`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC and
`MERCEDES-BENZ U.S. INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`INNOVATIVE DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,434,974
`Issue Date: October 14, 2008
`Patent Title: Light Emitting Panel Assemblies
`IPR Case No.: To Be Assigned
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF CLAIMS 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13, AND
`17 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,434,974
`
`Scott T. Weingaertner
`Registration No. 37,756
`King & Spalding LLP
`1185 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10036-2601
`Tel.: (212) 556-2227
`Fax: (212) 556-2222
`Email: sweingaertner@kslaw.com
`
`Natasha H. Moffitt
`Registration No. 53,340
`King & Spalding LLP
`1180 Peachtree Street, NE
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`Tel.: (404) 572-2783
`Fax: (404) 572-5134
`Email: nmoffitt@kslaw.com
`
`
`
`
`TOYOTA EXHIBIT 1007
`
`Page 1 of 58
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES ...................................................................................... 1
`
`PAYMENT OF FEES ............................................................................................... 4
`
`III.
`
`STANDING................................................................................................................ 4
`
`IV. REQUEST FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF CLAIMS 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13,
`and 17 OF THE ’974 PATENT .............................................................................. 4
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Technology Background ............................................................................... 5
`
`The Alleged Invention Of The ’974 Patent ................................................ 6
`
`V.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ..................................................................................... 7
`
`A.
`
`Standards For Claim Construction .............................................................. 7
`
`1.
`
`Broadest Reasonable Construction .................................................... 7
`
`B.
`
`“deformities” (Claims 1, 7, 13, And 17) ...................................................... 8
`
`VI.
`
`SUMMARY OF PRIOR ART TO THE ’974 PATENT FORMING THE
`BASIS FOR THIS PETITION ................................................................................ 8
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Admitted Prior Art ........................................................................................ 9
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,619,351 (“Funamoto”) (Ex. 1007)................................ 9
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,548,271 (“Tsuchiyama”) (Ex. 1008) ............................. 9
`
`D. U.S. Patent No. 5,654,779 (“Nakayama”) (Ex. 1009).............................. 10
`
`VII. GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY OF EACH CLAIM ....................... 10
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, And 13 Are Unpatentable Under 35
`U.S.C. §103(a) As Being Obvious Over Funamoto ................................. 10
`
`B.
`
`Ground 2: Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-11, And 13 Are Unpatentable Under
`35 U.S.C. §103(a) As Being Obvious Over Tsuchiyama In View Of
`Funamoto. ..................................................................................................... 26
`
`Page 2 of 58
`
`

`

`C. Ground 3: Claims 13 And 17 Are Unpatentable Under 35 U.S.C.
`§103(a) As Being Obvious Over Funamoto In View Of Nakayama. ... 39
`
`VIII. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 51
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 3 of 58
`
`

`

`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`Description
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,434,974
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,434,974
`Complaints filed in Related District Court Cases
`Declaration of Michael J. Escuti, Ph.D. (“Escuti Decl.”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,461,547 (“Ciupke”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,005,108 (“Pristash”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,619,351 (“Funamoto”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,548,271 (“Tsuchiyama”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,654,779 (“Nakayama”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,108,060 (“the ’060 Patent”) and corresponding file
`history
`U.S. Patent No. 5,160,195 (“Miller”)
`J. A. Castellano, Handbook of Display Technology, Academic Press Inc., San
`Diego, 1992, at pp. 9-13 and Ch. 8
`U.S. Patent No. 5,598,280 (“Nishio”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,384,658 (“Ohtake”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,303,322 (“Winston”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,050,946 (“Hathaway”)
`EP500960 (“Ohe”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,828,488 (“Ouderkirk”)
`3M product brochure 75-0500-0403-7, “Brightness Enhancement Film
`(BEF)”, 2 pages (1993)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,706,134 (“Konno”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,944,405 (“Takeuchi”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,381,309 (“Borchardt”)
`U.S. Patent No. 4,915,478 (“Lenko”)
`
`Exhibit #
`1001
`1002
`1003
`1004
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`
`1011
`1012
`
`
`
`1013
`1014
`1015
`1016
`1017
`1018
`1019
`
`1020
`1021
`1022
`1023
`
`Page 4 of 58
`
`

