`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`AMERICAN NATIONAL MANUFACTURING INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`SELECT COMFORT CORPORATION
`Patent Owner
`
`____________
`
`Case No. IPR2019-00514
`
`Patent No. 5,904,172
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,904,172
`
`
`
`
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Table of Contents
`
`I. MANDATORY NOTICES (37 CFR § 42.8) ................................................ 1
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Real Party-In-Interest (§ 42.8(b)(1)) ................................................... 1
`
`Related Matters (§42.8(b)(2)) ............................................................. 1
`
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel (§ 42.8(b)(3)) .......................................... 3
`
`Service Information (§ 42.8(b)(4)) ...................................................... 3
`
`II.
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 4
`
`III.
`
`Inter Partes Review Requirements (37 CFR § 42.100 et seq.) ...................... 4
`
`A.
`
`Inter Partes Review Fee (§ 42.103(a)) ................................................ 4
`
`B. Grounds for Standing (§ 42.104(a)) .................................................... 5
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Identification of Challenge (§ 42.104(b)(1)-(2)) .................................. 5
`
`Summary of the Challenged Patent and the Level of Skill in the
`Art ...................................................................................................... 6
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Description of Gifft ................................................................... 6
`
`Level of Skill of a POSITA ....................................................... 8
`
`Gifft’s Claims ........................................................................... 8
`
`Gifft’s Prosecution History ....................................................... 9
`
`E.
`
`Claim Construction (§ 42.104(b)(3)) ................................................. 10
`
`1.
`
`“pressure monitor means” ....................................................... 10
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`“pressure monitor means” (“PMM1”) ........................... 11
`
`“pressure monitor means” of claims 2, 6
`(“PMM2”) .................................................................... 12
`
`“pressure monitor means” of claims 12, 16
`(“PMM3”) .................................................................... 12
`
`F.
`
`Specific Challenges (§ 42.104(b)(4)) ................................................ 13
`
`1.
`
`Ground 1: Unpatentability of claims 2, 12, 22 as
`anticipated by Shafer .............................................................. 13
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`Overview of Shafer (Ex-1007) ...................................... 13
`
`Limitation 2.a.1 ............................................................. 14
`
`i
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`k.
`
`l.
`
`m.
`
`n.
`
`Limitation 2.a.2 ............................................................. 15
`
`Limitation 2.a.3 ............................................................. 16
`
`Limitation 2.a.4 ............................................................. 17
`
`Limitation 2.b.1 ............................................................ 17
`
`Limitation 2.b.2 ............................................................ 18
`
`Limitation 2.c................................................................ 20
`
`Limitations 12.a.1 – 12.a.4 ............................................ 23
`
`Limitations 12.b.1 – 12.b.2 ........................................... 24
`
`Limitation 12.c.............................................................. 24
`
`Limitation 12.d ............................................................. 25
`
`Limitation 22.a.............................................................. 26
`
`Limitation 22.b ............................................................. 27
`
`2.
`
`Ground 2: Unpatentability of claims 6, 16, 20, 24 as
`obvious in view of Shafer, Grant, and knowledge of a
`POSITA .................................................................................. 28
`
`a.
`
`Overview of Grant (Ex-1008) ....................................... 28
`
`b. Motivation to Combine Shafer and Grant ..................... 28
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`k.
`
`l.
`
`Limitations 6.a.1 – 6.a.4 ................................................ 29
`
`Limitation 6.b.1 ............................................................ 29
`
`Limitation 6.b.2 ............................................................ 29
`
`Limitation 6.b.3 ............................................................ 30
`
`Limitation 6.c................................................................ 31
`
`Limitations 16.a.1 – 16.a.4 ............................................ 32
`
`Limitations 16.b.1 – 16.b.3 ........................................... 32
`
`Limitation 16.c.............................................................. 32
`
`Limitation 16.d ............................................................. 32
`
`Limitations 20.a.1 – 20.a.4 ............................................ 32
`
`m.
`
`Limitations 20.b.1 – 20.b.3 ........................................... 33
`
`n.
