1
`
`Patent Owner Masimo Corporation’s
`Demonstratives For Oral Hearing
`
`November 17, 2023
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`IPR2022-01299
`
`MASIMO 2196
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01299
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Masimo Corporation’s
`Demonstratives For Oral Hearing
`
`November 17, 2023
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corporation
`IPR2022-01299
`
`MASIMO 2196
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01299
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,761,127
`
`Ex. 1001 Fig. 12 (simplified, annotated); POR 14
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`
`
`The Petition’s Grounds
`
`• Grounds 1A-1F rely on Yamada and Chadwick for
`the “thermal mass.”
`• Grounds 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 2C, 2D, 2E, and 2F rely
`on Cheung or Noguchi for using a temperature
`sensor for wavelength-shift compensation.
`• Grounds 1B, 1D, 1F, 2B, 2D, and 2F rely on
`Leibowitz for dependent claims in which the
`thermal mass has multiple layers or is copper clad.
`
`• Grounds 2A-2F rely on Yamada for the “thermal
`mass.”
`
`Pet. 2
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`3
`
`
`
`Every claim recites a “thermal mass”
`
`1/26. A physiological sensor comprising:
`… a thermal mass disposed proximate the emitters …
`
`7. A physiological sensor … comprising:
`a thermal mass …
`
`13/20. In a physiological sensor … a sensor method comprising:
`providing a thermal mass …
`
`Ex. 1001, independent claims 1, 7, 13, 20, 26
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`
`
`Function of the Thermal Mass
`
`The substrate 1200 is also configured with a
`relatively significant thermal mass, which
`stabilizes and normalizes the bulk temperature so
`that the thermistor measurement of bulk
`temperature is meaningful.
`
`Ex. 1001, 10:67-11:4; POR 19; Sur-Reply 1
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`5
`
`
`
`Board correctly integrates the thermal mass function
`
`Considering the intrinsic evidence, we understand
`a “meaningful” temperature reading in the context of the
`’127 patent to be one on a scale relevant to estimating
`LED wavelengths.
`
`[W]e provisionally construe “thermal mass” as a
`mass having resistance to temperature change on a
`scale relevant to estimating LED wavelengths …
`
`Inst. Dec. 18-19; POR 17-22; Sur-Reply 1-2
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`
`
`Apple fails to rebut Board construction of “thermal mass”
`
`• Apple’s construction, like the Board’s, adds a function (bulk-
`temperature stabilization) not recited in all claims.
`• Board’s use of “LEDs” rather than “light emitting sources” makes no
`practical difference considering prior art at issue.
`• Board’s construction distinguishes Cheung and is clear.
`
`Sur-Reply 1-2
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`7
`
`
`
`Apple relied on Yamada and Chadwick only
`for the “thermal mass” limitation [7.1] of claim 7
`
`Pet. 19-21; POR 31; Sur-Reply 4-5
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`8
`
`
`
`Apple merely incorporated its Yamada/Chadwick analysis
`into its “thermal mass” analysis for the other claims
`
`Pet. 42, 47, 57-58, 61; POR 30
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`
`
`Yamada and Chadwick lack a thermal mass
`
`The thermal function of Chadwick’s
`metal core with metal sheet 10 is
`cooling electronic components
`
`Pet. 14, 19-20; Ex. 1004, Fig. 19; Ex. 1005, Fig. 11;
`POR 30-44; Sur-Reply 4-7
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`10
`
`
`
`Yamada’s layer 153 not designed for thermal management
`
`While Yamada discloses that its substrate may include an “intermediate
`layer 153” made of a “conductive” metal, such sparse details do not show
`that the substrate includes the claimed “thermal mass.” However, a
`POSITA would have understood that the purpose of the intermediate layer
`is to provide electrical connection and provides negligible thermal
`management. Just because a circuit board includes one or more metal
`layers does not mean that those layers would have resistance to
`temperature change on a scale relevant to estimating LED wavelengths.
`Indeed, a POSITA would have understood that most circuit boards are not
`designed to sufficiently resist temperature change for estimating LED
`wavelengths. And there is no evidence Yamada’s conductive metal circuit
`board layer is designed with any consideration of thermal management of
`any type.
