Paper No. 1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Owens Coruing Corporation,
`Petitioner
`
`go
`
`CertainTeed Corporation,
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 8,383,228
`Issued: February 26, 2013
`Filed: November 8, 2011
`Husnu M. Kalkanoglu and Stephen A. Koch
`
`Inventors:
`
`Title: SHINGLE WITH REINFORCEMENT LAYER
`
`Inter Partes Review No. 2014- 01401
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 1
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Compliance with Requirements of an Inter Partes Review Petition .............. 1
`
`A.
`
`Certification that the Patent May Be Contested via Inter Partes
`Review by the Petitioner ....................................................................... 1
`
`B.
`
`Fee for Inter Partes Review (§ 42.15(a)) ............................................... 1
`
`C. Mandatory Notices (37 CFR § 42.8(b)) ................................................ 1
`1.
`Real Party in Interest (§ 42.8(b)(1)) ............................................ 1
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Other Proceedings (§ 42.8(b)(2)) ................................................ 2
`
`Lead and Backup Lead Counsel (§ 42.8(b)(3)) .......................... 2
`
`Service on Petitioner ................................................................... 2
`
`D. Proof of Service (§§ 42.6(e) and 42.105(a)) ......................................... 2
`
`II.
`
`Identification of Claims Being Challenged (§ 42.104(b)) ............................... 2
`
`III.
`
`Relevant Information Concerning the Contested Patent ................................. 3
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`A. Background of the Technology ............................................................. 3
`The Basic Asphalt Shingle Coated on Both Sides with
`Asphalt and Granules Had Been Known for Decades ................ 3
`The Prior Art Disclosed a Generally Longitudinal Second
`Thickness Layer For Reinforcement in the Nailing Zone .......... 7
`3. The Prior Art Taught Thin Reinforcement Material ................. 10
`Laminated Shingles Including Multiple Reinforcement
`Layers Were Known ................................................................. 12
`
`4.
`
`B.
`
`2.
`
`General Overview Of The ’228 Patent ................................................ 14
`The ’228 Patent Recognizes the Basic Asphalt Shingle
`1.
`Was Known ............................................................................... 14
`Only a Rear Exterior Surface Reinforcement Layer Is
`Disclosed in the ’228 Patent ..................................................... 15
`The Reinforcement Layer Is "Adhered" to the Surface
`in All the Claims ....................................................................... 17
`4. The Reinforcing Layer Provides Strength and Stability ........... 17
`
`3.
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 2
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`Co
`
`Prosecution History and Effective Filing Date of the ’228 Patent ...... 18
`
`D.
`
`go
`
`Prosecution of Related Patent Applications .............................. 18
`a) U.S. Appl. No. 10/871,911 ............................................. 18
`b) U.S. Appl. No. 12/857,868 ............................................. 19
`
`o
`
`Effective Filing Date of the Claims .......................................... 22
`
`Person of Ordinary skill ...................................................................... 22
`
`Construction of Terms Used in the Claims ......................................... 23
`Elements (a)-(d) of Claim 1 ...................................................... 23
`"said shingle" ............................................................................ 23
`"adhered to an exterior surface of said shingle" ....................... 26
`"reinforcement... layer" .......................................................... 30
`"substantially thinner" .............................................................. 30
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`IV.
`
`Precise Reasons for Relief Requested ........................................................... 31
`
`No
`
`Claims 1-22 Are Unpatentable Over Venrick 1939 ........................... 31
`1. Venrick 1939 Anticipates Claim 1 ............................................ 31
`Anticipates Claim 13 .......................................... 35
`Anticipates Claim 19 .......................................... 36
`
`Venrick 1939
`
`Venrick 1939
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`Venrick 1939
`
`Venrick 1939
`
`Venrick 1939
`
`Venrick 1939
`
`Venrick 1939
`
`9.
