Filed on behalf of: Fitbit, Inc.
`
`Paper No. ____
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`FITBIT, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`ALIPHCOM, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,446,275
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. MARK A. MUSEN
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FITBIT EXHIBIT 1002
`
`i of i
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`Page
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 
`I. 
`QUALIFICATIONS ....................................................................................... 1 
`II. 
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS .......................................................................... 5 
`III. 
`IV.  LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ............................................ 6 
`V. 
`THE ’275 PATENT ........................................................................................ 7 
`VI.  CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ........................................................................... 9 
`VII.  REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 9 
`A.  Hoffman ................................................................................................ 9 
`Gilley .................................................................................................. 11 
`B. 
`VIII.  CERTAIN REFERENCES TEACH OR SUGGEST ALL THE
`CLAIMED FEATURES OF CLAIMS 1–5, 8–10, 13–15, 18 AND 19
`OF THE ’275 PATENT ................................................................................ 17 
`A.  Ground 1: Hoffman Teaches or Suggests All the Features of
`Claims 1–5, 8, 9, 13–15, and 19 ......................................................... 17 
`1. 
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 17 
`2. 
`Claim 2 ..................................................................................... 33 
`3. 
`Claim 3 ..................................................................................... 35 
`4. 
`Claim 4 ..................................................................................... 36 
`5. 
`Claim 5 ..................................................................................... 38 
`6. 
`Claim 8 ..................................................................................... 40 
`7. 
`Claim 9 ..................................................................................... 41 
`8. 
`Claim 13 ................................................................................... 41 
`9. 
`Claim 14 ................................................................................... 43 
`10.  Claim 15 ................................................................................... 44 
`11.  Claim 19 ................................................................................... 48 
`Ground 2: Hoffman and Gilley Teach or Suggest All the
`Features of Claims 10, 18, and 19 ...................................................... 71 
`1. 
`Claim 10 ................................................................................... 71 
`2. 
`Claim 18 ................................................................................... 75 
`
`B. 
`
`
`
`i
`
`i of ii
`
`

`
`
`
`Claim 19 ................................................................................... 81 
`3. 
`IX.  CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 100 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-ii-
`
`
`
`ii of ii
`
`

`
`
`
`I, Mark A. Musen, declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`
`I have been retained by Fitbit Inc. (“Petitioner”) as an independent
`
`expert consultant in this proceeding before the United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office regarding U.S. Patent No. 8,446,275 (“the ’275 patent”), which I understand
`
`is labeled as Ex. 1001 in this proceeding. I have been asked to consider, among
`
`other things, whether certain references teach or suggest the features recited in
`
`claims 1–5, 8–10, 13–15, 18 and 19 of the ’275 patent. My opinions are set forth
`
`below.
`
`2.
`
`I am being compensated at my normal consulting rate for the time I
`
`spend on this matter. No part of my compensation is dependent on the outcome of
`
`this proceeding or any other proceeding involving the ’275 patent. I have no other
`
`interest in this proceeding.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`3.
`I am a Professor of Medicine (Biomedical Informatics) at Stanford
`
`University, where I have served on the faculty since 1988.
`
`4. My undergraduate degree (1977) and medical degree (1980) are from
`
`Brown University. During my time at Brown, I was a research assistant in the
`
`Laboratory for Advanced Methods in Biological Data Acquisition, where I
`
`programmed computers to control laboratory instruments and to acquire both
`
`
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`1 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`analog and digital signals from
`
`those
`
`instruments
`
`to perform biological
`
`experiments. I subsequently pursued clinical training in Internal Medicine at
`
`Stanford University Hospital, and obtained my license to practice medicine (1981)
`
`and became certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine (1983).
`
`5.
`
`In 1983, I entered the graduate program at Stanford University in
`
`Medical Information Sciences (now called “Biomedical Informatics”), where I
`
`received my Ph.D. in 1988. In graduate school, I took courses in databases,
`
`programming languages, artificial intelligence, algorithms and data structures,
`
`clinical decision-support systems, decision analysis, and multivariate statistics.
`
`My dissertation research concerned new methods for the engineering of clinical
`
`decision-support systems, and led to a line of investigation that I have continued
`
`into the present time.
`
`6.
