`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`MASIMO CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2022-01299
`U.S. Patent 7,761,127
`
`DECLARATION OF JACK GOLDBERG
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`1.
`
`I, Jack Goldberg, am making this declaration at the request of Patent
`
`Owner Masimo Corporation (“Masimo”) in the matters of the Inter Partes Review
`
`Nos. IPR2022-01299 and IPR2022-01300 of U.S. Patent No. 7,761,127 (“the ’127
`
`patent”). I understand that this declaration is being submitted in each of these
`
`proceedings as Exhibit 2051.
`
`2.
`
`I am being compensated for my work in this matter at my standard
`
`hourly rate for consulting services. My compensation in no way depends on the
`
`outcome of this proceeding.
`
`I.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
`I am an electrical engineer, and I have more than 45 years of experience
`3.
`
`working with various types of sensors, as well as the thermal management of
`
`electronic components, including sensors and components used in medical devices.
`
`Exhibit 2052 is a copy of my curriculum vitae.
`
`4.
`
`I received my Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering and
`
`Computer Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1973 and my
`
`Master of Science degree in the same field from MIT in 1978. From 1973 to 1984 I
`
`worked as an electrical engineer at various companies and on various technologies.
`
`From 1984 to 1995, when I was an engineer at a medical device company, IVAC
`
`Corporation, I worked extensively designing medical devices which incorporated
`
`-1-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`sensors, the processing of signals produced by sensors, and the calibration of such
`
`sensors. During that time, I also researched, and in some cases developed, other
`
`medical device technologies, including the non-invasive measurement of cardiac
`
`output, various technologies for non-contact determination of fluid flow rate,
`
`microwave sensing of fluid composition, non-invasive measurement of blood
`
`glucose, and both infrared and conventional clinical thermometers. In regard to
`
`projects at IVAC, heat flow and thermal management were of particular importance
`
`in the design and calibration of clinical thermometers and in the development of a
`
`unique technology for non-contact sensing of fluid flow. In 1995, I founded my
`
`present company, Metrionix, Inc., at which I have provided engineering and
`
`consulting services
`
`focusing on sensors, control, measurement, medical
`
`instrumentation, signal processing, RF technology, communications, audio, and
`
`acoustics. My consulting work has included research and development for medical
`
`instrument manufacturers and miniature human implantable devices and associated
`
`sensing means. As a result of my education and experience, I have expertise in the
`
`design of medical sensors and in the sensing, management, and control of thermal
`
`energy in various types of electromechanical systems, including medical devices.
`
`II.
`
`RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS
`5.
`I am an electrical engineer by training and profession. The opinions I
`
`express in this Declaration involve the application of my knowledge and experience
`
`-2-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`to the evaluation of the ’127 patents and certain prior art to that patent. My
`
`knowledge of patent law is that of a lay person, albeit one who is an inventor on
`
`numerous issued U.S. patents and has consulted on patent infringement cases, and
`
`thus, has had some experience relevant to patent law. Therefore, counsel have
`
`provided me with guidance as to the applicable patent law in this matter. The
`
`paragraphs below express my understanding of the principles related to patentability
`
`that I must apply, and have applied, in conducting my analyses and reaching the
`
`opinions set forth in this Declaration.
`
`6.
`
`I understand that, in assessing the patentability of a patent claim, the
`
`Patent Office generally construes claim terms by giving them their ordinary and
`
`customary meaning, as they would have been understood by a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art (“POSITA”) at the time of the invention in view of the intrinsic record
`
`(patent specification and file history). However, I understand that the inventors may,
`
`in the patent specification, expressly define a claim term to have a meaning that
`
`differs from the term’s ordinary and customary meaning. I also understand that the
`
`inventors may disavow or disclaim certain claim scope, thereby departing from the
`
`ordinary and customary meaning, when the intrinsic record demonstrates that a clear
`
`and unambiguous disavowal or disclaimer has occurred. I understand that extrinsic
`
`evidence, such as relevant technical literature and dictionaries, may be useful in
`
`ascertaining how a POSITA would have understood a claim term, but the intrinsic
`
`-3-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`record is the primary source for determining the meaning of claim terms. For the
`
`purposes of this review, and to the extent necessary, I have interpreted each claim
`
`term in accordance with the principles set forth in this paragraph.