`
`o.
`
`Limitation 20.c.............................................................. 33
`
`Limitation 20.d.1 .......................................................... 34
`
`ii
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`p.
`
`q.
`
`Limitation 20.d.2 .......................................................... 35
`
`Claim 24 ....................................................................... 36
`
`3.
`
`Ground 3: Unpatentability of claim 2 as obvious in view
`of Shafer, Kashiwamura, and knowledge of a POSITA ........... 36
`
`a.
`
`Overview of Kashiwamura (Ex-1009) .......................... 36
`
`b. Motivation to combine Shafer and Kashiwamura .......... 38
`
`c.
`
`Claim 2 ......................................................................... 39
`
`4.
`
`Ground 4: Unpatentability of claims 6, 20 as obvious in
`view of Shafer, Grant, Kashiwamura, and knowledge of a
`POSITA .................................................................................. 41
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`Claim 6 ......................................................................... 41
`
`Claim 20 ....................................................................... 41
`
`5.
`
`Ground 5: Unpatentability of claim 12 as obvious in view
`of Shafer, Dye, and knowledge of a POSITA .......................... 41
`
`a.
`
`Overview of Dye (Ex-1010) .......................................... 41
`
`b. Motivation to combine Shafer and Dye ......................... 43
`
`c.
`
`Claim 12 ....................................................................... 44
`
`Ground 6: Unpatentability of claim 16 as obvious in view
`of Shafer, Grant, Dye, and knowledge of a POSITA ............... 44
`
`a.
`
`Claim 16 ....................................................................... 44
`
`Ground 7: Unpatentability of claim 12 as obvious in view
`of Shafer, Cammack, and knowledge of a POSITA ................ 45
`
`a.
`
`Overview of Cammack (Ex-1011) ................................ 45
`
`b. Motivation to Combine Shafer and Cammack ............... 48
`
`c.
`
`Claim 12 ....................................................................... 50
`
`Ground 8: Unpatentability of claim 12 as obvious in view
`of Shafer, Dye, Cammack, and knowledge of a POSITA ........ 51
`
`a.
`
`Claim 12 ....................................................................... 51
`
`Ground 9: Unpatentability of claims 2, 22 as obvious in
`view of Shafer, Cammack, and knowledge of a POSITA ........ 51
`
`a.
`
`Claim 2 ......................................................................... 51
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`iii
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`b.
`
`Claim 22 ....................................................................... 52
`
`10. Ground 10: Unpatentability of claims 2, 22 as obvious in
`view of Shafer, Kashiwamura, Cammack, and knowledge
`of a POSITA ........................................................................... 52
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`Claim 2 ......................................................................... 52
`
`Claim 22 ....................................................................... 53
`
`11. Ground 11: Unpatentability of claims 2, 6, 12, 16, 20, 24
`as anticipated by Vrzalik ......................................................... 53
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`k.
`
`l.
`
`Overview of Vrzalik (Ex-1012) .................................... 53
`
`Limitation 2.a.1 ............................................................. 55
`
`Limitation 2.a.2 ............................................................. 55
`
`Limitation 2.a.3 ............................................................. 55
`
`Limitation 2.a.4 ............................................................. 56
`
`Limitation 2.b.1 ............................................................ 56
`
`Limitation 2.b.2 ............................................................ 56
`
`Limitation 2.c................................................................ 57
`
`Limitations 6.a.1 – 6.a.4 ................................................ 58
`
`Limitations 6.b.1 – 6.b.3 ............................................... 58
`
`Limitation 6.c................................................................ 58
`
`Limitations 12.a.1 – 12.a.4 ............................................ 59
`
`m.
`
`Limitations 12.b.1 – 12.b.2 ........................................... 59
`
`n.
`
`o.
`
`p.
`
`q.
`
`r.
`
`s.
`
`t.
`
`u.
`
`v.