`
`At Stanford, I am the Director of the Stanford Center for Biomedical
`
`Informatics Research. The faculty members in the Center teach students and
`
`conduct research related to all aspects of the use of information technology in
`
`medicine and healthcare—including new methods for analysis of data from
`
`electronic health records, new architectures for clinical decision support, new
`
`algorithms for interpreting biomedical images, and the use of genomic data to
`
`inform clinical diagnosis. Faculty members in the Center also include Stanford
`
`physicians responsible for operational aspects of all healthcare information
`
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`2 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`technology—both server-based and mobile—at Stanford Health Care and Stanford
`
`Children’s Health.
`
`7.
`
`In my own research program, I am principal investigator of the Center
`
`for Expanded Data Annotation and Retrieval, one of the eleven centers of
`
`excellence that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have supported as part of
`
`the Big Data to Knowledge (BD2K) Program since 2014. I chair the BD2K
`
`Centers Steering Committee and the BD2K Metadata Working Group. I am also
`
`principal investigator of the National Center for Biomedical Ontology, one of the
`
`seven National Centers for Biomedical Computing created by the NIH in 2005.
`
`8.
`
`At Stanford, I teach students in the Biomedical Informatics graduate
`
`program. I offer a large classroom-based course entitled, “Modeling Biomedical
`
`Systems,” where I teach methods of conceptual modeling, object-oriented design,
`
`and the engineering of computing systems that assist users with medical decision
`
`making.
`
`9.
`
`I have just completed a four-year term as a member of the National
`
`Advisory Council on Biomedical Imaging and Bio-engineering. In this capacity, I
`
`participated in numerous policy discussions regarding programs at the National
`
`Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bio-engineering (NIBIB) of the NIH, where a
`
`major thrust is the use of mobile technology to aid healthcare in the developing
`
`world. Along with other members of the Council, I provided a second level of peer
`
`
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`3 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`review for grant applications to the Institute that had already been refereed by
`
`national experts in bio-engineering.
`
`10.
`
`I have received many honors and awards for my research. I have been
`
`elected a Fellow of the American College of Medical Informatics (1989); I
`
`received the Donald A. B. Lindberg Award for Innovation in Informatics from the
`
`American Medical Informatics Association (2006); members of my research team
`
`and I received the “Ten Years” Award from the Semantic Web Science
`
`Association in 2014. Within the academic medicine community, I have been
`
`named a Fellow of the American College of Physicians (1990) and elected to
`
`membership in both the American Society for Clinical Investigation (1997) and the
`
`Association of American Physicians (2010). I have served as scientific program
`
`chair for several international conferences, including the American Medical
`
`Informatics Association Annual Symposium (2003), the International Semantic
`
`Web Conference (2005), and the International Conference on Knowledge Capture
`
`(2011). I am the founding co-editor-in-chief of the journal Applied Ontology.
`
`11.
`
`I serve as a consultant to the American Medical Association, to the
`
`World Health Organization, to other academic organizations, and to industry. My
`
`curriculum vitae documents more than 400 scientific publications in journals,
`
`books, and peer-reviewed conferences, as well as invited presentations on my work
`
`in biomedical information technology at numerous international meetings.
`
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`4 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`12. My C.V. is included as Exhibit 1012.
`
`III. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS
`13. All of the opinions contained in this Declaration are based on the
`
`documents I reviewed and my knowledge and professional judgment. In forming
`
`the opinions expressed in this Declaration, I reviewed the documents mentioned in
`
`this Declaration, including the ’275 patent (Ex. 1001), U.S. Patent Publication No.
`
`2012/0041767 to Hoffman et al. (“Hoffman”) (Ex. 1003), U.S. Patent Publication
`
`No. 2008/0076637 to Gilley et al. (“Gilley”) (Ex. 1004), the prosecution file
`
`history of U.S. Application No. 13/454,040 (“the ’040 application”) (Ex. 1005),
`
`and a product review by Mike Kobrin, Nike + iPod Sport Kit, PC Magazine (July
`
`14, 2006), http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1989319,00.asp (Ex. 1011).
`
`14. My opinions are additionally guided by my appreciation of how a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood the claims of the ’275
`
`patent at the time of the alleged invention, which I have been asked to assume is in
`
`the June 2011 timeframe.
