`
`______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________
`
`JIAWEI TECHNOLOGY (HK) LTD., JIAWEI TECHNOLOGY (USA) LTD.,
`SHENZHEN JIAWEI PHOTOVOLTAIC LIGHTING CO., LTD., ATICO
`INTERNATIONAL (ASIA) LTD., ATICO INTERNATIONAL USA, INC.,
`CHIEN LUEN INDUSTRIES CO., LTD., INC. (CHIEN LUEN FLORIDA),
`CHIEN LUEN INDUSTRIES CO., LTD., INC. (CHIEN LUEN CHINA),
`COLEMAN CABLE, LLC, NATURE’S MARK, RITE AID CORP., SMART
`SOLAR, INC., AND TEST RITE PRODUCTS CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SIMON NICHOLAS RICHMOND,
`Patent Owner.
`
`______________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,429,827 to Richmond.
`IPR Case No. Unassigned
`
`DECLARATION OF PETER W. SHACKLE, PH.D.,
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`k O f RRQS q R
`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`A.
`
`1.
`
`Engagement
`
`My name is Peter W. Shackle. I have been retained by counsel for
`
`Petitioners as an expert witness in the above-captioned proceeding. I have been
`
`asked to provide analysis and my opinion about
`
`the state of the art of the
`
`technology described in U.S. Patent No. 7,429,827 (the ’827 Patent”) and on the
`
`patentability of claims 31–34 (“the challenged claims”) of the ’827 patent.
`
`B.
`
`2.
`
`Background and Qualifications
`
`I reside at 112 Aspen Way, Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274. I hold a
`
`bachelor’s degree in physics from the University of Birmingham (United
`
`Kingdom) and a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Cambridge (United
`
`Kingdom).
`
`3.
`
`I have over twenty years’ experience in lighting electronics, with
`
`particular emphasis on light emitting diode (“LED”) drivers and electronic ballasts.
`
`I am the President of Photalume, a consulting company I founded in 2012. Before
`
`that, I was Director of Power Supply Products at Light-Based Technologies, and I
`
`also served as Chief Technology Officer
`
`for Lightech Electronics,
`
`Inc.
`
`Additionally, I held vice president positions at Fulham Co, Inc., Universal Lighting
`
`Technologies, and Robertson Worldwide.
`
`4.
`
`I am an elected senior life member of the Institute of Electrical and
`
`Electronics Engineers, and I am a member of the Illuminating Engineering Society.
`
`2
`
`k O f RRQS q S
`
`
`
`5.
`
`While I am an expert in many areas of electrical engineering, I am not
`
`an expert computer scientist. However, during the relevant
`
`timeframe, I had
`
`ordinary skill in programming computers and have written computer programs. In
`
`addition, I frequently work with or supervise computer programmers having
`
`ordinary or expert skill. Therefore, I am familiar with the ordinary skill necessary
`
`to implement the lighting device of the ’827 patent.
`
`6.
`
`My testimony on below is from the point of view of the person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art, despite the fact that I am an expert in several areas.
`
`7.
`
`I am a named inventor of fifty-five U.S. patents, and I have three
`
`patent applications pending before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. I have
`
`also authored eight publications in refereed journals and nine publications in trade
`
`journals, the most recent of which pertains to LED technology. My curriculum
`
`vitae is attached as Appendix A.
`
`C.
`
`8.
`
`Compensation and Prior Testimony
`
`I am being compensated at a rate of $350 per hour to provide analysis
`
`and testimony in this inter partes review proceeding. My compensation is not
`
`contingent on the outcome of any matter or the specifics of my testimony. I have
`
`no financial interest in the Petition.
`
`9.
`
`I have previously provided expert testimony in one other patent-
`
`related matter. My curriculum vitae discloses the details of this activity.
`
`3
`
`k O f RRQS q T
`
`
`
`D. Materials and Information Considered
`
`10. My findings are based on my years of education, research, experience,
`
`and background in the fields discussed above, and my investigation and study of
`
`relevant materials. In forming my opinions, I have considered the materials I
`
`identify in this declaration and those are listed in Appendix B.
`
`11.
`
`I know of information generally available to, and relied upon by,
`
`persons of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant times, including technical
`
`dictionaries and technical reference materials (including textbooks, manuals,
`
`technical papers and articles); some of my statements below are expressly based on
`
`such awareness.