`
`Venrick 1939
`10. Venrick 1939
`11. Venrick 1939
`12. Venrick 1939
`13. Venrick 1939
`14. Venrick 1939
`
`Anticipates Claims 2, 14, and 20 ....................... 36
`Anticipates Claims 3, 15 and 21 ........................ 36
`Renders Obvious Claims 4, 16, and 22 .............. 37
`Renders Obvious Claims 5 and 17 ..................... 38
`Renders Obvious Claims 6 and 7 ....................... 38
`Renders Obvious Claim 8 .................................. 38
`Renders Obvious Claim 9 .................................. 39
`Renders Obvious Claim 10 ................................ 39
`Renders Obvious Claim 11 ................................ 40
`Renders Obvious Claim 12 ................................ 41
`Renders Obvious Claim 18 ................................ 41
`
`ii
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 3
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`go
`
`Claims 1-22 Are Unpatentable Over Venrick 1939 in View of
`Frankoski 1998 .................................................................................... 41
`
`Venrick 1939 in View of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim 1 ....................................................................... 42
`
`Venrick 1939 In View Of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim 13 ..................................................................... 44
`
`Venrick 1939 In View Of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim 19 ..................................................................... 45
`
`Venrick 1939 in
`Obvious Claims
`
`Venrick 1939 in
`Obvious Claims
`
`View of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`2, 14 and 20 .................................................... 45
`View of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`3, 15 and 21 .................................................... 46
`Venrick 1939 in
`View of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`and 22 ................................................... 46
`Obvious Claims 4, 16,
`Venrick 1939 in View
`Obvious Claims 5 and
`
`of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`17 .......................................................... 47
`
`Venrick 1939 in View of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claims 6 and 7 ............................................................ 47
`
`Venrick 1939 in View of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim 8 ....................................................................... 47
`
`o
`
`o
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`°
`
`10. Venrick 1939 In View Of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim 9 ....................................................................... 48
`
`11. Venrick 1939 In View Of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim l0 ..................................................................... 49
`
`12. Venrick 1939 In View Of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim 11 ..................................................................... 49
`
`13. Venrick 1939 In View Of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim 12 ..................................................................... 50
`
`14. Venrick 1939 In View Of Frankoski 1998 Renders
`Obvious Claim 18 ..................................................................... 50
`
`Co
`
`Claims 1-22 Are Unpatentable Over Venrick 1939 in View
`of Kiik 2001 ......................................................................................... 50
`
`iii
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 4
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`Venrick 1939 in View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 50
`
`Venrick 1939 In View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 13 .................................................................................... 53
`
`Venrick 1939 In View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 19 .................................................................................... 54
`
`
`Venrick 1 939 in View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`14, and 20 ................................................................. 54
`Claims 2,
`
`Venrick 1 939 in View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`15 and 21 .................................................................. 54
`Claims 3,
`
`
`Venrick 1 939 In View Of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`16, and 22 ................................................................. 55
`Claims 4,
`Venrick 1939 In View Of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claims 5 and 17 ......................................................................... 56
`
`Venrick 1939 In View Of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claims 6 and 7 ........................................................................... 56
`
`Venrick 1939 In View Of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 8 ...................................................................................... 56
`
`Venrick 1939 In View Of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 9 ...................................................................................... 57
`
`Venrick 1939 In View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 10 .................................................................................... 57
`
`Venrick 1939 In View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 11 .................................................................................... 58
`
`Venrick 1939 In View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 12 .................................................................................... 58
`
`Venrick 1939 In View of Kiik 2001 Renders Obvious
`Claim 18 .................................................................................... 59
`
`o
`
`o
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`°
`
`°
`
`°
`
`10.
`
`11.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`14.
`
`Do
`
`Secondary Considerations Do Not Weigh In Favor of
`Nonobviousness ................................................................................... 59
`
`go
`
`CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 60
`
`iv
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 5
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`Attachment A. Proof of Service of the Petition
`
`Attachment B. List of Evidence and Exhibits Relied Upon in Petition
`
`V
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 6
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`I.
`
`Compliance with Requirements of an InterPartes Review Petition
`
`A.
`
`Certification that the Patent May Be Contested via InterPartes
`Review by the Petitioner
`
`Petitioner certifies it is not barred or estopped from requesting interpartes
`
`review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228 ("the ’228 patent") (Ex. 1035). Neither
`
`Petitioner, nor any party in privity with Petitioner: (i) has filed a civil action
`
`challenging the validity of any claim of the ’228 patent; or (ii) has been served a
`
`complaint alleging infringement of the ’228 patent more than one year prior to the
`
`present date. Also, the ’228 patent has not been the subject of a prior interpartes
`
`review or a finally concluded district court litigation involving Petitioner.
