POSITA at the
`
`time of the patent, and in fact found in virtually all activity recognition systems.
`
`For example, Wang discloses detecting a user action of walking or riding vehicle
`
`based on monitored input sensor signals from a GPS sensor. See APPLE-1005,
`
`p5c1, p8c1. As another example, Nadkarni discloses detecting motion of an
`
`animate object based on monitored input sensor signals from sensors such as
`
`accelerometers. See APPLE-1008, Abstract. Cilla discloses “Human activity
`
`recognition from sensors” (APPLE-1019, Abstract). See also
`
`To improve the user experience in the use of a portable device,
`
`techniques are used for “context characterization, i.e., from a range of
`
`conditions possible to detect by the system, such as time
`
`21
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`(date/time), current location, motion, etc., as well as the historical
`
`use of the device, 1 a certain grouping of actions and settings, called
`
`“context” are selected automatically or manually, modifying and
`
`setting from that moment the way of user interacts with the device.
`
`APPLE-1013, Abstract.
`
`
`
`The movement/state recognition unit 108 is means for detecting a
`
`movement/state pattern by using the sensor data. Accordingly,
`
`when the sensor data is input from the motion sensor 102, the
`
`movement/state recognition unit 108 detects a behaviour/state
`
`pattern based on the input sensor data. A movement/state pattern
`
`that can be detected by the movement/state recognition unit 108 is
`
`“walking,” “running,” “still,” “jumping,” “train (aboard/not
`
`aboard)” and “elevator (aboard/not aboard/ascending/descending),”
`
`for example.
`
`APPLE-1014, ¶0102.
`
`
`
`42. At 406, a first pattern is identified based on these detected conditions
`
`or events. Again, this is a commonsense part of any pattern recognition system,
`
`well within the knowledge of a POSITA. In fact, the very goal of pattern
`
`1.
`
`
`
`1 Bold represents emphasis added by me in each citation, unless otherwise
`
`specified.
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`recognition systems is to identify patterns. The ‘865 patent admits as much:
`
`“Typically,… one or more patterns to be identified may, for example, be
`
`represented via one or more vectors of observations in multiple dimensions”
`
`APPLE-1001, 6:46-48.
`
`43. At 408, “one or more varying parameters or variables are fixed in
`
`some manner, such as in a suitable subset having one or more signal sample
`
`values”. See Apple-1001, 15:7-8. Furthermore, this subset is associated with the
`
`pattern matched in 406. This was also a common part of pattern recognition
`
`systems as varying parameters are typically assigned values as the result of signal
`
`processing or classification, and not all parameters are fixed at any one time. For
`
`example, Wang describes a Motion parameter with possible values including
`
`“Moving Slowly” and “Moving Fast” and describes how this parameter is fixed
`
`from the sensor data (“The classification module is the consumer of raw data …
`
`The classification module returns user activity and position features such as
`
`‘moving fast’”. APPLE-1005, p6c1). Furthermore, Wang states that the pattern for
`
`Walking State (i.e., a possible first pattern) is associated with only a subset of the
`
`varying parameters. Namely, it is associated with the Location and Motion
`
`parameters, and the Background Sound parameter is not applicable (Wang, Table
`
`1). As another example, Louch describes fixing parameters associated with a
`
`
`
`23
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,768,865
`
`pattern by learning in disclosing that “the device 100 can ‘learn’ by recording a
`
`detected state of the device 10, e.g., a trajectory of a motion, or a signature of
`
`proximity” APPLE-1011, 10:8-10.
`
`44. At 410, a process is initiated to attempt to recognize a second pattern
`
`by monitoring these input signals based, at least in part, on the first pattern
`
`matched in 406. See APPLE-1001,15:18-20. This step had also been known and
`
`implemented, for example, at least in prior-art systems that were capable of
`
`detecting a state transition or a sequence of motions such as Wang and Jangle. See
`
`e.g., APPLE-1005, Abstract (see APPLE-1016); APPLE-1012, Abstract.
`
`Detecting a state transition from a first state to a second state necessitates
`
`recognizing a second pattern corresponding to a second state based on the first
`
`pattern corresponding to the first state. See e.g., APPLE-1005, Abstract. Wang
`
`discloses “If the user is at “State2” and “Sensor2” returns “Sensor reading 2” …
`
`“Sensor3” will be turned on immediately to further detect the user