`
`Limitation 12.c.............................................................. 59
`
`Limitation 12.d ............................................................. 59
`
`Limitations 16.a.1 – 16.a.2 ............................................ 60
`
`Limitations 16.b.1 – 16.b.3 ........................................... 60
`
`Limitation 16.c.............................................................. 61
`
`Limitation 16.d ............................................................. 61
`
`Limitations 20.a.1 – 20.a.4 ............................................ 61
`
`Limitations 20.b.1 – 20.b.3 ........................................... 61
`
`Limitation 20.c.............................................................. 61
`
`iv
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`w.
`
`x.
`
`Limitations 20.d.1 – 20.d.2 ........................................... 62
`
`Claim 24 ....................................................................... 63
`
`12. Ground 12: Unpatentability of claim 22 as obvious in
`view of Vrzalik, Shafer, and knowledge of a POSITA ............ 63
`
`a. Motivation to combine Vrzalik and Shafer.................... 63
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`Limitation 22.a.............................................................. 63
`
`Limitation 22.b ............................................................. 64
`
`13. Ground 13: Unpatentability of claim 4 as obvious in view
`of Shafer, Ramacier, and knowledge of a POSITA ................. 64
`
`a.
`
`Overview of Ramacier (Ex-1014) ................................. 64
`
`b. Motivation to Combine Shafer and Ramacier ............... 65
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`Limitations 4.a.1 – 4.a.4 ................................................ 66
`
`Limitation 4.b ............................................................... 66
`
`Limitation 4.c................................................................ 66
`
`Limitation 4.d ............................................................... 67
`
`IV. CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 68
`
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`Exhibit List
`
`Ex. Description
`1001 U.S. Patent 5,904,172 (“Gifft”)
`1002 Relevant excerpts of the File History of U.S. Patent 5,904,172 (Appl.
`08/901,144)
`1003 Relevant excerpts of the Reexamination File History of U.S. Patent
`5,904,172 (Appl. 90/012,456)
`1004 Claim Listing
`1005 Declaration of Dr. Robert Giachetti (“Giachetti”)
`1006 Curriculum vitae and testimony list of Dr. Robert Giachetti
`1007 PCT Publication WO96/13947 (“Shafer”)
`1008 U.S. Patent 5,353,838 (“Grant”)
`1009 U.S. Patent 4,655,505 (“Kashiwamura”)
`1010 U.S. Patent 5,383,894 (“Dye”)
`1011 U.S. Patent 4,309,783 (“Cammack”)
`1012 U.S. Patent 5,044,029 (“Vrzalik”)
`1013 U.S. Patent 3,155,991 (“Dunham”)
`1014 U.S. Patent 5,494,074 (“Ramacier”)
`1015 U.S. Patent 4,540,154
`1016 U.S. Patent 2,364,812
`1017 U.S. Patent 2,713,986
`1018 U.S. Patent 3,346,009
`1019 U.S. Patent 4,368,756
`1020 U.S. Patent 4,526,340
`1021 U.S. Patent 4,988,967
`1022 First Amended Complaint in Sleep Number Corporation v. Sizewise
`Rentals, L.L.C., No. 5:18-cv-0356-AB (SPx) (C.D. Cal. filed Feb. 20,
`2018)
`1023 First Amended Complaint in Sleep Number Corporation v. American
`National Manufacturing, Inc., No. 5:18-cv-0357-AB (SPx) (C.D. Cal. filed
`Feb. 20, 2018)
`1024 Petition in IPR2014-01419
`1025 Decision denying institution in IPR2014-01419
`1026 U.S. Patent 3,177,018 (“Goodwin”)
`1027 Power Transmission Handbook (1st. Ed.), 1993, Chapter 13, pp. 1-22
`1028 Power Transmission Handbook (1st. Ed.), 1993, Chapter 9, pp. 1-14
`
`
`
`vi
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`
`
`I. MANDATORY NOTICES (37 CFR § 42.8)
`
`A. Real Party-In-Interest (§ 42.8(b)(1))
`
`Petitioner and the associated entities Sizewise Rentals, L.L.C. (“Sizewise”),
`
`Dires, LLC (“Dires”) d/b/a Personal Comfort Bed, and Raye’s, Inc. d/b/a
`
`Wheelchairs of Kansas d/b/a Sunflower Medical are the real parties in interest.