`
`15. Based on my experience and expertise, it is my opinion that certain
`
`references teach or suggest all the features recited in claims 1–5, 8–10, 13–15, 18
`
`and 19 of the ’275 patent.
`
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`5 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`16. At the time of the alleged invention, which I have been asked to
`
`assume is in the June 2011 timeframe, a person of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`have had at least two years of relevant college-level coursework in an engineering
`
`field with one to two years of post-education relevant work experience.
`
`17.
`
`In determining the level of ordinary skill, I have been asked to
`
`consider, for example, the types of problems encountered in the art, prior solutions
`
`to those problems, the rapidity with which innovations are made, the sophistication
`
`of the technology, and the educational level of active workers in the field. Active
`
`workers in the field would have had at least several years of college-level
`
`coursework in a relevant engineering field, as noted above. Depending on the level
`
`of education, it would have taken between 1–2 years for a person to become
`
`familiar with the problems encountered in the art and to become familiar with the
`
`prior and current solutions to those problems.
`
`18.
`
`In my capacity as a professor at Stanford University, a large
`
`proportion of the students whom I train and supervise would also be considered
`
`persons of ordinary skill in the art under the above level of skill during the relevant
`
`timeframe.
`
`19. A person of ordinary skill in the art in June 2011 would be familiar
`
`with the general use of sensors to measure data in a medical or related context,
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`6 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`which would include for the purpose of monitoring an individual’s physical
`
`activity, and with database and computer science concepts relating to the storage
`
`and retrieval of those data for processing and analysis. A person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art would have at least some experience relating to the use of sensors in
`
`wearable medical devices.
`
`V. THE ’275 PATENT
`20. The ’275 patent relates to an activity monitoring system and device.
`
`Ex. 1001 at Abstract. The system claims to be a “general health and wellness
`
`management” device and system which receives “user data” from the user that
`
`includes “profile” and “preferences” information (id. at 20:62–64), tracks the
`
`user’s activity using wearable devices having sensors (id. at abstract), and then
`
`awards the user with points for their activity based on “reference values” that are
`
`“set forth in the profile” (id. at 44:6–12). The system can also set a “target score”
`
`for the user as a means of increasing user motivation. Id. at 38:58–59.
`
`21. Like prior activity tracking systems, the ’275 system and device
`
`utilizes sensors disposed in wearable devices to track user activity. Id. at Abstract.
`
`For example, a “pedometer 312 may be implemented . . . to measure various types
`
`of data associated with pedestrian-oriented activities such as running or walking.”
`
`Id. at 18:29–32.
`
`
`
`
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`7 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`22. The system establishes a user profile based on data input by the user:
`
`“A profile for a user can be input or entered via data 1720 to establish an initial
`
`over [sic] health and wellness profile based on one or more aspects thereof.” Id. at
`
`41:18–21. Based on the profile, the system can “generate data representing a subset
`
`of acquired parameters,” which is the subset of parameters that the system will use
`
`to award the user with points. Id. at 41:21–22. The points awarded to the user can
`
`then be “aggregated to form an overall health and wellness score.” Id. at 38:45–46.
`
`A “target score” can also be set for the user, which is meant to “ensure the user is
`
`motivated or induced to continue to improve his or her health.” Id. at 38:58–59.
`
`23. The system utilizes “reference values” to convert the user’s health-
`
`related activities into points—for example, a “profile [that] includes data that
`
`equates 45 milligrams [of vitamin C] as 20 points” would award a user with only
`
`10 points if the user consumed only 22 milligrams. Id. at 44:6–21. After the user’s
`
`activity has been converted into points, those points can be added to the user’s
`
`“overall score” which “represent[s] the user’s progress . . . in meeting a target
`
`score.” Id. at 44:24–32. Thus the system can “adjust” (id. at 44:33–34 and Fig.
`
`17B) the user’s score “toward or away from the target score” (id. at 44:33–34)
`
`“based on one or more of the acquired parameters” (Id. at Fig. 17B).
`
`24. A user’s accumulated points “may be used for obtaining various types
`
`of rewards, or as a virtual or actual currency” to purchase “virtual prizes” or
`
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`8 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`“physical goods.” Id. at 28:7–14. The system can provide the user with graphical
`
`feedback that “may be a simple representation of a facial expression” (id. at 25:33–
`
`34) or may be a graphical representation of the user’s attained score (id. at Figs.
