IPR2017-01370 Petition

U.S. 6,873,940

Filed on behalf of Unified Patents Inc. by:

Roshan S. Mansinghani (Reg. No. 62,429)

Jonathan Stroud (Reg. No. 72,518)
Unified Patents Inc.
1875 Connecticut Ave. NW, Floor 10
Washington, D.C., 20009
Tel: (214) 945-0200
Email: roshan@unifiedpatents.com

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

____________________________________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

____________________________________________

UNIFIED PATENTS INC.

Petitioner
v.
KAMATANI CLOUD, LLC
and
GENERAL PATENT CORPORATION
Patent Owner

IPR2017-01370
U.S. 6,873,940

PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT 6,873,940

CHALLENGING CLAIMS
1, 2, 5, 7-13, 15, 17, 18, 21, 23-28, 30-32, 34, 35, and 38-41

UNDER 35 U.S.C. 312 AND 37 C.F.R. 42.104

 IPR2017-01370 Petition
U.S. 6,873,940

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1

II. MANDATORY NOTICES ............................................................................ 2

A. Real Party-in-Interest ........................................................................... 2

B. Related Matters .................................................................................... 2

C. Counsel ................................................................................................. 2

D. Service Information .............................................................................. 3

III. PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED ................................................................. 4

IV. THE 940 PATENT ........................................................................................ 5

A. Background .......................................................................................... 5

B. Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ...................................................... 7

V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ........................................................................... 8

A. interactive communication line (Claims 1, 17, 38-41) ..................... 8

B. modulation means for modulating the measurement data into signals

suitable for transmission (Claims 1 and 38) ....................................... 8

i
 IPR2017-01370 Petition
U.S. 6,873,940

C. demodulation means for demodulating the data on the measurement

processing results into signals suitable for processing on said client

apparatus (Claims 1 and 38) ............................................................... 9

D. measurement means [capable of executing / enables execution of]

measurement processing on the basis of the measurement data (Claims

1 and 39) ............................................................................................. 10

E. means for detecting whether the measurement data [are/is] capable of

being measured by any measurement means in [the said/the] server

apparatus (Claims 1 and 39) ............................................................. 10

F. [means for] notifying whether the measurement processing is

available (Claims 1 and 39) .............................................................. 11

G. modulation means for modulating the data on the measurement

processing results into signals suitable for transmission (Claims 1 and

39)....................................................................................................... 11

H. means for adding to the measurement data coded information for

specifying measurement means for executing measurement processing

in said server apparatus (Claims 7 and 23) ....................................... 12

ii
 IPR2017-01370 Petition
U.S. 6,873,940

I. display means connected to said client-side demodulation means, such

that the data on the measurement processing result are displayed on said

display means ................................................................................... 13

J. audio output means connected to said client-side demodulation means,

such that the audio output means will audibly output the data on the

measurement processing results ....................................................... 13

VI. DETAILED ANALYSIS OF GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY .... 14

A. Ground 1: Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders Claims 1, 2, 7-11, 13,

15-18, 23-26, 28, 30, 31, and 38-41 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103

............................................................................................................ 14

1. Claim 1 is obvious.................................................................... 16

2. Claim 2 is obvious.................................................................... 50

3. Claim 7 is obvious.................................................................... 51

4. Claim 8 is obvious.................................................................... 56

5. Claim 9 is obvious.................................................................... 57

6. Claim 10 is obvious.................................................................. 57

7. Claim 11 is obvious.................................................................. 57

iii
 IPR2017-01370 Petition
U.S. 6,873,940

8. Claim 13 is obvious.................................................................. 59

9. Claim 15 is obvious.................................................................. 59

10. Claim 16 is obvious.................................................................. 62

11. Claim 17 is obvious.................................................................. 63

12. Claim 18 is obvious.................................................................. 65

13. Claim 23 is obvious.................................................................. 65

14. Claim 24 is obvious.................................................................. 65

15. Claim 25 is obvious.................................................................. 66

16. Claim 26 is obvious.................................................................. 66

17. Claim 28 is obvious.................................................................. 66

18. Claim 30 is obvious.................................................................. 66

19. Claim 31 is obvious.................................................................. 66

20. Claim 38 is obvious.................................................................. 67

21. Claim 39 is obvious.................................................................. 68

22. Claim 40 is obvious.................................................................. 70

23. Claim 41 is obvious.................................................................. 71

iv
 IPR2017-01370 Petition
U.S. 6,873,940

B. Ground 2: Sunshine in view of Miyajima and Ezekiel renders Claims

16, 32, 34, 35 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103 ............................ 72

1. Claim 16 is obvious.................................................................. 74

2. Claim 32 is obvious.................................................................. 75

3. Claim 34 is obvious.................................................................. 80

4. Claim 35 is obvious.................................................................. 81

C. Ground 3: Sunshine in view of Miyajima and Nathanson renders

Claims 5, 12, 21, and 27 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103 .......... 81

VII. Conclusion .................................................................................................... 83

v
 IPR2017-01370 Petition
U.S. 6,873,940

Table of Exhibits IPR2017-01370 Petition for Inter Partes Review

Exhibit No. Description

EX1001 U.S. Patent 6,873,940

EX1002 File History for U.S. Patent 6,873,940

EX1003 www.kamatanicloud.com (accessed April 27, 2017)

EX1004 U.S. 6,606,566 (Sunshine)

EX1005 U.S. Pat. Pub. 2002/0083128 (Miyajima)

EX1006 U.S. 5,790,977 (Ezekiel)

EX1007 Declaration of Arthur Zatarain

EX1008 U.S. App. 60/164,022

EX1009 U.S. App. 09/165,267

EX1010 U.S. 6,263,268 (Nathanson)

EX1011 Curriculum Vitae of Arthur Zatarain, PE

EX1012 SCADAware System Design Concepts (1994)

SCADAware MODBUS / Open Architecture Reference Manual

EX1013
(1998)

EX1014 Petitioners Voluntary Interrogatory Responses

EX1015 Ground 1 Claim Chart

EX1016 Ground 2 Claim Chart

vi
 IPR2017-01370 Petition
U.S. 6,873,940

EX1017 Ground 3 Claim Chart

EX1018 Wireless Modem (1995)

EX1019 U.S. Patent 6,344,844

EX1020 LabVIEW Signal Processing Course Manual (September 1997)

EX1021 U.S. Patent 5,243,852

EX1022 U.S. Patent 4,208,206

EX1023 Handbook for the Palm III Organizer (1998)

EX1024 Entelec 92 Technical Papers (1992)

EX1025 TEST SCADAware Brochure (1994)

SCADAware RTU / SCADA Systems Network Operations

EX1026
(August 1996)

EX1027 SCADA Systems (1989)

EX1028 Verbatim Owner's Manual (1996)

EX1029 Type 100 Voice RTU (1991)

vii
I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioner challenges claims 1, 2, 5, 7-13, 15, 17, 18, 21, 23-28, 30-32, 34, 35,

and 38-41 of U.S. Patent 6,873,940 (EX1001) (the 940 Patent), now managed by

and exclusively licensed to General Patent Corporation through its subsidiary

Kamatani Cloud LLC. The 940 Patent discloses a client taking a measurement and

sending the measurement to a server for processing by an instrument at the server.

But this framework was known and used years before the 940 Patent was filed at

least in the industrial control field under the name SCADA (Supervisory Control and

Data Acquisition). EX1007 (Zatarain Declaration) at 29-48. Unsurprisingly, the

940 Patents original application was first rejected and the applicant did not

challenge this rejection. Instead, the application claims were narrowed to require

(1) that the server detect whether it was capable of processing data and (2) that the

server notify the client of its availability to process data. While these changes

ultimately led to allowance, the examiner was unaware of prior art demonstrating

this was known years before the 940 Patent was filed. This challenge is based on

prior art never before this Officeneither during prosecution nor afterwards. The

prior art explicitly discloses all of the features alleged as novel by the applicant.

1
II. MANDATORY NOTICES

A. Real Party-in-Interest

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(1), Unified Patents Inc. (Unified or

Petitioner) certifies that Unified is the real party-in-interest, and further certifies

that no other party exercised control or could exercise control over Unifieds

participation in this proceeding, the filing of this petition, or the conduct of any

ensuing trial. In this regard, Unified has submitted voluntary discovery. See EX1014

(Petitioners Voluntary Interrogatory Responses).

B. Related Matters

The 940 Patent is owned by Kamatani Cloud, LLC (Kamatani or Patent

Owner), a subsidiary of General Patent Corporation. EX1003

(www.kamatanicloud.com, last accessed April 27, 2017) (Kamatani Cloud LLC is

a subsidiary of, and is managed by, General Patent Corporation, a leading patent

monetization firm. General Patent is also the exclusive licensing agent for the

Kamatani Cloud patent.). The 940 Patent was asserted in Kamatani Cloud LLC v.

Animetrics, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-05492 (SDNY July 11, 2016), which was terminated

September 12, 2016.

C. Counsel

Roshan S. Mansinghani (Reg. No. 62,429) is lead counsel, and Jonathan

Stroud (Reg. No. 72,518) is backup counsel.

2
 D. Service Information

Unified consents to electronic service via email at the following addresses:

roshan@unifiedpatents.com and jonathan@unifiedpatents.com. Petitioner can be

reached at Unified Patents Inc., 1875 Connecticut Ave. NW, Floor 10, Washington,

D.C. 20009 and (214) 945-0200.

3
III. PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED

Unified requests cancellation of Claims 1, 2, 5, 7-13, 15, 17, 18, 21, 23-28,

30-32, 34, 35, and 38-41 under 35 U.S.C. 103 on the following grounds:

Ground Reference(s) Claim(s)

U.S. 6,606,566 (Sunshine) EX1004

1, 2, 7-11, 13, 15-18, 23-
1
26, 28, 30, 31, 38-41
U.S. 2002/0083128 (Miyajima) EX1005

U.S. 6,606,566 (Sunshine) EX1004

2 U.S. 2002/0083128 (Miyajima) EX1005 16, 32, 34, 35

U.S. 5,790,977 (Ezekiel) EX1006

U.S. 6,606,566 (Sunshine) EX1004

3 U.S. 2002/0083128 (Miyajima) EX1005 5, 12, 21, 27

U.S. 6,263,268 (Nathanson) EX1010

4
IV. THE 940 PATENT

A. Background

The 940 Patent was filed on March 7, 2000. It is directed to a measurement

service system for carrying out remote measurements or telemetry[.] 940 Patent

(EX1001) at 1:7-10. The 940 Patent discloses a client that communicates a

measurement to a server over a communication line (e.g., a switched network):

5
Id. at Figure 1 (simplified diagram added). The server processes the measurement

(using, e.g., a coupled instrument), and returns the result of the processing to the

client.

The claims of the 940 Patent require an additional feature beyond this simple

exchange between the client and the server. The server must also detect whether it

is capable of processing a measurement, and notify the client whether measurement

processing is available (e.g., prior to the client sending the measurement to the

server).

During prosecution, all of the independent claims were substantively amended

only once. EX1002 at 92-99. This added the requirement of detecting whether

processing is available and notifying the client of the determination; this was the

only limitation the examiner found allowable. The applicant did not challenge the

examiners finding that the prior art disclosed or rendered obvious the other

limitations of the independent claims. The applicant simply added what the

examiner had found allowable. EX1002 at 100.

Afterwards, rather than allow the case, the examiner issued a second rejection

in view of a new reference. In response, the applicant did not amend the claims, and

attempted to distinguish the cited art based mainly on the client/server network

6
architecture and the detection functionality discussed above. EX1002 at 123-

124.

Subsequently, the examiner issued a notice of allowance based on the claims

requiring the server performing measurement processing and the detection

functionality discussed above. EX1002 at 132. But all of this was taught by

Miyajimaprior art that was never before the examineras discussed below.

B. Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art

A person of ordinary skill in the art in the field of the 940 Patent would have

had at least a degree in computer science, electrical engineering, or computer

engineering, or equivalent experience, and at least two years of experience in remote

monitoring and control systems. EX1007 at 16.

7
V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION

Claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) in light

of the specification in this proceeding. 37 C.F.R. 42.100(b).1 All claim terms not

discussed below are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation, as

understood by one of ordinary skill in the art and consistent with the disclosure.

A. interactive communication line (Claims 1, 17, 38-41)

The 940 Patent discloses that an interactive communication line can be a

switched network, the Internet, a private line, or a wireless communication channel.

EX1001 at 4:9-11. The figures and certain dependent claims of the patent confirm

this interpretation. Id. at Figs. 1-4 and Claims 9, 10, 25, and 26. Therefore, the

broadest reasonable interpretation of interactive communication line in light of the

specification is a wired or wireless communication channel or network.

B. modulation means for modulating the measurement data into

signals suitable for transmission (Claims 1 and 38)

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for the clients modulation means, per the claims plain

language, is modulating the measurement data into signals suitable for

1
Petitioners position regarding claim scope is not to be taken as a concession in a

court or other adjudicative body having different claim interpretation standards.

8
transmission. The following items are identified in the 940 Patent as performing

this function: interface means (Abstract), interface circuit (3:19-24, 4:32-37),

and client computer (4:6-8). Regarding the latter, the 940 Patent discloses steps

taken to perform this function, including receiving the measurement data, encoding

the data into transmission signals, and multiplexing (if required). EX1001 at

Abstract, 3:19-24, and 4:32-37. Equivalents of these items are also included within

the scope of the modulation means.

C. demodulation means for demodulating the data on the

measurement processing results into signals suitable for processing
on said client apparatus (Claims 1 and 38)

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for the clients demodulation means is demodulating

the data on the measurement processing results into signals suitable for processing

on said client apparatus. The following items are identified in the 940 Patent as

performing this function: measurement-result receiving means (Abstract),

measurement-result receiving circuit (3:34-37, 3:62-67, 6:21-26), and client

computer (4:6-8). Regarding the latter, the 940 Patent discloses steps taken to

perform this function, including receiving the result data and decoding the result data

so that it becomes visible for an electronic display. EX1001 at Abstract, 3:34-37,

9
3:62-67, and 6:21-26. Equivalents of these items are also included within the scope

of the demodulation means.

D. measurement means [capable of executing / enables execution of]

measurement processing on the basis of the measurement data
(Claims 1 and 39)

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for the servers measurement means is executing

measurement processing on the basis of the measurement data. The following

items are identified in the 940 Patent as performing this function: measuring

instrument (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, 3:51-53, 4:49-52, 5:6-10, 5:66-6:7, 6:33-40, 6:65-7:9),

medical diagnostic equipment (1:17-25), chemical analyzer (1:17-25),

oscilloscope (Fig. 3, 1:17-25, 5:66-6:7, 6:33-40), spectrum analyzer (Fig. 3,

1:17-25, 5:66-6:7, 6:33-40), and [automobile] tester (Fig. 4, 1:17-25, 6:65-7:9).

Equivalents of these items are also included within the scope of the measurement

means.

E. means for detecting whether the measurement data [are/is]

capable of being measured by any measurement means in [the
said/the] server apparatus (Claims 1 and 39)

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for this limitation is detecting whether the measurement

data [are/is] capable of being measured by any measurement means in [the said/the]

10
server apparatus. A server computer coupled to an instrument through an interface

is identified in the 940 Patent as performing this function. EX1001 at Figs. 1-4,

5:40-6:8. Equivalents of this arrangement are also included within the scope of this

limitation.

F. [means for] notifying whether the measurement processing is

available (Claims 1 and 39)

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for this limitation is notifying whether the measurement

processing is available. A server computer coupled to an instrument through an

interface is identified in the 940 Patent as performing this function. EX1001 at

Figs. 1-4, 5:40-6:8. Optionally, the server computer can use a Web site to indicate

the state of the instrument. Id. at 2:19-31. Equivalents of these arrangements are

also included within the scope of this limitation.

G. modulation means for modulating the data on the measurement

processing results into signals suitable for transmission (Claims 1
and 39)

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for this limitation is modulating the data on the

measurement processing results into signals suitable for transmission. The

following items are identified in the 940 Patent as performing this function:

interface circuit (Abstract, 3:55-61, 4:57-61, 6:14-20, 7:5-13), measurement-

11
result sending circuit (Abstract, 3:55-61, 4:57-61, 6:14-20, 7:5-13), and server

computer (4:6-8). Regarding the latter, the 940 Patent discloses steps taken to

perform this function, including receiving the measurement processing results data,

encoding the data into transmission signals, and multiplexing (if required). EX1001

at Abstract, 3:55-61, 4:57-61, 6:14-20, 7:5-13. Equivalents of these items are also

included within the scope of the modulation means.

H. means for adding to the measurement data coded information for

specifying measurement means for executing measurement
processing in said server apparatus (Claims 7 and 23)

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for this limitation is adding to the measurement data coded

information for specifying measurement means for executing measurement

processing in said server apparatus. The following items are identified in the 940

Patent as performing this function: measurement-signal sending circuit (3:44-54),

measurement-result sending circuit (6:18-17), client apparatus accessing a Web

site on the Internet (6:57-58, 7:5-14), and client computer (4:6-8). Regarding the

latter, the 940 Patent discloses steps taken to perform this function, including

determining a measuring instrument to process measurement data, creating

information identifying that measuring instrument, transmitting the identifying

12
information to the server. EX1001 at 3:44-54, 6:18-17, 6:57-58, 7:5-14. Equivalents

of these items are also included within the scope of this limitation.

I. display means connected to said client-side demodulation means,

such that the data on the measurement processing result are
displayed on said display means

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for this limitation is displaying data on the measurement

processing result. The 940 Patent discloses a display unit connected to

demodulation means (see supra V.C for this term) as performing this function.

EX1001 at Abstract, 3:14-18, 3:62-4:5, 4:64-5:5, 6:21-26. Equivalents of these

items are also included within the scope of the display means limitation.

J. audio output means connected to said client-side demodulation

means, such that the audio output means will audibly output the
data on the measurement processing results

This term should be construed under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth

Paragraph. The function for this limitation is audibly outputting the data on the

measurement processing result. The 940 Patent discloses a client computer and a

client computer communicating with a Web site as performing this function.

EX1001 at 2:19-31, 4:6-8, 5:3-5, 6:27-32, and Figs. 1-3. Equivalents of these items

are also included within the scope of the audio output means limitation.

13
VI. DETAILED ANALYSIS OF GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY

A. Ground 1: Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders Claims 1, 2, 7-11,

13, 15-18, 23-26, 28, 30, 31, and 38-41 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
103

Sunshine was filed on October 31, 2000, and claims priority to, inter alia, U.S.

60/164,022 (filed on November 4, 1999),2 which predates the March 7, 2000 priority

date of the 940 Patent. Therefore, Sunshine qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C.

102(e).

Like the 940 Patent, Sunshine is directed to detecting and transmitting

sensory data over a computer network. EX1004 at Abstract.

2
This provisional application supports the portions of Sunshine discussed below.

See generally EX1008; see, e.g., id. at 1-10.

14
Id. at Figure 1 (simplified diagram added).

Miyajima was filed on November 26, 2001 and claims priority to U.S.

09/165,267 (filed on October 1, 1998).3 This predates the March 7, 2000 priority

3
This application supports the portions of Miyajima discussed below as the two

applications have substantially similar disclosure except for the aspects of the

specification (not the claims) following 117 of Miyajima. See generally EX1009.

15
date of the 940 Patent. Therefore, Miyajima qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C.

102(e).

Like the 940 Patent, Miyajima is directed to communicating with a remote

electronic instrument over a computer network. EX1005 at Abstract. Importantly,

Miyajima discloses a server detecting when an instrument is available, and

communicating, via a dispatcher, the available instruments to the client (e.g.,

EX1005 at 38)this is the same feature that the applicants added to the

independent claims for allowance of the 940 Patent. See supra IV.A.

As discussed in more detail below, a skilled artisan would have been

motivated to combine Sunshine with Miyajima. EX1007 at 80. Both are in the

same field of working with measurements in a client/server environment (e.g.,

SCADA systems). EX1004 at Abstract; EX1005 at Abstract; EX1007 at 50-57.

Both recite performing measurement processing at a server in response to a request

from a client. EX1004 at Abstract; EX1005 at 9. And both discuss communicating

using networks. EX1004 at Fig. 1; EX1005 at Fig. 1. Thus, it would have been

obvious for a skilled artisan to combine the references in such a way as to render the

claims obvious. See also EX1015 (claim chart for Ground 1).

