throbber
Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`ASML NETHERLANDS B.V., EXCELITAS TECHNOLOGIES CORP., AND
`QIOPTIQ PHOTONICS GMBH & CO. KG,
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`ENERGETIQ TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`_____________
`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and
`IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`
`_____________
`
`
`DECLARATION OF PHILIP H. BUCKSBAUM, PH.D.
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 1, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
`I.
`II. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS .............................................................................. 3
`III. QUALIFICATIONS ......................................................................................... 3
`IV. MATERIALS REVIEWED ...........................................................................12
`V. LEGAL STANDARDS .....................................................................................13
`A. Anticipation .................................................................................................14
`B. Obviousness .................................................................................................16
`C.
`Prior Art .......................................................................................................22
`VI. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART .........................................23
`A. Active Workers In The Field And The Inventor .........................................23
`B.
`Problems In The Art, Prior Art Solutions, Rapidity with Which Innovations
`are Made, and Sophistication of the Technology .................................................24
`Petitioners Provide No Factual Support for their Definition and Do Not
`C.
`Rely On Any of the Relevant Factors...................................................................24
`VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ...........................................................................25
`A. Light Source ................................................................................................26
`B. High Brightness Light .................................................................................29
`C.
`Sustained......................................................................................................32
`VIII. BACKGROUND TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW ......................................35
`A. Plasma Light Background ...........................................................................35
`1.
`Plasma Basics ...........................................................................................35
`2.
`Spectral Brightness, Spectral Intensity, Brightness, Intensity, Power of a
`Plasma, Emissivity, and Radiation Temperature ..............................................36
`INVENTION OVERVIEW ............................................................................40
`IX.
`X. SUMMARY OF PETITIONERS’ ARGUMENT ............................................41
`XI. FACTUAL ASSESSMENT OF INSTITUTED GROUNDS ........................42
`A. Overview of Gärtner ....................................................................................43
`B. Gärtner does not anticipate the challenged claims reciting a “high
`brightness light” because it does not enable the claims .......................................44
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 2, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`1. Gärtner does not provide one skilled in the art with sufficient direction or
`guidance to obtain the claimed “high brightness light” without undue
`experimentation .................................................................................................44
`2. Gärtner’s lack of guidance regarding working examples weighs heavily
`against a finding that it enables the claimed “high brightness light” ...............47
`3.
`The state of the prior art (arc lamps) further supports a lack of
`enablement ........................................................................................................48
`C. The Gärtner does not render obvious the claims challenged in the
`consolidated IPR2015-01300 proceeding ............................................................49
`D. The combination of Gärtner and Beterov does not render obvious the
`claims challenged in the IPR2015-01377 proceeding ..........................................49
`E. The combination of Gärtner and Ershov does not render obvious the claims
`challenged in the IPR2015-01279 proceeding .....................................................50
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 3, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`I, Philip H. Bucksbaum, Ph.D., hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1. My name is Philip H. Bucksbaum.
`
`2.
`
`I understand that in response to a Petition submitted by ASML
`
`Netherlands B.V., Excelitas Technologies Corp., and Qioptiq Photonics GmbH &
`
`Co. KG (collectively, “Petitioners”), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”)
`
`instituted an inter partes review in consolidated IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-
`
`01303 (“IPR ’1300”) as to claims 1, 3, 4, 10, 16, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 34, 37,
`
`42, 43, 49, 55, 61, 62, 63, 64, 67, 68, 71, 72, 74, and 78, and IPR2015-01377
`
`(“IPR ’1377”) as to claims 23 and 60, of U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982 (the “’982
`
`Patent”). I understand that the ’982 Patent is titled “Laser-Driven Light Source”
`
`by Donald K. Smith and that the ’982 Patent is currently assigned to Energetiq
`
`Technology, Inc. of Woburn, MA (“Energetiq”).
`
`3.
`
`I also understand that in response to a Petition submitted by ASML
`
`Netherlands B.V., Excelitas Technologies Corp., and Qioptiq Photonics GmbH &
`
`Co. KG (collectively, “Petitioners”), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”)
`
`instituted an inter partes review, IPR2015-01279 (“IPR ’1279”) as to claims 19,
`
`39, 40, and 41 of U.S. Patent No. 7,786,455 (the “’455 Patent”). I understand that
`
`the ’455 Patent is titled “Laser-Driven Light Source” by Donald K. Smith and that
`
`the ’455 Patent is currently assigned to Energetiq Technology, Inc. of Woburn,
`1
`
`
`
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 4, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`
`MA (“Energetiq”).