`
`Petitioner also certifies this petition for interpartes review is filed in
`
`compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). Petitioner Owens Coming was served a
`
`complaint alleging infringement of the ’228 patent on April 22, 2014 resulting in
`
`Civ. A. No. I:14-cv-00510-SLR (D. Del.). See Ex. 1045 (Complaint).
`
`B. Fee for Inter Partes Review (§ 42.15(a))
`
`The Director is authorized to charge Deposit Account No. 50-1597.
`
`C. Mandatory Notices (37 CFR § 42.8(b))
`
`1. Real Party in Interest (§ 42.8(b)(1))
`
`The real party in interest is Owens Coming, located at One Owens Coming
`
`Parkway, Toledo, OH 43659.
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 7
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`2. Other Proceedings (§ 42.8(b)(2))
`
`The ’228 patent is the subject of litigation in the District of Delaware (Cir.
`
`A. No. I:14-cv-00510-SLR), which names Owens Coming as defendant. Patents
`
`related to the ’228 patent, by continuation, are the subject of petitions for inter
`
`partes review filed concurrently herewith (IPR Nos. 2014-01397,
`
`2014-01402-
`
`01404).
`
`3.
`
`Lead and Backup Lead Counsel (§ 42.8(b)(3))
`
`Lead Counsel
`Jeffrey P. Kushan
`Reg. No. 43,401
`j kushan~sidley.com
`(202) 736-8914
`
`Backup Lead Counsel
`Peter S. Choi
`Reg. No. 54,033
`peter.choi(~sidley.com
`(202) 736-8076
`
`4.
`
`Service on Petitioner
`
`Service on Petitioner may be made by mail or hand delivery to:
`
`Sidley
`
`Austin LLP, 1501 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005.
`
`The fax number for
`
`Petitioner’s counsel is (202) 736-8711.
`
`D. Proof of Service (§§ 42.6(e) and 42.105(a))
`
`Proof of service of this petition is provided in Attachment A.
`
`II.
`
`Identification of Claims Being Challenged (§ 42.104(b))
`
`Claims 1-22 of the ’228 patent are unpatentable. Specifically:
`
`(1) Claims 1-3, 13-15, and 19-21 are anticipated under § 102(b) by
`
`Venrick 1939.
`
`(2) Claims 4-12, 16-18, and 22 would have been obvious under § 103
`
`2
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 8
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`based on Venrick 1939.
`
`(3)
`
`Claims 1-22 would have been obvious under § 103 based on Venrick
`
`1939 in view of Frankoski 1998.
`
`(4)
`
`Claims 1-22 would have been obvious under § 103 based on Venrick
`
`1939 in view of Kiik 2001.
`
`Petitioner’s proposed claim construction, the evidence relied upon, and precise
`
`reasons why the claims are unpatentable are provided below. A list of evidence
`
`relied upon in support of this petition is set forth in Attachment B.
`
`III. Relevant Information Concerning the Contested Patent
`
`A.
`
`Background of the Technology
`
`1.
`
`The Basic Asphalt Shingle Coated on Both Sides with
`Asphalt and Granules Had Been Known for Decades
`
`Asphalt shingles have been used to cover roofs since the late-1800s. See,
`
`e.g., Ex. 1005, Cash, "Asphalt Roofing Shingles," Proc. 11t5 Conf. Roofing Tech.
`
`(1995) (Cash 1995), at 1; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 46. By the mid-1990s,
`
`three styles predominated: (1) the individual shingle; (2) the strip shingle (with or
`
`without tabs); and (3) the laminated shingle.
`
`Ex. 1005 (Cash 1995), at Figs. 10-
`
`12; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶¶ 46-47.
`
`Asphalt waterproofs the shingle. Ex.
`
`1007, Noone, "Asphalt-Shingles - A
`
`Century of Success and Improvement," Proc. 11t5 Conf. Roofing Tech. (1993)
`
`(Noone 1993), at 2; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 48. In general, making an
`
`asphalt shingle involves passing a base mat through a coater, where layers of hot
`
`3
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 9
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`asphalt are applied to the top and back surfaces. Ex. 1007 (Noone 1993), at 2; Ex.
`
`1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 48. Colored or non-colored granules are then dropped on
`
`the front surface and other granular materials are applied to the back. Ex. 1007
`
`(Noone 1993), at 2, 5; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 48. The granular material on
`
`the front adds color and texture. Finely ground talc and sand or other granular
`
`materials are added on the back to prevent sticking during storage and shipment.
