UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC. and
`
`LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC.
`
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`TOSHIBA SAMSUNG STORAGE TECHNOLOGY KOREA CORPORATION
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. RE43,106
`
`DECLARATION OF MASUD MANSURIPUR, PH.D.
`
`LG Electronics, Inc. et al.
`EXHIBIT 1012
`IPR Petition for
`U.S. Patent No. RE43,106
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.  Qualifications, Background, and Experience ................................................ 1 
`II.  Scope of Assignment ..................................................................................... 3 
`III.  Materials Considered ..................................................................................... 4 
`IV.  Summary of Opinions ................................................................................... 6 
`V.  Legal Principles used in Analysis .................................................................. 6 
`1.  Patent Claims in General ............................................................................... 6 
`2.  Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ............................................................... 7 
`3.  Claim Construction ........................................................................................ 8 
`4.  Prior Art ......................................................................................................... 9 
`5.  Patentability ................................................................................................. 10 
`VI.  A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Relevant Art .......................................... 13 
`1.  Relevant Field .............................................................................................. 13 
`2.  Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ............................................................. 13 
`VII.  Background of the Relevant Technology ................................................. 15 
`VIII.  The ’106 Patent ........................................................................................ 21 
`1.  The Claims of the ’106 Patent ..................................................................... 25 
`2.  Problem Addressed by the ’106 Patent ....................................................... 32 
`3.  Solution Set Forth in the ’106 Patent .......................................................... 33 
`IX.  Claim Construction ...................................................................................... 37 
`X.  Obviousness Analysis Regarding the Admitted Prior Art and Katayama ... 40 
`1.  Summary of Opinion ................................................................................... 40 
`2.  Summary of Admitted Prior Art .................................................................. 42 
`3.  Summary of Katayama ................................................................................ 48 
`4.  The combination of Katayama and the Admitted Prior Art ........................ 49 
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`6. Claim 4 ...................................................................................................... ..54
`
`7. Claim 5 ...................................................................................................... ..66
`
`8. Claim 6 ...................................................................................................... ..69
`
`9. Claim 20 .................................................................................................... ..71
`
`10.
`
`Claim 21 .............................................................................................. ..78
`
`11.
`
`Claim 22 .............................................................................................. ..8O
`
`12.
`
`Claim 23 .............................................................................................. ..83
`
`13.
`
`Claim 24 .............................................................................................. ..85
`
`14.
`
`Claim 25 .............................................................................................. ..86
`
`15.
`
`Claim 26 .............................................................................................. ..88
`
`16.
`
`Claim 27 .............................................................................................. ..89
`
`17.
`
`Claim 36 .............................................................................................. ..91
`
`18.
`
`Claim 37 ............................................................................................ ..101
`
`19.
`
`Claim 38 ............................................................................................ ..102
`
`5.  Integration of the Diffractive Element and Objective Lens ........................ 52 
`5. Integration of the Diffractive Element and Objective Lens ...................... ..52
`6.  Claim 4 ........................................................................................................ 54 
`7.  Claim 5 ........................................................................................................ 66 
`8.  Claim 6 ........................................................................................................ 69 
`9.  Claim 20 ...................................................................................................... 71 
`10.  Claim 21 ................................................................................................ 78 
`11.  Claim 22 ................................................................................................ 80 
`12.  Claim 23 ................................................................................................ 83 
`13.  Claim 24 ................................................................................................ 85 
`14.  Claim 25 ................................................................................................ 86 
`15.  Claim 26 ................................................................................................ 88 
`16.  Claim 27 ................................................................................................ 89 
`17.  Claim 36 ................................................................................................ 91 
`18.  Claim 37 .............................................................................................. 101 
`19.  Claim 38 .............................................................................................. 102 
`20.  Claim 39 .............................................................................................. 115 
`21.  Claim 40 .............................................................................................. 118 
`22.  Claim 41 .............................................................................................. 119 
`23.  Claim 42 .............................................................................................. 120 
`24.  Claim 43 .............................................................................................. 131 
`25.  Claim 44 .............................................................................................. 132 
`26.  Claim 45 .............................................................................................. 133 
`27.  Claim 46 .............................................................................................. 134 
`28.  Claim 47 .............................................................................................. 136 
`29.  Claim 48 .............................................................................................. 152 
`30.  Claim 49 .............................................................................................. 153 
`31.  Claim 50 .............................................................................................. 154 
`
`20.
