`
` 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 1136
`Zeiss v. Nikon
`IPR2013-00363
`
`
`
`[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