`
`Ex. 1007 (Noone 1993), at 2, 5-6; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 48.
`
`The basic steps for making an asphalt shingle, including coating both sides
`
`of the base mat (i. e., substrate) with asphalt and applying granular material on both
`
`sides, have remained the same for decades. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 11 49-50.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 2,099,131 to Miller (issued in 1937) (Miller 1937) (Ex. 1008)
`
`states, for example:
`
`It has heretofore been common practice to manufacture prepared
`
`roofing by saturating a suitable absorbant fabric, such as roofing felt,
`
`with a liquid bituminous material, e.g., asphalt, eoatin~ botl~ sides of
`
`the saturated fabric with a bituminous material, surfacing tlte
`
`bituminous coating on one side of tlte fabric witlt mineral gr#, such
`
`as crushed slate, and applFing mica, soapstone, or otlter anti-stick
`
`material to tlte coating on tlte otlter side of tlte fabric.
`
`!d. at 4, col. 1:13-24 (emphasis added); Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 50.
`
`A typical shingle includes a plurality of tabs (i. e., flaps) that extend
`
`downwardly from a headlap area. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 11 56-57. Each
`
`4
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 10
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`asphalt shingle has a nailing zone or fastening zone for attachment to a roof. Id.
`
`As shown below in the 1997 edition of the ARMA Residential Roofing Manual
`
`(ARMA Manual 1997) (Ex. 1009), Fig. 10, the nailing zone typically is located
`
`just above the tabs in the headlap area. Also shown is the generally longitudinal
`
`dimensions of the typical strip shingle, i.e., 36"x 12".
`
`Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 57. The nailing zone is (a) generally longitudinal
`
`like the shingle itself, (b) located between the right and left shingle edges, and (c)
`
`generally intermediate of the upper and lower edges. Id. at ¶¶ 57-58.
`
`Claim 1 of the ’228 patent provides: ’°[a] shingle having front and rear
`
`surfaces, a width defined by upper and lower edges and a length defined by right
`
`and left edges, including an upper headlap portion and a lower tab portion."
`
`Elements (a)-(d) of claim 1 require the following:
`
`(a) a base layer of mat having front and rear surfaces;
`
`(b) a coating of asphaltic material on both front and rear surfaces of
`
`the mat;
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 11
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`(c) coatings of granular material on both front and rear surfaces and
`
`adhered thereto, which, together with said base layer of mat and
`
`coatings of asphaltic material comprise a first thickness layer; [and]
`
`(d) a longitudinal fastening zone between right and left shingle edges
`
`generally intermediate said upper and lower edges.
`
`Ex.
`
`1035 (’228 patent), at col. 6:61-7:3. These elements describe nothing more
`
`than the basic asphalt shingle, or what was "common practice" since at least the
`
`1930s. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶¶ 59-68. The ’228 patent acknowledges that
`
`the components of the "basic" asphalt shingle were known in the prior art. Id. at ¶¶
`
`59-68; Ex. 1035 (’228 patent), at col. 3:3-6.
`
`To the basic asphalt shingle, elements (e)-(f) of claim 1 of the ’228 patent
`
`add and describe a "reinforcement second thickness layer":
`
`(e) an at least partially externally visible generally longitudinal
`
`reinforcement second thickness layer of a substantially thinner
`
`dimension than said first thickness layer, adhered to an exterior
`
`surface of said shingle and extending at least substantially between
`
`right and left edges of the shingle; and
`
`(f) said reinforcement layer extending across a lower end of a headlap
`
`portion; wherein said reinforcement layer comprises a material
`
`selected from the group consisting of woven or nonwoven: (i) thin
`
`fabric; (ii) plastic film; (iii) paper; (iv) parchment; (v) foil; and (vi)
`
`scrim.
`
`Ex.
`
`1035 (’228 patent), at col. 7:3-18; see also id. at col. 3:16-17 ("the shingle 20
`
`is similar to that of the [prior art] shingle 10 of FIG. 1, but with a reinforcement
`
`6
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 12
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`layer"). Reinforcement layers having the claimed features were known in the prior
`
`art. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶1 69-120.
`
`2.
