`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________________
`
`
`DJI EUROPE B.V.
`
`v.
`TEXTRON INNOVATIONS INC.
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`___________________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,275,950
`_____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. CHARLES REINHOLTZ IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT 10,275,950
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`DJI-1003
`IPR2023-01106
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I. 
`QUALIFICATIONS .................................................................................... 2 
`UNDERSTANDING OF RELEVANT LEGAL PRINCIPLES ................. 6 
`II. 
`’950 PATENT .............................................................................................. 9 
`III. 
`A.  Overview ................................................................................................... 9 
`B.  Level Of Ordinary Skill In The Art ........................................................ 12 
`C.  Prosecution History ................................................................................. 12 
`D.  Claim Construction ................................................................................. 18 
`IV.  GROUND 1: THE COMBINATION OF WARNER AND
`SHAVIT RENDERS CLAIMS 1-3, 8-9, 11-13, 14 AND 16
`OBVIOUS. ................................................................................................. 19 
`A.  Overview of the Combination ................................................................. 19 
`1.  Overview of Warner .......................................................................... 19 
`a.  Warner .......................................................................................... 20 
`2.  Wakutsu ............................................................................................. 30 
`3.  Shavit ................................................................................................. 31 
`4.  Motivation to Combine ...................................................................... 38 
`a.  Warner and Wakutsu .................................................................... 38 
`b.  Warner, Wakutsu, and Shavit ....................................................... 42 
`Independent Claim 1 ............................................................................... 46 
`1.  Preamble [1P] ..................................................................................... 48 
`2. 
`“Sensor” [1A]. .................................................................................... 49 
`3. 
`“Avionics System” [1B]/[1I] ............................................................... 50 
`4. 
`“Database” [1C] ................................................................................ 54 
`a. 
`“Database” in the aircraft. ............................................................. 55 
`b. 
`“Database” external to the aircraft. ............................................... 58 
`“Wireless transmitter” [1D] ............................................................... 61 
`
`B. 
`
`5. 
`
`- i -
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`6. 
`
`3. 
`
`4. 
`
`C. 
`
`D. 
`
`Page
`“Transceiver” [1E]. ............................................................................ 65 
`a. 
`“Transceiver” ................................................................................ 66 
`b. 
`“Transceiver comprising an input device” [1E.1], “Pilot
`identification information is entered directly” [1J] ...................... 68 
`“Transceiver having a transceiver identity” [1E.3] ...................... 69 
`c. 
`“Transceiver being configured for …” [1E.3], [1F], [1G] ........... 73 
`d. 
`“Only Accessible” [1H]. ..................................................................... 76 
`7. 
`Independent Claim 9 ............................................................................... 78 
`1.  Preamble [9P] ..................................................................................... 79 
`2. 
`“Wireless Transmitter” Limitations [9A.1]-[9A.3] ........................... 80 
`3. 
`“Database” Limitations [9B.1]-[9B.2] .............................................. 82 
`4. 
`“Transceiver” Limitations ................................................................. 83 
`5. 
`“Only Accessible” [9D] ...................................................................... 84 
`6.  Data Flow Limitation ......................................................................... 85 
`Independent Claim 13 ............................................................................. 86 
`1.  Preamble [13P] ................................................................................... 87 
`2. 
`“Providing an avionics system” [13A], “Sensing” [13B]
`and “providing a wireless transmitter” [13C] ................................... 87 
`“Transmitting the sensed flight performance data to a
`transceiver …” [13D] ......................................................................... 90 
`“Entering the pilot identification information directly on the
`transceiver” [13E] .............................................................................. 91 
`“Associating, by the transceiver, the sensed flight
`performance data …” [13F] ............................................................... 91 
`“Transmitting, by the transceiver, the received sensed flight
`performance data …” [13G] .............................................................. 92 
`
`5. 
`
`6. 
`
`- ii -
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`7. 
`
`“Allowing access to the received sensed flight performance
`data …” [13H] .................................................................................... 92 
`E.  Dependent Claims ................................................................................... 92 
`1.  Claims 2, 3, and 12 ............................................................................ 92 
`2.  Claims 4 and 5 ................................................................................... 94 
`3.  Claims 7, 10, and 16 .......................................................................... 95 
`4.  Claim 8 ............................................................................................... 96 
`5.  Claim 11 ............................................................................................. 97 
`6.  Claim 14 ............................................................................................. 98 
`V.  GROUND 2: THE COMBINATION OF WARNER,
`WAKUTSU, SHAVIT, AND GREUBEL RENDERS CLAIMS
`1-5, 7-14, AND 16 OBVIOUS. ................................................................. 99 
`A.  Overview of the Combination ............................................................... 100 
`1.  Greubel ............................................................................................. 100 
`2.  Motivation to Combine .................................................................... 104 
`Independent Claims ............................................................................... 108 
`B. 