`
`12. Due to procedural limitations for inter partes reviews, the grounds of
`
`unpatentability discussed are based solely on prior patents and other printed
`
`publications. I understand that Petitioner reserves all rights to assert other grounds
`
`for unpatentability or invalidity, not addressed herein, at a later time. Thus, the
`
`absence of discussion of such matters here should not be taken as indicating there
`
`are no such additional grounds for unpatentability and invalidity of the ’827 patent.
`
`II.
`
`LEGAL STANDARDS FOR PATENTABILITY
`
`A.
`
`13.
`
`General
`
`In expressing my opinions and considering the subject matter of the
`
`challenged claims of the ’827 patent, I am relying upon certain basic legal
`
`principles provided.
`
`4
`
`k O f RRQS q U
`
`
`
`14.
`
`I understand that in this proceeding Petitioners must prove that the
`
`challenged claims of the ’827 patent are unpatentable by a preponderance of the
`
`evidence. I understand that under “a preponderance of the evidence” standard,
`
`Petitioners must show that a fact is more likely true than it is not.
`
`15.
`
`I understand that for an invention claimed in a patent to be found
`
`patentable, it must be, among other things, new and not obvious from what was
`
`known before the invention was made.
`
`16.
`
`I understand the information used to evaluate whether a claimed
`
`invention is patentable is generally referred to as “prior art” and includes patents
`
`and printed publications (e.g., books, journal publications, articles on websites,
`
`product manuals, etc.).
`
`17.
`
`I understand there are two ways in which prior art may render a patent
`
`claim unpatentable. First, the prior art can be shown to “anticipate” the claim.
`
`Second, the prior art can be shown to have made the claim “obvious” to a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art. My understanding of the two legal standards is set forth
`
`below.
`
`B.
`
`18.
`
`Priority Dates for Claimed Subject Matter
`
`I understand that to be considered “prior art,” patents or printed
`
`publications must predate the priority dates for the subject matter claimed in the
`
`’827 patent.
`
`5
`
`k O f RRQS q V
`
`
`
`19.
`
`I have been informed that a patent is only entitled to a priority date
`
`based on an earlier filed application if the earlier filed application meets the
`
`requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112. Specifically, I have been informed that 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 112, ¶ 1 requires that the specification of a patent or patent application must
`
`“contain a written description of the invention, and the manner and process of
`
`making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any
`
`person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly
`
`connected,
`
`to make and use the [invention] .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.” I understand that
`
`the
`
`requirements of this provision are commonly called the written description
`
`requirement and the enablement requirement.
`
`20.
`
`I have been informed that compliance with both the written
`
`description requirement and enablement requirement must be determined as of the
`
`effective filing date of the application for which priority is sought.
`
`21.
`
`I have been informed that
`
`to satisfy the written description
`
`requirement a patent’s specification should reasonably convey to a person of skill
`
`in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention as of the
`
`effective filing date of the application.
`
`C.
`
`22.
`
`Claim Construction Standard
`
`I understand that in this proceeding, the claims must be given their
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. The claims after being
`
`6
`
`k O f RRQS q W
`
`
`
`construed in this manner are then to be compared to the information in the prior
`
`art, which for this proceeding is limited to patents and printed publications. I also
`
`understand that, at the same time, absent some reason to the contrary, claim terms
`
`are typically given their ordinary and accustomed meaning as understood by one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art.
`
`23.
`
`I understand that in other forums, such as in federal courts, different
`
`standards of proof and claim interpretation control, which are not applied by the
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for inter partes review. Accordingly, any
`
`interpretation or construction of the challenged claims in this proceeding, either
`
`implicitly or explicitly, should not be viewed as constituting, in whole or in part,
`
`Petitioner’s own interpretation or construction, except as regards the broadest
`
`reasonable construction of the claims presented.
`
`D.
`
`24.
`
`Anticipation
`
`I understand that the following standards govern the determination of
`
`whether a patent claim is “anticipated” by the prior art.
`
`25.
`
`I understand that, for a patent to be “anticipated” by the prior art,
`
`every limitation of the claim must be found, expressly, implicitly or inherently, in a
`
`single prior art reference. I further understand that the requirement of strict identity
`
`between the claim and the reference is not met if a single element or limitation
`
`required by the claim is missing from the applied reference.
`
`7
`
`k O f RRQS q X
`
`
`
`26.
`
`I understand that claim limitations that are not expressly described in
`
`a prior art reference may still be there if they are implicit or inherent to the thing or
`
`process being described in the prior art. I have been informed that to establish
`
`inherency, the extrinsic evidence must clarify that the missing descriptive matter is
`
`necessarily present in the thing described in the reference and that it would be so
`
`recognized by persons of ordinary skill in the art. I have been informed that
`
`inherency cannot be established just because a certain thing may result from a set
`
`of circumstances.
`
`27.
`
`I understand that it is acceptable to consider evidence other than the
`
`information in a particular prior art document
`
`to determine if a feature is
`
`necessarily present in or inherently described by that reference.
`
`E.
`
`28.
`
`Obviousness
`
`I understand that for a single reference or a combination of references
`
`to render obvious a claimed invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art must
`
`have been able to arrive at the claimed invention by altering or combining the
`
`applied references.
`
`29.
`
`I have been informed that a patent claim can be found unpatentable as
`
`obvious where the differences between the subject matter taught to be patented and
`
`the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious
`
`when the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in the relevant field.
`
`8
`
`k O f RRQS q Y
`
`
`
`Specifically, I understand that the obviousness question involves a consideration
`
`of:
`
`" the scope and content of the prior art;
`
`" the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue;
`
`" the knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and
`
`" whatever objective factors indicating obviousness or non-obviousness
`
`may be present in any particular case—referred to as “secondary
`
`considerations.”
`
`30.
`
`Such secondary considerations include: (a) commercial success of a
`
`product due to the merits of the claimed invention; (b) a long-felt, but unmet need
`
`for the invention; (c) failure of others to find the solution provided by the claimed
`
`invention; (d) deliberate copying of the invention by others; (e) unexpected results
`
`achieved by the invention; (f) praise of the invention by others skilled in the art; (g)
`
`the taking of licenses under the patent by others and (h) the patentee proceeded
`
`contrary to the accepted wisdom of the prior art. Secondary considerations are
`
`relevant where there is a connection, or nexus, between the evidence and the
`
`claimed invention.
`
`31.
`
`In addition, I understand that the obviousness inquiry should not be
`
`done in hindsight, but must be done using the perspective of a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the relevant art as of the effective filing date of the patent claim.
`
`9
`
`k O f RRQS q Z
`
`
`
`32.
`
`I understand that in order for a claimed invention to be obvious, there
`
`must be rationale for combining cited references as proposed.
`
`33.
`
`Obviousness may also be shown by demonstrating that it would have
`
`been obvious to modify what is taught in a single piece of prior art to create the
`
`patented invention. Obviousness may be shown by establishing that it would have
`
`been obvious to combine the teachings of more than one item of prior art. In
`
`determining whether a piece of prior art could have been combined with other prior
`
`art or with other information within the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art,
`
`the following are examples of approaches and rationales that may be
`
`considered:
`
`(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield
`
`predictable results;
`
`(B)
`
`Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain
`
`predictable results;
`
`(C) Use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or
`
`products) in the same way;
`
`(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product)
`
`ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
`
`10
`
`k O f RRQS q RQ
`
`
`
`(E) Applying a technique or approach that would have been “obvious to
`
`try” (i.e., choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions,
`
`with a reasonable expectation of success);
`
`(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations for use
`
`in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other
`
`market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art; or
`
`(G)
`
`Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would
`
`have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine
`
`prior art reference teachings to arrive at
`
`the claimed invention. I also
`
`understand this suggestion or motivation may come from such sources as
`
`explicit statements in the prior art, or from the knowledge or common sense
`
`of one of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`34.
`
`I understand that an invention that might be an obvious variation or
`
`modification of the prior art may be non-obvious if one or more prior art references
`
`discourages or lead away from the line of inquiry disclosed in the reference(s). A
`
`reference does not “teach away” from an invention simply because the reference
`
`suggests that another embodiment of the invention is better or preferred. My
`
`understanding of the doctrine of teaching away requires a clear indication that the
`
`11
`
`k O f RRQS q RR
`
`
`
`combination should not be attempted (e.g., because it would not work or explicit
`
`statement saying the combination should not be made).