`
`The Prior Art Disclosed a Generally Longitudinal Second
`Thickness Layer For Reinforcement in the Nailing Zone
`
`U.S. Patent No. 2,161,440 to Venrick (Venrick 1939) describes a
`
`"reinforcing strip" for "strengthening" to "reduce... tear," and to "provide a
`
`reinl~oreed area for nailing the shingle to the roof." Ex. 1013 (Venrick 1939), at 3,
`
`col. 1:40-46 (emphasis added); Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 11 93-97.
`
`The Venrick 1939 strip, which may be made of, inter alia, felt, metal, or
`
`"layers of roofing tape," Ex. 1013 (Venrick 1939), at 4, col. 2:74-75, also
`
`functions to add "rigidity" to "resist[] the action of the wind." Id. at 5 col. 1:1-9;
`
`Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 94. "[I]mproved resistance to failure upon bending"
`
`is also a function of the reinforcement layer in the ’228 patent. Ex. 1035 (’228
`
`patent), at col. 5:54-55; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 94. The reinforcing strip is
`
`shown in Fig. 1 of Venrick 1939 as 15 on the front surface of a shingle.
`
`L~
`
`/
`
`~’ l,ll,
`" " < ~.."" .."’ ’":"....
`" "" ~. .... ". -."’ :’".:" """"’.:......."":"~’<’"’:"~..,.~-.,,. ¯ ....- "~ ’= " .......
`i~: ~.:’:::)i:’.:’:::23:.~:"; ~::.:’:.: ’ .....
`
`Ex. 1003 (B~son Decl.), at ~ 95. Venrick 1939 also teaches that the reinforcement
`
`strip can be placed on the "undersurface," or re~. Ex. 1013 (Venrick 1939), at 4,
`
`7
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 13
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`col. 2:60-63, see also Figs. 8-14; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 96. Also, the strip
`
`is preferably "cemented" onto the granule surfacing, Ex. 1013 (Venrick 1939), at
`
`4, col. 1:32-37, and overlaps with the nailing zone to "give greater nailing
`
`strength," Id. at 4, col. 2:11-23; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 96.
`
`Figs. 8 and 9 of Venrick 1939 show the reinforcement strip 45 as a visible
`
`component that is adhered to the exterior rear surface of the shingle and extending
`
`at least partially into the zone having nailing holes 47. Ex. 1013 (Venrick 1939);
`
`Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 97. It extends at least partially into the zone having
`
`nailing holes 47, and as shown by the hashed lines, it also extends at least partially
`
`lower than the nailing zone (i. e., into the tab portion of the lower edge of the
`
`shingle). Id. It also extends toward the upper edge of the shingle into the headlap
`
`area. Id. The reinforcement strip clearly forms a second thickness layer. Id. The
`
`strip is also longitudinal given that shingles are generally longitudinal. Id.
`
`li i~:.-::.’: :-.:,".,.., :.."-!"., ’.’. v . ": . ~... ~ ~ .: . ...... ,- :’, ...... i. ~
`
`.;.,.i.:.~,::.:.".,<i::’,b. "i ::..~.:. .~i ........~ ?:.-..;......".....:.~/.. ~.! :.: :~:,,-’~... :~..:..~.i~ ~i.:
`i~:::i:;;.-:.....i . ..~:.I.~>:.,!...:..,:,.:~..~.,U,,..;.::::. ::.,;..:,,.:..~.I.L.!~.,::.~.,,..::~:~
`
`. .L~. ~9.
`
`It was known in the ~t that nailing through multiple layers of shingle
`
`material provided strength and contributed to roofing integrity. Id. at ~ 98. E.g.,
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,145,265 (Malarkey 2000) (Ex. i01 i), at col. 1:60-62 ("[N]ailing
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 14
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`through a double layer of material provides strength, which is essential for roofing
`
`integrity in windy conditions."). Because the nailing zone was generally
`
`longitudinal, see Ex. 1009 (ARMA Manual 1997), at Fig. 10, it would only make
`
`sense to make the reinforcement layer generally longitudinal while extending it at
`
`least partially into the nailing zone. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 98. This is what
`
`Venrick 1939 teaches. Ex. 1013 (Venrick 1939), at 5, col. 1:50-54 ("The shingles
`
`are nailed preferably.., where the raised median strip is.").
`
`Examples of reinforcing layers affixed to the rear surface abound. U.S.
`
`Patent No. 4,875,321 to Rohner (Rohner 1989) (Ex. 1015) discloses a "backing
`
`strip" (Fig. 2, 25) made of "light-weight weather-resistant material" to "provide a
`
`stiffer shingle which grips the nails." Id. at col. 1:55-59; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.),
`
`at I 103. Fig. 2 exemplifies a shingle with a reinforcing backing layer 25. Ex.
`
`1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 11 103-104. Fig. 3 confirms that the rear facing
`
`reinforcing layer 25 extends at least partially into the nailing zone 37. Ex. 1015
`
`(Rohner 1989); Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 11 103-104.
`
`Rohner 1989, FiR. 2
`
`Rohner 1989~ Fi~. 3
`
`31
`
`FIG. 2
`
`25
`
`F1G. 3
`
`9
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 15
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`The Rohner 1989 "backing strip" forms a second thickness layer on the rear
`
`surface, and is longitudinal. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶1 103-104.
`
`Similarly, U.S. Patent No. 5,860,263 to Sieling (Sieling 1999) (Ex. 1016)
`
`shows a "reinforcement" strip 60 affixed to the back portion of an asphalt shingle.
`
`Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at I 105.
`
`FIG.5
`
`31
`
`Sieling 1999 describes the reinforcing strip as having dimensions, which the
`
`person of ordinary skill would understand to fall within the nailing zone of the
`
`shingle. Ex. 1016 (Sieling 1999), at col. 3:23-28; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1
`
`106. The reinforcing strip is on the exterior surface and forms a second thickness
`
`layer and is longitudinal in orientation. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at I 106.
`
`3. The Prior Art Taught Thin Reinforcement Material
`
`As Venrick 1939, Rohner 1989, and Sieling 1999 show, the concept of using
`
`a reinforcing layer on the back of a shingle was not new. Id. at 11 69-120. Nor
`
`was the concept of using thin material for reinforcement. Id.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 3,813,280 to Olszyk (Olszyk 1974) (Ex. 1014) shows a
`
`nonwoven web layer 16 affixed to the back of an asphalt shingle. Ex. 1003
`
`10
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 16
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`(Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 99.
`
`Among other things, the purpose of the web layer is "adding reinl~orcement
`
`... and providing additional tear strengtlt." Ex. 1014 (Olszyk 1974), at col. 4:17-
`
`27 (emphasis added). The thickness of the web is on the order of 1/1000th of an
`
`inch. Ex. 1014 (Olszyk 1974), at col. 3:59-60 ("a thickness of between 10 mils or
`
`less to about 30 mils."); Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 101.
`
`U.S. Patent Publ. No. 2001/0055680 to Kiik (Kiik 2001) (Ex. 1018)
`
`discloses an asphalt roof shingle having a "backing material" adhered to the rear
`
`surface that can be made of woven polyester and latex fiber bound by latex. Id. at
`
`[0004], [0006]; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 110. The exemplary backing
`
`materials have a thickness of 13 or 23 1/1000th of an inch. Ex. 1018 (Kiik 2001),
`
`at [Table 1]; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 110. Data in Kiik 2001 show that the
`
`reinforced shingles exhibited improved tear strength and nail pull strength. Ex.
`
`1018 (Kiik 2001), at Table 1 and 2; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 113. Like
`
`Venrick 1939, Olszyk 1974, and Kiik 2001 showed that thin material could be
`
`affixed to the back of an asphalt shingle to provide reinforcing properties. Ex.
`
`11
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 17
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 7113.
`
`4.
`
`Laminated Shingles Including Multiple Reinforcement
`Layers Were Known
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,822,943 to Frankoski (Frankoski 1998) (Ex. 1010) issued
`
`in 1998. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 71. The ’228 patent incorporates by
`
`reference Frankoski 1998 and says that the ’°basic" asphalt shingle can be made
`
`according to its teachings. Ex. 1035 (’228 patent), at col. 3:3-6.
`
`Frankoski 1998 (Ex. 1010) also discloses a laminated shingle. Ex. 1003
`
`(Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 71. A laminated shingle is simply a shingle made of two
`
`layers that are glued together. Id.
`
`This is shown in Figure 1 of Frankoski 1998
`
`(Ex. 1010).
`
`FIG,1
`
`5
`
`The shingle comprises an upper layer 5 and a lower layer 7, which are glued
`
`together with a sealant 9. Ex. 1010 (Frankoski 1998), at col. 4:23-25; Ex. 1003
`
`(Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 72. The upper layer includes a headlap 10 and a number of
`
`tabs 35. Ex. 1010 (Frankoski 1998), at 4:25-31; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 72.
