UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` ____________
`
`FORD MOTOR COMPANY
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`INNOVATIVE DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`____________
`
`Case No. TBD
`U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
` ____________
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF A. BRENT YORK
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 1
`
`
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` ____________
`
`FORD MOTOR COMPANY
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`INNOVATIVE DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`____________
`
`Case No. TBD
`U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
` ____________
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF A. BRENT YORK
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 1
`
`
`
`I, A. Brent York, hereby declare the following:
`
`
`I. BACKGROUND AND EDUCATION
`1.
`I am an expert in the field of LED and optical systems including
`
`automotive lighting systems.
`
`2.
`
`I am the CEO of Tangenesys Consulting Ltd., a firm focused on
`
`executive-level
`
`leadership
`
`related
`
`to
`
`strategic
`
`innovation and business
`
`development, and
`
`intellectual property strategy of LED devices,
`
`lighting
`
`equipment and optical systems. Although I discuss my expert qualifications in
`
`more detail below, I also attach as [Appendix A] a recent and complete curriculum
`
`vitae, which details my educational and professional background.
`
`3. My formal, post-high school education includes a B.A.Sc in
`
`Engineering Physics in 1985 from the University of British Columbia where I
`
`focused on mechanical and electro-optical systems. My graduate education was an
`
`MBA from Simon Fraser University where I focused on International and
`
`Technology Business Strategy. My graduate thesis was the practical development
`
`of, what turned into a successful business plan, for an innovative machine vision
`
`illumination system that found significant application in the industrial machine
`
`vision field with such companies as Kodak, Bethlehem Steel, and Kimberley
`
`Clark.
`
`
`
`2
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 2
`
`
`
`4. My first professional career posting in 1985 was as a Photometrics
`
`Engineer (laboratory light measurement) with a Vancouver, B.C. company called
`
`TIR Systems Ltd., which was an optical and lighting systems company that had
`
`spun out of the graduate programs within the Physics Department of UBC. I held
`
`successively higher levels of engineering and technical responsibility during my 22
`
`year career with TIR Systems – the last 10 years at the senior engineering and
`
`executive levels. I achieved my professional designation as a Professional
`
`Engineer in the province of British Columbia in 1988 and also served as the local
`
`President (BC) of the Illuminating Engineering Society in British Columbia in
`
`90/91. I am a practicing lighting professional and have been a member of the
`
`IESNA for 29 years.
`
`5.
`
`TIR Systems Ltd. was founded by Dr. Lorne Whitehead and Dr. Roy
`
`Nodwell both of UBC to exploit a new type of patented optical technology
`
`invented at the university (see, e.g., original U.S. Patent No. 4,260,220) that could
`
`be used to guide light from remote sources to remote locations where it could be
`
`extracted, or in many cases, be extracted along the length of a light guide, and used
`
`for illumination or indication with very low loss rates. This unique technology
`
`could be exploited to create a variety of lighting systems in a wide range of
`
`unrelated fields, the most popular of which was trademarked “The Light Pipe.” It
`
`found extensive use in architectural lighting and specialty lighting systems in a
`
`
`
`3
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 3
`
`
`
`wide variety of lighting applications ranging from aerospace, military, nautical,
`
`signage, signaling, medical, architectural, entertainment, and automotive.
`
`6. My professional experience in the automotive lighting industry started
`
`in the late 1980’s when TIR Systems Ltd. was approached by Ford Motor
`
`Company, who was at the time trying to reduce the overall depth of the rear tail
`
`light assemblies in cars such as the Mustang. Automobile manufacturers such as
`
`Ford desired optical solutions to reduce the amount of internal volume in the trunk
`
`area that was required for conventional bulb and reflector assemblies. Essentially,
`
`a smaller and thinner light guide type cavity with remote light sources at the side
`
`instead of behind the usual reflector cavity would help to solve problems in
`
`automobile production and reduce the depth of penetration into the trunk while
`
`also creating a unique styling aesthetic. In summary, the engineering challenges
`
`were to apply optical system design to a mechanically constrained system in the
`
`shallower rear panels of an automobile.
