throbber
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`INNOLUX CORPORATION
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`PATENT OF SEMICONDUCTOR ENERGY LABORATORY CO., LTD.
`Patent Owner
`
`CASE IPR2013-00066
`
`PATENT 7,876,413
`
`NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE
`
`IN RESPONSE TO OBJECTION OF PETITIONER
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Previously Filed
`
`Exhibit 2001 — Complaint, Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd.
`Chimei Innolux Corp, et al., Case No. SACV 12-0021—JST (CD. Cal).
`
`v.
`
`Exhibit 2002 — Defendants” Motion to Stay Litigation Pending Outcome of Inter
`
`Partes Review, Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd. v. Chimei Innolux
`
`Corp, et al.
`
`Exhibit 2003 — Supplemental Declaration of Gregory S. Cordrey in Support of
`Defendants' Motion for Stay, Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd. v.
`Chimei Innolux Corp, et al.
`
`Exhibit 2004 — Defendants’ Reply in Support of their Motion to Stay,
`Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd v. Chimei Innolux Corp, et al.
`
`of
`Exhibit 2005 — Defendant Westinghouse Digital's Notice
`Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd v. Chimei Innolux Corp, et a].
`
`Joinder,
`
`Exhibit 2006 — Prosecution File History of US application serial no. 12/252,793
`(US Patent No. 7,876,413) Excerpt ~ Prior Art considered by the Office
`
`Exhibit 2007 — Sasuga, US Patent No. 5,432,626
`
`Exhibit 2008 — Display search Laboratory website material
`
`Exhibit 2009 — Sukegawa FIG. 1B marked by Dr. Hatalis at deposition to show
`vertical and horizontal limits of the opening in insulation film 9
`
`Exhibit 2010 — Sukegawa FIG. 2C marked by Dr. Hatalis at deposition to show
`hypothetical placement of a sealant
`
`Exhibit 201 1 — Dr. Hatalis deposition transcript, July 1, 2013
`
`i
`
`

`

`Exhibit 2012 — Declaration of Michael Escuti, PhD
`
`Exhibit 2013 — materials from LG website <TFT process>
`
`Exhibit 2014 ~ materials from CPT website <TFT process>
`
`Exhibit 2015 — materials from ShinMaywa website <evaporator>
`
`Exhibit 2016 —- materials from Pascal website <laser deposition>
`
`Exhibit 2017 — materials from MicroTec website <screen printing>
`
`Exhibit 2018 — materials from ULVAC website <laser ablation>
`
`Exhibit 2019 — materials from MicroFab website <ion beam etch technology>
`
`Exhibit 2020 — materials from SIJ website <inkjet>
`
`Exhibit 2021 — Henley_SID DIGEST OF TECHNICAL PAPERS 1994
`
`Exhibit 2022 — Shiba, US Patent No. 5,684,555, IPR2013—00068, EX. 1003.
`
`Exhibit 2023 — Dr. Hatalis deposition transcript, July 2, 2013, for No. IPR2013-
`00068
`
`Exhibit 2024 — Watanabe US Patent No. 5,504,601
`
`Currently Filed
`
`Exhibit 2025 — Supplemental Declaration of Dr. Michael J. Escuti
`
`Exhibit 2026 - Deposition transcript of Michael J. Escuti, dated September 6, 2013,
`for No. IPR 2013-00068
`
`Exhibit 2027 - Deposition transcript of Michael J. Escuti, dated September 5, 2013,
`for No, IPR 2013—00066
`
`’ii
`
`

