Attorney Docket No. CURT352IPR
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________
`
`Curt Manufacturing, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`Horizon Global Americas Inc.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`______________
`
`Case IPR2019-00625
`Patent 6,068,352
`
`______________
`
`Expert Declaration of Dr. Leland “Chip” Spangler in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 1
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`II.
`III.
`IV.
`V.
`
`Page
`BACKGROUND QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................... 1
`DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON ..................................................................... 8
`PERSON HAVING ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ............................... 9
`LEGAL ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................. 10
`BACKGROUND ........................................................................................... 13
`A.
`Introductory Timeline of Brake Controllers ....................................... 15
`B.
`Input Circuit ........................................................................................ 19
`C.
`Display Circuit .................................................................................... 20
`D.
`Pulse-Width Modulated Signal ........................................................... 20
`E.
`Power Switching Circuit ..................................................................... 22
`F.
`Current Sensing Circuit ....................................................................... 23
`G. Microcontroller .................................................................................... 25
`THE ’352 PATENT ....................................................................................... 26
`A.
`Overview ............................................................................................. 26
`B.
`File History .......................................................................................... 28
`VII. CONSTRUCTION OF CLAIM TERMS ...................................................... 32
`A.
`“coupled” (cls. 1, 6467, and 70) means “connected directly or
`indirectly” ............................................................................................ 33
`VIII. THE CITED PRIOR ART ............................................................................. 35
`A. McGrath .............................................................................................. 35
`B.
`Eccleston ............................................................................................. 39
`IX. CONCLUSIONS REGARDING PATENTABILITY .................................. 41
`
`VI.
`
`- i -
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 2
`
`

`

`A.
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`(b)
`
`Ground 1: Claims 64–67 and 70 Are Anticipated Under Pre-
`AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) by McGrath .................................................. 42
`1.
`Each Element of Claim 64 Is Found in McGrath ..................... 42
`(a)
`[64.P] A brake controller for controlling the brakes
`of a towed vehicle ........................................................... 42
`[64.1] An input circuit for generating a brake level
`signal representing the braking force to be applied
`by the towed vehicle’s brakes ......................................... 43
`[64.2] A power switching circuit adapted for
`coupling to the brakes of the towed vehicle and to
`the power supply of the towing vehicle . . . .................... 45
`[64.3] . . . For selectively supplying power from
`the towing vehicle power supply to the brakes of
`the towed vehicle in response to a pulse width
`modulated control signal supplied to a control
`input terminal .................................................................. 47
`[64.4] Whereby the braking current supplied to the
`towed vehicle brakes corresponds to a duty cycle
`of the pulse width modulated control signal .................. 48
`[64.5] A microcontroller coupled to said input
`circuit and to said power switching circuit . . . ............... 50
`[64.6] . . . Said microcontroller generating and
`supplying the pulse width modulated control signal
`to said control input terminal of said power
`switching circuit . . . ....................................................... 51
`[64.7] . . . Said microcontroller varying the duty
`cycle of the pulse width modulated control signal
`in response to the brake level signal supplied to
`said microcontroller by said input circuit to
`thereby cause said power switching circuit to
`deliver a braking current to the brakes of the towed
`vehicle that corresponds to the desired level of
`braking. ........................................................................... 52
`
`(e)
`
`(f)
`
`(g)
`
`(h)
`
`- ii -
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 3
`
`