`
`7.
`
`Around that time, TIR Systems’ technology was partnered with 3M,
`
`where the technology had been reduced to a thin film product called “Optical
`
`Lighting Film” or “OLF.” This thin optical film could be used to guide light from
`
`remote light sources in thin, hollow, lightweight optical assemblies of virtually any
`
`cross section where the light could be emitted with high uniformity via internal or
`
`external light extraction features.
`
`
`
`4
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 4
`
`
`
`8.
`
`Still in the late 1980s, development of working proof of concept tail
`
`light assemblies was initiated at TIR Systems where I worked in the laboratory
`
`designing and building prototype rectangular hollow waveguides that were
`
`approximately 12 inches long by about 6 inches high. The thickness of the
`
`waveguide was about 1¼ inches. I experimented with a number of internal
`
`reflective surface materials in various locations, including specular reflective sheet,
`
`optical lighting film, diffuse high reflectance white surfaces, and various
`
`combinations thereof, to create a range of different light emission characteristics
`
`and physical appearances for the finished assembly.
`
`9. While all of these designs relied upon a hollow light guide for
`
`propagation of light, I was encouraged to come up with a number of different
`
`finished light output aesthetic appearances for the styling team to evaluate that
`
`would still comply with the required rear tail light intensity requirements as
`
`established by SAE.
`
`10. Solid light guides were well known in the art by this time of the late
`
`1980’s and had enjoyed many years of use in the automotive industry, for example,
`
`in instrument cluster backlighting applications. The mechanisms for light guidance
`
`are still based today on principles of these early solid light guides, namely Total
`
`Internal Reflection. The mechanisms for light extraction are also the same,
`
`
`
`5
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 5
`
`
`
`essentially leveraging frustration of the total internal reflection such that the light
`
`emits from the guide.
`
`11. The SAE requirements for external automotive signal lights in the late
`
`1980s and early 1990s were dictated in terms of the angular range of the light
`
`arrays and the various peak and off peak photometric light intensities, which are
`
`defined in SI units known as candela.
`
`12. SAE and other standards bodies also called for certain standard color
`
`ranges for various signals but this was not evaluated as the means to adjust color
`
`was readily achieved with filters at a number of points in the optical path such as in
`
`front of the lamps or in the plastic forming the exterior plastic material outside the
`
`optical assembly.
`
`13.
`
`In the late 1980s and early 1990s, a number of light extraction
`
`mechanisms, utilized at different locations within the light guide, were used to
`
`“frustrate” the total internal reflection and cause the light to be extracted or emitted
`
`in a direction away from the external face of the waveguide. If one imagines a
`
`surface normal from the intended vertical face of the lamp assembly, the design
`
`goal was to produce a distribution of light rays, which are primarily directed to the
`
`rear of the automobile and towards the eyes of a driver in a following automobile.
`
`The distribution of light rays must also not be too narrow as to not be seen from
`
`oblique angles, nor so wide that light is inefficiently radiated away in directions
`
`
`
`6
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 6
`
`
`
`that are not useful. As can be appreciated, the distribution of light rays from a tail
`
`light assembly must achieve a variety of criteria, which are first driven by safety
`
`standards, and secondarily, by stylistic considerations.
`
`14. Examples of extraction mechanisms include: front face optical
`
`structures; screen printed patterns, rear light guide optical structures; rear light
`
`guide diffuse reflectors, internal scattering components; and internal dielectric
`
`optical elements having polygonal shape and slope angles called “chevrons.”
`
`These light extraction mechanisms could be placed internally, within the light
`
`guide reflector plane, or outside the light guide. Additionally, it was well known to
`
`use them singly or in conjunction with each other.
`
`15. Some rear light guide extraction methods included perpendicular
`
`strips of OLF, which had microprism structures embossed into their surfaces. I
`
`also experimented with metalized OLF material that would also act as a turning
`
`film, which would turn the light traveling down the light guide at an appropriate
`
`escape angle towards the front of the light guide where it would be beyond the
`
`guidance angles and hence pass through the front face and exit from the assembly.
