`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`MASIMO CORPORATION,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Patent 10,470,695
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF VIJAY K. MADISETTI, PH.D.
`
`Masimo Ex. 2001
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2020-01722
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page No.
`
`I.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................................. 1
`
`II. MATERIALS CONSIDERED ................................................................. 7
`
`III. UNDERSTANDING OF PATENT LAW ............................................... 8
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Level Of Ordinary Skill In The Art ................................................ 9
`
`Claim Construction......................................................................... 9
`
`C. Obviousness .................................................................................. 10
`
`IV. BACKGROUND .................................................................................... 11
`
`A.
`
`The Importance of Pulse Oximeters ............................................. 11
`
`B. How Oximetry Works .................................................................. 11
`
`C.
`
`The ’695 Patent ............................................................................ 13
`
`V.
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART .................................... 15
`
`VI. THE PETITION’S PROPOSED GROUNDS ........................................ 16
`
`VII. OVERVIEW OF ASSERTED REFERENCES ..................................... 17
`
`A.
`
`Sarantos (EX1014) ....................................................................... 17
`
`B. Mendelson (EX1015) ................................................................... 20
`
`C. Ackermans (EX1016) ................................................................... 20
`
`D.
`
`Chin (EX1006) ............................................................................. 22
`
`VIII. THE PETITION’S PROPOSED COMBINATIONS ............................. 23
`
`A. Apple’s Grounds Ignore Differences Between Thick Tissue
`and Thin ........................................................................................ 23
`
`-i-
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(Cont’d)
`
`Page No.
`
`B. Diffusers Can Make Sensors Worse by Reducing the Light
`Reaching the Detector .................................................................. 26
`
`C. Ground 1D: the combination of Sarantos, Mendelson, and
`Chin does not teach the claimed invention .................................. 28
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Chin is applied to a different measurement site than
`Sarantos or Mendelson ....................................................... 29
`
`Chin’s diffuser would not improve Sarantos-
`Mendelson in the same way ............................................... 30
`
`No evidence of a reasonable expectation of success ......... 31
`
`Sarantos and Chin teach two different types of
`sensors ................................................................................ 32
`
`Apple’s proposed modification would make
`Sarantos-Mendelson perform worse .................................. 36
`
`6.
`
`Sarantos-Mendelson already spreads light ........................ 37
`
`D. Ground 2C: the combination of Ackermans and Chin does
`not teach the claimed invention .................................................... 39
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Chin is applied to a different measurement site than
`Ackermans ......................................................................... 39
`
`Chin’s diffuser would not improve Ackermans in the
`same way ............................................................................ 40
`
`No evidence of a reasonable expectation of success ......... 41
`
`Ackermans and Chin teach two different types of
`sensors ................................................................................ 42
`
`-ii-
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(Cont’d)
`
`Page No.
`
`5.
`
`Apple’s proposed modification would make
`Ackermans perform worse ................................................. 43
`
`6.
`
`Ackermans already spreads light ....................................... 44
`
`IX. OATH ..................................................................................................... 46
`
`
`
`
`
`-iii-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`I, Vijay K Madisetti, Ph.D, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained by counsel for Patent Owner Masimo Corporation
`
`(“Masimo”) as an independent expert witness in this proceeding. I have been asked
`
`to provide my opinions regarding the Petition in this action and the declaration
`
`offered by Brian W. Anthony, Ph.D., (EX1003). I understand the Petition challenges
`
`the patentability of claims 1-6, 8, 9, 11-19, and 21-30 of U.S. Patent No. 10,470,695
`
`(“the ’695 Patent”). I am being compensated at my usual and customary rate for the
`
`time I spend working on this proceeding, and my compensation is not affected by its
`
`outcome.
`
`I.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS
`
`2. My qualifications are set forth in my curriculum vitae, a copy of which
`
`is included as Exhibit 2002. A summary of my qualifications follows.
`
`3.
`
`I am a professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering at the Georgia
`
`Institute of Technology (“Georgia Tech”). I have worked in the area of digital signal
`
`processing, wireless communications, computer engineering, integrated circuit
`
`design, and software engineering for over 25 years, and have authored, co-authored,
`
`or edited several books and numerous peer-reviewed technical papers in these area.
`
`4.
`
`I obtained my Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at
`
`the University of California, Berkeley, in 1989. While there, I received the Demetri
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`Angelakos Outstanding Graduate Student Award and the IEEE/ACM Ira M. Kay
`
`Memorial Paper Price.
`
`5.
`
`I joined Georgia Tech in the Fall of 1989 and am now a tenured full
`
`professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering. Among other things, I have been
`
`active in the areas of digital signal processing, wireless communications, integrated
`
`circuit design (analog & digital), system-level design methodologies and tools, and
`
`software engineering. I have been the principal investigator (“PI”) or co-PI in several
`
`active research programs in these areas, including DARPA’s Rapid Prototyping of
`
`Application Specific Signal Processors, the State of Georgia’s Yamacraw Initiative,
`
`the United States Army’s Federated Sensors Laboratory Program, and the United
`
`States Air Force Electronics Parts Obsolescence Initiative. I have received an IBM
`
`Faculty Award and NSF’s Research Initiation Award. I have been awarded the 2006
`
`Frederick Emmons Terman Medal by the American Society of Engineering
`
`Education for contributions to Electrical Engineering, including authoring a widely
`
`used textbook in the design of VLSI digital signal processors.
`
`6.
`
`During the past 20 years at Georgia Tech, I have created and taught
`
`undergraduate and graduate courses in hardware and software design for signal
`
`processing, computer engineering (software and hardware systems), computer
`
`engineering and wireless communication circuits.
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`7.
`
`I have been involved in research and technology in the area of digital
`
`signal processing since the late 1980s, and I am the Editor-in-Chief of the CRC
`
`Press’s 3-volume Digital Signal Processing Handbook (1998, 2010).
`
`8.
`
`I have founded three companies in the areas of signal processing,
`
`embedded software, military chipsets involving imaging technology, and software
`
`for computing and communications systems. I have supervised Ph.D. dissertations
`
`of over twenty engineers in the areas of computer engineering, signal processing,
`
`communications, rapid prototyping, and system-level design methodology.
`
`9.
`
`I have designed several specialized computer and communication
`
`systems over the past two decades at Georgia Tech for tasks such as wireless audio
`
`and video processing and protocol processing for portable platforms, such as cell
`
`phones and PDAs. I have designed systems that are efficient in view of performance,
`
`size, weight, area, and thermal considerations. I have developed courses and classes
`
`for industry on these topics, and many of my lectures in advanced computer system
`
`design, developed under the sponsorship of the United States Department of Defense
`
`in the late 1990s, are available for educational use at http://www.eda.org/rassp and
`
`have been used by several U.S. and international universities as part of their course
`
`work. Some of my recent publications in the area of design of computer engineering
`
`and wireless communications systems and associated protocols are listed in Exhibit
`
`2002.
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`10.
`
`In the mid 2006-2007 timeframe, I collaborated with Professor John
`
`Scharf and his colleagues at Emory Healthcare system in developing FFT-based
`
`pulse oximetry system prototypes on FPGAs, which extended technologies
`
`developed by Prof. Scharf and his colleagues from the 1996 time frame (See T.
`
`Rusch, R. Sankar, J. Scharf, “Signal Processing Methods for Pulse Oximetry”,
`
`Comput. Bio. Med, Vol. 26, No. 2, 1996). Some of my more recent publications in
`
`the area of biological signal processing and bioinformatics are listed in my CV and
`
`include, A. Bahga, V. Madisetti, “Healthcare Data Integration and Informatics in the
`
`Cloud”, IEEE Computer, Vol. 48, Issue 2, 2015, and “Cloud-Based Information
`
`Integration Informatics Framework for Healthcare Applications”, IEEE Computer,
`
`Issue 99, 2013. In addition to my signal processing experience specific to pulse
`
`oximetry, I also have experience in developing systems for other physiological
`
`signals. Beginning in the early 1990s, I worked, in particular, with ECG/EKG
`
`signals, and, in general, with biomedical signals and systems.
`
`11.
`
`In addition to my signal processing experience specific to pulse
`
`oximetry, I also have experience in developing algorithms and systems for other
`
`physiological signals. I worked with ECG/EKG signals in particular, and biomedical
`
`signals and systems in general, beginning in the early 1990s. In particular, I worked
`
`with graduate student Dr. Shahram Famorzadeh, in 1990 and 1991, to analyze and
`
`apply pattern recognition (a category of signal processing algorithms that is based
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`on correlation with a set of templates) to ECG/EKG waveforms to identify
`
`physiological conditions.
`
`12.
`
`I have experience with biomedical signals and devices in the field of
`
`speech and image processing since the late 1980s. I worked on deconvolution
`
`algorithms to recover the state of the system based on observed measurements of the
`
`physiological signals in the 1993-1998 time-frame. These signal processing
`
`techniques can be applied to pulse oximetry signals, and I have been working with
`
`these techniques since the mid-1980s.
`
`13.
`
`I have studied, researched and published in the area of adaptive filter
`
`signal processing for noise reduction and signal prediction, using correlation-based
`
`approaches since the mid-1980s, both in the time-domain and frequency domain,
`
`and also to ray-tracing applications, such as Seismic Migration for oil and shale gas
`
`exploration. See for instance, V. Madisetti & D. Messerschmitt, Dynamically
`
`Reduced Complexity Implementation of Echo Cancellers, IEEE International
`
`Conference on Speech, Acoustics and Signal Processing, ICASSP 1986, Tokyo,
`
`Japan, and M. Romdhane and V. Madisetti, “All-Digital Oversampled Front-End
`
`Sensors” IEEE Signal Processing Letters, Vol 3, Issue 2, 1996, and “LMSGEN: A
`
`Prototyping Environment for Programmable Adaptive Digital Filters in VLSI”,
`
`VLSI Signal processing, pp. 33-42, 1994.
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`14. Deconvolution of symmetric (seismic) and asymmetric (pulse
`
`oximetry) signals has gained much importance in the past two decades, and some of
`
`my early work on “Homomorphic Deconvolution of Bandpass Signals” in IEEE
`
`Transactions on Signal Processing, October 1997, established several new methods
`
`for deconvolution of such signals that had several advantages of robustness,
`
`increased accuracy, and simplicity.
`
`15.
`
`In the past decade I have authored several peer-reviewed papers in the
`
`area of computer systems, instruments, and software design, and these include:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`V. Madisetti, et al., “The Georgia Tech Digital Signal Multiprocessor, IEEE
`
`Transactions on Signal Processing, Vol. 41, No. 7, July 1993.
`
`V. Madisetti et al., “Rapid Prototyping on the Georgia Tech Digital Signal
`
`Multiprocessor”, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, Vol. 42, March
`
`1994.
`
`V. Madisetti, “Reengineering legacy embedded systems”, IEEE Design &
`
`Test of Computers, Vol. 16, Vol. 2, 1999.
`
`V. Madisetti et al., “Virtual Prototyping of Embedded Microcontroller-based
`
`DSP Systems”, IEEE Micro, Vol. 15, Issue 5, 1995.
`
`V. Madisetti, et al., “Incorporating Cost Modeling in Embedded-System
`
`Design”, IEEE Design & Test of Computers, Vol. 14, Issue 3, 1997.
`
`V. Madisetti, et al., “Conceptual Prototyping of Scalable Embedded DSP
`
`Systems”, IEEE Design & Test of Computers, Vol. 13, Issue 3, 1996.
`
`V. Madisetti, Electronic System, Platform & Package Codesign,” IEEE
`
`Design & Test of Computers, Vol. 23, Issue 3, June 2006.
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`
`
`V. Madisetti, et al., “A Dynamic Resource Management and Scheduling
`
`Environment for Embedded Multimedia and Communications Platforms”,
`
`IEEE Embedded Systems Letters, Vol. 3, Issue 1, 2011.
`
`16.
`
`I have been active in the areas of signal processing systems and mobile
`
`device communication systems for several years, and some of my publications in
`
`this area include “Frequency Dependent Space-Interleaving of MIMO OFDM
`
`Systems” Proc. of IEEE Radio and Wireless Conference (RAWCON ’03), 2003,
`
`“Embedded Alamouti Space Time Codes for High Rate and Low Decoding
`
`Complexity”, Proc. IEEE Asilomar Conf. on Signals, Systems, and Computers,
`
`2008; and “Asymmetric Golden Codes for Fast Decoding in Time Varying
`
`Channels”, Wireless Personal Communications (2011).
`
`II. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`
`17. Below is a listing of documents and materials that I considered and
`
`reviewed in connection with providing this declaration. In forming my opinions, I
`
`considered those materials as well as anything cited or discussed in this declaration.
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1001 U.S. Patent No. 10,470,695 to Al-Ali (“the ’695 Patent”)
`1002 Excerpts from the Prosecution History of the ’695 Patent
`1003 Declaration of Brian W. Anthony, Ph.D.
`APPLE-1004
`1005 U.S. Patent No. 8,998,815 to Venkatraman et al.
`(“Venkatraman”)
`1006 U.S. Patent No. 6,343,223 to Chin et al. (“Chin”)
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1016
`
`1014 U.S. Patent No. 9,392,946 to Sarantos et al. (“Sarantos”)
`1015 Mendelson et al., Skin Reflectance Pulse Oximetry: In Vivo
`Measurements from the Forearm and Calf, Journal of Clinical
`Monitoring Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 7-12 (January 1991) (“Mendelson”)
`PCT Pub. No. WO 2011/051888 to Ackermans et al.
`(“Ackermans”)
`1018 U.S. Patent No. 4,295,472 to Adams (“Adams”)
`1019 U.S. Patent No. 7,415,298 to Casciani et al. (“Casciani”)
`2006
`“COVID-19 Clinical management”, apps.who.int (January 25, 2021),
`available at
`https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/338882/WHO-2019-
`nCoV-clinical-2021.1-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
`2007 Cohen et al., “A plan to save coronavirus patients from dying at
`home,” cnn.com (April 12, 2020), available at
`https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/11/health/monitoring-covid19-at-
`home/index.html
`2008 Morey, et al., “Feasibility and accuracy of nasal alar pulse oximetry,”
`British Journal of Anaesthesia, Vol. 112, Issue 6, 1109-04 (June 2014)
`2009 Geun et al., “Measurement Site and Applied Pressure Consideration in
`Wrist Photoplethysmography,” The 23rd International Technical
`Conference on Circuits/Systems, Computers and Communications,
`1129-1132 (January 2008)
`Paper 2 Petition for Inter Partes Review IPR2020-01722
`Paper 8 Decision Granting Institution of Inter Partes Review IPR2020-01722
`
`
`
`III. UNDERSTANDING OF PATENT LAW
`
`18.
`
`I am not an attorney and will not be offering legal conclusions.
`
`However, I have been informed of several principles concerning the legal issues
`
`relevant to analyzing the challenges to the claims of the ’695 Patent, and I used these
`
`principles in arriving at my conclusions.
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`A. Level Of Ordinary Skill In The Art
`
`19.
`
`I understand that certain issues in an IPR, such as claim construction
`
`and whether a claim is invalid as obvious, are assessed from the view of a
`
`hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the relevant art at the time of the invention.
`
`I understand there are multiple factors relevant to determining the level of ordinary
`
`skill in the art, including (1) the level of education and experience of persons
`
`working in the field at the time of the invention; (2) the sophistication of the
`
`technology; (3) the types of problems encountered in the field; and (4) the prior art
`
`solutions to those problems. I understand that this hypothetical person of ordinary
`
`skill is presumed to have had knowledge from the teachings of the prior art.
`
`B. Claim Construction
`
`20.
`
`I understand that claim construction in an IPR is a legal question for the
`
`Board to decide. I also understand, however, that in construing claim terms, the
`
`Board asks what the terms would mean to a person of ordinary skill in the relevant
`
`art in view of the disclosures in the patent and the prosecution history of the patent.
`
`I understand that the Board may also consider external evidence, such as
`
`dictionaries. In general, however, I understand that claim terms are given the
`
`ordinary and customary meaning one of ordinary skill in the relevant art would apply
`
`to them in the context of the patent at the time the patent was filed.
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`C. Obviousness
`
`21.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is invalid under the patent law,
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103, if, at the time the claimed invention was made, the differences
`
`between the prior art and the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious
`
`to a person of ordinary skill in the art. I understand that the following facts are
`
`considered in determining whether a claimed invention is invalid as obvious in view
`
`of the prior art: (1) the scope and content of the prior art; (2) the level of ordinary
`
`skill in the art; and (3) the differences, if any, between the claimed invention and the
`
`prior art.
`
`22.
`
`I also understand there are additional considerations that may be used
`
`in evaluating whether a claimed invention is obvious. These include whether the
`
`claimed invention was the result of (a) a teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the
`
`prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art to arrive at
`
`the claimed invention; (b) a combination of prior art elements combined according
`
`to known methods to yield predictable results; (c) a simple substitution of one known
`
`element for another to obtain a predicable result; (d) the use of a known technique
`
`to improve similar things in the same way; (e) applying a known technique to a
`
`known thing ready for improvement to yield predictable results; (f) choosing from a
`
`finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of
`
`success; (g) known work in one field of endeavor prompting variations of it for use
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`in either the same filed or a different one based on design incentives or other market
`
`forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`23.
`
`I have applied this understanding in my analysis.
`
`24.
`
`I understand that Dr. Anthony carried out his analysis of patentability
`
`as of July 2, 2015. EX1003 ¶¶12, 15. I likewise carry out my analysis of patentability
`
`as of July 2, 2015. I do not offer any opinions regarding priority in this declaration.
`
`IV. BACKGROUND
`
`A. The Importance of Pulse Oximeters
`
`25. Once a person loses his or her oxygen supply, referred to as hypoxia, a
`
`caregiver has only a few minutes to prevent brain damage, heart failure and death.
`
`Accordingly, there is a need to quickly and accurately determine the amount of
`
`oxygen in blood. A type of physiological monitoring device, called a pulse oximeter,
`
`readily detects changes in a person’s oxygen saturation, which is an indicator of the
`
`person’s oxygen supply. EX1001 at 1:50-53. Recently, ease of use and portability
`
`led to pulse oximeter monitoring to be virtually universally recommended for at
`
`home patients having COVID-19 symptoms. EX2006 at 5; see generally 2007.
`
`B. How Oximetry Works
`
`26. A pulse oximeter’s non-invasive sensor generally includes “one or
`
`more light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and a photodetector.” EX1001 at 2:1-5. “The
`
`detector is responsive to the emitted light after attenuation or reflection by pulsatile
`
`blood flowing in the tissue site.” Id. at 2:8-10. The detector outputs a signal that is
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`processed, then an empirically derived lookup table is used to convert processed
`
`signals into a numerical readout of physiological parameters such as oxygen
`
`saturation (SpO2) and/or pulse rate. Id. at 2:10-14.
`
`27. Pulse oximeters rely on light probing locations on the body having
`
`perfused oxygenated blood, such as in the fingers, ears, nose, toe, and forehead.
`
`EX2008 at 1109. While these measurement sites are acceptable for caregiver
`
`monitoring environments, such locations are inconvenient for home or ambulatory
`
`use. For example, normal routines require freedom of motion for daily activities,
`
`including movement, exercise, and sports.
`
`28. Because light both transmits through tissue and backscatters or reflects
`
`back after entering tissue, pulse oximeter sensors can operate either by transmittance
`
`or reflectance. Reflective pulse oximetry is a method by which the emitter and
`
`detector are located on the same side of the tissue measurement site. EX1001 at
`
`10:14-20; EX2009 at 1129. Transmittance pulse oximetry is a method by which the
`
`emitter and detector are located on opposite sides of the tissue measurement site.
`
`EX1006 at 2:17-21. The detector captures and measures light transmitted from the
`
`emitter and attenuated by the tissue measurement site. Because these pulse oximetry
`
`methods are used with different body parts and rely on different light effects, the
`
`optical systems for reflective and transmittance pulse oximeters are designed
`
`differently.
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`C. The ’695 Patent
`
`29. Emitters are typically very small. Because the emitter has negligible
`
`dimension, the emitter is effectively a point. EX1001 at 5:44-46. In theory, using
`
`such an emitter, as shown in FIG. 6 below, is thought to reduce differences in the
`
`length the light 620 as it travels from the emitter 602 to the detector 610. Id. at 5:66–
`
`6:1. This difference is commonly referred to as path length variability. Reducing the
`
`variability in the path length produces a more accurate measurement of a person’s
`
`oxygen supply or pulse rate. Id.
`
`
`Id. at FIG. 6 (annotated). However, in practice, tissue and blood scatter light causing
`
`the lengths of the light path to vary. Id. at 6:1-8, 10:33-36. Path length variability
`
`causes measurement errors. Id. at 6:1-8, 10:33-36.
`
`30. The sensors described in the ’695 Patent irradiate a larger volume of
`
`tissue than a point source emitter shown above. EX1001 at 6:55–7:3. When applied
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`to the wrist, irradiating a larger volume of tissue increases the likelihood of light
`
`interacting with blood. Id. For example, FIGS. 7A and 7B (annotated below) show
`
`a reflective sensor 700 designed to be worn on a wrist. Id. at 10:40-49.
`
`Detector
`
`Light Diffuser
`Light Blocker
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Id. at FIGS. 7A and 7B (annotated).
`
`31. Sensor 700 includes one or more emitters 702 (shaded orange). Id. at
`
`10:54-55. A diffuser 704 (shaded blue) “homogenously spreads the [light] over a
`
`wide, donut-shaped area, such as the area . . . as depicted in FIG. 7B [(also shaded
`
`blue)].” Id. at 10:65–11:2. Circular wall 706 (shaded purple) blocks light from
`
`reaching the detector without going through tissue. EX1001 at 11:60-62. Sensor 700
`
`includes a detector 710 (shaded green) located on the same side of the wrist as the
`
`emitters 702. Id. at 10:45-49. Although FIGS. 7A-7B show a single detector 710, the
`
`’695 Patent discloses a plurality of detectors corresponding to the irradiated surface
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`area depicted in FIG. 7B. Id. at 11:38-43. Even with multiple detectors, the irradiated
`
`surface area would conforms to a circular shape.
`
`32. FIG. 7A depicts the path light 720 (shaded yellow) that travels from the
`
`emitters to the detectors. EX1001 at 11:44-47. This reflected light irradiates more
`
`surface area of the tissue than the prior art of FIG. 6 (shown above). More irradiation
`
`increases the likelihood reflective light will be probative of measurable blood. This
`
`“provides the opportunity to take an average of the detected light,” leading to “a
`
`more accurate oxygen saturation measurement.” Id. at 11:49-53.
`
`33. The ’695 Patent discloses a reflective pulse oximeter particularly useful
`
`for placement on the “wrist.” EX1001 at 10:45-49. While the wrist as a measurement
`
`site presents some unique challenges, the tissue at the wrist is sufficiently thick to
`
`support ample backscattering or reflection of light. See EX1001, FIG. 6 (sufficiently
`
`thick for light 620 to reflect back to the detector 610).
`
`V. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`34. Petitioner asserts the following level of ordinary skill in the art:
`
`[A] person with a working knowledge of physiological monitoring
`
`technologies. The person would have had a Bachelor of Science degree
`
`in an academic discipline emphasizing the design of electrical,
`
`computer, or software technologies, in combination with training or at
`
`least one to two years of related work experience with capture and
`
`processing of data or information, including but not limited to
`
`physiological monitoring technologies.
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`Pet. at 4-5. Alternatively, Petitioner asserts a POSITA could have “had a Master of
`
`Science degree in a relevant academic discipline with less than a year of related work
`
`experience in the same discipline.” Id. at 5.
`
`35. Dr. Anthony states that he applies the following level of skill in his
`
`analysis stating:
`
`[A] person of ordinary skill in the art as of the Critical Date of the ’695
`
`patent (a “POSITA”) would have had at least a Bachelor’s Degree in
`
`an academic area emphasizing electrical engineering, computer
`
`science, or a similar discipline, and in combination with training or at
`
`least one to two years of related work experience with capture and
`
`processing of data or information, including but not limited to
`
`physiological monitoring technologies. In addition, the POSITA would
`
`have had a working knowledge of physiological monitoring
`
`technologies. Superior education could compensate for a deficiency in
`
`work experience, and vice-versa.
`
`EX1003 ¶ 17.
`
`36.
`
`I note that the asserted level of skill (1) requires no coursework, training
`
`or experience with optics or optical physiological monitors; (2) requires no
`
`coursework, training or experience in physiology; and (3) focuses on data processing
`
`and not sensor design. In responding to Dr. Anthony’s opinions in this proceeding,
`
`I apply Dr. Anthony’s and Petitioner’s asserted level of skill.
`
`VI. THE PETITION’S PROPOSED GROUNDS
`
`37.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinion on the following grounds:
`
`-16-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`Ground
`1D
`2C
`Pet. at 2-3.