`C.  Dependent Claims ................................................................................. 109 
`VI.  GROUND 3: THE COMBINATION OF UCZEKAJ AND
`JIANG RENDERS CLAIMS 1-5, 8-9, 11-14, AND 16
`OBVIOUS. ............................................................................................... 109 
`A.  Overview of the Combination ............................................................... 109 
`1.  Uczekaj ............................................................................................. 109 
`2. 
`Jiang ................................................................................................. 117 
`3.  Motivation to Combine .................................................................... 122 
`Independent Claim 1 ............................................................................. 126 
`1.  Preamble [1P] ................................................................................... 127 
`2. 
`“Sensor” [1A] ................................................................................... 128 
`
`B. 
`
`- iii -
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`3. 
`4. 
`
`5. 
`6. 
`
`Page
`“Avionics System” [1B]/[1I] ............................................................. 129 
`“Database” [1C] .............................................................................. 131 
`a. 
`“Database” in the aircraft ............................................................ 131 
`b. 
`“Database” external to the aircraft. ............................................. 135 
`“Wireless Transmitter” [1D] ............................................................ 131 
`“Transceiver” [1E]. .......................................................................... 139 
`a. 
`“Transceiver” .............................................................................. 140 
`b. 
`“Transceiver comprising an input device” [1E.1], “Pilot
`identification information is entered directly” [1J]. ................... 140 
`“Transceiver having a transceiver identity” [1E.3] .................... 142 
`c. 
`“Transceiver being configured for …” [1E.3], [1F], [1G] ......... 143 
`d. 
`“Only Accessible” [1H]. ................................................................... 145 
`7. 
`Independent Claim 9 ............................................................................. 147 
`1.  Preamble [9P] ................................................................................... 149 
`2. 
`“Wireless Transmitter” Limitations [9A.1]-[9A.3]. ........................ 150 
`3. 
`“Database” Limitations [9B.1]-[9B.2] ............................................ 152 
`4. 
`“Transceiver” Limitations ............................................................... 153 
`5. 
`“Only Accessible” [9D] .................................................................... 154 
`6.  Data Flow Limitation ....................................................................... 154 
`Independent Claim 13 ........................................................................... 155 
`1.  Preamble [13P] ................................................................................. 156 
`2. 
`“Providing an avionics system” [13A], “Sensing” [13B]
`and “providing a wireless transmitter” [13C] ................................. 157 
`“Transmitting the sensed flight performance data to a
`transceiver …” [13D] ....................................................................... 160 
`
`C. 
`
`D. 
`
`3. 
`
`- iv -
`
`

`

`5. 
`
`6. 
`
`7. 
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`4. 
`
`“Entering the pilot identification information directly on the
`transceiver” [13E] ............................................................................ 161 
`“Associating, by the transceiver, the sensed flight
`performance data …” [13F] ............................................................. 161 
`“Transmitting, by the transceiver, the received sensed flight
`performance data …” [13G] ............................................................ 161 
`“Allowing access to the received sensed flight performance
`data …” [13H] .................................................................................. 162 
`E.  Dependent Claims ................................................................................. 162 
`1.  Claims 2, 3, and 12 .......................................................................... 162 
`2.  Claims 4 and 5 ................................................................................. 163 
`3.  Claim 8 ............................................................................................. 164 
`4.  Claim 11 ........................................................................................... 165 
`5.  Claim 14 ........................................................................................... 166 
`6.  Claim 16 ........................................................................................... 167 
`VII.  GROUND 4: THE COMBINATION OF UCZEKAJ, JIANG
`AND GREUBEL RENDERS CLAIMS 1-5, 8-9, 11-14 AND 16
`OBVIOUS. ............................................................................................... 168 
`A.  Motivation to Combine ......................................................................... 169 
`B. 
`Independent Claims ............................................................................... 171 
`C.  Dependent Claims ................................................................................. 172 
`VIII.  GROUND 5: THE COMBINATION OF WARNER, SHAVIT,
`AND UCZEKAJ DISCLOSES LIMITATIONS 4-5. ............................. 172 
`
`- v -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`
`
`I, Dr. Reinholtz, declare as follow:
`1.
`I have been engaged by Perkins Coie LLP on behalf of DJI Europe
`
`B.V. (“Petitioner”), to provide this Declaration concerning technical subject matter
`
`relevant to the petition for Inter Partes Review (“Petition”) of U.S. Patent No.
`
`10,275,950 to Girard (“the ’950 patent”).
`
`2.
`
`I am over 18 years of age. I have personal knowledge of the facts
`
`stated in this Declaration and could testify competently to them if asked to do so. I
`
`have reviewed and am familiar with the specification and the claims of the ’950
`
`patent. In general, I will cite to the specification of a United States patent using the
`
`following formats: (Patent No., Col:Line Number(s)) or (Patent No., Paragraph
`
`Number(s)). For example, the citation (’950 patent, 1:1-10) points to the ’950
`
`patent specification at column 1, lines 1-10. Also, for convenience, I use italics to
`
`denote limitations from the challenged claims.
`
`3.
`
`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 listed in the
`
`attached Appendix. I have also reviewed and am familiar with any other document
`
`referred to in this Declaration.
`
`4.
`
`I have been asked to provide my technical opinions regarding how a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood the claims of the ’950
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`
`patent at the time of the alleged invention, which I have been asked to assume is
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`the 2013 timeframe. For purposes of whether the teachings of the prior art render
`
`the claims of the ’950 patent obvious, I have been asked to assume the date of July
`
`26, 2013. I have also been asked to provide my technical opinions on how concepts
`
`in the ’950 patent specification relate to claim limitations of the ’950 patent. In
`
`reaching the opinions provided herein, I have considered the ’950 patent, its
`
`prosecution history, and the references cited above and have drawn as appropriate
`
`on my own education, training, research, knowledge, and personal and professional
`
`experience
`
`I. Qualifications
`5.
`In formulating my opinions, I have relied on my knowledge, training,
`
`and experience in the relevant field, which I will briefly summarize. A more
`
`detailed summary of my background, education, experience, and publications is set
`
`forth in my curriculum vitae (CV), which is submitted as DJI-1004. I have personal
`
`knowledge of the facts and opinions set forth in this declaration and believe them
`
`to be true. If called upon to do so, I would testify competently thereto. I have been
`
`warned that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or
`
`imprisonment, or both. I am being compensated for my time at my standard
`
`consulting rate. I am also being reimbursed for expenses that I incur during the
`
`course of this work. My compensation is not contingent upon the results of my
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`
`study and analysis, the substance of my opinions, or the outcome of any
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`proceeding involving the Challenged Claims. I have no financial interest in the
`
`outcome of this matter or in any litigation involving the ’950 patent.
`
`6.
`
`I am currently Emeritus Professor and Chair at Embry-Riddle
`
`Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, Florida. I was a Professor in in the
`
`Department of Mechanical Engineering at Embry-Riddle from 2007 until my
`
`retirement from full time teaching in May, 2022. I also served as Chair of the
`
`department from 2007 through 2017. From 1983 to 2007, I was a faculty member
`
`in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
`
`State University (Virginia Tech) in Blacksburg, Virginia, most recently serving as
`
`Alumni Distinguished Professor from 2002 to 2007. In my time at Virginia Tech, I
`
`also served as the Assistant Department Head, W.S. White Chair for Innovation in
`
`Engineering Education and ABET Review Chair, among other appointments. I
`
`earned a Bachelor of Science Degree (1976), a Master of Engineering Degree
`
`(1980), and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering (1983) from the University of
`
`Florida. My Ph.D. research was in the field of optimization of spatial mechanisms.
`
`7.
`
`I am a member of numerous professional societies and organizations.
`
`For example, I have been a Fellow in the American Society of Mechanical
`
`Engineers (ASME) since 2003. That organization has recognized my work on a
`
`number of occasions, including with the award of the ASME Outstanding Faculty
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`
`Advisor Award (1989-1990, 1991-92), the ASME National Faculty Advisor Award
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`(1995), and the ASME Distinguished Service Award (2005). For forty years, I
`
`have conducted research and taught classes in the field of mechanisms, mechanical
`
`design, robotics, robotics, aeronautics, and unmanned vehicle systems. My
`
`research in the robotics and unmanned systems area began in 1998, and I have
`
`remained continuously active in teaching and research in these areas through the
`
`present. Examples of my research and teaching qualifications are summarized
`
`below:
`
` At Virginia Tech and Embry-Riddle Universities, I have taught a
`
`variety of courses, including Robotics, Advanced Robotics, Unmanned
`
`Systems, Mechanisms, Mechanical Design and Mechatronics and I have
`
`received several teaching awards such as the College of Engineering
`
`Certificate of Teaching Excellence (1987-88, 1997-98, 2001-02, 2006-07),
`
`Wine Award for Excellence in Teaching (1992), Virginia Tech Academy of
`
`Teaching Excellence (inducted 1992), Dean’s Award for Excellence in
`
`Teaching (1998), Ingersoll-Rand Faculty Award for Outstanding
`
`Contributions to the Mechanical Engineering Department (2000), Outstanding
`
`Faculty Member Award (2003), and the Alumni Teaching Award (2004).
`
` I have also served as the advisor to many successful collegiate
`
`robotics teams, including the overall winning teams in the Association for
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`
`Unmanned Vehicle Systems (AUVSI) Intelligent Ground Vehicle
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`Competition (2003 through 2007), the International Aerial Robotics
`
`Competition (2005, 2007), the Unmanned Aerial Systems Competition
`
`(2007), and the RoboBoat Competition (2014, 2015). In particular, I
`
`continuously advised teams competing in the International Aerial Robotics
`
`Competition and the Unmanned Aerial Systems Competition since 2004.
`
`These competitions involve a broad range of avionics systems, including a
`
`variety of sensors, flight logs, data recording devices and wireless
`
`communications systems. As with all systems flying in the National Air
`
`Space, we were required to understand and adhere to FAA regulations.
`
` I was also team lead for qualifying teams in the 2004 and 2005
`
`DARPA Grand Challenge Competitions, and I was team lead and principal
`
`investigator of the third-place overall team in the 2007 DARPA Urban
`
`Challenge, a competition to develop a fully autonomous automobile capable
`
`of navigating a complex, dynamic urban course along with human-driven
`
`vehicles and other robotic cars.
`
` I hold two U.S. patents and have authored a popular textbook and
`
`have over 125 publications related to the design and analysis of mechanisms,
`
`kinematics, manipulators, robotics and unmanned vehicle systems. I have
`
`several best paper awards, such as the National Instruments Virtual
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`
`Instrumentation Applications Best Control Paper Award for “Developing a
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`Fully Autonomous Vehicle for Virginia Tech’s Entry in the DARPA Grand
`
`Challenge.” I have received many awards, including the Presidential Young
`
`Investigator Award from the National Science Foundation (1987-1992) and
`
`the South-Pointing Chariot Award at the 1999 Applied Mechanisms and
`
`Robotics Conference, for lifetime contributions to the mechanisms
`
`community. I have co-founded three successful companies working in the area
`
`of robotics and unmanned vehicle systems.
`
`II. Understanding of Relevant Legal Principles
`8.
` I am not a lawyer, and I will not provide any legal opinions. Although
`
`I am not a lawyer, I have been advised certain legal standards are to be applied by
`
`technical experts in forming opinions regarding the meaning and validity of patent
`
`claims.
`
`9.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is invalid if it is anticipated or obvious
`
`in view of the prior art, and that a claim can be unpatentable even if all of the
`
`requirements of the claim cannot be found in a single prior-art reference. I further
`
`understand that invalidity of a claim requires that the claim be anticipated or
`
`obvious from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made.
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`
`I have been informed that a patent claim is invalid if it would have
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`10.
`
`been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. In analyzing the obviousness
`
`of a claim, I understand the following factors may be taken into account: (1) the
`
`scope and content of the prior art; (2) the differences between the prior art and the
`
`claims; (3) the level of ordinary skill in the art; and (4) any so called “secondary
`
`considerations” of non-obviousness, if they are present. I am not aware of any
`
`evidence of secondary considerations of non-obviousness relevant to the ’950
`
`patent. I reserve the right to supplement this Declaration if Patent Owner (“PO”)
`
`introduces evidence of secondary considerations of non-obviousness.
`
`11.
`
`I understand that to prove that prior art or a combination of prior art
`
`renders a patent obvious, it is necessary to:
`
`(1)
`
`identify the particular references that, singly or in combination, make
`
`the patent obvious;
`
`(2)
`
`specifically identify which elements of the patent claim appear in each
`
`of the asserted references; and
`
`(3) explain why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined
`
`the references, and how they would have done so, to create the
`
`inventions claimed in the patent. I further understand that exemplary
`
`rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include:
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`
` combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`predictable results;
`
` simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain
`
`predictable results;
`
` use of known technique(s) to improve similar devices (methods or
`
`products) in the same way;
`
` applying a known technique to a known device (method or product)
`
`ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
`
` “obvious to try” – choosing from a finite number of identified,
`
`predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success;
`
` known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of the work
`
`for use in either the same field or a different field based on design
`
`incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art; and
`
` some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would
`
`have led a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the prior art
`
`reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the
`
`claimed invention.