`
`III. THE PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE RELEVANT
`FIELD AND IN THE RELEVANT TIMEFRAME
`
`35.
`
`Based on my review of these materials, I believe that the relevant field
`
`for the ’827 patent is solar powered lights and more particularly but not exclusively
`
`to solar powered lighting that produces a light of varying color and a continuous
`
`color changing cycle. (’827 patent, Ex. 1101, Col. 1:11–14, Col. 12:6-30.)
`
`36.
`
`As described above, I have extensive experience in the relevant field,
`
`including experience relating to control of LEDs to produce varying colors. Based
`
`on my experience, I have an established understanding of the relevant field.
`
`37.
`
`I understand that a “person of ordinary skill in the art” is presumed to
`
`know of all pertinent art as of the relevant timeframe, thinks along conventional
`
`wisdom in the art, and is a person of ordinary creativity. I understand that the level
`
`of skill in the art is evidenced by the prior art references. It is my understanding
`
`that the ’827 patent is to be interpreted based on how it would be read by a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art. It is my understanding that factors such as the education
`
`level of those working in the field, the sophistication of the technology, the
`
`problems encountered in the art, the prior art solutions to those problems, and the
`
`speed at which innovations are made may help establish the level of skill in the art.
`
`I understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`is not a specific real
`
`12
`
`k O f RRQS q RS
`
`
`
`individual, but rather is a hypothetical individual having the qualities reflected by
`
`the factors above.
`
`38.
`
`I understand the relevant timeframe for evaluating a claim is at the
`
`time of the invention, which is based on the effective filing date of each claim, or
`
`the date at which the subject matter of the claim was first disclosed in an
`
`application in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable the person
`
`skilled in the art to make and use the claimed invention. For my analysis, I assume
`
`that the effective filing date of the ’827 patent is December 23, 2003. In my
`
`opinion, given the relevant field and relevant timeframe of the ’827 patent, a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art would have: 1) a graduate degree in electrical or
`
`electronics engineering or physics with demonstrable experience in circuit design,
`
`or 2) a bachelor’s degree in electrical or electronics engineering or physics with
`
`two years industrial experience and demonstrable experience in circuit design.
`
`39.
`
`Based on my experience, I understand the capabilities of a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the relevant field as of 1978 and directed many such persons
`
`during my career.
`
`IV. Technical Background
`
`40.
`
`Light is one of many forms of electromagnetic radiation. The nature
`
`of electromagnetic radiation was quantified by James Clark Maxwell
`
`in
`
`approximately 1865 in the relations that have become known as Maxwell’s
`
`13
`
`k O f RRQS q RT
`
`
`
`equations. See Observer, Tech Monthly Section,
`
`“What
`
`are Maxwell’s
`
`Equations?,”
`
`Sept.
`
`14,
`
`2013
`
`at
`
`27,
`
`available
`
`at
`
`http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/15/maxwells-equations-electrify-
`
`world. Maxwell developed the theory that describes how a changing electric field
`
`can generate a magnetic field. See id. Similarly a changing magnetic field
`
`generates an electric field. See id. If the variation is sinusoidal, then its rate of
`
`change is also sinusoidal; therefore, a sinusoidally varying electric field will
`
`produce a sinusoidally varying magnetic field that will,
`
`in turn, produce a
`
`sinusoidally varying electric field. See id. In other words, the excitation reproduces
`
`itself and propagates through space, hence the nature of electromagnetic radiation.
`
`41.
`
`The exact manifestation of electromagnetic radiation is controlled by
`
`its frequency. It is possible to create electromagnetic radiation at frequencies
`
`corresponding to sound,
`
`for example, 3–30 KHz. The lowest
`
`frequencies
`
`commonly used are for AM radio that has a wavelength of around 300 m. It is
`
`much more common to characterize electromagnetic radiation by its wavelength
`
`rather than by its frequency. However, wavelength and frequency are linked by the
`
`speed of light. See David L. DiLaura et al., Illumination Engineering Society, The
`
`Lighting Handbook 1.2, 10th ed., 2011.
`
`42.