`
`B. Related Matters (§42.8(b)(2))
`
`Patent No. 5,904,172 (“Gifft”) is currently involved in the following legal
`
`proceedings against Petitioner and Sizewise: (1) Sleep Number Corporation v.
`
`Sizewise Rentals, L.L.C., No. 5:18-cv-0356-AB (SPx) (C.D. Cal. filed Feb. 20,
`
`2018)1 alleging infringement of “at least claims 12 and 16” (Ex-1022); (2) Sleep
`
`Number Corporation v. American National Manufacturing, Inc., No. 5:18-cv-
`
`0357-AB (SPx) (C.D. Cal. filed Feb. 20, 2018)2 alleging infringement of “at least
`
`
`1 This action was originally filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
`
`of Texas, styled as Sleep Number Corporation v. Sizewise Rentals, L.L.C., No.
`
`3:17-cv-3518 (N.D. Tex., filed Dec. 29, 2017), served on Petitioner and Sizewise
`
`January 2, 2018, and voluntarily dismissed by Sleep Number under Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`41(a)(1)(A)(i) on February 20, 2018 (Dkt. 29).
`
`2 This action was originally filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
`
`of Texas, styled as Sleep Number Corporation v. American National
`
`Manufacturing, Inc., No. 3:17-cv-03517 (N.D. Tex., filed Dec. 29, 2017), served
`
`1
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`claims 12 and 16” (Ex-1023). Petitioner and Sizewise were only on notice of
`
`patent owner’s allegations of infringement of claims 2, 6, 20, 22, 24 in the district
`
`court case upon receiving patent owner’s infringement contentions on September
`
`7, 2018. Gifft is currently involved in the following legal proceedings against
`
`Petitioner, Sizewise, and Dires: Certain Air Mattress Systems, Components
`
`Thereof, and Methods of Using the Same, USITC Inv. No. 337-TA-971,
`
`Commission Notice, 2015 WL 1366233, at *2, 80 Fed. Reg. 72,738 (Nov. 17,
`
`2015).3
`
`Gifft was previously involved in the following matters, now closed: (1)
`
`Select Comfort Corporation v. The Sleep Better Store, LLC, No. 0:12-cv-1148 (D.
`
`Minn., filed May 11, 2012); (2) Select Comfort Corporation v. Halcyon
`
`Waterspring, No. 0:03-cv-3325 (D. Minn., filed June 3, 2003); (3) Ex Parte
`
`Reexamination of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-12, and 14-18, Ser. No. 90/012,456, filed Oct.
`
`
`on Petitioner and Sizewise January 2, 2018, and voluntarily dismissed by Sleep
`
`Number under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) on February 20, 2018 (Dkt. 27).
`
`3 The final determination was appealed to the Federal Circuit. On December 26,
`
`2017 the Federal Circuit held the appeal was moot due to the expiration of the ‘172
`
`Patent, and remanded to the Commission to address Petitioner’s request to vacate
`
`the final determination. As of the filing of this Petition, the Commission has not
`
`decided vacatur.
`
`2
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`17, 2012, Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate issued Jan. 3, 2014; (4) Select
`
`Comfort Corporation v. Tempur Sealy International, Inc. d/b/a Tempur-Pedic, No.
`
`0:14-cv-00245 (D. Minn., filed January 24, 2014); (5) Tempur Sealy International,
`
`Inc. v. Select Comfort Corporation, IPR2014-01419 filed Aug. 29, 20144 (Ex-
`
`1024).