`
`7.
`
`It is my understanding that a claim is unpatentable as “anticipated”
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 102 if a single prior art reference discloses every limitation of the
`
`claim, arranged as in the claim. I understand that a prior art reference does not
`
`anticipate a claim, however, when it discloses multiple, distinct teachings that a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art might somehow combine to achieve the claimed
`
`invention. I understand that anticipation has not been alleged in the Petition, and,
`
`thus, is not at issue in this proceeding.
`
`8.
`
`I understand that a claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 if the
`
`claimed subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention. I also understand that an
`
`obviousness analysis takes into account the following factors, which are sometimes
`
`referred to as the Graham factors: (1) the scope and content of the prior art, (2) the
`
`differences between the claimed subject matter and the prior art, (3) the level of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, and (4) “objective indicia of non-
`
`obviousness,” also referred to as secondary considerations of non-obviousness.
`
`Those objective indicia include considerations such as whether a product covered by
`
`the claims is commercially successful due to the merits of the claimed invention,
`
`-4-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`whether there was a long felt need for the solution provided by the claimed invention,
`
`whether others failed to find the solution provided by the claimed invention, whether
`
`others copied the claimed invention, and whether there was acceptance by others of
`
`the claimed invention as shown by praise from others in the field.
`
`9.
`
`In determining the scope and content of the prior art, it is my
`
`understanding that a reference is considered appropriate prior art if it falls within the
`
`field of the inventor’s endeavor. In addition, a reference is appropriate prior art if it
`
`is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was
`
`involved. A reference is reasonably pertinent if it logically would have come to an
`
`inventor’s attention in considering his or her problem. If a prior-art reference relates
`
`to the same problem as the claimed invention, it is appropriate to use the reference
`
`in an obviousness analysis.
`
`10.
`
`To assess the differences between prior art and the claimed subject
`
`matter, it is my understanding that 35 U.S.C. § 103 requires the claimed invention
`
`to be considered as a whole. This “as a whole” assessment requires showing that
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention, confronted by the same
`
`problems as the inventor and with no knowledge of the claimed invention, would
`
`have selected the elements from the prior art and combined them in the claimed
`
`manner.
`
`-5-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`11.
`It is my further understanding that the Supreme Court has recognized
`
`several rationales for combining references or modifying a reference to show
`
`obviousness of claimed subject matter. Some of these rationales include: combining
`
`prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; simple
`
`substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; a
`
`predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions;
`
`applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for
`
`improvement to yield predictable results; choosing from a finite number of
`
`identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success; and some
`
`teaching, suggestion, or motivation that would have led one of ordinary skill to
`
`modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at
`
`the claimed invention.
`
`12.
`
`I understand that an assessment of what a reference discloses or
`
`teaches—for purposes of an anticipation analysis or an obviousness analysis—must
`
`be conducted from the perspective of a POSITA at the time of the invention. In
`
`other words, a reference discloses or teaches a claim limitation if a POSITA would,
`
`at the relevant time, interpret the reference as expressly, implicitly, or inherently
`
`disclosing the claim limitation. I further understand that a reference does not need
`
`to use the exact language of the claim to disclose a claim limitation.
`
`-6-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`III. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE RELEVANT ART
`13.
`The relevant field of art is devices and sensors for the non-invasive
`
`measurement of physiological parameters, such as carboxyhemoglobin.
`
`14.