`
`Short wave radio transmissions use wavelengths down to 120 m and
`
`television broadcasts use wavelengths from 5 m to 20 cm. Microwaves, for radars
`
`14
`
`k O f RRQS q RU
`
`
`
`near airports, use wavelengths of approximately a few centimeters down to a few
`
`millimeters. Wavelengths from 1 mm down to 0.75 µm (750 nm) represent the
`
`transmission of heat and are infrared (IR) frequencies. Decreasing the wavelength
`
`further results in radiation that the human eye can detect as light—the deepest red
`
`color has a wavelength of around 780 nm and the deepest violet color has a
`
`wavelength of around 400 nm. See id. at 3.1. The sun gives out radiation at even
`
`shorter wavelengths known as ultraviolet light (UV) that cannot be seen by the
`
`human eye, but can cause, for example, reddening or even blistering of human skin
`
`43.
`
`“For applied lighting, the optical radiation of interest can be divided
`
`into three components: UV, 100 to 400 nm; visible, 400 to 780 nm; and IR, 780 to
`
`1 mm.” See id. For LED lighting, we are concerned primarily with the visible light
`
`wavelengths from approximately 780 nm down to 400 nm. Figure A shows a
`
`spectrum of sunlight. This is the spectrum of light that the human eye can perceive.
`
`Note there is light at every wavelength. See id. at 6.6.
`
`15
`
`k O f RRQS q RV
`
`
`
`Figure A: Spectrum of daylight in the United States.
`
`44. Although, there are many colors across the spectrum, the human eye
`
`only perceives three primary colors. See id. at 2.5. All other colors are made up
`
`from combinations of these wavelengths. See id. For example, a fluorescent lamp
`
`can emit the primary colors of red, green and blue, plus some yellow. The human
`
`eye perceives this combination as white light. With solid state (LED) lighting,
`
`LEDs that are respectively red, green, and blue can be combined in specific
`
`proportions and are interpreted by the human eye as white light.
`
`45.
`
`Figure B shows the overlap of red, blue and green light including the
`
`creation of white light when the three colors are added together. See id. at 6.7.
`
`16
`
`k O f RRQS q RW
`
`
`
`Figure B: White light produced from Red, Green, and Blue light.
`
`46.
`
`To create varying color that can cover the spectrum of colors, one or
`
`more of the LEDs is varied in intensity, and the human eye perceives a varying
`
`color. See id. at 6.8.
`
`47. A continuous color changing cycle or varying color can be done by
`
`simply switching each of three LEDs (e.g., Red, Green, and Blue) on or off, which
`
`can produce a matrix of seven colors. For example, if Red and Blue are switched
`
`on and Green is off, then the resulting color is Magenta; if Red and Green are both
`
`switched on and Blue is off, then the resulting color is yellow; if Red, Blue and
`
`Green are all switched on, then the resulting color is white, etc. To produce over
`
`seven colors, each LED must be able to driven to change in brightness or intensity,
`
`not just switched on or off.
`
`17
`
`k O f RRQS q RX
`
`
`
`48.
`
`The use of Pulse Width Modulation to vary color and produce a
`
`continuous color changing cycle is well known in the prior art and can be used to
`
`produce a spectrum of colors. For example, U.S. Patent No. 7,064,498 to Dowling,
`
`filed March 13, 2001 and issued June 20, 2006, states, “[t]he '038 patent discloses
`
`LED control through a technique known as Pulse-Width Modulation (PWM). This
`
`technique can provide, through pulses of varying width, a way to control the
`
`intensity of the LED's as seen by the eye. Other techniques are also available for
`
`controlling the brightness of LED's and may be used with the invention. By mixing
`
`several hues of LED's, many colors can be produced that span a wide gamut of the
`
`visible spectrum. Additionally, by varying the relative intensity of LED's over
`
`time, a variety of color-changing and intensity varying effects can be produced.
`
`Other techniques for controlling the intensity of one or more LEDs are known in
`
`the art, and may be usefully employed with the systems described herein. In an
`
`embodiment, the processor 2 is a Microchip PIC processor 25 12C672 that controls
`
`LEDs through PWM, and the LEDs 4 are red, green and blue.” (Dowling, col. 6:1-
`
`26) (emphasis added).
