`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`NICHIA CORPORATION,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`DOCUMENT SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,919,787
`IPR2018-00965
`__________________
`
`
`DECLARATION OF JAMES R. SHEALY, Ph.D IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,919,787
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 1
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`
`
`
`
`1. My name is James Richard Shealy, Ph.D.
`
`2.
`
`I make this declaration in support of Petitioner Nichia Corporation’s
`
`(“Petitioner”) petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 7,919,787 (“the
`
`’787 patent,” Exhibit 1001), IPR2018-00965.
`
`3.
`
`I am over 21 years of age and otherwise competent to make this
`
`declaration.
`
`4.
`
`Although I am being compensated for my time in preparing this
`
`declaration, the opinions herein are my own, and I have no stake in the outcome of
`
`the inter partes review proceeding.
`
`5.
`
`I am not an employee of Petitioner or any affiliate or subsidiary
`
`thereof.
`
`6.
`
`This declaration summarizes the opinions I have formed to date. I
`
`reserve the right to modify my opinions, if necessary, based on further review and
`
`analysis of information that I receive subsequent to the filing of this report,
`
`including in response to positions that parties to the inter partes review proceeding,
`
`or their experts, may take that I have not yet seen.
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`II. MY EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS
`I have been involved in the science and engineering of light emitting
`7.
`
`diodes for almost 40 years, as detailed in my curriculum vitae (attached as
`
`Appendix A).
`
`8.
`
`I received a B.S. degree from North Carolina State in 1978, an M.S.
`
`from Rensselaer Polytechnic in 1980, and a Ph.D. from Cornell in 1983.
`
`9.
`
`I joined the Cornell faculty in 1987 and am currently a professor in
`
`the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
`
`10.
`
`I have been deeply involved in the research and design of LEDs over
`
`the course of my career. In 1978, I joined the technical staff of General Electric’s
`
`Corporate Research and Development Center under an Edison Fellowship. While
`
`there, among other work, I developed GaAs epitaxial materials for high voltage
`
`electronics. I also researched device fabrication by organometallic vapor phase
`
`epitaxy (“OMVPE”).
`
`11.
`
`In 1980, I transferred to General Electric’s Advanced Electronics
`
`Laboratory, where I developed materials and processes for the fabrication of
`
`AlGaAs LEDs as well as developing an OMVPE reactor and related processes for
`
`the fabrication of AlGaAs quantum well laser diodes. They were the highest
`
`power, lowest threshold devices at the time. The AlGaAs LEDs were developed in
`
`my group: from materials to device fabrication to a variety of packaging solutions.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 3
`
`
`
`
`
`The packages included lead frame packages, hermetically sealed metal and ceramic
`
`packages, and packages which combined the LED with a silicon photo transistor
`
`(commonly referred to as an opto-coupler). These packages included wire bonds
`
`to pads on the LED and on the package, silver epoxy die mounts, eutectic preform
`
`die mounts, LED passivation, reflectors, and focusing lenses integrated into the
`
`package assembly. In 1985, I was designated Principal Staff Scientist at General
`
`Electric in recognition of my research contributions.
`
`12. For a portion of my time at General Electric, I was also concurrently
`
`working at Cornell. In 1984, my group at Cornell developed the first single
`
`quantum well red laser by OMVPE. I then joined the Cornell faculty in 1987 and
`
`have continued my research in OMVPE, particularly as it relates to LEDs, laser
`
`diodes, and high frequency transistors. During this time, high performance
`
`AlGaInP red laser diodes and LEDs were realized. The red LEDs were packaged
`
`on metal submounts with an integral reflector and focusing lens to couple the LED
`
`emission into plastic optical fiber bundles. I have also researched GaN and related
`
`materials for both LEDs and high power transistors.
`
`13.
`
`In 1997, I was named the Director of Cornell’s Optoelectronics
`
`Technology Center. In 1998, I was promoted to full professor at Cornell. I have
`
`published in excess of 100 articles, and I am the inventor of over 15 patents, many
`
`of which deal with GaN-based materials and devices. Many of the GaN-based
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LEDs on which I worked were realized on defect-free GaN pyramidal p-n
`
`junctions with quantum well active regions. I have remained current in the field,
`
`as evidenced by my publications listed in my curriculum vitae.