`
`16. Another rear surface light guide extraction method included a high
`
`reflectivity diffuse reflector material, essentially a white sheet material cut in a
`
`tapered pattern and applied to the rear inside surface of the light guide. Light that
`
`was propagating down the waveguide in a guided mode would encounter the white
`
`
`
`7
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 7
`
`
`
`material and be diffusely reflected such that a majority of the light rays would no
`
`longer be guided by the front face light guide material in the light guide. Much of
`
`this light would then pass through and be emitted out of the light guide. By
`
`tapering these and other optical mechanisms for extraction a uniform distribution
`
`of emitted light down the length dimension of the light guide could be created.
`
`17. Another light guide extraction method was the use of a plurality of
`
`angled dielectric sheets of transparent acrylic that were placed within the light
`
`guide. These sheets would be of an increasing height the further they were away
`
`from the input light sources. Each of these would cause a component of the
`
`propagating light to be redirected upwards to the emitting face of the waveguide.
`
`By carefully adjusting the angles it was possible to retain a strong perpendicular
`
`light distribution for the light exiting the light guide. The added benefit of this
`
`process was that it helped to preserve the light ray distribution of the input light
`
`sources and increased the intensity of the emitted light in the direction of the
`
`surface normal to the waveguide. This was advantageous because it created a
`
`controlled emission bundle of light rays and it could be aimed to be slightly above
`
`the horizontal plane which made it advantageous in terms of pushing the peak
`
`intensity to a few degrees above the horizontal and optimizing it for a following
`
`vehicle’s driver without having to tilt the assembly in any way. A styling
`
`advantage was also witnessed as “images” of the input light sources would be
`
`
`
`8
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 8
`
`
`
`reproduced many times down the length dimension of the waveguide, which gave
`
`it the appearance of having many more virtual light sources behind the final rear
`
`lens.
`
`18. The above approaches relied on remote light sources that were
`
`coupled into one lateral edge of the waveguide along one of the short six-inch
`
`edges of the rectangular assembly. The light could be coupled directly into the
`
`edge where the surface normal from the light source face was parallel to the front
`
`emitting face of the lighting assembly. A 45 degree mirror system was also known
`
`that would put the light source surface perpendicular to the front emitting face of
`
`the lighting assembly. This would permit the light sources to be placed in
`
`convenient locations in the trunk recess and aimed backwards as in conventional
`
`tail light assemblies where they could be more conveniently accessed for lamp
`
`changes.
`
`19. All of the above approaches and methods were known in the industry
`
`prior to 1996 and I had significant personal experience in studying and
`
`experimenting with them prior to 1996.
`
`20. My industry experience also includes work on internal dome light
`
`systems for emergency vehicles such as ambulances. In this case it was desired to
`
`use an edge illuminated light guide structure in the ceiling that would be less prone
`
`to shock and vibration damage than previous designs and produce a uniform
`
`
`
`9
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 9
`
`
`
`pattern of light rays that would enable the medical care professionals to properly
`
`assess the condition of victims. This work was carried out in the late 1980’s.
`
`21. Other direct transportation lighting systems projects that I’ve held
`
`responsibility for include the design and implementation of navigational beacons
`
`with the US Coast Guard that required the development of very large vertical light
`
`guides that would produce a very efficient narrow distribution of light down the
`
`shipping channel to mark obstructions such as bridge piers and docks. These were
`
`designed, built and some of these were installed in the Columbia River area of
`
`Oregon/Washington.
`
`22. Another direct transportation project that ran well over a year in the
`
`1990’s in which I was involved was a project initiated by Boeing Aircraft
`
`Company to explore the feasibility of creating a waveguide system with compact
`
`high output arc lamps that could replace the linear fluorescent lighting systems in
`
`the cabin compartment of next generation aircraft.
`
`23. Other systems of note on which I worked include the development of
`
`a unique bi-directional waveguide system with standard metal halide lamps, which,
`
`to the best of my knowledge, remains in use today within the Sumner, Prudential
`
`and Callaghan tunnels in Boston.
`
`24.
`
`In sum, I have over 29 years of engineering and management
`
`experience in the lighting systems industry, including automotive applications both
`
`
`
`10
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 10
`
`
`
`as an employee of TIR Systems and as an industry consultant. During this time, I
`
`have worked extensively within, and with, such companies/organizations such as
`
`TIR Systems, 3M, Kodak, Philips Lighting, Hewlett Packard, McDonald’s
`
`Corporation, US Navy, US Coast Guard, Boeing, and numerous transportation
`
`authorities across the US.
`
`25.
`
`I have been retained by Petitioner, Ford Motor Company, in this
`
`matter and am submitting this declaration to offer my independent expert opinions
`
`concerning certain issues raised in the petition for inter partes review (“Petition”)
`
`in this matter. My compensation is not based on the substance of the opinions
`
`rendered here. As part of my work in connection with this matter, I have studied
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956 (“the ‘956 Patent”) [Exhibit 1001]1, including the
`
`respective written descriptions, figures, and claims, as well as the ‘956 Patent File
`
`History [Exhibit 1002]. Moreover, I have reviewed the accompanying Petition for
`
`Inter Partes Review of the ‘956 Patent and also carefully considered the following
`
`prior art references:
`
`•
`
`Japanese Patent Application H5-25602 to Katase (“Katase”) (translated
`to English), published on April 2, 1993, which I understand is available
`as prior art under 35 U.S.C. §102(b) [Exhibit 1003];
`
`•
`
`Japanese Laid Open Utility Model JPS57-60171 to Tsuboi (“Tsuboi”)
`(translated to English), published on December 22, 1982, which I
`understand is available as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) [Exhibit
`1014]; and
`
`1 Exhibit numbers refer to exhibits to the Petition.
`
`
`
`11
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 11
`
`
`
`
`
`•
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,030,108 to Ishiharada, filed on Aug. 9, 1993 and
`published February 29, 2000, which is available as prior art under 35
`U.S.C. §102(e) [Exhibit 1004].
`
`II. OPINIONS REGARDING LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE
`ART AND BACKGROUND OF THE TECHNOLOGY
`A. Level of Skill of a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art
`26.
`
`I was asked to give my opinion as to the level of skill of a person
`
`having ordinary skill in the art of the ‘956 Patent at the time of the claimed
`
`invention (which, as I have stated below, I have assumed was January 16, 1996).
`
`In determining the characteristics of a hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art of the ‘956 Patent at the time of the claimed invention, I considered several
`
`factors as of the time of the claimed invention, which were provided to me by
`
`counsel, including the type of problems encountered in the art, the solutions to
`
`those problems, the rapidity with which innovations are made in the field, the
`
`sophistication of the technology, and the education level of active workers in the
`
`field, which I have elaborated on in connection with discussing my own
`
`background above and in discussing the background of the technology below. I
`
`also placed myself back in the time frame of the claimed invention, and considered
`
`the persons with whom I had worked at that time. In my opinion, a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would be a person having a bachelor’s degree in
`
`Mechanical Engineering or Physics, or in a related field such as optical systems,
`
`
`
`12
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 12
`
`
`
`with at least two years of experience in the lighting systems field, especially in
`
`outdoor lighting systems and optical design or automotive lighting systems and
`
`optical design. Experience and technical training may substitute for educational
`
`requirements, while advanced degrees may substitute for experience.
`
`27. Based on my education, training, and professional experience in the
`
`field of the claimed invention, I am familiar with the level and abilities of a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention. Additionally, I,
`
`myself, also met at least these minimum qualifications for a person having ordinary
`
`skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention.
`
`B.
`
`Background Of The Technology Regarding Vehicle Illumination
`Systems
`
`28.