`

`3.
`
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 65 Is
`Found in McGrath ..................................................................... 53
`(a)
`[65] The brake controller as defined in claim 64
`and further including a display circuit coupled to
`said microcontroller for receiving display signals
`and for displaying information to the operator in
`response to said display signals that represents the
`relative braking force applied to the towed vehicle
`brakes. ............................................................................. 53
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 66 Is
`Found in McGrath ..................................................................... 55
`(a)
`[66] The brake controller as defined in claim 65,
`wherein display signals generated by said
`microcontroller correspond to the duty cycle of the
`switching control signal and said display circuit
`displays information corresponding to the duty
`cycle to the operator. ...................................................... 55
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 67 Is
`Found in McGrath ..................................................................... 56
`(a)
`[67] The brake controller is defined in claim 66,
`wherein said display circuit includes a plurality of
`LEDs that are illuminated to display a relative
`percentage of the duty cycle of the pulse width
`modulated control signal. ............................................... 56
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 70 Is
`Found in McGrath ..................................................................... 58
`(a)
`[70] The brake controller as defined in claim 64,
`wherein said input circuit includes a decelerometer
`comprising an inertia sensor that determines an
`extent of deceleration and generates said brake
`level signal. ..................................................................... 58
`Ground 2: Claim 1 Is Rendered Obvious Under Pre-AIA 35
`U.S.C. § 103(a) Over McGrath in View of Eccleston ........................ 59
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`2.
`
`B.
`
`- iii -
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 4
`
`

`

`1.
`2.
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`(e)
`
`(f)
`
`(b)
`
`Reasons to Enhance McGrath with Eccleston .......................... 61
`Claim 1 is Rendered Obvious Over McGrath in View of
`Eccleston ................................................................................... 71
`(a)
`[1.P] A brake controller for controlling the brakes
`of a towed vehicle ........................................................... 71
`[1.1] An input circuit for generating a brake level
`signal representing the braking force to be applied
`by the towed vehicle’s brakes ......................................... 71
`[1.2] A display circuit including a plurality of
`indicator lights ................................................................ 71
`[1.3] A power switching circuit and adapted for
`coupling to the brakes of the towed vehicle and to
`the power supply of the towing vehicle . . . .................... 73
`[1.4] . . . For selectively supplying power from the
`towing vehicle power supply to the brakes of the
`towed vehicle in response to a switching control
`signal supplied to a control input terminal ..................... 73
`[1.5] A current sensing circuit for sensing a level
`of braking current supplied to the brakes of the
`towed vehicle through said power switching
`circuit, and for generating a current level signal
`representing the sensed level of braking current ............ 75
`[1.6] A microcontroller coupled to said input
`circuit, said display circuit, said current circuit, and
`to said power switching circuit ....................................... 78
`[1.7] . . . Said microcontroller generating and
`supplying a switching control signal to said control
`input terminal of said power switching circuit ............... 80
`[1.8] . . . Thereby causing said power switching
`circuit to deliver a braking current to the brakes of
`the towed vehicle that is related to the brake level
`
`(g)
`
`(h)
`
`(i)
`
`- iv -
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 5
`
`

`

`(j)
`
`(k)
`
`signal supplied to said microcontroller by said
`input circuit ..................................................................... 80
`[1.9] . . . Said microcontroller illuminating one or
`more of said indicator lights of said display circuit
`to indicate a relative level of braking of the towed
`vehicle brakes ................................................................. 81
`[1.10] . . . And controlling one or more of said
`indicator lights to indicate that the towed vehicle
`brakes are or are not properly connected to said
`power switching circuit .................................................. 82
`
`- v -
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 6
`
`

`

`TABLE OF EXHIBITS1
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise
`noted)
`Aug. 20, 1996
`(filing date)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`Sept. 27, 1994
`(filing date)
`Sept. 22, 1992 § 102(b)
`
`§ 102(e)
`
`Feb. 24, 1970 § 102(b)
`
`Aug. 15, 1989 § 102(b)
`
`Sept. 30, 1975 § 102(b)
`
`July 6, 1976
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Oct. 20, 1981 § 102(b)
`
`Exhibit
`No.2
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`USPN 6,068,352 to Kulkarni et al. (the
`’352 Patent) (Patent under Inter Partes
`Review)
`File History for USPN 6,068,352
`Declaration of Dr. Leland Spangler in
`Support of Petition for Inter Partes
`Review of the ’352 Patent
`USPN 5,620,236 to McGrath et al.
`(McGrath)
`USPN 5,149,176 to Eccleston
`(Eccleston)
`USPN 3,497,266 to Umpleby
`(Umpleby)
`USPN 4,856,850 to Aichele et al.
`(Aichele)
`USPN 3,909,075 to Pittet, Jr. et al.
`(Pittet)
`USPN 3,967,863 to Tomecek et al.
`(Tomecek)
`USPN 4,295,687 to Becker et al.
`(Becker)
`
`1 For the Board’s convenience, this Table of Exhibits includes all references cited in
`this Declaration and in the corresponding Petition. Accordingly, the Table of
`Exhibits in the Declaration and the Petition are identical.
`
`2 For ease of review, I adopt the following citation convention for this Declaration.
`U.S. patent references are cited by the reference’s internal column:line, page:line, or
`¶ number (not stamped pagination). Supporting papers (file history, definitions,
`C.V.) are cited by stamped pagination number.
`
`- vi -
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 7
`
`

