`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Medivis, Inc.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Novarad Corp.
`Patent Owner
`
`Case IPR2023-00042
`US Patent No. 11,004,271
`
`SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF CRAIG S. ROSENBERG, PH.D.
`
`In Support of Patent Owner Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(2)
`
`
`
`1
`
`Page 1 of 4
`
`Ex. 2008
`Medivis v. Novarad
`IPR 2023-00042
`
`
`
`1.
`
`I have read Petitioner’s Objections to Exhibits Filed with Patent
`
`Owner Response (Paper 13) (“Petitioner’s Objections”) and provide additional
`
`comments with respect to this action.
`
`EXPERTISE IN THE RELEVANT FIELD
`
`2.
`
`I agree with Petitioner that “systems and methods for using
`
`augmented reality during medical procedures” is the relevant field.
`
`RELEVANT TIME PERIOD
`
`3.
`
`I also agree with Petitioner that the relevant time period for the ’271
`
`Patent is on or before March 30, 2017.
`
`PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART (“POSITA”)
`
`4.
`
`Petitioner asserts “the hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`at the time … (POSA) [aka POSITA] would be ‘a person with a bachelor’s degree
`
`in computer science, electrical engineering, or a related field with several years of
`
`experience in the design, development, and study of augmented reality devices
`
`either (a) familiar with conventional medical imaging data and visualization of data
`
`for medical procedures or (b) working with a team including someone with such
`
`familiarity.’” Petition at 10 (quoting Kazanzides Decl., Ex. 1012, ¶ 25).
`
`5.
`
`I agree that a POSITA would be a person with several years of
`
`experience in the design, development, and study of augmented reality
`
`environments—however, not necessarily augmented reality devices. Although the
`
`
`
`2
`
`Page 2 of 4
`
`Ex. 2008
`Medivis v. Novarad
`IPR 2023-00042
`
`
`
`’271 Patent claims the use of an augmented reality headset, the focus of the claims
`
`is more about software rather than hardware. For this reason, I stated in my
`
`declaration that a POSITA would include someone with a degree in human factors
`
`or human-computer interaction, which I would argue is a field related to electrical
`
`engineering and computer science. See Ex. 2004 at ¶ 42.
`
`6.
`
`As I stated in my declaration, “[a] POSITA at the time of the ’271
`
`Patent would include someone with a degree in human factors or human-computer
`
`interaction.” Ex. 2004 at ¶ 42. This is because, perhaps even more so than
`
`electrical and computer science engineers, “[h]uman factors professionals play a
`
`crucial role in the design and development of AR systems to ensure they are user
`
`friendly, effective, and safe.” Id. A human factors professional understands
`
`uniquely well the types of problems encountered in designing and developing AR
`
`environments. See Ex. 2007 at 1-3.
`
`7.
`
`As I stated in my declaration, I have “over 30 years of experience
`
`designing and implementing virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR)
`
`environments.” Ex. 2004 at ¶ 37. I am certainly qualified to provide expert
`
`opinions related to the user interface(s) and augmented reality environment(s)
`
`claimed in the ’271 Patent.
`
`
`
`3
`
`Page 3 of 4
`
`Ex. 2008
`Medivis v. Novarad
`IPR 2023-00042
`
`
`
`RULE 26 REQUIREMENTS
`
`8.
`
`I have attached to this declaration as Exhibit 2007 an updated CV that
`
`includes a current list of all cases in which I have provided expert testimony by
`
`way of deposition or at trial. Ex. 2007 at 4-5. Exhibit 2007 also includes a current
`
`list of all my publications. Ex. 2007 at 3-4.
`
`I hereby declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are
`
`true and that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true;
`
`and further that these statements were made with the knowledge that willful false
`
`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both,
`
`under § 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`Date: 8/8/2023
`
`Craig Rosenberg, Ph.D.
`
`
`
`4
`
`Page 4 of 4
`
`Ex. 2008
`Medivis v. Novarad
`IPR 2023-00042
`
`
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
