UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`[Page 1]
`
`CARL ZEISS SMT GMBH, )
`
` ) Case IPR2013-00362
`
` Petitioner, )
`
` ) Patent 7,348,575
`
` v. )
`
` )
`
`NIKON CORPORATION, )
`
` )
`
` Patent Owner. )
`
`-------------------------)
`
` - - -
`
` THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2014
`
` - - -
`
` Deposition of JOSE SASIAN, PH.D., taken at the
`
`offices of Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier &
`
`Neustadt, LLP, 1940 Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia,
`
`beginning at 9:17 a.m., before Nancy J. Martin, a
`
`Registered Merit Reporter, Certified Shorthand
`
`Reporter.
`
`
`
`
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`1
`
`ZEISS 1037
`Zeiss v. Nikon
`IPR2013-00362
`
`
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`[Page 1]
`
`CARL ZEISS SMT GMBH, )
`
` ) Case IPR2013-00362
`
` Petitioner, )
`
` ) Patent 7,348,575
`
` v. )
`
` )
`
`NIKON CORPORATION, )
`
` )
`
` Patent Owner. )
`
`-------------------------)
`
` - - -
`
` THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2014
`
` - - -
`
` Deposition of JOSE SASIAN, PH.D., taken at the
`
`offices of Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier &
`
`Neustadt, LLP, 1940 Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia,
`
`beginning at 9:17 a.m., before Nancy J. Martin, a
`
`Registered Merit Reporter, Certified Shorthand
`
`Reporter.
`
`
`
`
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`1
`
`ZEISS 1037
`Zeiss v. Nikon
`IPR2013-00362
`
`
`
`[Page 2]
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S :
`
` FISH & RICHARDSON
`
` BY: KURT L. GLITZENSTEIN, ESQUIRE
`
` MARC M. WEFERS, ESQUIRE
`
` 60 South Sixth Street
`
` Suite 3200
`
` Minneapolis, MN 55402
`
` (202) 626-6420
`
` Representing Petitioner Carl Zeiss SMT GmbH
`
` OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT,
`
` LLP
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7 8
`
`9
`
` BY: JOHN S. KERN, ESQUIRE
`
`10
`
` ROBERT C. MATTSON, ESQUIRE
`
` 1940 Duke Street
`
`11
`
` Alexandria, Virginia 22314
`
` (703) 413-3000
`
` Representing Patent Owner Nikon Corporation
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`2
`
`
`
`[Page 3]
`
` I N D E X
`
`TESTIMONY OF: JOSE SASIAN, PH.D.
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN...............................5
`
`BY MR. MATTSON....................................63
`
` - - -
`
` E X H I B I T S
`
` - - -
`
`NUMBER DESCRIPTION MARKED
`
`Exhibit 1132 Opti 517 Lens Design Fall 2013 12
`
`Exhibit 1133 Opti 517 Image Quality 12
`
`Exhibit 1134 Utility Patent Application 49
`
` Transmittal, Doc/ONO38USO
`
`Exhibit 1135 Service of Signed Transcript 50
`
` and Errata for the deposition
`
` of Richard C. Juergens
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5 6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`3
`
`
`
` DEPOSITION SUPPORT INDEX
`
`[Page 4]
`
`DIRECTION TO WITNESS NOT TO ANSWER
`
`Page Line
`
`(None)
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
`
`Page Line
`
`(None)
`
`QUESTIONS MARKED:
`
`Page Line
`
`(None)
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6 7 8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`4
`
`
`
` THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2014, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA;
`
`[Page 5]
`
` 9:17 A.M.
`
` - - -
`
` JOSE SASIAN, PH.D., after having been
`
`first duly sworn, was examined and testified as
`
`follows:
`
` EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. Good morning, sir.
`
` A. Good morning.
`
` Q. For the record, could you please state your
`
`full name.
`
` A. Jose Manuel Sasian Alvarado.
`
` Q. Dr. Sasian, you understand that you are here
`
`today to provide cross-examination in a patent trial
`
`and appeal board proceeding captioned IPR2013-00363?
`
` A. Yes, I am aware.
`
` Q. And, sir, are you aware that that
`
`cross-examination is in connection with a declaration
`
`that you submitted in connection with that IPR?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` MR. GLITZENSTEIN: Sir, let me hand you a
`
`copy of your declaration, which has been marked
`
`previously as -- it's substitute Exhibit 2002.
`
` (Previously marked Exhibit 2002.)
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`5
`
`
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. And, Dr. Sasian, can you confirm that this is
`
`in fact the declaration that you submitted in this
`
`[Page 6]
`
`matter?
`
` A. Yes, it appears to be so.
`
` Q. Thank you. And, sir, you understand that
`
`this proceeding concerns United States Patent
`
`7,348,575?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. If I refer to that patent today as "the '575
`
`patent," will you understand that?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` MR. GLITZENSTEIN: Sir, I'm going to hand you
`
`a copy of that patent that's been previously marked as
`
`Zeiss 1101.
`
` (Previously marked Exhibit 1101.)
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. And you've seen this before today as well;
`
`right, sir?
`
` A. Yes, sir.
`
` Q. The IPR proceeding in this matter concerns
`
`Independent Claim 55 of this patent; correct?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` Q. Let me ask you to turn in your declaration,
`
`sir, to Paragraph 73, please, starting on Page 31.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`6
`
`
`
`[Page 7]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. You've offered opinions in this matter that
`
`Mr. Juergens, who is Zeiss's expert in this matter, is
`
`not an expert in projection optical systems; right?
`
` A. Yes, sir.
`
` Q. So is that, in fact, your opinion, that he
`
`has no expertise in projection optical systems?
`
` A. I would clarify, yes, it is my opinion that
`
`he doesn't have expertise based on my review of his
`
`credentials in the area of projection lens design for
`
`photolithography.
`
` Q. So in your first sentence you note that
`
`the -- of Paragraph 73 you note that "The 575 Patent
`
`discloses a catadioptric projection optical system for
`
`use in the field of microlithography." Do you see
`
`that?
`
` A. Yes, sir.
`
` Q. Now, the opinion that you're offering in this
`
`matter with respect to Mr. Juergens, though, is
`
`broader; right? You're saying that Mr. Juergens has
`
`no expertise at all in projection optical systems, and
`
`I'm reading here from the heading of Section IX of
`
`your declaration, sir. Isn't that correct?
`
` A. Would you please rephrase the question?
`
` Q. Well, in Section -- withdrawn. In the
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`7
`
`
`
`[Page 8]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`heading of Section IX of your declaration, you say
`
`categorically that "Mr. Juergens is not an expert in
`
`projection optical systems." True?
`
` A. That's correct, in the context of my
`
`declaration.
`
` Q. All right. So my first question for you is
`
`you are in this matter offering the opinion that
`
`Mr. Juergens has no expertise in projection optical
`
`systems at all; right?
`
` MR. MATTSON: Objection. Form.
`
` THE WITNESS: That's what -- no, that's not
`
`what I said.
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. All right. So Mr. Juergens is an expert in
`
`some projection optical systems?
`
` A. What I clearly state is that Mr. Juergens is
`
`not an expert in projection optical systems, and from
`
`the context of my declaration as shown, that refers to
`
`lithography systems. He may have some experience with
`
`projection optical systems, but not of the kind that
`
`we are discussing, not of the kind that it's disclosed
`
`in the '575, for example.
`
` Q. And, in fact, Mr. Juergens does have
`
`expertise in the area of projection optical systems
`
`generally. True?
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`8
`
`
`
` A. I don't recall seeing any mention of that in
`
`[Page 9]
`
`his resume.
`
` Q. That wasn't my question, sir.
`
` A. Could you repeat your question, please.
`
` Q. My question was it's true, is it not, that
`
`Mr. Juergens has expertise in the area of projection
`
`optical systems generally; right?