`

`Exhibit
`No.2
`
`Description
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`USPN 4,398,252 to Frait (Frait)
`USPN 5,282,641 to McLaughlin
`(McLaughlin)
`USPN 5,615,930 to McGrath et al.
`(McGrath ’930)
`USPN 4,721,344 to Frait et al. (Frait
`’344)
`USPN 5,741,048 to Eccleston
`(Eccleston ’048)
`Coupling, The New IEEE Standard
`Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics
`Terms (5th ed. 1993)
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Leland “Chip”
`Spangler
`Product Data of ADC08031, 2, 4, 8
`
`Product Data of ADC08131, 34, 38
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise
`noted)
`Aug. 9, 1983
`
`Feb. 1, 1994
`Dec. 15, 1995
`(filing date)
`Jan. 26, 1988
`Dec. 6, 1994
`(filing date)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`§ 102(b)
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`§ 102(e)
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`§ 102(e)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`June 1999
`
`June 1999
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`- vii -
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 8
`
`

`

`I, Dr. Leland “Chip” Spangler, make the present Declaration in support of the
`
`request for Inter Partes Review (IPR) of Claims 1, 64–67, and 70 (the Challenged
`
`Claims) of USPN 6,068,352 (the ’352 Patent) (Ex. 1001). To that end, I hereby
`
`declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND QUALIFICATIONS
`1.
`I was retained as a technical expert in this matter on behalf of the
`
`Petitioner, Curt Manufacturing, LLC (referred to as “Petitioner”). In providing my
`
`opinions expressed below, I have relied upon my experience and my review of the
`
`documents cited in the Petition and referred to in this Declaration.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`A copy of my curriculum vitae is provided herewith. See Ex. 1017.
`
`Over the last 30 years, I have worked in virtually all aspects of the
`
`semiconductor industry for both large and small companies helping to design,
`
`develop, and manufacture products that use integrated circuits (ICs), semiconductor,
`
`and electronic devices in new and innovative ways for automotive, medical,
`
`industrial, commercial, and consumer applications. I have directly been responsible
`
`for the design and development of many integrated circuit products that have been
`
`put into high volume production. I understand the details of the manufacturing
`
`processes, equipment and materials that are used to manufacture ICs and other
`
`semiconductor and electronic devices.
`
`1
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 9
`
`

`

`4.
`
`I earned a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from The University of
`
`Michigan in 1988. The emphasis of that work was in silicon-based, glass-substrate
`
`transistors and sensors and the associated device physics, and fabrication
`
`technologies. The transistors I designed and fabricated had the fastest electron
`
`mobility of any silicon transistor at the time. I earned an M.S.E. in Electrical
`
`Engineering from The University of Michigan in 1983. My Masters Degree work
`
`included the development of pressure sensor and circuits for automotive
`
`applications. I earned a B.S.E. in Electrical Engineering from The University of
`
`Michigan in 1982.
`
`5.
`
`I have approximately thirty years of experience in the design,
`
`development, and manufacture of integrated circuit and semiconductor products in
`
`new and innovative ways for automotive, medical, industrial, commercial and
`
`consumer applications.
`
`6.
`
`From 1985 to 1988, and while still in graduate school, I helped start and
`
`was the Director of Research and Development at Integrated Microsystems, Inc. In
`
`that role, I was responsible for hardware, software, and fabrication technology
`
`development for silicon-based neural recording probes and blood oxygen sensors.
`
`7.
`
`From 1988 to 1989, I was a member of the scientific staff at Bell
`
`Northern Research. In that role, I designed a database processor integrated circuit
`
`2
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 10
`
`