`
`14.
`
`I have also previously testified in a number of patent infringement
`
`proceedings, including relating to LEDs, including materials growth, device
`
`fabrication, and their packaging.
`
`15.
`
`I have used my education and experience researching, publishing and
`
`working in the LED field, and my understanding of the knowledge, creativity, and
`
`experience of a person having ordinary skill in the art, in forming the opinions
`
`expressed in this declaration, as well as any other materials discussed herein.
`
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`In forming my opinions, I read and considered the ’787 patent and its
`16.
`
`prosecution history, the exhibits listed in the Exhibit List filed with the petition for
`
`inter partes review of the ’787 patent, as well as any other material referenced
`
`herein.
`
`17. For any future testimony I may give in this matter, I may use some or
`
`all of the documents and information cited to, referred to, and identified in this
`
`declaration, as well as any additional materials that are entered into evidence in
`
`this matter.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 5
`
`
`
`
`
`IV. LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF OBVIOUSNESS
`I have been informed and I understand that a patent claim is
`18.
`
`unpatentable and invalid if the subject matter of the claim as a whole would have
`
`been obvious to a POSITA in the field of the patent as of the time of the invention
`
`at issue. I have been informed and understand that the following factors must be
`
`evaluated to determine whether the claimed subject matter is obvious: (i) the scope
`
`and content of the prior art; (ii) the difference or differences, if any, between each
`
`claim of the patent and the prior art; (iii) the level of ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the patent was filed; and (iv) any objective indicia of non-obviousness.
`
`19.
`
`I have been informed and I understand that the objective indicia of
`
`non-obviousness (or “secondary considerations”) that should be considered
`
`include, for example, the following: (i) commercial success; (ii) long-felt but
`
`unresolved needs; (iii) copying of the invention by others in the field; (iv) initial
`
`expressions of disbelief by experts in the field; (v) failure of others to solve the
`
`problem that the inventor solved; and (vi) unexpected results. I have been
`
`informed and understand that evidence of these objective indicia must be
`
`commensurate in scope with the claimed subject matter. I am not aware of any
`
`objective indicia of non-obviousness relevant to the claims of the ’787 patent.
`
`20.
`
`In determining whether the subject matter as a whole would have been
`
`obvious at the time that the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 6
`
`
`
`
`
`the art, I have been informed of and understand certain principles regarding the
`
`combination of elements of the prior art. A combination of familiar elements
`
`according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it yields predictable
`
`results. Also, if a person of ordinary skill in the art can implement a predictable
`
`variation in a prior art device, and would see the benefit from doing so, such a
`
`variation would be obvious. In particular, when there is pressure to solve a
`
`problem and there are a finite number of identifiable, predictable solutions, it
`
`would be reasonable for a person of ordinary skill to pursue those options that fall
`
`within his or her technical grasp. If such a process leads to the claimed invention,
`
`then the latter is not an innovation, but more the result of ordinary skill and
`
`common sense.
`
`21.
`
`I have also been informed and understand that a teaching, suggestion
`
`and motivation is a useful guide in establishing a rationale for combining elements
`
`of the prior art. The test poses the question as to whether there is an explicit
`
`teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art to combine prior art elements in
`
`a way that realizes the claimed invention. Though useful to the obviousness
`
`inquiry, I understand that this test should not be treated as a rigid rule. It is not
`
`necessary to seek out precise teachings; it is permissible to consider the inferences
`
`and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art (who is considered to
`
`have an ordinary level of creativity and is not an “automaton”) would employ.
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`V. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`I have been informed and understand that the disclosure of patents and
`22.
`
`prior art references are to be viewed from the perspective of a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention. I have been told I may
`
`use the short hand “POSITA” to describe this person. I have provided my opinions
`
`from this perspective, which, as discussed below, is as of August 14, 2007, the
`
`filing date of the application (U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/838,301) that
`
`led to the ’787 patent.
`
`23.
`
`I have been informed and understand that prior art references can
`
`provide evidence of the level of ordinary skill in the art, and that factors that may
`
`be considered in determining this level of skill can include the educational level of
`
`the inventors and active workers in the field, the types of problems encountered in
`
`the art, the prior art solutions to those problems, the rapidity with which
`
`innovations are made, and the sophistication of the technology.