`
`Claim 39 ............................................................................................ ..115
`
`21.
`
`Claim 40 ............................................................................................ ..118
`
`22.
`
`Claim 41 ............................................................................................ ..119
`
`23.
`
`Claim 42 ............................................................................................ .. 120
`
`24.
`
`Claim 43 ............................................................................................ .. 131
`
`25.
`
`Claim 44 ............................................................................................ .. 132
`
`26.
`
`Claim 45 ............................................................................................ ..133
`
`27.
`
`Claim 46 ............................................................................................ .. 134
`
`28.
`
`Claim 47 ............................................................................................ ..136
`
`29.
`
`Claim 48 ............................................................................................ .. 152
`
`30.
`
`Claim 49 ............................................................................................ ..153
`
`31.
`
`Claim 50 ............................................................................................ ..154
`
`iii
`
`iii
`
`

`
`32.
`
`Claim 51 ............................................................................................ ..l66
`
`33.
`
`Claim 52 ............................................................................................ ..l67
`
`34.
`
`Claim 53 ............................................................................................ ..l69
`
`35.
`
`Claim 54 ............................................................................................ ..l70
`
`32.  Claim 51 .............................................................................................. 166 
`33.  Claim 52 .............................................................................................. 167 
`34.  Claim 53 .............................................................................................. 169 
`35.  Claim 54 .............................................................................................. 170 
`36. 
`Secondary Considerations ................................................................... 172 
`36.
`Secondary Considerations ................................................................. .. 172
`37.  Claim Charts........................................................................................ 177 
`XI.  Conclusion .................................................................................................177 
`
`37.
`
`Claim Charts ...................................................................................... .. 177
`
`XI. Conclusion ............................................................................................... ..l77
`
`
`
`iv
`
`iv
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`1. My name is Masud Mansuripur. I am a Professor of Optical Sciences
`
`and Chair of Optical Data Storage in the College of Optical Sciences at the
`
`University of Arizona. I understand that my declaration is being submitted in
`
`connection with a Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. RE43,106
`
`(the “’106 patent”) (Ex. 1001).
`
`I.
`
`Qualifications, Background, and Experience
`2.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering
`
`from Arya Mehr University (Iran) in 1977, a Master of Science degree in Electrical
`
`Engineering from Stanford University in 1978, a Master of Science degree in
`
`Mathematics from Stanford University in 1980, and a Ph.D. in Electrical
`
`Engineering from Stanford University in 1981.
`
`3.
`
`I have authored four scientific and technical books and authored or
`
`co-authored over 250 scientific and technical journal articles; I am listed as an
`
`inventor on eight U.S. patents, of which six are directed to optical data storage, and
`
`I have over 30 years of experience with the optical data storage industry.
`
`4. While a graduate student at Stanford University from 1978 to 1981, I
`
`worked as a consultant for Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) and also
`
`worked at Xerox Research Centre of Canada as a member of research staff. At
`
`Xerox, I was involved with developing a rewritable optical disc for massive
`
`storage of digital information. After receiving my Ph.D. degree from Stanford, I
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`
`
`joined the College of Engineering at Boston University, where I established a
`
`research program in Optical Data Storage. In 1988, the College of Optical
`
`Sciences at the University of Arizona invited me to join their newly-established
`
`Optical Data Storage Center, which was funded by IBM, Kodak, Philips-Dupont,
`
`Siemens, and the State of Arizona. Since 1988, I have worked as a Professor of
`
`Optical Sciences at the University of Arizona, devoting my time to teaching and
`
`research in optics, optical data storage, optical communication, and several other
`
`areas of modern science and technology.
`
`5.
`
`I have been a technical advisory board member of Quinta Co., San
`
`Jose, California (1995-2000), DataPlay Co., Boulder, Colorado (1998-2002),
`
`Toptica Photonics, Munich, Germany (1999-present), NanoChip Co., San Jose,
`
`California (2003-07), and Polarizonics Co., Los Angeles, California (2005-06). I
`
`am also a member of the International advisory committee of the Instrument
`
`Technology Research Center (National Applied Research Laboratory), Taiwan
`
`(2008-present). These companies and organizations engage (or were engaged) in
`
`developing advanced optical data storage media and drives.