`
`10–11).
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`25.
`I understand that in this proceeding, a claim receives its broadest
`
`reasonable construction in light of the specification of the patent in which it
`
`appears. I also understand that in these proceedings, any term that is not construed
`
`should be given its plain and ordinary meaning under the broadest reasonable
`
`construction. I have followed these principles in my analysis below.
`
`VII. REFERENCES
`A. Hoffman
`26. Hoffman teaches an athletic performance monitoring system that can
`
`“encourage individuals to participate in athletic activities and improve their fitness
`
`levels.” Ex. 1003 at ¶ 0004. In particular, the system motivates users to exercise by
`
`rewarding them with “activity points” when they perform different athletic and
`
`non-athletic activities. Id. at ¶ 0005. Accumulated activity points can then be
`
`“spent” on rewards such as products, services, discounts, and status upgrades. Id.
`
`27. The system includes a “platform that maintains user account
`
`information.” Id. at ¶ 0069. This allows the user to “register with [the system] to
`
`track and monitor their athletic performance and other types of activity.” Id. The
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`
`9 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`system collects and stores information likely to “produce insights into various
`
`aspects of the user” such as their interests in sports, personal styles and strengths,
`
`their preferences for events or event locations, shopping and/or browsing interests,
`
`their social network memberships, and event participation and workout data. Id at
`
`¶ 0073. This information allows the system to “customize content based [] user
`
`interests” and “personalize the user’s experience” with the system. Id.
`
`28. The system also includes a wearable “athletic parameter measurement
`
`device” with one or more sensors for measuring “athletic parameters” relating to
`
`athletic activity, such as running or walking. Id. at ¶ 0037. The device is “located
`
`[in] the sole of a user’s shoe,” id. at ¶ 0038, Fig. 4, or within an exercise watch, id.
`
`at ¶ 0049, or wristband, id. at ¶ 0070. The acquired parameters from this device
`
`include “calories burned, miles run, steps taken,” see id. at ¶ 0096, as well as more
`
`activity-specific parameters such as heart rate, duration, and force exerted during
`
`weightlifting or step exercises, see id. at ¶ 0082, and speed and/or distance traveled
`
`during running exercises, see id. at ¶ 0038.
`
`29. The system converts the acquired parameters into “activity points”
`
`using a determined conversion rate based on the type of activity performed, id. at
`
`¶ 0077, “user characteristics such as weight, gender, height, age, resting heart rate,
`
`an[d] activity level,” id. at ¶ 0078, or a user’s athleticism as determined by the
`
`system and measured by, for example, a “SPARQ rating,” id. at ¶ 0079. The
`
`
`
`
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`10 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`system aggregates, or sums, a user’s activity points across all their tracked
`
`activities into a single activity-point “score,” which “allow[s] a user to measure
`
`[their] athletic performance across multiple types of activities.” Id. at ¶ 0091.
`
`30. Based on the user’s interests in their profile, the system can suggest
`
`target activity-point reward goals that can be “purchased” by a certain number of
`
`activity points. See id. at ¶¶ 0005, 0114, 0122–0123. These reward goals can
`
`include “VIP treatment” at stores or events, product and/or service discounts, and
`
`“video game related items.” Id. at ¶ 0122. The system can modify the activity-point
`
`“cost” of these rewards based on the user’s interests, for example by reducing the
`
`target activity-point reward goal for items related to the user’s interests. See id.
`
`31. The system can also display the user’s accumulated activity points
`
`relative to their target activity-point reward goal in order to “visually represent
`
`[the] progress a user has made toward earning a number of activity points needed
`
`to purchase [a] corresponding reward.” See id. at ¶¶ 0087, 0114, 0123, 0130, Figs.
`
`14–16. This display allows the user to compare their progress towards their
`
`activity-point reward goal over multiple types of athletic and non-athletic
`
`activities. See id. at ¶¶ 0091, 0123.