`
` MR. MATTSON: Objection. Foundation.
`
` THE WITNESS: No, I disagree with that.
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. Do you agree that Mr. Juergens has expertise
`
`in the field of optics?
`
` A. He may have some expertise.
`
` Q. You would agree with me that he is an expert
`
`in the field of optics; right?
`
` A. Could you give me an example of what he's an
`
`expert specifically?
`
` Q. So Mr. Juergens lectures your students on the
`
`issues of optics. True?
`
` A. Yes, it's true.
`
` Q. You invite Mr. Juergens to teach your
`
`students on the issues of optics. True?
`
` A. That's true.
`
` Q. You wouldn't invite somebody to teach your
`
`students on the issue of optics if he were not an
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`9
`
`
`
`[Page 10]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`expert in optics. True?
`
` A. No, that's not true.
`
` Q. You know what Mr. Juergens' area of expertise
`
`are. True? At least some of them.
`
` A. I'm aware that he is an expert on teaching,
`
`on teaching optical design software. That's what I
`
`think his expertise is because he did that for many,
`
`many years when he was with optical research
`
`associates. That, I would agree, is one of his
`
`expertise in optics.
`
` Q. So one of Mr. Juergens' areas of expertise in
`
`the field of optics is optical design software. True?
`
` A. In teaching optical design software, yes.
`
` Q. And he's an expert in optical design software
`
`as well; right?
`
` A. What do you mean by being an expert in
`
`optical design software?
`
` Q. Amongst other things, being an expert in
`
`using optical design software.
`
` A. In using, yes.
`
` Q. And you mentioned that Mr. Juergens was
`
`formerly employed by the company that makes Code 5
`
`software; right?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` Q. And Mr. Juergens is an expert in Code 5
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`10
`
`
`
`[Page 11]
`
`software; right?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` Q. And Mr. Juergens has been an expert in the
`
`use of Code 5 software since long prior to 2003; is
`
`that correct?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` Q. Now, let's get back to the coursework that
`
`you invite Mr. Juergens to lecture your students on.
`
`What is the subject matter of the material that you
`
`invite him to speak to your -- to teach your students
`
`about?
`
` A. The subject matter of that course is lens
`
`design.
`
` Q. What kind of lens design?
`
` A. It's an introductory course in the basics of
`
`lens design.
`
` Q. This is your course OPTI 517?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` Q. How many years have you been inviting
`
`Mr. Juergens to teach that course?
`
` A. In the order of 8, 10 years.
`
` MR. GLITZENSTEIN: Let me show you --
`
`actually, let me ask the court reporter to mark as
`
`Zeiss Exhibit 1132 material that's been printed out
`
`from your website on OPTI 517.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`11
`
`
`
` (Deposition Exhibit 1132 was marked for
`
`[Page 12]
`
` identification.)
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. Dr. Sasian, can you confirm that this is in
`
`fact a course syllabus for your OPTI 517 course for
`
`the most recent term in which it was offered?
`
` A. These two pages are a capture of the website
`
`where I provide the lectures, the homeworks and other
`
`materials for my course, including this syllabus.
`
` Q. Then on the second page of Exhibit 1132, do
`
`you see that there's a link to "Rick Juergens 2013"?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. And that's a link to the lecture materials
`
`that Mr. Juergens delivers to your students; right?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` MR. GLITZENSTEIN: I'd like to ask the court
`
`reporter to mark as Zeiss 1133 a copy of a document
`
`entitled "OPTI 517 Image Quality Richard Juergens."
`
` (Deposition Exhibit 1133 was marked for
`
` identification.)
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. Sir, do you recognize these materials as the
`
`lecture materials that Mr. Juergens gives to your
`
`students at your invitation?
`
` A. Yes.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`12
`
`
`
`[Page 13]
`
` Q. And, sir, the -- is it safe to say that you
`
`would consider Mr. Juergens to be an expert on the
`
`subject matter discussed in his lecture materials?