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶126; POR 31-32
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`
`
`Not every metal core circuit board has a thermal mass
`
`Ex. 2162 (Dr. Anthony) 185:3-15; POR 40
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`
`
`Thermal function of Chadwick’s metal core is cooling
`electronic circuits and components of micro-miniature size
`
`Ex. 1005, 1:38-51, 2:19-29; POR 35-37; Sur-Reply
`5-7
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`13
`
`
`
`Petition relies on Chadwick’s cooling function
`
`Pet. 20
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`14
`
`
`
`Cooling LEDs to reduce spectral shift is not
`the claimed bulk-temperature stabilization
`
`Indeed, a POSITA would have understood Chadwick to minimize
`temperature-change resistance to maximize its core’s cooling function.
`Thus, the core would not retain sufficient heat from multiple LEDs to be
`relevant to estimating LED wavelengths. Chadwick’s metal core would
`have too little resistance to temperature change.
`
`In my opinion, a metal core such as the one suggested by Chadwick would
`In my opinion, a metal
`almost certainly produce so much cooling that any LED temperature
`core such as the one suggested by Chadwick would almost certainly produce so
`much cooling that any LED temperature difference from ambient temperature would
`difference from ambient temperature would be negligibly small and there
`be negligibly small and there would be no reason to compensate for temperatureinduced
`would be no reason to compensate for temperature-induced wavelength
`wavelength shift by using a temperature sensor to estimate LED
`shift by using a temperature sensor to estimate LED wavelengths.
`wavelengths.
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶133, 153; POR 35-37, 58-59;
`Sur-Reply 5-7, 20-21
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`15
`
`
`
`Apple fails to rebut that cooling is Chadwick’s sole function
`
`Reply 19; POR 35-37; Sur-Reply 20-22
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`16
`
`
`
`Chadwick’s cooling function would work with Yamada
`
`Reply 19; POR 35-37; Sur-Reply 20-22
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`17
`
`
`
`Uniform temperature gradient does not satisfy
`“thermal mass”
`• Petition argued that Chadwick would “produce a reasonably
`distributed/uniform temperature gradient reflective of an average,
`bulk temperature” for Element [7.3], the “bulk temperature”
`limitation.
`
`• Apple cannot rely on this argument for the “thermal mass”
`limitation.
`
`- 35 U.S.C. § 312(a)(3) (petition must identify grounds with
`particularity)
`- SAS Inst. v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348, 1356 (2018) (Director lacks
`“license to depart from the petition”)
`
`Pet. 24; POR 37
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`18
`
`
`
`Chadwick would not produce a uniform temperature gradient
`
`No evidence supports Dr. Anthony’s assertion that
`Chadwick’s metal core would “produce a reasonably
`distributed/uniform temperature …”
`
`A POSITA would have understood that the frequent
`cycling on and off of the LEDs would have caused
`Chadwick’s metal core to continually have a non-uniform
`temperature gradient, with higher temperatures
`concentrated near the LEDs, while the sensor is in
`operation.
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶167; POR 38; Sur-Reply 8
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`19
`
`
`
`Cooling electronics does not ensure uniform temperature
`
`Ex. 2162 (Dr. Anthony) 109:8-17; POR 39
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`20
`
`
`
`Apple conducted no structural analysis showing
`Chadwick’s metal core is the claimed “thermal mass”
`
`Ex. 2162 (Dr. Anthony) 165:5-17, 117:16-21, 118:12-
`16; Pet. 20-21; POR 39-40; Sur-Reply 6
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`21
`
`
`
`Apple’s analysis of Chadwick’s metal core is deficient
`
`[O]ne cannot conclude, simply because a circuit board
`has a metal core or metal layers, that the metal core or
`layers act as a “thermal mass” as claimed. Circuit
`boards are custom designed for particular devices and
`for particular purposes, which may include performing
`one or more of several thermal functions. … Accordingly,
`a cursory comparison of Chadwick’s metal core with
`embodiments of the ’127 patent cannot show that
`Chadwick’s metal core acts as the claimed “thermal
`mass.”
