Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 1 of 40 PageID #: 11318
`Case 5:19-cv-00036—RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 1 of 40 PageID #: 11318
`
`EXHIBIT 6
`
`EXHIBIT 6
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 2 of 40 PageID #: 11319
`Case 5:19-cv-00036—RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 2 of 40 PageID #: 11319
`
`APPENDIX E
`APPENDIX E
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 3 of 40 PageID #: 11320
`
`APPENDIX E
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794 (the “’794 patent”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,363,266 to Nonogaki (“Nonogaki”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,870,685 to Flynn (“Flynn”)
`
` I
`
` have provided below a claim chart comparing the disclosures of the combination of Nonogaki and Flynn to claims 1, 9, and 14 of the
`’794 patent (“the ’794 Asserted Claims”). In my opinion, as detailed below and in my report, the combination of Nonogaki and Flynn
`renders obvious each of the ’794 Asserted Claims.
`
` I
`
` note that the ’794 Patent claims priority to Japanese Application No. 12-154358, filed May 22, 2000. For purposes of this report, I
`apply the May 22, 2000, priority date for the ’794 Patent.
`
`Nonogaki was filed on March 1, 2000, and issued on March 26, 2002. Nonogaki therefore qualifies as prior art with regard to the ’794
`patent under at least 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`Flynn was filed on September 4, 1996, and issued on February 9, 1999. Flynn therefore qualifies as prior art with regard to the ’794
`patent under at least 35 U.S.C. § 102(a), § 102(b), and § 102(e).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`Claim 1
`[1(pre)] An information
`processing device
`comprising:
`
`Nonogaki discloses or renders obvious this claim limitation.
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`
`Nonogaki is directed to “an electronic device for use with a portable telephone,” which discloses the
`claimed information processing device. This and other disclosures of this limitation are quoted
`below.
`
`An electronic device may include a plurality of function sections which can function
`independently. A CPU can control the functions of the respective function sections by
`controlling a power from the battery pack.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 4 of 40 PageID #: 11321
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`specification1, and a POSITA would have realized that incorporating the smart battery would have
`obviated the need to independently implement the “detection means” of Nonogaki, which uses various
`resistors to measure electric current levels to determine the remaining battery capacity level, and would
`have been motivated to do so. A POSITA would further have known that using a smart battery in
`accordance with the Duracell/Intel smart battery specification, as suggested by Flynn, would have
`allowed Nonogaki’s device to interchangeably utilize any of the commercially available smart batteries
`that complied with the standard. Thus, a POSITA looking to improve on Nonogaki’s device would
`have been motivated to use the smart battery as used in Flynn with similar settings (such as the pre-set
`reference battery levels and priority), to simplify the design and reduce the cost of developing and
`implementing customized hardware configuration and driving software for measuring battery capacity
`level and setting the reference levels, in favor of the already available functionalities in the smart
`batteries in accordance with the Duracell/Intel specification. And because the Duracell/Intel smart
`battery specification was already available to the public at the time of Nonogaki, a POSITA would
`have been able to make such a change as a matter of a routine design choice, and would have expected
`that such modification would have yielded a predictable result, with a reasonable expectation of
`success.
`
`[1(c)(ii)] said controller
`sends a power consumption
`reduction instruction to each
`function device included in
`a set GA if NA is detected,
`
`I further incorporate all motivations to combine Nonogaki and Flynn listed in Section V.G.1 of my
`report.
`Nonogaki discloses or renders obvious this claim limitation.
`
`Nonogaki discloses a controller (e.g., CPU 105) sending a power consumption reduction instruction
`(e.g., turning off one or more switches PSW1-PSW4) to each function device included in a set GA if
`NA is detected (e.g., when actual battery capacity Qc is equal to one or more values of Qrr(X)).
`
`A study of the flowcharts shown in FIGS. 5A and 5B reveals that, since there are reserved
`function sections up to the X-1th function sections, Qrr(X-1) obtained when control goes from
`the step S42 to the step S44 may become equal to all of total necessary current accumulated
`remaining quantities of the function sections which may be set so as to be reserved. Qrr0 that
`is memorized in the memory [MEMQrr0] may be zero.
`
`1 Flynn at Figs. 6A-6B.
`
`19
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 5 of 40 PageID #: 11322
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`If the equality Qc=Qrr(X-1) is satisfied as represented by a YES at the step S45, then control
`goes to a step S46, whereat the functions of all function sections other than the function sections
`up to the X-1th function section [i.e., function sections having Xth priority, X+1th priority, and
`so on] may be disabled. That is, under control of the CPU 105, of the connection switches
`PSW1 to PSW4, the connection switches corresponding to all function sections other than the
`function sections up to the X-1th function sections may be turned off to stop the supply of power
`from the battery pack 110. The user can learn the function sections up to the X-1th function
`section from the function Nos. memorized in the memory [MEM1] to the memory [MEMN(X-
`1)].
`Nonogaki at 9:10-29. In other words, if, for example, X=4, when CPU 105 detects that battery capacity
`Qc reaches Qrr3 (i.e., battery level sufficient to run only the function sections with priority 1 through
`3), the CPU 105 turns off all function sections other than the 1st through 3rd priority function sections
`(i.e., turns off the function sections with 4th, 5th . . . priority) by turning off the power supply connection
`switches for the corresponding function sections. To turn off the power supply connection switches,
`the CPU 105 must issue an instruction to turn off those switches. This is indicated in Nonogaki 3:59-
`60: “These connection switches PSW1 to PSW4 may be turned on and off under control of the CPU
`105.” Id. (emphasis added). In other words, CPU 105, acts as a controller, sends power reduction
`instructions by turning off connection switches PSW1 to PSW4. As indicated in FIG. 4, these switches
`control the flow of current to various function sections (e.g., music reproduction 101, telephone 102,
`music recording 103, and radio reception 104).
`
`I incorporate by reference my overview of Nonogaki in Section V.G.1 of my report, which also
`explains why Nonogaki teaches this limitation.
`
`In addition to this limitation being disclosed or rendered obvious by Nonogaki alone, a POSITA would
`have been motivated to combine Nonogaki with Flynn to further disclose or render obvious this
`limitation.
`
`Flynn discloses the controller sending a power consumption reduction instruction to each function
`device included in a set GA if NA is detected (e.g., microprocessor 112 sends a registration cancellation
`message to the base station, and the microprocessor 112 disables at least the transmission of cellular
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 6 of 40 PageID #: 11323
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`calls, upon the battery capacity falling below the low capacity value). This and other disclosures of
`this limitation are quoted below.
`
`In the preferred embodiment of the present invention, the microprocessor 112 takes one or
`more selected actions when the present capacity value reaches the low, critical and dead
`capacity values, respectively. Thus, if the present capacity value falls below the low capacity
`value, the microprocessor 112 will generate an audible and/or visual alarm to the user via the
`loudspeaker 104 and/or the display 108. The alarm would warn the user of a low battery
`condition and optionally provide the user with an indication that, at this battery level, ongoing
`telephone calls or other activities of interest can be only sustained for an enumerated period of
`time. Furthermore, once the low capacity value is reached, the microprocessor 112
`immediately sends a registration cancellation message to the serving base station so as to
`prevent the system from directing any incoming calls to the mobile station 100. This avoids the
`risk of the mobile station 100 receiving and processing a page message from the system and,
`in the process, discharging the battery 200 to the point where all desired operations will cease.
`The registration cancellation message also allows the system to mark the mobile station 100 as
`being presently unavailable for telephone calls and, thus, incoming calls for the mobile station
`100 can be immediately redirected to a prerecorded message. After sending the registration
`cancellation message, the mobile station 100 will disable the transmit operation. In this state,
`however, the mobile station 100 can continue to receive from the system certain services such
`as the short message service (SMS) defined in IS-136.
`Flynn at 11:64-12:24.
`
`21
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 7 of 40 PageID #: 11324
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`
`Flynn Fig. 8B.
`
`According to the present invention, for a smart battery or a semi-smart battery and as shown
`in decision blocks 420 and 430-432, respectively, the microprocessor 112 is regularly
`determining whether the present capacity value has reached the low capacity alarm value. If,
`at any time, the microprocessor 112 detects a low battery condition, it proceeds from block 442
`to block 444 where it generates a low battery warning to the user through the loudspeaker 104
`and/or the display 108. At block 446, the microprocessor 112 sends a registration cancellation
`message via the RF section 116 to the serving base station. Then at block 448, the
`microprocessor 112 disables the transmit operation and enables only the receive operation in
`the RF section 116.
`
`22
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 8 of 40 PageID #: 11325
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`Flynn at 13:62-14:7; see also id. at 7:16-38.