`

`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §311, Petitioner hereby respectfully request inter partes
`
`review of Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13, and 17 of Ex. 1001, U.S. Patent No. 7,434,974 (“the
`
`’974 Patent”) which issued on October 14, 2008. The challenged claims are
`
`unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the prior art publications identified and
`
`applied in this Petition.
`
`I. MANDATORY NOTICES
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.8, Petitioner provides the following mandatory
`
`disclosures:
`
`A. Real Parties-In-Interest. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, a Delaware limited
`
`liability company with its principal place of business at 1 Mercedes Drive, Montvale,
`
`New Jersey 07465, and Mercedes-Benz U.S. International, Inc., an Alabama
`
`corporation with its principal place of business at 1 Mercedes Drive, Vance, Alabama
`
`35490, are real parties-in-interest.
`
`B. Related Matters. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(2), Petitioner submits that
`
`the ’974 Patent is the subject of a patent infringement lawsuit brought by the Patent
`
`Owner, Innovative Display Technologies LLC (see Ex. 1003), against Petitioner in the
`
`United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas: Innovative Display
`
`Technologies LLC v. Mercedes-Benz U.S. International, Inc. and Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC,
`
`Case No. 2:14-cv-535. In addition, the ‘974 Patent is the subject of another IPR,
`
`Page 5 of 58
`
`

`

`IPR2014-01092. The ’974 Patent is also asserted in at least the actions listed in the
`
`chart below.
`
`Description
`Innovative Display Technologies LLC (“IDT”) v. Acer Inc.
`et al.
`IDT v. Apple Inc.
`IDT v. Apple Inc.
`IDT v. AT&T Inc., et. al.
`IDT v. Best Buy Co., Inc., et. al.
`IDT v. BMW of North America, LLC, et. al.
`IDT v. Canon U.S.A. Inc., et. al.
`IDT v. Research in Motion Limited et al.
`IDT v. Dell Inc.
`IDT v. Garmin International, Inc., et. al.
`
`IDT v. Google Inc., et. al.
`IDT v. Hewlett-Packard Corporation
`IDT v. Huawei Investment et al.
`IDT v. Hyundai Motor Group, et. al.
`IDT v. Mazda Motor Corporation, et. al.
`IDT v. Mercedes-Benz U.S. International, Inc., et. al.
`IDT v. Microsoft Corporation
`IDT v. Mitac Digital Corporation, et. al.
`IDT v. Nikon Inc., et. al.
`IDT v. Nissan Motor, Co., Ltd., et. al.
`IDT v. Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc.
`IDT v. Sprint Corporation, et. al.
`IDT v. T-Mobile US, Inc., et. al.
`IDT v. Tomtom North America Inc., et. al.
`
`Docket Number
`2:13-cv-522, EDTX
`
`2:14-cv-00030, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00301, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00720, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00532, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00106, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00142, EDTX
`2:13-cv-00526, EDTX
`2:13-cv-00523, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00143, EDTX
`
`2:14-cv-00302, EDTX
`2:13-cv-00524, EDTX
`2:13-cv-00525, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00201, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00624, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00535, EDTX
`2:13-cv-00783, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00144, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00145, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00202, EDTX
`2:13-cv-00784, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00721, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00723, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00146, EDTX
`
`Page 6 of 58
`
`

