`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ALIVECOR, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case No. IPR2023-00950
`U.S. Patent No. 10,076,257 B2
`____________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §312 AND 37 C.F.R. §42.104
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`US Patent and Trademark Office
`PO Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`V.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`LIST OF EXHIBITS .............................................................................................. vi
`I.
`STANDING UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.104(a) ................................................ 1
`II.
`PAYMENT OF FEES .................................................................................. 1
`III. OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGES AND RELIEF REQUESTED ........... 1
`IV.
`’257 PATENT SUMMARY ......................................................................... 1
`A.
`SPECIFICATION ......................................................................................... 2
`B.
`PROSECUTION HISTORY ........................................................................... 3
`C. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................ 4
`PRIOR ART .................................................................................................. 5
`A. MARKEL (EX. 1005) ................................................................................. 6
`B. NISSILÄ (EX. 1006) .................................................................................. 6
`C. RIGHTER (EX. 1007) ................................................................................ 6
`VI. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ....................................... 6
`VII. ARGUMENT ................................................................................................. 7
`A. GROUND 1: CLAIMS 1-22 ARE UNPATENTABLE UNDER 35 U.S.C.
`§103 OVER MARKEL ................................................................................. 7
`B. GROUND 2: CLAIMS 1-22 ARE UNPATENTABLE UNDER 35 U.S.C.
`§103 OVER MARKEL IN VIEW OF NISSILÄ ................................................69
`C. GROUND 3: CLAIMS 12-13 AND 19 ARE UNPATENTABLE AS OBVIOUS
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §103 OVER MARKEL IN VIEW OF NISSILÄ AND/OR
`RIGHTER .................................................................................................84
`VIII. PRIOR ART NOT PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED TO THE
`OFFICE ....................................................................................................... 91
`IX. THE FINTIV FACTORS FAVOR INSTITUTION ................................ 91
`X. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 94
`XI. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8 .............................. 95
`A. REAL PARTY IN INTEREST UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8(B)(1) ......................95
`
`ii
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`B. RELATED MATTERS UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8(B)(2) ...............................95
`C. DESIGNATION OF COUNSEL UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.8(B)(3) ....................95
`D.
`SERVICE INFORMATION..........................................................................97
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Page(s)
`
`
`CASES
`Adobe, Inc. v. Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC,
`IPR2019-00712, Paper 9 (PTAB Sept. 12, 2019) ............................................... 91
`Apple Inc. v. AliveCor, Inc.,
`Case 4:22-cv-07608-HSG ................................................................................... 95
`Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc.,
`IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020) ............................................. 92
`CommScope Technologies LLC v. Dali Wireless, Inc.,
`IPR2022-01242, Paper 23 (PTAB Feb. 27, 2023) .............................................. 93
`Kennametal, Inc. v. Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co.,
`780 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2015) .......................................................................... 36
`Sand Revolution II, LLC v. Cont’l Intermodal Grp. - Trucking LLC,
`IPR2019-01393, Paper 24 (PTAB June 16, 2020) ....................................... 92, 93
`Shoes by Firebug v. Stride Rite Children’s Group,
`962 F.3d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2020) ............................................................................ 5
`STATUTES
`35 U.S.C. §102(a) ...................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §102(b) ...................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §103 ........................................................................................... 1, 7, 69, 84
`35 U.S.C. §311–319 ................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. §325(d) .................................................................................................... 91
`OTHER AUTHORITIES
`37 C.F.R. §42 ............................................................................................................. 1
`37 C.F.R. §§42.6(e), 42.105 ....................................................................................... 8
`
`iv
`
`

`

`
`
`37 C.F.R. §42.8 ........................................................................................................ 95
`37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(1) ............................................................................................... 95
`37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(2) ............................................................................................... 95
`37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(3) ............................................................................................... 95
`37 C.F.R §42.10(b) .................................................................................................. 96
`37 C.F.R. §42.24 ........................................................................................................ 7
`37 C.F.R. §42.104(a) .................................................................................................. 1
`37 CFR §42.24(a)(i) ................................................................................................... 7
`U.S. Patent No. 10,866,257 ...............................................................................passim
`U.S. Patent No. 10,866,619 ...................................................................................... 95
`
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`