`

`and an associative memory chip for TCP/IP-based wide area network applications.
`
`The systems that these chips were to be used in were precursors to the Internet.
`
`8.
`
`From 1989 to 1993, I was a Lead Product Design Engineer and an
`
`Engineering Supervisor at Ford Electronics. In that role, I initiated a silicon
`
`automotive sensor program and assisted in the design and development of sensors,
`
`integrated circuits and electronic modules for automotive safety and engine control
`
`systems. My primary function was to develop and bring to production one of the first
`
`airbag accelerometers including the design and fabrication of the associated interface
`
`IC. This work led to the program, as well as several engineers, being transferred to
`
`Ford Microelectronics, Inc. In Colorado. I also served on several internal technology
`
`assessment and planning teams that established integrated circuit and sensor product
`
`roadmaps at the corporate level for Ford Motor Company.
`
`9.
`
`From 1993 to 1998, I was a Principal Engineer and Engineering
`
`Manager at Ford Microelectronics, Inc. In that role, I was responsible for the design,
`
`development, and qualification of silicon automotive integrated circuits and sensors.
`
`One of these sensors was the first plastic packaged surface mount accelerometer
`
`qualified for automotive use. I was directly involved in the design of the ICs in these
`
`products and the fabrication technologies that were used to manufacture them.
`
`3
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 11
`
`

`

`10.
`
`I continued supporting and helped to implement corporate level
`
`development and implementation of IC and sensor wafer fabrication technology
`
`roadmaps. Many of these devices went into high volume.
`
`11. At Ford Microelectronics, I was also the international corporate
`
`technology expert for silicon sensors. In that role, I had direct responsibility for
`
`interfacing with the first companies to develop and manufacture the components
`
`used in these products including integrated circuit and sense element chips. In this
`
`position, I also worked closely with engineers from semiconductor suppliers
`
`throughout the world.
`
`12.
`
` In 1998, I began work as an analog IC design engineer for Ford
`
`Microelectronics and then Intel, where I designed output amplifiers, oscillators,
`
`comparators, level-shift circuits, slew-controlled input/output (I/O) circuits,
`
`interface circuits, and electrostatic discharge (ESD) protection used in 2.1 volt,
`
`mixed-signal complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS)
`
`integrated
`
`circuits for automotive applications.
`
`13.
`
`From 2001 to 2011, I was employed at Aspen Technologies, a MEMS
`
`and IC product development and packaging and assembly subcontract company. I
`
`was originally hired by Aspen Technologies as a principal engineer and was
`
`promoted through various positions including director of Engineering and Vice
`
`President of Engineering, eventually becoming the President and Chief Technical
`
`4
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 12
`
`

`

`Officer in 2009. In that role, I was responsible for all operations including sales,
`
`marketing, engineering, manufacturing, finance and quality activities for a wide
`
`range of products including sensors, ICs, RF devices, optical displays, pressure
`
`sensors, photonic devices, microfluidic products, diagnostic and implantable
`
`biomedical devices, DNA sequencing chips as well as a host of other semiconductor
`
`devices. Customers included large mil-aero companies such as Boeing as well as
`
`smaller companies such as Silicon Light Machines and Ion Torrent Systems.
`
`Industrial customers ranged from Agilent and Hewlett-Packard to Atmel, National
`
`Semiconductor and Intel. Medical customers ranged from large companies like
`
`Stryker Instruments, Boston Scientific and Life Technologies to startups such as
`
`Endotronics, and Cantimer. Over the course of ten years, I was directly involved in
`
`commercialization efforts for over 350 products. Aspen Technologies was sold in
`
`late 2010 and no longer exists in the form described herein.
`
`14.
`
`From 2011 until 2012, I was employed as the Vice President of
`
`Development for Treehouse Design, Inc. In that role, I was responsible for the
`
`product development of a variety of innovative medical and industrial products.
`
`These included sensors and integrated circuits for medial surgical robots as well as
`
`optical communication systems for industrial applications.
`
`15.
`
`Prior to 2012, as a consultant, I created and executed development plans
`
`for various microelectronic and microsystem products, including pressure sensors,
`
`5
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 13
`
`

