throbber
U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Docket No. 1285100-0002
`Filed on behalf of VIZIO, Inc.
`By: David M. Tennant, Reg. No. 48,362
`White & Case LLP
`701 Thirteenth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20005
`Tel: (202) 626-3684
`Email: dtennant@whitecase.com
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`VIZIO, Inc.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Nichia Corporation
`Patent Owner
`
`Case No. Unassigned
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-.9-, 42.100-.123
`
`Claims 1 & 4
`
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES ......................................................................... 2
`
`A.
`
`
`
`B.
`
`
`
`Real Party-in-Interest ........................................................................ 2
`
`Related Matters .................................................................................. 2
`
`C.
`
` Notice of Counsel and Service Information ...................................... 3
`
`III. CERTIFICATION OF GROUNDS FOR STANDING .............................. 3
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGE AND RELIEF REQUESTED ................ 4
`
`A.
`
`
`
`Prior Art and Printed Publications .................................................... 4
`
`B.
`
` Grounds for Challenge ...................................................................... 5
`
`V.
`
`CONVENTIONAL TECHNOLOGY ......................................................... 5
`
`A.
`
`
`
`Color, Chromaticity, and the CIE Chromaticity Curve .................... 5
`
`B.
`
` Development of White Light LEDs ................................................ 11
`
`C.
`
`
`
`Cerium-Activated Yttrium Aluminum Garnet (YAG) Phosphor ... 12
`
`VI. OVERVIEW OF THE ’375 PATENT ...................................................... 13
`
`A.
`
`
`
`Summary of Alleged Invention of the ’375 Patent ......................... 13
`
`B.
`
` Overview of the ’375 Patent Prosecution History .......................... 15
`
`VII. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIMARY PRIOR ART REFERENCES ............ 17
`
`A.
`
` Overview of Baretz ......................................................................... 17
`
`B.
`
` Overview of Pinnow ........................................................................ 20
`
`C.
`
` Overview of Nakamura ................................................................... 21
`
`D.
`
` Overview of Schuil .......................................................................... 23
`
`ii
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`VIII. PERSON HAVING ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ......................... 24
`
`IX. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ...................................................................... 24
`
`X.
`
`SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR PETITION .................................................. 26
`
`A.
`
` Ground I: Claims 1 and 4 are rendered obvious by Baretz in view
`of Pinnow ........................................................................................ 26
`
`1.
`
`Claim 1 ................................................................................. 26
`
`(a)
`
`Preamble: “A method for manufacturing a light
`emitting device comprising:” ..................................... 26
`
`(b) Element [1.A.1]: “preparing a light emitting
`component having an active layer of a
`semiconductor,” ......................................................... 28
`
`(c) Element [1.A.2] “said active layer comprising a
`gallium nitride based semiconductor containing
`indium and being capable of emitting a blue color
`light having a spectrum with a peak wavelength
`within the range from 420 to 490 nm;” ..................... 32
`
`(d) Element [1.B.1]: “preparing a phosphor capable
`of absorbing a part of the blue color light emitted
`from said light emitting component and emitting a
`yellow color light having a broad emission
`spectrum comprising a peak wavelength existing
`around the range from 510 to 600 nm and a tail
`continuing beyond 700 nm,” ...................................... 33
`
`(e) Element [1.B.2]: “wherein selection of said
`phosphor is controlled based on an emission
`wavelength of said light emitting component; and” .. 43
`
`(f)
`
`Element [1.C.1]: “combining said light emitting
`component and said phosphor so that the blue
`color light from said light emitting component and
`the yellow color from said phosphor are mixed to
`make a white color light,” .......................................... 45
`
`iii
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`(g) Element [1.C.2]: “wherein a chromaticity point of
`the white color light is on a straight line
`connecting a point of chromaticity of the blue
`color light and a point of chromaticity of the
`yellow color light, and” ............................................. 52
`
`(h) Element [1.D]: “wherein a content of said
`phosphor in said light emitting device is selected to
`obtain a desired chromaticity of the white color
`light.” ......................................................................... 57
`
`(i)
`
`Baretz in view of Pinnow disclose “preparing” a
`light emitting component and phosphor .................... 59
`
`(j)
`
`Reasons to combine Baretz and Pinnow ................... 64
`
`2.
`
`Claim 4 ................................................................................. 70
`
`B.