`
`C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel (§ 42.8(b)(3))
`
`Lead Counsel
`Kyle L. Elliott (Reg. No. 39,485)
`Spencer Fane LLP
`1000 Walnut Street, Suite 1400
`Kansas City, MO 64106
`kelliott@spencerfane.com
`Tel: (816) 474-8100
`Fax: (816) 474-3216
`
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`Kevin S. Tuttle (Reg. No. 52,307)
`Spencer Fane LLP
`1000 Walnut Street, Suite 1400
`Kansas City, MO 64106
`ktuttle@spencerfane.com
`Tel: (816) 474-8100
`Fax: (816) 474-3216
`Jaspal S. Hare (Reg. No. 66,988)
`Spencer Fane LLP
`5700 Granite Pkwy, Suite 650
`Plano, TX 75024
`jhare@spencerfane.com
`Tel: (214) 750-3623
`Fax: (972) 324-0302
`Service Information (§ 42.8(b)(4))
`
`D.
`
`Petitioner
`
`consents
`
`to
`
`electronic
`
`service
`
`by
`
`email
`
`to:
`
`kelliott@spencerfane.com; ktuttle@spencerfane.com; jhare@spencerfane.com; and
`
`jallee@spencerfane.com. Mail or hand delivery of service on Petitioner may be
`
`
`4 Institution denied, no final written decision. Ex-1025.
`
`3
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`made to: Spencer Fane LLP, 1000 Walnut Street, Suite 1400, Kansas City, MO
`
`64106.
`
`II.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`American National Manufacturing, Inc., (“Petitioner”) hereby petitions for
`
`inter partes review (“IPR”) under 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 and 37 CFR § 42.100 et
`
`seq. of claims 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, 22, 24 (“Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent
`
`5,904,172 (“Gifft”), filed July 28, 1997 as Appl. No. 08/901,144, issued May 18,
`
`1999, and expired July 28, 2017. Ex-1001.5 Gifft is assigned to Sleep Number
`
`Corporation. The claimed subject matter of Gifft is not novel, is obvious, and was
`
`well known before Gifft. The Challenged Claims should be cancelled.
`
`III.
`
`Inter Partes Review Requirements (37 CFR § 42.100 et seq.)
`
`A.
`
`Inter Partes Review Fee (§ 42.103(a))
`
`Petitioner pays the fee for this petition as required by 37 CFR § 42.15(a)
`
`contemporaneously with the filing of this petition. The undersigned authorizes the
`
`Director to charge the fee for this petition, and any necessary additional fees, to
`
`Deposit Account No. 50-0354.
`
`
`5 References to: issued patent prior art is in the form “Ex-####-P-C:x-y,” where
`
`“####” is the exhibit number, “P” is page, “C” is column, and “x-y” are lines;
`
`published applications are in the form of “Ex-####-P-¶para.,” where “para” is the
`
`paragraph number; and declarations are in the form of “Ex-####-¶para.”
`
`4
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`B. Grounds for Standing (§ 42.104(a))
`
`Petitioner certifies that Gifft is available for IPR and that Petitioner is not
`
`barred or estopped from requesting an IPR challenging the validity of the
`
`Challenged Claims on the grounds identified in the petition.
`
`C.
`
`Identification of Challenge (§ 42.104(b)(1)-(2))
`
`Petitioner requests cancellation of claims 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, 20, 22, 24, and
`
`specifically provides grounds for cancellation of the claims in this petition. The
`
`challenged claims, statutory ground, and patents or printed publications relied on
`
`for each ground are stated below.
`
`Ground
`
`Claims
`
`Basis
`
`References
`
`2, 12, 22
`
`102(b) Shafer
`
`6, 16, 20, 24
`
`103(a) Shafer, Grant
`
`2
`
`6, 20
`
`12
`
`16
`
`12
`
`12
`
`2, 22
`
`2, 22
`
`103(a) Shafer, Kashiwamura
`
`103(a) Shafer, Grant, Kashiwamura
`
`103(a) Shafer, Dye
`
`103(a) Shafer, Grant, Dye
`
`103(a) Shafer, Cammack
`
`103(a) Shafer, Dye, Cammack
`
`103(a) Shafer, Cammack
`
`103(a) Shafer, Kashiwamura, Cammack
`
`2, 6, 12, 16, 20, 24
`
`102(b) Vrzalik
`
`22
`
`4
`
`103(a) Vrzalik, Shafer
`
`103(a) Shafer, Ramacier
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`
`
`5
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`D.
