Takeaway: When interpreting claims, the Board may interpret claim terms for which the parties did not expressly propose constructions when necessary to evaluate the parties’ arguments.

In its Final Written Decision, the Board determined that Petitioner showed by a preponderance of the evidence that all of the challenged claims of the ’210 patent are unpatentable.

The ’210 patent relates to arrangements and techniques for managing vehicle diagnostic information. In an embodiment, sensors are arranged throughout the vehicle to collect data and an antenna array is mounted on the vehicle to receive wireless signals from the sensors. A control system processes the signals for display and/or transmission to a remote location. Continue reading →

In its Final Written Decision, the Board held that claims 1, 20, 30, 31, 67, 107, and 108 of the ’067 patent are unpatentable. At the same time, the Board found that claims 21 and 22 of the ’067 patent were not shown to be unpatentable.

Petitioner had requested inter partes review of claims 1, 20-22, 30, 31, 35, 67, 107, and 108 of the ’067 patent.  The Board then instituted trial with respect to each of these challenged claims.  The grounds upon which institution was based were alleged anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 of claims 1, 20, 31, 67, 107, and 108 in view of Cronce and of claims 1, 20-22, 30, 31, 67, 107, and 108 in view of Deluca. Continue reading →