IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`Al-Ali
`In re Patent of:
`8,457,703 Attorney Docket No.: 50095-0002IP1
`U.S. Patent No.:
`June 4, 2013
`
`Issue Date:
`Appl. Serial No.: 11/939,519
`
`Filing Date:
`November 13, 2007
`
`Title:
`LOW POWER PULSE OXIMETER
`
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF UNITED STATES PATENT
`NO. 8,457,703 PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319, 37 C.F.R. § 42
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
` 
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR .......................................................................... 2 
`  Grounds for Standing ................................................................................. 2 
`  Challenge and Relief Requested ................................................................. 3 
`THE ’703 PATENT ......................................................................................... 4 
`  Brief Description ........................................................................................ 4 
`  Summary of the Prosecution History ......................................................... 5 
`  Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art .............................................................. 5 
`  Claim Construction ..................................................................................... 6 
`1.  “reducing/reduce activation of an attached sensor” (claims 1 and 15) . 6 
`  UNPATENTABILITY GROUNDS ................................................................ 7 
`  GROUND 1A: Claims 9-10, 12-14, 20, and 22-24 are obvious based on
`Diab and Amano ......................................................................................... 7 
`1.  Overview of Diab .................................................................................. 7 
`2.  Overview of Amano .............................................................................. 8 
`3.  The Combination of Diab and Amano .................................................. 9 
`4.  Reasons to Combine Diab and Amano ............................................... 10 
`5.  Claim 9 ................................................................................................ 11 
`6.  Claim 10 .............................................................................................. 22 
`7.  Claim 12 .............................................................................................. 22 
`8.  Claim 13 .............................................................................................. 25 
`9.  Claim 14 .............................................................................................. 26 
`10. Claim 20 .............................................................................................. 26 
`11. Claim 22 .............................................................................................. 27 
`12. Claim 23 .............................................................................................. 28 
`13. Claim 24 .............................................................................................. 28 
`  GROUND 1B: Claims 11 and 21 are obvious based on Diab, Amano, and
`Edgar ......................................................................................................... 29 
`1.  Overview of Edgar .............................................................................. 29 
`2.  The Combination of Diab, Amano, and Edgar ................................... 30 
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`3.  Reasons to Combine Diab, Amano, and Edgar ................................... 31 
`4.  Claim 11 .............................................................................................. 33 
`5.  Claim 21 .............................................................................................. 37 
`  GROUND 1C: Claims 1-7 and 15-18 are obvious based on Diab, Amano,
`and Turcott ................................................................................................ 37 
`1.  Overview of Turcott ............................................................................ 37 
`2.  The Combination of Diab, Amano, and Turcott ................................. 37 
`3.  Reasons to Combine Diab, Amano, and Turcott................................. 38 
`4.  Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 40 
`5.  Claim 2 ................................................................................................ 43 
`6.  Claim 3 ................................................................................................ 43 
`7.  Claim 4 ................................................................................................ 44 
`8.  Claim 5 ................................................................................................ 44 
`9.  Claim 6 ................................................................................................ 45 
`10. Claim 7 ................................................................................................ 45 
`11. Claim 15 .............................................................................................. 45 
`12. Claim 16 .............................................................................................. 46 
`13. Claim 17 .............................................................................................. 46 
`14. Claim 18 .............................................................................................. 47 
`  GROUND 2A: Claims 9-10, 12-14, 20, and 22-24 are obvious based on
`Diab and the GK-POSITA; GROUND 2B: Claims 11 and 21 are obvious
`based on Diab, the GK-POSITA, and Edgar; GROUND 2C: Claims 1-7
`and 15-18 are obvious based on Diab, the GK-POSITA, and Turcott ..... 47 
`  GROUND 3A: Claims 9-10, 12-14, 20, and 22-24 are obvious based on
`Amano ...................................................................................................... 49 
`1.  Overview of Amano ............................................................................ 49 
`2.  Claim 9 ................................................................................................ 51 
`3.  Claim 10 .............................................................................................. 59 
`4.  Claim 12 .............................................................................................. 59 
`5.  Claim 13 .............................................................................................. 60 
`6.  Claim 14 .............................................................................................. 61 
`7.  Claim 20 .............................................................................................. 62 
`
`ii
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`8.  Claim 22 .............................................................................................. 63 
`9.  Claim 23 .............................................................................................. 63 
`10. Claim 24 .............................................................................................. 63 
`  GROUND 3B: Claims 1-3 and 15-17 are obvious based on Amano and
`Turcott ...................................................................................................... 64 
`1.  The Combination of Amano and Turcott ............................................ 64 
`2.  Reasons to Combine Amano and Turcott ........................................... 64 
`3.  Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 66 
`4.  Claim 2 ................................................................................................ 67 
`5.  Claim 3 ................................................................................................ 68 
`6.  Claim 15 .............................................................................................. 69 
`7.  Claim 16 .............................................................................................. 70 
`8.  Claim 17 .............................................................................................. 70 
`  PTAB DISCRETION SHOULD NOT PRECLUDE INSTITUTION .......... 70 
`A.  Factor 1: Institution will increase the likelihood of stay .......................... 70 
`B.  Factor 2: District Court schedule .............................................................. 71 
`C.  Factor 3: Apple’s investment in IPR outweighs forced investment in
`litigation to date ........................................................................................ 72 
`D.  Factor 4: The Petition raises unique issues .............................................. 73 
`E.  Factor 5: Institution would provide the Board an opportunity to invalidate
`claims that could later be reasserted against others .................................. 74 
`F.  Factor 6: Other circumstances support institution .................................... 74 
`PAYMENT OF FEES ................................................................................... 75 
`  CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 75 
`  MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R § 42.8(a)(1) ......................... 75 
`  Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ............................... 75 
`  Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ......................................... 75 
`  Lead And Back-Up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) .................... 76 
`  Service Information .................................................................................. 76 
`
` 
`
`iii
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE-1001
`
`APPLE-1002
`
`APPLE-1003
`
`APPLE-1004
`
`APPLE-1005
`
`APPLE-1006
`
`APPLE-1007
`
`APPLE-1008
`
`APPLE-1009
`
`APPLE-1010
`
`
`APPLE-1011
`
`
`APPLE-1012
`
`
`APPLE-1013
`
`
`APPLE-1014
`
`APPLE-1015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`EXHIBITS
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703 to Al-Ali (“the ’703 Patent”)
`
`Excerpts from the Prosecution History of the ’703 Patent
`
`Declaration of Brian W. Anthony, Ph.D.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,293,915 to Amano et al. (“Amano”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,393,311 to Edgar, Jr. et al. (“Edgar”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,527,729 to Turcott (“Turcott”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,632,272 to Diab et al. (“Diab”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,178,343 to Bindszus et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,924,979 to Swedlow et al.
`
`Tremper, Pulse Oximetry, Anesthesiology, The Journal of the
`American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc., Vol. 70, No. 1
`(January 1989)
`
`Mendelson, Skin Reflectance Pulse Oximetry: In Vivo
`Measurements from the Forearm and Calf, Journal of Clinical
`Monitoring, Vol. 7, No. 1 (January 1991)
`
`Excerpts from Bronzino, The Biomedical Engineering
`Handbook, CRC Press, Inc. (1995)
`
`Konig, Reflectance Pulse Oximetry – Principles and Obstetric
`Application in the Zurich System, Journal of Clinical
`Monitoring, Vol. 14, No. 6 (August 1998)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,490,505 to Diab et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,027,410 to Williamson et al.
`
`iv
`
`

`

`
`
`
`APPLE-1016
`
`
`APPLE-1017
`
`
`APPLE-1018
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0004428 to Pless
`et al.
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0032386 to
`Sackner et al.
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0163287 to Vock
`et al.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,163,721 to Thompson
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,058,203 to Inagami
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,711,691 to Howard et al.
`
`Reserved
`
`
`APPLE-1019
`
`APPLE-1020
`
`APPLE-1021
`
`APPLE-1022-1030
`
`APPLE-1031
`
`
`APPLE-1032
`
`APPLE-1033
`
`
`APPLE-1034
`
`
`APPLE-1035
`
`
`APPLE-1036
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Scheduling Order, Masimo v. Apple et al., Case 8:20-cv-00048,
`Paper 37 (April 17, 2020)
`
`Stipulation by Apple
`
`Telephonic Status Conference, Masimo v. Apple et al., Case
`8:20-cv-00048, Paper 78 (July 13, 2020)
`
`Joseph Guzman, “Fauci says second wave of coronavirus is
`‘inevitable’”, TheHill.com (Apr. 29, 2020), available at:
`https://thehill.com/changing-america/resilience/natural-
`disasters/495211-fauci-says-second-wave-of-coronavirus-is
`
`“Tracking the coronavirus in Los Angeles County,”
`LATimes.com (Aug. 20, 2020), available at
`https://www.latimes.com/projects/california-coronavirus-cases-
`tracking-outbreak/los-angeles-county/
`
`Order Amending Scheduling Order, Masimo et al. v. True
`Wearables et al., Case 8:18-CV-02001 (July 7, 2020)
`
`v
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`Apple Inc. (“Petitioner” or “Apple”) petitions for Inter Partes Review
`
`(“IPR”) of claims 1-7, 9-18, and 20-24 (“the Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,457,703 (“the ’703 Patent”). The ’703 Patent describes a purported
`
`improvement to “a sleep-mode pulse oximeter... utilizing conventional sleep-mode
`
`power reduction” “where the circuitry is powered down,” and thus “the pulse
`
`oximeter is not functioning during sleep mode” which can result in “miss[ed]
`
`events, such as patient oxygen desaturation.” APPLE-1001, 1:63-2:2, 2:18-21.
`
`According to the ’703 Patent, the improved pulse oximeter uses processing
`
`characteristics to “regulate pulse oximeter power dissipation” by “reducing
`
`activation of an attached sensor” or “reducing an amount of processing.” APPLE-
`
`1001, 5:15-23, claims 1 and 9.
`
`But this “improvement” was not new. To the contrary, the ’703 Patent was
`
`granted without full consideration to the wide body of applicable art. As Dr. Brian
`
`Anthony explains in his accompanying declaration with respect to the applied prior
`
`art, patient monitors such as pulse rate detectors and pulse oximeters commonly
`
`included these and other features before the ’703 Patent’s earliest effective filing
`
`date, and a patient monitor including each feature of the Challenged Claims would
`
`have been obvious to a POSITA. APPLE-1003, ¶¶37-127. For example, U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,293,915 to Amano et al. (APPLE-1004) describes the exact
`
`limitations of the ’703 Patent’s proposed solution to the problem found in the prior
`
`1
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`
`art “sleep-mode pulse oximeter.” APPLE-1001, 1:63-2:2, 2:18-21. Much like the
`
`’703 Patent, Amano describes a pulse wave examination apparatus that “reduce[s]
`
`power consumption in the apparatus” while allowing a subject to “detect his pulse
`
`condition continuously in his daily life” by suspending body movement processing
`
`operations (reducing an amount of processing) “when... no body movement is
`
`present.” APPLE-1004, 21:50-22:9, 35:54-64, 36:23-27, 38:26-27. Amano is not
`
`alone, as Turcott (APPLE-1006) describes “minimiz[ing] power consumption” by
`
`adjusting “the drive current” of the light emitter (reducing activation of an attached
`
`sensor). APPLE-1006, 11:51-59. Other references cited herein likewise disclose
`
`managing power consumption during continuous patient monitoring by adjusting
`
`behavior of a patient monitor, as discussed in detail below. Apple respectfully
`
`submits that an IPR should be instituted, and that the Challenged Claims should be
`
`canceled as unpatentable.
`
`
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR
`
` Grounds for Standing
`
`Apple certifies that the ’703 Patent is available for IPR. The present Petition
`
`is being filed within one year of service of a complaint against Apple in Masimo
`
`Corporation et al. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 8:20-cv-00048 (C.D. Cal.). Apple is not
`
`estopped from requesting this review challenging the Challenged Claims on the
`
`below-identified grounds.