`
`Summary of the Challenged Patent and the Level of Skill in the
`Art
`
`1.
`
`Description of Gifft
`
`Gifft is directed to a valve enclosure assembly for use with an air inflatable
`
`mattress, in particular, an assembly used to control the pressure in an inflatable
`
`mattress and method to inflate the mattress. Ex-1001-9-1:4-8; Ex-1005-¶35.
`
`Gifft purports to address problems with a prior art valve enclosure assembly
`
`10 where the valving function of the sealing disk leaks at the seal created at the
`
`periphery of the disk due in part to the force of the air in a connected mattress
`
`acting on the disk. Ex-1001-9-2:4-26. In addition, Gifft states there is a need to
`
`minimize bladder leaks, provide for continuous monitoring of the air bladders in
`
`the mattress, and to provide production efficiencies, such as reducing assembly
`
`time and eliminating sealants. Ex-1001-9-2:28-32; Ex-1005-¶36.
`
`Gifft asserts its invention substantially meets the aforementioned needs of
`
`the industry by using a new valve design, a solenoid actuates the new valve design,
`
`and a tap on the valve enclosure assembly allows continuous monitoring of the
`
`bladders. Ex-1001-9-2:35-54.
`
`Gifft identifies the present invention as the improved valve enclosure
`
`assembly 100, and in reference to FIG. 2, discloses a “pump 112” fluidly coupled
`
`to air bladders 122, 124 for providing compressed air through air hoses 116, 118,
`
`with a “pressure monitoring port 146” located at the “valve enclosure assembly
`
`6
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`100.” Ex-1001-10-3:60-4:14, -10-4:30-37, FIGS. 2-3; Ex-1005-¶37. FIG. 3 is a
`
`view of the claimed invention:
`
`
`
`Pressure within the air bladders 122, 124 and valve enclosure assembly 100
`
`is measured by a pressure sensor operably coupled to a processor on a “processor
`
`board 20”. Ex-1001-10-4:3-6, -9-1:19-22. The assembly 100 has an enclosure 130
`
`and rear cover 132 defining an air chamber 133. Ex-1001-10-4:17-20, FIGS. 3, 10-
`
`11. Ex-1005-¶37. The processor provides commands to the valve enclosure
`
`assembly during an inflate/deflate cycle, e.g., by opening and closing “valves 218”
`
`actuated by “solenoids 210,” and operating the pump 112 in response to user
`
`settings and monitored pressure. Ex-1001-1-Abstract, -10-3:3-24, -12-7:29-49.
`
`The “guides 196” and “stops 198” within “enclosure 130” position “solenoids 210”
`
`relative to each “valve 218” providing operational alignment. Ex-1001-11-6, -39-
`
`7
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`43; Ex-1005-¶38. In order for the processor to meet commands from a user
`
`operated controller 126 to inflate/deflate bladders 122, 124, “the processor of the
`
`pump 112 must be able to continuously monitor pressure in the respective left
`
`bladder or right bladder 122, 124 as desired.” Ex-1001-12-7:63-8:3.
`
`2.
`
`Level of Skill of a POSITA
`
`Gifft involves the design and development of a pneumatic chamber products
`
`and control thereof. Ex-1005-¶27. The inventor Gifft, has a B.S. in engineering and
`
`industry experience at the time of invention. A person having ordinary skill in the
`
`art (“POSITA”) at the time of the alleged invention would have an undergraduate
`
`degree (B.S.) in Mechanical Engineering, or equivalent technical discipline, and at
`
`least one year of experience with designing or developing products or machines
`
`including pumps, valves, and computer control for systems that can fill via pump
`
`and or drain (vent) through the use of computer controlled valves and pumps. Id.
`
`Such a POSITA is knowledgeable about standard fluid power components and
`
`their selection (pumps, solenoid valves, check valves etc.) and the basics of
`
`computer control and methodology (e.g. selecting sensors, reading the sensor
`
`output into a system for control). Id.
`
`3. Gifft’s Claims
`
`Gifft has ten extant independent claims, with claims 2, 4, 6, 11-12, 14, 16,
`
`19-20 directed to apparatuses, and claim 9 directed to a method. Ex-1001-12-14,
`
`8
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`17. Exhibit 1004 is a claim listing that enumerates the limitations of the
`
`Challenged Claims.
`
`4. Gifft’s Prosecution History
`
`The first action on the merits rejected original claims 1-3, 9-12, 16-17, 19,
`
`26-29. Ex-1002-43-47. Claims 1-3, 9, 19, and 26 were rejected under pre-AIA 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by U.S. Patent 5,509,154 to Shafer. Ex-1002-45.
`
`Claims 4-8, 13-15, 18, 20-25, 30-32 were object to but were deemed allowable if
`
`rewritten in independent form. Ex-1002-47. Claim 5 depended from claim 1, and
`
`recited “wherein a plurality of guides and stops are disposed within the enclosure
`
`for correctly positioning components within the enclosure.” Ex-1002-66. Claim 5
`
`was amended to include all of the limitations of original independent claim 1, and
`
`issued as independent claim 2. Compare Ex-1002-65 to Ex-1001-12-8:45-66. No
`
`information disclosure statement was field by applicant during the initial
`
`examination.
`
`Ex parte reexamination of Gifft, filed October 17, 2012 challenged issued
`
`claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-12, 14-18. Ex-1001-16-Face; Ex-1003-198-211. An ex parte
`
`reexamination certificate was granted November 12, 2012: finding claims 2, 4-6,
`
`11-12, 14-18 patentable; cancelling claims 1, 10; amending claim 9; and adding
`
`claims 19-25. Ex-1003-120-129. Ex-1003-1-2.
`
`9
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`A certificate of correction issued May 6, 2014 correcting claim dependancies
`
`in view of the reexamination certificate. Ex-1001-15.
`
`An IPR was filed by Tempur Sealy International, Inc. on August 29, 2014
`
`challenging claims 2-3, 6, 9, 12-13, 16, 20-15 (Ex-1024-3), but was denied
`
`institution for noncompliance with 35 U.S.C. §§ 312(a)(3), (4), 37 C.F.R. §§
`
`42.104(b)(4), (5), and 37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(2) (requiring a petition to include a
`
`detailed explanation of the significance of the evidence). Ex-1025-6.
`
`E. Claim Construction (§ 42.104(b)(3))
`
`Solely for purposes of the IPR, Petitioner provides the constructions below.
`
`All other terms are given their ordinary and customary meaning in view of a
`
`POSITA on the effective filing date of Gifft.
`
`1.
`
`“pressure monitor means”
`
`Independent Challenged Claims include the limitation “pressure monitor
`
`means” (“PMM”) subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶6. The specification
`
`discloses two embodiments, and the claims distinguish the two embodiments
`
`involving PMM, in part: (1) as “being in fluid communication with the at least one
`
`bladder for continuously monitoring” (claims 2, 6, 20); and (2) as “being in fluid
`
`communication with the at least one valve for monitoring” (claims 12, 16). The
`
`claims recite the processor to which the MPP is operably coupled.
`
`10
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`Gifft discloses a first structural arrangement of the invention as involving
`
`“pressure monitoring port 146 … fluidly coupled to the interior of the improved
`
`valve enclosure assembly 100” conveying pressure to a pressure sensor by a tube,
`
`such as shown in FIGS. 4, 6-8. Ex-1001-10-4:30-36, -12-8:3-6. Gifft discloses a
`
`second structural arrangement of an alternative preferred embodiment involving “a
`
`pressure monitor tab 240 … disposed on the valve body 220” of a valve 218, with
`
`an “air passageway 222 … that is fluidly coupled to the air passageway 222 of the
`
`valve body 220” with tab 240 fluidly coupled to a pressure sensor. Ex-101-10-
`
`3:50-52, -11-6:22-26, -12-8:7-15, FIG. 9.