`
`I incorporate by reference my overview of Flynn in Section V.G.1 of my report, which also explains
`why Flynn teaches this limitation.
`
` A
`
` POSITA would be motivated to combine Nonogaki and Flynn for many reasons. A POSITA would
`readily recognize that Nonogaki and Flynn deal with the same problem, i.e., controlling the battery
`power of an electronic device to extend the time during which certain higher priority functions can
`continue to operate by disabling some lower priority functions. Battery capacity thresholds are used
`both in Nonogaki and Flynn to decide when to disable certain lower priority functions. In Nonogaki,
`a user is recited to manually set the priority of the function sections 101 to 104. The threshold value
`Qrr(X) for turning off the function sections is calculated based this user-set priority order. In contrast,
`Flynn recites a predetermined priority for certain functions, such that user does not need to explicitly
`set the priority ranking of the various function devices. For example, in Flynn, transmission of cellular
`calls is disabled first (when the battery level reaches the “low capacity value”), then lighting and
`display operations at a later time (when the battery level reaches the “critical capacity value”), and so
`on. See Flynn at 14:30-36, 12:24-34. A POSITA would have been motivated to incorporate this pre-
`set priority of Flynn into Nonogaki, such that Nonogaki’s device could be set up with a set of default
`priority order for its various function sections (and corresponding threshold values based on the default
`priority order), even before user completes the priority settings dialog. A POSITA would have realized
`that this change would allow Nonogaki’s device to take advantage of the power-saving effect of its
`invention even when the user fails to perform the initial priority setup through the settings dialog.
`
`A POSITA would be motivated to use the explicitly different threshold capacity values of Flynn (i.e.,
`critical, low, and dead) instead of the user-specified capacity values Qrr(X) of Nonogaki. Doing so
`would have the advantage of simplifying the user interaction with the power control system. At the
`time of the ’794 Patent, battery powered mobile devices—especially the type of small devices with
`limited number of functions, such as the cellular telephone exemplified in Nonogaki and Flynn—often
`had limited user-interface screen and smaller keypads (if any), and interactions using such those limited
`user interface methods was often cumbersome. A POSITA designing power management systems for
`a similar battery-operated device would have been motivated improve on Nonogaki’s device, which
`requires text-based dialog interactions before the battery-saving effect of Nonogaki’s invention could
`be utilized, to provide enhanced out-of-box experiences for the user. Implementing a pre-set priority
`
`23
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 9 of 40 PageID #: 11326
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`that can be applicable for the majority of users, as Flynn does, in Nonogaki’s device would have
`allowed user to bypass the priority-setting dialog interaction altogether, while still allowing the user to
`change the priority if a particular user wants to use a priority order that is different from the default
`priority order. Thus, it would have been obvious to a POSITA to replace the battery level settings of
`Nonogaki by those of Flynn because such replacement would amount to no more than a design and
`implementation choice. The proposed combination would yield the predictable result, with a
`reasonable expectation of success, that different function sections would be power controlled at
`different remaining battery capacities.
`
`In addition, a POSITA would have realized that the proposed modification would have the added
`advantage of obviating the need to calculate the reference levels used to turn off the various function
`sections of Nonogaki’s device. Nonogaki recites the calculation of various threshold Qrr values based
`on the user-set priority ranking of the various function sections. By using the pre-set priorities as in
`Flynn, a POSITA would have realized that the Qrr values can also be pre-stored into the system
`memory without having to be calculated at runtime. A POSITA would have known that doing so
`would obviate the needs for performing the operation of determining the electric current necessary to
`run each function sections and calculating the different reference levels, further reserving the power
`used for running the priority settings dialog and for calculating the threshold Qrr values for the
`operation of the higher-priority functions. Doing so would have been a routine design and
`implementation choice of a POSITA that a POSITA would have expected would have yielded a
`predictable result.
`
`In addition, Nonogaki was assigned to Sony Corporation, and Flynn was assigned to Ericsson, Inc.,
`both of which were major manufacturers and competitors in the cellular telephone market at the time
`of the ’794 patent. A POSITA reading the disclosure of Nonogaki and trying to improve the user
`interactions of Nonogaki’s device would have naturally look to the developments in similar devices
`from Sony’s competitors, including major manufacturers of cellular telephones at the time, such as
`Ericsson. A POSITA would then have found that Flynn’s pre-set priority settings could be used to
`improve the usability of Nonogaki’s device.