1. Claim 1 is obvious

16
 A measuring service system comprising a server apparatus and
a client apparatus connected to each other through an
interactive communication line

As demonstrated below, Sunshine discloses this limitation because it discloses

a system in which a field device (corresponding to the claimed client apparatus)

communicates sensory data (e.g., an analyte, such as a vapor) to a processor

(corresponding to the claimed server apparatus), and the processor sends results

of analyzing the sensory data, over a computer network (corresponding to the

claimed interactive communication line as discussed above in V.A) e.g. through

a server hosting a Web site).

17
 Sunshine

940 Patent

18
 Sunshine discloses a field device that communicates measurements to a

processor over a network. EX1004 at Abstract. The processor can be part of a

server. Id. at 6:66-7:9. The processor sends results of processing the measurement

data over the network back to the field device. Id. at 5:35-47.

Therefore, Sunshine discloses this limitation. See also id. at Abstract, 1:16-

20, 1:45-55, 1:56-2:11, 2:31-37, 2:39-55, 2:66-3:4, 3:5-30, 6:66-7:9, 8:66-9:8, 9:30-

42, 9:53-67, and Figs. 1, 2, and 6-8.

such that the client apparatus sends measurement data, input

thereto from a measured medium, to the server apparatus
through the interactive communication line

As demonstrated below, Sunshine discloses this limitation because it discloses

a field device (corresponding to the claimed client apparatus) detecting an analyte

(e.g., a vapor) in its environment (corresponding to the claimed measured

medium), generating electrical signals corresponding to the detected analyte

(corresponding to the claimed measurement data), and sending those electrical

signals to a processor (corresponding to the claimed server apparatus) over a

computer network, e.g., the Internet (corresponding to the claimed interactive

communication line). The similarity between Sunshine and the '940 Patent is

illustrated below (the blue arrows indicate the flow of information):

19
 Sunshine

940 Patent

20
 Sunshines field device detects an analyte (e.g., a vapor) in its environment,

and send electronic signals representative of the detected analyte to the processor

over a computer network (e.g., the Internet):

The present invention generally relates to detecting and

transmitting analyte data from a field device to a processor. In an
exemplary embodiment, the present invention provides computer
codes for capturing and transmitting analyte data over a
computer network such as an internet, the Internet, a local area
network, a wide area network or any combination thereof.
EX1004 at 2:31-37. Sunshine discloses applying this technique to detecting

chemical leaks in the same manner as this claimed limitation:

For example, the present invention can be used to detect

chemical leaks. Data relating to the harmful chemical are
captured by the field device 10 and relayed to the processor 12.
The processor 12 compares the captured data to data available
from the electronic library 14 to ascertain the identity of the
chemical.
Id. at 9:30-35.

Therefore, Sunshine discloses this limitation. See also id. at Abstract, 2:31-

37, 2:39-55, 4:25-32, 4:46-55, 4:63-5:13, 5:14-20, 7:26-45, 7:46-51, 7:52-59, 8:66-

9:8, 9:30-42, and Figs. 1, 2, and 6-8.

while the server apparatus executes measurement processing

on the basis of the measurement data to send data on the

21
 measurement processing results to the client apparatus
through the interactive communication line

As demonstrated below, Sunshine discloses this limitation because it discloses

that a processor (corresponding to the claimed server apparatus) determines the

identity of the analyte (e.g., a vapor) based on the received electronic signals from

the field device (corresponding to the executes measurement processing . . .

limitation), and sends the determined analyte (e.g., a vapor) identity (corresponding

to the claimed measurement processing results) to the field device (corresponding

to the claimed client apparatus) over a computer network, e.g. the Internet

(corresponding to the claimed interactive communication line). The similarity

between Sunshine and the '940 Patent is illustrated below (the blue arrows indicate

the flow of information):

22
 Sunshine

940 Patent

23
 Sunshine discloses a processor receiving measurements from the field device

over a network (e.g. the Internet) and performing processing based on the

measurements (using an analyte analyzer) to determine an identity of an analyte

(e.g., a vapor):

The analyte analyzer 26 is capable of performing analysis on a

detected analyte. Using data stored in the electronic library 14
and after appropriate formatting by the data codec 22, the analyte
analyzer 26 compares data received from the field device 10 with
data retrieved from the electronic database 14 to identify the
identity of the detected analyte.
EX1004 at 5:35-40. Sunshine discloses applying this technique to detecting

chemical leaks in the same manner as this claimed limitation. Id. at 9:30-42. As

these citations demonstrate, the identity of the analyte (i.e., the result of processing

the field devices data) is sent to the field device over the network. See also id. at

1:20-22, 4:11-19, 4:22-5:6, 6:25-7:13, 9:3-14, and Fig. 17; see also supra

VI.A.1.b.

Moreover, Sunshines measurement processing is similar to the type of

processing disclosed by the 940 Patent. In one embodiment, the 940 Patent

discloses measurement processing as analyzing components of a chemical

(EX1001 at 1:23-25) which is similar to Sunshines disclosure of analyzing a vapor

determine its identity. In another embodiment, the 940 Patent discloses

24
measurement processing as sending electronic signals representing measurements

taken of a vehicle and returning a diagnosis as a result (id.) which is similar to

Sunshines disclosure of analyzing a vapor and returning its identity as a result.

Therefore, Sunshine discloses this limitation.

said client apparatus comprises client-side modulation means

for modulating the measurement data into signals suitable for
transmission

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. This is a

means-plus-function term whose function is modulating the measurement data into

signals suitable for transmission and whose corresponding structure includes an

interface circuit. See supra V.B.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the function of this means-

plus-function limitation because it discloses the field device (corresponding to the

claimed client apparatus) sending electronic signals representative of a detected

analyte (corresponding to the measurement data) using, e.g., wireless

communication using satellite radio or microwave technologies (which a skilled

artisan would have understood involves, or at least renders obvious, modulating data

into transmission signals as is claimed):

As to communications between the field device 10 and the

processor 12, such communications can be conducted via a
computer network 18. . . . The computer network 18 can be one

25
 of a variety of networks including a worldwide computer
network, an internet, the Internet, a WAN, a LAN or an intranet.
. . . The field device 10 can communicate with the computer
network 18 via the communication interface 24 using either
wireless or wired technologies. Wireless technologies may
include infrared, radio waves, satellite and microwaves.
EX1004 at 7:26-51 (emphasis added); see also id. at 4:63-5:13, 7:52-59, 8:10-18,

8:24-52, 8:66-9:8, and Figs. 1, 2, and 6-8.

In view of this, a skilled artisan would have understood that employing

satellite radio technology or microwave technology implies, or at least renders

obvious, that the signals representing the analyte measurements are modulated for

transmission in the frequency ranges of those wireless technologies. EX1007 at

35, 40-48, and 81-84. Moreover, Sunshines disclosure is similar to the 940 Patents

limited discussion of modulation as modulation was well-understood at the time:

The measurement data taken from the detecting unit 11 into the
client apparatus 200 are modulated by the interface circuit 12 as
detection signals, coded by the measurement-signal sending
circuit 13 into signals suitable for transmission, and subjected to
other modulation processing such as multiplexing as required.
EX1001 at 3:19-24; see also id. at 4:32-37. Because using modulation would have

been inferred by a skilled artisan reading Sunshine and because modulation was a

well-known option to a skilled artisan, Sunshine renders obvious performing

26
modulation. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1741, 167

L.Ed.2d 705 (2007); In re Translogic Tech., Inc., 504 F.3d 1249, 1262 (Fed. Cir.

2007); Scanner Techs. Corp. v. ICOS Vision Sys. Corp. N.V., 528 F.3d 1365, 1381

82 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Therefore, Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the

function of this means-plus-function limitation.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the structure of this means-

plus-function limitation (e.g., an interface circuit) because it discloses the field

device being implemented as a personal digital assistant (e.g., a Palm or Handspring

device) including a codec to communicate data in a mobile manner:

The field device 10 can be a portable, handheld device such as

the Palm devices manufactured by 3Com and the Visor
produced by Handspring. By incorporating the analyte detector
20 and the data codec 22 in a portable, handheld device, a user
has the additional ability to operate in a mobile manner.
EX1004 at 4:63-5:2. Sunshine further explains:

The main function of the data codec 22 is to encode and decode

data exchanged between the field device 10 and the outside
world. For example, the data codec 22 receives data from the
analyte detector 20 and, after appropriate encoding or formatting,
relays them to the processor 12 via the computer network 18.
Id. at 4:46-52.

27
 A skilled artisan would have understood that the Palm or Handspring devices

disclosed by Sunshine typically included wireless interfaces implemented with

circuits. EX1007 at 85-88. In particular, a skilled artisan would have understood

that such devices communicated wirelessly using internal chips integrated into

circuit boards or modules. Id. Moreover, a skilled artisan would have understood

that Sunshine taught, or at least rendered obvious, using an interface circuit to

implement these components in a handheld device that communicates wirelessly.

Id. Hence, Sunshine discloses, teaches, or at least renders obvious, the structure of

this means-plus-function limitation.

[said client apparatus comprises] client-side demodulation

means for demodulating the data on the measurement
processing results into signals suitable for processing on said
client apparatus

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. This is a

means-plus-function term whose function is demodulating the data on the

measurement processing results into signals suitable for processing on said client

apparatus and whose corresponding structure includes a receiving circuit. See

supra V.C.

As demonstrated below, Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the

function of this means-plus-function limitation because it discloses the field device

(corresponding to the claimed client apparatus) receiving electronic signals

28
representing an analyte identification (corresponding to the claimed data on the

measurement processing results) via, e.g., wireless communication such as satellite

radio or microwave technologies (which a skilled artisan would have understood

involves, or at least renders obvious, demodulating the received data as claimed).

Further, the field device processes the received electronic signals for use by the

device, e.g. to display the analyte identification to the user (which implicitly teaches,

or at least renders obvious, the claimed signals suitable for processing on said client

apparatus).