`
`I was also asked to provide a brief background as to the technology
`
`related to the ‘956 Patent. The need for automotive lighting in vehicles was
`
`originally dictated by the need to be able to see in front of the vehicle and to be
`
`seen by pedestrians and other users of the roadways in darkened conditions –
`
`especially as the use of street lighting for roadways was severely limited to certain
`
`affluent urban areas at the turn of the century. For example, the first Ford Model
`
`T’s used carbide lamps for headlamps and oil lamps for tail lamps. The use of a
`
`dynamo to create electricity did not become commonplace until about 1920 and
`
`this permitted the use of tungsten filament lamps to be fitted around the vehicle for
`
`forward lighting and signaling.
`
`
`
`13
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 13
`
`
`
`29. Filament based lamps were the dominant light source used in
`
`automotive lighting for several decades until it became economical to supplant it
`
`with compact high intensity discharge (HID) lamps for forward lighting and Light
`
`Emitting Diodes (LEDs) for brake and marker functions. The noted advantages of
`
`these newer sources is that they are generally smaller, more robust, more efficient
`
`and significantly more intense than their predecessors, which leads directly to a
`
`scaled reduction in the optical system size required for the light beam patterns.
`
`Stylistically, this affords huge gains in the automotive industry from a branding
`
`perspective. Examples include the distinctive BMW “beauty rings” and the Audi
`
`“eyebrow.” These lighting systems can be significantly smaller , or very unique,
`
`which allows front hoodlines and rear decklines to change and for other stylistic
`
`cues to be built into the vehicle identity. It has been said in the field of automotive
`
`design that lighting is the only stylistic branding cue you can have for vehicles at
`
`night, which is why it is an important field that receives significant attention in the
`
`studio and engineering offices of such companies.
`
`30. For rear facing stop and signal lamps through the 1990’s, the
`
`dominant optical technology used with most filament based lamps was commonly
`
`derived from the simple parabolic reflector which may have facets molded to break
`
`up the image of the filament into many smaller images which would fill the
`
`rearward appearance. Over this deeply drawn molded reflector would often be a
`
`
`
`14
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 14
`
`
`
`colored plastic injection molded lens assembly that formed the outer surface of the
`
`signal light. These often had very precise patterns of grooves and minute optical
`
`surfaces that would help re-direct the light from the parabolic reflector and spread
`
`it into the necessary directions of up and down, and left and right required to
`
`comply with law. The tools used by engineers in the development of these systems
`
`in the past were often hand drawn ray tracing from the source to the far field.
`
`However, during the last 20 or more years it is commonly performed by optical
`
`design software packages that have become increasingly sophisticated in terms of
`
`their ability to yield desired light output profiles and optimize lighting results.
`
`31. Another known issue with incandescent filament lamps in automotive
`
`lighting assemblies was the potential for high temperatures to build up within the
`
`lighting assembly when the lights were on during the day or periods of high
`
`ambient temperature. An incandescent lamp is known in the industry to typically
`
`produce only about 10 lumens/watt for a standard filament and up to about 20
`
`lumens/watt for a halogen lamp. This low level of performance implies that most
`
`of the energy of the lamp (~80% +) is simply infrared energy that must be
`
`dissipated somewhere in the housing. This amount of heat presents a limitation to
`
`signal light designers that ensured that it was hard to reduce the overall volume of
`
`the existing lighting signals without causing a potential melting of the reflector or
`
`the lens under certain extreme conditions.
`
`
`
`15
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 15
`
`
`
`32. Another challenge that must be considered in the design of automotive
`
`signal lamps is the high levels of ultraviolet light that will strike the exterior signal
`
`light lenses. Engineers working with optical materials for outdoor exposure will
`
`make allowances for this and select specific resins and compounds that will be
`
`capable of lasting the intended life of the automobile. Lighting engineers will
`
`routinely scan materials properties tables for new resins and other materials that
`
`may be better suited for the rigors of their applications. When these are selected
`
`and a design is prototyped they are often subjected to extreme testing protocols that
`
`will expose them to salt spray, UV, vibration, shock, chemical attack, sand
`
`abrasion, and many others before the design is qualified to enter production.