`

`solar devices, medical diagnostic equipment, optical sensors, inertial sensors, and
`
`advanced integrated circuits. I also helped develop glass substrate pressure and
`
`temperature sensors, CMOS and bipolar SOI circuits, and helped develop their
`
`fabrication processes. I have also provided consulting services for a number of
`
`customers in microelectronic facilities, equipment and processes, organizational
`
`development, quality and manufacturing operations. I have also helped to design a
`
`wafer-level, hermetic packaging process for a millitorr pressure sensor.
`
`16.
`
`For most of my career, I have consulted on various semiconductor
`
`topics. In 2011, I started consulting and contract product engineering on a full time
`
`basis. My consulting and contract engineering company is named Aspen
`
`Microsystems, LLC. Since 2012 and continuously to the present, this has been my
`
`full time occupation. My clients consist of various companies and organizations that
`
`are using semiconductor technologies in their operations or in their products. I have
`
`also provided educational services in semiconductor and microsystem fabrication,
`
`packaging and assembly technologies for both public and private customers.
`
`17.
`
`Since 2006, I have been an Editor of the IEEE Journal of
`
`Microelectromechanical Systems (JMEMS). I also serve on the Board of Directors
`
`of the Transducers Research Foundation, a position I have held since 2008. From
`
`2004 to 2012, I was a member of the International Steering Committee Member of
`
`6
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 14
`
`

`

`the Transducers Conference. Since 1982, I have been a Member of the Institute of
`
`Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
`
`18.
`
`I am named as an inventor or co-inventor on thirteen United States and
`
`several international patents in the field of electrical system and circuit design. I
`
`continue to do work that has resulted in invention disclosures and patent
`
`applications. Representative patents include:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`J. Janik, R. Brindley, E. Tang, and L. Spangler, “Sensor
`Assembly and Method for Measuring Forces and Torques,” U.S.
`Patent No. 9,274,104 (issued Mar. 1, 2016).
`P. Stevenson, C. Stephan, A. Samman, L. Spangler,
`“Acceleration Sensing Module with a Combined Self-Test and
`Ground Electrode,” U.S. Patent No. 5,731,520 (issued Mar. 24,
`1998).
`L. Spangler, C. Kemp, M. Graf, “Integrated Silicon Automotive
`Accelerometer and Single-Point Impact Sensor,” U.S. Patent No.
`5,495,414 (issued Feb. 27, 1996).
`L. Spangler, “Method for Calibrating a Single-Point Impact
`Sensor,” U.S. Patent No. 5,337,260 (issued Aug. 9, 1994).
`
`19.
`
`I have published more than twenty journal and conference papers on
`
`topics in the field of electrical system and circuit design. Representative
`
`publications include:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`M. Gaitan, L. Spangler, et.al., 2017 iNEMI Roadmap for MEMS
`and Sensors, International Electronics Manufacturing Initiative,
`Herndon, Virginia, May 2017.
`L. Spangler, Factors Influencing the Design of Microsystems,
`2004 Custom Integrated Circuits Conference, Orlando, Florida,
`October 2004.
`L. Spangler, C. Kemp, L. Starr, IC Design for Sensor Interfaces
`in the Harsh Automotive Environment, Proceedings of the 8th
`
`7
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 15
`
`