`
`12.
`
`I have been informed that, in considering obviousness, hindsight
`
`reasoning derived from the patent-at-issue may not be used
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`
`
`III.
`’950 Patent
`A. Overview
`13. The ’950 patent “relates generally to aircraft avionics systems.” (DJI-
`
`1001, 1:8-9.) The ’950 patent notes that “[c]onventional avionics systems can also
`
`be utilized to display and store flight performance information of the aircraft
`
`during flight.” (DJI-1001, 1:18-20.) This information “is useful for monitoring the
`
`aircraft performance, to assist with maintenance, and to provide feedback during
`
`pilot training.” (DJI-1001, 1:20-22.) The ’950 patent alleges that “many
`
`shortcomings remain” in these conventional systems. (DJI-1001, 1:23-25.)
`
`However, I note that the ’950 patent fails to identify any specific shortcomings.
`
`14. Figure 3 “is a simplified schematic of the flight performance
`
`monitoring, analysis, and feedback system” of the ’950 patent. (DJI-1001, 1:41-
`
`43.) This system includes transmitter 303, transceiver 305, and database 307. (DJI-
`
`1001, 2:67-3:1.)
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`
`
`’950 Patent, Figure 3
`
`
`
`15. Transmitter 303 “is in data communication with an avionics system
`
`309 associated with aircraft 311.” (DJI-1001, 3:5-6.) During operation of the
`
`system, sensor 310 “associated with avionics system 309 senses performance data
`
`of aircraft 311 during flight, which in turn is received, stored, and transmitted to
`
`transceiver 305.” (DJI-1001, 3:6-10.) In an embodiment, “transmitter 303 is a
`
`Secure Digital (SD) or a non-volatile memory card that is configured to receive,
`
`store, and/or transmit data to and from avionics system 309.” (DJI-1001, 3:11-14.)
`
`Transmitter 303 further “includes a wireless device 313 configured to transmit data
`
`to and from transceiver 305.” (DJI-1001, 3:14-16.)
`
`16. Transceiver 305 “is a portable smartphone and/or tablet configured to
`
`receive data from transmitter 313 and relay the data to database 307.” (DJI-1001,
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`
`3:20-22.) Transceiver 305 has “a touch or voice key entry feature that enables a
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`user to enter information to be relayed to avionics system 309 and/or database
`
`307.” (DJI-1001, 3:23-26.)
`
`17. Database 307 “is configured to store data from transmitter 303.” (DJI-
`
`1001, 3:29-30.) The database is “operably associated with a computer 315 for
`
`viewing and analysis of the data via a computer display (not shown).” (DJI-1001,
`
`3:30-32.) As an example, database 307 can be “configured to automatically
`
`populate aircraft and pilot logbooks with data received from the aircraft, e.g., flight
`
`hours, landings, and so forth.” (DJI-1001, 3:34-38.)
`
`18. One contemplated method of use of the ’950 patent’s system is “as a
`
`training exercise.” (DJI-1001, 4:42-43.) In this use, “flight performance
`
`information is sent to database 307” after flight and “thereafter reviewed by a flight
`
`instructor.” (DJI-1001, 4:43-46.) The flight instructor can then “provide feedback
`
`based upon the flight performance data.” (DJI-1001, 4:46-48.) The ’950 patent
`
`indicates in this embodiment “only the instructor has access in lieu of multiple
`
`pilots having access.” (DJI-1001, 4:48-51.)
`
`19. The ’950 patent contends “the wireless connectivity discussed herein
`
`alleviates the need to remove/replace memory cards often, allows for easier
`
`integration with online/internet analysis solutions, improves user experience by
`
`integrating common devices into the solution.” (DJI-1001, 4:19-23.) The ’950
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`
`patent also alleges that an “[a]nother advantage of system 301 is that it uses non-
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`aviation/off-board communication devices, e.g., transmitter 305 and computer 315,
`
`as the primary method, which allows for easier upgrades/improvements in
`
`hardware and software, as minimal qualification are [sic] required.” (DJI-1001,
`
`4:23-28.)
`
`B. Level Of Ordinary Skill In The Art
`20. A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) would have had a
`
`bachelor’s degree or equivalent in the field of aeronautical engineering, electrical
`
`engineering, mechanical engineering, computer science, or equivalent training and
`
`experience, and at least one year of experience in the field of avionics or
`
`electromechanical system analysis and/or design. A higher level of education or
`
`work experience might make up for less experience, and vice versa.
`
`C. Prosecution History
`21. The ’950 patent was filed with three broad independent claims (1, 11,
`
`and 17) (reproduced below). (DJI-1002, 27-30.) In the first Office Action, claim 1
`
`was rejected as anticipated by U.S. Publication 2012/0053777 to Meisels
`
`(“Meisels”), claim 11 as obvious over Meisels in view of U.S. Publication
`
`2010/0105329 to Durand (“Durand”), and claim 17 as obvious over Meisels in
`
`view of U.S. Publication 2013/0141572 to Torres (“Torres”). (DJI-1002, 52-64.)
`
`1. An aircraft, comprising:
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`
`
`a sensor;
`
`an avionics system associated with the sensor;
`
`a wireless transmitter in data communication with the avionics
`
`system;
` wherein the avionics system is configured to monitor aircraft
`flight performance data from the sensor; and
` wherein the wireless transmitter is configured to wirelessly
`transmit aircraft flight performance data to the wireless database.
`
`11. An aircraft flight performance monitoring system, comprising:
`
`a wireless transmitter in data communication with an avionics
`systems of the aircraft;
`
`a portable wireless transceiver associated with the wireless
`transmitter; and
`
`a wireless database associated with the wireless transmitter;
` wherein the wireless transmitter is configured to receive and
`transmit flight performance data from the avionics system to the
`portable wireless transceiver, which in turn is transmitted to the
`wireless database.
`
`17. A method to monitor aircraft flight performance data,
`comprising:
`
`sensing flight performance data with a sensor;
`
`transmitting sensed flight data to a wireless transmitter;
` wirelessly transmitting the sensed flight performance data to a
`wireless database; and
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`
` monitoring flight performance data with a display operably
`associated with the wireless database.
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`22.
`
`In response, Applicant amended claims 1, 11, and 17 “to include the
`
`following: (1) a database in communication with the sensor and the avionics
`
`system; and (2) wherein the database is configured to obtain and store pilot
`
`information and flight performance of the aircraft during flight.” (DJI-1002, 78-
`
`87.) In the first Final Office Action, the Examiner rejected claim 1 as obvious over
`
`Meisels in view of U.S. Publication 2011/0241902 to Shavit (“Shavit”), claim 11
`
`as obvious over Meisels, Shavit, and Durand, and claim 17 as obvious over
`
`Meisels, Shavit, and Torres. (DJI-1002, 93-106.)
`
`23.
`
`In response to the first Final OA, Applicant amended claims 1 and 11
`
`to recite “a transceiver in data communication with the database and configured to
`
`receive pilot information prior to flight and associate the aircraft flight
`
`performance with the pilot information.” (DJI-1002, 119.) Claim 17 was amended
`
`to recite that the “obtaining and storing pilot information in a database” added
`
`previously to the claim was “prior to flight.” (DJI-1002, 121.) Applicant argued
`
`that Shavit “does not disclose the use of a transceiver configured to receive pilot
`
`data prior to flight.” (DJI-1002, 126.) After filing of a Request for Continued
`
`Examination (“RCE”), the Examiner issued another Office Action rejection claim
`
`1 as obvious over Meisels, Shavit, and U.S. Patent 6,148,179 to Wright (“Wright”),
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`
`claim 11 as obvious over Meisels, Shavit, and Wright, and claim 17 as obvious
`
`U.S. Patent 10,275,950
`
`
`over Meisels, Shavit, Wright, and Torres. (DJI-1002, 145-158.)
`
`24.
`
`In response to the February 2016 Non-Final Office Action, Applicant
`
`amended claim 1 to recite the “transceiver having a transceiver identity associated
`
`with pilot identification information, the transceiver being configured for receiving
`
`information relating to sensed flight performance from the wireless transmitter, for
`
`associating the thus received information with the pilot identification information
`
`associated with the transceiver identity, and for transmitting the received
`
`information with the thus associated pilot identification information to the
`
`database.” (DJI-1002, 171.) Claims 11 and 17 were amended to include similar
`
`limitations. (DJI-1002, 172-174.) The Examiner subsequent