`
`33. LEDs officially celebrated their 50th birthday in 2012 where they were
`
`demonstrated in the laboratories of GE by Nick Holonyak, Jr. The first LEDS
`
`were not very bright and it took great effort to produce them. In the 1960’s,
`
`Monsanto began producing LEDs. In 1970, the Pulsar Watch with a red glowing
`
`LED display was released. Hewlett-Packard also began working on LED
`
`technology and in 1985 the very first LED signal lamp appeared on the 1986
`
`Nissan 300ZX center high mounted stop lamp. This development was noted by
`
`both automotive design teams but also lighting systems developers.
`
`
`
`16
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 16
`
`
`
`34. These first LEDs released by Stanley Electric produced about 3000
`
`millicandela. In the late 1980’s (about 1987), I personally experimented with these
`
`lamps with various optical structures, including light guides.
`
`35. One of the projects that was initiated by a phototherapeutic drug
`
`company (Quadralogics) of Vancouver was to explore ways to more efficiently
`
`irradiate blood cells in a flow chamber with about 630 nm light. The idea was that
`
`the drug attached itself preferentially to leukemic blood cells and when irradiated
`
`with about 630 nm red light the drug broke down and became lethal to the host
`
`cell, which was largely leukemic in nature. I had been previously experimenting
`
`with highly filtered light from halogen sources but the risk of damage to the
`
`healthy cells became a difficult problem without very expensive filtering
`
`mechanisms. A powered array of these Stanley LEDs was built and tested by
`
`Quadralogics.
`
`36. The rapid evolution of LEDs is fairly well known, the best example
`
`being the reduction in the number of LEDs required to perform the Center High
`
`Mounted Stop Lamp (CHMSL) lighting function shrinking from 72 LEDs in 1985
`
`to a mere 12 in 1997. Today that function uses even significantly fewer LEDs.
`
`37. Automotive lighting designers have been carefully supported in their
`
`implementation of LEDs and associated LED technology by hundreds of
`
`
`
`17
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 17
`
`
`
`application engineers from the largest global suppliers of LEDs such as Osram
`
`Optoelectronics, Lumileds, Cree, Nichia and many others.
`
`38.
`
`In March of 1988, Popular Science featured an article on page 115
`
`that is simply titled, “Stop! It’s an LED2”. This short article in a popular and very
`
`accessible technical magazine addresses several of the motivations for using LEDs
`
`in automobile lighting systems.
`
`39. This article states, “Engineers have thought of using LEDs in
`
`automotive lighting for a number of years. Their size allows designers much more
`
`flexibility: A typical LED element is about twice the size of a match head.” [Ex.
`
`1011 at 115].
`
`40. As the article points out, LED efficiency is better than that of
`
`incandescent and they are much less prone to vibration damage than incandescent
`
`bulbs. [Ex. 1011 at 115]. As such, it was well known in the industry prior to 1996
`
`that LEDs were advantageous for automotive lighting applications.
`
`
`
`III.
`
`INVALIDITY UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103
`
`41.
`
`I was asked to consider whether the alleged invention claimed in the
`
`‘956 Patent was known in the art as of January 16, 1996. After studying carefully
`
`the ‘956 Patent, it is my opinion that the purportedly patentable features claimed in
`
`it, including a light emitting assembly for vehicle illumination with a light guide,
`
`2 See Ex. 1011.
`
`
`
`18
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 18
`
`
`
`LEDs, and a substrate that provides an exterior portion of a vehicle arranged as
`
`described in Claims 1, 4-6, 9, and 31 (the “Challenged Claims”) were already well
`
`known in the art. Essentially, the vehicle illumination system described and
`
`claimed in the ‘956 Patent was not new given the state of the art of vehicle
`
`illumination assemblies and the knowledge of one skilled in the art by 1996.
`
`A.
`42.