`

`Description
`IDT v. Toyota Motor Corporation, et. al.
`IDT v. Verizon Communications, Inc., et. al.
`IDT v. Volkswagen AG, et. al.
`IDT v. ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`Delaware Display Group LLC (“DDG”) and IDT v.
`Amazon.com, Inc.
`DDG and IDT v. HTC Corporation et al.
`DDG and IDT v. Lenovo Group Ltd., et al.
`DDG and IDT v. LG Electronics Inc., et al.
`DDG and IDT v. Pantech Co.,Ltd, et al.
`DDG and IDT v. Sony Corporation et al.
`DDG and IDT v. Vizio, Inc.
`IDT v. Ford Motor Company
`IDT v. General Motors LLC
`
`Docket Number
`2:14-cv-00200, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00722, EDTX
`2:14-cv-00300, EDTX
`2:13-cv-00527, EDTX
`1:13-cv-2106, D.Del.
`
`1:13-cv-02107, D.Del.
`1:13-cv-02108, D.Del.
`1:13-cv-02109, D.Del.
`1:13-cv-02110, D.Del.
`1:13-cv-02111, D.Del.
`1:13-cv-02112, D.Del.
`1:14-cv-00849, D. Del.
`1:14-cv-00850, D. Del.
`
`
`
`Petitioner is concurrently filing petitions to review U.S. Patent Nos. 7,300,194,
`
`7,404,660, 7,384,177, 6,755,547, and 8,215,816, which are in the same family as the
`
`’974 Patent. The ’974 Patent is a continuation of U.S. Patent No. 7,160,015.
`
`C. Lead and Back-up Counsel.
`
`Petitioner provides the following designation of counsel:
`
`LEAD COUNSEL
`Scott T. Weingaertner
`Reg. No. 37,756
`King & Spalding LLP
`1185 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10036-2601
`Tel.: (212) 556-2227
`Fax: (212) 556-2222
`
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`Natasha H. Moffitt
`Reg. No. 53,340
`King & Spalding LLP
`1180 Peachtree Street, NE
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`Tel.: (404) 572-2783
`Fax: (404) 572-5134
`
`Page 7 of 58
`
`

`

`sweingaertner@kslaw.com
`
`nmoffitt@kslaw.com
`
`D. Service Information. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.8(b)(4), Petitioner identifies
`
`the following service information: Please direct all correspondence regarding this
`
`proceeding to lead counsel at the address identified above. Petitioner consents to
`
`electronic service by email: sweingaertner@kslaw.com and nmoffitt@kslaw.com.
`
`II.
`
`PAYMENT OF FEES
`The U.S. Patent Office is authorized to charge the filing fee for this Petition, as
`
`well as any other fees that may be required in connection with this Petition or these
`
`proceedings on behalf of Petitioner, to the deposit account of King & Spalding LLP,
`
`Deposit Account No. 11-0980.
`
`III. STANDING
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.104(a), Petitioner certifies that the patent sought for
`
`review, the ’974 Patent, is available for inter partes review and that Petitioner is not
`
`barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review of the patent.
`
`IV. REQUEST FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF CLAIMS 1, 3-5, 7-11,
`13, AND 17 OF THE ’974 PATENT
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.104(b), Petitioner requests that the Board find
`
`unpatentable Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13, and 17 of the ’974 Patent. Such relief is justified
`
`as the alleged invention of the ’974 Patent was described by others prior to the
`
`effective filing date of the ’974 Patent.
`
`Page 8 of 58
`
`

`

`A. Technology Background
`Generally, light emitting panel assemblies are used in conjunction with liquid
`
`crystal displays (“LCDs”) and various applications thereof, as a backlight module to
`
`provide light to the display. Ex. 1004, Declaration of Michael J. Escuti, Ph.D.
`
`(“Escuti Decl.”), ¶38. The light emitting panel assembly is composed of all the
`
`elements of the LCD other than the liquid crystals themselves. Id. For example, the
`
`light emitting panel assembly is all but element 12 (in yellow) in the annotated figure
`
`below from Ex. 1005, U.S. Patent No. 5,461,547 (“Ciupke”).
`
`
`
`In order to produce surface illumination with the target brightness and
`
`uniformity at the lowest possible electrical power, the light emitting panel assembly
`
`can include features to spatially homogenize and control the angular distribution of
`
`emitted light. Escuti Decl., ¶42. Examples of these features include light pipes,
`
`transition area, reflectors, and various types of microstructured deformities (e.g.,
`
`microprisms, diffusers, and microlenses). Id. The light pipe, also sometimes called a
`
`light guide or wave guide, accepts light injected from the side and distributes it across
`
`the emission area. The ’974 Patent calls the light pipe a “transparent panel member”
`
`(e.g., 1:19-20), “light emitting panel member” (e.g., 1:33-34), and “transparent light
`
`Page 9 of 58
`
`

`

`emitting panel” (e.g., 2:66). Escuti Decl., ¶43. The transition area, which is usually
`
`between the light source and the light pipe, is used to securely position the light
`
`source relative to the light pipe, and to spread and transmit light to produce a more
`
`uniform input illumination. Escuti Decl., ¶44. Deformities, such as microprisms,
`
`diffusers, and microlenses, are employed to control the direction and spatial
`
`uniformity of light within light emitting panel assemblies. Id. ¶45.
`
`B. The Alleged Invention Of The ’974 Patent
`The ’974 Patent relates “to light emitting panel assemblies each including a
`
`transparent panel member for efficiently conducting light, and controlling the light
`
`conducted by the panel member to be emitted from one or more light output areas
`
`along the length thereof.” Ex. 1001, 1:18-22. The ’974 Patent discloses an edge-lit
`
`light emitting panel assembly, which can also be referred to as a backlight. Edge-lit
`
`light emitting panel assemblies are often preferred because they can be physically
`
`thinner and lower weight. Escuti Decl., ¶40. As the ’974 Patent acknowledges, “[l]ight
`
`emitting panel assemblies are generally known.” Ex. 1001, 1:23. The purported
`
`advantage of the alleged invention described in the ’974 Patent relates to several
`
`different light emitting panel assembly configurations which allegedly provide for
`
`better control of light output from the panel assembly and for more “efficient”
`
`utilization of light, thereby resulting in greater light output from the panel assembly.
`
`Id. 1:24-28. Yet, such advantages are common knowledge, as prior art such as U.S.
`
`Page 10 of 58
`
`

`

`Patent No. 5,005,108 (“Pristash”) has already disclosed them. See, e.g., Ex. 1006, 1:10-
`
`16.
`
`The ’974 Patent discloses a light emitting assembly including a light emitting
`
`panel member received in a cavity or recess in a tray or housing. Ex. 1001, Abstract.
`
`The panel member has a pattern of light extracting deformities on or in at least one
`
`surface of the panel member to cause light received from at least one LED light
`
`source positioned near or against the light entrance surface of the panel member to be
`
`emitted from a light emitting surface of the panel member. Id. The tray or housing
`
`acts as an end edge and/or side edge reflector for the panel member to reflect light
`
`that would otherwise exit the panel member through the end edge and/or side edge
`
`back into the panel member for causing additional light to be emitted from the panel
`
`member. Id.
`
`V.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`A.
`Standards For Claim Construction
`1.
`Broadest Reasonable Construction
`
`A claim subject to inter partes review is given its “broadest reasonable
`
`construction in light of the specification of the patent in which it appears.” 37 C.F.R.
`
`§42.100(b). This means that the words of the claim are given their plain meaning
`
`from the perspective of one of ordinary skill in the art unless that meaning is
`
`inconsistent with the specification. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
`
`Page 11 of 58
`
`

`

`Petitioner submits, for the purposes of inter partes review only, that the claim terms are
`
`presumed to take on their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the
`
`specification of the ’974 Patent.
`
`B.
`“deformities” (Claims 1, 7, 13, And 17)
`The ’974 Patent expressly defines the term “deformities” as follows: “As used
`
`herein, the term deformities or disruptions are used interchangeably to mean any
`
`change in the shape or geometry of the panel surface and/or coating or surface
`
`treatment that causes a portion of the light to be emitted.” Ex. 1001, 4:36-40. Thus,
`
`based on the express definition of deformities in the specification, “deformities”
`
`(Claims 1, 7, 13, and 17) should be construed to mean “any change in the shape or
`
`geometry of a surface and/or coating or surface treatment that causes a portion of the
`
`light to be emitted.” Escuti Decl., ¶64.
`
`VI. SUMMARY OF PRIOR ART TO THE ’974 PATENT FORMING THE
`BASIS FOR THIS PETITION
`The following documents serve as a basis to show that Petitioner has a
`
`reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the Claims 1, 3-5, 7-
`
`9, 13, and 17 of the ’974 Patent. Petitioner provides a detailed explanation of the
`
`pertinence and manner of applying the cited prior art to Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13, and
`
`17 of the ’974 Patent in Section VII, infra. It will be shown that, in light of the prior
`
`art references, the light emitting assembly in the ’974 Patent is a function of prior art
`
`and obvious design decisions, not innovation or invention.
`
`Page 12 of 58
`
`