`

`•
`
`•
`
`NASA Symposium on VLSI Design, Albuquerque, New
`Mexico, October 1999.
`L. Spangler, C. Kemp, ISAAC (Integrated Silicon Automotive
`Accelerometer), Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 54, 1996, 523-
`529.
`L. Spangler, Smart Sensors for Automotive Applications, SPIE
`1996 Smart Structures and Materials Conf., San Diego,
`California, February 1996.
`
`20.
`
`I have taught numerous professional development courses on topics in
`
`the field of electrical system and circuit design. Representative courses include:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Wafer-Level Packaging for the Functional Integration of MEMS
`and ICs, 2016 Int. Wafer Level Packaging Conf. (IWLPC), Oct.
`2016.
`MEMS Markets, Product Design and Production, European
`government laboratory, Feb. 2016.
`Practical Aspects of MEMS and Microsystems Packages,
`IMAPS Int. Symp., Orlando, Florida, Oct. 2013.
`
`21.
`
`I consider myself an expert in the field of electrical engineering as it
`
`relates to automotive electrical system and circuit design.
`
`II.
`
`DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON
`22.
`In reaching my opinions in this case, I carefully reviewed the currently
`
`filed Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,068,352 (IPR Petition)
`
`and the various exhibits referenced therein, such as, for example, the ’352 Patent
`
`itself and the prior art references cited in the IPR Petition. I agree with the contents
`
`of the IPR Petition for at least the reasons expressed in this Declaration, and I view
`
`my opinions expressed below to be consistent with those contents.
`
`8
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 16
`
`

`

`23.
`
`I also carefully reviewed each of the documents listed in the Table of
`
`Exhibits at the beginning of this Declaration (which is identical to the Table of
`
`Exhibits in the IPR Petition).
`
`III. PERSON HAVING ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`24.
`I was asked to offer an opinion on the characteristics of a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention (POSA) for the ’352
`
`Patent, which I understand from Petitioner’s counsel to be in the 1995 to 1996
`
`timeframe.
`
`25. My understanding from Petitioner’s counsel is that one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art is presumed to be a person with at least a particular level of skill and
`
`knowledge in a certain field or industry and that is capable of understanding and
`
`practicing the technology described in the patent at issue (i.e., the ’352 Patent). This
`
`person is of ordinary creativity and not an automaton.
`
`26.
`
`In assessing the level of ordinary skill, I further understand one may
`
`consider several factors including: (1) the educational level of the inventor; (2) the
`
`educational level of active workers in the field; (3) type of problems encountered in
`
`the art; (4) prior art solutions to those problems; (5) the rate of innovation in the
`
`field; and (6) the sophistication of the technology.
`
`27. As it relates to this technology, I believe a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art at the time of the alleged invention would have the following characteristics:
`
`9
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 17
`
`

`

`(1) a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering or an equivalent degree; (2) a
`
`minimum of two to five years of experience in electrical engineering or electronics,
`
`specifically electrical system and/or circuit design; and (3) general knowledge of
`
`engineering that would include understanding of automotive products including
`
`electrical system and circuit design, construction, functions, attributes, and processes
`
`used to implement such products.
`
`28. Based upon my education and experience as set forth above, I believe
`
`that I would qualify as at least a POSA in the relevant time frame. At the time of the
`
`alleged invention, I had a sufficient level of knowledge, experience, and education
`
`to provide an expert opinion in the field of the ’352 Patent.
`
`29. My testimony and opinions in this Declaration are given from the
`
`perspective of a POSA at the time of the alleged invention of the ’352 Patent unless
`
`otherwise specifically indicated. This is true even if my statements are in the present
`
`tense.
`
`IV. LEGAL ASSUMPTIONS
`30.
`I am not a lawyer, and I have no legal training. I have been informed
`
`by Petitioner’s counsel about certain legal principles and standards, which I have
`
`assumed and applied for purposes of this declaration. Some of these, which form
`
`the legal framework for the opinions I am providing, are summarized below.
`
`10
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 18
`
`