`
`B. Gilley
`32. Gilley teaches a health and fitness system similar to the system taught
`
`by Hoffman. Like Hoffman, Gilley establishes a user profile that defines a variety
`
`
`
`
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`11 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`of health and activity parameters (Ex. 1004 at ¶¶ 0015, 0045, 0084), monitors and
`
`analyzes activity data from sensors disposed in a wearable computing device (id. at
`
`¶¶ 0014, 0071, 0082, 0089, 0090), sets health and activity targets for a user (id. at
`
`¶¶ 0017, 0049, 0075, 0096, 0105), tracks and provides feedback regarding a user’s
`
`progress towards those targets (id. at ¶¶ 0016, 0099, 0169), and includes a reward
`
`system through which an attained amount of activity can be exchanged for a
`
`reward (id. at ¶¶ 0073, 0182). The system in Gilley, like Hoffman, provides
`
`nutritional monitoring (id. at ¶¶ 0183–0197) as well as social and community
`
`features (id. at ¶¶ 0018, 0171–0182).
`
`33. Additionally, the overall architecture of the system in Gilley is nearly
`
`identical to the system in Hoffman. Like Hoffman, Gilley utilizes activity sensors
`
`disposed in a portable electronic device worn by the user, such as a watch or band
`
`or in a user’s shoe. See id. at ¶¶ 0014, 0071, 0082, 0089, 0090. Like Hoffman,
`
`Gilley teaches that the sensors can communicate with another portable electronic
`
`device, such as an iPod. Compare id. (Gilley) at ¶¶ 0081–0082, 0089 with Ex.
`
`1003 (Hoffman) at ¶¶ 0033, 0037, 0047, and Fig. 2. As in Hoffman, collected
`
`activity data in Gilley is accessed and analyzed at the portable electronic device
`
`(Ex. 1004 at ¶ 0081) and/or uploaded to a user’s local computer (id. at ¶ 0085 and
`
`¶ 0089). Such data representing activity parameters in Gilley are likewise
`
`uploaded to a central activity-monitoring server, with which the user has registered
`
`
`
`
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`12 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`and has created a profile. Id. at ¶ 0084 and ¶ 0086. As in Hoffman, the server in
`
`Gilley analyzes a user’s activity data, presents it to the user along with the user’s
`
`progress toward achieving targets or goals, and provides motivational feedback and
`
`suggested targets or activities. Id. at ¶¶ 0084–0088. As in Hoffman, a user’s profile
`
`information can be synchronized and stored across the monitoring device, the
`
`server, and the user’s local computer. Id.
`
`34. The technological similarities between the systems of Hoffman and
`
`Gilley make compatibility natural. Gilley is assigned to Apple, Inc. and expressly
`
`teaches that its system can be implemented using “a sensor/receiver kit similar to
`
`the Nike+ipod Sport Kit sold by Apple, Inc. and Nike, Inc.” Id. at ¶ 0081–0082.
`
`See also id. at ¶ 0156 (“System 2000 can include . . . wearable sensors 2008 and
`
`2010 (e.g., the sensor from the Nike+iPod Sport Kit and its heat flux sensor)”).
`
`Hoffman is assigned to Nike, Inc. and describes the use of sensors in
`
`communication with an “interface device 205 and/or electronic player device 203,”
`
`such as the Nike+iPod Sport Kit utilized in Gilley. See, e.g., Ex. 1003 at ¶¶ 0033,
`
`0044–0045. Indeed, a combination of product technology taught in Gilley and
`
`Hoffman was jointly marketed by their assignees, Apple, Inc. and Nike, Inc., and
`
`received favorable reviews before the ’275 patent’s priority date. See, e.g., Ex.
`
`1011 (PC Magazine “Nike + iPod Sport Kit” Review, July 14, 2006).
`
`
`
`
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`13 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`35. The goal of the Gilley system is similar to that of Hoffman. Gilley
`
`teaches a health and fitness system intended to “assist or motivate the user” (Ex.
`
`1004 at ¶ 0067) that can dynamically adapt the user’s target “in order to maintain
`
`the user’s motivation” (id. at ¶ 0075 and ¶ 0140) and can provide activity
`
`instructions (id. at ¶ 0016) or “motivational messages tailored to the user’s
`
`performance metrics” in order to help the user reach their target (id. at ¶ 0169).
`
`36. Gilley teaches assigning activity levels to a user (“e.g., beginner,
`
`intermediate or advanced” id. at ¶ 0049) based on the user’s profile data (id. at
`
`¶ 0050) and data collected about the user’s activity (id. at ¶ 0017). See also Fig. 1.
`
`This allows the system to better tailor the user’s target and the activities suggested
`
`to the user so as to keep the user motivated by not subjecting the user to repeated
`
`failure through their inability to meet their target or to complete the suggested
`
`activities. See id. at ¶ 0075 (“if the collected data (e.g., sensor data) indicates that
`
`the user will not reach a target . . . the lifestyle companion system can temporarily
`
`[or permanently] reduce the target performance metric to a level that is more
`
`attainable . . . in order to maintain the user's motivation”); see also id. at ¶ 0140
`
`(“The electronic device also can adjust the user's fitness goals to be less ambitious
`
`to maintain the user's motivational level”); see also id. at ¶ 0039 and ¶ 0049.
`
`Gilley establishes a profile for the user based on data it collects about the user such
`
`as “physical and mental health . . . nutrition, weight, breathing metrics (e.g.,
`
`
`
`
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`14 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`breaths per minute or some other related metric), relaxation and/or sleep
`
`. . . weight goals and the user’s current nutritional habits. . . heart disease and
`
`cardiovascular issues, infections, joints and muscle problems . . . or any other
`
`medical condition” (id. at ¶ 0041) “relationships, career, financial condition,
`
`environment, hobbies, interests, other personal information, and goals regarding
`
`the same” (id. at ¶ 0044) and myriad other parameters in order to establish a
`
`profile. Then, “in step 102, the lifestyle companion system can assign or associate
`
`certain categories to the user profile.” Id. at ¶ 0049. For example, “the lifestyle
`
`companion system can assign an activity level to the user’s profile, e.g., beginner,
`
`intermediate, or advanced.” Id. at ¶ 0049. Accordingly, “[b]ased on the assigned
`
`activity level, the lifestyle companion system can later suggest fitness activities in
`
`step 104 that are more suited to the fitness category assigned to the user profile,
`
`and, thus, more suited to the capabilities of the user.” Id. at ¶ 0049.
`
`37. Gilley also teaches changing a user’s assigned level based on the
`
`activity data collected from the user as they use the monitoring device. As the
`
`user’s lifestyle changes, the profile is updated so that the suggested activities and
`
`references are also changed. Id. at ¶ 0045 and ¶ 0046. As the user engages in
`
`exercise and activities, the system gathers that information and “the lifestyle
`
`companion system can change the category level assigned to a user in step 102
`
`based on the collected data” so as to move the user up or down between the
`
`
`
`
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`15 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`classifications. Id. at ¶ 0072; see Fig. 1. As Gilley explains, “data collected in step
`
`110 [“data from user during performance of activity and/or throughout day(s)” id.
`
`at step 110 of Fig. 1] can be stored and thereafter analyzed, for example, by
`
`analysis software” and “the lifestyle companion system can change the category
`
`level assigned to a user in step 102 based on the collected data.” Id. at ¶ 0072. The
`
`system taught by Gilley can “use the collected data to dynamically adapt a user’s
`
`goals and/or activities in step 110.” Id. at ¶ 0072.
`
`38. Gilley also teaches providing tailored feedback such as suggestions
`
`for activities based on the user’s profile data and the data collected from the user.
`
`As Gilley explains, “[t]he lifestyle companion system also can use the collected
`
`data to determine when to provide audio and/or visual cues to the user and the type
`
`or content of the cues.” Id. at ¶ 0072. “For example, if the collected data indicates
`
`that the user will not reach a target performance metric. . . the lifestyle companion
`
`system can increase the intensity or duration of the current fitness activity or a
`
`future fitness activity” (id. at ¶ 0076) or otherwise “suggest activities . . . based on
`
`data previously collected in accordance with step 110” (id. at ¶ 0078) in order to
`
`compensate for the projected shortfall. Id. at ¶ 0078; see, e.g., id. at ¶ 0102 (for
`
`example, “the lifestyle companion system of the present invention can select
`
`fitness activities for suggestion to the user by selecting a precompiled workout
`
`compilation”).
`
`
`
`
`
`-16-
`
`
`
`16 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`VIII. CERTAIN REFERENCES TEACH OR SUGGEST ALL THE
`CLAIMED FEATURES OF CLAIMS 1–5, 8–10, 13–15, 18 AND 19 OF
`THE ’275 PATENT
`39.
`In my opinion, Hoffman teaches or suggests all the features recited in
`
`claims 1–5, 8, 9, 13–15, and 19 of the ’275 patent.
`
`A. Ground 1: Hoffman Teaches or Suggests All the Features of
`Claims 1–5, 8, 9, 13–15, and 19
`1.
`Claim 1
`40. As described below, Hoffman teaches the features of claim 1:
`
`Claim Language
`1. A method
`comprising:
`
`[1A] receiving
`data representing
`a profile defining
`parameters upon
`which a target
`score is
`established based
`on one or more
`health-related
`activities;
`
`
`Hoffman
`Hoffman teaches a method in which an activity monitoring
`system receives data representing a profile that defines a
`variety of parameters for a user, including parameters such as
`a user’s interests, upon which a target number of activity
`points for a goal or reward (i.e., a target score) is established
`based on one or more health-related activities of the user.
`
`“receiving data representing a profile . . .”: Hoffman teaches
`an activity monitoring system’s receipt of data representing a
`profile for a user that a user accesses via “login credentials
`such as a username and a password.” Ex. 1003 at ¶ 0109. See
`also id. at ¶ 0073 (the system “customize[s] content based on
`a user interests and other aspects of a user’s profile”), ¶ 0106
`(“a user may configure multiple devices by propagating or
`copying the profile”), and ¶ 0004 (“an individual’s personal
`site on an activity tracking and monitoring service may be
`
`
`
`
`
`-17-
`
`
`
`17 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Hoffman
`customized according to the interests of the individual as
`determined based on their behavior, their purchases, their
`athletic activity and/or combinations thereof”). As Hoffman
`further explains, its “athletic performance monitoring system
`801 may provide a . . . platform that maintains user account
`information” and “may allow users to register with system
`801 to track and monitor their athletic performance and other
`types of activity.” Id. at ¶ 0069.
`
`“. . . profile defining parameters . . .”: Hoffman further
`teaches that a user’s profile defines a wide range of
`parameters that are associated with a user, including, for
`example: a user’s interests (id. at ¶ 0073 and Claim 9); the
`type of activity data a user wishes to monitor and track in the
`system (id. at ¶ 0109); “athletic activity performance data,
`shopping history, browsing history” (id.); “a lifetime listing
`of activity submissions, activity point accumulating events,
`activity point consumption events and the like” (id. at
`¶ 0118); and “user characteristics such as weight, gender,
`height, age, resting heart rate, [and] activity level” (id. at
`¶ 0078). As Hoffman explains, “system 801 may allow users
`to register with system 801 to track and monitor their athletic
`performance and other types of activity” and “users may
`allow system 801 to collect user information and activity
`information such as workout data, on-line browsing statistics,
`
`
`
`
`
`-18-
`
`
`
`18 of 100
`
`

`
`
`
`Claim Language
`
`Hoffman
`shopping preferences and the like to formulate a digital
`portrait of the user.” Id. at ¶ 0069.
`
`“. . . parameters upon which a target score is established . .
`.”: Hoffman further teaches that a user’s profile defines
`parameters, such as a user’s interests, upon which a target
`score is established. The system of Hoffman converts
`measured amounts of a user’s athletic activity into “activity
`points” that—in addition to representing a user’s health-
`related activities—are used as a virtual currency to obtain
`various rewards. See, e.g., id. at ¶ 0005 (“The activity
`monitoring services and systems may further motivate a user
`to exercise by rewarding the users with activity points when
`the user performs a variety of different athletic and non-
`athletic activities. Activity points may comprise a form of
`currency that may be spent on various rewards.”).
`
`Hoffman teaches that the activity points necessary to purchase
`a reward are established and presented as a “goal” (i.e., a
`target score), as the system “use[s] reward 1601 and an
`activity point cost thereof as a goal on a user’s athletic
`performance monitoring site.” Id. at ¶ 0123. See also id. at
`¶ 0114 (“interface 1400 may further display a goal 1411 and a
`number of points 1413 needed to achieve goal 1411”) and id.
`at Claim 10 (“determine a goal defined for the user, wherein
`
`
`
`
`
`-19-
`
`