`
` Ground II: Claims 1 and 4 are rendered obvious by Baretz in
`view of Pinnow, and further in view of Nakamura and Schuil ....... 71
`
`1.
`
`Claim 1 ................................................................................. 71
`
`(a)
`
`Preamble: “A method for manufacturing a light
`emitting device comprising:” ..................................... 71
`
`(b) Element [1.A.1]: “preparing a light emitting
`component having an active layer of a
`semiconductor,” ......................................................... 72
`
`(c) Element [1.A.2] “said active layer comprising a
`gallium nitride based semiconductor containing
`indium and being capable of emitting a blue color
`light having a spectrum with a peak wavelength
`within the range from 420 to 490 nm;” ..................... 74
`
`(d) Element [1.B.1]: “preparing a phosphor capable
`of absorbing a part of the blue color light emitted
`from said light emitting component and emitting a
`yellow color light having a broad emission
`spectrum comprising a peak wavelength existing
`
`iv
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`around the range from 510 to 600 nm and a tail
`continuing beyond 700 nm,” ...................................... 75
`
`(e) Element [1.B.2]: “wherein selection of said
`phosphor is controlled based on an emission
`wavelength of said light emitting component; and” .. 76
`
`(f)
`
`Element [1.C.1]: “combining said light emitting
`component and said phosphor so that the blue
`color light from said light emitting component and
`the yellow color from said phosphor are mixed to
`make a white color light,” .......................................... 77
`
`(g) Element [1.C.2]: “wherein a chromaticity point of
`the white color light is on a straight line
`connecting a point of chromaticity of the blue
`color light and a point of chromaticity of the
`yellow color light, and” ............................................. 77
`
`(h) Element [1.D]: “wherein a content of said
`phosphor in said light emitting device is selected to
`obtain a desired chromaticity of the white color
`light.” ......................................................................... 77
`
`(i)
`
`Reasons to combine Baretz, Pinnow, Nakamura,
`and Schuil .................................................................. 78
`
`2.
`
`Claim 4 ................................................................................. 81
`
`XI. CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 82
`
`
`
`v
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`
`Page(s)
`
`FEDERAL CASES
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp.,
`415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) .......................................................................... 24
`
`DOCKETED CASES
`Everlight Electronics Co., v. Nichia Corp.,
`Case No. 12-11758 (E.D. Mich.) .......................................................................... 2
`
`FEDERAL STATUTES
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ................................................................................................. 4, 6
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(e) ..................................................................................................... 4
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ..................................................................................................... 6
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 ................................................................................................ 1
`
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a) ..................................................................................................... 6
`
`FEDERAL REGULATIONS
`
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-.80, 42.100-.123 ........................................................................... 1
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ................................................................................................ 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) .................................................................................................. 3
`
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.22(a)(1), 42.104(b)(1)-(2) ............................................................... 4
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) ................................................................................................. 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4)-(5) .................................................................................... 26
`
`vi
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-.80, 42.100-.123,
`
`Petitioner VIZIO, Inc. (“Petitioner”) hereby petitions for inter partes review of
`
`claims 1 and 4 (“Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 8,309,375 (EX1001, the
`
`“’375 patent”) and cancellation of those claims as unpatentable.
`
`The ’375 patent is titled “Light Emitting Device and Display.” The
`
`Challenged Claims generally recite a method of manufacturing a light emitting
`
`device (“LED”) capable of emitting a white color light by combining (1) a light
`
`emitting component emitting a blue color light and (2) a phosphor capable of
`
`absorbing the blue color light and emitting a yellow color light. The blue color
`
`light mixes with the yellow color light to make the white color light.
`
` The elements of the Challenged Claims add various conventional or
`
`inherent characteristics related to the light emitting component and phosphor, such
`
`as the material of the active layer of the light emitting component, emission
`
`spectrums having certain peak emission wavelengths, and a chromaticity of the
`
`white light. Indeed, in a related district court case involving patents which are in
`
`the same family as the ’375 patent, the jury found all asserted claims invalid for
`
`obviousness in view of the prior art, including U.S. Patent No. 6,600,175 to Baretz
`
`(EX1004, “Baretz”) relied upon in this Petition, rejecting attempts by Nichia
`
`Corporation (“Patent Owner”) to limit the Baretz disclosure of the same or similar
`
`1
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`conventional elements recited by the Challenged Claims. (See Everlight
`
`Electronics Co., v. Nichia Corp., Case No. 12-11758 (E.D. Mich.) (the “Michigan
`
`case”), 04/22/2015 Trial Transcript (EX1019, “Jury Verdict”) p. 6; Appeal Nos.