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
` Challenge and Relief Requested
`
`An explanation of how these claims are unpatentable under the statutory
`
`grounds identified below is provided in the form of a detailed description that
`
`follow. Additional explanation and support for each ground of rejection is set forth
`
`in the Declaration of Brian W. Anthony, Ph.D. (APPLE-1003), referenced
`
`throughout this Petition.
`
`Ground
`
`Claims
`
`§103 Basis
`
`9-10, 12-14, 20, 22-24 Diab (APPLE-1007) and Amano
`
`11, 21
`
`Diab, Amano, and Edgar (APPLE-1005)
`
`1-7, 15-18
`
`Diab, Amano, and Turcott (APPLE-1006)
`
`9-10, 12-14, 20, 22-24 Diab and the General Knowledge of a
`POSITA (GK-POSITA)
`
`11, 21
`
`Diab, GK-POSITA, and Edgar
`
`1-7, 15-18
`
`Diab, GK-POSITA, and Turcott
`
`9-10, 12-14, 20, 22-24 Amano (APPLE-1004)
`
`1-3, 15-17
`
`Amano and Turcott (APPLE-1006)
`
`1A
`
`1B
`
`1C
`
`2A
`
`2B
`
`2C
`
`3A
`
`3B
`
`
`Each reference pre-dates the provisional application (filed 7/2/2001) and
`
`qualifies as prior art:
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`Reference
`
`Date
`
`Section
`
`Diab
`
`5/27/1997 (issued) 102(b)
`
`Amano
`
`7/16/1999 (filed)
`
`102(e)
`
`Edgar
`
`10/1/1999 (filed)
`
`102(e)
`
`Turcott
`
`10/11/2000 (filed) 102(e)
`
`None of these references were cited in any office action by the examiner
`
`during prosecution.
`
` THE ’703 PATENT
`
` Brief Description
`
`The ’703 Patent relates to “a low power pulse oximeter.” APPLE-1001,
`
`4:64-5:14, 5:14-15, FIG. 3. The pulse oximeter “utilizes multiple sampling
`
`mechanisms to alter power consumption.” APPLE-1001, 5:59-61; APPLE-1003,
`
`¶¶26-29. The ’703 patent describes that the sampling mechanisms “modify power
`
`consumption by, in effect, increasing or decreasing the number of input samples
`
`received and processed.” APPLE-1001, 6:9-11; APPLE-1003, ¶¶30-31. The
`
`patent states that “[s]ampling, including acquiring input signal samples and
`
`subsequent sample processing, can be reduced during high signal quality periods
`
`and increased during low signal quality periods or when critical measurements are
`
`necessary.” APPLE-1001, 6:11-15.
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`
`
`Summary of the Prosecution History
`
`Original claims 1-16 were rejected based on U.S. Patent No. 5,924,979 to
`
`Swedlow et al. (“Swedlow”). APPLE-1002, 65-68. In the response to the first
`
`office action, the applicant argued that “Swedlow discloses a ‘sleep mode’ for a
`
`pulse oximeter” and the “sleep mode technologies, including Swedlow, do not
`
`teach or suggest continuous determination of measurement values” but “[r]ather,
`
`sleep mode disclosures, including Swedlow, simply turn off various
`
`portions/electronics for predetermined periods of time.” APPLE-1002, 91. As
`
`described in detail below, other prior art references—which were never before the
`
`examiner—teach or suggest the claimed features. APPLE-1003, ¶32.
`
` Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art relating to, and at the time of, the
`
`invention of the ’703 Patent (“POSITA”) would have had a Bachelor of Science
`
`degree in an academic discipline emphasizing the design of electrical, computer, or
`
`software technologies, in combination with training or at least one to two years of
`
`related work experience with capture and processing of data or information,
`
`including but not limited to physiological monitoring technologies or a Master of
`
`Science degree in a relevant academic discipline with less than a year of related
`
`work experience in the same discipline. APPLE-1003, ¶33.
`
`5
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
` Claim Construction
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`Petitioner submits that all claim terms should be construed according to the
`
`Phillips standard. Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005); 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.100. Here, based on the evidence below and the prior art’s description
`
`of the claimed elements being similar to that of the ’703 patent specification, no
`
`formal claim constructions, except those discussed below, are necessary in this
`
`proceeding because “claim terms need only be construed to the extent necessary to
`
`resolve the controversy.” Wellman, Inc. v. Eastman Chem. Co., 642 F.3d 1355,
`
`1361 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
`
`1.
`
`“reducing/reduce activation of an attached sensor”
`(claims 1 and 15)
`
`We construe this phrase as “reducing the duty cycle of an emitter driver
`
`output to the sensor” or “entering a data off state for a time period in which the
`
`emitter drivers are turned off.” APPLE-1003, ¶36. This construction is consistent
`
`with the ’703 Patent disclosure, as understood by a POSITA, which states that
`
`“[i]ntermittently reducing the drive current duty cycle can advantageously reduce
`
`power dissipation” and “[i]n conjunction with an intermittently reduced duty cycle
`
`or as an independent sampling mechanism, there may be a ‘data off’ time period
`
`longer than one drive current cycle where the emitter drivers... are turned off.”
`
`APPLE-1001, 3:28-30, 6:66-7:1, 7:8-12; APPLE-1003, ¶36.
`
`6
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`Moreover, regardless of whether the particular language offered by this
`
`proposed construction is adopted, the scope of the phrase “reducing/reduce
`
`activation of an attached sensor” should nonetheless be broad enough to
`
`encompass “reducing the duty cycle of an emitter driver output to the sensor” and
`
`“entering a data off state for a time period in which the emitter drivers are turned
`
`off.” See APPLE-1001, 3:28-30, 6:66-7:1, 7:8-12; APPLE-1003, ¶36.
`
` UNPATENTABILITY GROUNDS
`
` GROUND 1A: Claims 9-10, 12-14, 20, and 22-24 are
`obvious based on Diab and Amano
`
`1. Overview of Diab1
`
`Diab describes “a physiological monitor for pulse oximetry” referred to as
`
`“pulse oximeter 299.” APPLE-1007, 34:10-12, FIG. 11. The oximeter includes “a
`
`digital signal processing system 334” that “provides clean plethysmographic
`
`waveforms of the detected signals and provides values for oxygen saturation and
`
`pulse rate to the display.” APPLE-1007, 35:34-47, 34:24-28, FIGS. 13-14. The
`
`signal processor 334 performs functions of a “pulse rate module 410” that includes
`
`
`1 General descriptions provided for the references, including but not limited to
`
`Diab, and combinations thereof are hereby incorporated into each subsection
`
`addressing/applying those references, as are the discussions of combinations.
`
`7
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`
`“a motion status module 584,” the output of which is provided to “a motion artifact
`
`suppression module 580.” APPLE-1007, 38:61-63, 47:30-38, 47:47-49, FIGS. 14,
`
`20. An “average peak width value” is input to the motion status module 584, and
`
`“if the peaks are wide, this is taken as an indication of motion.” APPLE-1007,
`
`47:50-52, FIG. 20. “If motion is not detected, spectral estimation on the signals is
`
`carried out directly without motion artifact suppression,” and “[i]n the case of
`
`motion, motion artifacts are suppressed using the motion artifact suppression
`
`module 580.” APPLE-1007, 47:52-56. The “output filter 594” of the pulse rate
`
`module 410 provides “the pulse of the patient, which is advantageously provided to
`
`the display.” APPPLE-1007, 48:3-5, 50:27-29; APPLE-1003, ¶¶37-40.
`
`2. Overview of Amano
`
`Amano describes a “pulse wave examination apparatus” that includes a
`
`“pulse wave detecting section 10.” APPLE-1004, 40:23-24. Amano teaches that,
`
`in the context of processing the detected pulse wave obtained from a LED and a
`
`phototransistor of the pulse wave detection section 10, “when the body movement
`
`component eliminating section 30 is made to operate for the elimination of the
`
`body movement component [from the detected pulse wave] even if there is no
`
`body movement,... power is consumed by the body movement eliminating
`
`operation.” APPLE-1004, 21:3-57. Amano provides a solution where “when no
`
`body movement is present, the operations of the waveform treating section 21 and
`
`8
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`
`body movement component eliminating section 30 are suspended,” which
`
`“reduce[s] power consumption in the apparatus.” APPLE-1004, 21:65-22:6,
`
`35:54-64. Thus, Amano teaches reducing power consumption by suspending
`
`unnecessary processing operations. Id.; APPLE-1003, ¶¶41-42.
`
`3.
`
`The Combination of Diab and Amano
`
`In light of Amano’s teaching that “power is consumed by the body
`
`movement eliminating operation,” a POSITA would have found obvious that
`
`operating Diab’s “motion artifact suppression module 580” likewise consumes
`
`power. APPLE-1004, 21:50-22:6, 35:54-64; APPLE-1007, 47:52-56, 48:34-49:38;
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶43. Additionally, in light of Amano’s teaching that suspending
`
`“the operations of... body movement component eliminating section” reduces
`
`power consumption, a POSITA would have found obvious that performing Diab’s
`
`“spectral estimation on the signals... directly without motion artifact suppression” 2
`
`similarly reduces power consumption. Id. In light of Amano’s teaching of
`
`reducing power consumption by suspending unnecessary processing operations, a
`
`POSITA would have found obvious that Diab’s oximeter likewise reduces power
`
`consumption by performing “spectral estimation on the signals... directly without
`
`motion artifact suppression.” Id.
`
`
`2 All emphasis added unless otherwise indicated.
`
`9
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`4.
`
`Reasons to Combine Diab and Amano
`
`A POSITA would have been motivated to and would have found it obvious
`
`and straightforward to supplement Diab’s teachings with the teachings of Amano
`
`as described above. APPLE-1003, ¶44. Both Diab and Amano are in the same
`
`field of art and relate to devices that provide pulse waveforms. APPLE-1004,
`
`21:3-8, 29:23-25, 31:2-8, 33:50-54, 34:3-14, 35:17-21, 36:23-27, 38:26-27, 40:23-
`
`27; APPLE-1007, 34:27-28, 35:44-47, 49:25-32. Both Amano and Diab disclose a
`
`need to eliminate motion-induced noise from a pulse waveform. APPLE-1004,
`
`33:54-67; APPLE-1007, 2:23-26, 2:53-3:9, 34:1-9.
`
`Amano is offered to demonstrate that reducing the amount of processing by
`
`suspending operations reduces power consumption. APPLE-1004, 21:50-22:6,
`
`35:54-64; APPLE-1007, 47:52-56, 48:34-49:38; APPLE-1003, ¶45. A POSITA
`
`faced with Diab’s disclosure would look to similar systems, such as Amano, to
`
`obtain more information on the effect of Diab’s reduction in processing. Id.
`
`Amano’s teachings reveal to a POSITA that changes in power consumption were
`
`obvious from changes in the amount of processing that are contemplated by Diab.
`
`Id. A POSITA would have recognized that supplementing Diab’s teachings with
`
`the teachings of Amano as described above would have led to predictable results
`
`without significantly altering or hindering the functions performed by Diab’s
`
`oximeter. Id.
`
`10
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`5.
`
`Claim 9
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`9[p]: “A method of managing power consumption during continuous patient
`monitoring by adjusting behavior of a patient monitor, the method
`comprising:”
`
`In the combination, Diab teaches a method for operating “a physiological
`
`monitor for pulse oximetry” referred to as “pulse oximeter 299” that “compute[s]
`
`the arterial and venous blood oxygen saturations of a physiological system on a
`
`continuous or nearly continuous time basis.” APPLE-1007, 34:10-12, 63:38-41,
`
`FIG. 11; APPLE-1003, ¶46. The oximeter includes “a digital signal processing
`
`system 334” that “provides clean plethysmographic waveforms of the detected
`
`signals and provides values for oxygen saturation and pulse rate to the display.”
`
`APPLE-1007, 35:34-47, 34:24-28, FIGS. 13-14. A portion of the functional
`
`diagram of the oximeter 299 is shown below:
`
`APPLE-1007, Detail of FIG. 11
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`Diab’s signal processor 334 adjusts behavior of the oximeter during
`
`continuous patient monitoring by including “a motion status module 584,” the
`
`output of which is provided to “a motion artifact suppression module 580.”
`
`APPLE-1007, 47:30-38, 47:47-49, FIGS. 14, 20; APPLE-1003, ¶¶47-48. An
`
`“average peak width value” is input to the motion status module 584, and “if the
`
`peaks are wide, this is taken as an indication of motion.” APPLE-1007, 47:50-52,
`
`FIG. 20. “If motion is not detected, spectral estimation on the signals is carried out
`
`directly without motion artifact suppression,” and “[i]n the case of motion, motion
`
`artifacts are suppressed using the motion artifact suppression module 580.”
`
`APPLE-1007, 47:52-56. Thus, Diab adjusts the behavior of the oximeter by (1)
`
`not performing motion artifact suppression when motion is not detected and (2)
`
`suppressing motion artifacts when motion is detected. APPLE-1007, 47:52-56;
`
`APPLE-1003, ¶¶47-48.
`
`Also in the combination, Amano teaches that “when the body movement
`
`component eliminating section... is made to operate... power is consumed by the
`
`body movement eliminating operation” and “when no body movement is present,
`
`the operations of... body movement component eliminating section... are
`
`suspended,” “thereby reducing calculation time and power consumption.”
`
`APPLE-1004, 21:50-22:6, 35:54-64. A POSITA would have found obvious that
`
`operating Diab’s “motion artifact suppression module 580” consumes power based
`
`12
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`
`on Amano’s teaching that “power is consumed by the body movement eliminating
`
`operation” to Diab’s oximeter. APPLE-1004, 21:50-22:6, 35:54-64; APPLE-1007,
`
`48:34-49:38; APPLE-1003, ¶49.
`
`Additionally, a POSITA would have found obvious that performing
`
`“spectral estimation on the signals... directly without motion artifact suppression”
`
`reduces power consumption based on Amano’s teaching that suspending “the
`
`operations of... body movement component eliminating section” reduces power
`
`consumption. Id.; APPLE-1003, ¶50. A POSITA would have been motivated and
`
`would have found it obvious and straightforward to combine Diab with Amano to
`
`manage power consumption by “reducing calculation time and power
`
`consumption,” as suggested by Amano, “[i]f motion is not detected” by performing
`
`“spectral estimation on the signals... directly without motion artifact suppression,”
`
`as taught by Diab. Id.
`
`9[a]: “driving one or more light sources configured to emit light into tissue of
`a monitored patient;”
`9[b]: “receiving one or more signals from one or more detectors configured to
`detect said light after attenuation by said tissue;”
`
`In the combination, Diab’s “pulse oximeter... non-invasively measures the
`
`arterial saturation of oxygen in the blood.” APPLE-1007, 2:66-3:1. Diab’s
`
`oximeter 299 includes “red and infrared light emitters 301, 302 [that] each emits
`
`energy which is absorbed by the finger 310 and received by the photodetector 320”
`
`13
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`
`after attenuation by the finger. APPLE-1007, 35:23-27, 4:51-57, 33:51-60, 34:12-
`
`19; APPLE-1003, ¶51. “The finger comprises skin, tissue, muscle, both arterial
`
`blood and venous blood, fat, etc., each of which absorbs light energy.” APPLE-
`
`1007, 33:60-64. A portion of the functional diagram of the oximeter 299 showing
`
`the sensor is below:
`
`light sources
`
`detector
`
`tissue
`
`
`
`APPLE-1007, Detail of FIG. 11 (annotated)
`
`9[c]: “continuously operating a patient monitor at a lower power consumption
`level to determine measurement values for one or more physiological
`parameters of a patient;”
`
`In the combination, Diab’s oximeter includes “a digital signal processing
`
`system 334” that includes a “digital signal processor 362” that carries out “the
`
`operations of the pulse oximeter 299” depicted in FIGS. 14-20. APPLE-1007,
`
`38:31-38, 38:61-63. The signal processor “provides clean plethysmographic
`
`waveforms of the detected signals and provides values for oxygen saturation and
`
`pulse rate to the display.” APPLE-1007, 35:34-47, 34:24-28, FIGS. 13-14. The
`
`signal processor 334 of the oximeter 299 performs functions of a “pulse rate
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 50095-0002IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703
`
`
`module 410” that includes “a motion