`
`I understand that the level of ordinary skill in the art for the ’127 patent
`
`is determined as of March 1, 2005, which is the earliest effective filing date of the
`
`patent. I also understand that Apple has not alleged that the ’127 patent is entitled
`
`to an effective filing date other than March 1, 2005.
`
`15.
`
`I understand that Apple has proposed the following definition of a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art (a “POSITA”) with respect to the ’127 patent:
`
`For purposes of this IPR, Petitioner submits that a person of ordinary
`skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention (“POSITA”) would
`have had a Bachelor of Science degree in an academic discipline
`emphasizing the design of electrical and thermal 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 physiological monitoring technologies. Alternatively, the
`person 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.
`
`Pet., 7-8.
`
`16.
`
`I disagree with Apple’s definition because it would require a POSITA
`
`to have a degree in an academic discipline emphasizing both electrical and thermal
`
`technologies. I am not aware of such an academic discipline being available at the
`
`relevant time. However, a POSITA’s training or work experience would have
`
`-7-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`included thermal management of electrical systems. Accordingly, in my view, the
`
`correct definition of a POSITA is as follows:
`
` A POSITA at the time of the invention would have had a Bachelor of
`Science degree in an academic discipline emphasizing the design of
`electrical systems, in combination with training or at least one to two
`years of related work experience with thermal management of electrical
`systems and capture and processing of data or information, including
`physiological monitoring technologies. Alternatively, the person 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.
`
`I applied my definition of a POSITA in my analysis set forth in this declaration.
`
`However, I alternatively applied Apple’s definition of a POSITA and determined
`
`that my opinions are the same under either definition. Specifically, as explained
`
`fully below, in my opinion the challenged claims of the ’127 patent would not have
`
`been obvious to a POSITA under either my definition or Apple’s definition.
`
`17.
`
`I understand the capabilities of a POSITA as of March 2005. Indeed, I
`
`possessed those capabilities myself before, during, and after that time. As an
`
`electrical engineer for over four decades, with significant experience working with
`
`sensors and thermal management of sensors, I understand the level of knowledge
`
`and skill that a POSITA would have possessed in March 2005. Through my
`
`experiences, I am familiar with what a POSITA would have understood regarding
`
`non-invasive physiological measurement devices at the relevant time.
`
`-8-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`IV. THE ’127 PATENT
`A.
`Pulse Oximetry
`18.
`The ’127 patent relates generally to physiological sensors that emit light
`
`at multiple wavelengths into a patient’s tissue and detect the light after it has been
`
`attenuated by the tissue to determine physiological parameters of the patient. Pulse
`
`oximetry is one example of a technology that uses such physiological sensors. See
`
`EX1001, 2:14–45.
`
`19.
`
`Pulse oximetry systems non-invasively determine
`
`the oxygen
`
`saturation levels of an individual’s arterial blood. During respiration, oxygen in the
`
`lungs binds with hemoglobin molecules within blood. See generally DESIGN OF
`
`PULSE OXIMETERS, Webster J.G (ed.) (1997) (“Webster”) (EX2053), 6-10. The
`
`circulatory system transports that oxygen saturated blood through the human body
`
`through arteries. Id. The surge of blood flow entering the arteries causes a pulse
`
`(referred to as the pulsatile flow of blood), whereas venous blood returning from the
`
`capillaries is largely nonpulsatile. Id. Pulse oximetry technology relies on
`
`differences in light absorption of oxygen-bound and oxygen-unbound hemoglobin.
`
`Id., 13-14.
`
`-9-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`20. A typical pulse oximeter includes red and infrared (IR) light-emitting
`
`diode (LED) emitters and one or more photodiode detectors.1 Id., 34-36. Pulse
`
`oximetry determines oxygen saturation by comparing the light absorbance of
`
`oxygenated hemoglobin and deoxygenated hemoglobin at
`
`two different
`
`wavelengths. Id., 13-14. Bright red oxygenated blood absorbs light differently than
`
`dark red deoxygenated blood. Id., 40-46. The ratio of light absorbed at red
`
`wavelengths compared to light absorbed at infrared wavelengths indicates the
`
`percentage of hemoglobin carrying oxygen. Id. That is known as oxygen saturation.
`
`21. As the blood flow pulsates, it changes, or modulates, the light
`
`absorption. Id., 14. The pulse oximeter tracks the changes in light absorbance as
`
`the blood pulsates. Id., 34.
`
`22.
`
`The ’127 patent describe two ways to track the changes in light
`
`absorbance as the blood pulsates: transmittance and reflectance. EX1001, 5:23-41.
`
`Because light both transmits through tissue and backscatters or reflects back after
`
`entering tissue, pulse oximeter sensors can operate either by transmittance or
`
`reflectance. That is, for pulse oximeter sensors operating by transmittance, the
`
`1 The light sources in most claims of the ’127 patent are not limited to LEDs.
`
`However, because light-based physiological sensors often use LEDs, and for
`
`conciseness, I refer to the light sources as LEDs.
`
`-10-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`detector (sometimes referred to as a photodiode) and emitter are on opposite sides
`
`of the tissue at the measurement site. See also EX2053, 36. For pulse oximeter
`
`sensors operating by reflectance, a detector is placed on the same side as the emitters.
`
`Id. Both methods are illustrated below.
`
`23.
`
`Light traveling through the measurement site is absorbed by various
`
`substances such as skin pigmentation, bones, tissue, and the arterial and venous
`
`blood. Id., 46-47. The resulting light absorption at the detector also varies due to
`
`the blood volume change of arterial blood. The detector(s) generate an output signal
`
`proportional to the intensity of the detected light. The illustration below shows
`
`detected signals corresponding to two different light sources.
`
`24.
`
`LEDs have been commonly used in pulse oximeter sensors. However,
`
`other light sources have also been utilized, including laser diodes. According to the
`
`-11-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (“SPIE”)2 and understood by a
`
`POSITA, the light emitted by an LED is not light of a single wavelength
`
`(monochromatic), but includes a narrow band of wavelengths characterized by a
`
`peak wavelength. Unlike laser light, which is monochromatic, LED light has a
`
`spectral shape, such as shown below in the figure below, which is Fig. 10A of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,758,644 (“the ’644 patent”) (EX2026), assigned to Masimo. In Figure
`
`10A, the x-axis is the wavelength of light (“λ”) and the y-axis is the intensity of light.
`
`The emission spectrum 440 of Figure 10A is an example of narrowband emission
`
`with an approximately Gaussian spectral shape.
`
`2 “LEDs are moderately narrowband emitters with an approximately Gaussian
`spectral shape. The spectrum of an LED is often expressed by a single wavelength,
`with four different single-wavelength descriptions in general use. The most common
`spectrum-based description is the peak wavelength, λp, which is the wavelength of
`the peak of the spectral density curve. Less common is the center wavelength, λ0 5m,
`which is the wavelength halfway between the two points with a spectral density of
`50% of the peak. For a symmetrical spectrum, the peak and center wavelengths are
`identical. However, many LEDs have slightly asymmetrical spectra. Least common
`is the centroid wavelength, λc, which is the mean wavelength. The peak, center, and
`centroid wavelengths are all derived from a plot of Sλ(λ) versus λ. The fourth
`description, the dominant wavelength, λd, is a colorimetric quantity that is described
`in the section on color. It is the most important description in visual illumination
`systems because it describes the perceived color of the LED.” A. V. Arecchi, T.
`Messadi, and R. J. Koshel, Field Guide to Illumination, SPIE Press, Bellingham,
`WA (2007) (EX2054), page 26.
`
`-12-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`EX2026, Fig. 10A. Also shown below are similar emission spectra from two LED
`
`datasheets, including a red LED manufactured by Fairchild Semiconductor and
`
`available at the time of filing of the ’127 patent, and another LED incorporated
`
`within an integrated circuit specifically intended for pulse oximetry applications,
`
`OSRAM’s model SFH7050, Figures 2 and 3, respectively.
`
`FIG. 2: Excerpt from p. 3 of Fairchild Semiconductor “Double Heterojunction
`AlGaAs Low Current Red LED Lamps,” datasheet DS300012, Feb. 27, 2001
`(EX2055)
`
`-13-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`FIG. 3: Excerpt from p. 11 of OSRAM SFH7050 Ver 1.1 Datasheet, Apr. 20, 2016
`(EX2056)
`
`25.
`
`The peak wavelength shown in both Figure 2 and Figure 3 is near 660
`
`nm, a wavelength in the range commonly used for the measurement of blood oxygen
`
`saturation. See, e.g., EX2026, 8:34-43. Further, both Figures 2 and 3 and the
`
`specifications accompanying those figures in their respective datasheets note that the
`
`peak wavelength shown is at an ambient temperature of 25oC and at a specific drive
`
`current. A POSITA would also understand that the term “nominal wavelength” as
`
`used in the ’127 patent refers to peak wavelength of the emitter’s emission spectrum
`
`when measured under certain specific conditions, such as at a given drive current
`
`and at a given ambient temperature. See, e.g., EX1001, 8:28-30; 8:35-39 (the
`
`emission spectrum of an LED is “centered around a nominal wavelength”).
`
`-14-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`26. An accurate measurement by a light-based sensor such as a pulse
`
`oximeter relies on the system knowing the wavelength of light emitted by each of
`
`the LEDs during the actual physiological measurement process. Each LED is
`
`designed and manufactured to emit light of a specific “nominal” or “centroid”
`
`wavelength when measured under certain conditions. For example, a red LED may
`
`have a nominal wavelength of 660 nm and an infrared LED may have a nominal
`
`wavelength of 905 nm. See EX1001, 7:43–8:10, Table 1 (showing LEDs with
`
`multiple nominal wavelengths). However, under operating conditions, the actual
`
`“operating” wavelength of an LED may vary from its nominal wavelength. For
`
`example, an LED’s operating wavelength varies with the LED’s junction
`
`temperature. See id., 6:60–62 (operating wavelength determined as function of
`
`temperature). The junction temperature of an LED is the temperature at the “p-n
`
`junction” of the LED, which is the junction between positive and negative
`
`semiconductor regions of the LED. An LED’s operating wavelengths also varies
`
`with the drive current supplied to the LED. See id., 2:62-65. Significant wavelength
`
`shift caused by temperature variation could produce inaccurate results in a light-
`
`based sensor that does not compensate for wavelength shift.
`
`-15-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`B.
`The Claimed Invention
`27.
`I have reviewed the Declaration of Mohamed Diab, which I understand
`
`is being submitted as Exhibit 2001 in these IPRs. That declaration sets forth
`
`Masimo’s development process of the invention claimed in the ’127 patent.
`
`28.
`
`-16-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`29.
`
`30.
`
`-17-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`31.
`
`-18-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`32.
`
`33.
`
`Each claim of the ’127 patent includes a thermal mass disposed within
`
`the substrate thermally coupled to the LEDs and a temperature sensor. The
`
`temperature sensor measures a temperature that the sensor uses to estimate the
`
`-19-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`operating wavelengths of all LEDs. EX1001, 10:22-48. All independent claims but
`
`claim 20 recite that the measured temperature is a “bulk temperature.” The ’127
`
`patent explains the thermal mass stabilizes the bulk temperature “so that the
`
`thermistor measurement of bulk temperature is meaningful.” Id., 10:67-11:4. In the
`
`context of the ’127 patent, the bulk temperature is meaningful because it allows
`
`reliable estimation of the LED operating wavelengths. Id., 10:32-39, Claim 7. The
`
`invention allows the measurement of carboxyhemoglobin, “oxygen saturation[,] and
`
`pulse rate with increased accuracy or robustness.” EX1001, 5:5-22.