`
`6.
`
`I am the Founder and President of MM Research, Inc.
`
`(www.mmresearch.com), Tucson, Arizona (founded in 1995), which develops and
`
`markets simulation software for the optical data storage industry. I was the Chief
`
`Optical Scientist at Capella Corp. from 2001-02, while on a 50% leave of absence
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`
`
`from the University of Arizona. I have been a consultant to numerous optics
`
`industry leaders during my professional career, including IBM, Kodak, Imation,
`
`Seagate, Samsung, LG Electronics, Hewlett-Packard, DataPlay, Quinta, TeraStore,
`
`NanoChip, Read/Rite, MaxOptix, Komag, DiscoVision, Ricoh, Calimetrics,
`
`General Electric, Energy Conversion Devices, Digital Equipment Corp., Data
`
`General, and Korea Institute of Science and Technology.
`
`7.
`
`During the past 35 years, in addition to conducting extensive
`
`theoretical studies and computer simulations, I have designed and built test
`
`equipment for the optical data storage industry. Some of these instruments have
`
`been commercialized by Toptica Photonics (Munich, Germany).
`
`8.
`
`A more complete recitation of my professional experience including a
`
`list of my journal publications, patents, conference proceedings, book authorship,
`
`and committee memberships may be found in my Curriculum Vitae, attached to
`
`my declaration as Appendix A.
`
`II.
`
`Scope of Assignment
`9.
`
`I have been retained in this matter by Rothwell, Figg, Ernst &
`
`Manbeck, P.C. (“Rothwell Figg”) as a technical expert in the field of optical data
`
`storage and retrieval technology, including optical pickup systems for optical disks
`
`such as compact disks (CDs) and digital video (or versatile) disks (DVDs). I am
`
`being compensated for my work in this matter at my usual and customary rate. I
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`
`
`have no personal or financial stake or interest in the outcome of the Petition for
`
`Inter Partes Review or any related action. My compensation in no way depends
`
`upon my testimony or the outcome of the Petition for Inter Partes Review.
`
`10.
`
`I have been advised that Rothwell Figg represents LG Electronics,
`
`Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (collectively “LG” or “Petitioners”) in this
`
`matter and that Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corporation (“TSST”
`
`or “Patent Owner”) owns the ’106 patent. I have no personal or financial stake or
`
`interest in LG, TSST, or the ’106 patent.
`
`11.
`
`I have also been engaged by Rothwell Figg to assist with the pending
`
`litigation between LG and TSST.
`
`III. Materials Considered
`12.
`In forming the opinions expressed below, I considered the ’106 patent
`
`and its file history. I have also considered the following documents:
`
`(1)
`
` U.S. Patent No. 5,696,750 to Katayama (filed Jun. 5, 1996) (issued Dec.
`
`9, 1997) (“Katayama”) (Ex. 1002);
`
`(2)
`
` “Optical Pick-Up for DVD,” by Shinoda et al., IEEE Transactions on
`
`Consumer Electronics, Vol. 42, No. 3 (August 1996) (“Shinoda”) (Ex.
`
`4
`
`1003);
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(3)
`
`“Impact of Diffractive Optics on the Design of Optical Pick Up,” by
`
`Lehureau, Proc. SPIE Vol. 2783, Micro-Optical Technologies for
`
`Measurement, Sensors, and Microsystems, 22-29 (August 26, 1996)
`
`(“Lehureau”) (Ex. 1004);
`
`(4)
`
`“Dual Focus Optical Head for 0.6mm and 1.2mm Disks,” by Komma et
`
`al., SPIE Vol. 2338, Optical Data Storage, 282-288 (1994) (“Komma
`
`Article”) (Ex. 1005);
`
`(5) U.S. Patent No. 5,446,565 to Komma et al. (filed Feb. 1, 1994) (issued
`
`Aug. 29, 1995) (“Komma Patent”) (Ex. 1006);
`
`(6) U.S. Patent No. 5,526,338 to Hasman et al. (filed Mar. 10, 1995) (issued
`
`Jun. 11, 1996) (“Hasman”) (Ex. 1007);
`
`(7)
`
`“Effect of Aberrations and Apodization on the Performance of Coherent
`
`Optical Systems,” by J.P. Mills and B. J. Thompson, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A
`
`Vol. 3, No. 5, 694-703 (May 1986) (“Mills Article”) (Ex. 1008);
`
`(8) Fundamentals of Optics, by F. Jenkins & H. White, Fourth Edition
`
`(1976) (“Jenkins & White”) (Ex. 1009);
`
`(9) Handbook of Optics – Devices, Measurements, & Properties, by Michael
`
`Bass, Second Edition, Vol. II (1995) (“Bass”) (Ex. 1010);
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`
`
`(10) U.S. Patent No. 5,349,471 to Morris et al. (filed Feb. 16, 1993) (issued
`
`Sep. 20, 1994) (“Morris”) (Ex. 1011); and
`
`(11) U.S. Patent No. 6,552,990 to Kajiyama et al. (PCT filed Sept. 29, 1997)
`
`(Issued Apr. 22, 2003) (“Kajiyama”) (Ex. 1020).