`
`4.
`
`I have been retained on behalf of Energetiq as an independent expert
`
`in this inter partes review proceeding to provide expert opinions on the technology
`
`at issue. Specifically, I have been asked to provide my expert opinion relating to
`
`the patentability of claims 1, 3, 4, 10, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 34, 37, 42,
`
`43, 49, 55, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 67, 68, 71, 72, and 78 of the ’982 Patent and the
`
`patentability of claims 19, 39, 40, and 41 of the ’455 Patent relative to the
`
`instituted grounds. Unless specifically stated, my opinions herein apply to the
`
`claimed technology in both the ’982 Patent and the ’455 Patent.
`
`5.
`
`I understand that Petitioners have submitted expert Declarations by
`
`Dr. J. Gary Eden (“Declaration”) in support of their Petitions to assert that the
`
`claims at issue are invalid.
`
`6.
`
`I confirm to the best of my knowledge the exhibits cited in this
`
`declaration are true and accurate copies of what they purport to be, and that an
`
`artisan in the field would reasonably rely on them to formulate opinions such as
`
`those set forth in this declaration.
`
`7.
`
`For my time consulting on this matter, I am being compensated at my
`
`customary consulting rate. I am also being reimbursed for reasonable expenses
`
`incurred for my work on this matter. My compensation does not depend on the
`
`conclusions I reach in this declaration nor does it depend on the outcome of this
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 5, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`
`proceeding.
`
`
`
`II.
`
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS
`
`8.
`
`Regarding validity of the patents-at-issue, it is my opinion that the
`
`challenged claims reciting “high brightness light” are valid and that alleged prior
`
`art reference Gärtner neither enables nor anticipates the “high brightness light”
`
`limitation of the challenged claims of the ’982 Patent or the ’455 Patent.
`
`9. Moreover, because Petitioners rely on Gärtner, as opposed to Beterov
`
`(IPR2015-01377 proceeding) or Ershov (IPR2015-01279 proceeding) for
`
`disclosing a “high brightness light,” it is my opinion that Gärtner does not render
`
`obvious any of the challenged claims reciting that limitation in the ’982 or ’455
`
`Patents.
`
`
`
`III. QUALIFICATIONS
`
`10. My
`
`educational background, professional
`
`experience,
`
`and
`
`qualifications as an expert in the fields of physics of laser interactions with atoms,
`
`molecules, light sources, and plasmas are detailed in my latest curriculum vitae
`
`(“CV”) and list of publications, a true and correct copy is attached as Exhibit
`
`2074.
`
`
`
`
`11. For over 35 years I have worked professionally as a researcher and
`
`3
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 6, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`educator in the fields of atomic and molecular physics, ultrafast laser-matter
`
`interactions, and vacuum ultraviolet and x-ray science.
`
`12.
`
`I am the Marguerite Blake Wilbur Professor in Natural Science at
`
`Stanford University, with appointments in the departments of Physics, Applied
`
`Physics, and Photon Science. I am also the Director of the Stanford Photon
`
`Ultrafast Laser Science and Engineering (PULSE) Institute at Stanford University
`
`and the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. I have been a Professor on the
`
`faculty of Stanford since 2006. My current Stanford faculty duties include
`
`chairing the Graduate Admissions Committee in Applied Physics, which selects
`
`which students from around the world are admitted to Masters and Ph.D. degree
`
`programs at Stanford.
`
`13.
`
`I hold several advisory roles in addition to my normal research,
`
`teaching, and management positions at Stanford. Among these, I currently chair a
`
`National Academy of Sciences study commissioned by the United States
`
`Department of Energy, the Army, and the Navy, to advise the government on high
`
`intensity lasers. I am also a member of the National Science Foundation Advisory
`
`Committee for their Mathematics and Physical Sciences Directorate. I am also a
`
`member of the National Photonics Initiative Steering Committee, which advises
`
`the United States Congress and the executive branch on emerging opportunities in
`
`optics and photonics technologies.
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 7, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`I have been working in the Physics field for over 35 years. During
`
`14.
`
`my career, I have held the following positions: Peter Frankin University Professor
`
`of Physics, University of Michigan, 2005-2006; Otto Laporte Collegiate Professor
`
`of Physics, University of Michigan, 1998-2006; Professor of Physics, University
`
`of Michigan, 1990-1998; Adjunct Associate Professor of Applied Physics,
`
`Columbia University, 1989-1990; Member of Technical Staff, Bell Laboratories,
`
`Murray Hill, NJ, 1982-1990; Post-doctoral Member of Technical Staff, Bell
`
`Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ, 1981-1982; Post-doctoral Fellow, Lawrence Berkeley
`
`National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, 1980-1981.
`
`15.
`
`I hold the following academic degrees: A.B. magna cum laude in
`
`Physics from Harvard College, Cambridge, MA, 1975; M.A. in Physics from the
`
`University of California at Berkeley, 1978; and Ph.D. in Physics from the
`
`University of California at Berkeley, 1980.
`
`16. As a result of my career, I have been fortunate to be the recipient of
`
`many accolades from both my peers and my employers. I have received the
`
`following professional honors and awards for my research and teaching activities:
`
`Fellow of the National Academy of Sciences, since 2004; Fellow of the American
`
`Academy of Arts and Sciences, since 2012; Fellow of the American Physical
`
`Society, since 1990; Fellow of the Optical Society of America, since 1995, and
`
`President of the Optical Society in 2014; John Simon Guggenheim Memorial
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 8, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`Foundation Fellow, 1996-1997; Miller Visiting Research Fellow, University of
`
`California at Berkeley, 1996; University of Michigan Sokol Award for
`
`Contributions to Graduate Education and Research, 2001; Distinguished Traveling
`
`Lecturer, Division of Laser Science, American Physical Society, 1996-1999;
`
`American Physical Society Centennial Speaker, 1998-1999; Distinguished Faculty
`
`Research Award, University of Michigan, 1996; Rosenberg Lecturer in Physics,
`
`Yale University, 1995; NATO Post-doctoral Fellowship, 1981; National Science
`
`Foundation Graduate Fellowship, 1975-1978; Elected to Phi Beta Kappa, 1975.
`
`17.
`
`I have conducted or otherwise managed research in a wide variety of
`
`technical areas throughout my career. Some of my most relevant research has
`
`been on the physics of ultrafast laser-matter interactions and use of infrared laser
`
`energy to generate vacuum ultraviolet light sources known as high harmonics
`
`(HHG), and I have worked in a number of areas related to laser-driven ionization,
`
`laser-induced ponderomotive forces and other laser and plasma light sources
`
`during my career. My graduate work started in 1975 at the University of California
`
`at Berkeley, in a laser spectroscopy laboratory. My graduate research required
`
`designing, building, and using flashlamp-pumped tunable lasers, so I have had a
`
`familiarity with plasma light technology since the beginning of my career. I built
`
`several different kinds of lasers in pursuit of my doctoral research, including
`
`internally and externally frequency doubled pulsed and continuous (cw) lasers and
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 9, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`infrared optical parametric oscillators. My doctoral dissertation in 1980 concerned
`
`the measurement of the strength of the neutral weak interaction in laser-induced
`
`atomic transitions.
`
`18. My postdoctoral research area at Lawrence Berkeley National
`
`Laboratory involved experimental tests of electroweak interactions in atoms, and I
`
`co-authored a textbook on this emerging area of physics in 1981. Thereafter I took
`
`a position at Bell Laboratories, where I broadened my technical pursuits in my
`
`research and participated in building one of the first high-powered ultrafast
`
`ultraviolet laser amplifier systems involving amplification in excimers in a plasma
`
`discharge. I used this new light source to study nonlinear vacuum ultraviolet
`
`(VUV) light source generation in atomic gases. My group, for a time, held the
`
`record for the shortest wavelength coherent radiation ever produced. I then used
`
`this source to develop two new fields of physics research. The first was ultrafast
`
`laser-melting of semiconductors, where I measured the thermodynamic properties
`
`of the liquid-to-amorphous silicon transition. The second area was ultrafast time
`
`resolved vacuum ultraviolet photoemission spectroscopy, where my colleagues
`
`and I measured the electronic band structure of transiently excited semiconductors.
`
`19. By 1985, I had become a permanent member of the research staff at
`
`Bell Labs. I began investigations in a new area of high field laser-atom physics. I
`
`helped to establish the field of high field laser-atom physics and discovered a
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 10, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`number of new phenomena and published several written materials on the
`
`discovery. My most important discoveries in this field concerned the role of
`
`ponderomotive forces in strong laser-atom phenomena such as ionization. I also
`
`became interested in the production of terahertz radiation, and was among the first
`
`to recognize the unique properties of ultra-broadband “half-cycle” pulses of
`
`radiation that could be produced in the terahertz spectral region.
`
`20. After my time at Bell Labs, I went to the University of Michigan in
`
`1990 as a Full Professor in Physics, and continued my study of intense laser-
`
`ionized gases. For example, my students and I explored new properties of
`
`coherent vacuum ultraviolet radiation generated by focusing intense lasers into a
`
`dense (0.1-1 atmosphere) gas. I also began two new areas of research: coherent
`
`electron wave packets in atoms, and ultrafast quantum coherent control. These
`
`fields have flourished. In 2001, I became the director of a new National Science
`
`Foundation center at Michigan (FOCUS) devoted to research in ultrafast coherent
`
`control and related science. Quantum control is now considered one of the grand
`
`challenge problems in atomic physics and physical chemistry. I have recently
`
`extended ultrafast techniques to still shorter wavelengths in order to investigate
`
`ultrafast quantum processes more deeply.
`
`21.
`
`In 2006, I moved to Stanford University to establish and direct the
`
`Stanford PULSE Institute, a research center that utilizes intense laser light sources,
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 11, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`including the world’s first x-ray free-electron laser, the Linac Coherent Light
`
`Source (LCLS), located at Stanford’s SLAC National Accelerator laboratory.
`
`22.
`
`I have specific extensive experience in a number of areas that I
`
`believe to be relevant to the technology involved in this proceeding and to the
`
`issues that I have been asked to consider and comment upon as an expert in the
`
`field. These specific experience areas include the following:
`
`(i) My present research activity is primarily focused on a research
`
`center at Stanford University devoted to research using ultrafast laser-matter
`
`interactions.
`
`(ii)
`
`I have extensive experience with many types of different lasers,
`
`including those discussed by the Petitioners and Petitioners’ expert, Dr. Eden. I
`
`have designed, built, and/or used a number of laser-based or plasma-based light
`
`sources and systems, including: flashlamp-pumped dye lasers; continuous-wave
`
`(cw) tunable dye lasers; arc-lamp pumped cw Nd:YLF lasers; actively mode-
`
`locked and Q-switched flashlamp-pumped Nd:YAG and Nd:YLF lasers and
`
`amplifiers; mode-locked cw lasers; synchronously mode-locked and cavity-
`
`dumped dye lasers and dye amplifiers; KrF excimer lasers and KrF excimer
`
`amplifiers; metal vapor electronic Raman lasers; laser systems for generating
`
`broadband terahertz half-cycle pulses; cw Ti:Sapphire oscillators; Kerr-lens mode-
`
`locked Ti:Sapphire oscillators; Ti:Sapphire chirped-pulse amplifiers; dispersion-
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 12, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`compensated fiber transport systems for ultrafast pulses; optical parametric
`
`amplifiers; non-collinear optical parametric amplifiers; and high harmonics
`
`generators. I have been familiar with the science and technology of laser-plasma
`
`interactions for over 35 years. From 1975 to 1980, I designed, built, and used a
`
`succession of plasma flashlamp pumped tunable dye lasers, including work on the
`
`flashlamp plasma light sources and their coupling to the dye gain medium. In the
`
`1980’s, I worked at Bell Laboratories to design and build an extreme ultraviolet
`
`(XUV or EUV) light source based on amplification of laser radiation in an excimer
`
`plasma discharge, and then nonlinear excitation of a rare gas with the amplified
`
`ultraviolet light to make vacuum ultraviolet radiation. My colleagues and I later
`
`used this VUV lightsource to illuminate semiconductor wafers of silicon, gallium
`
`arsenide, and other semiconductors of potential interest to the micro-electronics
`
`community, to probe their properties. I pioneered, later in the 1980’s, the study of
`
`laser-matter ponderomotive forces in the strong-field low density regime. This
`
`involved direct measurements on the electrons in the plasma formed by the focused
`
`laser, and later I also studied light emission from these plasmas in the vacuum
`
`ultraviolet. Recently I have further broadened my technical research to investigate
`
`different ways to produce VUV lightsources of unprecedented brightness and short
`
`pulse duration using nonlinear interactions in a dense gas irradiated by intense
`
`laser pulses.
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 13, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
` I am the Director of the Stanford PULSE Institute at Stanford
`
`(iii)
`
`University. The PULSE Institute is a jointly managed faculty research center at
`
`Stanford University and SLAC, devoted to expanding the science applications and
`
`opportunities of ultrafast short wavelength and high intensity light sources.
`
`PULSE research areas include atomic physics, physical chemistry, materials
`
`science, bioscience, and plasma physics.
`
`(iv)
`
`I was the founding Editor of the Virtual Journal of Ultrafast
`
`Science for the American Institute of Physics.
`
`(v)
`
`I have authored or co-authored: more than 400 scientific
`
`articles, including approximately 200 in peer-reviewed journals; four books; and
`
`six book chapters or sections. I have given over 370 lectures as a speaker at
`
`scientific conferences and meetings, and as an invited lecturer. A complete list of
`
`publications I have authored and invited lectures I have given is included in my
`
`curriculum vitae. (See Curriculum Vitae of Philip H. Bucksbaum (Ex. 2074).)
`
`(vi)
`
`I have taught courses in Physics and Applied Physics over the
`
`past twenty-five years, including courses in atomic physics, quantum control,
`
`lasers, x-rays, nonlinear optics, and quantum optics. I have supervised the doctoral
`
`research of 34 graduate students who performed original research in these areas of
`
`physics, at Columbia University, the University of Michigan, and Stanford
`
`University.
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 14, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`23. With a broad background in lasers and plasma physics and light
`
`sources, I believe that I am expert in this field and I am qualified to provide an
`
`accurate assessment of the technical issues in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`IV. MATERIALS REVIEWED
`
`24.
`
`In preparation of this declaration and in reaching my opinions
`
`presented in this report, I reviewed and considered the items identified in
`
`Appendix A attached to this report. My research for this report included
`
`reviewing the ’982 Patent and its file history, Petitions in the IPR2015-01300,
`
`’1303, and ’1377 proceedings submitted by Petitioners challenging claims in the
`
`’982 Patent, the Declarations submitted by Dr. Eden in support of the Petitions
`
`challenging claims in the ’982 Patent, the consolidated Institution Decision for
`
`IPR2015-01300, -1303 and Institution Decision for IPR2015-01377 for the ’982
`
`Patent issued by the Board, the alleged prior art references cited therein, and third
`
`party publications. I have reviewed the ’455 Patent and its file history, the Petition
`
`submitted by Petitioners challenging claims in the ’455 Patent, the Declaration
`
`submitted by Dr. Eden in support of the Petition challenging claims in the ’455
`
`Patent, the Institution Decision for the ’455 Patent issued by the Board, and the
`
`alleged prior art references cited therein. I also attended the deposition of Dr.
`
`Eden held on the 27th and 28th of January 2016. I may make reference to this
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 15, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`deposition by citing to excerpts of a transcript of the deposition. I am also aware
`
`of the facts set out in the declaration of Dr. Don Smith, which I understand is
`
`being submitted at the same time as my declaration, (“Smith Declaration”) (Ex.
`
`2016) and the Exhibits cited and relied on therein. My opinions herein are also
`
`based on my education, training, research, knowledge, and my professional
`
`experience and expertise.
`
`25. While I have reviewed, analyzed and discussed herein, the documents
`
`identified in the Petitions, Declarations, and/or otherwise produced by Petitioners,
`
`this analysis should not be construed as an admission that any of these documents
`
`are applicable as prior art against any of the Energetiq patents discussed in this
`
`report. Whenever I opine below that a reference does not disclose a claim
`
`element, my opinion is that the reference fails to disclose the claim element both
`
`expressly and inherently.
`
`
`
`V.
`
`LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`26.
`
`I am not an attorney. Energetiq’s counsel has informed me about the
`
`legal standards of patent validity. I understand that in this proceeding before the
`
`Board, Petitioners, as the patent challenger, bear the burden of proving the
`
`elements of patent invalidity by a preponderance of the evidence. I further
`
`understand that the scope of issues that are to be considered in this inter partes
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 16, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`review are limited to the grounds disclosed in the Petition on which the Board has
`
`instituted review.
`
`A. Anticipation
`
`27. Energetiq’s counsel has informed me that a claim is invalid if it is
`
`anticipated. I understand that invalidity by anticipation requires that every
`
`element of the claimed invention, either expressly or inherently, be described in a
`
`single prior art document such that a person of ordinary skill in the art could
`
`practice the invention without undue experimentation. I understand that the way
`
`in which the elements are arranged or combined in the claim must also be
`
`disclosed, either expressly or inherently, in an anticipatory reference. I also
`
`understand that the requirement that the prior art elements themselves be arranged
`
`as in the claim means that claims cannot be treated as mere catalogs of separate
`
`parts, in disregard of the part-to-part relationships set forth in the claims and that
`
`give the claims their meaning.
`
`28.