`
`34. A POSITA would understand the ’127 patent’s disclosure that the
`
`thermal mass stabilizes the bulk temperature “so that the thermistor measurement of
`
`bulk temperature is meaningful” (id., 10:67-11:4) to be consistent with Mr. Diab’s
`
`explanation that the bulk temperature of the thermal mass is not constant or uniform
`
`and it correlates with but does not perfectly track LED temperatures. Indeed, a
`
`POSITA would understand that the bulk temperature of the thermal mass needs to
`
`change (i.e., it cannot be constant) to correlate with (but not perfectly track) the LED
`
`temperatures to be a “meaningful” measurement for reliably estimating LED
`
`wavelengths. A POSITA would further understand that the thermal mass would not
`
`have a uniform temperature because, during operation, the multiple LEDs will inject
`
`heat into different locations of the thermal mass and the heat will be distributed over
`
`-20-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`time such that temperature variations at different portions of the thermal mass are
`
`inevitable.
`
`35. As Diab explains, and as a POSITA would understand in view of the
`
`specification, for the claimed invention to work, the thermal mass needs to be
`
`properly designed so that the measured bulk temperature of the thermal mass can be
`
`used to reliably estimate the operating wavelengths of the LEDs. Proper design
`
`involves achieving a balance between conducting heat energy from the LEDs to the
`
`thermistor so that the measured temperature will track changes to LED temperature
`
`and storing heat energy so that the measured temperature will not fluctuate too much
`
`and be inaccurate. A circuit board that stores too much or too little heat energy or
`
`that is too thermally conductive or not thermally conductive enough would not
`
`function as the claimed thermal mass. Accordingly, even if off-the-shelf multi-layer
`
`metallized circuit boards were available for use in a light-based sensor, a POSITA
`
`would not expect such an off-the-shelf circuit board to act as the claimed thermal
`
`mass.
`
`36.
`
`The Examiner allowed the claims of the ’127 patent over prior-art pulse
`
`oximeters that used temperature sensors to compensate for wavelength shift but did
`
`not measure a bulk temperature of a thermal mass. One prior-art pulse oximeter the
`
`Examiner analyzed in detail is Cheung. Shown below is an annotated figure from
`
`Cheung.
`
`-21-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`EX1001, Fig. 11 (annotated). A POSITA would understand this figure as showing
`
`a temperature sensor 50 and LEDs 40, 42 mounted to a substrate (the component in
`
`blue) that has some mass disposed within it. Cheung alleges that its temperature
`
`sensor when used with a coding resistor can be used to accurately determine the
`
`LEDs wavelengths. EX1007, 13:20-33. However, the Examiner found that Cheung
`
`does not have a thermal mass disposed within a substrate. EX1002, 73. Thus,
`
`Cheung’s temperature sensor cannot measure a bulk temperature of a thermal mass.
`
`Indeed, Cheung expressly discloses that its temperature sensor measures the ambient
`
`temperature of the sensor assembly. EX1007, 13:26-27, 19:31-33.
`
`-22-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`37. Despite asserting accuracy, because Cheung lacked the claimed thermal
`
`mass and measured ambient temperature instead of the bulk temperature of the
`
`thermal mass, Cheung could not have achieved the superior accuracy that has driven
`
`the commercial success of Masimo’s rainbow® sensors. Indeed, multiple prior-art
`
`references, including Webster (describing Cheung) and Huiki, discouraged the use
`
`of temperature sensors as unreliable and encouraged the use of alternative methods
`
`known to be more reliable. Accordingly, without taking advantage of hindsight in
`
`view of the Masimo inventors’ extensive research and development of a properly
`
`designed thermal mass, a POSITA could not reasonably have expected that
`
`measuring a bulk temperature of a thermal mass and using the measured bulk
`
`temperature to estimate multiple LED operating wavelengths would produce a
`
`reliable result.