`
`I have also relied upon my education, background, and experience.
`
`IV. Summary of Opinions
`13. Based on my investigation and analysis and for the reasons set forth
`
`below, it is my opinion that all of the limitations of claims 4-6, 20-27, 36, and 38-
`
`54 of the ’106 patent were known, and claims 4-6, 20-27, 36, and 38-54 would
`
`have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the prior art set
`
`forth in the Background of the ’106 patent and Katayama.
`
`V. Legal Principles used in Analysis
`14.
`I am not a patent attorney nor have I independently researched the law
`
`on patentability. Rather, LG’s attorneys have explained legal principles to me that
`
`I have relied on in forming my opinions set forth in this declaration.
`
`1. Patent Claims in General
`15.
`I understand that patent claims are the numbered sentences at the end
`
`of each patent. I understand that the claims are important because the words of the
`
`claims define what a patent covers. I understand that the figures and text in the rest
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`
`
`of the patent provide a description and/or examples and help explain the scope of
`
`the claims, but that the claims define the breadth of the patent’s coverage.
`
`16.
`
`I understand that an “independent claim” expressly sets forth all of the
`
`elements that must be met in order for something to be covered by that claim. I
`
`understand that a “dependent claim” does not itself recite all of the elements of the
`
`claim but refers to another claim for some of its elements; in this way, the claim
`
`“depends” on another claim and incorporates all of the elements of the claim(s)
`
`from which it depends. I also understand that dependent claims add additional
`
`elements. I understand that, to determine all the elements of a dependent claim, it
`
`is necessary to look at the recitations of the dependent claim and any other claim(s)
`
`on which it depends.
`
`2. Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`17.
`I understand that the person of ordinary skill in the art is a
`
`hypothetical person who is presumed to have known the relevant art at the time of
`
`the invention. Factors that may be considered in determining the level of ordinary
`
`skill in the art may include: (A) the type of problems encountered in the art; (B)
`
`prior art solutions to those problems; (C) rapidity with which innovations are
`
`made; (D) sophistication of the technology; and (E) educational level of active
`
`workers in the field. In a given case, every factor may not be present, and one or
`
`more factors may predominate.
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`
`
`18.
`
`I understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person
`
`of ordinary creativity, not an automaton. I further understand that the hypothetical
`
`person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed subject matter pertains
`
`would, of necessity, have the capability of understanding the scientific and
`
`engineering principles applicable to the pertinent art.
`
`3. Claim Construction
`19.
`I understand that, in an inter partes review, claim terms are given their
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, and that, under
`
`the broadest reasonable interpretation standard, the words of a claim are generally
`
`given their ordinary and customary meaning as would be understood by a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art in question at the time of the invention in the context of the
`
`entire disclosure.
`
`20.
`
`I also understand that, in determining the meaning of a disputed claim
`
`limitation, the intrinsic evidence of record is considered by examining the claim
`
`language itself, the written description, and the prosecution history. I further
`
`understand that a patentee may act as its own lexicographer and depart from the
`
`ordinary and customary meaning by defining a term with reasonable clarity,
`
`deliberateness and precision, but that there is a presumption that a claim term
`
`carries its ordinary and customary meaning.
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`
`
`4. Prior Art
`21.
`I understand that the law provides categories of information (known
`
`as “prior art”) that may be used to anticipate or render obvious patent claims. I
`
`understand that, to be prior art with respect to a particular patent, a reference must
`
`have been made, known, used, published, or patented, or be the subject of a patent
`
`application by another, before the priority date of the patent.
`
`22. Further, I understand that statements by a patent applicant or patentee,
`
`including statements in the patent that something is in the “prior art,” can
`
`constitute prior art that can be used to anticipate or render obvious patent claims.
`
`That is, prior art can be created by admissions of the patent applicant or patentee.
`
`23.
`
`I also understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is presumed
`
`to have knowledge of all prior art.
`
`24. For purposes of this opinion, I have been asked to presume that the
`
`systems and components described as “conventional” and “prior art” in the
`
`Background and figures of the ’106 patent, Katayama, and the other references
`
`identified in Section III (Materials Considered) items 1-10 are prior art from a
`
`technical perspective – that is, all were available to a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art on or before the priority date of the patent.
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`5. Patentability
`25.
`I understand that a determination of whether the claims of a patent are
`
`rendered obvious by prior art is a two-step analysis: (1) determining the meaning
`
`and scope of the claims, and (2) comparing the properly construed claims to the
`
`prior art. I have endeavored to undertake this process herein.
`
`26.
`
`I understand that, even if every element of a claim is not found
`
`explicitly or implicitly in a single prior art reference, the claim may still be
`
`unpatentable if the differences between the claimed elements 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 of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`27.
`
`I understand that a patent claim would have been obvious when it is
`
`only a combination of old and known elements, with no change in their respective
`
`functions, and that these familiar elements are combined according to known
`
`methods to obtain predictable results. I understand that the following four factors
`
`are considered when determining whether a patent claim would have been obvious:
`
`(1) the scope and content of the prior art; (2) the differences between the prior art
`
`and the claim; (3) the level of ordinary skill in the art; and (4) additional
`
`considerations of objective evidence, sometimes referred to as “secondary
`
`considerations,” tending to prove obviousness or non-obviousness. The additional
`
`considerations include: unexpected, surprising, or unusual results; nonanalogous
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`
`
`
`art; teachings away from the invention; substantially superior results; synergistic
`
`results; long-standing need; commercial success; copying by others; and nearly-
`
`simultaneous invention by others. I understand that there must be a connection
`
`between these additional factors and the scope of the claim language.
`
`28.
`
`In determining obviousness based on a combination of prior art
`
`references, I also understand that evidence of some reason to combine the
`
`teachings is required to make the combination, and thus such evidence must be
`
`considered, along with any evidence that one or more of the references would have
`
`taught away from the claimed invention at the time of the invention.
`
`29.
`
`I understand that some examples of rationales that may support a
`
`conclusion of obviousness include:
`
`(A) combining prior art elements according to known methods to
`
`yield predictable results;
`
`(B) simply substituting one known element for another to obtain
`
`predictable results;
`
`(C) using known techniques to improve similar devices (methods, or
`
`products) in the same way;
`
`(D) applying a known technique to a known device (method, or
`
`product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`
`
`
`(E) choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions,
`
`with a reasonable expectation of success—in other words, whether
`
`something is “obvious to try;”
`
`(F) using work in one field of endeavor to prompt variations of that
`
`work for use in either the same field or a different one based on design
`
`incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art; and
`
`(G) arriving at a claimed invention as a result of some teaching,
`
`suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of
`
`ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art
`
`reference teachings.
`
`I understand that other rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness may be
`
`relied upon, for instance, that common sense (where substantiated) may be a
`
`reason to combine or modify prior art to achieve the claimed invention.
`
`30.
`
`I understand that a basis to combine teachings need not be stated
`
`expressly in any prior art reference. However, I understand that there must be
`
`some evidence showing an articulated reasoning with rational underpinnings to
`
`support a motivation to combine teachings and to support the legal conclusion of
`
`obviousness.
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`
`
`
`31.
`
`In addition, I understand that in order to establish that an element of a
`
`claim is “inherent” in the disclosure of a prior art reference, it must be clear to one
`
`skilled in the art that the missing element is the inevitable outcome of the process
`
`and/or thing that is explicitly described in the prior art, and that it would be
`
`recognized as necessarily present by a person of ordinary skill in the art. I
`
`understand that to establish inherency, it is not enough that a certain result or
`
`characteristic may occur or be present in the prior art, nor may inherency be
`
`established by probabilities or possibilities.
`
`VI. A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Relevant Art
`32.
`I understand that my assessment and determination of the patentability
`
`of the challenged claims of the ’106 patent must be undertaken from the
`
`perspective of what would have been known or understood by someone of ordinary
`
`skill in the relevant field as of the earliest possible priority date of the ’106 patent –
`
`March 28, 1997.
`
`1. Relevant Field
`33.
`In my opinion, the field relevant to the claims of the ’106 patent is
`
`optical data storage and retrieval, including optical pickup systems and
`
`components.
`
`2. Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`34. Based on my experience in the field, analysis of the ’106 patent, and
`
`review of the relied upon prior art references, it is my opinion that a person of
`13
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`ordinary skill in the relevant field as of March 28, 1997, would have had
`
`familiarity with optical data storage and retrieval devices, including optical pickup
`
`systems and components for use with CDs and DVDs, and at least a Bachelor of
`
`Science degree in electrical engineering and/or physics and 3-5 years of experience
`
`working in the field of optical data storage and retrieval, or a comparable amount
`
`of combined education and equivalent experience with respect to optical pickup
`
`systems and devices. Strength in one of these areas can compensate for a
`
`weakness in another. Unless otherwise specified, when I state that something
`
`would be known to or understood by one skilled in the art or possessing ordinary
`
`skill in the art, I am referring to someone with this level of knowledge and
`
`understanding.
`
`35. With over 35 years of experience working in the optical data storage
`
`and retrieval field, I am well acquainted with the level of ordinary skill that would
`
`have been required to design, develop, and/or implement the subject matter of the
`
`’106 patent. I have direct experience with the relevant subject matter and am
`
`capable of rendering an informed opinion regarding what the level of ordinary skill
`
`in the art was for the relevant field as of March 28, 1997. I am also capable of
`
`rendering an informed opinion regarding what one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`would have understood as of March 28, 1997.
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`
`
`
`VII. Background of the Relevant Technology
`36. Optical recording media, such as CDs and DVDs, are used for the
`
`recording and/or reproduction of information. Generally, information is recorded
`
`onto an optical recording medium by changing a physical property such as the
`
`reflectivity of the optical recording medium using either a stamping process (so-
`
`called read-only media) or by means of a laser light source (in the case of
`
`recordable and/or rewritable media). This information can be subsequently
`
`retrieved by detecting the changes in the aforementioned physical property (e.g.,
`
`optical reflectivity) using a laser light source.
`
`37. The sub-system used to read and record information on an optical
`
`recording medium is often referred to as an optical transducer or “pickup.” An
`
`optical pickup will typically have one or more light sources, an objective lens for
`
`focusing the light onto the optical recording medium, and optical detectors for
`
`reading signals reflected from the surface of the optical recording medium. Optical
`
`pickups may also include beam splitters, wave modification elements (e.g.,
`
`polarizing plates), and actuators as necessary for a particular setup and/or medium.
`
`38. Different optical recording media have different physical dimensions
`
`and specifications, including thickness and information density. For example, the
`
`specifications for CD and DVD are set forth below:
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1003, Table 1 (“Specifications of DVD and CD”). An optical recording
`
`medium having a higher density (e.g., DVD) will typically require a smaller “spot
`
`size” for reading and/or recoding information onto the disk.
`
`39. The “spot size” generally refers to the diameter of the circular patch of
`
`light formed within the focal plane of the objective lens. For a so-called
`
`diffraction-limited (i.e., aberration-free) objective lens, the spot size is directly
`
`proportional to the wavelength of the laser used, and is also inversely proportional
`
`to the numerical aperture of the objective lens. The numerical aperture may be
`
`understood as a measure of the apex angle of the cone of light formed upon
`
`passage of the laser beam through the objective lens. The spot is formed at the
`
`apex of the light cone, which ideally coincides with the focal plane of the lens,
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`
`
`
`which should be the location of the information layer of a CD or DVD during the
`
`normal operation of a disc drive.
`
`40. The relationship between spot size, the numerical aperture (NA) of an
`
`objective lens, and wavelength of the light source is given by the following