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶134; POR 41
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`22
`
`
`
`Apple argued testing is needed for “thermal mass”
`
`Ex. 1012 (Apple ITC Briefing), 218; POR 41-42; Sur-
`Reply 6
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`23
`
`
`
`Apple’s argument that testing is needed prevailed at the ITC
`
`Ex. 2093 (ITC Initial Determination), 265; POR 41-42
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`24
`
`
`
`No experiments, tests, or simulations show that Chadwick’s
`metal core is the claimed “thermal mass”
`
`Ex. 2162 (Dr. Anthony) 168:11-21; POR 41; Sur-
`Reply 6
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`25
`
`
`
`Apple did not explain how to change Yamada’s substrate or
`Chadwick’s core to make either a “thermal mass”
`
`Pet. 15; POR 38-40, 42-44; Sur-Reply 19-20
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`26
`
`
`
`Anthony would not say how to modify Chadwick
`to make it a thermal mass
`
`Ex. 2162 (Dr. Anthony) 145:4-22; POR 40; Sur-Reply
`19-20
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`27
`
`
`
`Suggestion to use temperature sensor to compensate for
`wavelength shift does not propose any structural change
`
`Pet. 37; Reply 19; Sur-Reply 20
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`28
`
`
`
`Anthony’s suggestion to size the core is deficient
`
`Ex. 1003 (Dr. Anthony) ¶41 (cited by Reply 20); Sur-
`Reply 20; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶160
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`29
`
`
`
`King rebutted Anthony’s suggestion to size the core
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶160; Sur-Reply 20
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`30
`
`
`
`The ’127 patent specification is not evidence of obviousness
`
`• Apple improperly relied on the ’127 patent itself to allege obviousness.
`Reply 21-22.
`
`• But even Dr. Anthony agreed the ’127 patent specification is not
`evidence of obviousness. Ex. 2195, 161:7-10.
`
`• The ’127 patent’s disclosure of stabilizing and normalizing “the bulk
`temperature so that the thermistor measurement of bulk temperature is
`meaningful” is novel guidance not found in any pre-’127-patent evidence.
`
`• The ’127 patent discloses additional details to enable specific
`implementations. See, e.g., Ex. 1001, 10:20-11:44, Figs. 12-18.
`
`Ex. 2195, 161:7-10; Ex. 1001, 10:20-11:44, Figs. 12-
`18; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶134-135; Sur-Reply 23-24
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`31
`
`
`
`Apple’s cases do not justify using the ’127 patent
`as evidence of obviousness
`In re Epstein and In re Publicover are ex parte examination cases
`rejecting applicant’s non-enabling-prior-art arguments.
`
`•
`
`• Uber Technologies found a patent’s silence as to how to transmit data
`suggested that choosing between two “undisputably known” prior-art
`methods would have been obvious.
`
`• Neither fact pattern applies here.
`
`Sur-Reply 24
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`32
`
`
`
`Leibowitz adds only multi-layer copper construction
`
`Another difficulty that has arisen as larger numbers of
`components are mounted on circuit boards, is that the heat
`produced by the components must be dissipated …
`
`One of the principal advantages of the use of graphite in the
`circuit board structure is that it serves as a good conductor of
`heat, which normally can flow from the mounted components
`through the copper layers of the board, through mounting bolts,
`and hence to a housing or other heat sink.
`
`Pet. 33-35, 50, 63; Ex. 1006, 1:56-64, 4:65-5:2; POR
`67-69
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`33
`
`
`
`Every claim but 20 recites the “bulk temperature” limitations
`
`1/26. A physiological sensor comprising:
`
`… wherein the temperature sensor provides a temperature sensor
`output responsive to the bulk temperature so that the wavelengths are
`determinable as a function of the drive currents and the bulk temperature.
`
`7. A physiological sensor … comprising:
`
`… a temperature sensor thermally coupled to the thermal mass and
`capable of determining a bulk temperature for the thermal mass, the
`operating wavelengths dependent on the bulk temperature …
`
`13. In a physiological sensor … a sensor method comprising:
`
`… determining a plurality of operating wavelengths … dependent on
`a bulk temperature of the light emitting sources …
`
`Ex. 1001, independent claims 1, 7, 13, 26
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`34
`
`
`
`Claim 7 interrelates the measured bulk temperature, LED
`operating wavelengths, and physiological parameters
`
`λa”) are dependent on the bulk temperature (“Tb”)
`through Equation 3:
`
`Ex. 1001, claim 7; POR 27, Sur-Reply 4
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`35
`
`
`
`Wavelengths vary with LED junction temperature, not bulk
`temperature, as a matter of physical law
`
`A POSITA would have understood that temperature-based changes to LED
`wavelengths are always caused by changes to LED junction temperatures,
`not by changes to the bulk temperature of the thermal mass. Further, a
`POSITA would have understood that any change in the bulk temperature of
`the thermal mass is the result, not the cause, of the changes in LED
`junction temperatures that lead to wavelength shift. … Therefore, as a
`matter of physical law, both LED wavelengths and the bulk temperature of
`the thermal mass are responsive to LED junction temperatures; the LED
`wavelengths are not responsive to the bulk temperature of the thermal
`mass.
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶118; POR 28
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`36
`
`
`
`Apple agreed the “bulk temperature” is used to estimate
`operating wavelengths in claim 7
`
`[C]laim 7 separately requires (a) measuring “bulk temperature,” and (b)
`“the operating wavelengths dependent on the bulk temperature”; …
`Likewise, the Summary of Invention describes (a) “the temperature sensor
`provides a[n] output responsive to the bulk temperature,” and (b) “the
`wavelengths are determinable as a function of the … bulk
`temperature”). [Ex. 1001] at 2:61-65; see also id. at Abstract (similar).
`Thus, the measurement of a “bulk temperature for the thermal mass” is a
`separate, predicate step before that temperature is used to estimate
`operating wavelengths.
`
`Ex. 1018 (Apple ITC Briefing), 121 (bold italics in
`original); POR 28
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`37
`
`
`
`Yamada does not measure a “bulk temperature”
`of a thermal mass to estimate LED wavelengths
`
`a. Apple does not show Yamada’s temperature measurement
`represents LED temperatures.
`b. Apple does not show Yamada’s temperature measurement is
`representative of all or substantially all of the thermal mass.
`
`POR 45-47
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`38
`
`
`
`Cheung does not measure a “bulk temperature”
`of a thermal mass to estimate LED wavelengths
`
`• The “bulk temperature” is not an approximate or average LED temperature.
`• Conclusory and contrary to the evidence and basic heat transfer principles.
`Ex. 1007, Fig. 11, 13:20-32, 19:31-33; Ex. 2151 (Dr.
`King) ¶¶208-216; POR 47-48; Sur-Reply 8-11
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`39
`
`
`
`Noguchi does not measure a “bulk temperature”
`of a thermal mass to estimate LED wavelengths
`
`Ex. 1008, Fig. 2, 2:30-31; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶228-
`230; Ex. 2093, 298; POR 4-5, 49-50; Sur-Reply 8-11
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`40
`
`
`
`No Motivation to Combine
`
`a. Cheung and Noguchi teach that ambient temperature near the LEDs
`can accurately compensate for wavelength shift
`b. Webster criticized using a temperature sensor and instead urged
`using LED drive current directly to compensate for wavelength shift
`c. Huiku criticized using a temperature sensor and instead urged
`determining junction temperature directly from forward voltage drop
`
`POR 50-66; Sur-Reply 9-24
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`41
`
`
`
`Noguchi measures “temperature of the LED itself or the
`surrounding ambient temperature”
`
`Ex. 1008, Fig. 2, 2:2-4, 2:30-40; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King)
`¶177; POR 5, 52-54, 65; Sur-Reply 8-11
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`42
`
`
`
`Cheung measures ambient temperature
`
`Ex. 1007, Fig. 11, 13:20-32, 19:31-33; Ex. 2151 (Dr.
`King) ¶177; POR 6, 21, 52-54; Sur-Reply 8-11
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`43
`
`
`
`Apple improperly recasts Cheung and Noguchi
`as measuring a “bulk temperature”
`
`Sur-Reply 9-11
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`44
`
`
`
`Webster criticized using a temperature sensor
`and instead urged direct measurement of LED drive current
`
`Ex. 2053, 68-69; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶178-179;
`POR 54; Sur-Reply 11-12
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`45
`
`
`
`Huiku criticized using a temperature sensor
`and instead urged using forward voltage drop
`
`Ex. 2067, 19:7-29; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶181; POR
`55-56; Sur-Reply 11-12
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`46
`
`
`
`Apple’s argument against teaching away is hindsight
`
`Reply 16; Sur-Reply 11-12
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`47
`
`
`
`The Petition’s Alleged Motivations to Combine
`Yamada and Chadwick
`
`Pet. 15-17
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`48
`
`
`
`1. Heat reduction would not have motivated the invention
`
`Ex. 1004 ¶¶39, 102-104, Fig. 31; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King)
`¶¶184-187; POR 57-58; Sur-Reply 22
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`49
`
`
`
`2. Mitigating heat-induced wavelength shift
`would have led away from the invention
`
`If a thermal core successfully reduced wavelength shift, it would
`obviate the need for wavelength-shift compensation. Indeed, as
`explained above, Chadwick’s metal core would have been so
`effective at cooling that it would have effectively eliminated
`wavelength shift and any need to compensate for it. Accordingly,
`Apple’s proposed use of a thermal core would discourage a
`POSITA from attempting to design a thermal mass that would
`resist temperature change on a scale relevant to estimating LED
`wavelengths and using the measured temperature of the thermal
`mass to estimate LED wavelengths.
`
`Apple argues that reducing wavelength shift would improve
`accuracy in oximetry measurements. Pet., 16. But that
`improvement would motivate a POSITA to reduce wavelength shift
`further rather than attempt another solution.
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶189-190; POR 58-59; Sur-
`Reply 20-22
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`50
`
`
`
`3. Facilitating measurement of an approximate or average
`LED temperature would not have motivated the invention
`
`POR 59-62
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`51
`
`
`
`3a. The “bulk temperature” is not an approximate or average
`LED temperature
`
`Dr. King
`
`“Apple has not shown that measuring an approximate or average
`temperature of the LEDs would enable estimation of LED
`wavelengths to compensate for wavelength shift. … [A] mass that
`provided an LED temperature average would not be useful for
`temperature compensation because it would fail to capture the
`heterogenous, transient nature of the LED heat inputs.”
`
`POR 22-26, 60; ID 14-18; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶193
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`52
`
`
`
`3b. No evidence supports Anthony’s conclusion that
`Chadwick’s core would measure average LED temperature
`
`Neither Yamada nor Chadwick nor any other document Apple
`relies on shows that the metal core’s temperature would indicate
`an average temperature of the LEDs as Apple’s expert asserts.
`Further, Apple did not conduct any simulations or tests showing
`that Chadwick’s metal core temperature would indicate an
`average temperature of the LEDs. …
`
`In view of the complex temperature distribution in a system with
`multiple LEDs injecting different amounts of heat into the metal
`core at different times, it is extremely unlikely that a POSITA could
`have placed a temperature sensor on Chadwick’s metal core so
`that its temperature measurement would indicate an average
`temperature of the LEDs. Apple’s assumptions are simply not
`grounded in heat transfer physics.
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶194-195; POR 60-61.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`53
`
`
`
`3c. Apple provided no reason for Yamada to measure an
`approximate or average LED temperature
`
`Apple fails to explain why Yamada’s temperature sensor would
`have needed to measure an approximate or average temperature
`of the LEDs. It certainly would not need to do so to achieve its
`disclosed goal of warning patients when “the temperature of the
`optical probe … becomes too high” to prevent burns. See
`EX1004 ¶111. Yamada achieves that goal by measuring “the
`temperature near the user” or “the temperature of the main body
`… where it is the highest.” Id. ¶109 (emphases added). In a
`safety application such as Yamada’s burn avoidance, a POSITA
`would understand that the key temperature to measure is the
`maximum temperature, not the average temperature. …
`
`And Apple does not propose modifying Yamada’s temperature
`sensor to achieve any goal for which it would have made sense to
`attempt to measure LED temperatures.
`
`Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶197-198; POR 61.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`54
`
`
`
`3d. Webster teaches away from average LED temperature
`
`Dr. King
`
`Webster’s criticism of Cheung would have led a POSITA away not
`just from Cheung, but from any attempt to measure any
`temperature, including the temperature of Chadwick’s metal core,
`as an indicator of approximate or average LED temperatures.