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn are also in the same field of endeavor and both directed to prolong the battery life
`by turning off lower-priority functions so that higher-priority functions can be performed longer. A
`POSITA trying to improve on power management system of Nonogaki’s device would have been
`
`24
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 10 of 40 PageID #: 11327
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`motivated to look to the solutions provided in the power management systems in similar devices
`directed to solving the same problems, such as Flynn’s battery-powered cellular telephone and the
`power management systems implemented therein.
`
`In addition, Flynn presents the choices of using a “dumb” battery, a “semi-smart” battery, or a “smart
`battery.” In contrast, Nonogaki uses a generic battery pack to implement the ability of sequentially
`turning off the low-priority function sections, which is implemented Flynn using the smart battery’s
`built-in capabilities for reporting the remaining capacity and setting the reference level for the battery
`capacity. A POSITA trying to improve on Nonogaki’s device would have realized that Nonogaki’s
`design can be greatly simplified by utilizing the smart battery used in Flynn. Flynn provides the
`detailed disclosure of the built-in capability of the smart battery in accordance with the Duracell/Intel
`specification, and a POSITA would have realized that incorporating the smart battery would have
`obviated the need to independently implement the “detection means” of Nonogaki, which uses various
`resistors to measure electric current levels to determine the remaining battery capacity level, and would
`have been motivated to do so. A POSITA would further have known that using a smart battery in
`accordance with the Duracell/Intel smart battery specification, as suggested by Flynn, would have
`allowed Nonogaki’s device to interchangeably utilize any of the commercially available smart batteries
`that complied with the standard. Thus, a POSITA looking to improve on Nonogaki’s device would
`have been motivated to use the smart battery as used in Flynn with similar settings (such as the pre-set
`reference battery levels and priority), to simplify the design and reduce the cost of developing and
`implementing customized hardware configuration and driving software for measuring battery capacity
`level and setting the reference levels, in favor of the already available functionalities in the smart
`batteries in accordance with the Duracell/Intel specification. And because the Duracell/Intel smart
`battery specification was already available to the public at the time of Nonogaki, a POSITA would
`have been able to make such a change as a matter of a routine design choice, and would have expected
`that such modification would have yielded a predictable result, with a reasonable expectation of
`success.
`
`I further incorporate all motivations to combine Nonogaki and Flynn listed in Section V.G.1 of my
`report.
`
`
`25
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 11 of 40 PageID #: 11328
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`[1(c)(iv)] and to each
`function device of a set GB
`if NB is detected,
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`represented by a YES at the decision step S18, then control goes to a step S19, whereat a
`numeral of a first digit is memorized in a memory [MEM3]. Then, control goes to a step S20,
`whereat the user may calculate an available time tn=(=10*MEM2+MEM3) of the selected
`function section (n assumes a function NO.) by the numerals MEM2, MEM3 stored in the
`memory [MEM2] and the memory [MEM3], and this available time tn may be stored in a
`memory [MEMtn].
`Nonogaki at 6:37-7:19.
`
`For example, the setting means may calculate a necessary current accumulated remaining
`capacity of the one or the plurality of function sections, and may set a relationship in which
`only the one or the plurality of function sections may become available if the battery remaining
`capacity may become below a total necessary current accumulated remaining capacity. Also,
`the setting means may calculate a necessary current accumulated remaining capacity of the
`one or the plurality of function sections, and may set a relationship in which only a functions
`section with a priority below a priority N (N is an integer greater than 1) if the battery
`remaining capacity is below a total quantity of necessary current accumulated remaining
`capacities of function sections with priorities up to the priority N. The setting means may
`calculate the necessary current accumulated remaining capacity of each function section by
`using input information of an available time and an available environment temperature of each
`function section, for example.
`Nonogaki at 1:60-2:18.
`
`I incorporate by reference my overview of Nonogaki in Section V.G.1 of my report, which also
`explains why Nonogaki teaches this limitation.
`
`Nonogaki teaches this claim limitation.
`
`Nonogaki discloses that the controller (e.g., CPU 105) sends a power consumption reduction
`instruction (e.g., activates one or more switches PSW1-PSW4) to each function device included in a
`set GA if NA is detected (e.g., when actual battery capacity Qc is equal to one or more Qrr(X) values).
`This and other disclosures of this limitation are quoted below.