`

`31.
`
`I have assumed that a patent claim may be found invalid or not
`
`patentable if it is anticipated or rendered obvious by prior art. I have considered
`
`references such as patents and publications to be prior art to the ’352 Patent if they
`
`were patented or published more than one year before the alleged priority date (i.e.,
`
`the date the application leading to the ’352 Patent was filed), or if they were patented
`
`or filed as an application for a patent, which was subsequently published, with a date
`
`prior to the date the subject matter of the claims of the ’352 Patent was allegedly
`
`invented.
`
`32.
`
`I have assumed that to render a patent claim invalid or not patentable
`
`for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (§ 102), a single prior art reference must
`
`teach, expressly or inherently, all of the elements of the claim.
`
`33.
`
`I have assumed that to render a patent claim invalid or not patentable
`
`for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (§ 103), a prior art reference or combination
`
`of prior art references must teach or suggest to a POSA all of the elements of the
`
`claim. Rationales that support such a finding of obviousness include: combining
`
`prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; simple
`
`substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; use of
`
`known techniques to improve similar devices, methods or products in the same way;
`
`applying a known technique to a known device, method or product ready for
`
`improvement to yield predictable results; it would have been “obvious to try” by
`
`11
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 19
`
`

`

`choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable
`
`expectation of success; known work in one field of endeavor prompting variations
`
`for use in either the same field or a different field based on design incentives or other
`
`market forces if the variations are predictable to a POSA; some teaching, suggestion,
`
`or motivation in the prior art that would have led a POSA to modify the prior art
`
`reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed
`
`invention.
`
`34.
`
`I have assumed that the reasoning as to why combining multiple
`
`references would be obvious, or obvious to try, can be found in the common sense
`
`of a POSA and need not be explicitly articulated or suggested in any prior art
`
`reference. I have also assumed that a patent claim is more likely to be obvious when
`
`it recites only a combination of known elements, where each element performs the
`
`same function that it was known to perform, and where the combination does no
`
`more than yield predictable results.
`
`35.
`
`I have assumed that the invalidity analysis is made through the eyes of
`
`a POSA at the time of the alleged invention, and that a POSA is not an automaton,
`
`but rather one of ordinary creativity and common sense. I have also assumed that,
`
`although there may be other considerations that weigh against a finding of
`
`obviousness (such as a long felt need in the art for the patented device, or unexpected
`
`12
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 20
`
`

`

`results achieved by the patented device), when such a combination fails to produce
`
`an unexpected result, it is the product of common sense rather than of innovation.
`
`V.
`
`BACKGROUND
`36.
`In preparing this Declaration, I have reviewed many patents and
`
`publications describing brake controllers for controlling the brakes of a towed
`
`vehicle. These patents and publications, which date back to 1970, show that brake
`
`controllers with input circuits, display circuits, power switching circuits, current
`
`sensing circuits, microcontrollers, and indicator lights have been well known for
`
`decades. In addition, the alleged inventions of the ’352 Patent — a brake controller
`
`having a microcontroller coupled to an input circuit and a power switching circuit,
`
`the microcontroller generating and supplying a pulse width modulated signal to the
`
`power switching circuit, and the microcontroller varying a duty cycle of the pulse
`
`width modulated signal in response to a brake level signal supplied to the
`
`microcontroller by the input circuit to thereby cause the power switching circuit to
`
`deliver a braking current to the brakes of the towed vehicle that corresponds to the
`
`desired level of braking (Claim 64), the brake controller of Claim 64 including a
`
`display circuit coupled to the microcontroller for receiving display signals and for
`
`displaying information to the operator in response to the display signals that
`
`represents the relative braking force applied to the towed vehicle brakes (Claim 65),
`
`the brake controller of Claim 65 wherein display signals generated by the
`
`13
`
`Curt - Exhibit 1003 - 21
`
`

`

`microcontroller correspond to the duty cycle of the switching control signal and the
`
`display circuit displays information corresponding to the duty cycle to the operator
`
`(Claim 66), the brake controller of Claim 66 wherein the display circuit includes a
`
`plurality of LEDs that are illuminated to display a relative percentage of the duty
`
`cycle of the pulse width modulated control signal (Claim 67), the brake controller of
`
`Claim 64 wherein the input circuit includes a decelerometer comprising an inertia
`
`sensor that determines an extent of deceleration and generates the brake level signal
`
`(Claim 70), and a brake controller including an input circuit, a display circuit, a
`
`power switching circuit, a current sensing circuit, and a microcontroller, the
`
`microcontroller (i) generating and supplying a switching control signal, (ii)
`
`illuminating one or more indicator lig