`
` MR. MATTSON: Objection. Foundation.
`
` (The witness reviewed Exhibit 1133.)
`
` THE WITNESS: To answer your question, I
`
`consider Mr. Juergens to be an expert on some subjects
`
`of this material.
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. Which ones?
`
` A. 1, on teaching the material. On explaining
`
`the students concepts. On the basics of aberrations
`
`that's the second one. Those are two examples.
`
` Q. What other ones?
`
` A. Another one is on the use of the plots that
`
`an optical design program will deliver to understand
`
`the aberrations and the image quality of systems.
`
` Q. Any others?
`
` A. Not that I can think of in this moment.
`
` Q. If you take a look at Pages 7- -- I'm sorry.
`
`Let's start with 59, for example. There's a
`
`discussion on Page 59 of "Correcting Chromatic
`
`Aberration." Do you consider him an expert in that
`
`field?
`
` A. I don't think so.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`13
`
`
`
`[Page 14]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Q. Why not?
`
` A. Because one thing is to do a cursory
`
`explanation of how an achromatic works to correct
`
`chromatic aberration, and another thing an expert
`
`would have discussed the correction of chromatic
`
`aberration in technical papers, innovate optical
`
`systems by ways of correcting and other ways of
`
`correcting chromatic aberration or make points that
`
`previously haven't been known on correction of
`
`chromatic aberration.
`
` Q. Do you think that Mr. Juergens has an
`
`understanding of chromatic aberration?
`
` A. Yes, I think so.
`
` Q. Do you think he has an understanding of the
`
`mechanisms for correcting chromatic aberration?
`
` A. Of some mechanisms for correcting chromatic
`
`aberration, yes.
`
` Q. If you could turn to Slide 76, please, of the
`
`exhibit.
`
` A. 76?
`
` Q. 76, yes, sir. And this is a discussion of
`
`"Spherical Aberration and Aspherics."
`
` A. "Spherical Aberrations and Aspherics," yes.
`
` Q. Do you consider Mr. Juergens to be an expert
`
`in that subject matter?
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`14
`
`
`
`[Page 15]
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Turn to Page 78. There's a discussion here
`
`of "Optimizing Aspherics." Do you consider
`
`Mr. Juergens to be an expert in that subject?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. If you could go back to Slide 74, please. At
`
`the top of Mr. Juergens' slide he has a statement that
`
`"Spherical aberration can be reduced by splitting the
`
`lens into more than one lens." Do you understand what
`
`he means by that?
`
` A. Yes, I understand.
`
` Q. What's your understanding?
`
` A. Well, this is the well-known technique, the
`
`textbook argument that because spherical aberration
`
`depends on the queue-up of the optical power, and when
`
`you use the technique of lenses splitting where you
`
`divide the optical power in half, say, by adding
`
`another lens with half the power of the original
`
`power. So now you have, other than a single lens with
`
`a power of 1, you have two lenses with a power of half
`
`each, giving a total power of 1. However, spherical
`
`collaboration grows like the cubic of the power, then
`
`rather than having a power, say, spherical aberration
`
`depending -- spherical aberration of being, say, 1,
`
`now you have a factor of half to put in front of it.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`15
`
`
`
`[Page 16]
`
` So lens splitting in theory can reduce
`
`spherical aberration. It's known to reduce spherical
`
`aberration.
`
` Q. You say that this is a textbook piece of
`
`knowledge?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. This has been known since prior to 2003?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` Q. All right. Thank you, sir. You can put the
`
`presentation materials aside. Let me return you,
`
`though, to your declaration at Paragraph 73. And, in
`
`particular, the opinion that you offer in that
`
`paragraph on the following page, Page 32, where you
`
`say that "Mr. Juergens' qualifications fall far short
`
`of one of ordinary skill in the art, and consequently,
`
`he is not qualified as an expert in projection optical
`
`systems or, even more generally, the field of
`
`microlithography." If I could ask you, sir, to turn
`
`to Claim 55 in the '575 patent.