`
`Statement of Legal Framework
`
`I am a technical expert and do not offer any legal opinions. But from
`
`my discussions with counsel, I have been informed of the legal framework applied
`
`for determining patentability and related matters. I applied this framework in
`
`developing my technical opinions in this matter. I understand that, under 35
`
`U.S.C. §102(b), a U.S. or foreign patent qualifies as prior art to an asserted patent
`
`if the date of issuance of the patent is more than one year before the earliest
`
`effective filing date of the asserted patent.3 I further understand that a printed
`
`publication, such as an article published in a magazine or trade publication,
`
`constitutes prior art to an asserted patent if the publication occurs more than one
`
`year before the earliest effective filing date of the asserted patent.
`
`
`3 Title 35, section 102(b) of the United States Code providers: “A person shall be
`entitled to a patent unless (b) the invention was patented or described in a printed
`publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country,
`more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United
`States.”
`
`
`
`19
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 19
`
`
`
`43.
`
`I understand that, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e), a U.S. patent qualifies as
`
`prior art to the asserted patent if the application for that patent was filed in the
`
`United States before the invention of the asserted patent.4
`
`44.
`
`I understand that documents and materials that qualify as prior art can
`
`be used to invalidate a patent claim as anticipated (35 U.S.C. § 102) or as obvious
`
`(35 U.S.C. § 103). And, specifically, I understand that patents and p rinted
`
`publication prior art is the type of prior art that can be used to invalidate a patent
`
`claim during an inter partes review proceeding, such as this one.
`
`i. Anticipation
`I understand that a patent is only valid when the invention claimed in
`
`45.
`
`the patent is new, useful, and non-obvious in light of the “prior art.” Prior art is
`
`generally the state of technology in the relevant field at the time of the invention
`
`and includes such documentary materials as patents and publications, as well as
`
`evidence of actual uses or sales of a technology within the United States.
`
`Categories of prior art include: (1) anything that was publicly known or used in the
`
`4 Title 35, section 102(e) of the United States Code provides: “A person shall be
`entitled to a patent unless (e) the invention was described in - (1) an application for
`patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before
`the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application
`for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the
`applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty
`defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for the purposes of this subsection
`of an application filed in the United States only if the international application
`designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty
`in the English language.”
`
`
`
`20
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 20
`
`
`
`United States by someone other than the inventor before the inventor made his
`
`invention; (2) anything that was in public use or on sale in the United States more
`
`than one year before the application for the patent was filed by the inventor; (3)
`
`anything that was patented or described in a printed publication anywhere in the
`
`world before the inventor made his invention; (4) anything that was patented or
`
`described in a printed publication anywhere in the world more than one year before
`
`the inventor filed the application for the patent; (5) anything that was invented by
`
`another person in this country before the inventor made his invention so long as the
`
`other person did not abandon, suppress, or conceal his prior invention; and (6)
`
`anything that was described in a patent that issued from a patent application filed
`
`in the United States or certain foreign countries before the inventor made his
`
`invention.
`
`46.
`
`I understand that a person cannot obtain a patent on an invention if
`
`someone else has already made the same invention. If an invention is not new,
`
`then the invention has been “anticipated” by the prior art.
`
`47.
`
`I understand that a claim is invalid as “anticipated” by the prior art if
`
`each and every limitation of the claim is found, either expressly or inherently, in a
`
`single prior art reference. I also understand that the implicit or inherent disclosures
`
`of a prior art reference may anticipate the claimed invention. A limitation of a
`
`patent claim is said to be inherently disclosed by a prior art reference if a person of
`
`
`
`21
`
`PETITIONER EX. 1005 Page 21
`
`
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time reading the reference would understand that the
`
`limitation is necessarily present in the reference. Therefore, a claim is “anticipated”
`
`by the prior art if each and every limitation of the claim is found, either expressly
`
`or inherently, in a single item of prior art.
`
`48.
`
`I also understand that a single prior art reference may incorporate by
`
`reference disclosures from other prior art references and still be considered a single
`
`reference. But to incorporate matter by reference, a host document must contain
`
`language clearly identifyin
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