`
`24.
`
`It is my opinion that those of ordinary skill in the art during the
`
`relevant period would have had at least a B.S. in mechanical or electrical
`
`engineering or a related field, and four years’ experience designing LED packages.
`
`However, I note that this description is approximate, and a higher level of
`
`education or skill might make up for less experience, and additional experience
`
`could make up for a lower education level, for example, an M.S. in any of the
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 8
`
`
`
`
`
`above fields and two years’ experience would qualify as a person of ordinary skill,
`
`in my opinion.
`
`VI. RELEVANT PERIOD
`25. As a preliminary matter, I have been asked for my opinion as to what
`
`a POSITA would consider as the relevant time period in which to consider prior
`
`art.
`
`26.
`
`I have been informed and I understand that art cannot be considered
`
`after the filing date of a patent. I have been informed, and I understand, that—
`
`under certain circumstances—a patent may claim “priority” to an earlier-filed
`
`patent application in order to obtain a “priority date” that is earlier than the date
`
`listed as the filing date on the face of the patent. If that were to happen, I have
`
`been informed and I understand that art cannot be considered after that “priority
`
`date.”
`
`27.
`
`I have been informed that, for a later-filed patent to be entitled to the
`
`benefit of the filing date of an earlier-filed application, the earlier-filed application
`
`must describe the invention claimed in the later-filed patent in such sufficient
`
`detail that (i) a POSITA would conclude that the inventor had possession of the
`
`claimed invention and (ii) a POSITA would understand how to make and use the
`
`invention without having to participate in undue experimentation.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 9
`
`
`
`
`
`28. The face of the ’787 patent identifies that it is a continuation-in-part of
`
`U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/608,605, filed on June 27, 2003 (the “’605
`
`application”), which issued as U.S. Patent No. 7,256,486.
`
`29. Therefore, in order to check whether the ’787 patent is entitled to an
`
`earlier priority date, I have been asked to see if the disclosure of the ’605
`
`application describes the claimed invention of the ’787 patent to the level of detail
`
`I discussed above.
`
`30. Every claim of the ’787 patent, either explicitly or through
`
`dependency, claims “a light emitting semiconductor die comprising a top major
`
`light emitting surface and an oppositely-disposed bottom major surface, the light
`
`emitting semiconductor die having an anode and a cathode on the bottom major
`
`surface of the light emitting semiconductor die … wherein the bottom major
`
`surface … is a bottom surface of a substrate of the die.” Ex. 1001, claims 1-14. I
`
`note that, below, I use the term “LED” as shorthand for “light emitting
`
`semiconductor die.”
`
`31. After reviewing the ’605 application, it is my opinion that the ’605
`
`application does not provide the required description for this claim element. The
`
`’605 application discloses an LED with an anode on one surface and a cathode on
`
`an opposed surface of the LED. But, the ’605 application does not disclose an
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 10
`
`
`
`
`
`LED with both of the anode and cathode on the bottom major surface of the LED
`
`that opposes the light emitting face (the growth substrate side of the LED).
`
`32. Further, claims 2-4 and 8-14 of the ’787 patent, either explicitly or
`
`through dependency, claim first and second “electrically conducting
`
`interconnecting element[s]” located on at least one “sidewall” of the substrate. Ex.
`
`1001, claims 2-4, 8-14. After reviewing the ’605 application, it is my opinion that
`
`the ’605 application does not provide the required description for this claim
`
`element. The ’605 application discloses interconnecting elements located in
`
`cylindrical through holes that extend between the two major surfaces of the
`
`substrate. Examples of these interconnecting elements can be seen enumerated as,
`
`e.g., 120 and 122 in Figures 1A through 2F, 320 in Figures 3A through 4F, 520-
`
`523 in Figures 5A through 6D of the ’605 application. But, the ’605 application
`
`does not disclose interconnecting elements that are located on at least one sidewall
`
`of the substrate. One simple example that shows that this claim element is missing
`
`from the ’605 application’s disclosure is apparent from the figures of the
`
`application. The ’605 application includes only Figures 1A through 6D; whereas
`
`the ’787 patent adds additional figures, e.g., Figures 8A through 8C (and several
`
`columns of corresponding disclosure).
`
`33.
`
`In light of my opinion in this regard, I understand that I may consider
`
`prior art from prior to the filing date of the ’787 patent, August 14, 2007.
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`34. Hence, my understanding of a POSITA is also with regard to that
`
`same time frame.
`
`VII. SUMMARY OF THE ’787 PATENT
`35. The ’787 patent explains that conventional LED devices are
`
`unsuitable for use in high packing density applications. The object of the
`
`purported invention is thus to have a packaging device that is similar in size to the
`
`LED, and that the device should be able to be manufactured with conventional
`
`circuit board assembly processes. Ex. 1001 at 1:36-45.
`
`36. The ’787 patent alleges to achieve this through the use of an LED
`
`having both a cathode and an anode on a substrate on the bottom surface of the
`
`LED opposite to its major light emitting surface. The ’787 patent further explains
`
`that the cathode and anode of the LED are mounted on a substrate packaging
`
`assembly that has wiring either through cylindrical vias, or along its sidewalls—
`
`(e.g., along semi-cylindrical channels in the sidewalls). Ex. 1001 at 2:6-3:12.
`
`37. Figure 7B, annotated below, depicts one embodiment of the ’787
`
`patent. As shown, the LED is enclosed by a red box, and the substrate packaging
`
`assembly is enclosed by a blue box. The LED is shown to have both electrical
`
`contacts 760 and 762 on the same side of the LED.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 12
`
`
`
`
`
`substrate
`packaging
`assembly
`
`LED
`
`
`
`38. The ’787 patent teaches that the substrate packaging assembly on
`
`which the LED is mounted includes two bonding pads (numbers 730 and 732,
`
`which are colored purple, above) on its upper surface. Ex. 1001 at 12:19-34. As
`
`shown in Figure 7B above, the LED electrodes (anode and cathode bond pads)
`
`represented as 760 and 762 are at the boundary between the LED and the package
`
`assembly.
`
`39. The anode bond pad (760) and cathode bond pad (762) of the LED,
`
`which are “connected to the anode and the cathode of the LED die,” (and which
`
`are colored green, above) are mounted and electrically connected to the two
`
`bonding pads of the substrate packaging assembly (730, 732). Ex. 1001 at 12:35-
`
`44 . The ’787 patent notes that either of the electrical contacts 760 or 762 may be
`
`considered the anode bond pad or the cathode bond pad, and vice versa. Ex. 1001
`
`at 12:42-44. I agree with the ’787 patent in that respect because a POSITA would
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`understand that either bond pad could be the anode or the cathode, depending on
`
`the configuration of the LED resulting from its fabrication process.
`
`40. The substrate packaging assembly also includes, on its lower surface,
`
`two “connecting pads” (numbers 740 and 742, which are colored orange, above),
`
`and interconnecting elements (numbers 720 and 722, which are colored yellow,
`
`above) that electrically connect the connecting pads to the bonding pads. Ex. 1001
`
`at 12:47-63. In the embodiment depicted in Figure 7B, the interconnecting
`
`elements run through cylindrical holes in the substrate packaging assembly. Ex.
`
`1001 at 12:13-14. The “connecting pads” serve to provide electrical contacts from
`
`the LED to the backside of the substrate packaging assembly.
`
`41. The ’787 patent discloses another embodiment where the
`
`interconnecting elements are located on the sidewalls of the substrate packaging
`
`assembly. Ex. 1001 at 13:17-28. The differences between these two embodiments
`
`can be seen below in Figures 7A and 8A. Figure 7A, annotated below on the left,
`
`depicts a plan view of the first embodiment described above, where the
`
`interconnecting elements 720 and 722 can be seen running through the substrate
`
`via holes. Figure 8A, annotated below on the right, depicts a plan view of the
`
`second embodiment, where the interconnecting elements 770 and 772 can be seen
`
`running along the curved sidewalls of the substrate packaging assembly.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VIII. SUMMARY OF PROSECUTION HISTORY
`I have reviewed the prosecution history of the ’787 patent, and
`42.
`
`provide the following summary of two excerpts.