`
`49. Dowling further explains how the output color can be made to change
`
`continuously. “When the device is powered on, it may enter a first mode 8. for
`
`example, under control of a program executing on the processor 2 of FIG. 1. The
`
`first mode 8 may provide a color wash, in which the LEDs cycle continuously
`
`18
`
`k O f RRQS q RY
`
`
`
`through the full color spectrum, or through some portion of the color spectrum.”
`
`(Dowling, col 6: 31-35.)
`
`50.
`
`The frequency or rate at which the color changes cycle through can be
`
`controlled by a parameter in the control software. (Dowling, col 6: 36-38) (“a rate
`
`of the color wash may be determined by a parameter stored, for example, in the
`
`memory 6 shown in FIG. 1 A”).
`
`51.
`
`The human eye cannot perceive rapid variations in intensity. If a light
`
`is modulated at 50 Hz, most people can perceive a rapid flashing on and off. If this
`
`frequency is increased to 100 Hz, many people may not discern the variation. By a
`
`frequency of 120 Hz, a majority of people cannot perceive the fluctuation but
`
`instead see steady light. Above 200 Hz, essentially no one can detect
`
`the
`
`fluctuation by directly looking at it. See David L. DiLaura et al., Illumination
`
`Engineering Society, The Lighting Handbook 1.2 at 7.69. Lighting technologists
`
`take advantage of this by using very rapid pulses of light from 400 to 1000 pulses
`
`per second to controllably modulate light. The width of each pulse is varied; this is
`
`called pulse width modulation. See id.
`
`52. When PWM is done, the human eye perceives a light that grows
`
`bright and dim, even though electronic instruments may record that the peak of
`
`each pulse is actually the same. See id. A pulse width modulator is commonly used
`
`to control the LED’s intensity. A color spectrum is achieved by continuously
`
`19
`
`k O f RRQS q RZ
`
`
`
`changing intensity level by varying the level of power to each LED. The result is a
`
`mixture of colors; for example,
`
`if red, blue and green light
`
`is used,
`
`that
`
`combination can produce color changes across the color spectrum.
`
`53.
`
`In some LED color changing work, it is assumed that the pulse width
`
`modulation is taking place at a frequency which is much higher than the human
`
`eye can perceive. Frequencies from 400 Hz to 1000 Hz are commonly used. When
`
`this pulse width modulation is used to produce what the human eye perceives as a
`
`repeatedly varying or changing color, another, much lower, frequency is used, for
`
`example one cycle every few seconds, in which the system may go through a
`
`prearranged sequence of colors and then can start over again when programmed to
`
`repeat.
`
`54.
`
`This repetition rate may be called the cycle frequency, although other
`
`terminology is used, for example, Dowling describes this a “a rate of the color
`
`wash may be determined by a parameter stored, for example, in the memory 6
`
`shown in FIG. 1 A.” (Dowling at 6:36)
`
`55.
`
`Light output from a source is measured in lumens. The lumen is a
`
`simple measure of the total energy being emitted as light, over the whole visible
`
`spectrum and in all directions. See David L. DiLaura et al.,
`
`Illumination
`
`Engineering Society, The Lighting Handbook 1.2 at 5.9. Commonly light bulbs are
`
`sold according to how many lumens they output. For example, 1000 lumens is a
`
`20
`
`k O f RRQS q SQ
`
`
`
`very bright lamp for indoor purposes. The intensity of light is a measure of how
`
`much light is being emitted per solid angle. See id. at 5.13. Thus, intensity does not
`
`depend on the distance from the lamp. You can also increase the intensity in a
`
`given direction by using a lens or a reflector to direct more light in that direction.
`
`Intensity is measured in lumens per steradian or candela. See id. Intensity is
`
`directly proportional to the amplitude of the electric and magnetic waves that
`
`comprise the light, but the term “amplitude” is not normally used in the lighting
`
`industry.
`
`56.
`
`Since the preceding paragraph involves the first use of the word
`
`“lens” in this declaration, I will clarify that an array or sheet of lenses is often used
`
`to diffuse light coming out of a luminaire. See id. at 8.4. These diffusers are thus
`
`called lenses. In addition, when a plane sheet of glass or plastic is used around a
`
`light source, such a structure is referred to as a lens. See id. Such a structure may
`
`be rendered translucent to conceal the shape of a light source within the structure.