Sunshine discloses the field device receiving signals from the remote

processor (e.g. over the Internet) representing the analyte identification using

wireless means (such as satellite radio or microwave signals) and processing them

for use:

The field device 10 can communicate with the computer network

18 via the communication interface 24 using either wireless or
wired technologies. Wireless technologies may include infrared,
radio waves, satellite and microwaves.
EX1004 at 7:46-49. Sunshine explains that the data codec both encodes and decodes

(i.e., modulates and demodulates) the data exchanged between devices:

The main function of the data codec 22 is to encode and decode

data exchanged between the field device 10 and the outside
world. . . . In other instances, data coming from the processor 12

29
 are decoded by the data codec 22 to allow the data to be used by
the field device 10.
Id. at 4:46-54. One example of how the field device can use the data that has been

demodulated and processed is by identifying the analyte:

For example, the present invention can be used to detect

chemical leaks. Data relating to the harmful chemical are
captured by the field device 10 and relayed to the processor 12.
The processor 12 compares the captured data to data available
from the electronic library 14 to ascertain the identity of the
chemical. Results of the comparison are then sent to the field
device 10 to enable the user to initiate the necessary remedial
measures, if any, to limit further damage.
Id. at 9:30-37. See also id. at 4:63-5:13, 7:26-45, 7:46-51, 7:52-59, 8:10-18, 8:24-

52, 8:66-9:8, and Figs. 1, 2, and 6-8.

A skilled artisan would have understood that Sunshines teaching that wireless

data is decoded involves, or at least renders obvious, demodulation. Specifically, a

skilled artisan would have understood that processing data received wirelessly using

Sunshines codec typically included extracting the data from the analog carrier signal

and performing an analog-to-digital conversion. These steps would have been

recognized by a skilled artisan as demodulation. EX1007 at 85-88. Further, a

skilled artisan would have understood that to display data received using the

disclosed wireless means involves, or at least renders obvious, demodulating the

30
received data into a format suitable for use by the device, e.g. displaying on the field

device. Id.

Notably, Sunshines disclosure is like the 940 Patents limited discussion of

demodulation as demodulation was well-understood at the time:

The data signals of the measurement results are received at the

transceiver 14 of the client apparatus 200 through the switched
network 15, demodulated by the measurement-result receiving
circuit 21, and displayed on the measurement-result display unit
22. Thus the measurement results can be made visible.
EX1001 at 3:34-37; see also id. at Abstract, 3:62-67, and 6:21-26. Because using

demodulation would have been inferred by a skilled artisan reading Sunshine and

because demodulation was a well-known option to a skilled artisan, Sunshine renders

obvious performing modulation. KSR Int'l Co., 127 S.Ct. at 1741; Translogic, 504

F.3d at 1262; Scanner Techs., 528 F.3d at 138182.

Therefore, Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the function of this

means-plus-function limitation.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the structure of this means-

plus-function limitation (e.g., a receiving circuit) because it discloses the field

device being implemented as a personal digital assistant (e.g., a Palm or Handspring

31
device) including a codec to receive data in a mobile manner and allow the data to

be used by the device:

The field device 10 can be a portable, handheld device such as

the Palm devices manufactured by 3Com and the Visor
produced by Handspring. By incorporating the analyte detector
20 and the data codec 22 in a portable, handheld device, a user
has the additional ability to operate in a mobile manner.
EX1004 at 4:63-5:2. Sunshine further explains:

The main function of the data codec 22 is to encode and decode

data exchanged between the field device 10 and the outside
world. . . . In other instances, data coming from the processor 12
are decoded by the data codec 22 to allow the data to be used by
the field device 10.
Id. at 4:46-52.

A skilled artisan would have understood that Palm or Handspring devices

received information wirelessly using internal chips integrated into circuit boards or

modules. Moreover, a skilled artisan would have understood that Sunshine taught,

or at least rendered obvious, using one more circuits to implement these structures

in a handheld device. EX1007 at 85-88. Hence, Sunshine discloses, teaches, or

at least renders obvious, the structure of this means-plus-function limitation.

said server apparatus comprises at least one measurement

means capable of executing measurement processing on the
basis of the measurement data

32
 Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. This is a

means-plus-function term whose function is executing measurement processing on

the basis of the measurement data and whose corresponding structure includes a

measuring instrument, an oscilloscope, a spectrum analyzer, and an automobile

tester. See supra V.D.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the function of this means-

plus-function limitation because it discloses that a processor (corresponding to the

claimed server apparatus) determines the identity of the analyte (e.g., a vapor)

based on the received electronic signals from the field device (corresponding to the

executing measurement processing . . . limitation), and sends the determined

analyte (e.g., a vapor) identity to the field device over a computer network. See

supra VI.A.1.c.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the structure of this means-

plus-function limitation which includes a measuring instrument because Sunshine

discloses that the processor includes an analyte analyzer:

33
EX1004 at Fig. 1 (arrow added);

The analyte analyzer 26 is capable of performing analysis on a

detected analyte. Using data stored in the electronic library 14
and after appropriate formatting by the data codec 22, the analyte
analyzer 26 compares data received from the field device 10 with

34
 data retrieved from the electronic database 14 to identify the
identity of the detected analyte.
Id. at 5:35-40; see also id. at Abstract, 1:56-2:11, 2:55-61, 2:66-3:4, 5:21-34, 5:35-

47, 5:49-6:54, 6:55-65, 6:66-7:9, 7:26-45, 8:19-23, 8:53-65, 9:9-23, 9:30-42, 9:53-

67, and Figs. 1, 2, and 6-8. Sunshine teaches that the analyte analyzer instrument

receives the measurement data, processes it using known patterns, and generates an

identity of the analyte. Sunshine discloses the algorithms applied by the analyte

analyzer when processing the measurement data. Id. at 5:49-6:54. In view of this

alone, a skilled artisan would have understood that Sunshines analyte analyzer

discloses, or at least renders obvious, a measuring instrument that performs the

function of this limitation. EX1007 at 89-94.

Moreover, a skilled artisan would have understood Sunshines analyte

analyzer to qualify as, or at least render obvious, a measuring instrument because it

operates in a similar manner as instruments disclosed by the 940 Patent. For

example, Sunshines analyte analyzer corresponds to the 940 Patents chemical

analyzer, an instrument that analyzes the components of a material (EX1001 at 1:17-

25), because Sunshines analyte analyzer analyzes signals representing the chemical

components of an analyte (e.g. a vapor) to determine the identity of the analyte.

EX1007 at 89.

35
 As another example, Sunshines analyte analyzer performs a similar type of

processing as the 940 Patents oscilloscope. An oscilloscope operates by receiving

electrical signals and performing processing to present information about the signals

to the user; in particular, an oscilloscope could compare present signals to previously

stored signals and that involved comparing the received electrical signals to stored

patterns. EX1007 at 90-92. Sunshines analyte analyzer also compares the

detected analyte to stored patterns to identify the analyte. EX1004 at 5:49-52.

This similarity holds for other instruments disclosed by the 940 Patent. The

disclosed spectrum analyzer instrument (EX1001 at 1:17-21) operates by receiving

electrical signals and performing processing to present information about the signals

to the user; in particular, a spectrum analyzer could compare the received electrical

signals to stored patterns. EX1007 at 93. The disclosed tester instrument operates

by receiving electrical signals representing the state of a vehicle and performing

processing to present a diagnosis of the vehicles fault (EX1001 at 1:17-25); this

involves comparing the received electrical signals to stored patterns. EX1007 at

94.

To the extent it is argued that the claims should be so narrowly construed as

to find that Sunshine does not disclose or render obvious a measuring instrument or

even an equivalent thereof, Miyajima discloses the structure of this means-plus-

36
function limitation (which includes a measuring instrument and a spectrum analyzer,

see supra V.D). Miyajima explicitly discloses that the server is connected to a

measuring instrument (which Miyajima calls a measuring apparatus). EX1005 at

Abstract. In addition, Miyajima explicitly discloses that the measurement instrument

can be a spectrum analyzer. Id. at 44. Thus, Miyajima discloses the structure

corresponding to this means-plus-function limitation.

A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine Miyajima with

Sunshine. Several reasons for doing so are mentioned supra VI.A. In addition, a

skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine the measurement instruments

mentioned in Miyajima with Sunshine. While the predominant embodiment

discussed in Sunshine concerns identifying an analyte, Sunshine mentions that its

invention is related to the detection and transmission of sensory data (EX1004 at

1:16-20) and that the invention can be applied in a wide variety of technologies

where efficient transmission of sensory data is beneficial (id. at 1:56-2:11). See

also id. at 3:5-30. Such a combination would merely involve substituting a known,

commercially available part without requiring any great effort by a skilled artisan.

EX1007 at 95-98; KSR Int'l Co., 127 S.Ct. at 1741; Translogic, 504 F.3d at 1262;

Scanner Techs., 528 F.3d at 138182.

37
 A skilled artisan would have understood that either the general measuring

apparatus or the more-specific spectrum analyzer instruments of Miyajima could

be used to process sensory data. EX1007 at 95-96. Specifically, a skilled artisan

would have understood that the spectrum analyzer could be used to perform

vibration analysis in SCADA systems. Id. Thus, a skilled artisan would be

motivated to combine Miyajima with Sunshine regarding this limitation.

[said server apparatus comprises] means for detecting whether

the measurement data are capable of being measured by any
measurement means in the said server apparatus, and notifying
whether the measurement processing is available

Miyajima discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. This is a

means-plus-function term whose function is detecting whether the measurement

data are capable of being measured by any measurement means in the said server

apparatus, and notifying whether the measurement processing is available and

whose corresponding structure is a server computer coupled to an instrument

through an interface. See supra V.E and V.F. In addition, for the notifying

function, an optional feature of the structure is to use a Web site. See supra V.F.

Miyajima discloses, or at least renders obvious, the function of this means-

plus-function limitation because it discloses a client apparatus that can communicate

with a remote server apparatus that is connected to an instrument. EX1005 at

Abstract. The server determines whether instrument is available to process data

38
(e.g., if it is powered on or if it is processing another clients data). Id. at 47 and

58. This corresponds to the detecting whether the measurement data are capable of

being measured by any measurement means in the said server apparatus limitation.

The server communicates the availability status of the instrument to the client via a

dispatcher. Id. In this manner, the client can choose a currently available instrument.

This corresponds to the notifying whether the measurement processing is available

limitation.

