UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN TABLE SAWS
`INCORPORATING ACTIVE INJURY
`MITIGATION TECHNOLOGY AND
`COMPONENTS THEREOF
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-
`
`FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 337 OF THE
`TARIFF ACT OF 1930, AS AMENDED
`
`Complainants
`
`Proposed Respondents
`
`SawStop, LLC
`9564 S.W. Tualatin Road
`Tualatin, OR 97062
`Tel. 503-570-3200
`
`SD3, LLC
`9564 S.W. Tualatin Road
`Tualatin, OR 97062
`Tel. 503-570-3200
`
`Robert Bosch Tool Corporation
`1800 Central Road
`Mount Prospect, IL 60056
`Tel. 224-232-2000
`
`Robert Bosch GmbH
`Robert-Bosch-Platz 1
`70839 Gerlingen-Schillerhohe
`Baden-Wuerttemberg
`Germany
`Tel. +49-711-811-0
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 1
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................1
`
`COMPLAINANTS ............................................................................................................. 3
`
`III.
`
`PROPOSED RESPONDENTS ..........................................................................................8
`
`IV.
`
`THE PRODUCTS AT ISSUE ............................................................................................9
`
`V.
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENTS AND NONTECHNICAL DESCRIPTIONS OF
`THEINVENTIONS .........................................................................................................10
`
`A. (cid:9)
`
`B . (cid:9)
`
`Non-Technical Overview of the Inventions in the Asserted Patents ....................10
`
`The (cid:9) '7l2 Patent (cid:9) ....................................................................................................11
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the '712 Patent ......................................11
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the '712 Patent ...................................................12
`
`Non-Technical Description of the '712 Patent .........................................12
`
`C . (cid:9)
`
`The (cid:9) '455 (cid:9) Patent (cid:9) ....................................................................................................12
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the '455 Patent ......................................12
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the '455 Patent ...................................................13
`
`Non-Technical Description of the '455 Patent .........................................13
`
`D . (cid:9)
`
`The (cid:9) '836 Patent ....................................................................................................13
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the '836 Patent ......................................13
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the '836 Patent ...................................................14
`
`Non-Technical Description of the '836 Patent .........................................14
`
`E . (cid:9)
`
`The (cid:9) '927 Patent ....................................................................................................14
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the '927 Patent ......................................14
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the '927 Patent ...................................................15
`
`Non-Technical Description of the '927 Patent .........................................15
`
`F . (cid:9)
`
`The (cid:9) '279 (cid:9) Patent (cid:9) ....................................................................................................16
`
`1
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 2
`
`

`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the '279 Patent ......................................16
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the '279 Patent ...................................................16
`
`Non-Technical Description of the '279 Patent .........................................16
`
`G . (cid:9)
`
`The '450 Patent ....................................................................................................17
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the '450 Patent ......................................17
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the '450 Patent ...................................................17
`
`Non-Technical Description of the '450 Patent .........................................17
`
`H. (cid:9)
`
`Licensees to the Asserted Patents .........................................................................18
`
`VI.
`
`UNLAWFUL AND UNFAIR ACTS OF RESPONDENTS — PATENT
`INFRINGEMENT ............................................................................................................18
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`Infringement of the '712 Patent ............................................................................18
`
`Infringement of the '455 Patent ............................................................................19
`
`Infringement of the '836 Patent ............................................................................19
`
`Infringement of the '927 Patent ............................................................................20
`
`Infringement of the '279 Patent ............................................................................20
`
`Infringement of the '450 Patent ............................................................................21
`
`VII.
`
`SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF UNFAIR IMPORTATION ...............................................21
`
`VIII. CLASSIFICATION OF THE INFRINGING PRODUCTS UNDER THE
`HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE ..........................................................................21
`
`IX.
`
`RELATED LITIGATION ................................................................................................22
`
`X.
`
`THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY RELATING TO THE ASSERTED PATENTS............22
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`SawStop's Practice of the Asserted Patents (Technical Prong) ...........................22
`
`United States Economic Activity Relating-to the Domestic Industry
`Products (Economic Prong) .................................................................................. 22
`
`XI.
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED ....................................................................................................23
`
`ii
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 3
`
`

`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Description
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 7,225,712
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 7,600,455
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 7,610,836
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 7,895,927
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 8,011,279
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 8,191,450
`Certified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 7,225,712
`Certified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 7,600,455
`Certified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 7,610,836
`Certified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 7,895,927
`Certified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 8,011,279
`Certified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 8,191,450
`Foreign Counterparts of the Asserted Patents
`SawStop Awards
`SawStop Product Catalog
`SawStop Jobsite Saw User Guide
`Confidential Comments from Dealers
`Selection from Bosch Tool Website
`Bosch Tool Press Release
`Media Reports About the Accused Products
`'712 Patent Infringement Claim Chart
`Supplemental '712 Patent Infringement Claim Chart
`'455 Patent Infringement Claim Charts
`'836 Patent Infringement Claim Chart
`'927 Patent Infringement Claim Chart
`'279 Patent Infringement Claim Charts
`Supplemental '279 Patent Infringement Claim Chart
`'450 Patent Infringement Claim Chart
`Declaration Regarding Evidence of Importation
`'712 Patent Domestic Industry Claim Chart
`'455 Patent Domestic Industry Claim Chart
`'836 Patent Domestic Industry Claim Chart
`'927 Patent Domestic Industry Claim Chart
`'279 Patent Domestic Industry Claim Chart
`'450 Patent Domestic Industry Claim Chart
`Confidential Declaration Regarding the Domestic Industry
`Declaration Regarding Demonstrations of Accused Product
`Physical Exhibit: SawStop Jobsite Saw
`
`Exhibits
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`21A
`22
`23
`24
`25
`25A
`26
`27
`28
`29
`30
`31
`32
`33
`34
`35
`P1
`
`iii
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 4
`
`

`
`Appendices
`A
`B
`
`C
`D
`
`E
`F
`
`G
`H
`
`I
`J
`
`K
`L
`
`APPENDIX LIST
`
`Description
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,225,712
`Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentioned in the
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,225,712
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,600,455
`Additional Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentioned in
`the Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,600,455'
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,610,836
`Additional Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentioned in
`the Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,610,836
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,895,927
`Additional Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentioned in
`the Prosecution History of the U.S. Patent No. 7,895,927
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 8,011,279
`Additional Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentioned in
`the Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 8,0-11,279
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 8,191,450
`Additional Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentioned in
`the Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 8,191,450
`
`i This appendix and those that follow contains only patents and technical references not
`already included in earlier appendices.
`
`i`i'A
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 5
`
`

`
`I. (cid:9)
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`SawStop, LLC and SD3, LLC ("SawStop" or "Complainants") file this first
`
`amended complaint under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337,
`
`based on the unlawful importation into the United States, sale for importation into the United
`
`States, and/or sale within the United States after importation by proposed respondents Robert
`
`Bosch Tool Corporation ("Bosch Tool") and Robert Bosch GmbH (collectively "Proposed
`
`Respondents") of certain table saws incorporating active injury mitigation technology and
`
`components thereof that infringe one or more claims of United States Patent Nos. 7,225,712
`
`("the '712 patent"); 7,600,455 ("the '455 patent"); 7,610,836 ("the '836 patent"); 7,895,927
`
`("the '927 patent"); 8,011,279 ("the '279 patent"); and 8,191,450 ("the '450 patent")
`
`(collectively, the "Asserted Patents"), either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`2.
`
`SawStop, LLC is a manufacturer of table saws incorporating active injury
`
`mitigation technology and a licensee of the Asserted Patents. SD3, LLC is the parent of
`
`SawStop, LLC and owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the Asserted Patents.
`
`3.
`
`Proposed Respondents manufacture abroad, import, sell for importation into the
`
`United States, and/or sell or offer for sale after importation into the United States certain table
`
`saws incorporating active injury mitigation technology and components thereof ("Accused
`
`Products") that infringe the following claims of the Asserted Patents (independent claims in
`
`bold)2 :
`
`2 Complainants have not yet been able to conduct detailed examination and testing of
`the Accused Products because they have not yet been released for retail purchase.
`Complainants expect that, after testing, the Accused Products will be shown to infringe
`additional claims of the Asserted Patents, including at least claims 12-14 of the '712 patent and
`claims 2 and 3 of the '455 patent. Complainants expect to move to amend the first amended
`complaint to assert additional claims after obtaining discovery of the Accused Products and
`conducting the appropriate testing to confirm infringement.
`
`1
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 6
`
`

`
`Patent No.
`
`7,225,712
`
`7,600,455
`
`7,610,836
`
`7,895,927
`
`8,011,279
`
`8,191,450
`
`Asserted Claims
`
`8, 9, 11, 15, 18, 20
`
`1, 5, 7, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20
`
`1, 5, 16
`
`7, 8, 10, 11, 12
`
`1, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17
`
`1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 11
`
`4.
`
`A domestic industry as required by 19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)(2) and (3) exists in the
`
`United States relating to articles protected by the Asserted Patents. SawStop's domestic
`
`industry includes significant domestic investment in plant and equipment, significant domestic
`
`employment of labor and capital, and substantial domestic investment in the exploitation of the
`
`inventions claimed in the Asserted Patents.
`
`5.
`
`SawStop seeks as relief a permanent limited exclusion order under 19 U.S.C. §
`
`1337(d) barring from entry into the United States infringing table saws incorporating active
`
`injury mitigation technology and components thereof that are manufactured abroad, sold for
`
`importation, imported, and/or sold in the United States after importation by or on behalf of the
`
`Proposed Respondents. SawStop further seeks as relief permanent cease and desist orders under
`
`19 U.S.C. § 1337(f) prohibiting the Proposed Respondents from importing, selling, marketing,
`
`advertising, distributing, offering for sale, transferring (except for exportation), soliciting United
`
`States agents or distributors, or aiding and abetting other entities in the importation, sale for
`
`importation, sale after importation, transfer (except for exportation), or distribution of table
`
`saws incorporating active injury mitigation technology and components thereof that infringe the
`
`Asserted Patents.
`
`2
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 7
`
`

`
`II. COMPLAINANTS
`
`6.
`
`SawStop, LLC and SD3, LLC are limited liability companies organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Oregon. Both companies have a principal place of business at 9564
`
`S.W. Tualatin Road, Tualatin, Oregon. SD3, LLC owns the Asserted Patents and 100% of
`
`SawStop, LLC. SawStop, LLC is an operating company that designs, develops, produces and
`
`sells table saws with active injury mitigation technology.
`
`7.
`
`SawStop was founded in August, 2000 by Dr. Stephen F. Gass and several
`
`colleagues to commercialize inventions related to table saw safety. About one year earlier, Dr.
`
`Gass, a patent lawyer and life-long woodworker, was working in his newly-built barn when the
`
`thought came to him: "I wonder if you could stop a saw blade fast enough to avoid a serious
`
`injury?" Dr. Gass knew that table saw accidents are common and life-changing. His background
`
`in physics enabled him to calculate the speed and inertia of the blade, determine how fast the
`
`blade would have to stop to avoid a serious injury, and consider how to detect contact between
`
`the blade and a person. About a month after beginning to work on the problem he had
`
`developed a prototype. Thus began the story of SawStop that would profoundly change not
`
`only Dr. Gass' life, but the lives of thousands of woodworkers who would come to avoid
`
`serious injuries because of this technology.
`
`8.
`
`Excited by his invention, Dr. Gass joined with three fellow patent attorneys from
`
`his Portland law firm to further develop and protect the technology in hopes of licensing it to
`
`existing saw manufacturers. Pooling their resources, Dr. Gass and his colleagues formed SD3,
`
`LLC to own intellectual property associated with their work, and SawStop, LLC to further
`
`develop and commercialize safety systems for woodworking equipment. They also hired an
`
`engineering company to prepare more refined prototypes to demonstrate to potential licensees.
`
`3
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 8
`
`

`
`9. (cid:9)
`
`In 2000, SawStop's founders took their prototypes to the largest woodworking
`
`tradeshow in the U.S. - the International Woodworking Fair in Atlanta. There, in a small
`
`conference room far from the main show floor, Dr. Gass demonstrated the SawStop prototype to
`
`dozens of woodworkers by holding a hot dog on a board as if it were a misplaced finger and
`
`pushing the board and hot dog into the spinning blade. The blade would cut through the board
`
`until it touched the hot dog and then stop, leaving the hot dog with only a scratch, as shown in
`
`these photographs:
`
`10. Many woodworkers with missing fingers approached Dr. Gass and thanked him
`
`for making woodworking safer. Several power tool manufacturers also visited SawStop's tiny
`
`booth to watch the demonstration. SawStop gave them copies of about a dozen patent
`
`applications that they had recently filed on various inventions related to active injury mitigation
`
`technology to generate interest in commercializing SawStop's inventions. Before leaving the
`
`trade show, SawStop's prototypes won a competition called the Challenger's Award, which
`
`recognizes the most innovative developments in woodworking over the prior two years.
`
`11. Over the next two years, Dr. Gass and his colleagues discussed licensing their
`
`intellectual property to a number of interested power tool manufacturers, including Proposed
`
`El
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 9
`
`

`
`Respondents. However, by late 2002 it became apparent that the existing power tool
`
`manufacturers were not willing to license SawStop's inventions. Instead, Dr. Gass was told that
`
`while his technology was interesting, "safety doesn't sell," that the technology was unproven,
`
`could not be implemented in a benchtop or jobsite saw, and SawStop's proposed royalty to
`
`license its patents was too high.
`
`12. Dr. Gass and his colleagues were then faced with a choice — either give up and
`
`go back to practicing law, or raise money to develop their own saw and bring it to market.
`
`Believing that there would be a market demand for safer saws, Dr. Gass and his colleagues
`
`chose the latter course. They were able to raise several million dollars from investors who
`
`believed that SD3's patent rights would allow a small start-up company to compete successfully
`
`against larger, established power tool manufacturers like Proposed Respondents. Without patent
`
`protection, Dr. Gass and his colleagues would never have been able to raise the capital needed
`
`to bring their saws to market — and consumers would never have had the opportunity to
`
`purchase a safer saw.
`
`13.
`
`In late 2004 SawStop started selling industrial table saws equipped with
`
`inventions described in the Asserted Patents. These industrial saws are large, relatively
`
`expensive, stationary table saws typically found in factories, schools and wood shops. Today,
`
`SawStop's table saws are the best-selling industrial table saws in the country, with over 60,000
`
`saws installed in schools, factories and homes in all 50 states. SawStop saws have already saved
`
`the hands and fingers of thousands of people who had accidents while using them. Nearly every
`
`day, SawStop receives letters or e-mails from woodworkers who avoided injury, their
`
`employers, or their families such as the note below.
`
`5
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 10
`
`

`
`O (cid:9)
`
`f. Clays, Yj L ie- F i s o, (cid:9)
`w tp
`t-c t to S hole ''j S `S S4ccr1
`T 5 (
`}
`D
`
`
`
`Lid SO
`vvcytcivg O
`C-. \O ' (cid:9)
`t (cid:9)
`cr y'NL& Yee
`e C 1LLd (cid:9)
`e r ! Ao - t
`(cid:9) 5tt s
`0~ "5
`O
`
`o e,
`
`
`
`Gc (cid:9)
`
`hip
`
`S (cid:9)
`
`0(01 e (cid:9)
`
`l'\)_
`
`co
`
`C (cid:9)
`
`Win,
`
`14. (cid:9)
`
`About a year after first demonstrating the saw in Atlanta, SawStop was contacted
`
`by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, which asked to test one SawStop's
`
`prototype saws. SawStop was later awarded the CPSC Chairman's Commendation for
`
`Substantial Contributions to Product Safety. SawStop's table saws have received numerous
`
`other awards, including: Breakthrough Award from Popular Mechanics magazine; One of the
`
`100 Best New Innovations from Popular Science magazine; One of the Top 10 Tools from
`
`Workbench magazine; Award of Quality Editor's Choice from Workbench magazine; Reader's
`
`3
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 11
`
`

`
`Choice Award from Woodshop News magazine; Best Innovations from Time magazine;
`
`Woodwork Institute of California Endorsement; Sequoia Award from the Association of
`
`Woodworking & Furnishings Suppliers; Imhotep Award from the International Social Security
`
`Association; Nova Award from the Construction Innovation Forum; Editor's Choice Award
`
`from Tools of the Trade magazine; Editor's Best Overall Choice and Readers Choice Awards
`
`from Taunton's Tool Guide; the Heartwood Award from the Architectural Woodwork Institute;
`
`and the Innovation Award from Handy Magazine. See Exhibit 14. SawStop's patented
`
`technology has been featured multiple times on NPR 3 and has even been lampooned by the
`
`Colbert Report — for "destroying America" by denying Americans' right to cut off their
`
`fingers.4
`
`15. (cid:9)
`
`As SawStop grew, it invested heavily in the creation of new products, employing
`
`about a dozen engineers to conduct research and development. SawStop introduced new saws
`
`for different users at different price points. See Exhibit 15. For the past few years, SawStop has
`
`been developing what it calls its Jobsite Saw. See Exhibits 16 and P1. The Jobsite Saw is
`
`SawStop's first bench top table saw in a category the industry had claimed would be impractical
`
`for SawStop's safety technology. These saws are much lighter and less expensive than
`
`industrial table saws, and saws in the bench top category can typically be picked up by a single
`
`person to move from place to place or can be rolled around on a cart like a wheel barrow. Bench
`
`top table saws constitute the vast majority of the overall market for table saws. SawStop began
`
`' See http://ww.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyld=4182602;
`http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyld=127780027;
`http://www.npr.org/2011/06/18/13725 8370/if-table-saws-can-be-safer-why-arent-they;
`http://www.npr.org/2011/09/23/1 40708285/regulators-consider-safety-brakes-for-table-saws;
`http://www.npr.org/2011/12/29/144417825/201 2-could-see-new-regs-for-table-saws;
`http://www.npr.org/2012/04/02/14984335 1 /fixing-the-cutting-edge-innovation-meets-table-saw.
`" See http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/hgxqxc/people-who-are-destroying-
`america---sawstop
`
`7
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 12
`
`

`
`shipping these saws to dealers at the end of January 2015. SawStop's entry into the bench top
`
`market is the first time that SawStop has offered a product that competes directly with table
`
`saws sold by Proposed Respondents.
`
`16.
`
`Shortly after SawStop released its Jobsite Saw, it learned from potential
`
`distributors that Proposed Respondents were intending to sell a competing table saw with active
`
`injury mitigation technology into the bench top market this fall. As discussed below, Proposed
`
`Respondents have demonstrated this saw at domestic trade shows and on the internet, and offer
`
`it for sale through a distributor, although it is not yet in stock for purchase. SawStop has
`
`repeatedly heard dealers say they are not going to offer SawStop's Jobsite Saw and instead wait
`
`for the forthcoming saw from Proposed Respondents because of Proposed Respondents'
`
`dominant presence in the power tool market. See Exhibit 17.
`
`III. PROPOSED RESPONDENTS
`
`17. Bosch Tool is a Delaware Corporation with a principal place of business at 1800
`
`West Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois, 60056.
`
`18. According to its website, Bosch Tool was formed in January 2003 when Robert
`
`Bosch GmbH combined its North American power tool, accessory and lawn and garden
`
`divisions into one organization. See Exhibit 18.
`
`19. Robert Bosch GmbH is a German multinational engineering and electronics
`
`company located at Robert-Bosch-Platz 1, 70839 Gerlingen-Schillerhohe, Baden-
`
`Wuerttemberg, Germany.
`
`20.
`
`Robert Bosch GmbH designs and develops table saws and other power tools,
`
`which are predominately manufactured in Asia. Bosch Tool markets and sells Bosch-branded
`
`table saws and other power tools in the United States market.
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 13
`
`

`
`21.
`
`On March 18, 2015, Bosch Tool announced the Bosch GTS1041A REAXX, a
`
`bench top table saw allegedly equipped with "Active Response TechnologyTM" that detects
`
`flesh that contacts the blade and retracts the blade below the tabletop. See Exhibit 19.
`
`22.
`
`Following this announcement, Bosch Tool posted a promotional video of its
`
`REAXX saw on its website5 and has shown and demonstrated this table saw at several trade
`
`shows in the United States, including on March 20-21, 2015, in Providence, Rhode Island, at a
`
`trade show called "JLC Live New England." After that public demonstration the media
`
`reported that Bosch had previously shown and demonstrated the table saw in Las Vegas,
`
`Nevada during a trade show called "World of Concrete" that was held on February 3-6, 2015.
`
`Bosch has also shown the table saw on May 19-21, 2015, in Louisville, Kentucky, at a trade
`
`show called "Woodcraft's 18th Annual Vendor Trade Show." Bosch's announcement of a table
`
`saw with active injury mitigation technology has received substantial media attention, including
`
`comparisons with SawStop's Jobsite Saw. See Exhibit 20
`
`23.
`
`Bosch Tool currently offers the Bosch GTS 1041 A REAXX for sale through a
`
`distributor, AceTool. See http://www.acetoolonline.comBosx-GTSI -041A-09-Worksite-Table -
`
`Saw-REAXX-p/bos-gtslO4la-09.htm. However, at the time of filing this first amended
`
`complaint, AceTool did not have this saw in stock for retail purchase.
`
`IV. THE PRODUCTS AT ISSUE
`
`24.
`
`Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(12), the Accused Products include,
`
`without limitation, table saws incorporating active injury mitigation technology and components
`
`5 See http://www.boschtools.com/Innovation/Pages/ReaXXSaw.aspx
`
`6
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 14
`
`

`
`thereof, including Bosch's Model GTS-1041A REAXXTM table saw and replaceable safety
`
`cartridges designed for use in this product. 6
`
`V. THE ASSERTED PATENTS AND NONTECHNICAL DESCRIPTIONS OF
`THE INVENTIONS?
`
`A. (cid:9)
`
`25.
`
`Non-Technical Overview of the Inventions in the Asserted Patents
`
`Each year, tens of thousands of people suffer serious injuries, including
`
`amputations, in accidents involving table saws. The Asserted Patents are generally directed to
`
`safety inventions that mitigate these injuries.
`
`26.
`
`Table saws have long been equipped with guards to block the user from coming
`
`into contact with the blade However, due to the nature of the cutting operation, such guards
`
`cannot completely prevent the user from contacting the blade and many users suffer serious
`
`injuries despite the guards. In addition, many users find the guards interfere with their work and
`
`remove them from the saw.
`
`27.
`
`The Asserted Patents overcome the shortcomings of traditional injury-prevention
`
`systems. Instead of merely blocking the operator from contacting the dangerous components,
`
`the inventions described in the Asserted Patents include wordworking machines that stop and/or
`
`retract the dangerous components in response to detecting a dangerous condition.
`
`Woodworking machines as described in the Asserted Patents minimize potential injury to the
`
`operator; what may have previously been a severed finger is instead a minor surface wound.
`
`6 As noted above, a physical exhibit of the Accused Products is presently unavailable.
`Information regarding the Model GTS-1041A REAXX table saw can be found at Exhibit 18.
`7 All non-technical descriptions of the patents herein are presented to give a general
`background of those patents. These statements are not intended to be used nor should they be
`used for purposes of patent claim construction. Complainants present these statements subject
`to and without waiver of its right to argue that claim terms should be construed in a particular
`way under claim interpretation jurisprudence and the relevant evidence.
`
`10
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 15
`
`

`
`The patented inventions also overcome the shortcomings of traditional blade guards because
`
`they do not interfere with normal operation of the machine.
`
`28.
`
`The Asserted Patents also describe woodworking machines with control systems
`
`that determine the operability of the reaction system prior to an operator's use of the machine.
`
`These control systems protect the operator from injury that might otherwise occur if the reaction
`
`system failed to operate properly.
`
`29.
`
`The combination of the inventive elements of the Asserted Patents substantially
`
`reduce the risks associated with the operation of woodworking machines, thereby providing an
`
`overall benefit to the public by virtue of increased operator safety and a reduction in workplace
`
`accidents. In fact, SawStop saws embodying the inventions in the Asserted Patents have
`
`already mitigated injuries in over 3,000 accidents where a user came into contact with a
`
`spinning blade.
`
`B. (cid:9)
`
`The '712 Patent
`
`1. (cid:9)
`
`Identification and Ownership of the '712 Patent
`
`30.
`
`SD3, LLC owns by assignment the right, title and interest in United States Patent
`
`No. 7,225,712, titled "Motion Detecting System for Use in a Safety System for Power
`
`Equipment," which issued on June 5, 2007, naming Stephen F. Gass, Robert L. Chamberlain, J.
`
`David Fulmer, Joel F. Jensen, and Benjamin B. Schramm as inventors. A certified copy of the
`
`'712 patent is attached as Exhibit 1. A certified copy of the assignment from the named
`
`inventors to SD3, LLC is attached as Exhibit 7. A certified copy of the prosecution history of
`
`the '712 patent is attached as Appendix A. Copies of each patent and applicable pages of each
`
`technical reference mentioned in the prosecution history of the '712 patent are attached as
`
`Appendix B.
`
`11
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 16
`
`

`
`2. (cid:9)
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the '712 Patent
`
`31. (cid:9)
`
`Exhibit 13 lists each foreign patent and each pending foreign patent application
`
`(not already issued as a patent), and each foreign patent application that has been denied,
`
`abandoned or withdrawn, containing a disclosure corresponding to the '712 patent, with an
`
`indication of the prosecution status of each such patent application. No other foreign patents or
`
`patent applications corresponding to the '712 patent have been filed, abandoned, withdrawn, or
`
`rejected.
`
`3. (cid:9)
`
`Non-Technical Description of the '712 Patent
`
`32.
`
`The '712 patent relates generally to a woodworking machine with a control
`
`system that monitors rotation of a cutting tool and triggers a reaction system only if the cutting
`
`tool is moving, thereby distinguishing between potentially safe and unsafe operator contact with
`
`the cutting tool. The control system allows an operator to work in close proximity to the cutting
`
`tool once it has stopped but while the machine is still powered, such as making a measurement
`
`between a saw blade and a fence with a tape measure to set the cutting width on a table saw,
`
`without facing the risk of triggering the safety system due to incidental but non-dangerous
`
`contact with the stationary tool. The alternative of, for instance, disconnecting the power each
`
`time such an operation must be carried out would be far less convenient for the user.
`
`C. (cid:9)
`
`The '455 Patent
`
`1. (cid:9)
`
`Identification and Ownership of the '455 Patent
`
`33.
`
`SD3, LLC owns by assignment the right, title and interest in United States Patent
`
`No. 7,600,455, titled "Logic Control for Fast-Acting Safety System," which issued October 13,
`
`2009, naming Stephen F. Gass, J. David Fulmer, Joel F. Jensen, Benjamin B. Schramm, and
`
`Robert L. Chamberlain as inventors. A certified copy of the '455 patent is attached as Exhibit
`
`2. A certified copy of the assignment from the named inventors to SD3, LLC is attached as
`
`12
`
`SD3 Exhibit 2001 – Page 17
`
`

`
`Exhibit 8. A certified copy of the prosecution history of the '455 patent is attached as Appendix
`
`C. Copies of each patent and applicable pages of each technical reference mentioned in the
`
`prosecution history of the '455 patent are attached as Appendix D. 8
`
`2. (cid:9)
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the '455 Patent
`
`34. (cid:9)
`
`Exhibit 13 lists each foreign patent and each pending foreign patent application
`
`(not already issued as a patent), and each foreign patent application that has been denied,
`
`abandoned or withdrawn, containing a disclosure corresponding to the '455 patent, with an
`
`indication of the prosecution status of each such patent application. No other foreign patents or
`
`patent applications corresponding to the '455 patent have been filed, abandoned, withdrawn, or
`
`rejected.
`
`3. (cid:9)
`
`Non-Technical Description of the '455 Patent
`
`35.
`
`The '455 patent relates generally to a woodworking machine with a control
`
`system that tests whether a reaction system is operational. If the control system determines the
`
`reaction system is not operational, it will disable the machine. For example, if the control
`
`system determines the reaction system has failed or been installed improperly, the control
`
`system will prevent the machine from spinning the