UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. Kamstrup A/S, Petitioner

Transcription

1 Filed on behalf of Kamstrup A/S By: Thomas R. Arno Kerry Taylor KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP 2040 Main Street, 14 th Floor Irvine, CA Tel.: (949) Fax: (949) Filed: June 12, 2015 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Kamstrup A/S, Petitioner v. Miitors Aps Patent Owner of U.S. Patent 8,893,559 to Drachmann Appl. No. 13/650,946 filed Oct. 12, 2012 Issued Nov. 25, 2014 Case IPR U.S. Patent 8,893,559 PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,893,559 PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. 312 AND 37 C.F.R i -

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. EXHIBIT LIST... v I. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. 42.8(a)(1)... 1 A. Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(1)... 1 B. Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(2)... 1 C. Lead and Back-up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(3)... 1 D. Service Information Under 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(4)... 2 II. GROUNDS FOR STANDING UNDER 37 C.F.R (a)... 2 III. SUMMARY OF ISSUE PRESENTED... 2 IV. INTRODUCTION... 3 V. STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED... 9 VI. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND AND STATE OF THE ART VII. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART VIII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION IX. GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY A. Ground 1: Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, and are obvious over Walker in view of European Patent Application Publication EP B. Ground 2: Claim 5 is obvious over Walker, Applicant s Admitted Prior Art, and Marsh C. Ground 3: Claim 7 is obvious over Walker, Drachmann 311, and Yamamoto D. Ground 4: Claim 9 is obvious over Walker, Drachmann 311, and Buckberry i -

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont d) Page No. E. Ground 5: Claims 1, 6, 11, and 13 obvious over Rhodes and Drachmann F. Ground 6: Claim 2 is obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, and Nielsen G. Ground 7: Claims 3 and 5 are obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, and Marsh H. Ground 8: Claims 3, 4, 8, and 12 are obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, and Walker I. Ground 9: Claim 7 is obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, and Yamamoto J. Ground 10: Claim 9 is obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, further in view of Buckberry K. Ground 11: Claim 10 is obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, further in view of Nielsen and Korner L. Ground 12: Claims 1, 2, 6, and 7 are anticipated by Nielsen M. Ground 13: Claims 3 and 5 are obvious over Nielsen with or without Marsh N. Ground 14: Claims 3, 4, 8, and 12 are obvious over Nielsen in view of Walker O. Ground 15: Claim 9 is obvious over Nielsen and Buckberry P. Ground 16: Claim 10 is obvious over Nielsen in view of Körner Q. Ground 17: Claims 11 and 13 are obvious over Nielsen and Drachmann ii-

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont d) Page No. X. THE PROPOSED REJECTIONS RAISE NEW ISSUES IN WHICH KAMSTRUP WILL LIKELY PREVAIL XI. CONCLUSION iii-

5 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page No(s). In re Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC, No , 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 1699, Slip. Op. at 21 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2015) In re Katz, 687 F.2d 450 (CCPA 1982) OTHER AUTHORITIES 35 U.S.C passim 35 U.S.C , 10, U.S.C U.S.C C.F.R ,2 37 C.F.R , 2, C.F.R C.F.R C.F.R iv -

6 EXHIBIT LIST Exhibit No. Description 1001 U.S. Patent 8,893,559 to Drachmann 1002 U.S. Patent 400,331 to Graeser 1003 U.S. Patent 1,214,425 to Caston 1004 U.S. Patent 1,473,751 to Walker 1005 U.S. Patent 3,237,453 to Yamamoto et. al 1006 European Patent Application Publication EP to Drachmann 1007 European Patent Application Publication EP to Drachmann et al European Patent Application Publication EP to Skallebæk, et. al 1009 Danish Patent DK B1 to Drachmann 1010 U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/ to Drachmann 1011 European Patent Application Publication EP to Körner 1012 English Translation of European Patent Application Publication EP to Körner with certification 1013 European Patent Application Publication EP to Marsh 1014 International Publication WO 2008/ to Buckberry 1015 International Publication WO 2007/ to Rhodes 1016 U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/ to Nielsen 1017 International Publication WO 2010/ to Nielsen 1018 Declaration of Anders Skallebæk - v -

7 Kamstrup A/S (hereinafter Kamstrup ) requests inter partes review under 35 U.S.C. 312 and 37 C.F.R of Claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 8,893,559 ( the 559 patent ), which issued on November 25, 2014 to Drachmann. I. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. 42.8(a)(1) As set forth below and pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 42.8(a)(1), the following mandatory notices are provided as part of this Petition: A. Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(1) Kamstrup Water Metering LLC and Kamstrup Inc. (collectively, Kamstrup ) are real parties in interest for the petitioners. Kamstrup Water Metering LLC and Kamstrup Inc. are wholly owned subsidiaries of Kamstrup International A/S, a Danish corporation, which, in turn, is a wholly owned subsidiary of the petitioner Kamstrup A/S, a Danish corporation, which, in turn, is a wholly owned subsidiary of OK, a Danish cooperative that is owned by approximately 13,000 of its customers and dealers. B. Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(2) Petitioner is not aware of any related matters which would affect, or be affected by, a decision in this proceeding. C. Lead and Back-up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(3) Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(3) and 42.10(a), Kamstrup provides the following designation of counsel: - 1 -

8 Lead Counsel Thomas R. Arno (Reg. No. 40,490) Postal and Hand-Delivery Address El Camino Real San Diego, CA Telephone: (858) Facsimile: (858) Back-up Counsel Kerry S. Taylor (Reg. No. 43,947) Postal and Hand-Delivery Address El Camino Real San Diego, CA Telephone: (858) Facsimile: (858) Petitioners Lead Counsel is Thomas R. Arno, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Registration No. 40,490, of Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP. Petitioner s back up counsel is Kerry S. Taylor, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Registration No. 43,947 of Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP. D. Service Information Under 37 C.F.R. 42.8(b)(4) Please address all correspondence to the lead counsel at the address shown above. Petitioner also consents to electronic service by to: BoxKamstrup@knobbe.com. II. GROUNDS FOR STANDING UNDER 37 C.F.R (a) Kamstrup certifies that the 559 patent is available for inter partes review and that Kamstrup is not barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review challenging the patent claims on the grounds identified in this petition. III. SUMMARY OF ISSUE PRESENTED This petition primarily presents the Patent Trial and Appeal Board with the following issue: - 2 -