`
`a.
`
`“pressure monitor means” (“PMM1”)
`
`In
`
`the pending district court actions, patent owner’s
`
`infringement
`
`contentions propose a construction of PMM as a means-plus function limitation
`
`subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6 where: the function is continuously
`
`monitoring the pressure in the at least one bladder; and the structure is a port
`
`fluidly coupled to the interior of the valve enclosure assembly that is designed to
`
`receive a tube, a pressure sensor, and a tube connected to the port and to the
`
`pressure sensor, and equivalents thereof; and where the other claim terms are given
`
`their plain and ordinary meaning in light of the specification. Petitioner applies this
`
`construction herein as PMM1.
`
`11
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`b.
`
`“pressure monitor means” of claims 2, 6 (“PMM2”)
`
`PMM of claims 2, 6 does not specify the structure and function of
`
`“communication with the at least one valve.” Claims 2, 6 recite “for continuously
`
`monitoring.” In the alternative to PMM1 to the extent “pressure monitor means” is
`
`construed where: the function is continuously monitoring the pressure in the least
`
`one bladder; the structure is a port on the enclosure fluidly coupled to the interior
`
`of the valve enclosure assembly that is designed to receive a tube, a pressure
`
`sensor, and a tube connected to the port and to the pressure sensor, and equivalents
`
`thereof; and where the other claim terms are given their plain and ordinary
`
`meaning in light of the specification. Petitioner applies this alternative construction
`
`herein as PMM2.
`
`c.
`
`“pressure monitor means” of claims 12, 16 (“PMM3”)
`
`The PMM of claims 12, 16 specifies the structure and function of
`
`“communication with the at least one valve” “for monitoring.” In the alternative, to
`
`the extent “pressure monitor means” is construed where: the function is monitoring
`
`the pressure in the at least one bladder; the structure is a port on the valve fluidly
`
`coupled to the valve that is designed to receive a tube, a pressure sensor, and a tube
`
`connected to the port and to the pressure sensor, and equivalents thereof; and
`
`where the other claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning in light of
`
`the specification. Petitioner applies this alternative construction herein as PMM3.
`
`12
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,904,172
`
`F.
`
`Specific Challenges (§ 42.104(b)(4))
`
`This petition and the supporting evidence discussed herein, demonstrate “a
`
`reasonable likelihood that petitioner would prevail with respect to at least one of
`
`the claims challenged in the petition.” 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). Claims 2, 4, 6, 12, 16,
`
`20, 22, 24 are anticipated, or obvious over the prior art relied upon in this petition,
`
`as explained in detail in the declaration of Dr. Giachetti (Ex-1005), and below.
`
`1. Ground 1: Unpatentability of claims 2, 12, 22 as anticipated
`by Shafer
`
`a. Overview of Shafer (Ex-1007)
`
`Shafer, filed October 18, 1995, published May 9, 1996, is prior art to Gifft
`
`under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). Ex-1007-1. Shafer was not disclosed, cited, or
`
`considered during examination or reexamiantion of Gifft.
`
`Shafer is directed to an air control system for air bladders of an air bed. Ex-
`
`1007-1-Abstract. Ex-1005-¶42. Shafer is from the same field of endeavor as Gifft
`
`in that it is directed to an air inflatable mattress/bed and is, therefore, analogous art.
`
`Id. Shafer states it would be advantageous to accurately and consistently monitor
`
`and control the air pressure of an air mattress to a desired pressure. Ex-1007-7-13-
`
`15. The system provides air under pressure to the air bladders, and controls the
`
`pressure of the air bladders. Ex-1007-12-7-10. The system includes a pump with an
`
`air distribution unit. Ex-1007-47-FIG-5, -49-FIG-10, -17-14-15, -24-12 to -25-15.
`
`The air distribution unit includes pressurized air outlets connected to the air
`
`13
`
`WA 11287419.5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5