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. There's nothing in Claim 55 that limits these
`
`optical systems to any particular field. True?
`
` A. I disagree.
`
` Q. What in that claim, in your view, limits
`
`these optical systems in a particular field?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`16
`
`
`
`[Page 17]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` A. Well, the fact that the preamble of the
`
`Claim 55 calls for a catadioptric projection optical
`
`system and the fact that patents -- patent documents
`
`have a clear structure where there is an abstract and
`
`a field of invention, and the field of invention in
`
`this case it's photolithography. So a person who
`
`would read this specification, this patent
`
`specification will understand that the catadioptric
`
`projection optical system discussed in Claim 55 refers
`
`to a system for photolithography.
`
` Q. And so in forming your opinions in this
`
`matter, sir, you have based those opinions on the
`
`understanding that the catadioptric projection optical
`
`system recited in the preamble of Claim 55 is limited
`
`to the fields set forth in Column 1 of patent in the
`
`section "FIELD OF THE INVENTION"?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Sir, can you turn in your declaration to your
`
`analysis of the claim construction issue in this
`
`matter which concerns the word "unit," which begins at
`
`Paragraph 41.
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. I want to start you actually at Paragraph 45.
`
`You state there that it's your opinion that the terms
`
`in this claim, namely "'first unit,'" "'second unit'"
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`17
`
`
`
`and "'third unit'" and "'fourth unit,'" each refer to
`
`"'a group of optical elements (lenses or mirrors) that
`
`cooperate together to perform a specific purpose or
`
`[Page 18]
`
`common function.'" Do you see that?
`
` A. We are talking about Paragraph 44?
`
` Q. No. 45.
`
` A. Oh, 45. I'm sorry. Yes. That's my opinion.
`
` Q. I want to make sure I understand that
`
`opinion, sir. So you have this parenthetical in your
`
`construction which is your lenses or mirrors, and that
`
`follows the term "optical elements" in your
`
`construction. What does the parenthetical signify?
`
` A. It provides an example of the optical
`
`elements.
`
` Q. You say that it "provides an example." I'm
`
`not following that. Are there -- let me step back.
`
` Why are you providing an example of optical
`
`elements in your claim construction?
`
` A. I'm sorry. Could you please repeat.
`
` Q. Let me try to rephrase it.
`
` Why does your claim construction for this
`
`matter include examples?
`
` A. Because lenses and mirrors are the optical
`
`elements used on the catadioptric optical system of
`
`the '575.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`18
`
`
`
`[Page 19]
`
` Q. So do you consider lenses and mirrors --
`
`withdrawn.
`
` When you use the term "optical elements" in
`
`your construction, is that the same thing as lenses or
`
`mirrors?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` Q. So are there things other than lenses or
`
`mirrors that constitute optical elements as that term
`
`is used in your construction?
`
` A. Could you please repeat the question again.
`
` Q. Let me try to rephrase it.
`
` A. I understood it, but I just want to make sure
`
`my answer is right. It's just the same question.
`
`Don't rephrase it.
`
` Q. Are there things other than lenses or mirrors
`
`that constitute optical elements as that term is used
`
`in your construction?
`
` A. Yeah, there may be other optical elements.
`
` Q. What things other than lenses or mirrors
`
`constitute optical elements as that term is used in
`
`your construction?
`
` A. The aperture stop.
`
` Q. So the aperture stop is an optical element?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. What else constitutes an optical element as
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`19
`
`
`
`that term is used in your construction?
`
` A. I cannot think of anything else at this
`
`[Page 20]
`
`moment.
`
` Q. How about a filter?
`
` A. Yes, a filter could.
`
` Q. How about a polarizer?
`
` (The witness reviewed the document.)
`
` THE WITNESS: Polarize, yes.
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. How about a prism?
`
` (The witness further reviewed the document.)
`
` THE WITNESS: Not in this context.
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. How about a flat plate, a window?
`
` A. Yeah, window would qualify.
`
` Q. How about a mirror with no magnification
`
`property flattener?
`
` A. It may or may not qualify.
`
` Q. What would make it qualify or not qualify?
`
` A. Well, we are -- I am constructing the term
`
`"unit" here, and being consistent with the
`
`specification of having an optical system with a
`
`single axis, if that mirror creates a different axis,
`
`then that will qualify.
`
` Q. So you're construing the term "unit" as it's
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`20
`
`
`
`[Page 21]
`
`used in Claim 55 of the '575 patent; correct?
`
` A. I'm constructing the unit as I specify in my
`
`declaration.
`
` Q. All right. The term "unit" -- withdrawn.
`
` You are construing the term "unit" because it
`
`appears in Claim 55 of this method; right?
`
` (The witness further reviewed the document.)
`
` THE WITNESS: Yes.
`
`BY MR. GLITZENSTEIN:
`
` Q. And Claim 55 in this matter doesn't
`
`contain -- or withdrawn.
`
` Does Claim 55 in this matter contain any
`
`limitation that says that it's an on-access system?
`
` (The witness further reviewed the document.)
`
` MR. GLITZENSTEIN: Well, withdrawn.
`
` Q. Does Claim 55 contain any limitations that
`
`say that it's an in-line system with a single axis?
`
` A. It doesn't have the words.
`
` Q. Let me go back to your construction, sir. I
`
`want to make sure I understand it. So you said -- I
`
`think one of the first things you said an optical
`
`element could be other than a lens or a mirror is an
`
`aperture stop. What makes an aperture stop an optical
`
`element?
`
` A. In defining an optical system, in defining
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`21
`
`
`
`[Page 22]
`
`properly an optical system, a critical element, it's
`
`the aperture stop. It's an optical element and it's a
`
`critical element, and I teach my students that
`
`identifying the aperture stop is very important in an
`
`optical system. So it's an optical element that
`
`limits the amount of light throughout the optical
`
`system.
`
` Q. So is that your definition for "optical
`
`element" is that it's anything that's important to an
`
`optical system?
`
` A. No.
`
` Q. How do I know -- withdrawn.
`
` What, in your view, are the metes and bounds
`
`of the optical element that's recited in your
`
`construction?
`
` A. The lenses, the mirrors. The optical
`
`components that are consistent with the specification
`
`of the '575 on the category of optical systems.
`
` Q. Can you give me a definition of what, in your
`
`view, constitutes an optical element as used in your
`
`construction in this matter?
`
` A. An optical element is a lens. An optical
`
`element is a mirror.
`
` Q. Those are just examples. What defines
`
`something as being an optical element or not?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`22
`
`
`
`[Page 23]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` A. In general terms, an optical element, it's a
`
`physical structure that acts on light.
`
` Q. So a prism is a physical structure that acts
`
`on light, and yet, you testified earlier that it's not
`
`an optical element, according to your definition. Why
`
`not?
`
` A. I didn't say that it's not an optical
`
`element.
`
` Q. So you do think that a prism is an optical
`
`element?
`
` A. A prism is an optical element.
`
` Q. So let me step back to the methodology that
`
`you followed in construing this claim term "unit" as
`
`found in Claim 55. When you were doing that,
`
`Dr. Sasian, did you understand the claim to be limited
`
`to an in-line system with a single axis?
`
` A. In view of this specification, yes.
`
` Q. Let me ask you -- sir, I want to ask you
`
`about the second half of your construction, which is
`
`found at the top of Page 20 of your declaration. You
`
`say there that the -- this group of optical elements
`
`must "cooperate together to perform a specific purpose
`
`or common function"; right?
`
` A. That's correct.
`
` Q. If I put any two lenses with optical power
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`23
`
`
`
`side by side in the optical path, aren't they going to
`
`always cooperate together to perform a specific
`
`[Page 24]
`
`purpose or common function?
`
` A. Not always.
`
` Q. So light passes through the first lens, and
`
`that has an effect on the light passing through;
`
`correct?
`
` A. It may indeed.
`
` Q. And then it passes through the next lens, and
`
`that lens has an effect on the light. True?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. All right. So the light, as a consequence of
`
`passing through the two lenses, has had a certain
`
`effect imparted on it; correct?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. So why is that effect not an example of those
`
`two lenses cooperating together to perform a specific
`
`purpose?
`
` A. There are some instances where you put one
`
`lens and then you put the other lens, and you cancel
`
`the effects of the first lens. So the combination
`
`doesn't produce any particular function.
`
` Q. All right. Let's take a scenario where you
`
`have two lenses and the second lens doesn't cancel the
`
`effect of the first lens. In that case, it is the
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`24
`
`
`
`case, is it not, that those two lenses are cooperating
`
`together to perform a specific purpose; right?
`
`[Page 25]
`
` A. What purpose?
`
` Q. The purpose is that the light -- the
`
`character of the light has been altered as a
`
`consequence of passing through those two lenses;
`
`right?
`
` A. But the lights, if you will modify, alter,
`
`not necessarily that's the specific purpose.
`
` Q. Well, let's go to the real world then. In
`
`the real world, optical systems are designed for
`
`specific purposes. True?
`
` A. Actually, just to make it clear, the
`
`discussion we're having is in the real-world optics,
`
`as is my understanding. We're referring to actual
`
`technology. Is that -- I believe that's what we are
`
`discussing? Real world technology.
`
` Q. Let me start back with my original example.
`
`I believe you testified that if you put two lenses
`
`side by side, you pass light through both of them, and
`
`if the light -- if the second lens doesn't cancel out
`
`the effect of the first lens, I believe you said maybe
`
`that's the case where those two lenses are cooperating
`
`together to perform a specific purpose. True?
`
` A. I don't recall the exact words. The point --
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`25
`
`
`
`[Page 26]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`if we can start over this discussion and refresh my
`
`mind, maybe we can progress.
`
` Q. All right. Let me see if I can straighten
`
`this out. So if I have two lenses and I pass a beam
`
`of light through the two lenses and the light exiting
`
`the second lens has a characteristic that is due to
`
`having passed through those two lenses, that is an
`
`example of two lenses cooperating together to perform
`
`a specific purpose. True?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Let me ask you to take a look at your
`
`declaration. If I could ask you to look at
`
`Paragraph 48, sir. I think this is just a typo, but I
`
`want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding something
`
`that you're saying here. You note, four lines from
`
`the bottom of Paragraph 48, that you "disagree with
`
`Zeiss' construction of the term 'boundary lens.'" Is
`
`that just a typo?
`
` A. Yeah. Thank you for bringing it to my
`
`attention. It should be "unit."
`
` Q. That's what I assumed. I just wanted to make
`
`sure that that was correct. All right. So you'd like
`
`to sort of change, on the record, that material in
`
`quotes in your Paragraph 48 from the words "boundary
`
`lens" to the single term "unit"?
`
`877-479-2484
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. www.uslegalsupport.com
`
`26
`
`
`
`[Page 27]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` A. Yes. Thank you.
`
` Q. Okay. If I could ask you to turn to
`
`Paragraph 54. I wanted to ask you about the opinion
`
`you express in the first sentence of 54 where you say
`
`that the "Patent distinguishes between a 'lens unit'
`
`and the 'first unit', 'second unit', 'third unit', and
`
`'fourth unit.'" What did you mean there by saying
`
`that it "distinguishes between" those terms?
`
` A. If one reads Claim 55, Claim 55 calls for a
`
`first unit, a second unit, a third unit, a fourth
`
`unit. These are numbered units. And if you read the
`
`specification, there are -- in explaining the
`
`embodiments, the '575 uses the term "lens unit" to
`
`refer to a particular group of optical elements.
`
` Q. Let me start with the term "lens unit." What
`
`is your understanding, as you have applied it for
`
`purposes of the opinions you've expressed in this
`
`matter, of the term "lens unit" as used in the
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