`

`A.
`Admitted Prior Art
`The ’974 Patent discusses the following functionality and structure of prior art
`
`light emitting assemblies: (1) a “transparent light emitting panel 2,” (2) “one or more
`
`light sources 3 which emit light in a predetermined pattern,” and (3) “a light transition
`
`member or area 4 used to make the transition from the light source 3 to the light
`
`emitting panel.” Ex. 1001, 2:58-65 (describing these elements and their functionalities
`
`as being “well known in the art”).
`
`B. U.S. Patent No. 5,619,351 (“Funamoto”) (Ex. 1007)
`Funamoto discloses a surface-type illumination device suitable for providing a
`
`backlight in an LCD. Ex. 1007, Abstract. Funamoto qualifies as prior art under 35
`
`U.S.C. §102(e) because Funamoto entered national stage under 35 U.S.C. §371 on
`
`May 10, 1994 before the June 27, 1995 priority date to which the ’974 Patent may be
`
`entitled. Funamoto was not cited or considered during prosecution of the application
`
`that led to the ’974 Patent.
`
`C. U.S. Patent No. 5,548,271 (“Tsuchiyama”) (Ex. 1008)
`Tsuchiyama discloses a data display radio pager including an LCD provided
`
`with at least one backlight LED for illuminating the LCD, and a backlight structure
`
`for accommodating, together with the backlight LED, at least one alert LED for
`
`alerting a user of the radio pager to an incoming call in the LCD. Ex. 1008, 1:58-62.
`
`Tsuchiyama qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. §102(e) because Tsuchiyama was
`
`filed on June 24, 1994, before the June 27, 1995 priority date to which the ’974 Patent
`
`Page 13 of 58
`
`

`

`may be entitled. Tsuchiyama was not cited or considered during prosecution of the
`
`application that led to the ’974 Patent.
`
`D. U.S. Patent No. 5,654,779 (“Nakayama”) (Ex. 1009)
`Nakayama discloses an LCD device wherein at least a part of the light guiding
`
`board can be removed from the lighting unit section or lighting means can be
`
`removed from the LCD panel section without removing the frames and without the
`
`need of varying the outer dimensions and thickness of the device, utilizing light with
`
`higher efficiency and with lighter weight removable portions. Ex. 1009, 2:12-24.
`
`Nakayama qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. §102(e) because Nakayama was filed
`
`on December 29, 1994, before the June 27, 1995 priority date to which the ’974
`
`Patent may be entitled. Nakayama was not cited or considered during prosecution of
`
`the application that led to the ’974 Patent.
`
`VII. GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY OF EACH CLAIM
`In light of the disclosures detailed below, the ’974 Patent is unpatentable for at
`
`least the reasons summarized in the chart below and discussed in more detail herein.
`
`Ground # Ground
`1
`103(a)
`2
`103(a)
`
`3
`
`103(a)
`
`Prior art
`Funamoto
`Tsuchiyama in
`view of Funamoto
`Funamoto in view
`of Nakayama
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, And 13 Are Unpatentable Under 35
`U.S.C. §103(a) As Being Obvious Over Funamoto
`It is well known in the light emitting panel assembly field to include a light
`
`Exhibit(s) #
`1007
`1008 and 1007
`
`1007 and 1009
`
`Claims
`1, 3-5, 7-11, 13
`1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-11,
`13
`13, 17
`
`Page 14 of 58
`
`

`

`emitting panel member and the other structural features, as required by independent
`
`Claims 1 and 13. Indeed, in the Background of the Invention, the ’974 Patent
`
`concedes “[l]ight emitting panel assemblies are generally known.” Ex. 1001, 1:23. The
`
`“novel” feature was “light emitting panel assembly configurations which provide for
`
`better control of the light output from the panel assemblies and for more efficient
`
`utilization of light, which results in greater light output from the panel assemblies.” Id.
`
`1:24-28. However, the purportedly “novel” feature was fully described in Funamoto.
`
`Funamoto (Ex. 1007) discloses Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, and 13 of the ’974 Patent
`
`and therefore renders those claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103. According to
`
`Funamoto, the increased use of surface-type illumination devices with a cylindrical
`
`light source and a flat polarizer as backlights for LCD panels in addition to the
`
`increased use of LCD panels for color displays calls for the LCD panels to become
`
`thinner and lighter with less power consumption. Ex. 1007, 1:15-38. Some problems
`
`Funamoto aimed to solve include overheating and the increased number of necessary
`
`driver circuits. Id. 1:42-66. To address these concerns, Funamoto discloses an
`
`illumination device for color LCDs that are small, lightweight, with high and uniform
`
`brightness, which can also be temperature controlled, and without increasing the
`
`number of driver circuits needed. Id. 2:3-23.
`
`The elements of Claim 1 of the ’974 Patent are shown in the annotated figure
`
`to the right, composed of Figures 14 and 15 of Funamoto that are labeled as claim
`
`Page 15 of 58
`
`

`

`elements.
`
`
`
`Notably, the “polarizer” of Funamoto is the panel member of the ’974 Patent.
`
`Although it is not immediately clear that the polarizer is a light emitting panel
`
`member, consideration of Funamoto’s child patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,108,060 (“the
`
`’060 Patent”) (Ex. 1010) illustrates that the ’060 Patent includes the exact same
`
`sentence as in Funamoto, but with “polarizer” replaced with “light guide plate
`
`(“Illumination device 20 is a surface-type illumination device set up with a cylindrically-shaped
`
`fluorescent light 22 at the edge of substantially rectangular light guide plate 21.” Ex. 1010, 6:31-
`
`33). As previously discussed, a light guide is an example of a light pipe/panel
`
`member. Therefore, the “polarizer” of Funamoto is the same as the light emitting
`
`panel member of the ’974 Patent because the light polarizer has a light entrance
`
`surface and a light emitting surface, as is clear from the assembly structure and the
`
`function of the polarizer. See Escuti Decl., ¶¶72-74.
`
`The ’974 Patent requires at least one LED light source positioned near or
`
`Page 16 of 58
`
`

`

`against the light entrance surface. Although Funamoto does not explicitly disclose an
`
`LED, it does describe a light source (“cylindrically-shaped fluorescent light 22,” Ex. 1007,
`
`6:24-25). Funamoto also repeatedly mentions decreased power consumption as an
`
`objective. Id. 1:5-12, 12:66-67. As such, a person of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`easily substitute an LED for the fluorescent light source disclosed. See Escuti Decl.,
`
`¶¶76-78. This is particularly true because an LED would have been an obvious design
`
`choice at the time of Funamoto, selected for its efficiency and low power
`
`consumption, among other things. See id. ¶77.
`
`Finally, Funamoto teaches a tray with
`
`posts, tabs, or other structural features that
`
`provide a mount for mounting of the assembly
`
`into a larger assembly or device as seen to the
`
`right as element 4, encircled in annotated Figure 1. The structural feature represented
`
`by element 4 allows for the bottom tray with all of the components within, to be
`
`mounted into the top case. See id. ¶¶79-81.
`
`
`
`With respect to Claim 7, the annotated figure and explanation above illustrates
`
`that Funamoto teaches all the elements of Claim 1, in addition to the tray or housing
`
`having posts, tabs, or other structural features that provide a mount or structural
`
`support for at least one other part or component. Any other component that is
`
`unlabeled within annotated Figures 14 and 15 qualifies as the “at least one other part
`
`Page 17 of 58
`
`

`

`or component” that the tray’s structural features provide structural support. See id.
`
`¶¶103-106. This component can be an LCD as required in Claim 8 of the ’974 Patent
`
`as disclosed (“Upper frame 38 acts as a spacer to secure the gap between liquid crystal display
`
`panel 10 and illumination device 60.” Ex. 1007, 13:53-54), and as also seen in lilac in
`
`annotated Figure 2 below, where the other components are colored in accordance to
`
`their labels in annotated Figs. 14 and 15.
`
`
`
`
`
`The “component” can also be a printed circuit (“Also, at side 10b, which is adjacent
`
`to side 10a, a plurality of driver ICs 14 are installed for latching pixel data for the columns and
`
`sending it to the liquid crystal display panel.” Ex. 1007, 6:3-9), as required by Claim 9 of the
`
`’974 Patent. See Escuti Decl., ¶¶114-115.
`
`
`
`Claim 13 of the ’974 is met by Funamoto, as shown above in annotated Figures
`
`14 and 15 of Funamoto. An additional component is overlaying the panel member,
`
`including any element located above the “panel member” in the expanded view in
`
`Figure 15. See id. ¶¶124-128. Further, Funamoto teaches the panel member having at
`
`least one of a tab, hole, cavity, or protrusion that positions the tray or housing relative
`
`to the panel member. The corners of the panel member are removed in order to
`
`install the light source so that the light source and the panel member fit together
`
`Page 18 of 58
`
`

`

`appropriately. Ex. 1007, 14:12-27; see also Escuti Decl., ¶¶124-128. The cavity, or
`
`empty space within a solid object, in the corner of the panel allows for positioning of
`
`the panel relative to the light source and into the tray. See id.
`
`The claim chart below shows a detailed analysis of how each element of Claims
`
`1, 3-5, 7-11, and 13 of the ’974 Patent is obvious over Funamoto. For all these
`
`reasons, Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, and 13 are unpatentable in view of Funamoto and thus,
`
`Petitioner has a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one claim.
`
`’974 Claim Element
`1. A light emitting panel
`assembly comprising
`
`Funamoto (Ex. 1007)
`“In liquid crystal display 1, illumination device 20 is
`installed in lower case 3. Above that, liquid crystal display
`panel 10 is installed using frame 30 and 31.” Ex. 1007,
`5:61-67; see also Fig. 2 below.
`
`
`
`light
`least a
`[1.a] at
`emitting panel member
`having a light entrance
`surface
`and
`a
`light
`emitting surface,
`
`See Escuti Decl., ¶71.
`“Illumination device 20 is a surface-type illumination
`device set up with a cylindrically-shaped fluorescent light
`22 at the edge of substantially rectangular polarizer 21.”
`Ex. 1007, 6:24-26.
`“Illumination device 20 is comprised of polarizer 21,
`which is substantially rectangular in shape and is missing
`the corner of edge 40, fluorescent light 22, which
`encompasses edge 40 in an L-shape, and reflectors 23a
`and 23b, which cover fluorescent light 22 in the direction
`of polarizer 21 and efficiently reflect
`light from
`fluorescent light 22 to polarizer 21.” Id. 6:32-40; see also
`4:49-53, Fig. 4.
`See Escuti Decl., ¶¶72-75.
`[1.b] at least one LED “Illumination device 20 is a surface-type illumination
`
`Page 19 of 58
`
`

`

`’974 Claim Element
`light source positioned
`near or against the light
`entrance surface, and
`
`[1.c] a tray or housing
`having a cavity or recess
`in which
`the panel
`member
`is
`entirely
`received,
`
`Funamoto (Ex. 1007)
`device set up with a cylindrically-shaped fluorescent light
`22 at the edge of substantially rectangular polarizer 21.”
`Ex. 1007, 6:24-26; 13:47.
`“This invention relates in general to a thin, surface-type
`illumination device that can be used as a backlight for
`liquid crystal displays (LCD) and, in particular, to a
`suitable
`illumination device for use
`in a notebook
`computer display that provides high brightness with low
`power consumption as well as to a liquid crystal display
`that uses this illumination device.” Id. 1:6-12.
`“Further, because the light conversion efficiency can be
`raised, power consumption can be reduced.” Id. 12:66-67.
`See Escuti Decl., ¶¶76-78.
`“Liquid crystal display 1 is constructed with liquid crystal
`display panel 10 and an illumination device to be
`described later sandwiched between upper case 2 and
`lower case 3. Upper case 2 and lower case 3 are fixed in
`place by tooth 4.” Ex. 1007, 5:47-51; see also Fig. 2 below.
`
`
`
`“In liquid crystal display 1, illumination device 20 is
`installed in lower case 3. Above that, liquid crystal display
`panel 10 is installed using frame 30 and 31.” Id. 5:61-67;
`see also Fig. 3 above.
` “Frames 30 and 31 are used to protect illumination device
`20 and to position it within the case. At the same time, it
`also fills the role of maintaining a fixed distance for gap 33
`between illumination device 20 and liquid crystal display
`panel 10, for example, 0.2-1 mm. For this reason, frames
`30 and 31 are prepared so that their lower halfs [sic] 34
`and 35 support illumination device 20 and their upper
`
`Page 20 of 58
`
`

`

`’974 Claim Element
`
`Funamoto (Ex. 1007)
`halfs [sic] 36 and 37 act as spacers between illumination
`device 20 and liquid crystal display panel 10.” Id. 6:10-17.
`“Illumination device 60 is enclosed within frames 38 and
`39, which are divided into an upper and lower section.
`Upper frame 38 acts as a spacer to secure the gap between
`liquid crystal display panel 10 and illumination device
`60…. Within the U-shaped lower frame 39 of illumination
`device 60 are enclosed the following in the order from
`bottom to top, reflecting sheet 25, polarizer 61, diffusion
`sheet 26, and prism sheet 27.… On top of lower frame 39,
`which encloses all of these, is the flat, L-shaped upper
`frame 38.” Id., 13:47-65; see also Figs. 14, 15 below.
`
`[1.d] wherein the panel
`member has a pattern of
`light
`extracting
`deformities on or in at
`least one surface
`to
`cause light to be emitted
`from the light emitting
`surface of
`the panel
`member, and
`
`[1.e] the tray or housing
`includes end walls and
`side walls that act as end
`
`
`
`
`
`See Escuti Decl., ¶¶79-81.
`“In this example, the pattern sheet is omitted because the
`diffusion sheet 52 is printed on lower surface 61b of
`polarizer 61.” Ex. 1007, 14:10-12.
`“FIG. 17 shows diffusion pattern 52, which is printed on
`polarizer 61, when looking from the direction of lower
`side 21b of polarizer 21 … Through diffusion pattern 52,
`the light introduced to polarizer 61 is diffused and a
`uniform light is released from upper surface 61a of
`polarizer 61 towards the liquid crystal display panel.” Id.
`14:27-41; see also Figs. 14, 15.
`See Escuti Decl., ¶¶82-83.
`“Edge reflective tape 28 is arranged at the two edges 4la
`and 41b, which are opposite the edges 41c and 4ld where
`fluorescent light 22 and reflector 23 are installed. . . . The
`
`Page 21 of 58
`
`

`

`’974 Claim Element
`edge reflectors and side
`edge reflectors for the
`panel member to reflect
`light
`that
`would
`otherwise exit the panel
`member through an end
`edge and/or side edge
`back
`into
`the panel
`member and toward the
`pattern
`of
`light
`extracting
`deformities
`for causing additional
`light to be emitted from
`the
`light
`emitting
`surface of
`the panel
`member,
`[1.f] wherein the tray or
`housing
`provides
`structural support to the
`panel member
`
`Funamoto (Ex. 1007)
`light that reaches the edges of the opposite side is
`returned back to polarizer 21.” Ex. 1007, 7:60-67.
`“The remaining edge 41b is equipped with edge reflecting
`tape 28.” Id. 13:63-64.
`“Materials such as white PET sheets, aluminum, and such
`can be used for the edge reflective tape as well as the
`reflectors mentioned above. It is also possible to integrate
`these into the case or frame as well.” Id. 7:67-8:4
`“Concerning this liquid crystal display, the drawings and
`descriptions substantially similar to the embodiment
`shown in FIG. 1 are eliminated.” Id. 13:42-44.
`See Escuti Decl., ¶¶84-86.
`
`“Liquid crystal display 1 is constructed with liquid crystal
`display panel 10 and an illumination device to be
`described later sandwiched between upper case 2 and
`lower case 3.” Ex. 1007, 5:47-50; see also Fig. 2 above.
`“In liquid crystal display 1, illumination device 20 is
`installed in lower case 3.” Id. 5:64-66; see also Fig. 3 above.
`“Frames 30 and 31 are used to protect illumination device
`20 and to position it within the case. At the same time, it
`also fills the role of maintaining a fixed distance for gap 33
`between illumination device 20 and liquid crystal display
`panel 10, for example, 0.2-1 mm. For thi