9 U.S. Patent No. 8,893,559 is directed to an ultrasonic consumption meter having a housing and a flow channel, with a locking mechanism which locks the housing in position relative to the flow channel. The prior art discloses consumption meters having housings for ultrasonic transducers and teaches many different types of locking mechanisms capable of locking a housing in position relative to a flow channel. Would the ultrasonic consumption meter, as claimed in U.S. Patent No. 8,893,559, have been anticipated by the prior art, or would the ultrasonic consumption meter as claimed in U.S. Patent No. 8,893,559 have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention? IV. INTRODUCTION U.S. Patent No. 8,893,559 (Ex. 1001), hereinafter referred to as the 559 patent, is directed to an ultrasonic flowmeter having a sealed housing for the electronics and transducers, with the housing locked in position relative to the flow channel by a locking mechanism. The 559 patent (Ex. 1001) lists Jens Drachmann as the sole inventor. Referring to Figure 2 of the 559 patent (Ex. 1001), the measuring components of the described flowmeter are contained in a cup 6, which is capped by a hermetically sealed lid (not shown in Figure 2). The working electronic - 3 -

10 components are entirely inside the cup 6 and the lid, and no wires enter or exit the cup or the lid. The cup 6 and the flow channel containing the fluid to be measured have mating protrusions 11 and 12. When the cup is installed onto the flow channel these protrusions 11 and 12 are secured to each other with the locking pin 8 that slides into openings in the protrusions in a direction parallel to the flow channel. The independent claims of the 559 patent (Ex. 1001) are directed to the locking mechanism, the cup and sealed lid configuration, and the housing that is not penetrated by wires. Figure 2 of the 559 patent (Ex. 1001) is reproduced below: - 4 -

11 The 559 patent claims priority to Danish Patent Application , filed on April 12, This Danish application matured into Danish Patent No. DK B1 (Ex. 1009). The petitioner, Kamstrup A/S, opposed the grant of DK B1 (Ex. 1009) at the Danish Patent Office. In a decision of September 25, 2012, the Danish Patent Office canceled all claims of DK The claims of the granted Danish patent DK B1 (Ex. 1009) are similar to the claims present in the U.S. Patent Application Publication of the 559 patent, which published as US 2013/ on February 7, 2013 (Ex. 1010). During prosecution of the U.S. patent application that matured into the 559 patent, the limitations of dependent claims 4, 8, and 12 from publication US 2013/ were incorporated into independent claims. The various grounds for unpatentability set forth below are not the same as those applied in the Danish Opposition. The grounds of unpatentability set forth below comprise three branches, with the base of each branch being a different primary reference. The three primary references cited in the grounds for unpatentability proposed in this petition corresponding to the three branches are as follows: 1. U.S. Patent 1,473,751 to Walker (Ex. 1004), herein after referred to as Walker. This is a 1923 patent available as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Walker shows a water meter in a housing that is locked to a flow channel with - 5 -

12 protrusions on both the housing and the flow channel and a locking pin that slides into openings in the protrusions in a direction parallel to the flow channel. The basic difference between Walker and the flowmeters claimed in the 559 patent is that Walker does not utilize ultrasonic flow measurement technology inside its housing. Walker is not of record in the prosecution of the 559 patent (Ex. 1001). 2. International Publication Number WO 2007/ to Rhodes (Ex. 1015), hereinafter referred to as Rhodes. This document was published on February 22, 2007 and is available as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Rhodes shows an ultrasonic flowmeter including a housing main body with a sealed lid and a base. The main body and the base form a cup. The flow channel is clamped between the main body and the base. Rhodes is different from Walker in that it includes the ultrasonic measurement technology that Walker lacks, and uses a different locking mechanism to the pipe. The basic difference between Rhodes and the flowmeter embodiments claimed in the 559 patent is that the ultrasonic transducers of Rhodes are not in the same sealed compartment as the rest of the ultrasonic measurement electronics, but instead are individually fixed and sealed to the flow channel in a separate compartment that is not watertight. Rhodes is of record in the prosecution of the 559 patent. 3. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/ to Nielsen (Ex. 1016), hereinafter referred to as Nielsen. This document is a publication of U.S

13 Patent Application Serial Number 13/255,724, which is a U.S. National Phase entry of International Application Number PCT/DK2010/050066, having the petitioner Kamstrup A/S as the named applicant. This International Application was filed on March 25, 2010, designated the U.S., and published in English as International Publication Number WO 2010/ on October 7, A copy of the International Publication is provided as Ex The effective date of Nielsen as prior art to the 559 patent is March 25, 2010, its international filing date, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(e). Nielsen shows an ultrasonic flowmeter comprising a casing formed from a cup and a lid that are sealed together with ultrasound transducers and sensing electronics contained therein. This sealed casing is coupled to the flow channel with screw secured brackets that attach to flanges on the flow channel such that recesses in the bottom of the cup containing the ultrasound transducers extend into holes in the flow channel. The basic difference between Nielsen and the flowmeter embodiment illustrated in the 559 patent is that the lid of Nielsen includes a sealed electrical interface for connection to an external device. The mechanical coupling scheme of Nielsen also has some differences in implementation from that shown in the 559 patent. Nielsen is not of record in the prosecution of the 559 patent. It may be noted that the corresponding PCT Publication of Nielsen, International Publication Number WO 2010/ (Ex. 1017), is of record in the prosecution of the 559 patent

14 However, this PCT Publication is not prior art under any section of 35 U.S.C Thus, the Examiner had no basis to use this of record PCT Publication of Nielsen as part of a rejection during the prosecution of the 559 patent. These three primary references are supplemented in some of the grounds for invalidity below by three secondary references that have as a named inventor Jens Drachmann, the same named inventor as listed on the 559 patent (Ex. 1001). As with the Nielsen reference described above, the petitioner Kamstrup A/S is the named applicant on all three of these secondary references. Two of these three references are mentioned in the Background section of the 559 patent (Ex. 1001, col. 1, lines 35 and 43). These references describe various methods of housing the electronic components of ultrasonic flowmeters in hermetically sealed enclosures to protect them from water exposure and damage. Other secondary references are also introduced in the grounds for invalidity for several dependent claims. Kamstrup A/S provides below a detailed comparison of the claimed subject matter and the prior art. Kamstrup respectfully submits that Claims 1-13 are anticipated by or would have been obvious in view of the prior art presented herein and therefore requests that the Board institute an inter partes review and determine that these claims are unpatentable

15 V. STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED Kamstrup respectfully requests that the Board cancel Claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 8,893,559 (Ex. 1001) based on the following grounds for unpatentability: Ground 1. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, and are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being obvious over Walker (Ex. 1004) in view of European Patent Application Publication No to Drachmann (Ex. 1006), hereinafter referred to as Drachmann 311. U.S. Patent No. 1,214,425 to Caston (Ex. 1003), hereinafter referred to as Caston, and U.S. Patent 3,237,453 to Yamamoto (Ex. 1005), hereinafter referred to as Yamamoto, provide explicit suggestion and motivation to combine Walker with Drachmann 311 to the extent such a suggestion or motivation is not explicitly present in Walker and Drachmann 311 themselves. Ground 2. Claim 5 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Walker and Drachmann 311 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 1 above, and further in view of European Patent Application Publication EP to Marsh (Ex. 1013), hereinafter referred to as Marsh. Ground 3. Claim 7 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Walker in view of Drachmann 311 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 1 above, and further in view of Yamamoto (Ex. 1005)

16 Ground 4. Claim 9 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Walker and Drachmann 311 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 1 above and further in view of International Publication No. WO 2008/ to Buckberry et. al. (Ex. 1014), hereinafter referred to as Buckberry. Ground 5. Claims 1, 6, 11, and 13 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Rhodes (Ex. 1015) in view of EP Publication No to Drachmann et. al (Ex. 1007), hereinafter referred to as Drachmann 250. Ground 6. Claim 2 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Rhodes in view of Drachmann 250 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 5 above, and further in view of Nielsen (Ex. 1016). Ground 7. Claims 3 and 5 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Rhodes in view of Drachmann 250 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 5 above, and further in view of Marsh (Ex. 1013). Ground 8. Claims 3, 4, 8 and 12 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Rhodes in view of Drachmann 250 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 5 above, and further in view of Walker. Ground 9. Claim 7 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Rhodes in view of Drachmann 250 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 5 above, and further in view of Yamamoto (Ex. 1005)

17 Ground 10. Claim 9 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Rhodes in view of Drachmann 250 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 5 above, and further in view of Buckberry. Ground 11. Claim 10 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Rhodes in view of Drachmann 250 as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 5 above, and further in view Nielsen (Ex. 1016) and European Patent Application Publication EP A1 to Körner (Ex. 1011), hereinafter referred to as Körner. A certified translation of Körner from German into English is provided as Ex Ground 12. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 7 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Nielsen (Ex. 1016). Ground 13. Claims 3 and 5 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Nielsen as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 11 above, and further in view of Marsh. Ground 14. Claims 3, 4, 8, and 12 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Nielsen as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 11 above, and further in view of Walker. Ground 15. Claim 9 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Nielsen as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 11 above, and further in view of Buckberry

18 Ground 16. Claim 10 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Nielsen as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 11 above and further in view of Körner. Ground 17. Claims 11 and 13 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Nielsen as applied to Claim 1 in Ground 11 above and further in view of Drachmann 311. VI. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND AND STATE OF THE ART As noted above, the 559 patent is directed to an ultrasonic water meter having a sealed housing and a mechanism for locking the housing to a flow channel. Accordingly, set forth below is a discussion of the historical development of these aspects of flowmeters, with a focus on the content of the prior art references relied upon in the grounds for unpatentability. Fluid flowmeters connecting water or other fluid sources with consumers of those fluids such as homes or businesses date back at least to the 19 th century. An example is provided by U.S. Patent No. 400,331 to Graeser, issued March 26, 1889 (Ex. 1002). This patent shows a water meter with a case containing a dial driven by a wheel which is in turn driven by the fluid flow. By the early 20 th century, the attachment structure for coupling a casing of a water meter to a supply pipe was itself a subject of separate technical development. For example, Caston (Ex. 1003) is directed to improvements in means for

19 connecting water meters to supply pipes. Ex page 2, lines As another example, Walker (Ex. 1004) provides a coupling system for a water meter to a supply pipe where the coupling system retains evidence of tampering. Walker states, [m]y invention relates to a device for locking a water meter or any other similar gauge to a supply line in such a manner, that a seal must be broken before the meter can be detached or opened. Ex page 3, lines In both Caston and Walker, the structure of the flow measuring device inside the housing is not described. In fact, Caston specifically states that [t]he specific structure of the meter is not shown or described, as the construction thereof is immaterial since my improvements are capable of use in connection with practically all types of meters. Ex page 2, lines Fig. 3 of Walker is reproduced below:

20 As shown in Fig. 3 of Walker, a water meter 10 is contained in a housing with projections 14 that are connected to a flow channel comprising the pipe sections 29 that are locked to the housing. As technology advanced over time, the methods used to measure flow in flowmeters advanced as well. By the 1960s, electronic flow measurement techniques based on ultrasound had been developed as an alternative to various forms of mechanical flow measurement devices. One example is provided by U.S. Patent No. 3,237,453 to Yamamoto et. al (Ex. 1005). In the system described by Yamamoto et. al, electrical signals from ultrasonic transducers 1 and 7 drive a pulse motor 11 that operates a counter 12, (Ex. 1005, Fig. 1) instead of a wheel driving a dial as in Graeser s 1889 patent. The development of ultrasonic flow measurement techniques did not eliminate the use of housings for the flow measurement mechanism. For flowmeters using electrical signal based ultrasound technology, the benefits of providing housings that protect the electronic components from damage due to exposure to water have been recognized and described. For example, Drachmann 311, published on October 22, 2008 (Ex. 1006) shows an ultrasonic flowmeter with a casing and an internal embedding material that encapsulates the measuring means, the electronic circuit, the transmitter, and the power supply. Figures 3 and 4 of Drachmann 311 are reproduced below:

21 As another example, Drachmann 250, published on July 29, 2009 (Ex. 1007) describes an ultrasonic flowmeter where the casing houses the electronics and includes a transparent cover for viewing a display. Figures 1 and 2 of Drachmann 250 are reproduced below:

22 A third example, European Patent Application Publication EP to Skallebæk et. al (Ex. 1008), hereinafter referred to as Skallebæk, having Jens Drachmann as second named inventor, and published on July 29, 2009, shows an ultrasonic flowmeter with a two layer casing for housing the measuring means and electronic circuit. Figures 1 and 2 of Skallebæk are set forth below:

23 All three of these European Patent Application Publications state that [a] known way of rendering consumption meters robust to penetration of water and dust is to provide a hermetically sealed casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. Ex [0005]; Ex [0005]; Ex [0005]. Furthermore, it may be noted that all three of these European Patent Application Publications describe self-contained ultrasonic flowmeters, which are operable without any external connections or wire penetrations. The early water meter patents Caston and Walker show various locking mechanisms for coupling a mechanical water meter to a flow channel. Various

24 locking mechanisms for coupling an ultrasonic flowmeter to a flow channel have also been described. For example, Marsh describes an ultrasonic fluid flowmeter having ultrasound transducers 40 and 42 on a slip on yoke 16 which locks onto a flow channel via a locking cam pin 20. (Ex. 1013, col 3, lines 49-55). Figure 1 of Marsh is reproduced below: In Rhodes (Ex. 1015), a housing is locked to a flow channel by clamping a flow pipe between a base part 118 and a main body 111. A lid 101 closes the top of the main body. Figure 3 of Rhodes is reproduced below:

25 Another example is Nielsen which describes both the ultrasonic transducers and electronic components in a single, sealed compartment. Ex. 1016, Abstract. The single housing 132/134 of Nielsen is locked to the flow channel using bracing

26 brackets 116 with mounting screws. Ex. 1016, [0040]. Figure 1 of Nielsen (Ex. 1016) is reproduced below: Based on the teachings of the prior art, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to create an ultrasonic consumption meter having its sensitive electronics and transducers protected by a housing which is locked and fixed relative to the flow channel, as recited in the Claims of the 559 patent. VII. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART In the field relevant to ultrasonic flowmeters in the years 2009 and 2010, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have held a bachelor of science degree in a field of engineering or a closely related discipline, and at least one year of practical

27 academic or industrial experience designing, testing, and/or manufacturing flowmeters. Ex VIII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION In inter partes review, a claim term is given its "broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification." See 37 C.F.R (b); see also In re Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC, No , 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 1699, Slip. Op. at 21 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2015). Claim 8 recites wherein the at least one locking pin is secured by a seal. As recited in Claim 8, the term seal should be construed to mean legal seal or tamper-evident seal. The term seal is susceptible to more than one meaning. The specific meaning of seal as recited in Claim 8 is clear from the specification of the 559 patent. The 559 patent describes the locking pin can be secured by sealing means that prevents extraction of the pin without leaving a visible trace on the seal or the housing or the flow channel. (Ex. 1001, col. 5, lines ) Additionally, the term seal in Claim 8 should be interpreted as described above to distinguish it from the use of seal in Claim 1, which recites a hermetical seal. The remainder of the claim terms in the 559 patent are presumed to take on their ordinary and customary meaning based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language in view of the specification. Kamstrup does

28 not believe that any special meanings apply to the claim terms in the 559 patent, other than that described above. Kamstrup s position regarding the scope of the claims should not be taken as an assertion regarding the appropriate claim scope in other adjudicative forums where a different claim interpretation standard may apply. IX. GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY A. Ground 1: Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, and are obvious over Walker in view of European Patent Application Publication EP Walker issued on November 13, 1923, which is greater than one year prior to the earliest priority date for the 559 patent. Accordingly, Walker is prior art to the 559 patent under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Walker was not of record during the prosecution of the 946 application. Walker discloses every feature of Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-8, and of the 559 patent except for (1) the use of ultrasonic measurement technology for the flow measurements, (2) the housing being hermetically sealed. These missing items are in the secondary reference. A suggestion to place a variety of technologies into the housing of Walker is provided by Walker itself where it is stated that inside the housing and locked to the flow channel is a water meter or any other similar gauge. Walker, Ex. 1004, page 3, lines A suggestion that ultrasonic components would benefit by such a housing is provided by the text of the

29 patent where it states that [e]lectronic consumption meters are delicate equipment that will suffer when placed in harmful environments, unless sensitive parts are well protected. 559 patent, Ex. 1001, col. 1, lines With respect to Claim 1, Walker discloses a water meter, or any other similar gauge (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 9-11, FIGS. 1-3). Walker discloses a flow channel formed by pipes 29, one pipe on each side. The pipes 29 are inserted into the water supply line. (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 86-87). Walker discloses that the water meter 10 has a lid 11 which may be raised for reading the meter. (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 30-35, Fig. 1). Walker does not disclose ultrasonic transducers, electronic circuits, or that the housing that contains the water meter measuring apparatus is for these components. The 559 patent itself admits that ultrasonic consumption meters are known, and cites two references for such designs in the Background section. (Ex. 1001, col. 1, line 29-31). One of these references, Drachmann 311 (Ex. 1006) further discloses, [u]ltrasonic transducers 1, 2 for generating and detecting ultrasonic signals are placed so that the generated signals can be introduced into the measuring section. (Ex at [0037]-[0038], FIG. 1). This reference also discloses, [t]he electronic circuit 3 also comprises components for operating the consumption meter. (Ex at [0040], FIG. 1), and further discloses a casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. (Ex at [0005])

30 It would be obvious to place the electronic components of Ex inside the housing of Walker because such components are taught in Ex to be placed inside a housing to form a fully enclosed ultrasonic consumption meter. A suggestion to place a variety of technologies into the housing of Walker is provided by Walker itself where it is stated that inside the housing and locked to the flow channel is a water meter or any other similar gauge. Walker, Ex. 1004, page 3, lines This is exactly the kind of meter or gauge that is provided in Drachmann 311. ( A consumption meter converts a measured quantity value to a consumed quantity. As an example, an ultrasonic flow meter may measure a time delay between counter-propagating ultrasonic waves in a medium flow, in order to determine a corresponding consumption of the medium, such as a consumption of hot or cold water. Ex. 1006, page 2, [0002]) Yamamoto explains benefits of the use of ultrasonic components for a meter because not only can the flow velocity of the interior liquid be measured from outside the pipe, but very high accuracy of measurement can be obtained. (Ex. 1005, page 2, col. 1, lines 31-33). This combination is further supported by Caston (Ex. 1003), which notes that the internal structure of the meter can vary widely without affecting the functionality of an external locking mechanism. On this point, Caston specifically states that [t]he specific structure of the meter is not shown or described, as the construction thereof is immaterial since my improvements are capable of use in connection with

31 practically all types of meters. (Ex. 1003, page 2, lines 36-44). A suggestion that ultrasonic components would benefit by a housing is also provided by the text of the 559 patent where it states that [e]lectronic consumption meters are delicate equipment that will suffer when placed in harmful environments, unless sensitive parts are well protected. 559 patent, Ex. 1001, col. 1, lines The ultrasonic meter components of Ex (or Ex for that matter) can be placed inside the housing of Walker without any necessary modification to the locking features of Walker. As can be seen in the Figures of Walker, what is inside the housing does not affect the locking mechanism. (See also, Skallebæk Declaration, Ex. 1018, paragraph 4). With respect to the locking mechanism of Claim 1, Walker discloses nuts 17 with flanges 27 that engage flanges 28 on the pipes 29 (i.e. the flow channel as noted above). Nuts 17 are advanced over the ends of the projections 14 until they abut the nuts 16 with slots 21 and holes 20 aligned. Bar 23 is installed in the slots 21, seals 22 are attached by inserting wires through the holes 20 in the nuts 16 and 17. (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines , Fig. 1, Fig. 3) Bar 23 is part of the locking mechanism at least in that it prevents the nuts 16 and 17 from rotating relative to each other in a manner that would loosen the connection. In this regard, Walker states This bar 23 has a T-head 24 at one end and a small aperture 25 at its opposite end and the aperture has been so selected, that a pad lock 26 may be