`
`I understand that if the prior art reference does not expressly set forth
`
`a particular element of the claim, that reference still may anticipate if that element
`
`is “inherent” in its disclosure. I understand that the concept of inherent disclosure
`
`does not alter the requirement that all elements must be disclosed in an
`
`anticipatory reference in the same way as they are arranged or combined in the
`
`claim. Also, I understand that an element is inherent in a disclosure if one of
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 17, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the filing of the patent at issue, would have
`
`found that the disclosure makes clear that the missing descriptive matter is
`
`necessarily present in the thing described in the disclosure. I also understand that
`
`inherency, however, may not be established by probabilities or possibilities. The
`
`mere fact that a certain thing may result from a given set of circumstances is not
`
`sufficient.
`
`29.
`
`I understand that to anticipate a means plus function claim element, a
`
`prior art reference must disclose an identical or equivalent structure that performs
`
`the same function, as the function and corresponding structure of the means plus
`
`function element. I understand that in the context of a means-plus-function claim,
`
`the supposed invalidating prior art must disclose not simply a means for achieving
`
`the desired function, but rather the particular structure recited in the written
`
`description corresponding to that function, or an equivalent thereof. I also
`
`understand that Petitioners must provide a structural analysis by identifying the
`
`corresponding structure or an equivalent structure was present in the prior art. I
`
`understand that a structural analysis is required when means-plus-function
`
`limitations are at issue; a functional analysis alone will not suffice.
`
`30.
`
`I have been informed by Energetiq’s counsel that in addition to
`
`disclosing every element of the challenged claim, a prior art reference must enable
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art to make the anticipating subject matter without
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 18, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`undue experimentation. I understand that undue experimentation is a conclusion
`
`reached by weighing factual considerations, commonly referred to as the Wands
`
`factors, which include the quantity of experimentation necessary, the amount of
`
`direction or guidance presented, the presence or absence of working examples, the
`
`nature of the invention, the state of the prior art, the relative skill of those in the
`
`art, the predictability or unpredictability of the art, and the breadth of the claims,
`
`but that these considerations are illustrative, as opposed to mandatory.
`
`B. Obviousness
`
`31.
`
`I have been informed that a claimed invention is invalid if it is
`
`obvious. I understand that a patent is obvious if the differences between the
`
`claimed subject matter and the prior art are such that the 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.
`
`32. Energetiq’s counsel has informed me that obviousness is a question of
`
`law based on underlying questions of fact. I understand that the underlying factual
`
`inquiries in an obviousness analysis include: (1) determining the scope and content
`
`of the prior art; (2) resolving the level of ordinary skill in the prior art; (3)
`
`ascertaining the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art; and
`
`(4) considering objective evidence of nonobviousness.
`
`33.
`
` With regard to determining the scope and content of the prior art, I
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 19, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`have been informed by Energetiq’s counsel that a reference qualifies as prior art
`
`for an obviousness determination when the prior art reference is analogous to the
`
`claimed invention. I understand that there are two tests that define the scope of
`
`analogous prior art: (1) whether the art is from the same field of endeavor,
`
`regardless of the problem addressed, or (2) if the reference is not within the field
`
`of the inventor's endeavor, whether the reference is reasonably pertinent to the
`
`particular problem with which the inventor is involved.
`
`34.
`
`I have been informed by Energetiq’s counsel that objective evidence
`
`of nonobviousness can be considered in determining whether a patent claim is
`
`obvious. I understand that such evidence may often be the most probative and
`
`cogent evidence in the record, because such evidence may show that an invention
`
`appearing to have been obvious in hindsight, was not obvious at the time. I
`
`understand that such evidence can include:
`
`•
`
`Long-Felt Need: Evidence that a claimed invention solved
`
`longstanding problems or fulfilled a long-felt need in an
`
`industry can be considered as an indication of nonobviousness.
`
`•
`
`Industry Skepticism and Failure of Others: Evidence that
`
`individuals in the industry were skeptical about how the
`
`invention would work, or thought that it might have operational
`
`problems,
`
`can be
`
`considered
`
`as
`
`an
`
`indication of
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`Energetiq Ex. 2010, Page 20, IPR2015-01300, IPR2015-01303
`
`

`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Cases IPR2015-01300 and IPR2015-01303
`U.S. Patent No. 7,435,982
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`Commercial Success: Evidence of commercial success can be
`
`considered as an indication of nonobviousness.
`
`Industry Praise and Unexpected Results: Evidence that industry
`
`members have prai

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket