`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