`
`16-1577, 1611.)
`
`Each of the Challenged Claims is a combination of well-known elements
`
`arranged in a conventional way to produce predictable results. The Challenged
`
`Claims were obvious and should be canceled.
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES
`
`A.
`
` Real Party-in-Interest
`
`The real party-in-interest is VIZIO, Inc.
`
`B.
`
` Related Matters
`
`Patent Owner has filed a patent infringement action against the Petitioner
`
`asserting infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,915,631 (the “’631 patent”),
`
`7,901,959 (the “’959 patent”), 7,855,092 (the “’092 patent”), and the ’375 patent in
`
`the Central District Court of California. Case No. 8:16-cv-00545. As previously
`
`mentioned, Patent Owner has also asserted U.S. Patent Nos. 5,998,925 and
`
`7,531,960, which are in the same family as the ’375 patent, in the Michigan case
`
`where the jury found all asserted claims invalid for obviousness. (See Appeal Nos.
`
`16-1577, -1611.) In addition, Petitioner has filed, or will file, concurrent with the
`
`2
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`present Petition, petitions for inter partes review of the ’631, ’959, and ’092
`
`patents which are in the same family as the ’375 patent.
`
`C.
`
` Notice of Counsel and Service Information
`
`Petitioner’s counsel are:
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`Nathan Zhang
`Registration No. 71,401
`WHITE & CASE LLP
`3000 El Camino Real
`5 Palo Alto Square, 9th Floor,
`Palo Alto, CA 94306
`650-213-0300 (phone)
`650-213-8158 (fax)
`
`Lead Counsel
`
`David M. Tennant
`Registration No. 48,362
`WHITE & CASE LLP
`701 Thirteenth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20005-3807
`202-626-3600 (phone)
`202-639-9355 (fax)
`
`
` A
`
` Power of Attorney is being filed concurrently herewith in accordance with
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b). Petitioner consents to electronic service. Pursuant to 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4), all services and communication to the above attorneys can be
`
`sent to WCVizioIPRTeam@whitecase.com.
`
`III. CERTIFICATION OF GROUNDS FOR STANDING
`
`Petitioner certifies pursuant to Rule 42.104(a) that the patent for which
`
`review is sought is available for inter partes review and that Petitioner is not
`
`barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review challenging the patent
`
`claims on the grounds identified in this Petition.
`
`3
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`IV. OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGE AND RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Pursuant to Rules 42.22(a)(1) and 42.104(b)(1)-(2), Petitioner challenges
`
`claims 1 and 4 of the ’375 patent.
`
`A.
`
`
`
`Prior Art and Printed Publications
`
`The following references are pertinent to the grounds of unpatentability
`
`explained below:1
`
`1.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,600,175 to Baretz (EX1004, “Baretz”) was filed
`
`March 26, 1996 and issued July 29, 2003. Baretz is prior art to the ’375 patent
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`2.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 3,699,478 to Pinnow (EX1005, “Pinnow”) was filed
`
`on May 26, 1969 and issued October 17, 1972. Pinnow is prior art to the ’375
`
`patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`3.
`
`Nakamura et al., “High-Power InGaN Single-Quantum-Well-
`
`Structure Blue and Violet Light-Emitting Diodes” (EX1014, “Nakamura”) was
`
`published September 1995 in Applied Physics Letters 67 by the American Institute
`
`of Physics.2 Nakamura is prior art to the ’375 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`
`
`1 Petitioner has used the pre-AIA statutory framework to refer to the prior art.
`
`2 See Stansbury declaration. (EX1022)
`
`4
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`U.S. Patent No. 4,024,070 to Schuil (EX1015, “Schuil”) was filed on
`
`4.
`
`May 16, 1975 and issued May 17, 1977. Schuil is prior art to the ’375 patent under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`B.