`
`27
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 12 of 40 PageID #: 11329
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`A study of the flowcharts shown in FIGS. 5A and 5B reveals that, since there are reserved
`function sections up to the X-1th function sections, Qrr(X-1) obtained when control goes from
`the step S42 to the step S44 may become equal to all of total necessary current accumulated
`remaining quantities of the function sections which may be set so as to be reserved. Qrr0 that
`is memorized in the memory [MEMQrr0] may be zero.
`If the equality Qc=Qrr(X-1) is satisfied as represented by a YES at the step S45, then control
`goes to a step S46, whereat the functions of all function sections other than the function sections
`up to the X-1th function section may be disabled. That is, under control of the CPU 105, of the
`connection switches PSW1 to PSW4, the connection switches corresponding to all function
`sections other than the function sections up to the X-1th function sections may be turned off to
`stop the supply of power from the battery pack 110. The user can learn the function sections up
`to the X-1th function section from the function Nos. memorized in the memory [MEM1] to the
`memory [MEMN(X-1)].
`Nonogaki at 9:10-29. These steps are further explained in Fig. 6, reproduced below.
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 13 of 40 PageID #: 11330
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`
`Nonogaki at Fig. 6.
`
`For example, Nonogaki discloses that the CPU 105 controls the function sections by cutting off power
`through the connection switches PSW 1 to PSW 4. When X=4, once the battery capacity Qc reaches
`a threshold value, for example, Qrr3 (the level sufficient to operate only priority 1, 2, 3 function
`sections), power to the function section with priority 4 is cut by turning off the PSW that leads to that
`the function section with priority 4, as explained above [1(c)(ii)]. Then, when the next threshold level
`Qrr2 is reached (X=3), power to the function section with priority 3 is cut by turning off PSW that lead
`
`29
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 14 of 40 PageID #: 11331
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`to function section with priority 3. (At this point, the function sections with priority 4 and upward are
`not affected, because they were already turned off in when X=4.)
`
`I incorporate by reference my overview of Nonogaki in Section V.G.1 of my report, which also
`explains why Nonogaki teaches this limitation.
`
`In addition to this limitation being disclosed or rendered obvious by Nonogaki alone, a POSITA would
`have been motivated to combine Nonogaki with Flynn to further disclose or render obvious this
`limitation.
`
`Flynn discloses the “low capacity” level (NA), and “critical capacity” level or “dead capacity” level,
`either of which may be NB. When the “critical capacity” level is detected, microprocessor 112 disables
`“lighting and display operations.” A POSITA would have understood that a Nonogaki’s individualized
`sequence of priority and calculation of remaining capacity level threshold Qrr may be simplified to
`have just two or three threshold capacity levels as disclosed in Flynn. A POSITA would have further
`understood that Nonogaki’s sequence of comparing the Qc to various levels of Qrr (that were pre-
`calculated based on priority setting) can be simply replaced by comparing Qc to the pre-set thresholds
`for “low capacity” “critical capacity” and “dead capacity” levels, while leaving the remaining portion
`of Nonogaki system intact to allow the CPU to control the various function sections by turning on and
`off the power supply connection switches (PSW1 to PSW4) to control the operation of function
`sections (101 to 104), and had a reasonable expectation that such combination would be successful.
`This and other disclosures of this limitation are quoted below.
`
`In the preferred embodiment of the present invention, three different threshold capacity values
`are defined in the following descending order: low capacity, critical capacity and dead
`capacity (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "alarm" capacity values). The first value,
`low capacity, designates the minimum capacity level for maintaining normal mobile station
`operations. The second value, critical capacity, designates the capacity level at which certain
`high current-consuming operations or components such the power amplifier, display and
`lighting subsystems or the temperature control oscillator (TCXO) can no longer be sustained.
`Finally, the third value, dead capacity, designates the capacity level at which almost no mobile
`station operations (even low current consumers) can be supported. At this level, the charging
`operation may be the only operation which is allowed to proceed.
`
`30
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 15 of 40 PageID #: 11332
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`
`Flynn at 11:6-21.
`
`When the microprocessor 112 detects a critical battery condition, it proceeds from block 460
`to block 462 where it generates a critical battery warning to the user through the loudspeaker
`104 and/or the display 108. At block 464, the microprocessor 112 disables a number of
`operations which draw a high amount of electrical current, such as the lighting and display
`operations.
`Flynn at 14:30-36.