`
`Claims
`6, 14, 21
`6, 14, 21
`
`Asserted References
`Sarantos in view of Mendelson and Chin
`Ackermans in view of Chin
`
`38. Claims 6 and 21 depend from claims 1 and 19, respectively, and recite
`
`“a diffuser which receives, spreads, and emits the spread light, wherein the emitted
`
`spread light is directed at the tissue measurement site.” EX1001 at claims 6, 21.
`
`Claim 14 depends from claim 9 and recites “spreading, with a diffuser, the emitted
`
`light and emitting the spread light from the diffuser to the tissue measurement site.”
`
`Id. at claim 14.
`
`VII. OVERVIEW OF ASSERTED REFERENCES
`
`A.
`
`Sarantos (EX1014)
`
`39. Sarantos, assigned to Fitbit, Inc., discloses a wristband wearable fitness
`
`monitor 200. EX1014 at 7:12-16. Annotated FIG. 2, below left, and the zoomed-in
`
`portion below right, disclose a monitor 200 with light emitters 108 and a detector
`
`212. Id. at 7:16-23. When worn by a user, the wristband monitor 200 positions the
`
`emitters 108 and the detector 212 on the same side of the wrist, therefore, Sarantos’
`
`disclosure focuses on a reflectance type sensor.
`
`-17-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`EX1014 at FIG. 2 (annotated).
`
`
`
`40.
`
`In use, light from the emitters irradiate a wearer’s skin near the wrist.
`
`Id. at 7:25-30. The light backscatters, or reflects, off the tissue and emerges back out
`
`of the skin. Id. FIG. 6, below, graphs the results of a simulation to show that light
`
`intensity decreases with increasing distance from the emitter (simulated as centered).
`
`Id. at 10:51-55.
`
`-18-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`Id. at FIG. 6 (colored).
`
`
`
`41.
`
`In order to capture more of the higher-intensity light emerging from the
`
`skin, Sarantos encourages use of its rectangular detectors (shaded blue) over the
`
`prior art square detectors (outlined blue). See EX1014 at 10:67–11:3. Sarantos also
`
`discloses that detectors should be in close proximity to emitters, typically between 1
`
`mm to 4 mm apart. Id. at 18:61-66. Sarantos warns that designs outside this range
`
`“may prove counterproductive, as a higher-intensity [emitter] may be needed . . . in
`
`order to obtain a sufficiently strong signal at the photodetector. Id. at 19:13-18. A
`
`higher-intensity emitter, and/or driving an emitter harder to generate more intensity,
`
`consumes additional power, which “may be undesirable in a wearable fitness
`
`-19-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`monitor context.” Id. at 19:18-21. Wrist-worn monitors, like those of Sarantos, are
`
`battery powered, thus, raising power consumption lowers battery life.
`
`42. Sarantos does not disclose a diffuser.
`
`B. Mendelson (EX1015)
`
`43. Mendelson describes a reflectance type sensor tested on the forearm
`
`and calf. EX1015 at Abstract. The reflectance sensor used in this study is shown
`
`below in FIG. 1.
`
`Id. at Fig. 1 (annotated).
`
`
`
`44. Mendelson does not disclose a diffuser.
`
`C. Ackermans (EX1016)
`
`45. Ackermans describes arranging reflectance type sensors into nodes of
`
`a “hexagonal lattice structure.” EX1016 at 7:33-34.
`
`-20-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`
`Id. at FIG. 4. In one embodiment, Ackermans discloses that its sensor attaches to the
`
`wrist as a wristwatch. Id. at 10:29-32.
`
`46. FIG. 1, annotated below, shows a sensor 10 having a detector 30
`
`peripheral to an emitter 20. Id. at Abstract.
`
`
`Id. at FIG. 1 (annotated). The emitter 20 irradiates the skin with light 21. Id. The
`
`emitted light 21 spreads as it travels toward the skin, and is already diffuse when it
`
`reaches the skin. The light 21 backscatters, or reflects off tissue, and the returning
`
`light 31 travels toward detector 30. EX1016 at 5:2-4.
`
`47. Ackermans does not disclose a diffuser.
`
`-21-
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01722
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`
`D. Chin (EX1006)
`
`48. Chin describes a transmittance type nostril sensor for measuring
`
`oxygen saturation and pulse rate. EX1006 at 1:14-21, 8:21-21. FIGS 7A and 7B,
`
`annotated below, provide that the sensor includes a piece of bent metal 170 having
`
`a detector 178 (shaded blue) o