`
`V.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`A.
`“thermal mass” (claims 1, 7, 13, 20, and 26)
`I was asked to assess the meaning of “thermal mass,” as used in claims
`38.
`
`1, 7, 13, 20, and 26, to a POSITA. In my opinion, a POSITA would understand
`
`“thermal mass” to be a mass that provides a bulk temperature that can be used to
`
`reliably estimate LED wavelengths. The claim language and specification of the
`
`’127 patent support my opinion.
`
`-23-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`39.
`The claims that recite a “thermal mass” also recite a “temperature
`
`sensor thermally coupled to the thermal mass.” In my view, the thermal coupling of
`
`the temperature sensor to the thermal mass would suggest to a POSITA that the
`
`temperature sensor measures a temperature of the thermal mass. Further, the claims
`
`indicate that the measured temperature is a “bulk temperature,” as summarized
`
`below:
`
` Claims 1 and 26 recite that the thermal mass “stabilize[s] a bulk
`
`temperature” and the LED “wavelengths are determinable as a function of
`
`… the bulk temperature.”
`
` Claim 7 recites a “temperature sensor” that measures “a bulk temperature
`
`for the thermal mass” and “the operating wavelengths [are] dependent on
`
`the bulk temperature.”
`
` Claim 13 recites “determining a plurality of operating wavelengths of the
`
`light emitting sources dependent on a bulk temperature.”
`
` Claim 20 and its dependent claim 21 recite “indicating an operating
`
`wavelength for each of the plurality of light emitting sources” and
`
`“wherein the indicating step comprises measuring a bulk temperature.”
`
`The foregoing claim language supports that the claimed “thermal mass” provides a
`
`bulk temperature that can be used to reliably estimate LED wavelengths.
`
`-24-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`40.
`The specification describes several aspects of the “thermal mass,”
`
`including that the thermal mass is:
`
` within the substrate (EX1001, Fig. 12)
`
` disposed proximate the emitters so as to stabilize a bulk temperature for
`
`the emitters (id., 10:24-26)
`
` thermally coupled to a temperature sensor that provides a bulk temperature
`
`so that the wavelengths are determinable as a function of the drive currents
`
`and the bulk temperature (id., 10:26-31)
`
` relatively significant so as to stabilize and normalize the bulk temperature
`
`so that the thermistor measurement of bulk temperature is meaningful (id.,
`
`10:67-11:4).
`
`41.
`
`The specification also describes an embodiment in which “substantial
`
`metallized areas” provide the “thermal mass.” Id., 11:10-13. The annotated
`
`drawings below, based on Figures 14 and 18 of the ’127 patent, depict inner layers
`
`with metallized areas that stabilize a bulk temperature. Id.
`
`-25-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`See id., Figs. 14, 18 (annotated).
`
`42.
`
`The ’127 patent also discloses that LEDs are mounted to a component
`
`end of one side of the substrate and a thermistor is mounted to the component end
`
`of the other side:
`
`See id., Figs. 15 & 16 (annotated). The LEDs are mounted on component pads and
`
`wire bond pads. Id., 11:16-20. Substrate layers have traces that electrically connect
`
`the component pads and wire bond pads to the connectors 1532-1534. Id., 11:25-
`
`-26-
`
`MASIMO 2051
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01300
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299 & IPR2022-01300
`Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`28. The thermistor is also mounted to pads. Id., 11:28-30. Plated thru holes
`
`electrically connect the connector pads on the component and solder sides. Id.,
`
`11:31-33. Thus, the inner layers, LEDs and thermistor are thermally coupled
`
`through the metallized areas, plated thru holes, component pads, and wire bond pads.
`
`43.
`
`The ’127 file history also supports my opinion. The Examiner allowed
`
`claims of the ’127 patent over Cheung. EX1002, 68-75. Cheung discloses a
`
`traditional finger-attached