`

`Exhibit 2028 — G.P. Crawford and M.J. Escuti, Liquid Crystal Display Technology,
`in Encyclopedia of Imaging Science and Technology, ed. J.P. Hornak, (John Wiley
`& Sons, Inc., 2002)
`
`Exhibit 2029 - Syllabus: 492/592-003 — Soft Electronics: Organic Devices &
`Liquid Crystal Displays
`
`Exhibit 2030 - Lab Module 4 of 4: OTFT: Fabrication and Characterization of an
`
`Organic Thin Film Transistor
`
`Exhibit 2031 - 2006-2473: A New Introductory Course on Signals, Circuits and
`Systems
`
`Exhibit 2032 - Syllabus for ECE 303 - Electromagnetic Fields.
`
`Exhibit 2033 — Syllabus for E 304 — Intro to Nano Science & Technology.
`
`Exhibit 2034 - Walter F. Goede, Seminar M—l: Status of Electronic Displays,
`Society For Information Display, 1996.
`
`Exhibit 2035 - Colin Prince, Seminar M—3: Active—Matrix LCDs, Society For
`Information Display, 1997.
`
`Exhibit 2036 — Terence J. Nelson, Seminar M—l: Electronic Information Display
`Perspective, Society For Information Display, 1998.
`
`Exhibit 2037 ~ Interactive Information Display Tutorial
`
`Exhibit 2038 - Komanduri et al., Late-News Paper: Polarization Independent
`Liquid Crystal Microdisplays, IPR2013-00068, Ex. 1008.
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd. (“Patent Owner”) provides this
`
`Notice of Supplemental Evidence in Response to Objection of Innolux Corporation
`
`(“Petitioner”) dated September 12, 2013 and respectfully submits that Dr. Michael
`
`J. Escuti does qualify as a person of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. In
`
`response to Petitioner’s objection, Patent Owner submits Exhibits 2025—2038 as
`
`supplemental evidence pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(2).
`
`Section 42.64(b)(l) requires that evidentiary objections “must identify the
`
`grounds for the objection with sufficient particularity to allow correction in the
`
`form of supplemental evidence.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(l); 77 Fed. Reg. 48676
`
`(Aug. 14, 2012). Petitioner objected on the grounds that Dr. Escuti’s “expertise is
`
`in photonics and liquid crystals rather than the TFT technology at issue in ‘413
`
`patent.” See paper No. 28, page 2. Dr. Escuti, however, provided testimony
`
`explicitly demonstrating his TFT design and fabrication experience and expertise,
`
`which is the TFT technology at issue in US. Patent No. 7,876,413 (the “’413
`
`patent” (Ex. 1001). See Exhibit 2025, Supplemental Declaration of Dr. Michael J.
`
`Escuti. Moreover, Dr. Escuti’s declaration, curriculum vitae, and deposition
`
`testimony together demonstrate that he is knowledgeable as to the level of skill of
`
`persons of ordinary skill in the art at the time when the patent application to which
`
`the ’413 patent claim priority was filed. Thus, Petitioner’s objection is not well
`
`grounded considering the record as a whole.
`
`It
`
`is unclear what experience
`
`

`

`Petitioner alleges Dr. Escuti is lacking. Therefore, Petitioner also does not provide
`
`the required particularity. Patent Owner thus reserves all rights to respond to any
`
`further explanations Petitioner is allowed to provide regarding its objections to Dr.
`
`Escuti’ s qualifications.
`
`Additionally, Petitioner’s assertion that Dr. Escuti failed to review the state
`
`of the art in 1997 takes Dr. Escuti’s testimony out of context and misinterprets it.
`
`As set forth in Exhibit 2025, Dr. Escuti was familiar with the state of the art in
`
`1997.
`
` It/éwfé/” £23.: ”/3 Respectfully submitted,
`Dated: {r
`
`Mark f:QV’MffprijReg. 3QZF§22~§K
`Edward D. Manzo, Reg. 28,139i\.__$
`HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP
`
`a»
`
`,. 9/
`
`
`
`120 So. Riverside Plaza, #2200
`Chicago, IL 60606
`312-655-1500
`
`

`

`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I certify that the foregoing NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE IN
`
`RESPONSE TO OBJECTION OF PETITIONER and each of Exhibits 2025 to
`
`2038 were served on the Petitioner by electronic mail on the following on
`
`September 25, 2013.
`
`Scott A. McKeown
`
`Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.
`
`1940 Duke Street
`
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`
`Gregory S. Cordrey
`
`Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
`
`3 Park Plaza, Suite 1100
`
`Irvine, CA 92614-2592
`
`Stanley Gibson
`
`Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
`
`3 Park Plaza, Suite 1100
`
`Irvine, CA 92614—2592
`
`
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket