UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC,
`
`Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,508,563
`
`Issue Date: January 21, 2003
`
`Patent Title: Light Emitting Panel Assemblies for Use in
`Automotive Applications and the Like
`
`IPR Case No.: IPR2015-01067
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF JEFFREY ERION
`
`
`
`
`
`Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Petitioner - Ex. 1007
`
`

`

`I, Jeffrey Erion, hereby state and declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`SUMMARY
`
`1.
`
`I have been engaged by Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (“Mercedes”) to
`
`review U.S. Patent No. 6,508,563 (“the ’563 patent”) (Ex. 1001) and opine on
`
`whether, as of January 16, 1996, certain claims of the ’563 patent were anticipated or
`
`rendered obvious by one or more of the following prior art references:
`
`a. U.S. Patent No. 4,977,487 to Okano (“Okano”) (Ex. 1003);
`
`b. U.S. Patent No. 5,711,592 to Hotta (“Hotta”) (Ex. 1004);
`
`c. Japanese Laid Open Utility Model No. S61-153201 (“Asai”) (Ex.
`1005);
`
`d. German Published Patent Application No. DE 41 29 094 A1 to
`Decker (“Decker”) (Ex. 1006).
`
`2.
`
`As is set forth in detail below, it is my opinion that:
`
`a. Okano anticipates Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 18, and 22 of the ’563 patent;
`
`b. Hotta anticipates Claims 1, 2, 11, 18, and 22 of the ’563 patent;
`
`c. Asai anticipates Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, and 22 of the ’563 patent; and
`
`d. Claim 23 of the ’563 patent is obvious in view of the disclosures of
`Hotta and the general knowledge of a person of skill in the art
`and/or the disclosures of Decker.
`
`II. BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`
`3.
`
`I graduated from Oregon State University in 1969 with a Bachelor of
`
`Science degree in Production Technology. Production Technology was an
`
`engineering major offered by Oregon State that focused on material manufacturing
`
`processes and methods related to metals. The curriculum for this major was similar to
`
`2
`
`

`

`a “manufacturing engineer” major today. Following graduation, I was employed at
`
`Ford Motor Company for a total of 31 years, 19 of which were focused on vehicle
`
`lighting and research and development of vehicle lighting products, including LED
`
`lighting systems. In 1990, I became the Manager of the Advanced Exterior Research
`
`and Development Department at Ford. My group was responsible for the
`
`development of advanced lighting technologies predominantly for the exterior of the
`
`vehicle including headlights, tail lamps, parking lamps and any other lamps that were
`
`located on the exterior of the vehicle.
`
`4. While at Ford, I was trained in optics, lighting regulations, lamp design,
`
`statistics and major engineering disciplines. I took three post graduate classes in
`
`various engineering subjects. In 2000 I joined Visteon Corporation as the Senior
`
`Manager for Research and Development for Exterior Vehicle Lighting. For over five
`
`years I led the development of advanced lighting equipment for vehicle exterior
`
`lighting using halogen, high intensity discharge (HID), LED and laser light sources.
`
`We developed the next generation of lighting equipment including sophisticated
`
`faceted reflection and projector lamps, fiber optic driven lighting systems, LED
`
`powered signal and forward lighting, and laser powered signal lighting lamps.
`
`5.
`
`I was a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) from
`
`1984 to 2007 and served as Chairman of the SAE Lighting Committee from 1998 to
`
`2001. I also served as a chairman and member of many of the subcommittees of the
`
`SAE Lighting Committee, including the Road Illuminations Committee, the Bulb
`
`3
`
`

`

`Task Force, Signaling and Marking Committee, LED Signal Lighting Task Force,
`
`Lighting Coordinating Committee and Headlamp Task Force.
`
`6.
`
`I was a member of the U.S. Delegation to the Groupe De Travail
`
`“Bruxelles 1952” (GTB), a group of international experts in vehicle lighting reporting
`
`ultimately to the United Nations. I participated in this group for more than twenty
`
`years as a co-chairman and a member of several committees producing proposals for
`
`new or amended United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE)
`
`global lighting standards.
`
`7.
`
`I am currently named as inventor on twenty-seven U.S. Patents and
`
`patent applications for use in the automotive and exterior lighting industry.
`
`8.
`
`I have been compensated at the rate of $275/hour for my work on this
`
`matter. My compensation has not influenced any of my opinions in this matter and
`
`does not depend on the outcome of this proceeding or any issue in it.
`
`9. My opinion and underlying reasoning for this opinion are set forth
`
`below. I reserve the right to amend or supplement this report if new or additional
`
`information is made available to me or if a claim construction is adopted that is
`
`different from what has been provided in this report.
`
`III. LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`10.
`
`In forming my opinions and considering the patentability of the claims
`
`of the ’563 patent, I am relying upon certain legal principles that counsel has
`
`explained to me.
`
`4
`
`

`

`11.
`
`I understand that for an invention claimed in a patent to be found
`
`patentable, it must be, among other things, new and not obvious in light of what came
`
`before it. Patents and publications which predated the invention are generally
`
`referred to as “prior art.”
`
`12.
`
`I understand that in this proceeding the burden is on the party asserting
`
`unpatentability to prove it by a preponderance of the evidence. I understand that “a
`
`preponderance of the evidence” is evidence sufficient to show that a fact is more
`
`likely than not.
`
`13.
`
`I understand that in this proceeding, the claims must be given their
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. The claims after
`
`being construed in this manner are then to be compared to information that was
`
`disclosed in the prior art.
`
`14.
`
`I have been informed that the claims of a patent are judged from the
`
`perspective of a hypothetical construct involving “a person having ordinary skill in the
`
`art.” The “art” is the field of technology to which the patent is related. I understand
`
`that the purpose of using a person having ordinary skill in the art’s viewpoint is
`
`objectivity. Thus, I understand that the question of validity is viewed from the
`
`perspective of a person having ordinary skill in the art, and not from the perspective
`
`of (a) the inventor, (b) a layperson, or (c) a person of extraordinary skill in the art. I
`
`have been informed that the claims of the patent-at-issue are interpreted as a person
`
`5
`
`

`

`having ordinary skill in the art would have understood them in the relevant time
`
`period (i.e., when the patent application was filed or the earliest effective filing date).
`
`15.
`
`I understand that for utility patents, the role of one having ordinary skill
`
`in the art in the obviousness context is to determine whether to combine prior art
`
`references or to modify a single prior art reference, to arrive at a single piece of art for
`
`comparison with the patented design.
`
`16. The ’563 patent relates to the area of automotive and vehicle lighting. In
`
`my view and based on my education and experience, I am very familiar with the level
`
`of knowledge that one having ordinary skill would have possessed during the relevant
`
`period of time, which I have assumed, for purposes of this proceeding, is January 16,
`
`1996, the date on which the first patent application in a series of patent applications
`
`was filed. In my opinion, one of “ordinary skill in the art” in the field of automotive
`
`and vehicle lighting would have at least a B.S. Degree in Optical, Mechanical, or
`
`Electrical Engineering, Physics or Mathematics, or the equivalent thereof, and at least
`
`three years of industry experience in the development of vehicle lighting optical
`
`systems. Additional degrees or training might substitute for experience, while
`
`experience in the development of vehicle lighting optical systems might substitute for
`
`formal education.
`
`A.
`
`17.
`
`Anticipation
`
`I understand that the following standards govern the determination of
`
`whether a patent claim is “anticipated” by the prior art. I have applied these standards
`
`6
`
`

`

`in my analysis of whether claims of the ’563 patent were anticipated at the time of the
`
`invention.
`
`18.
`
`I understand that a patent claim is “anticipated” by a single prior art
`
`reference if that reference discloses each element of the claim in a single embodiment.
`
`A prior art reference may anticipate a claim inherently if an element is not expressly
`
`stated, but only if the prior art necessarily includes the claim limitations.
`
`19.
`
`I understand that the test for anticipation is performed in two steps.
`
`First, the claims must be interpreted to determine their meaning. Second, a prior art
`
`reference is analyzed to determine whether every claim element, as interpreted in the
`
`first step, is present in the reference. If all the elements of a patent claim are present
`
`in the prior art reference, then that claim is anticipated and is invalid.
`
`20.
`
`I understand that it is acceptable to examine extrinsic evidence outside
`
`the prior art reference in determining whether a feature, if not expressly discussed in
`
`the reference, is necessarily present within that reference.
`
`B. Obviousness
`
`21.
`
`I understand that a claim can be invalid in view of prior art if the
`
`differences between the subject matter claimed and the prior art are such that the
`
`claimed subject matter as a whole would have been “obvious” at the time the
`
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art.
`
`22.
`
`I understand that the obviousness standard is defined at 35 U.S.C. §
`
`103(a). I understand that a claim is obvious over a prior art reference if that
`
`7
`
`

`

`reference, combined with the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art or other
`
`prior art references disclose each and every element of the recited claim.
`
`23.
`
`I also understand that the relevant inquiry into obviousness requires
`
`consideration of four factors:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`The scope and content of the prior art;
`
`The differences between the prior art and the claims at issue;
`
`The knowledge of a person having ordinary skill in the pertinent
`
`art; and
`
`d.
`
`Objective factors indicating obviousness or non-obviousness that
`
`may be present in any particular case, such factors including
`
`commercial success of products covered by the patent claims; a
`
`long-felt need for the invention; failed attempts by others to make
`
`the invention; copying of the invention by others in the field;
`
`unexpected results achieved by the invention; praise of the
`
`invention by the infringer or others in the field; the taking of
`
`licenses under the patent by others; expressions of surprise by
`
`experts and those skilled in the art at the making of the invention;
`
`and that the patentee proceeded contrary to the accepted wisdom
`
`of the prior art.
`
`24.
`
`I understand that when combining two or more references, one can
`
`consider whether a teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references
`
`8
`
`

`

`exists so as to avoid impermissible hindsight. I have been informed that the
`
`application of the teaching, suggestion or motivation test should not be rigidly
`
`applied, but rather is an expansive and flexible test. For example, I have been
`
`informed that the common sense of a person having ordinary skill in the art can serve
`
`as motivation for combining references. I have also been informed, for example, that
`
`it may be appropriate to combine two or more references when such a combination
`
`would have been obvious to try or would have yielded predictable results.
`
`25.
`
`I understand that the content of a patent or other printed publication
`
`(i.e., a reference) should be interpreted the way a person having ordinary skill in the
`
`art would have interpreted the reference as of the effective filing date of the patent
`
`application for the ’563 patent. I have assumed that the person having ordinary skill is
`
`a hypothetical person who is presumed to be aware of all the pertinent information
`
`that qualifies as prior art. In addition, the person having ordinary skill in the art
`
`makes inferences and creative steps. He or she is not an automaton, but has ordinary
`
`creativity.
`
`26.
`
`I have been informed that the application that issued as the ’563 patent
`
`was filed on December 5, 2001. However, the application claims the benefit, for
`
`purposes of priority, of a parent application that was filed on January 16, 1996. As a
`
`result, I will assume that the relevant time period for determining what one having
`
`ordinary skill in the art knew is January 16, 1996, the effective filing date for purposes
`
`of this proceeding.
`
`9
`
`

`

`C.
`
`27.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`I have been informed that 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.” I have been informed that this means that the words of the claim are
`
`given their plain meaning from the perspective of one having ordinary skill in the art
`
`unless that meaning is inconsistent with the specification. I understand that the “plain
`
`meaning” of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by
`
`those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and that the ordinary
`
`and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including
`
`the words of the claims, the specification, drawings, and prior art.
`
`28.
`
`I understand that “extrinsic” evidence – e.g., evidence outside of the
`
`specification and prosecution history of the ’563 patent – may be consulted for the
`
`meaning of a claim term as long as it is not used to contradict claim meaning that is
`
`unambiguous in light of the intrinsic evidence. I also understand that in construing
`
`claim terms, the general meanings gleaned from reference sources must always be
`
`compared against the use of the terms in context, and the intrinsic record must always
`
`be consulted to identify which of the different possible dictionary meanings is most
`
`consistent with the use of the words by the inventor.
`
`10
`
`

`

`IV. BACKGROUND OF LIGHT EMITTING PANEL ASSEMBLIES IN
`AUTOMOBILES
`
`29.
`
`In 1962, scientists at General Electric invented the first Light Emitting
`
`Diode, or LED. This invention was truly unique as it was the first time that light had
`
`been produced by a completely solid state device. The impact of this invention was
`
`much like the invention of the first transistor, which replaced the vacuum tube in the
`
`early 1960s. The new LED light source lasted longer, consumed less power, took up
`
`less space, and required less maintenance than the conventional ordinary incandescent
`
`bulb. However, the light output of the first LEDs was very low and they could only
`
`be used for applications such as indicator lights on electrical equipment. Over time,
`
`however, the power and capabilities of LEDs improved.
`
`30. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, lamp optical specialists found it
`
`possible to produce a low power signal lamp for use in vehicles. The “center high
`
`mounted stop lamp,” sometimes referred to as the CHMSL, is the small third brake
`
`light usually mounted in the back window of vehicles or the trunk lid. It was
`
`traditionally designed with incandescent light sources, but became a good candidate
`
`for LED technology because it was generally difficult to service and package space
`
`was limited. The first examples of these lights required over 20 LEDs to emit enough
`
`light to meet safety regulation and standards. As technology improved, different types
`
`of LEDs were developed that could produce substantially more light. The number of
`
`LEDs required for each lamp function continually lessened.
`
`11
`
`

`

`31.
`
`For the first automotive applications of LEDs, simple direct optical
`
`solutions were employed. Most of these were borrowed from conventional light
`
`source technologies, most commonly Fresnel types (i.e., optics that are refractive and
`
`generally circular in nature with relatively high collection efficiency).
`
`32.
`
`Ford introduced the first LED tail lamp using a combination of
`
`refractive and reflective optics to produce a very flat lamp used on the trunk lid for
`
`the 1992 Thunderbird. In particular, the 1992 Thunderbird used a linear array of
`
`LEDs along the bottom edge of the lamp with a vertical panel-shaped reflector having
`
`closely spaced horizontal facets that reflected the light from the LEDs rearward. An
`
`outer lens had optics on the inside to spread the light laterally for better appearance
`
`and to meet the tail lamp photometric legal requirements. Thus, by the early 1990s,
`
`LED panel assemblies for vehicle taillights were available commercially.
`
`33. During this same time period, considerable development efforts were
`
`being directed to the use of fiber optics and light guides. Fiber optics are specifically
`
`used to transmit light from one location to another. Light guides are a combination
`
`of light transmitter and light distributor. Through the use of light guides, a light
`
`source could be positioned remotely but still used to illuminate a signal lamp at some
`
`other location. It was well-known that LED light sources were particularly well-suited
`
`to use in combination with light guides because LEDs produce less heat than
`
`incandescent light sources, thereby reducing the risk of melting the light guide.
`
`12
`
`

`

`34.
`
`In summary, the development of the LED, light pipe, and light guide
`
`technologies were well established in the early 1990s. By then, LED-based center
`
`high mounted stop lamps were already well-known. Even more sophisticated light
`
`delivery systems had been introduced on limited vehicles, along with innovations
`
`relative to the fiber optic and light guide optical systems. I was personally involved in
`
`the development of these systems at Ford Motor Company during this period and
`
`responsible for intellectual property relating to these systems.
`
`V. THE ’563 PATENT
`
`A.
`
`Background of the ’563 Patent
`
`35. The ’563 patent relates generally to light emitting panel assemblies for
`
`use in automotive applications, such as taillights and other exterior lighting
`
`applications. See Ex. 1001 at col. 1:17-19; col. 1:25-30. The patent recognizes that
`
`“[l]ight emitting panel assemblies are generally known,” but professes to relate to
`
`certain improvements to such assemblies, especially for automotive applications. See
`
`id. at col. 1:20-25.
`
`36. The ’563 patent has 23 claims, of which, Claims 1, 5, 11, and 22 are
`
`independent. My analysis will focus on Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 18, 22, and 23 of the ’563
`
`patent (collectively, the “Challenged Claims”). For convenience, I have reproduced
`
`these claims below:
`
`1. A light emitting panel assembly mounted on a body portion of a
`vehicle, said panel assembly comprising at least one solid light emitting
`panel member having top and bottom surfaces and a greater cross
`
`13
`
`

`

`sectional width than thickness, said panel assembly having at least one
`light input surface for receiving light from at least one light source and
`directing the light through said panel assembly from an edge of said
`panel assembly for emission of the light from one of said top and
`bottom surfaces of said panel member, said panel member being located
`on an exterior surface of said body portion with said panel member
`wrapped around a corner of said vehicle to provide illumination around
`said corner.
`
`2. The assembly of claim 1 wherein said panel member is located at least
`at one of a rear corner and a front corner of said vehicle.
`
`5. A light emitting panel assembly mounted on a body portion of a
`vehicle, said panel assembly comprising at least one solid light emitting
`panel member having top and bottom surfaces and a greater cross
`sectional width than thickness, said panel assembly having at least one
`light input surface for receiving light from at least one light source and
`directing the light through said panel assembly from an edge of said
`panel assembly for emission of the light from one of said top and
`bottom surfaces of said panel member, and another light source located
`directly behind said panel member for shining light through said panel
`member independently of the light emitted by said panel member from
`said light source.
`
`7. The assembly of claim 5 wherein said other light source comprises at
`least one of: a light emitting diode, an incandescent lamp, and a halogen
`lamp.
`
`11. A light emitting panel assembly mounted on a body portion of a
`vehicle, said panel assembly comprising at least one solid light emitting
`panel member having top and bottom surfaces and a greater cross
`sectional width than thickness, said panel assembly having at least one
`light input surface for receiving light from at least one light source and
`directing the light through said panel assembly from an edge of said
`panel assembly for emission of the light from one of said top and
`bottom surfaces of said panel member, said panel member being located
`on an exterior surface of said body portion with said panel member
`conforming to a curved profile of said vehicle to provide illumination
`along said curved profile.
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`18. The assembly of claim 11 further comprising a lens or film covering
`one of said top and bottom surfaces of said panel member.
`
`22. A light emitting panel assembly mounted on a body portion of a
`vehicle, said panel assembly comprising at least one solid light emitting
`panel member having top and bottom surfaces and a greater cross
`sectional width than thickness, said panel assembly having at least one
`light input surface for receiving light from at least one light source
`attached to said light input surface and directing the light through said
`panel assembly from an edge of said panel assembly for emission of the
`light from one of said top and bottom surfaces of said panel member,
`said panel member being located on an exterior surface of said body
`portion with said panel member conforming to a curved profile of said
`vehicle to provide illumination along said curved profile.
`
`23. The assembly of claim 22 wherein said light source is connected to a
`printed circuit board.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`For the purposes of my analysis, I have accorded the terms of the
`
`B.
`
`37.
`
`Challenged Claims their plain and ordinary meaning to a person of skill in the art as of
`
`January 1996.
`
`VI. ANALYSIS AND OPINIONS
`
`38.
`
`In my opinion, Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 18, 22, and 23 of the ’563 patent are
`
`either anticipated by or rendered obvious in light of prior art as is set forth in more
`
`detail below.
`
`A.
`
`39.
`
`’563 patent.
`
`Anticipation by Okano
`
`In my opinion, Okano anticipates Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 18, and 22 of the
`
`15
`
`

`

`40. Okano, which issued on December 11, 1990, is directed to a light
`
`emitting panel assembly for use on the interior and exterior of automobiles.
`
`41. Okano explains that prior art illumination devices could be problematic
`
`because of their large size and complex design. Ex. 1003 at col. 1:20-24, col. 1:55-58.
`
`To overcome these and other problems, Okano discloses a face-brightening device
`
`that comprises a plurality of optical fibers placed side-by-side and fixed together on a
`
`base film made of synthetic resin to form a flat portion, as shown in Figures 6a-c,
`
`below. Id. at Figure 6a-c; id. at col. 5:25-28.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`42. The portions of the optical fibers that are to be brightened are notched
`
`at the backside. Id. at col. 5:19-21; Fig. 5c. Light emitted from the light sources
`
`located at the edge of the assembly passes through the terminals 6 and 6’, advances
`
`through the optical fibers 1, and is emitted through the notched portions of the
`
`optical fibers. See id. at col. 5:32-40. When the optical fibers are notched all over, the
`
`entire face of the device is brightened. See id. at col. 6:44-46.
`
`43. Okano further discloses that the face brightening device is inserted into
`
`a vehicle tail light assembly, which also includes a color lens, a reflector plate, and a
`
`lamp body. Id. at col. 6:6-7:15; Fig. 11a.
`
`(1) Okano discloses the elements of Claim 1
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`44. Claim 1 of the ’563 patent is an independent apparatus claim that teaches
`
`four elements:
`
`[a] “light emitting panel assembly mounted on a body portion of a
`vehicle”;
`
`[b] “at least one solid light emitting panel member having top and
`bottom surfaces and a greater cross sectional width than thickness”;
`
`[c] “having at least one light input surface for receiving light from at least
`one light source and directing the light through said panel assembly from
`an edge of said panel assembly for emission of the light from one of said
`top and bottom surfaces of said panel member”; and
`
`[d] “being located on an exterior surface of said body portion with said
`panel member wrapped around a corner of said vehicle to provide
`illumination around said corner.”
`
`45.
`
`In my opinion, Okano discloses each of these elements.
`
`(a) Okano discloses a “light emitting panel assembly
`mounted on a body portion of a vehicle”
`
`46.
`
`In anticipation of the first element of Claim 1, Okano discloses a “face
`
`brightening device” that can be mounted on the exterior of a vehicle.
`
`47. As a threshold matter, as depicted in Figure 11a, above, Okano discloses
`
`a light emitting panel assembly. In particular, Okano discloses that the “face
`
`brightening device” is comprised of “optical fibers and a light source wherein the light
`
`source is attached to one or both ends of the optical fibers to brighten those notched
`
`faces of the optical fibers which form … brightening faces and the like needed inside
`
`and outside the vehicles.” Ex. 1003 at Abstract. See id. at col. 2:52-53; col. 2:67-3:2.
`
`18
`
`

`

`48.
`
`Figure 6a of Okano similarly discloses “a face brightening device (A)
`
`comprising the optical fibers 1 wherein a plurality of the optical fibers 1 are fixed side
`
`by side on a base film 2 made of synthetic resin to form a brightening section 3.” Id.
`
`at col. 5:25-28. Okano also discloses that “[w]hen the light sources (L) and (L') are
`
`switched on, light emitted from the light sources passes through the terminals 6 and 6'
`
`and advances through the optical fibers 1….” Id. at col. 5:35-38; see id. at col. 6:63-65;
`
`Figure 6a below:
`
`
`
`49. The “face brightening device” of Okano is a “panel assembly” because it
`
`is a generally flat or planar structure with components that are overmolded into a
`
`supportive structure containing a housing and a cover lamp. This structure is
`
`depicted in Figures 6a-c and 11a, reproduced above, as well as Figures 11b-d:
`
`19
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`50. Okano also discloses that the face brightening device may be mounted
`
`on the exterior of a vehicle. For example, Okano discloses that “[t]he present
`
`invention relates to a face-brightening device for use inside and outside the vehicles.”
`
`Id. at col. 2:52-53.
`
`51. The figures in the Okano specification also depict the face brightening
`
`device attached to a vehicle, such as for use as a rear taillight. For example, Figure 10
`
`below shows that the face brightening device can be applied to the quarter window
`
`garnish (h), center pillar garnish (j), or side protector mold (k). Okano also discloses
`
`that the device can be applied to the rear panel garnish, step plate, bumper mold, or
`
`inside of the trunk room or the like. Id. at col. 6:55-63; Fig. 2a.
`
`
`
`20
`
`

`

`52.
`
`In addition, Figure 11a “shows face brightening devices (A), (A1) and
`
`(A2),” which combine to form a rear combination lamp. The rear combination lamp
`
`comprises the face brightening devices, “a reflector plate 12,” “the lamp body 11,”
`
`“couplers 6a and 6a',” and a “transparent colored lens 13.” Id. at col. 6:63-7:15; see
`
`Fig. 11a below; Figs. 11b-d.
`
`
`53. Accordingly, Okano discloses “a light emitting panel assembly mounted
`
`on a body portion of a vehicle,” as required by Claim 1 of the ’563 patent.
`
`(b) Okano discloses “comprising at least one solid light
`emitting panel member having top and bottom
`surfaces and a greater cross sectional width than
`thickness”
`
`54. The face brightening device is a solid light emitting panel. For example,
`
`Okano discloses that the device comprises a plurality of light-emitting optical fibers
`
`fixed side-by-side on a base film made of synthetic resin to form a flat portion. Ex.
`
`1003 at col. 5:25-28, col. 5:61-62; Fig. 6a below at 1, 2; Figs. 6b-6h, 11a-11d.
`
`21
`
`