`
`The lower layer is longitudinal, and extends between the right and left edges. Ex.
`
`1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 72.
`
`12
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 18
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`It was widely known that gluing an extra shingle layer to the back surface of
`
`what was essentially a single layer strip shingle, as in a laminated shingle, provided
`
`reinforcement by enabling a roofer to nail through two, rather than one, layer of
`
`material. Id. at 1 76. Malarkey 2000 (Ex. 1011) explains this common sense
`
`principle by noting that "nailing tltrouglt a double la~:er ol~material provides
`
`strengtlt." Id. at col. 1:54-62 (emphasis added); Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 76.
`
`Laminated shingles, which by the late 1990s and early 2000s were among the most
`
`popular shingles made and sold, therefore utilized a second thickness layer of
`
`material recognized to add reinforcement. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 76.
`
`Fig. 2 of Frankoski 1998 (Ex. 1010) also shows a scrim layer 60 that is used
`
`as a component of the laminated shingle. Id. at 11 77-78.
`
`?O
`
`FIG. 2
`
`\
`
`Scrim is thin material that can be made from any number of different fabrics,
`
`synthetic, or composite materials. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 11 77-78. The
`
`scrim layer "provides a superior strength and nail pull-through resistance to
`
`withstand, for example, hurricane force winds." Ex. 1010 (Frankoski 1998), at col.
`
`3:20-24; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 78. Frankoski 1998 (Ex. 1010) states that
`
`13
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 19
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`the reinforcing scrim preferably extends the entire length of the shingle. Id. at col.
`
`5:27-28. This would be understood to mean the reinforcing scrim is generally
`
`longitudinal given that most shingles were longer than they were wide. Ex. 1003
`
`(Bryson Decl.), at ¶¶ 78-81. Frankoski 1998 also explicitly states that the scrim
`
`should "coincide with at least a portion of the nail zone." Ex. 1010 (Frankoski
`
`1998), at col. 5:38-39; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at ¶ 81.
`
`As discussed infra at § III.C.2., Patent Owner distinguished the alleged
`
`invention over Frankoski 1998 by arguing that the reinforcing layer of the alleged
`
`invention is not "embedded" within the shingle as is the scrim 60 in Frankoski
`
`1998, and that it instead is affixed to the exterior, rear surface of the shingle. At
`
`the time these arguments were made, neither Venrick 1939, Rohner 1989 nor
`
`Sieling 1999 (each discussed above) were before the Patent Office. See generally,
`
`Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at §§ III.F-III.H.
`
`B. General Overview Of The ’228 Patent
`
`The ’228 patent (Ex. 1035) issued on February 26, 2013, to Kalkanoglu and
`
`Koch and is entitled "Shingle With Reinforcement Layer." Col. 1:1.
`
`1.
`
`The ’228 Patent Recognizes the Basic Asphalt Shingle Was
`Known
`
`The ’228 patent acknowledges that the basic components of an asphalt
`
`shingle were known in the prior art. Ex. 1035 (’228 patent), at col. 2:49-3:6.
`
`Referring to Fig. 1, the ’228 patent describes the "prior art shingle" as being made
`
`14
`
`FAST FELT 2027, pg. 20
`Owens Corning v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,383,228
`
`of a mat covered with asphalt on "each exposed surface" with "granular material"
`
`on the upper exposed surface to withstand weather and "smaller granules" on the
`
`"undersurface." Id. at col. 2:49-59. The ’228 patent states that the "basic" prior
`
`art shingle can be made by the methods disclosed in, among other references,
`
`Frankoski 1998. Id. at col. 3:3-6; Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at 1 70.
`
`2.
`
`Only a Rear Exterior Surface Reinforcement Layer Is
`Disclosed in the ’228 Patent
`
`The person of ordinary skill would understand that the reinforcement layer
`
`disclosed in the ’228 patent is affixed to the rear surface of the asphalt shingle, and
`
`nowhere else. Ex. 1003 (Bryson Decl.), at I 175.
`
`The specification states the "present invention is directed toward providing
`
`a shingle, wherein a separate, exterior reinforcement layer is provided outside the
`
`rear surface of the shingle .... " Ex. 1035 (’228 patent), at