`
` Grounds for Challenge
`
`This Petition, supported by the declaration of Dr. Paul Prucnal (“Prucnal”
`
`(EX1002)) filed herewith, demonstrates that there is a reasonable likelihood that
`
`Petitioner will prevail with respect to at least one of the Challenged Claims and
`
`that each of the Challenged Claims are not patentable. See 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
`
`Petitioner requests cancellation of Challenged Claims 1 and 4 under the following
`
`statutory grounds:
`
`1.
`
`Ground 1: Claims 1 and 4 are rendered obvious by Baretz in view of
`
`Pinnow under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
`2.
`
`Ground 2: Claims 1 and 4 are rendered obvious by Baretz in view of
`
`Pinnow, and further in view of Nakamura and Schuil under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
`V. CONVENTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
`
`A.
`
` Color, Chromaticity, and the CIE Chromaticity Curve
`
`Colors can be represented as a mixture of three primary colors: blue-violet,
`
`green, and orange-red. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶41; H. Rossotti, “Colour,” Princeton
`
`5
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`University Press (1983) (EX1007, “Rossotti”) 3 pp. 153-154; M. Luckiesh, “Color
`
`and its Applications,” D. Van Nostrand Co., The Plimpton Press (1921) (EX1016,
`
`“Luckiesh”)4 pp. 57-58.) For example, a mixture of red and green produces
`
`yellow, and a mixture of yellow and blue produces white. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶41;
`
`EX1016[Luckiesh] p. 58.) Because their mixture results in white, yellow and blue
`
`are complimentary colors. 5 (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶41; EX1016[Luckiesh] p. 58.)
`
`The color wheel below shows the spectrum of complementary colors.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶42; EX1016[Luckiesh] p. 59.)
`
`
`
`3 Rossotti was first published and available in 1983 and has a Library of Congress
`
`catalog date stamp of July 6, 1987. (EX1007, exhibit p. 4.)
`
`4 Luckiesh was published and available in 1921. (EX1016)
`
`5 While denoted by the color wheel by the label “V,” Luckiesh discloses that when
`
`referring to the “additive primaries [of] red, green, and blue … [s]ome prefer to use
`
`the term ‘violet’ instead of ‘blue’ [but] [b]lue, however, appears satisfactory and is
`
`a safer term than violet, because there are a great many who apply the term violet
`
`to purples.” (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶42; EX1016[Luckiesh] pp. 57-58.)
`
`6
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶41; EX1016[Luckiesh] FIG 22, annotated.)
`
`As shown above, in addition to yellow and blue, other such complementary
`
`colors include green and pink, and blue-green and red. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶42;
`
`EX1016[Luckiesh] p. 59.)
`
`Maxwell’s triangle, shown below, is another representation of how different
`
`colors can be achieved by mixing the three primary colors. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶43;
`
`EX1007[Rossotti] p. 154.) The three primary colors form the vertices of
`
`Maxwell’s triangle. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶43; EX1007[Rossotti] p. 154.) When two
`
`colors are mixed, the resulting color can be represented as a point on a line
`
`connecting those two colors along Maxwell’s triangle. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶44;
`
`EX1007[Rossotti] p. 154.)
`
`7
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`(EX1007[Rossotti] FIG. 66.)
`
`
`
`For example, a mixture of green and orange-red will result in yellow, which
`
`is at a point on Maxwell’s triangle between green and orange-red.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶44; EX1007[Rossotti] FIG. 66.) Similarly, a mixture of blue-
`
`violet and yellow will result in white. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶44; EX1007[Rossotti]
`
`FIG. 66.)
`
`Chromaticity is an objective specification of color as observed by a standard
`
`individual. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶45; EX1007[Rossotti] p. 155-156.) The
`
`8
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`chromaticity of all visible colors can be represented as a point within the CIE6
`
`chromaticity curve, shown below. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶45; EX1007[Rossotti] p.
`
`157-158.)
`
`
`
`
`
`(EX1007[Rossotti] FIG. 68.)
`
`6 The Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage (CIE) is the standards body that
`
`defines the “standard observer” and the CIE chromaticity curve.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶45; EX1007[Rossotti] pp. 156-167.)
`
`9
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`The usefulness of the CIE chromaticity chart is based on the fact that the
`
`resultant light from a mixture of two colors of lights will fall on a point along the
`
`line joining the two colors on the CIE chromaticity curve. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶46;
`
`EX1007[Rossotti] pp. 157-158.) For example, purple light, which is the result of a
`
`mixture of red and blue-violet light, corresponds to point “X” in FIG. 69, below,
`
`along the line that connects the light wavelengths representing red and blue-violet
`
`light. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶46; EX1007[Rossotti] pp. 157-158.)