32 inserted in the aperture 25 and in this manner lock the two couplings together providing a seal for the water meter. Ex. 1004, page 1, lines Regarding the claimed housing structure of a cup and a lid, Walker discloses a housing which has a cylindrical wall and a bottom to form a cup (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 30-35, Fig. 1). Walker also discloses a lid 11 for the housing (Walker, page 1, lines 33-35, Fig. 1). Walker does not disclose that the housing includes a hermetical seal. Ex discloses [a] known way of rendering consumption meters robust to penetration of water and dust is to provide a hermetically sealed casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. (Ex at [0005]). If ultrasonic transducers and electronic circuits are used as the measurement technology inside the housing of Walker, it would be obvious to seal the water meter 10 hermetically in accordance with the teachings of the Ex Even the 559 patent states [e]lectronic consumption meters are delicate equipment that will suffer when placed in harmful environments, unless sensitive parts are well protected. 559 patent, Ex. 1001, col. 1, lines (See also, Skallebæk Declaration, Ex. 1018, paragraph 4). Claim 3 recites further specific limitations regarding the structure of the locking mechanism, that it includes protrusions on the cup, protrusions on the flow channel, and a locking pin. With respect to this claim, Walker discloses

33 projections 14, nuts 16, and flanges 18 and 19 on nuts 16. (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 40-47, FIGS. 1 and 5). All of these are protrusions on the housing 10. Walker discloses flanges 28, nuts 17, and flanges 18 and 19 on nuts 17. (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 46-48, FIGS. 1 and 5). All of these are protrusions on the flow channel 29. Walker discloses a sealing bar 23 extending through slots 21. (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 55-67, FIGS. 1-4). The sealing bar 23 is a locking pin. With respect to Claim 4, which recites that the locking pin of Claim 3 can be inserted and extracted by a movement parallel to the length of the flow channel, Walker discloses the sealing bar 23 is inserted and extracted by a movement parallel to the length of the flow channel pipes 29. (Ex. 1004, Fig. 3). With respect to Claim 6, Walker discloses a water meter. (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 30-33, FIGS. 1-3). With respect to Claim 8, the sealing bar 23 of Walker is secured in place with lock 26 forming a seal. Walker states: a pad lock 26 may be inserted in the aperture 25 and in this manner lock the two couplings together providing a seal for the water meter. Ex. 1004, page 1, lines The 559 patent states that [a]n advantageous sealing means is a wire drawn through a hole in the locking pin. The arm of the lock 26 in Walker forms such a wire in this location forming a seal. With respect to Claim 11, Walker does not disclose any electrical wires penetrating the water meter. (Ex. 1004, Fig. 1). If the meter inside housing

34 were ultrasonic, still no wire penetration would become required. Drachmann 311 discloses [a] known way of rendering consumption meters robust to penetration of water and dust is to provide a hermetically sealed casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. No penetrating wires are necessary, and none are illustrated in Drachmann 311 (Ex at [0005], Figs. 3 and 4). See also Skallebæk Declaration, Ex. 1018, 4. Claims 12 and 13 are independent claims with limitations tracking those discussed above with reference to Claims 4 and 11. All the same arguments are applicable to these claims respectively. The table below supports Ground 1 of invalidity above: 559 Patent Claim Correspondence to Walker and Drachmann 311 Claim 1 An ultrasonic consumption meter comprising: a flow channel for the media to be measured; at least one ultrasonic transducer for emitting and receiving ultrasound; an electronic circuit for operating the meter; and a housing for the transducers and the electronic circuit water meter Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 9-11 ultrasonic flow meter Ex. 1006, [0002] two short pipes 29 are first inserted in the supply pipe line Ex. 1004, page 3, lines [u]ltrasonic transducers 1, 2 for generating and detecting ultrasonic signals are placed so that the generated signals can be introduced into the measuring section. Ex. 1006, [0037] [t]he electronic circuit 3 also comprises components for operating the consumption meter. Ex at [0040]

35 casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. Ex at [0005] characterized by a locking mechanism that locks the housing in position relative to the flow channel; This bar 23 has a T-head 24 at one end and a small aperture 25 at its opposite end and the aperture has been so selected, that a pad lock 26 may be inserted in the aperture 25 and in this manner lock the two couplings together providing a seal for the water meter. Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 60-67, Fig. 4 Ex. 1004, page 3, lines , Fig. 1, Fig. 3 wherein the housing consists of a cup, Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 30-35, Fig. 1 a lid and Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 33-35, Fig. 1 a hermetical seal [a] known way of rendering consumption meters robust to penetration of water and dust is to provide a hermetically sealed casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. (Ex. 1006, [0005]. Claim 3 The ultrasonic consumption meter according to claim 1, See table for Claim 1 above. wherein the locking mechanism comprises at least one protrusion on the housing, at least one protrusion on the flow channel, Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 40-47, FIGS. 1 and 5 Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 46-48, FIGS. 1 and 5 and at least one locking pin. Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 55-67, FIGS

36 Claim 4 The ultrasonic consumption meter according to claim 3, wherein the locking mechanism is configured such that the at least one locking pin can be inserted and extracted by a movement parallel to the length of the flow channel. See table for Claim 3 above. Ex. 1004, Fig. 3 Claim 6 The ultrasonic consumption meter according to claim 1, wherein the consumption meter is a water meter. See table for Claim 1 above. a water meter. (Ex. 1004, page 3, lines 30-33, FIGS. 1-3). Claim 8 The ultrasonic consumption meter according to claim 3, wherein the at least one locking pin is secured by a seal. See table for Claim 3 above. a pad lock 26 may be inserted in the aperture 25 and in this manner lock the two couplings together providing a seal for the water meter. Ex. 1004, page 3, lines Claim 11 The ultrasonic consumption meter according to claim 1, wherein the housing is not penetrated by electrical wires. See table for Claim 1 above. Ex. 1004, Fig. 1 Ex. 1006, [0005], Fig

37 Claim 12 An ultrasonic consumption meter comprising: See table for Claim 1 above. a flow channel for the media to be measured; at least one ultrasonic transducer for emitting and receiving ultrasound; an electronic circuit for operating the meter; and a housing for the transducers and the electronic circuit; characterized by a locking mechanism that locks the housing in position relative to the flow channel; wherein the locking mechanism comprises at least one protrusion on the housing, See table for Claim 3 above. at least one protrusion on the flow channel, and at least one locking pin; and wherein the locking mechanism is configured such that the at least one locking pin can be inserted and extracted by a See table for Claim 4 above