`

`
`
`Exhibit
`Ex. 1001
`
`Ex. 1002
`
`Ex. 1003
`
`Ex. 1004
`
`Ex. 1005
`
`Ex. 1006
`
`Ex. 1007
`
`Ex. 1008
`
`Ex. 1009
`
`Ex. 1010
`
`Ex. 1011
`
`Ex. 1012
`
`Ex. 1013
`
`Ex. 1014
`
`Ex. 1015
`
`Ex. 1016
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`Short Name
`’257 Patent
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 10,076,257 B2
`
`’257 File History Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No.
`10,076,257 B2
`
`Berger
`Declaration
`
`Declaration of Dr. Ronald D. Berger
`
`Berger CV
`
`Curriculum vitae of Dr. Ronald Berger
`
`Markel
`
`Nissilä
`
`Righter
`
`U.S. Patent Appl. No. 11/492,278
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,775,566
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,191,891
`
`Farringdon
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,502,643
`
`Cardiology
`Explained
`
`EUAN A. ASHLEY & JOSEF NIEBAUER,
`CARDIOLOGY EXPLAINED (2004)
`
`Cudahy
`
`Sujdak
`
`Geddes
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,184,620
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,847,836
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,606,352
`
`Ceballos
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,522,915
`
`Gilles
`
`Weiss
`
`Apple’s
`Complaint
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,635,646
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,623,926
`
`Complaint, Apple Inc. v. AliveCor, Inc., Case
`No. 4:22-cv-07608-HSG, Dkt. No. 1 (N.D.
`Cal., Dec. 12, 2022)
`
`Ex. 1017
`
`Hobson
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,876,274
`
`vi
`
`

`

`
`
`Exhibit
`
`Ex. 1018
`
`Short Name
`
`National Judicial
`Caseload Profile
`
`Description
`
`U.S. District Courts – National Judicial
`Caseload Profile (accessed via
`https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/f
`cms_na_distprofile0331.2022.pdf)
`
`vii
`
`