`

`55. The face brightening device disclosed in Okano has at least a top and
`
`bottom surface. As Figure 6b below illustrates, the “optical fibers 1” are positioned
`
`on top of the “base film 2.” Id. at col. 5:52-57; see id. at col. 5:21-22, col. 6:17-19.
`
`
`
`
`
`56. The face brightening device of Okano also has a cross-sectional width
`
`that is greater than its thickness. With respect to the “optical fiber 1,” Okano
`
`discloses that “a diameter of 0.1-3.0ϕ is usually used,” although its diameter may be
`
`larger according to its expected brightness or arrangement in the device. Id. at col.
`
`5:4-13; see also Fig. 5a below. Moreover, Okano discloses that the thickness of the
`
`“brightening section 3” ranges from 0.l mm (approximately the diameter of a human
`
`hair) to 1.5 mm (approximately the width of a lead pencil). Id. at col. 5:29-31. See also
`
`22
`
`

`

`Figure 6a below:
`
`57. The thickness of the front face of a lamp body is also disclosed in Figure
`
`11a to be 0.5 mm thick. Id. at col. 6:63-7:13; see also Fig. 11a below:
`
`
`
`
`58. The fibers disclosed in Okano are very thin. When Okano is explaining
`
`the relationship of the area of the panel in relation to the thickness of the panel, the
`
`ratio is very high. If turned on its edge, the light-emitting panel would be difficult to
`
`see unaided, which explains why a support structure is preferable for providing
`
`rigidity or form. Figure 6c below, which shows a sectional view of the optical fiber,
`
`illustrates the relative thickness and width. The illustration in Figure 6c is magnified
`
`many times in order to make it visible:
`
`23
`
`

`

`
`
`59. This thickness, which is approximately 0.02 inches, is about the
`
`thickness of a fingernail, which provides an appreciation of the overall thickness of
`
`the optical system described by Okano in relation to the lamp system. It can also be
`
`seen that, with the fiber optic panel being so thin, it is easy to shape and form as
`
`desired, as depicted in Figure 11a above. The low thickness compared to width is
`
`consistent with Okano’s objective of having a device that is “smaller in size, simpler in
`
`construction, lighter in weight, [and] more saving in space” than previous designs,
`
`including the prior art taillight designs of Figures 2a and 2b. See id. at Abstract; col.
`
`2:63-3:6.
`
`60. Accordingly, Okano discloses “said panel assembly comprising at least
`
`one solid light emitting panel member having top and bottom surfaces and a greater
`
`cross sectional width than thickness,” as required by Claim 1 of the ’563 patent.
`
`24
`
`

`

`(c) Okano discloses “having at least one light input
`surface for receiving light from at least one light
`source and directing the light through said panel
`assembly from an edge of said panel assembly for
`emission of the light from one of said top and bottom
`surfaces of said panel member”
`
`61. The face brightening device disclosed in Okano has a light input surface
`
`and directs the light for emission out of the surfaces of the device. For example, the
`
`Abstract discloses a face brightening device “comprising optical fibers and a light
`
`source wherein the light source is attached to one or both ends of the optical fibers to
`
`brighten those notched faces of the optical fibers which form … brightening faces
`
`and the like.” Ex. 1003 at Abstract; see also id. at col. 2:54-62. Okano further discloses
`
`that “[t]he optical fiber 1 has a portion to be brightened and another portion
`
`extending to the light source. The portion of the optical fiber 1 which is to be
`
`brightened is notched at the backside thereof, as shown in FIG. 5c.” Id. at col. 5:18-
`
`21.
`
`62.
`
`Figure 6a, below, illustrates the light input surface (shaded blue), “light
`
`sources (L) and (L ')” (shaded yellow), and “brightening section 3” (shaded light
`
`green). When the light sources are switched