38 movement parallel to the length of the flow channel. Claim 13 An ultrasonic consumption meter comprising: See table for Claim 1 above. a flow channel for the media to be measured; at least one ultrasonic transducer for emitting and receiving ultrasound; an electronic circuit for operating the meter; and a housing for the transducers and the electronic circuit; characterized by a locking mechanism that locks the housing in position relative to the flow channel; and wherein housing is not penetrated by electrical wires. See table for Claim 11 above. B. Ground 2: Claim 5 is obvious over Walker, Applicant s Admitted Prior Art, and Marsh Marsh (Ex. 1013) published on December 17, 1997, greater than a year before the earliest priority date of the 559 patent. Accordingly, Marsh is prior art to the 559 patent under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Claim 5 recites wherein the at

39 least one locking pin can be inserted and extracted by a movement perpendicular to the length of the flow channel. (Ex. 1001, Claim 5). As noted above, Marsh describes an ultrasonic flowmeter housing which is lockable to a flow channel using a yoke and a pin which is moveable perpendicular to the length of the flow channel. (Ex :49-4:11, FIG. 1). Marsh teaches that the housing of an ultrasonic consumption meter may be extended beyond the lower extent of a flow channel, and that a locking pin perpendicular to the flow channel may be used to secure the flow channel to the housing. (Ex :52-55, FIGs. 1, 4). Although Walker discloses the sealing bar 23 is inserted and extracted by a movement parallel to the length of the flow channel, modifying Walker to implement a perpendicular pin as in Marsh would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. (Ex ). The 559 patent itself indicates that such a modification is within the skill level of those of ordinary skill in the art and would produce predictable results because the 559 patent discloses no embodiments of a perpendicular locking pin, but merely states that the locking pin may be parallel or perpendicular to the flow channel. (Ex. 1001, col. 5, lines 55-56). The 559 patent applicant therefore admits that the perpendicular option is easily realizable by one of ordinary skill in the art in view of a parallel design, and that the result of a change from parallel to perpendicular would produce predictable results. The use of the Marsh perpendicular pin technique instead of or

40 in addition to the Walker parallel technique is merely a predictable use of prior art elements according to their known functions. Specific methods of implementing such a substitution may also be readily envisioned. (Ex ). For example, flanges could extend downward from the housing of Walker, and Walker s slots 21 could be placed in those flanges instead of or in addition to the nuts 16 and 17. The sealing bar 23 (or an additional sealing bar, since Claims 3 and 5 refer to at least one locking pin) could then extend through the housing slots, but now across the direction of the flow channel 29, rather than parallel to it. Such a sealing bar placement would then still protect the bottom panel from tampering, as the parallel sealing bar 23 disclosed in Walker is designed to do. C. Ground 3: Claim 7 is obvious over Walker, Drachmann 311, and Yamamoto Walker and Drachmann 311 do not specifically mention that the meters can be used for gas. Yamamoto teaches that ultrasonic consumption meters can be used for measuring gas flow. Ex. 1005, col. 3, lines It would have been obvious to utilize the device of Walker as modified by Drachmann 311 as a gas meter as taught by Yamamoto. It is well known in the art to use ultrasonic flow measurement technology with fluids in liquid and gas form. (Ex. 1018, 11)

41 D. Ground 4: Claim 9 is obvious over Walker, Drachmann 311, and Buckberry Claim 9 recites that the electronic circuit includes a pressure sensitive device. Buckberry discloses that [t]he ultrasonic flowrate measurement device preferably further comprises a pressure sensor, wherein [t]he pressure sensor is preferably carried by and electrically coupled to the flexible circuit board. Ex. 1014, page 7, lines 3-5; page 15, line 30 page 16, line 5; FIGs It would have been obvious to include a pressure sensor as taught by Buckberry as a supplemental measuring device to the transducers and electronic circuit of Drachmann 311. It was well known in the art at the time the 559 patent was filed that an ultrasonic flow meter could include a pressure sensor. (Ex. 1018, 5). E. Ground 5: Claims 1, 6, 11, and 13 obvious over Rhodes and Drachmann 250. Rhodes published on February 22, 2007, greater than a year before the earliest priority date of the 559 patent. Accordingly, Rhodes is prior art to the 559 patent under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Rhodes teaches an ultrasonic flowmeter having a housing for transducers and electronics, where the housing is attached to a flow channel. Ex Abstract, pg. 4, lines 1-3, As noted briefly above, the Rhodes device includes electronic measurement circuitry in a first enclosure of a housing, and transducers coupled and sealed to the pipe in a second enclosure of the housing

42 CITE Wires penetrate a wall between the two enclosures to connect the transducers to the rest of the ultrasound measuring electronics. (Ex :23-28, FIG. 3). If Claim 1 of the 559 patent is interpreted to require that both the ultrasound transducers and the rest of the measurement electronics are enclosed in a single hermetically sealed housing, then Rhodes discloses every feature of the claims in this Ground 4 except that in Rhodes the transducers are not in the same housing as the rest of the electronics, and, for Claims 11 and 13, a connector is provided in the side of the sealed chamber with the rest of the electronics. Drachmann 250 (Ex. 1007) published July 29, 2009, which is less than one year prior to the earliest priority date of the 559 patent. Although Jens Drachmann is a listed inventor on Drachmann 250, the inventorship of the 559 patent differs from the inventorship of Drachmann 250. Accordingly, Drachmann 250 is prima facie prior art to the 559 patent under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being published by another. See In re Katz, 687 F.2d 450 (CCPA 1982). Drachmannn 250 cures the deficiencies of Rhodes by suggesting a common sealed enclosure for both the ultrasound transducers and the rest of the measurement electronics. With respect to the initial ultrasonic meter elements of Claim 1, Rhodes discloses an ultrasonic flow meter comprising a pipe having two ends... (Ex. 1015, Abstract; FIGs. 1-3; page 4, lines 1-3, 21-28). Rhodes further discloses at least one ultrasound transducer, stating transducer 4 is the same diameter as the

43 inside bore of the pipe so the ultrasonic signal passes through the whole area of flowing liquid. (Ex. 1015, page 4, lines 21-23; FIG. 1). Rhodes discloses an electronic circuit, including a circuit board 106 and battery 108 (Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 1-5; FIG. 3). Rhodes discloses a first enclosure housing the electronic circuitry... and a plurality of ultrasonic transducers attached to an external surface of the pipe in the second enclosure. (Ex. 1015, page 3, lines 3-9). Rhodes further discloses that the first and second enclosures are formed by enclosure/main body 111. (Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 1-5, 23-28; FIG. 3 (depicting electronic circuit 106 and ultrasonic transducer 114 within the enclosure/main body 111). Rhodes does not disclose placing the transducers and the measurement electronics in the same sealed enclosure. Drachmann 250 discloses a casing for housing the measuring means, the electronic circuit and the display. (Ex. 1007, Abstract; [0009]; FIGs. 1-3). Drachmann 250 also states [a] known way of rendering consumption meters robust to penetration of water and dust is to provide a hermetically sealed casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. (Ex. 1007, [0005]). It would have been obvious to modify Rhodes to hermetically seal all the meter parts in the same chamber as taught by Drachmann 250 as another known alternative construction with predictable results. A person of skill in the art would have understood that the housing described in Rhodes (Ex. 1015) could be constructed as a single sealed chamber containing the transducers and the

44 rest of the measurement circuits... that this would have the benefit of protecting both the transducers and the rest of the measurement circuits from damage to those components during meter use due to exposure to water or other harmful environmental conditions. (Ex. 1018, 6). With regard to the locking mechanism limitation of Claim 1, Rhodes discloses that the assembled tube... fits into the part of the main body 111 and is secured using a screw 117 and a support 116. (Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 17-20; FIG. 3). This can be compared to the 559 patent itself which states [a] simple locking mechanism could be screws holding the two pieces together. Ex. 1001, col. 3, lines With respect to the housing consisting of a cup and a lid, Rhodes discloses an ultrasonic flow meter having an enclosure body 111 coupled to a base 118 that together form a cup. (Ex. 1015, FIG. 3). Rhodes further discloses a top cover 104 which attaches to the main body 111, forming a lid. (Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 2-11; Fig. 3). Rhodes describes sealing the upper chamber containing the electronics. Rhodes discloses: [t]he assembled to [sic] cover 104, 105, 106 and 107 is screwed 103 to the main body 111 with an O-ring seal between. (Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 9-11; Fig. 3). Rhodes further discloses that [t]he top cover 104 holds the LCD viewing window 105 (ultrasonically welded in place to ensure sealing). (Ex

45 1015, page 5, lines 2-4). Rhodes further discloses the first enclosure [a portion of the main body] being watertight. (Ex. 1015, page 3, lines 4-5). However, in Rhodes, there is no hermetical seal for the lower chamber that contains the transducers. Drachmann 250 discloses a casing for housing the measuring means, the electronic circuit and the display. (Ex. 1007, Abstract; [0009]; FIGs. 1-3). Drachmann 250 also states [a] known way of rendering consumption meters robust to penetration of water and dust is to provide a hermetically sealed casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. (Ex. 1007, [0005]) It would have been obvious to modify Rhodes to hermetically seal all the meter parts in the same chamber as taught by Drachmann 250 as another known alternative construction with predictable results. This would eliminate the need for separate sealing for each transducer as disclosed in Rhodes. (Ex. 1018, 6). With respect to Claim 6, Rhodes discloses an all-electronic water meter (Ex. 1015, page 2, lines 5-7). With respect to Claims 11 and 13, Rhodes illustrates a connector 109/110 (Ex FIG. 3) that attaches in a hole of the upper chamber. Drachmann 250 discloses a meter where the electronics are completely enclosed within the housing with no penetrations, as evidenced by statements in the specification that any suitable antenna may be provided for wireless transmission of the quantity value

46 and that a power supply can be in the form of a battery. (Ex. 1007, [0043] - [0044]; FIGs. 1-2). It would have been obvious to eliminate the connector of Rhodes to operate wirelessly and with internal power according to the teachings of Drachmann 250 to eliminate the need to form physical connections subject to breakage or dirt, for example. See also Declaration, Ex. 1018, paragraph 6. The table below supports Ground 5 of invalidity: 559 Patent Claim Correspondence to Rhodes and Drachmann 250 Claim 1 An ultrasonic consumption meter comprising: a flow channel for the media to be measured; at least one ultrasonic transducer for emitting and receiving ultrasound; an electronic circuit for operating the meter; and a housing for the transducers and the electronic circuit; an ultrasonic flow meter... Ex. 1015, Abstract; page 3, lines 1-2 a pipe having two ends... Ex. 1015, Abstract; Fig. 1 transducer 4 Ex. 1015, page 4, lines 21-23; FIG. 1 Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 1-5; Fig. 3 a first enclosure housing the electronic circuitry... and a plurality of ultrasonic transducers attached to an external surface of the pipe in the second enclosure. Ex. 1015, page 3, lines 3-9 casing for housing the measuring means, the electronic circuit and the display. Ex. 1007, Abstract; [0009]; FIGs. 1-3 [a] known way of rendering consumption meters robust to penetration of water and dust is to provide a hermetically sealed casing for sealing

47 off the internal parts of the meter. Ex. 1007, [0005] characterized by a locking mechanism that locks the housing in position relative to the flow channel; wherein the housing consists of a cup, assembled tube... fits into the part of the main body 111 and is secured using a screw 117 and a support 116. Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 17-20; Fig. 3 Ex. 1015, Fig. 3 a lid and top cover 104 Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 2-11; Fig. 3 a hermetical seal [t]he assembled to [sic] cover 104, 105, 106 and 107 is screwed 103 to the main body 111 with an O-ring seal between. Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 9-11; Fig. 3 [t]he top cover 104 holds the LCD viewing window 105 (ultrasonically welded in place to ensure sealing). Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 2-4 the first enclosure being watertight. Ex. 1015, page 3, lines 4-5 a casing for housing the measuring means, the electronic circuit and the display. Ex. 1007, Abstract; [0009]; FIGs. 1-3 [a] known way of rendering consumption meters robust to penetration of water and dust is to provide a hermetically sealed casing for sealing off the internal parts of the meter. Ex. 1007, [0005] Claim 6 The ultrasonic consumption See table for Claim 1 above

48 meter according to claim 1, wherein the consumption meter is a water meter. an all-electronic water meter Ex. 1015, page 2, lines 5-7 Claim 11 The ultrasonic consumption meter according to claim 1, wherein the housing is not penetrated by electrical wires. See table for Claim 1 above Ex. 1007, [0043] - [0044]; FIGs. 1-2 Claim 13 An ultrasonic consumption meter comprising: See table for Claim 1 above a flow channel for the media to be measured; at least one ultrasonic transducer for emitting and receiving ultrasound; an electronic circuit for operating the meter; and, a housing for the transducers and the electronic circuit; characterized by a locking mechanism that locks the housing in position relative to the flow channel; and wherein the housing is not penetrated by electrical See table for Claim 11 above