`

`
`
`AliveCor, Inc. (“Petitioner”) seeks IPR under 35 U.S.C. §§311-319 and 37
`
`C.F.R. §42 of Claims 1-22 (“the Challenged Claims”) of Patent No. 10,076,257
`
`(“the ’257 Patent”). Petitioner requests cancellation of the Challenged Claims.
`
`I.
`
`STANDING UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.104(a)
`
`Petitioner certifies that the ’257 Patent is available for IPR and that Petitioner
`
`is not barred or estopped from requesting IPR.
`
`II.
`
`PAYMENT OF FEES
`
`Petitioner authorizes Account No. 16-0605 to be charged.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGES AND RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Pursuant to 42.22(a)(1) and 42.104(b)(1)-(2), Petitioner requests cancellation
`
`of the Challenged Claims pursuant to the grounds below. Additional support is
`
`provided in the Declaration of Dr. Berger (Ex. 1003 (“Berger Declaration”)).
`
`Ground 1: Claims 1-22 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §103 over
`
`Markel.
`
`Ground 2: Claims 1-22 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §103 over
`
`Markel in view of Nissilä.
`
`Ground 3: Claims 12-13 and 19 are unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`§103 over Markel in view of Righter.
`
`IV.
`
`’257 PATENT SUMMARY
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`
`
`A. Specification
`
`The ’257 Patent relates generally to a heart rate monitor in an electronic device
`
`(see Ex. 1001, Abstract; Ex. 1003, ¶52). The electronic device includes “at least two
`
`leads that the user contacts in order to detect the user’s cardiac signals” (Ex. 1001,
`
`1:56-58, 2:38-42). The ’257 Patent purports to solve alleged problems relating to the
`
`physical placement of these leads by disclosing an electronic device with “a
`
`seamlessly integrated cardiac sensor” (Ex. 1001, 2:7-8; Ex. 1003. ¶53). “[T]he leads
`
`can be exposed such that the user may directly contact the leads or may instead or in
`
`addition be coupled to an electrically conductive portion of the device enclosure” so
`
`that the lead is positioned underneath the bezel (Ex. 1001, 2:45-50, Figs. 4A, 4B;
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶53).
`
`Ex. 1001, Figs. 4A, 4B (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
` “Leads 322 and 324, which can include conductive pads, can be coupled to
`
`sides 312 and 314 of bezel 310, respectively” and “electronic device 300 can include
`
`additional lead 326 embedded in or behind display 302” (Ex. 1001, 8:20-21,
`
`8:40-41; Ex. 1003, ¶54).
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1001, Fig. 3 (annotated)
`
`
`
`B. Prosecution History
`
`
`
`Application Number 14/136,658 was filed on December 20, 2013 (Ex. 1001,
`
`Cover). On June 19, 2015, the Examiner rejected all pending claims in view of
`
`Ceballos (Ex. 1013) (Ex. 1002, 173, 176-180; Ex. 1003, ¶59).
`
`In response, the Applicant amended the claims (Ex. 1002, 199-205; Ex. 1003,
`
`¶60). Applicant explained Ceballos did not disclose the amended claim language
`
`because Ceballos disclosed an exposed electrode that was not “positioned
`
`underneath the exterior surface” of the enclosure (Ex. 1002, 209-210; Ex. 1003,
`
`¶64). Applicant referred to the ’257 Patent’s Figure 4B as an example of the
`
`amended claim language in the first independent claim. (Ex. 1002, 208-209;
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶61).
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1001, Fig. 4B (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`Next, the Examiner issued a Final Rejection, rejecting all pending claims in
`
`view of Gilles (Ex. 1014; Ex. 1002, 217-220; Ex. 1003, ¶68). In response, Applicant
`
`traversed the rejection and argued that the amended claims requiring a pad
`
`“positioned underneath the exterior surface of the first portion” avoided Gilles
`
`(Ex. 1002, 274; Ex. 1003, ¶70-71).
`
`The Examiner issued another Final Rejection rejecting all pending claims in
`
`view of Weiss (Ex. 1015; Ex. 1002, 300-301; Ex. 1003, ¶72). In response, Applicant
`
`traversed the rejection (Ex. 1002, 316; Ex. 1003, ¶73). The Examiner issued a Notice
`
`of Allowance on May 22, 2018 (Ex. 1003, ¶56–74).
`
`C. Claim Construction
`
`The language “An electronic device for detecting a user’s cardiac signal” in
`
`elements [1.pre] and [15.pre] is limiting and should receive its plain and ordinary
`
`meaning (Ex. 1003, ¶¶75-77).
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`
`
`A preamble limits the invention if it recites essential structure or steps, or if it
`
`is necessary to give life, meaning, and vitality to the claim. Shoes by Firebug v.
`
`Stride Rite Children’s Group, 962 F.3d 1362, 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2020). Dependence on
`
`a particular disputed preamble phrase for antecedent basis may limit claim scope
`
`because it indicates a reliance on both the preamble and claim body to define the
`
`claimed invention. Id.
`
`Here, the language “An electronic device for detecting a user’s cardiac signal”
`
`in [1.pre] and [15.pre] provides antecedent basis that defines language in the claim
`
`body. For example, [1.pre] and [15.pre] each recite “a user’s cardiac signal,” which
`
`is referred back to later in the claim bodies as “the user’s cardiac signal” (Ex. 1003,
`
`¶77)1. The phrase “a user” in [1.pre] and [15.pre] is referred back to in the claim
`
`bodies as part of “the user’s skin’s contact” (Ex. 1003, ¶77). As another example,
`
`[15.pre] recites “An electronic device,” which is referred back to later in the claim
`
`body as “the electronic device” (Ex. 1003, ¶77). Consequently, a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would have understood that the language “An electronic device for
`
`detecting a user’s cardiac signal” in [1.pre] and [15.pre] is limiting and should
`
`receive its plain and ordinary meaning (Ex. 1003, ¶77).
`
`V.
`
`PRIOR ART
`
`
`
` All emphasis is added unless otherwise noted.
`
`- 5 -
`
` 1
`
`

`

`
`
`A. Markel (Ex. 1005)
`
`Publication No. 2007/0021677 (“Markel,” Ex. 1005) published on January 25,
`
`2007 (Ex. 1005, Cover; see also Ex. 1003, ¶¶78-86). Markel is prior art under at
`
`least 35 U.S.C. §102(a) and §102(b) (pre-AIA) (Ex. 1003, ¶79).
`
`B. Nissilä (Ex. 1006)
`
`Patent No. 6,775,566 (“Nissilä,” Ex. 1006) issued on August 10, 2004
`
`(Ex. 1006, Cover; see also Ex. 1003, ¶¶87-91). Nissilä is prior art under at least 35
`
`U.S.C. §102(b) (pre-AIA) (Ex. 1003, ¶88).
`
`C. Righter (Ex. 1007)
`
`Patent No. 5,191,891 (“Righter,” Ex. 1007) issued on March 9, 1993
`
`(Ex. 1007, Cover; see also Ex. 1003, ¶¶92-100). Meyers is prior art under at least 35
`
`U.S.C. §102(b) (pre-AIA) (Ex. 1003, ¶93).
`
`VI. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) at the time of the alleged
`
`invention of the ’257 Patent would have been a person with a working knowledge
`
`of physiological monitoring technologies, a Bachelor of Science degree in an
`
`academic discipline emphasizing the design of electrical, computer, or software
`
`technologies, and 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
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`
`
`physiological monitoring technologies (Ex. 1003, ¶38). More education can
`
`supplement practical experience and vice versa (Ex. 1003, ¶38).
`
`VII. ARGUMENT
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1-22 Are Unpatentable Under 35 U.S.C. §103
`over Markel
`
`Markel renders obvious claims 1-22 of the ’257 Patent (Ex. 1003, ¶¶101-349).
`
`1. Claim 1
`
`i.
`
`[1.pre]: An electronic device for detecting a user’s
`cardiac signal, comprising:
`Markel renders obvious [1.pre] (Ex. 1003, ¶¶102-107).
`
`Markel discloses “[a] general-purpose mobile communication device,
`
`general-purpose computer user-interface device, and other non-health-related
`
`electronic devices with cardiovascular monitoring capability” (Ex. 1005, Abstract,
`
`[0004], [0060]; Ex. 1003, ¶103). Markel teaches “various aspects of the present
`
`invention may also be applied to other electronic devices” (Ex. 1005, [0080], [0099],
`
`[0125], [0154]; Ex. 1003, ¶104).
`
` Figure 1 illustrates a mobile communication device 100. (Ex. 1005, [0006],
`
`[0033], Figs. 1, 4-9; Ex. 1003, ¶105).
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 1 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`ii.
`[1.a]: an enclosure;
`Markel renders obvious [1.a] (Ex. 1003, ¶¶108-110; see also Ex. 1005,
`
`Figs. 1, 4, 6 (annotated)).
`
`Ex. 1005, Figs. 1, 4, 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`Markel discloses a “main body portion 110” (green), which corresponds to
`
`the claimed “enclosure” of [1.a] (Ex. 1003, ¶109). Markel discloses that “mobile
`
`communication device 100 (‘MCD’) may comprise a main body portion 110”
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`
`
`(Ex. 1005, [0034], Fig. 1; Ex. 1003, ¶109; see also Ex. 1005, [0053], [0054], [0056],
`
`[0076], [0077]). Markel describes the main body portion as “compris[ing] the
`
`portion of the [mobile communication device] that is generally held in the hand of
`
`the user during normal use of the [mobile communication device]” (Ex. 1005,
`
`[0043]; see also id. [0064]; Ex. 1003, ¶109).
`
`iii.
`
`[1.b]: a heart sensor configured to detect the user’s
`cardiac signal,
`Markel renders obvious [1.b] (Ex. 1003, ¶¶111-114; see also Ex. 1005,
`
`Fig. 10 annotated).
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 10 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`Markel discloses components (red) that correspond to the claimed “heart
`
`sensor configured to detect the user’s cardiac signal” (Ex. 1003, ¶112). Markel
`
`discloses that “mobile communication device 1000” includes “a first electrode 1020
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`
`
`and a second electrode 1022 (and, for example, a third or Nth electrode 1024)”
`
`(Ex. 1005, [0058]; Ex. 1003, ¶112). Markel further discloses that the electronic
`
`device utilizes electrodes “to detect and acquire various cardiac (i.e., heart-related)
`
`signals from a user” (Ex. 1005, [0058]; see also id., [0060]; Ex. 1003, ¶112).
`
`Markel further discloses an electronic device that “comprise[s] at least one
`
`cardiac sensor (e.g., one or more electrodes, an audio monitoring or acoustical
`
`detection device, etc.) that is adapted to detect cardiac activity of the user of the
`
`[electronic device]” (Ex. 1005, [0035]; see also id., Abstract; Ex. 1003, ¶113).
`
`iv.
`
`[1.c.i]: the heart sensor comprising: a first lead
`comprising a first pad that is embedded in a first
`portion of the enclosure,
`Markel renders obvious [1.c.i] (Ex. 1003, ¶¶115-121; see also Ex. 1005,
`
`Fig. 6 annotated).
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`A POSITA would have understood the plain and ordinary meaning of “lead”
`
`to include (1) an electrode that comes into contact with a user and (2) the electrical
`
`connection (e.g., wires) that connects the electrode to additional electronics that
`
`implement that ECG signal acquisition (Ex. 1003, ¶116). A POSITA would have
`
`understood that a “pad” is a component of the electrode (Ex. 1003, ¶116).
`
`Markel discloses components that correspond to the claimed “a heart sensor
`
`configured to detect the user’s cardiac signal” (see [1.b]; Ex. 1003, ¶117).
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 10 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`One of those components is a “second electrode 1022” and associated wiring
`
`(yellow), which correspond to the claimed “first lead” (Ex. 1005, [0058]; Ex. 1003,
`
`¶118). Markel discloses that the second electrode is “coupled” to the cardiac
`
`information acquisition module (Ex. 1005, [0059]; (Ex. 1003, ¶118)). A POSITA
`
`would thus have understood that Markel’s “second electrode” and associated wiring
`
`is a “first lead” (Ex. 1003, ¶118).
`
`In Markel’s Figure 6 configuration, the second electrode is “molded into the
`
`audio output portion 610 or positioned on the main body portion 610” of the
`
`electronic device (Ex. 1005, [0050]; (Ex. 1003, ¶119)). A POSITA would thus have
`
`understood that Markel’s “second electrode” comprises a first pad that is “molded
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`
`
`into the audio output portion 610” (i.e., embedded in a first portion of the enclosure)
`
`(Ex. 1003, ¶119).
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`Additionally, Markel discloses that the “second electrode” may be “placed on
`
`the right side portion 420 (e.g., placed on or molded into region 420b)” (Ex. 1005,
`
`[0045]; (Ex. 1003, ¶120). A POSITA would thus have understood that Figure 4’s
`
`“second electrode” would include a first pad that is embedded into the “right side
`
`portion 420,” (i.e., a first portion of the enclosure) in the Figure 4 configuration
`
`(Ex. 1003, ¶120).
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 4 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`[1.c.ii]: wherein an exterior surface of the enclosure
`comprises an exterior surface of the first portion,
`Markel renders obvious [1.c.ii] (Ex. 1003, ¶¶122-125; see also Ex. 1005,
`
`Fig. 6 annotated).
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`Markel discloses a “main body portion 110,” which corresponds to the
`
`claimed “enclosure” (see [1.a]; Ex. 1003, ¶123). Furthermore, a POSITA would
`
`have understood that Markel’s “second electrode” comprises a first pad that is
`
`embedded in the “audio output portion 610” (i.e., a first portion of the enclosure)
`
`(see [1.c.i]; Ex. 1003, ¶123). Thus, a POSITA would have understood that the
`
`exterior surface of the “audio output portion 610” corresponds to the “exterior
`
`surface of the first portion” of [1.c.ii] (Ex. 1003, ¶123).
`
`Additionally, a POSITA would have understood that Figure 4’s “second
`
`electrode” comprises a first pad that is embedded in the “right side portion 420” (see
`
`[1.c.i]; Ex. 1003, ¶124). A POSITA would have understood that the exterior surface
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`

`
`
`of the “right side portion 420” corresponds to the “exterior surface of the first
`
`portion” of [1.c.ii] in the Figure 4 configuration (Ex. 1003, ¶124).
`
`vi.
`
`[1.c.iii]: wherein the first pad is positioned underneath
`the exterior surface of the first portion, and wherein the
`first pad is configured to detect a first electrical signal
`of the user’s cardiac signal via the user’s skin’s contact
`with the exterior surface of the first portion of the
`enclosure;
`Markel renders obvious [1.c.iii] under Apple’s interpretation and a correct
`
`interpretation of the claim language (Ex. 1003, ¶¶126-140).
`
`Apple’s interpretation of [1.c.iii]. For purposes of showing alleged
`
`infringement, Apple appears to have interpreted [1.c.ii] to include the surface of an
`
`exposed electrode pad that is configured to detect a cardiac signal via direct contact
`
`with the user’s skin (Ex. 1003, ¶127-128).
`
`- 16 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1016 (Apple’s Complaint), 11-12 (annotation in original)
`
`
`
`
`
`Markel teaches that the second electrode is “positioned on the audio output
`
`portion 610” of the electronic device (Ex. 1005, [0050]; Ex. 1003, ¶129; see also
`
`Ex. 1005, [0044]; Ex. 1003, ¶130). “Such electrode placement may, for example,
`
`provide for user contact” with the second electrode “during the process of listening”
`
`to the electronic device (Ex. 1005, [0050]; Ex. 1003, ¶129).
`
`- 17 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`With respect to Markel’s Figure 4 configuration, the second electrode
`
`is “placed on the right side portion 420” of the electronic device (Ex. 1005, [0045];
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶131). Such electrode placement allows the electrode to “contact a user
`
`during normal (or typical) use of the [electronic device]” (Ex. 1005, [0041];
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶131).
`
`- 18 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 4
`
`
`
`
`
`Markel further discloses that electrodes “detect cardiac activity of a user that
`
`is conductively coupled to the electrodes (e.g., by touching the electrodes)”
`
`(Ex. 1005, [0035]; Ex. 1003, ¶132). Markel’s electrodes also “may comprise a
`
`metallic surface exposed for user contact” (Ex. 1005, [0037]; Ex. 1003, ¶132).
`
`Consequently, Markel discloses that its “second electrode” may include an exposed
`
`electrode pad that is configured to detect a cardiac signal via direct contact with the
`
`user’s skin (Ex. 1003, ¶132), which is consistent with Apple’s interpretation of
`
`[1.c.iii] (Ex. 1003, ¶133).
`
`Correct interpretation of [1.c.iii]. In the alternative, and under the correct
`
`interpretation of [1.c.iii], Markel renders obvious [1.c.iii] (Ex. 1003, ¶134).
`
`- 19 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Markel teaches that an electrode “may be substantially concealed (or hidden)
`
`from a user . . . with little or no visible indication of the electrode presence”
`
`(Ex. 1005, [0040]; Ex. 1003, ¶135). A POSITA would have understood that
`
`Markel’s “second electrode” comprises a first pad that is embedded in the “audio
`
`output portion 610” (i.e., a first portion of the enclosure) (see [1.c.i]; Ex. 1003,
`
`¶135). When “integrated into various molded components of the mobile
`
`communication device,” this “electrode may be formed from conductive plastic (or
`
`another material)” (Ex. 1005, [0037]; Ex. 1003, ¶135). A POSITA would thus have
`
`been motivated to place the pad of the “second electrode” underneath the conductive
`
`plastic of the “audio output portion.” This would have “substantially concealed (or
`
`hidden)” the electrode pad from the user, which would have been desirable to
`
`increase the device’s aesthetics while protecting the electrode (Ex. 1003, ¶135).
`
`Markel further teaches that an electrode’s pad need not be in direct contact
`
`with a user and may be “adapted to detect cardiac activity of a user that is
`
`conductively coupled to the electrodes (e.g., by touching the electrodes)” (Ex. 1005,
`
`[0035]; Ex. 1003, ¶136). Specifically, a POSITA would recognize that the pad of an
`
`electrode can be conductively coupled to a user through an intermediate conductive
`
`material (Ex. 1003, ¶136). Indeed, Markel teaches that “a conductive plastic (or
`
`another material) [] may be integrated into various molded components of the
`
`mobile communication device.” (Ex. 1005, [0037]; Ex. 1003, ¶136).”
`
`- 20 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Moreover, a POSITA would have had a reasonable expectation of success in
`
`placing the electrode pad underneath and detecting a cardiac signal via the
`
`conductive plastic of the “audio output portion” because Markel discloses that
`
`(1) “electrodes may be incorporated into the [electronic device] in any of a variety
`
`of manners” and “in any of a variety of locations” (Ex. 1005, [0035], [0045];
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶137), and (2) electrodes “detect cardiac activity of a user that is
`
`conductively coupled to the electrodes” and conductive plastics “may provide
`
`sufficient conductivity for an electrode to perform adequately” (Ex. 1005, [0037];
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶137).Thus, the first pad is configured to detect a first electrical signal of
`
`a cardiac signal via the user’s skin’s contact with the exterior surface of the
`
`electronic device’s “audio output portion” (i.e., the first portion of the enclosure)
`
`(Ex. 1003, ¶138).
`
`A POSITA would have understood that Markel’s “second electrode” in
`
`Figure 4 comprises a first pad that is embedded in the “right side portion 420” (see
`
`[1.c.i]; Ex. 1003, ¶139). Similarly, a POSITA would have placed the pad of the
`
`“second electrode” in Markel’s Figure 4 underneath the conductive plastic of the
`
`“right side portion 420” (Ex. 1003, ¶139). In that configuration, that first pad would
`
`have been configured to detect a first electrical signal of a cardiac signal via the
`
`user’s skin’s contact with the exterior surface of the electronic device’s “right side
`
`portion” (i.e., the first portion of the enclosure) (Ex. 1003, ¶139).
`
`- 21 -
`
`

`

`
`
`vii.
`
`[1.d.i]: the heart sensor comprising: . . . a second lead
`comprising a second pad that is embedded in a second
`portion of the enclosure,
`Markel renders obvious [1.d.i] (Ex. 1003, ¶¶141-147; see also Ex. 1005,
`
`Fig. 6 annotated).
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`Markel discloses components that correspond to the claimed “a heart sensor
`
`configured to detect the user’s cardiac signal” (see [1.b]; Ex. 1003, ¶143).
`
`- 22 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 10 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`One of those components is a “first electrode 1020” and associated wiring
`
`(blue), which correspond to the claimed “second lead” (Ex. 1005, [0058]; Ex. 1003,
`
`¶144). Markel discloses that the first electrode is “coupled” to the cardiac acquisition
`
`module (Ex. 1005, [0059]; Ex. 1003, ¶144). A POSITA would thus have understood
`
`that Markel’s “first electrode” and associated wiring is a “second lead” (Ex. 1003,
`
`¶144).
`
`In Markel’s Figure 6, the “first electrode” is “disposed on the main body
`
`portion 620 (e.g., molded into the main body portion 620 or positioned on the main
`
`body portion 620)” (Ex. 1005, [0050]; Ex. 1003, ¶145). A POSITA would thus have
`
`understood that Markel’s “first electrode” comprises a second pad that is “molded
`
`- 23 -
`
`

`

`
`
`into the main body portion 620” (i.e., embedded in a second portion of the enclosure)
`
`(Ex. 1003, ¶145).
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`Additionally, Markel discloses a configuration in Figure 4 wherein the “first
`
`electrode” is “placed on the left side portion 410 (e.g., placed on or molded into
`
`region 410b)” (Ex. 1005, [0045]; Ex. 1003, ¶146). A POSITA would thus have
`
`understood that Figure 4’s “first electrode” would include a second pad that is
`
`embedded into the “left side portion 410,” (i.e., a second portion of the enclosure) in
`
`the Figure 4 configuration (Ex. 1003, ¶146).
`
`- 24 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 4 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`viii.
`
`[1.d.ii]: wherein the second pad is configured to detect a
`second electrical signal of the user’s cardiac signal via
`the user’s skin’s contact with at least one of the second
`pad and the second portion of the enclosure;
`Markel renders obvious [1.d.ii] (Ex. 1003, ¶¶148-157; see also Ex. 1005,
`
`Fig. 6 annotated).
`
`- 25 -
`
`

`

`
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 6 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`Markel discloses a “main body portion 110,” which corresponds to the
`
`claimed “enclosure” (see [1.a]; Ex. 1003, ¶149). Furthermore, a POSITA would
`
`have understood that Markel’s “first electrode” is embedded in the “main body
`
`portion 620” (i.e., a second portion of the enclosure) (see [1.d.i]; Ex. 1003, ¶149).
`
`First, Markel renders obvious that the second pad of the “first electrode” is
`
`configured to detect a second electrical signal of a cardiac signal via the user’s skin’s
`
`contact with the second pad (Ex. 1003, ¶151). Markel discloses that electrodes
`
`“detect cardiac activity of a user that is conductively coupled to the electrodes (e.g.,
`
`by touching the electrodes)” (Ex. 1005, [0035]; Ex. 1003, ¶151). Markel discloses
`
`that “electrodes contact a user during normal (or typical) use of the [electronic
`
`- 26 -
`
`

`

`
`
`device].” (Ex. 1005, [0041]; Ex. 1003, ¶151). Markel’s electrodes “may comprise a
`
`metallic surface exposed for user contact” (Ex. 1005, [0037]; Ex. 1003, ¶151).
`
`Second, and in the alternative, Markel renders obvious that the second pad of
`
`the “first electrode” is configured to detect a second electrical signal of a cardiac
`
`signal via the user’s skin’s contact with the second portion of the enclosure for the
`
`same reasons as discussed with regard to the first pad of the “second electrode” in
`
`[1.c.iii] (see [1.c.iii]; Ex. 1003, ¶152-155). Markel teaches that an electrode’s pad
`
`need not be in direct contact with a user and may be “adapted to detect cardiac
`
`activity of a user that is conductively coupled to the electrodes (e.g., by touching the
`
`electrodes)” (see [1.c.iii]; Ex. 1005, [0035]; Ex. 1003, ¶153).
`
`A POSITA would have understood that Markel’s “first electrode” in Figure 4
`
`comprises a second pad that is embedded in the “left side portion 410” (see [1.d.i];
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶156). Similarly, a POSITA would have placed the pad of the “first
`
`electrode” in Markel’s Figure 4 underneath the conductive plastic of the “left side
`
`portion 410” (Ex. 1003, ¶156). In that configuration, that second pad would have
`
`been configured to detect a second electrical signal of a cardiac signal via the user’s
`
`skin’s contact with the exterior surface of the electronic device’s “left side portion”
`
`(i.e., the second portion of the enclosure) (Ex. 1003, ¶156).
`
`- 27 -
`
`

`

`
`
`ix.
`
`[1.e]: a processor coupled to the heart sensor and
`configured to receive and process the detected cardiac
`signal, wherein the first lead further comprises a first
`connector coupled to the first pad and configured to
`provide the first electrical signal detected by the first
`pad to the processor, and wherein the second lead
`further comprises a second connector coupled to the
`second pad and configured to provide the second
`electrical signal detected by the second pad to the
`processor.
`Markel renders obvious [1.e] (Ex. 1003, ¶¶158-162; see also Ex. 1005,
`
`Fig. 10 annotated).
`
`Ex. 1005, Fig. 10 (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`First, Markel renders obvious a processor coupled to the heart sensor and
`
`configured to receive and process the detected cardiac signal. Markel teaches a
`
`“cardiac information processing module 1050” (dark blue) that “processes acquired
`
`cardiac information” from the “cardiac information acquisition module 1010”
`
`- 28 -
`
`

`

`
`
`(Ex. 1005, [0058], [0059]; see also id. [0178]; Ex. 1003, ¶159 (module “integrated
`
`into a baseband processor chip”)).
`
`Second, Markel renders obvious that the first lead further comprises a first
`
`connector coupled to the first pad and configured to provide the first electrical signal
`
`detected by the first