`
`(EX1007[Rossotti] FIG. 69.)
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`In this example, “a mixture of two parts red (770nm) and one part [blue-
`
`]violet (380nm) would lie at a point X, twice as near to the red point as the violet
`
`point.” (EX1007[Rossotti] p. 157-158 (emphasis in original).) White light falls in
`
`the region around the point “E” shown in the middle of the CIE chromaticity
`
`diagram in FIG. 69, above. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶¶46-47; EX1007[Rossotti] FIG.
`
`69.)
`
`B.
`
` Development of White Light LEDs
`
`The development of white light LEDs was primarily driven by the increasing
`
`demand for solid state LED lamps over conventional incandescent lamps for
`
`displays and signage. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶48; EX1004[Baretz] 2:15-18.) There
`
`were a number of different ways conventional LEDs produced white light.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶49.) One method of producing white light LEDs is to mix red,
`
`green and blue light emitted by three different LED chips. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶49;
`
`EX1004[Baretz] 2:47-53.) Another method is to use an LED chip and a medium
`
`disposed over the LED chip that contains one or more phosphors.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶50; EX1004[Baretz] ABSTRACT, 1:6-8, 2:25-30, 8:18-25,
`
`9:39-50.) The phosphor absorbs the light (e.g., blue light) emitted by the LED chip
`
`and emits light (e.g., yellow light) of a different wavelength. As described above
`
`in Section V.A, blue and yellow light mix to make white light. (EX1002[Prucnal]
`
`¶¶41-44; EX1004[Baretz] 8:26-43, 9:4-9.)
`
`11
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
` Cerium-Activated Yttrium Aluminum Garnet (YAG) Phosphor
`
`C.
`
`Cerium-activated yttrium aluminum garnet (also referred to as “YAG:Ce” or
`
`“Ce:YAG” by those in the art) is a well-known phosphor used to make a white
`
`light. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶52.) The properties of YAG:Ce make it very attractive
`
`for display and lighting applications; these properties include (1) a “relatively large
`
`absorption cross section”; (2) “a very short lifetime of approximately 0.07 µsec”;
`
`and (3) “a quantum efficiency of approximately 70%.” (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶53;
`
`L.G. Van Uitert et al., “Photoluminescent Conversion of Laser Light for Black and
`
`White and Mulitcolor Displays,” J. Applied Optics (1971)7 (EX1006, “Van
`
`Uitert”) p.151.) Additionally, YAG:Ce may be tuned by adjusting its composition
`
`for a particular use by shifting its absorption and emission spectra.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶53; EX1006[Van Uitert] p.151.)
`
`YAG:Ce is also known to withstand harsh operating conditions, including
`
`high temperature and intense light sources due to its excellent thermal properties,
`
`making it suitable to be used with high intensity light sources without thermal
`
`quenching. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶54; M.V. Hoffman, “Improved Color Rendition in
`
`High Pressure Mercury Vapor Lamps,” J. Illuminating Eng’g. Soc., Vol. 6, No. 2
`
`
`
`7 See Stansbury declaration. (EX1021)
`
`12
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`(1977) (EX1008, “Hoffman”)8 p.91; J.M. Robertson et al., “Epitaxially Grown
`
`Monocrystalline Garnet Cathode-Ray Tube Phosphor Screens,” App. Physics
`
`Leters 37 (1980) (EX1009, “Robertson 1”) pp.471-472)
`
`Due to at least these characteristics, YAG:Ce has been used predominantly
`
`in a variety of white light applications, including lamps and displays since the
`
`1980s. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶55.)
`
`VI. OVERVIEW OF THE ’375 PATENT
`
`A.
`
`
`
`Summary of Alleged Invention of the ’375 Patent
`
`The ’375 patent generally describes a light emitting device capable of
`
`emitting a white color light by mixing a blue color light emitted from an LED chip
`
`with light emitted by phosphor disposed over the chip. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶56;
`
`EX1001[’375] 8:38-46. The light emitted by the phosphor has a longer
`
`wavelength than the blue color light. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶56; EX1001[’375]
`
`ABSTRACT.)