49 wires. F. Ground 6: Claim 2 is obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, and Nielsen As described above, the Drachmann 250 reference suggests incorporating all the electrical components of Rhodes, including the transducers, into a single sealed housing. Nielsen also teaches a single sealed housing formed in part from a bottom membrane 132 with recesses 236 that hold the transducers. (Ex. 1016, Fig. 2, [0038]). These recesses fit into holes in the flow channel. (Id., FIG. 2). In view of Nielsen, it would have been obvious to modify the main body 111 of Rhodes to include the recesses of Nielsen in the central wall of the main body 111 of Rhodes, and mount them into holes in the flow channel as shown in Nielsen. This would eliminate the separate wired connections running to each transducer, simplifying the construction. (Ex. 1018, 7). G. Ground 7: Claims 3 and 5 are obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, and Marsh Claim 3 recites that the locking mechanism comprises at least one protrusion on the housing, at least one protrusion on the flow channel, and at least one locking pin. There are a variety of structures on the pipe of Rhodes and the housing of Rhodes that form protrusions and that are used in the locking mechanism of Rhodes. For example, the main body of Rhodes includes protruding supports for

50 the u-tube 34 and securing points for the tube 37 (Ex. 1015, page 5, lines 10-12). The pipe includes protruding forked tabs that the screws 117 engage to hold the pipe to the main body (Ex. 1015, Figures 3 and 5b). The main body 111 and base 118 also show half circle cutouts with protruding shoulders that clamp protruding portions on the pipe ends (e.g. the part with a flattened area for use with spanners, Ex. 1015, page 3, lines 7-8). Thus, the device of Rhodes includes a variety of protrusions on both the housing and the pipe that are involved in the attachment of the housing to the pipe. A locking pin, however, is not shown. Claim 5 limits the locking pin to one that is inserted and extracted perpendicular to the flow channel. As noted above, Marsh describes an ultrasonic flowmeter housing which is lockable to a flow channel using a yoke and a pin which is moveable perpendicular to the length of the flow channel. Ex :49-4:11, FIG. 1. Marsh teaches that the housing of an ultrasonic consumption meter may be extended beyond the lower extent of a flow channel, and that a locking pin perpendicular may be used to secure the flow channel to the housing. To apply such a system to Rhodes as modified by Drachmann 250, the sides of the main body 111 of Rhodes could be extended past the bottom of the flow channel, and a locking pin as in Marsh could be placed under the flow channel coupling the two sides of the main body 111. (Ex. 1018, 8). With this addition of a locking pin such as shown in Marsh, the limitations of both of Claims 3 and 5 are met

51 H. Ground 8: Claims 3, 4, 8, and 12 are obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, and Walker As noted above, the housing and pipe of Rhodes includes multiple protrusions that form part of the Rhodes locking mechanism. A locking pin, however, is not shown. Claim 4 limits the locking pin to one that is inserted and extracted parallel to the flow channel. Walker suggests joining fasteners on opposite sides of the flowmeter housing, along the flow path, with a locking pin parallel to that flow path in order to protect a bottom panel from removal. This principal may be applied to Rhodes by providing the slotted nuts of Walker on each of the threaded ends of the flow channel of Rhodes, with the same locking pin inserted along the flow channel between the nuts. See Declaration, Ex. 1018, paragraph 8. Claim 12 includes the same language regarding the locking mechanism as Claim 4, and is thus obvious for the same reasons as Claim 4. Claim 8 requires the locking pin to be secured with a seal, and as discussed above, this is shown in Walker as well. I. Ground 9: Claim 7 is obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, and Yamamoto Rhodes and Drachmann 250 do not specifically mention that the meters can be used for gas. Yamamoto suggests using ultrasonic consumption meters for gas. Ex. 1005, col. 3, lines It would be obvious to utilize the device of Rhodes as modified by Drachmann 250 as a gas meter as taught by Yamamoto

52 J. Ground 10: Claim 9 is obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, further in view of Buckberry Claim 9 recites that the electronic circuit includes a pressure sensitive device. Buckberry discloses that [t]he ultrasonic flowrate measurement device preferably further comprises a pressure sensor, wherein [t]he pressure sensor is preferably carried by and electrically coupled to the flexible circuit board. (Ex. 1014, page 7, lines 3-5; page 15, line 30 page 16, line 5; FIGs. 3-4). It would have been obvious to include a pressure sensor as taught by Buckberry as a supplemental measuring device to the transducers and electronic circuits of Rhodes. It was well known in the art at the time the 559 patent was filed that an ultrasonic flow meter could include a pressure sensor. (Ex. 1018, 5). K. Ground 11: Claim 10 is obvious over Rhodes, Drachmann 250, further in view of Nielsen and Korner Claim 10 recites that an insert in the flow channel is fixed in its position by one or more features on the cup. As discussed above with reference to Ground 6, Nielsen teaches a single sealed housing formed in part from a bottom membrane 132 with recesses 236 that hold the transducers. (Ex. 1016, Fig. 2, paragraph [0038]). These recesses fit into holes in the flow channel. In view of Nielsen, it would be obvious to modify the main body 111 of Rhodes to include the transducer containing recesses of Nielsen in the central wall of the main body 111 of Rhodes, and mount them into holes in the flow channel as shown in Nielsen

53 (See Ex. 1018, 7). Nielsen and Rhodes, however, do not disclose an insert in the flow channel, nor that such an insert is fixed in position by features of the cup. Körner (Ex. 1011) was published on June 20, 2007, greater than 1 year before the earliest priority date of the 559 patent. Accordingly, Körner is prior art to the 559 patent under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Körner describes an ultrasonic flowmeter having an encapsulated transducer extending through a hole in the flow channel and contacting the media flowing in the flow channel. (Ex (translation of Ex. 1011) [0013], [0014], FIGS. 1, 2, and 4). FIG. 2 of Körner is reproduced below

54 Körner, as depicted in FIG. 2, teaches that an encapsulated ultrasonic transducer 5 extends into the flow channel and through an opening in an interior measuring tube 3, which is inserted into the flow channel. Thus, the interior measuring tube 3 is held in place by the housing for the ultrasonic transducer 5. As stated in Körner, [p]ositioning and fixing the measuring tube in the housing can also be ensured by the measuring tube having an extension area with a holder for a head area of the ultrasonic transducer over a part of the periphery. (Ex. 1012, 0013). A comparison between FIG. 2 of Körner and FIG. 4 of the 559 patent is illuminating. FIG. 4 of the 559 patent is reproduced below