`
`For these reasons in the rest of this declaration the terms “lens” and “diffuser” are
`
`treated as equivalents, reflecting common practice in the lighting industry in the
`
`context of luminaires.
`
`57.
`
`In the lighting industry the technology of controllably making lights
`
`brighter and dimmer is very important. Several terms are used to quantify this
`
`process. For example, we have already defined intensity above. When a surface is
`
`21
`
`k O f RRQS q SR
`
`
`
`illuminated by a light, it gives out light, and the amount of light given out per
`
`steradian per unit area is called luminance. See id. at 5.14. The commonplace term
`
`brightness used to describe the intensity or luminance of light has no mathematical
`
`representation but is defined simply as the perceived luminance. See id.
`
`58. A light sensitive switch comprises at a minimum a) a light responsive
`
`element that can be a photodiode, phototransistor, photovoltaic cells, photoTRIAC,
`
`photoSCR, a phototransistor or any other circuit element
`
`that changes some
`
`parameter of its circuit characteristics in response to light; b) a power switch that
`
`operates to activate or deactivate a circuit in response to a signal from the light
`
`responsive element. Such a switch might be a bipolar transistor, a field effect
`
`transistor, a silicon-controlled rectifier (SCR), an insulated gate bipolar transistor
`
`or any electronic power switch known to those skilled in the art. Each of these
`
`categories has many sub categories, for example, bipolar transistors may be NPN,
`
`PNP, Darlington, etc. The light sensitive switch is not required to be a mechanical
`
`switch.
`
`59.
`
`It is possible that one device may comprise the entire function of a
`
`light sensitive switch. A phototransistor will turn on in response to light and turn
`
`off again when the light
`
`is removed. Inside the chip, one can distinguish a
`
`photodiode part and a transistor part, but the product is sold as a single device.
`
`There are other similar devices such as a photoSCR and a photoTRIAC.
`
`22
`
`k O f RRQS q SS
`
`
`
`Sometimes it may be convenient to have some intermediate circuitry in between
`
`the light responsive element and the power switch. Most commonly this will
`
`comprise amplification or buffering to allow thresholds for switching to be
`
`adjusted, or incorporating hysteresis (e.g., Schmitt trigger circuits) to make the
`
`switching decisive and free from jitter.
`
`60.
`
`Furthermore,
`
`the light
`
`responsive element might have multiple
`
`purposes inside a product, for example, a photovoltaic cell may be used not only to
`
`generate a signal voltage but may also generate energy for the purposes of the
`
`system. Likewise, a photoresistor that operates on an inverse relationship with light
`
`intensity may be used as a conventional resistor and still provide a function even in
`
`the absence of light.
`
`V.
`
`STATE OF THE ART
`
`61.
`
`Solar powered lights are lighting products that produce light using
`
`stored energy obtained from sunlight. Garden/memorial lights, illuminated wind
`
`chimes and wind indicators represent a particular subset of solar powered lights.
`
`Solar lights may involve a combination of elements such as a photovoltaic cell, a
`
`rechargeable battery, a lamp and ambient light sensing control circuitry used to
`
`determine when to turn the lamp on, and lighting circuitry often using integrated
`
`circuits to determine which colors and patterns to display.
`
`23
`
`k O f RRQS q ST
`
`
`
`62.
`
`A first key ingredient for solar powered lighting is a compact,
`
`lightweight rechargeable battery. Nickel metal hydride batteries were first released
`
`in 1989 and were soon improved upon by the lithium ion battery, which first
`
`became available in 1991. See, e.g., U.S. Patent No. 5,062,028 to Frost, issued
`
`October 1991 (generally describing a solar lamp on a ground stake powered by
`
`rechargeable nickel metal hydride batteries).
`
`63.
`
`The second key ingredient
`
`for solar powered lighting is
`
`the
`
`availability and effectiveness of photovoltaic cells. By the year 2000, a relatively
`
`small solar cell could generate enough power in one day to keep a discharge lamp
`
`operating for several hours during the night.
`
`64.
`
`Early attempts at making solar powered lights used lead acid batteries,
`
`for example, as described by Doss in U.S. Patent No. 4,841,416, filed in March
`
`1988 and issued in June 1989. This product used a 12V incandescent l