`
`FIG. 1 of the ’375 patent, reproduced below, shows an LED device 100
`
`having an LED chip 102 disposed within a cup 105a of the device 100.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶57; EX1001[’375] 8:28-46.) Coating resin 101 containing a
`
`
`
`8 See Stansbury declaration. (EX1024)
`
`13
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`phosphor fills the cup 105a, and the resin 101 and molding material 104 cover the
`
`LED chip 102. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶56; EX1001[’375] 8:41-43.)
`
`
`
`
`
`(EX1001[’375] FIG. 1.)
`
`In operation, “part of the light emitted by the light emitting component (LED
`
`chip) 102 (hereinafter referred to as LED light) excites the phosphor contained in
`
`the coating resin 101 to generate fluorescent light having a wavelength different
`
`from that of LED light, so that the fluorescent light emitted by the phosphor and
`
`LED light which is output without contributing to the excitation of the phosphor
`
`are mixed and output.” (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶57; EX1001[’375] 8:48-54.)
`
`The ’375 patent states that conventional light emitting diodes have problems
`
`such as “deterioration of the fluorescent material leading to color tone deviation
`
`14
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`and darkening of the fluorescent material resulting in lowered efficiency of
`
`extracting light,” and proposes the use of a “fluorescent material” that has
`
`“excellent resistance to light and heat so that the properties thereof do not change
`
`even when used over an extended period of time while being exposed to light of
`
`high intensity emitted by the light emitting component.” (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶¶58-
`
`59; EX1001[’375] 2:33-36, 3:20-25.) The ’375 patent discusses the use of a
`
`fluorescent material that “is preferably yttrium-aluminum-garnet fluorescent
`
`material (YAG phosphor) activated with cerium, or a fluorescent material
`
`represented by the general formula (Re1-rSmr)3(Al1-sGas)5O12:Ce, where 0 ≦r ≦1 and
`0 ≦s ≦1, and Re is at least one selected from Y and Gd.” (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶59;
`
`EX1001[’375] 10:28-34.)
`
`The ’375 patent provides that the wavelength of the light emitted by the
`
`LED is “preferably from 400 nm to 530 nm,” and “more preferably from 420nm to
`
`490 nm.” (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶59; EX1001[’375] 14:23-31.) The phosphor is
`
`“capable of absorbing excitation light having a peak at a wavelength near 450nm,”
`
`and “emits light of broad spectrum having a peak” ranging from 530 to 580 nm and
`
`“tailing out to 700nm.” (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶59; EX1001[’375] 11:5-10, 12:38-49.
`
`B.
`
` Overview of the ’375 Patent Prosecution History
`
`On November 9, 2010, Patent Owner as the Applicant filed U.S. Patent
`
`Application No. 12/942,792 (the “’792 application”). (EX1003[’375FH],
`
`15
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`11/09/2010 Utility Patent Application Transmittal.) Along with the ’792
`
`application, Applicant submitted an Information Disclosure Statement identifying
`
`Baretz and Pinnow, along with over 200 other prior art references. (EX1003 [’375
`
`FH], 11/09/2010 Information Disclosure Statement.) There is no substantive
`
`discussion of Baretz or Pinnow by the Applicant or the Examiner of record during
`
`prosecution of the ’375 patent. Moreover, Nakamura and Schuil were not
`
`disclosed to the USPTO during prosecution of the ’375 patent.
`
`On January 30, 2012, the Examiner issued a non-final Office Action
`
`rejecting claims 1-17 and 19 as being obvious in view of U.S. 5,847,507
`
`(“Butterworth”) and of U.S. 5,966,393 (“Hide”), and objecting to claim 18.
`
`(EX1003[’375FH], 01/30/2012 Non-Final Rejection.) On May 30, 2012,
`
`Applicant filed a response arguing that Butterworth (filed July 14, 1997) did not
`
`qualify as prior art against the ’792 application by swearing behind the reference.
`
`(EX1003[’375FH], 05/30/2012 Reply to Office Action p. 6-8.) Applicant also
`
`argued that Butterworth did not disclose the phosphor having a peak wavelength of
`
`530 to 570 nm and a tail continuing beyond 700nm recited by claim 4, the crystal
`
`structure of the phosphor as recited by claim 6, and the white light characteristics
`
`as recited by claim 9. (Id.)
`
`
`
`On July 12, 2012, the Examiner issued a notice of allowance, closing
`
`prosecution. (EX1003[’375FH], 07/12/2012 Notice of Allowance.) The ’375
`
`16
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`patent issued on November 13, 2012. (EX1003[’375 FH], 10/24/2012 Issue
`
`Notification.)
`
`VII. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIMARY PRIOR ART REFERENCES
`
`A.
`
` Overview of Baretz
`
`Baretz discloses a method for manufacturing a device for converting blue
`
`colored light from solid state devices (e.g. LEDs) to make white colored light using
`
`a down-converting medium 20. (EX1004[Baretz] ABSTRACT, 9:4-9.)
`
`Specifically, Baretz discloses a white light LED containing a blue or UV light
`
`emitting LED chip packaged with “a down-converting medium comprising
`
`fluorescer and/or phosphor component(s), or mixtures thereof … which functions
`
`to down convert the light output from face 18 of LED 13 to white light”; in
`
`particular Baretz teaches that “monochromatic blue or UV radiation output of the
`
`LED is absorbed and then down converted by the fluorophore or phosphor to yield
`
`longer wavelengths to include a broad spectrum of frequencies which appear as
`
`white light.” (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶73; EX1004[Baretz] 7:19-27.)
`
`Baretz discloses multiple possible configurations of the white light LED.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶¶74-79; EX1004[Baretz] 8:58-60.) In one embodiment,
`
`illustrated below in FIG. 1 of Baretz, within the light-transmissive enclosure 11 is
`
`an LED chip (“light emitting diode (LED) die 13”). (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶74;
`
`EX1004[Baretz] 8:60-9:9.) Baretz discloses that “a blue LED light source” that is
`
`17
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`“suitable for use in the structure of FIG. 1 … may be based on: indium gallium
`
`nitride; silicon carbide; zinc selenide; or any other blue light emitting diode
`
`source,” such as “a leaded, gallium nitride based LED which exhibits blue light
`
`emission with an emission maximum at approximately 450nm.”
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶76; EX1004[Baretz] 8:60-9:10, 10:20-27.) Baretz discloses
`
`suitable blue LED chips were commercially available from Toyoda Gosei Co. Ltd.
`
`and Nichia Chemical Industries, Ltd. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶76; EX1004[Baretz]
`
`9:10-17.)
`
`(EX1004[Baretz] FIG. 1.)
`
`
`
`Baretz discloses that light-transmissive enclosure 11 may be formed of “any
`
`suitable material having a light transmissive character, such as a clear or
`
`translucent polymer, or a glass material” and filled with a down-converting
`
`18
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`medium 20 containing “fluorescer and/or phosphor component(s)” that down-
`
`converts the light output from the blue or UV LED chip to make white light.
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶77; EX1004[Baretz] 8:62-64, 9:4-9.)
`
`Shown in FIG. 2, reproduced below, of Baretz is another configuration of
`
`the white light LED. (EX1002[Prucnal] ¶¶78-79; EX1004[Baretz] 8:1-3.) The
`
`white light LED of FIG. 2 has a similar structure to that of the white light LED
`
`shown in FIG. 1, except that instead of the down-converting medium 20 filling the
`
`interior of the enclosure 11, the down-converting material (e.g. a fluorescer or
`
`phosphor) is “dispersed in the wall 7 of the housing structure, and/or coated as an
`
`interior film 9 … on the interior wall surface of the housing wall 7.”
`
`(EX1002[Prucnal] ¶79; EX1004[Baretz] 9:51-60.)
`
`
`
`(EX1004[Baretz] Figure 2.)
`19
`
`
`
`

`
`U. S. PATENT NO. 8,309,375
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`Baretz discloses that a wide variety of suitable “fluorescer(s) and/or
`
`phosphor(s)” may be dispersed within the down-converting medium 20, and in
`
`“suitable amounts [that] can be readily determined without undue experimentation,
`
`to provide good white light emission (of virtually any tint or hue), as well as a
`
`virtually infinite series of chromaticity for all visible hues.” (EX1002[Prucnal]
`
`¶80; EX1004[Baretz] 9:39-50, 10:66-11:7.)
`
`As explained in greater detail in la

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