`
`43. First, on July 8, 2010, the examiner issued a final rejection of claims
`
`1, 10 and 16 with respect to the limitation “a light emitting semiconductor die
`
`comprising a top major light emitting surface and an oppositely-disposed bottom
`
`major surface, the light emitting semiconductor die having either both, or at least
`
`one, of an anode and a cathode on the bottom major surface of the light emitting
`
`die.” The examiner explained that the original disclosure “never adequately
`
`discloses that the recited anode and cathode are formed at a same bottom surface
`
`that opposites [sic] a light emitting top surface.” Ex. 1002 (’787 Patent File
`
`History) at 128-29.
`
`44. Second, in an appeal brief, to overcome that rejection, the applicant
`
`submitted the figure reproduced below in the claim construction section, and
`
`admitted that it “was known as of the filing date of the present application to
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`construct a light emitting semiconductor die with an anode and cathode on one
`
`surface of the semiconductor die and a light emitting surface on the opposite
`
`surface of the semiconductor die.” Ex. 1002 at 146-47. The applicant further
`
`stated “that it was well within the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art to
`
`construct a light emitting semiconductor die as claimed.” Ex. 1002 at 146-47. In
`
`that same brief, the applicant admitted that “the semiconductor arts are a well-
`
`established and predictable field” and that “light-emitting semiconductor dies and
`
`their behavior are well established and predictable.” Ex. 1002 at 148.
`
`IX. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`I have been informed and understand that claim construction is the
`45.
`
`process of determining the meaning of words (or terms) within a patent claim. I
`
`have also been informed and understand that the proper construction of a claim
`
`term is the meaning that a POSITA would have given to that term.
`
`46.
`
`I have been informed and understand that claims in inter partes
`
`review proceedings are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light
`
`of the specification, so long as they are not set to expire during the course of the
`
`proceedings. I have been told to apply, and have applied, the broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation in performing my analysis in this declaration.
`
`47.
`
`In comparing the claims of the ’787 patent to the prior art, I have
`
`carefully considered the ’787 patent and its file history based upon my experience
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 16
`
`
`
`
`
`and knowledge in the relevant field. In my opinion, the broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation of the claim terms of the ’787 patent is generally consistent with the
`
`terms’ ordinary and customary meaning, as a person of ordinary skill would have
`
`understood them. That said, for purposes of this proceeding, I have applied the
`
`following three particular constructions when analyzing the prior art and the
`
`claims.
`
`48. As a threshold matter, I note that the top and bottom major surfaces of
`
`the LED claimed in the ’787 patent are distinguishable from the first and second
`
`major surfaces of the claimed “substantially planar substrate” (i.e., the substrate of
`
`the substrate packaging assembly). The claimed LED itself also has a substrate
`
`(because in LED construction, the active layers of an LED are grown on a
`
`crystalline substrate), but the LED’s substrate should not be confused with the
`
`substrate packaging assembly. Furthermore, it was known by a POSITA at the
`
`time of the invention that the LED could have its active layers remaining on its
`
`growth substrate or the active LED layers/growth substrate could be flip mounted
`
`onto a support substrate (a carrier) followed by the removal of the growth
`
`substrate. This flip mounted geometry has certain advantages in LED operation
`
`(including an electrically conducting substrate) and it is often produced with
`
`electrical contacts (anode and cathode) on the same side of the LED which is
`
`opposite from its major light emitting surface. The growth substrate is simply
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 17
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`replaced with a support substrate (in the flip mounted geometry) prior to the LED
`
`being mounted to the package assembly.
`
`49. The term “top major light emitting surface” is found in claims 1, 7,
`
`and 11. It is my opinion that the broadest reasonable construction of this term to a
`
`POSITA is “of the two largest faces of the LED, the face through which light is
`
`emitted.” Ex. 1001 at 5:22-25, 12:35-42; Ex. 1002 at 147 (Illustration 2).
`
`50.
`
`I note that the ’787 patent is consistent in its usage of “major surface”
`
`to refer, as a matter of geometric orientation, to a face that is greater in size than
`
`the other faces of the element being described. For example, with respect to LED
`
`750, the patent describes that it has two opposed major surfaces. Ex. 1001 at
`
`12:35-42, 5:22-25. These two opposed major surfaces are shown in Figure 7B,
`
`annotated below:
`
`
`
`bottom major surface of
`LED 750, which is the
`bottom of its growth or
`carrier substrate
`
`
`
`top major surface of
`LED 750
`
`
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 18
`
`
`
`
`
`51.
`
`I also note that, as discussed above, in an appeal brief submitted
`
`during prosecution of the application leading to the ’787 patent, the applicant
`
`included the following figure to orient the Board with respect to the top major light
`
`emitting surface of LED 750. Ex. 1002 at 147.
`
`
`52. The term “an oppositely-disposed bottom major surface” is found
`
`in claims 1, 7, and 11. It is my opinion that the broadest reasonable construction of
`
`this term to a POSITA is “of the two largest faces of the LED, the face opposite the
`
`light emitting face.” Ex. 1001 at 5:22-25, 12:35-42; Ex. 1002 at 147.
`
`53.
`
`I note that in the prosecution history, discussed above, the applicant
`
`explained that “[t]he originally-filed application also provides that an anode and
`
`cathode can be formed on the bottom major surface of an LED die, where the
`
`bottom major surface refers to the surface which faces the substrate [i.e., the
`
`substrate within the packaging assembly] onto which the LED die is mounted.”
`
`Ex. 1002 at 147.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 19
`
`
`
`
`
`54. The term “the bottom major surface . . . is a bottom surface of a
`
`substrate of the die” is found in claims 1, 7, and 11. It is my opinion that the
`
`broadest reasonable construction of this term to a POSITA is “the face of the LED
`
`opposite the light emitting face is on the substrate side of the LED.” Ex. 1001 at
`
`5:22-25, 12:35-42; Ex. 1002 at 187-95 (Examiner’s Amendment). A POSITA
`
`would understand that the “die” being referred to is the LED, and that the
`
`“substrate” side of the LED refers to the growth substrate side, unless the LED is
`
`flip mounted where the carrier substrate becomes the substrate side of the LED,
`
`effectively flipping the p-n junction orientation within the LED.
`
`X.
`
`SUMMARY OF SELECT PRIOR ART AND STATE OF THE ART
`
`55. All the components of the ’787 patent claims were known in the art,
`
`as detailed below.1
`
`56. As discussed below, LEDs of numerous configurations were well
`
`known, and, mounting these LEDs on various kinds of substrate packaging
`
`assemblies was also well known. It would not be significant or unexpected to one
`
`of skill in the art to alter the arrangement of these components or to substitute
`
`various LEDs onto various substrate packaging assemblies.
`
`
`1 I have been told that the references discussed herein qualify as prior art under the
`
`law.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 20
`
`
`
`
`
`57. For these reasons, it is my opinion that, as a general matter, all of the
`
`elements of the claims of the ’787 patent were well known in the art and that there
`
`is nothing unexpected in the combination of these elements in the ’787 patent. As
`
`evidence to support this opinion, I discuss below the state of the art (prior to the
`
`filing date of the claims of the ’787 patent) generally with respect to several of the
`
`elements of the claims. My opinion then addresses the claimed elements more
`
`specifically in light of certain references.
`
`A. Various LEDs Were Well Known During the Relevant Period
`58. LEDs began appearing in practical electronic components in the
`
`1960s.
`
`59. With respect to the LED arts in general, various configurations of
`
`LEDs were commonplace, as evidenced by just a few illustrative references: U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,611,002 to Weeks (Ex. 1007); International Patent Application
`
`Publication No. WO 2005/081319 to Wirth (Ex. 1008);2 and U.S. Patent
`
`Application Publication No. 2004/0217360 to Negley (Ex. 1009).
`
`
`2 The citations to the Wirth reference are to the Bates stamped page numbers in the
`
`bottom right hand corner of the exhibit.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 21
`
`
`
`
`
`The Weeks LED (U.S. Patent No. 6,611,002 (Exhibit 1007))
`
`1.
`60. Weeks generally discloses “gallium nitride material devices having
`
`backside vias.” Ex. 1007 at 1:62-63.
`
`61. Weeks teaches an LED embodiment of its invention having multiple
`
`vias that extend from its backside to a position within its GaN layers:
`
`FIG. 8 illustrates an LED 70 including multiple backside vias 24a,
`24b according to another embodiment of the present invention. LED
`70 includes gallium nitride material device region 14 formed on non-
`conducting layer 15. Non-conducting layer 15 may be
`compositionally-graded and is formed on silicon substrate 12. . . . Via
`24a extends from backside 22 to a position within GaN layer 72 and
`via 24b extends from backside 22 to a position within GaN layer 80.
`An n-type backside contact 20b is formed within via 24a and a p-type
`backside contact 20b is formed within via 24b. A dialectric layer 31
`isolates portions of p-type backside contact 20b to prevent shorting. It
`should be understood that LEDs having a variety of different
`structures may also be provided.
`
`Ex. 1007 at 10:34-54.
`
`
`62. Weeks explains that its contacts may be comprised of “[a]ny suitable
`
`conducting material known in the art”; that “[s]uitable metals for n-type contacts
`
`include titanium, nickel, aluminum, gold, copper, and alloys thereof”; and that
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 22
`
`
`
`
`
`“[s]uitable metals for p-type contacts include nickel, gold, and titanium, and alloys
`
`thereof.” Ex. 1007 at 6:7-21.
`
`63. Weeks further explains that, in some embodiments, light is emitted
`
`out of the top and sides of its LED. Ex. 1007 at 6:53-57 (“In some embodiments,
`
`such as when device 10 is an opto-electronic device, backside contact 20 can
`
`function as a reflective layer. By efficiently reflecting internally emitted light
`
`away from substrate 12, backside contact 20 can direct the emitted light out of
`
`topside 18 and sides 30 of device 10.”).
`
`64. Weeks discloses a few interesting advantages of its design, including
`
`that using it can result in a packed device with smaller dimensions, (Ex. 1007 at
`
`2:57-62), that its invention helps dissipate “thermal energy generated during the
`
`operation of the device,” and that its invention can enhance output efficiencies by
`
`making its backside layer reflective, (Ex. 1007 at 2:63-3:2; 6:37-64).
`
`65. Figure 8, annotated below, depicts the above-described LED disclosed
`
`in Weeks:
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 23
`
`
`
`
`topside 18
`
`substrate 12
`
`backside 22
`66.
`
`backside contact 20a
`
`backside contact 20b
`
`
`
`
`2.
`
`The Wirth LED (International Patent Application
`Publication No. WO 2005/081319 (Exhibit 1008))
`
`67. Wirth generally discloses “optoelectronic components.” Ex. 1008 at
`
`149; Fig. 1.
`
`68. Wirth explains that “[t]he semiconductor function region comprises an
`
`active zone 400 provided to generate . . . radiation . . . .” Ex. 1008 at 187. Wirth
`
`discloses that active zone 400 “comprises for example a plurality of semiconductor
`
`layers and/or is based for example on GaN or GaP” and that “a current spreading
`
`layer 5,” that is highly transparent, is disposed on the active region. Ex. 1008 at
`
`187-88.
`
`
`
`Nichia Exhibit 1003
`Page 24
`
`
`
`
`
`69. Wirth discloses an anode and a cathode—i.e., that portion of the “first
`
`connection” and “second connection” that are exposed on the bottom major surface
`
`of the LED (i.e., at the location of “carrier 3,” which “contains a material suitable
`
`for use as a growth substrate”). Ex. 1008 at 187-92. Wirth explains that “[t]he
`
`connecting conductor material 8 is electrically conductively connected to a first
`
`connection 11 on the side of the carrier facing away from semiconductor function
`
`region 2” and that “connection 12 is conductively connected to the carrier, which is
`
`preferably designed to be electrically conductive, so that the semiconductor
`
`function region can be electrically activated via the first connection and the second
`
`connection.” Ex. 1008 at 191. Wirth further explains that these first and second
`
`connections (i.e., the cathode and the anode) may “contain a metal, such as Ti, Pt,
`
`Al or Au” and that “[a]lloys, and in particular alloys comprising at least one of
`
`these metals, such as AuGe, are also suitable” for creating the cathode and the
`
`anode. Ex. 1008 at 191.
`
`70. Wirth discloses a few interesting advantages of its design, including
`
`that using it can result in a packed device with smaller dimensions, (Ex. 1008 at
`
`149-50, 160, 175, 181, 192-93), and that its invention “advantageously eliminates
`
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