39
EX1005 at Fig. 1 (simplified diagram added).

40
 Miyajima discloses a client apparatus that can communicate with a remote

server apparatus that is connected to an instrument:

An automatic remote electronic instrument connecting system

and method are disclosed in which server apparatuses to which
electronic measuring apparatuses are connected and a client
apparatus for remote-controlling these electronic measuring
apparatuses are connected together via a network.
EX1005 at Abstract. The server detects if an instrument to which it is coupled is

available for use by the client, e.g. if the instrument is powered on or if the instrument

is not processing information on behalf of another client:

First, the server apparatus information registration section 320 in

the electronic-measuring-apparatus server apparatus 300
determines whether the electronic measuring apparatus 310 has
been powered on and enabled to communicate data (step b1), and
if so, creates registered information data including its own name
and the ID number of the electronic measuring apparatus 310
(step b2).
Id. at 47;

If, for example, the relevant electronic measuring apparatus 310

is performing a predetermined operation under the control of
another electronic-measuring-apparatus client apparatus 100,
data is created indicating that no communication channels can be
established (step d19).

41
Id. at 58. See also id. at 5, 6, 12, 13, 38, 40, 47, 58, and Figs. 1-12.

In view of this, a skilled artisan would have understood that Miyajima teaches

a server that detects whether measurement data can be processed by disclosing the

server detecting if an instrument to which it is coupled is available for use by the

client. This is done by the server detecting if the instrument is powered on or if the

instrument is not processing information on behalf of another client. Moreover,

Miyajimas disclosure is like the 940 Patents (limited) discussion of detecting

whether the data is capable of being measured at the server:

The server computer may also have the functions of detecting

whether the measurement data are capable of being measured by
any measuring instrument in the server apparatus 100, and
notifying whether the measurement service is available. Further,
the measurement service system may be such that the operating
state of each measuring instrument can be confirmed on the Web
site 55.
EX1001 at 5:46-54. Therefore, Miyajima discloses, or at least renders obvious, the

detecting function of this means-plus-function limitation.

Miyajima discloses that the server notifies the client as to the availability of

the measuring apparatuses. In particular, Miyajima discloses that the server uses the

dispatcher to give the client a list of available measuring apparatuses:

42
 In addition, the client apparatus described above includes a
communicable-server-apparatus query section for requesting
prior to data transmission to the server apparatus, a list data on
the server apparatuses and electronic measuring apparatuses
connected to the network, and the dispatcher apparatus includes
a communicable-server-apparatus query response section for
returning the list data in response to the request. Thus, the client
apparatus can determine before carrying out predetermined
measurements, the presence of an electronic measuring
apparatus that is actually connected to the network and that can
be allowed to execute desired measuring operations and of a
server apparatus including this measuring apparatus, in order to
reliably and freely specify the electronic measuring apparatus
and the server apparatus from a selectable range.
EX1005 at 10. Moreover, Miyajimas disclosure is similar to the 940 Patents

discussion (though limited) of notifying a client whether the processing is available

at the server:

The server computer may also have the functions of detecting

whether the measurement data are capable of being measured by
any measuring instrument in the server apparatus 100, and
notifying whether the measurement service is available. Further,
the measurement service system may be such that the operating
state of each measuring instrument can be confirmed on the Web
site 55.

43
Id. at 5:46-54. Therefore, Miyajima discloses, or at least renders obvious, the

notifying function of this means-plus-function limitation.

Miyajima discloses, or at least renders obvious, the structure of this means-

plus-function limitation: a server computer coupled to an instrument through an

interface. Miyajima discloses the following structure for its server apparatus:

EX1005 at Fig. 1 (excerpted). As this figure demonstrates, the server is in

communication with the instrument (labeled the electronic measuring apparatus in

the figure). Miyajima explains how the server communicates with the instrument:

First, the server apparatus information registration section 320 in

the electronic-measuring-apparatus server apparatus 300
determines whether the electronic measuring apparatus 310 has
been powered on and enabled to communicate data (step b1), and
if so, creates registered information data including its own name

44
 and the ID number of the electronic measuring apparatus 310
(step b2). Once the registered information data has been created,
the connection switch section 340 connects the server apparatus
information registration section 320 and the communication
device 350 together, and the server apparatus information
registration section 320 then transfers the created registered
information data to the communication device 350 (step b3),
which then transmits this data to Ethernet (step b4).
Id. at 47. A skilled artisan would have understood that Miyajimas server apparatus

information registration section 320 serves as an interface between the server and

the instrument. Thus, Miyajima discloses, or at least renders obvious, the structure

for this means-plus-function limitation.

It is appropriate to combine Sunshine with Miyajima to address this limitation.

In VI.A above, reasons were given as to why Sunshine is properly combined with

Miyajima. Additionally, a skilled artisan would be motivated to add Miyajimas

teaching of detecting whether an instrument was capable of processing data and

notifying a client that an instrument was available for use by the client to Sunshine

because the benefits of this teaching recited by Miyajima would apply to the

problems Sunshine addresses. Miyajima explains that this technique provides

reliability for the client ( 10), eliminates the step of confirming an instruments

power state ( 11) thereby providing for faster operation, and improves accuracy (

45
13). All of these apply to Sunshine. Sunshine discloses using its invention to detect

chemical leaks. EX1004 at 9:30-42. A skilled artisan would have understood that

improving reliability and accuracy when detecting chemical leaks by being notified

of the servers availability to process data would be desirable to avoid costly and

dangerous delay or error. EX1007 at 99-101. Further, a skilled artisan would

appreciate that reducing a step to provide faster service, as Miyajima teaches, would

benefit a user trying to detect a chemical leak where the passage of time can increase

the likelihood of damage and its severity. Id. Indeed, Sunshine acknowledges the

importance and desirability of increasing the speed of operation:

Timely transmission and analysis of sensory data for detected

analytes have tremendous applications in a variety of areas.
There are many instances where it is desirable to obtain results
on the analysis of the sensory data in a timely manner. For
example, in a hospital/medical environment, it would be greatly
beneficial if data collected from a patient can be transmitted
quickly to a laboratory to determine the cause of the patient's
ailments thereby allowing the doctors to prescribe the necessary
treatment without any undue delay. In a similar example, medical
and other related data from home monitoring devices can be
collected and transmitted swiftly to the appropriate hospitals
and/or authorities to allow them to provide better response to
home emergencies. In another example, in environments where

46
 the presence of certain substances can potentially lead to
dangerous conditions, such as a gas leak in a foundry or a home,
the swift transmission of sensory data for analysis can very well
preempt an impending disaster. Clearly, there are many other
situations which one could think of where the efficient
transmission of sensory data will generate tremendous benefits.
Hence, it would be desirable and beneficial to provide a system
that is capable of timely transmitting sensory data for analysis.
EX1004 at 1:56-2:11. Hence, a skilled artisan would be motivated to combine

Miyajima and Sunshine as discussed above.

server-side modulation means for modulating the data on the

measurement processing results into signals suitable for
transmission

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. This is a

means-plus-function term whose function is modulating the data on the

measurement processing results into signals suitable for transmission and whose

corresponding structure includes an interface circuit. See supra V.G.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the function of this means-

plus-function limitation because it discloses a processor (corresponding to the

claimed server apparatus) sending electronic signals representing a vapor

identification (corresponding to the claimed data on the measurement processing

results) via, e.g., wireless communication using satellite radio or microwave

47
technologies (which a skilled artisan would have understood involves, or at least

renders obvious, modulating the data as claimed):

As to communications between the field device 10 and the

processor 12, such communications can be conducted via a
computer network 18. . . . The computer network 18 can be one
of a variety of networks including a worldwide computer
network, an internet, the Internet, a WAN, a LAN or an intranet.
. . . The field device 10 can communicate with the computer
network 18 via the communication interface 24 using either
wireless or wired technologies. Wireless technologies may
include infrared, radio waves, satellite and microwaves.
EX1004 at 7:26-51 (emphasis added); see also id. at Abstract, 1:56-2:11, 2:66-3:4,

2:55-61, 5:21-34, 5:35-47, 6:55-65, 6:66-7:9, 7:26-45, 8:19-23, 8:53-65, 9:9-23,

9:30-42, 9:53-67, and Figs. 1, 2, and 6-8.

In view of this, a skilled artisan would have understood that employing

satellite radio technology or microwave technology implies, or at least renders

obvious, that the signals representing the analyte identification data are modulated

for transmission. EX1007 at 35, 40-48, and 81-84. Moreover, Sunshines

disclosure is like the 940 Patents limited discussion of modulation as modulation

was well-understood at the time:

The data on the measurement processing results are modulated

by the interface circuit 18, coded by the measurement-result

48
 sending circuit 20 into signals suitable for transmission, and
subjected to other modulation processing such as multiplexing as
required. The transceiver 16 transmits the modulated data
signals of the measurement results to the switched network 15.
EX1001 at 3:55-61; see also id. at 4:57-61, 6:14-20, and 7:5-13. Therefore,

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the structure of this means-

plus-function limitation (e.g., an interface circuit) because it discloses the

processor being implemented in a server (as one embodiment) and including a codec

to communicate data:

The processor 12 includes a data codec 22 and an analyte

analyzer 26. Similar to the data codec 22 in the field device 10,
the function of the data codec 22 in the processor 12 is to encode
and decode data exchanged between the processor 12 and the
outside world. For example, the data codec 22 receives data from
the field device 10 via the computer network 18 and processes or
decodes the data into a format which can be understood by the
analyte analyzer 26; similarly, the data codec 22 can also format
or encode data so as to allow the processor 12 to transmit them
to the field device 10.
EX1004 at 5:21-31; see also id. at 5:35-47, 6:55-65, 7:26-45, 9:53-67, Figs. 1, 2, and

6-8.

49
 In view of this, a skilled artisan would have understood that Sunshines server

with a data codec communicated wirelessly using typical components such as

internal chips integrated into circuit boards or modules. Moreover, a skilled artisan

would have understood that Sunshine taught, or at least rendered obvious, using an

interface circuit to implement these components in a server that communicates

wirelessly. EX1007 at 85-88. Hence, Sunshine discloses, teaches, or at least

renders obvious, the structure of this means-plus-function limitation.

2. Claim 2 is obvious

The system according to claim 1, wherein the measurement data from said
measured medium are data obtained by operating physical and chemical
equipment.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this because Sunshine

discloses a field device obtaining data (corresponding to the claimed measurement

data) regarding a gas leak (corresponding to the claimed measured medium) in a

foundry (i.e., an environment in which physical and chemical equipment are

operated, as claimed). EX1004 at 1:56-2:6. As was well-known long before the

940 Patent was filed, a foundry is an industrial site where physical and chemical

equipment are used to work metal. EX1007 at 102. Thus, Sunshine applies its

technology to obtain data on a gas leak in an environment where physical and

chemical equipment are operated. What's more, Sunshine identifies many

50
applications of obtaining and transmitting sensory data that involve physical and

chemical equipment, such as detecting chemical leaks, fire safety monitoring, heavy

industrial manufacturing, emission control, and oil and gas petrochemical

applications. See id. at 9:30-42 and 3:5-30. Therefore, Sunshine, in light of

Miyajima, discloses, or at least renders obvious, this claim.

3. Claim 7 is obvious

The system according to claim 1, wherein said client apparatus further

comprises means for adding to the measurement data coded information for
specifying measurement means for executing measurement processing in
said server apparatus.

Sunshine in light of Miyajima renders this claim obvious. This is a means-

plus-function term whose function is adding to the measurement data coded

information for specifying measurement means for executing measurement

processing in said server apparatus and whose corresponding structure includes a

sending circuit. See supra V.H.

Sunshine and Miyajima render obvious the system of Claim 1. See supra

VI.A.1. Miyajima discloses a system for specifying measurement means for

executing measurement processing in said server apparatus as is claimed in Claim

7. Miyajima discloses that a client can choose among multiple measuring

apparatuses that are coupled to one or more servers (e.g., two servers each connected

51
to a measuring apparatus) using a dispatcher by obtaining a list of available servers

and specifying the desire server:

52
EX1005 at Fig. 1 (simplified diagram added) and 41. Miyajima discloses that the

client can choose among the servers that are available at that time. Id. at 42. Thus,

Miyajima discloses a system for specifying measurement means for executing

measurement processing in said server apparatus as is claimed because Miyajima

discloses the client specifying which measuring apparatus is desired by specifying a

particular server among multiple servers with which to connect. See also EX1005

at 44 and 51.

Miyajima discloses coded information for specifying measurement means

as is claimed. Miyajima discloses that one manner in which a client can

communicate with a measuring apparatus is using an ID number of the measuring

apparatus. EX1005 at 4. However, Miyajima recognized that the ID number could

change or be mistyped; therefore, Miyajima taught encoding the identifier of an

electronic measuring apparatus to a name that the client would use (corresponding

to the claimed coded information). Id. at 42 and 44.

While Miyajima does not expressly state that the clients transmission

selecting the server that is connected to the desired measuring apparatus

accompanies measurement data, it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan,

and efficient, to accompany the data desired to be processed with the identification

of the instrument that the client desires to process the data. A skilled artisan would

53
have found it obvious to include the information as to which measuring apparatus

should process the measurement data it is sending, given that Miyajima explicitly

discloses the client being able to choose which measurement apparatus to use.

EX1007 at 49 and 104-106. To send them separately would add another step,

resulting in inefficiency and increasing the likelihood of error. This is especially the

case as Miyajimas disclosure corresponds to the 940 Patents description of this

limitation:

Upon transmission of the detection signals (measurement data)

from the client apparatus 200, the measurement-signal sending
circuit 13 may add to the detection signals coded data indicative
of which measuring instrument 19 in the server apparatus 100
should be selected. In such a case, any one of the measuring
instruments 19 is selected on the basis of the coded information.
EX1001 at 3:44-50. Therefore, Miyajima discloses, or at least renders obvious, the

function of this means-plus-function limitation.

Miyajima discloses the structure of this means-plus-function limitation. The

structure can be a sending circuit. See supra V.H. Miyajima discloses the client

performing identifying a desired server and transmitting that preference using one

or more circuits.

Miyajima identifies the following components and performing the function

discussed above:

54
 The communicable-server-apparatus query section 120
creates and outputs query data for a check on which electronic-
measuring-apparatus server apparatuses 300 are enabled to
communicate, and obtains a list data indicating the names of
electronic-measuring-apparatus server apparatuses 300 enabled
to communicate returned in response to the query data. The data
communication request section 130 creates data that is
transmitted to the electronic-measuring-apparatus dispatcher
apparatus 200 and that indicates a data communication request,
and obtains a communication channel as a communication path.
EX1005 at 36 (emphasis added). Miyajima depicts these components arranged as

one or more sending circuits in which transmission switch 412 receives the

information to be transmitted from communicable-server-apparatus query section

120 and data communication request section 130 in order to pass the data to

communication device 150 for transmission:

55
Id. at Fig. 11 (annotations added); see also id. at 36, 41, 42, 44, 51, 52, 70, 71, 72,

and Figs. 1-12. A skilled artisan would have understood this discloses the sending

circuit of the 940 Patent. EX1007 at 107-108. Therefore, Miyajima discloses

the structure of this means-plus-function limitation.

A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine these aspects of

Miyajima with Sunshine for the reasons discussed above. See supra VI.A VI.A.1.

4. Claim 8 is obvious

The system according to claim 7, wherein a plurality of measurement means

are provided, such that any one of said measurement means is selected on
the basis of the coded information added to the measurement data.

Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders obvious Claim 7, and Miyajima

discloses the additional limitations of Claim 8 because it discloses a client obtaining

56
a list of multiple servers and the electronic measuring apparatuses (e.g., an

instrument) connected to the servers, and the client selecting one of the servers based

on the desired measuring apparatus. See supra VI.A.7. A skilled artisan would

have been motivated to combine these aspects of Miyajima with Sunshine for the

reasons discussed above. See supra VI.A and VI.A.1.

5. Claim 9 is obvious

The system according to claim 1, wherein said inter active communication

line comprises the Internet network, a switched line or a private line.

Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders obvious Claim 1, and Sunshine

discloses the additional feature of Claim 9 by disclosing communication between

the field device and the processor over the Internet. EX1004 at 2:31-37 and 7:26-

45.

6. Claim 10 is obvious

The system according to claim 1, wherein said interactive communication

line comprises a wireless communication channel.

Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders obvious Claim 1, and Sunshine

discloses the additional feature of Claim 10 by disclosing communication between

the field device and the processor occurring wirelessly. EX1004 at 7:46-51; see also

id. at 4:63-5:13 and 7:26-45.

7. Claim 11 is obvious

57
 The system according to claim 1, further comprising detecting unit for
fetching the measurement data from the measured medium to input the
same to said client apparatus.

Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders obvious Claim 1, and Sunshine

discloses the additional feature of Claim 10 by disclosing a field device that includes

an analyte detector (corresponding to the claimed detecting unit) which detects an

analyte from the environment (corresponding to the claimed fetching the

measurement data from the measured medium) and sends the information to a data

codec that transmits the information to the processor (corresponding to the claimed

to input the same to said client apparatus):

EX1004 at Fig. 1 (excerpted and highlighting added).

More specifically, the analyte detector 20 is used to detect the

presence of an unknown analyte 16. The analyte detector 20 then

58
 accordingly generates a unique output signature for this
unknown analyte 16. The unique output signature is next relayed
to the data codec 22 and encoded for transmission to the
processor 12.
Id. at 9:3-8; see also id. at Abstract, 1:24-30, 2:39-55, 4:25-32, 4:46-55, 4:63-5:13,

8:66-9:8, and Figs. 1, 2, and 6-8.

8. Claim 13 is obvious

The system according to claim 1, wherein the measurement data from said
measured medium are medical diagnostic data.

Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders obvious Claim 1, and Sunshine

discloses the additional feature of Claim 13 by explicitly disclosing that field device

can detect medical diagnostic information. EX1004 at 10:55-11:29; see also id. at

1:56-2:11, 3:5-30, 10:55-12:8.

9. Claim 15 is obvious

The system according to claim 1, wherein said client apparatus further

comprises display means connected to said client-side demodulation means,
such that the data on the measurement processing result are displayed on
said display means.

Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders obvious Claim 1, and Sunshine

discloses, or at least renders obvious, the additional features of Claim 15. This is a

means-plus-function term whose function is displaying data on the measurement

59
processing result and whose corresponding structure includes a display unit

connected to demodulation means. See supra V.I.

As demonstrated below, Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the

function of this means-plus-function limitation because it discloses the field device

receiving electronic signals representing an analyte identification (corresponding to

the claimed data on the measurement processing result) via, e.g., wireless

communication such as satellite radio or microwave technologies (which a skilled

artisan would have understood involves, or at least renders obvious, demodulating

the received data). Further, the field device processes the received electronic signals

to display the analyte identification to the user (corresponding to the claimed the

data on the measurement processing result are displayed).

Sunshine discloses the field device wirelessly receiving signals from the

remote processor (e.g. over the Internet) representing the analyte identification.

EX1004 at 7:26-51. Sunshine also discloses displaying the data for the user of the

field device using a data codec. Id. at 4:46-54 and 9:30-42. A skilled artisan would

have understood that to display data received using the disclosed wireless means

involves, or at least renders obvious, demodulating the received data into a format

suitable for displaying on the field device. EX1007 at 81-84.

60
 Moreover, Sunshine discloses that the field device can be implemented using

Palm or Handspring handheld devices. EX1004 at 4:63-5:13. A skilled artisan

would have understood that the Palm and Handspring devices identified by Sunshine

include a display unit for displaying information. EX1007 at 103. Notably,

Sunshines disclosure is like the 940 Patents limited discussion of displaying

demodulated information as displaying demodulated information was well-

understood at the time:

The data signals of the measurement results are received at the

transceiver 14 of the client apparatus 200 through the switched
network 15, demodulated by the measurement-result receiving
circuit 21, and displayed on the measurement-result display unit
22. Thus the measurement results can be made visible.
EX1001 at 3:34-37; see also id. at Abstract, 3:14-18, 3:62-4:5, 4:64-5:5, and 6:21-

26. Therefore, Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the function of this

means-plus-function limitation.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the structure of this means-

plus-function limitation. The structure is a display unit connected to a demodulation

means. Sunshine discloses that the field device is a Palm or Handspring personal

digital assistant including a codec to receive data in a mobile manner. EX1004 at

4:63-5:13 and 4:46-55. A skilled artisan would have understood that such devices

61
included displays that were connected to demodulation means to display the

demodulated information to the user. EX1007 at 36-38, 48, 81-88, and 103.

Moreover, Sunshines disclosure is like the 940 Patents limited discussion of

displaying information using a display unit as this was well-understood at the time.

Therefore, Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the structure of this

means-plus-function limitation.

10. Claim 16 is obvious

The system according to claim 1, wherein said client apparatus further

comprises audio output means connected to said client-side demodulation
means, such that the audio output means will audibly output the data on the
measurement processing results.

Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders obvious Claim 1, and Sunshine

Sunshine renders the additional features of Claim 16 (a means-plus-function claim)

obvious. Sunshine discloses a field device outputting data on measurement

processing results to a user from demodulation means. See supra VI.A.11

(discussing outputting this data on a display). Sunshines disclosure that the field

device can be a handheld computer from Palm or Handspring (EX1004 at 4:63-5:13)

renders obvious that the form of this output is sound using a speaker in the field

device.

A skilled artisan would have understood that the Palm and Handspring devices

identified by Sunshine both include speakers for outputting sound and that

62
communicating information to users of client devices using sound was a common

and well-understood option in this technical field. EX1007 at 109-110. A skilled

artisan would have understood that such devices included speakers that were

connected to demodulation means to output the demodulated information to the user.

Id. Notably, Sunshines disclosure is like the 940 Patents limited discussion of

outputting demodulated information as sound further demonstrating that this was

well-understood at the time:4

The measurement processing results may also be informed

audibly together with or instead of the display on the
measurement-result display unit 41.
EX1001 at 5:3-5. Therefore, Sunshine renders this claim obvious. KSR Int'l

Co., 127 S.Ct. at 1741; Translogic, 504 F.3d at 1262; Scanner Techs., 528 F.3d at

138182.

11. Claim 17 is obvious

A measurement method for connecting a server apparatus and

a client apparatus through an interactive communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.a.

4
Indeed, this claim was rejected twice during prosecutionand the applicant never

argued that these limitations differed from the prior art. See supra IV.A.

63
 such that the client apparatus sends measurement data, input
thereto from a measured medium, to the server apparatus
through the interactive communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.b.

while the server apparatus executes measurement processing

on the basis of the measurement data to send data on the
measurement processing results to the client apparatus
through the interactive communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

said client apparatus modulates the measurement data into

signals suitable for transmission

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.d.

[said client apparatus] demodulates the data on the

measurement processing results into signals suitable for
processing on said client apparatus

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.e.

said server apparatus detects whether the measurement data is

capable of being processed at the server apparatus

Sunshine does not expressly disclose this limitation, but Miyajima teaches this

limitation. See supra VI.A.1.g.

[said server] notifies whether a measurement data processing

service is available

64
 Sunshine does not expressly disclose this limitation, but Miyajima teaches this

limitation. See supra VI.A.1.g.

[said server] executes measurement processing on the basis of

the measurement data

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

[said server] modulates the data on the measurement

processing results into signals suitable for transmission

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.h.

12. Claim 18 is obvious

The method according to claim 17, wherein the measurement data from said
measured medium are data obtained by operating physical and chemical
equipment.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this claim. See supra VI.A.2.

13. Claim 23 is obvious

The method according to claim 17, wherein said client apparatus further
comprises means for adding to the measurement data coded information for
specifying measurement means for executing measurement processing in
said server apparatus.

Sunshine and Miyajima render this claim obvious. See supra VI.A.7.

14. Claim 24 is obvious

The method according to claim 23, wherein a plurality of measurement

means are provided, such that any one of the measurement means will be
selected on the basis of coded information added to the measurement data.

65
 Sunshine and Miyajima disclose this claim. See supra VI.A.8.

15. Claim 25 is obvious

The method according to claim 17, wherein the interactive communication

line comprises the Internet network, a switched line or a private line.

Sunshine discloses this claim. See supra VI.A.9.

16. Claim 26 is obvious

The method according to claim 17, wherein the interactive communication

line comprises a wireless communication channel.

Sunshine discloses this claim. See supra VI.A.10.

17. Claim 28 is obvious

The method according to claim 17, wherein the measurement data from said
measured medium are medical diagnostic data.

Sunshine discloses this claim. See supra VI.A.13.

18. Claim 30 is obvious

The method according to claim 17, wherein said client apparatus displays
the data on the measurement processing results.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this claim. See supra

VI.A.15.

19. Claim 31 is obvious

The method according to claim 17, wherein said client apparatus audibly
outputs the data on the measurement processing results.

66
 Sunshine alone or in combination with Ezekiel render this claim obvious. See

supra VI.A.10 and infra VI.B.4.

20. Claim 38 is obvious

A client apparatus in a measurement service system, which is

connected to a server apparatus through an interactive
communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.a.

said server apparatus comprising a measuring instrument

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. Miyajima also

discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.f.

a detector for indicating if received data is capable of being

measured by said measuring instrument

Sunshine does not expressly disclose this limitation, but Miyajima teaches this

limitation. See supra VI.A.1.g.

wherein said client apparatus sends measurement data, input

thereto from a measured medium, to the server apparatus
through the interactive communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.b.

[said client apparatus] receives data from the server apparatus

through the interactive communication line as a result of
measurement processing executed on the server apparatus on
the basis of the measurement data

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c and VI.A.1.e.

67
 said client apparatus comprising: modulation means for
modulating the measurement data into signals suitable for
transmission

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.d.

[said client apparatus comprising] demodulation means for

demodulating the data on the measurement processing results
into signals suitable for processing on said client apparatus

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.e.

21. Claim 39 is obvious

A server apparatus in a measurement service system, which is

connected to a client apparatus through an interactive
communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.a.

such that it receives measurement data, input from a measured

medium to the client apparatus, through the interactive
communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.b.

executes measurement processing on the basis of the

measurement data

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

transmits data on the measurement processing results to the

client apparatus through the communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

68
 said server apparatus comprising: at least one measurement
means that enables execution of measurement processing on
the basis of the measurement data

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. This is a

means-plus-function term whose function is execution of measurement processing

on the basis of the measurement data and whose corresponding structure includes

a measuring instrument, an oscilloscope, a spectrum analyzer, and an automobile

tester. See supra V.D.

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, the function of this means-

plus-function limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c. Sunshine discloses, or at least

renders obvious, the structure of this means-plus-function limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.f.

[said server apparatus comprising:] a means for detecting

whether the measurement data is capable of being measured by
any measurement means in the server apparatus and notifying
whether the measurement processing for the measurement data
is available

Sunshine and Miyajima disclose, or at least render obvious, this limitation.

See supra VI.A.1.g.

[said server apparatus comprising:] modulation means for

modulating the data on the measurement processing results
into signals suitable for transmission

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.h.

69
 22. Claim 40 is obvious

A measurement method, which is furnished with a client

apparatus connected to a server apparatus through an
interactive communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.a.

such that the client apparatus sends measurement data, input

thereto from a measured medium, to the server apparatus
through the interactive communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.b.

receives data from the server apparatus through the interactive

communication line as a result of measurement processing
executed on the server apparatus on the basis of the
measurement data

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

the server apparatus detects whether the measurement data is

capable of being measured by any measuring instrument in the
said server apparatus and notifies the client apparatus whether
a measurement processing service is available for the
measurement data

Sunshine does not expressly disclose this limitation, but Miyajima teaches this

limitation and it would have been obvious to combine them. See supra VI.A.1.g.

the measurement data are modulated into signals suitable for

transmission

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.d.

70
 the data on the measurement processing results are
demodulated into signals suitable for processing on said client
apparatus

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.e.

23. Claim 41 is obvious

A measurement method for connecting a client apparatus

through an interactive communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.a.

receiving measurement data from the client apparatus input

thereto from a measured medium through the interactive
communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.b.

detecting if the measurement data can be processed

Sunshine does not expressly disclose this limitation, but Miyajima teaches this

limitation and it would have been obvious to combine them. See supra VI.A.1.g.

notifying the client apparatus if the measurement data cannot

be processed

Sunshine does not expressly disclose this limitation, but Miyajima teaches this

limitation and it would have been obvious to combine them. See supra VI.A.1.g.

otherwise executing measurement processing on the basis of

the measurement data

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

71
 sending data on the measurement processing results to the
client apparatus through the interactive communication line

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

measurement processing is performed on the basis of the

measurement data

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

the data on the measurement processing results are modulated

into signals suitable for transmission

Sunshine discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.h.

B. Ground 2: Sunshine in view of Miyajima and Ezekiel renders

Claims 16, 32, 34, 35 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103

Ezekiel was filed on February 6, 1997 and was issued on August 4, 1998

(which predates the March 7, 2000 PCT filing date of the 940 Patent by over a year).

Therefore, Ezekiel qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(b).

Like the 940 Patent, Ezekiel is directed to communicating with a remote

electronic instrument over a computer network. EX1006 at Abstract. Ezekiel

discloses a client accessing an instrument over the Internet. Id. The client uses a

Web site to select and interface with the instrument:

72
EX1006 at Fig. 2.

A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine Sunshine with

Ezekiel. EX1007 at 116-117. Both are in the same field of working with

measurements in a client/server environment (e.g., SCADA systems). EX1004 at

Abstract; EX1006 at 2:45-53; EX1007 at 50-57. Both recite performing

measurement processing at a server in response to a request from a client. EX1004

at Abstract; EX1006 at Abstract and 2:45-53. Both discuss the use of the Internet.

EX1004 at 6:55-65; EX1006 at 1:1-2. Further discussion of why a skilled artisan

73
would combine the teachings of these references is given in the discussion of how

these references invalidate the 940 Patent below. See also EX1016 (claim chart for

Ground 2).

1. Claim 16 is obvious

The system according to claim 1, wherein said client apparatus further

comprises audio output means connected to said client-side demodulation
means, such that the audio output means will audibly output the data on the
measurement processing results.

Sunshine in view of Ezekiel renders this means-plus-function claim obvious.

Sunshine discloses a field device outputting data on measurement processing results

to a user from demodulation means. See supra VI.A.11 (discussing outputting this

data on a display). Sunshines disclosure that the field device can be a Palm or

Handspring handheld device renders obvious that the form of this output is sound

using a speaker. See supra VI.A.12. Ezekiel discloses the client device receiving

output from the instrument via a Web browser and that Web browsers can deliver

sound to the user. EX1006 at 1:19-24 and 2:45-53. This corresponds to the disclosed

structure of this claim. See supra V.J. In view of this, a skilled artisan would have

found this claim obvious especially because outputting information as sound in this

technical field was well-known before the 940 Patent. EX1007 at 109-110; see

also supra VI.B and VI.B.1 (discussing motivations to combine Ezekiel and

74
Sunshine); KSR Int'l Co., 127 S.Ct. at 1741; Translogic, 504 F.3d at 1262; Scanner

Techs., 528 F.3d at 138182.

2. Claim 32 is obvious

A measurement service method for connecting a server

computer and a client computer through a Web site on the
Internet

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.a.

such that the client computer sends measurement data, input

thereto from a measured medium, to the server computer
through the Internet network

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.b.

while the server computer executes measurement processing on

at least one of measurement instruments connected to the
server computer on the basis of the measurement data to send
data on the measurement processing results to the client
computer through the Internet network

Sunshine discloses this limitation. See supra VI.A.1.c.

wherein applications for measurement services are accepted on

the Web site

Sunshine renders this limitation obvious. As demonstrated below, Sunshine

discloses a field device that sends a measurement to a processor over the Internet,

and discloses that the processor can make the results available to the field device on

a Web site. While Sunshine does not explicitly state that the field device initiates

service with the processor to send the measurement using a Web site, the fact that

75
Sunshine discloses the processor communicating results of processing the

measurement via a Web site would have made it obvious to a skilled artisan at the

time for the processor to accept applications for measurement services are accepted

on the Web site from the field device.

Sunshine discloses that the processor can be accessed via a Web site and that

the processor can post results of measurement services onto a Web site. EX1004 at

6:66-7:9 and 9:9-23. Given the ubiquity of interactive Web site applications at the

time, including those disclosed of posting the results for retrieval, it would have been

obvious to a skilled artisan for the initial communication to occur by having

applications for measurement services are accepted on the Web site as is claimed

when the field device and the processor are already disclosed as communicating

using a Web site. EX1007 at 112-113. It would have required a simple

substitution in means of communicationfrom a computer-device input to a generic

web site inputthat would have required only simple substitution of known

equivalents at the time of invention. KSR Int'l Co., 127 S.Ct. at 1741; Translogic,

504 F.3d at 1262; Scanner Techs., 528 F.3d at 138182. That this limitation would

have been obvious to a skilled artisan is further evidenced by the 940 Patents sole

perfunctory description of this feature:

76
 In the embodiment, the Internet network is used as the
interactive communication line. Therefore, applications for
measurements are accepted on the Web site 55, and in some
cases, the applicants may be billed online through the Web site
55. The server apparatus 100 and the client apparatus 200 may
be a server computer and a client computer, respectively. In this
case, a desired measuring instrument in the server apparatus 100
can be selected on the Web site 55 so that transmission of
measurement data from the client apparatus 200 will be accepted.
EX1001 at 5:35-45 (emphasis added). As this quotation demonstrates, the 940

Patent itself treats this limitation as simply a natural consequence of having the client

and server communicate over the Internetexactly what Sunshine explicitly

discloses. Therefore, Sunshine renders this limitation obvious.

Moreover, to the extent a narrow construction of this limitation is adopted or

it is found not obvious in light of Sunshine itself, Ezekiel teaches, or at least renders

obvious, this limitation. In summary, Ezekiel discloses a system in which a client

can access an instrument over the Internet using a Web site. The Web site displays

the instruments that are available, and the client selects the instrument it would like

to communicate with. Thus, Ezekiel teaches applications for measurement services

are accepted on the Web site as is claimed.

77
 Ezekiel discloses a system in which a client can visit a Web site, view the

available instruments, and select a desired instrument:

FIG. 2 shows a browser control panel 40. . . . The application

class of instrument 20 is linked to web page 70 with an HTTP
address made up of the host name (i.e., "Rocky7") of instrument
20 or internet Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)/Internet
Protocol (IP) address (e.g., 15.8.162.231), and the remote
application port (e.g. port 8080) used for retrieving remote
application 10, shown in FIG. 1.
EX1006 at 3:64-4:8;

Id. at Fig. 2;

For example, Uniform Resource Locator (URL) 72 may be for

any of a variety of instruments such as a signal source, a signal
analyzer, a meter, or a sensor. The instruments represented by

78
 URLs on web page 70 do not have to exist in one physical
location.
Id. at 4:24-28;

After selecting instrument 20, instrument 20 dynamically loads a

web page from instrument 20 to the web browser.
Id. at 4:43-44; see also 1:57-62, 3:64-4:9, 4:24-42, 4:43-51, 6:27-35, and 7:5-13.

This discloses, or at least renders obvious, applications for measurement services

are accepted on the Web site as is claimed. In fact, Ezekiels disclosure directly

corresponds to the940 Patents preferred embodiment:

In the embodiment, the Internet network is used as the interactive

communication line. Therefore, applications for measurements
are accepted on the Web site 55, and in some cases, the applicants
may be billed online through the Web site 55. The server
apparatus 100 and the client apparatus 200 may be a server
computer and a client computer, respectively. In this case, a
desired measuring instrument in the server apparatus 100
can be selected on the Web site 55 so that transmission of
measurement data from the client apparatus 200 will be
accepted.
EX1001 at 5:35-45 (emphasis added). Therefore, Ezekiel teaches, or at least renders

obvious, this limitation. KSR Int'l Co., 127 S.Ct. at 1741; Translogic, 504 F.3d at

1262; Scanner Techs., 528 F.3d at 138182.

79
 A skilled artisan at the time would have been motivated to combine Ezekiels

teaching of a client selecting a desired instrument over a server with Sunshine for

several reasons in addition to the reasons given supra VI.B. First, as discussed

above, Sunshine discloses using a Web site for communication between the field

device and the processor. Second, Ezekiels stated advantage of providing flexibility

in accessing an instrument from a remote location (EX1006 at 44-56) applies to the

system of Sunshine because it would provide field devices a flexible and accessible

manner of selecting the desired processor. Hence, a skilled artisan would be

motivated to combine these teachings of Ezekiel with Sunshine. EX1007 at 114-

117.

wherein said server computer has the functions of detecting

whether the measurement data are capable of being measured
by any measuring instrument in the said server computer, and
notifying whether the measurement service is available

Miyajima discloses, or at least renders obvious, this limitation. See supra

VI.A.1.g.

3. Claim 34 is obvious

The method according to claim 18, wherein a desired one of the measuring
instruments is selected on the Web site before transmission of the
measurement data is accepted.

80
 Ezekiel discloses this claim because it discloses a user being able to select a

desired instrument from a Web site. EX1006 at Fig. 2 and 3:64-4:51; see also id. at

2:5-19.

4. Claim 35 is obvious

The method according to claim 18, wherein an operating state of each of

the measuring instruments is confirmed on the Web site.

Sunshine in view of Miyajima renders Claim 18 obvious (see supra A.1.12),

and Ezekiel discloses the additional feature of Claim 35 because it discloses a Web

site displaying, in addition to data from the instrument, diagnostic data such as

alarms when thresholds are exceeded. EX1006 at 4:24-42; see also id. at 3:64-4:51

and Figs. 1-5. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to add this feature of

Ezekiel to Sunshine for the reasons discussed above. See supra VI.B and VI.B.1.

C. Ground 3: Sunshine in view of Miyajima and Nathanson renders

Claims 5, 12, 21, and 27 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103

Nathanson was filed on August 26, 1998 (which predates the March 7, 2000

PCT filing date of the 940 Patent by over a year). Therefore, Nathanson qualifies

as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(e). Nathanson discloses the subject matter added

by Claims 5, 12, 21, and 27 to their respective independent claims. Thus, Sunshine,

in view of Miyajima and Nathanson, renders these claims obvious. See EX1017

(claim chart for Ground 3).

81
 Claims 5, 12, 21, and 27 recite similar subject matter. Claim 5 is

representative:

5. The system according to claim 1, wherein the measurement

data from said measured medium are data indicative of the state
of a piece of equipment that is part of an automobile.
Nathanson discloses obtaining diagnostic data about a vehicle and communicating

it over, e.g, an IP network like the Internet. EX1010 at Abstract, 1:15-2:48, 3:1-30,

4:4-37, and 4:43-5:52. Therefore, it discloses the limitations in Claims 5, 12, 21,

and 27.

In view of this, it would have been obvious to apply the system of Sunshine

and Miyajima in the automotive context as described by Nathanson. EX1007 at

118-120. Both are in the same field of working with measurements in a client/server

environment (e.g., SCADA systems). EX1004 at Abstract; EX1010 at Abstract;

EX1007 at 50-57. Both discuss the use of the Internet to transmit sensory data.

EX1004 at 6:55-65; EX1010 at 4:4-16. And both discuss transmitting sensory data

regarding gases or vapors. EX1004 at 3:5-30; EX1010 at 4:28-38.

82
VII. CONCLUSION

For the forgoing reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests inter partes review

of Claims 1, 2, 5, 7-13, 15, 17, 18, 21, 23-28, 30-32, 34, 35, and 38-41 of the 940

Patent.

Respectfully Submitted,

______________________________

Roshan S. Mansinghani
Registration No. 62,429

Jonathan Stroud
Registration No. 72,518

83
 CERTIFICATE UNDER 37 CFR 42.24(d)

Under the provisions of 37 CFR 42.24(d), the undersigned hereby certifies

that the word count for the foregoing Petition for Inter Partes Review totals 13,907,

which is fewer than the 14,000 words allowed under 37 CFR 42.24(a)(i).

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: May 8, 2017 ______________________________

Roshan S. Mansinghani
Registration No. 62,429

84
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 8, 2017, I served a copy of this Petition for Inter

Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,873,940 Under 35 U.S.C. 312 and 37 C.F.R.

42.104 and Exhibits EX1001-1029 via priority mail on the following:

ALEXANDER POLTORAK C/O GENERAL PATENT CORPORATION

MONTEBELLO PARK
75 MONTEBELLO ROAD
SUFFERN, NEW YORK, 10901-3746

TERRILE, CANNATTI, CHAMBERS & HOLLAND, LLP

P.O. BOX 203518
AUSTIN TX 78720

KHEYFITS P.C.
1140 6TH AVENUE, 9TH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NY 10036

______________________________

Roshan S. Mansinghani
Registration No. 62,429

85