`
`Ex. 2053, 68-69; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶199; POR 61-
`62
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`55
`
`
`
`3e. Cheung measures average LED temperature
`without a thermal mass
`
`Dr. King
`
`But if a POSITA would have been content with measuring merely
`an approximate or average LED temperature, the POSITA would
`have just used Cheung’s method of measuring ambient
`temperature. A POSITA would have understood Webster as
`indicating that Cheung’s method would at least measure an
`average LED temperature or a close approximation. Therefore, a
`POSITA would have had no reason to try a speculative method of
`measuring a bulk temperature that may not even have indicated
`an approximate or average LED temperature.
`
`Pet. 43; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶200; POR 62
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`56
`
`
`
`4. Drawing heat away from the LEDs
`would not have motivated the invention
`
`Ex. 1004 ¶¶39, 102-104, Fig. 31; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King)
`¶¶184-187; POR 57-58; Sur-Reply 22
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`57
`
`
`
`5. Apple’s generic known-techniques argument is deficient
`
`Pet. 17; POR 62-63; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶202
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`58
`
`
`
`Apple fails to show that Cheung would have motivated a
`POSITA to measure a bulk temperature of a thermal mass
`
`Pet. 37-38; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶221-222; POR 63-
`64; Sur-Reply 8-11
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`59
`
`
`
`Apple fails to show that Noguchi would have motivated a
`POSITA to measure a bulk temperature of a thermal mass
`
`Pet. 53-54; Ex. 2151 (Dr. King) ¶¶235-237; POR 64-
`66; Sur-Reply 8-11
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`60
`
`
`
`Apple’s new Oldham argument does not satisfy its burden
`
`Reply 17-18; Sur-Reply 12-15.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`61
`
`
`
`Oldham does not use a “thermal mass” as claimed
`
`Ex. 1050 ¶¶38-39, 52; Ex. 2194 (Dr. King) ¶¶11-12;
`Sur-Reply 14.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`62
`
`
`
`Oldham’s generic wavelength-shift-compensation
`embodiment is no more detailed than Cheung or Huiku
`
`Ex. 1050 ¶41; Ex. 2194 (Dr. King) ¶13; Sur-Reply 14-
`15
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`63
`
`
`
`Oldham’s temperature regulating system keeps various
`system components at substantially the same temperature
`
`Ex. 1050 ¶34; Ex. 2194 (Dr. King) ¶14; Sur-Reply 15
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`64
`
`
`
`Apple does not satisfy its burden through string citation
`to other new references
`
`Reply 18; Sur-Reply 12-13, 16
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`65
`
`
`
`Muthu would not motivate a POSITA to combine
`Yamada and Chadwick to yield the claimed invention
`
`Ex. 1051, 333, Fig. 8, 337; Ex. 2194 (Dr. King) ¶¶16-
`20; Sur-Reply 16-18
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`66
`
`
`
`Dry would not motivate a POSITA to combine
`Yamada and Chadwick to yield the claimed invention
`
`Ex. 1052, ¶¶4-9, Ex. 2194 (Dr. King) ¶21-24; Sur-
`Reply 18
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`67
`
`
`
`Man would not motivate a POSITA to combine
`Yamada and Chadwick to yield the claimed invention
`
`Ex. 1053 ¶¶ 17-18, Ex. 2194 (Dr. King) ¶¶ 25-27;
`Sur-Reply 18
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`68
`
`
`
`Littleton would not motivate a POSITA to combine
`Yamada and Chadwick to yield the claimed invention
`
`Ex. 1054, 2:4-7, 3:7-22; Ex. 2194 (Dr. King) ¶¶ 28-30;
`Sur-Reply 18-19
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`69
`
`
`
`Objective evidence supports non-obviousness
`
`POR 70-79; Reply 23-27; Sur-Reply 25-28
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`70
`
`
`
`The accuracy enabled by the “thermal mass” and “bulk
`temperature” drove commercial success and industry praise
`
`Ex. 2102 (Diab) ¶¶15, 56, 104; Ex. 1056, 96:12-17;
`POR 79; Sur-Reply 27
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`71
`
`
`
`Dr. King’s analysis and Masimo tests and simulations
`corroborate Diab’s nexus testimony
`
`Ex. 2151 ¶261; Ex. 2103; Ex. 2128; Exs. 2135-2140;
`Ex. 2102 ¶¶40-56; POR 79; Sur-Reply 26-27
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`72
`
`
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