`
`If the present capacity value thereafter should fall below the critical capacity value, the
`microprocessor 112 generates a more urgent audible and/or visual warning to the user via the
`loudspeaker 104 and/or the display 108. This warning may indicate to the user that mobile
`station operations would be terminated within a certain period of time. In this state, call
`originations and receptions by the mobile station would continue to be disallowed and other
`operations allowed or disallowed depending on their current consumption requirements as
`compared with the available capacity. If the present capacity value then should fall below the
`dead capacity value, the microprocessor 112 will terminate all remaining mobile station
`operations other than the charging operation. In the preferred embodiment, the dead capacity
`value is selected so as to prevent any permanent damage to the cells 202 of the battery 200 if
`its capacity was to fall below this level (such as the type of damage which would occur if a
`lithium-type battery was severely discharged).
`Flynn at 12:24-34; see also id. at Fig. 8B.
`
`I incorporate by reference my overview of Flynn in Section V.G.1 of my report, which also explains
`why Flynn teaches this limitation.
`
`A POSITA would be motivated to combine Nonogaki and Flynn for many reasons. A POSITA would
`readily recognize that Nonogaki and Flynn deal with the same problem, i.e., controlling the battery
`power of an electronic device to extend the time during which certain higher priority functions can
`continue to operate by disabling some lower priority functions. Battery capacity thresholds are used
`both in Nonogaki and Flynn to decide when to disable certain lower priority functions. In Nonogaki,
`a user is recited to manually set the priority of the function sections 101 to 104. The threshold value
`Qrr(X) for turning off the function sections is calculated based this user-set priority order. In contrast,
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 16 of 40 PageID #: 11333
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`Flynn recites a predetermined priority for certain functions, such that user does not need to explicitly
`set the priority ranking of the various function devices. For example, in Flynn, transmission of cellular
`calls is disabled first (when the battery level reaches the “low capacity value”), then lighting and
`display operations at a later time (when the battery level reaches the “critical capacity value”), and so
`on. See Flynn at 14:30-36, 12:24-34. A POSITA would have been motivated to incorporate this pre-
`set priority of Flynn into Nonogaki, such that Nonogaki’s device could be set up with a set of default
`priority order for its various function sections (and corresponding threshold values based on the default
`priority order), even before user completes the priority settings dialog. A POSITA would have realized
`that this change would allow Nonogaki’s device to take advantage of the power-saving effect of its
`invention even when the user fails to perform the initial priority setup through the settings dialog.
`
`A POSITA would be motivated to use the explicitly different threshold capacity values of Flynn (i.e.,
`critical, low, and dead) instead of the user-specified capacity values Qrr(X) of Nonogaki. Doing so
`would have the advantage of simplifying the user interaction with the power control system. At the
`time of the ’794 Patent, battery powered mobile devices—especially the type of small devices with
`limited number of functions, such as the cellular telephone exemplified in Nonogaki and Flynn—often
`had limited user-interface screen and smaller keypads (if any), and interactions using such those limited
`user interface methods was often cumbersome. A POSITA designing power management systems for
`a similar battery-operated device would have been motivated improve on Nonogaki’s device, which
`requires text-based dialog interactions before the battery-saving effect of Nonogaki’s invention could
`be utilized, to provide enhanced out-of-box experiences for the user. Implementing a pre-set priority
`that can be applicable for the majority of users, as Flynn does, in Nonogaki’s device would have
`allowed user to bypass the priority-setting dialog interaction altogether, while still allowing the user to
`change the priority if a particular user wants to use a priority order that is different from the default
`priority order. Thus, it would have been obvious to a POSITA to replace the battery level settings of
`Nonogaki by those of Flynn because such replacement would amount to no more than a design and
`implementation choice. The proposed combination would yield the predictable result, with a
`reasonable expectation of success, that different function sections would be power controlled at
`different remaining battery capacities.
`
`In addition, a POSITA would have realized that the proposed modification would have the added
`advantage of obviating the need to calculate the reference levels used to turn off the various function
`sections of Nonogaki’s device. Nonogaki recites calculation of various threshold Qrr values based on
`
`32
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 343-7 Filed 06/03/20 Page 17 of 40 PageID #: 11334
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,329,794
`
`Nonogaki and Flynn
`the user-set priority ranking of the various function sections. By using the pre-set priorities as in Flynn,
`a POSITA would have realized that the Qrr values can also be pre-stored into the system memory
`without having to be calculated at runtime. A POSITA would have known that doing s