2002
`Paper No. ___
`Filed: May 6, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`APPLE, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`UUSI, LLC dba NARTRON
`Patent Owner
`
`____________________
`
`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. DARRAN CAIRNS
`IN SUPPORT OF PATENT OWNER’S PRELIMINARY RESPONSE
`
`1628997.1
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................. 2
`I.
`II. MATERIALS REVIEWED ............................................................................................. 4
`III.
`PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ......................................................... 4
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE ’183 PATENT ............................................................................ 5
`V.
`REFERENCES RELIED ON BY PETITIONER........................................................ 12
`A.
`Chiu...................................................................................................................... 12
`B.
`Schwarzbach........................................................................................................ 16
`C. Meadows .............................................................................................................. 17
`D.
`Ingraham ’548 ..................................................................................................... 18
`PROPER CLAIM CONSTRUCTION.......................................................................... 19
`A.
`Legal Standard.................................................................................................... 19
`B.
`“selectively providing signal output frequencies”............................................ 19
`VII. OPINIONS REGARDING PRIOR ART COMBINATIONS .................................... 22
`The Asserted References Do Not Disclose Selectively Providing “Signal
`A.
`Output Frequencies” .......................................................................................... 22
`Neither Chiu nor Schwarzbach Discloses an Oscillator Providing an Output
`Signal Having a “Predefined Frequency” that is Used to Activate Touch
`Terminals in an Array........................................................................................ 26
`[All Grounds]—A POSITA Would Not Have Been Motivated to Combine
`Chiu with Schwarzbach’s Oscillator or Have Reasonably Expected the
`Combination to Work......................................................................................... 27
`A POSITA Would Not Have Been Motivated to Combine Chiu and
`Schwarzbach with Meadows and the Proposed Combination Would Not
`Work to Achieve the Claims of the ’183 Patent ............................................... 28
`VIII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 31
`
`VI.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`1628997.1
`
`i
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`I, Darran Cairns, declare as follows:
`1.
`My name is Dr. Darran Cairns. I am a Director of Program
`
`Operations and Faculty Member in the School of Computing and Engineering at
`
`the University of Missouri Kansas City. I am also an Adjunct Professor of
`
`Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at West Virginia University, where I have
`
`served on the faculty since 2006.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained by UUSI, LLC d/b/a/ Nartron (“Patent Owner” or
`
`“Nartron”) as an independent expert consultant in this proceeding before the Patent
`
`Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “Board”).
`
`3.
`
`I have been asked to review and opine as to Apple’s Petition for Inter
`
`Partes Review, Case IPR2019-00359 of U.S. Patent No. 5,796,183 (“the ’183
`
`Patent”) (the “Petition”), and the Declaration of Dr. Phillip Wright submitted in
`
`support of that Petition. I also have been asked to explain the technology described
`
`and the invention claimed in U.S. Patent No. 5,796,183 and the two Reexamination
`
`Certificates issued for that patent. Finally, I have been asked to consider and
`
`describe the prior art references asserted in the IPR.
`
`4.
`
`I am being compensated at a rate of $490/hour for my work. I have
`
`no other interest in this proceeding. My compensation is in no way contingent on
`
`the nature of my findings, the presentation of my findings in testimony, or the
`
`outcome of this proceeding.
`
`1628997.1
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`5.
`As stated above, I am a Director of Program Operations and Faculty
`
`Member in the School of Computing and Engineering at the University of Missouri
`
`Kansas City, and I am also an Adjunct Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace
`
`Engineering at West Virginia University. I was an Associate Professor with
`
`Tenure at West Virginia University until August 2014.
`
`6.
`
`I hold an undergraduate degree in Physics (1995) and Ph.D. in
`
`Materials Science and Engineering (1999) from the University of Birmingham in
`
`the United Kingdom. From 1998 to 2001, I was a postdoctoral research associate
`
`in the Display Laboratory at Brown University. During my time at the University
`
`of Birmingham, I performed research related to optical fibers and optical fiber
`
`sensors and worked closely with engineers at Pirelli Cables. During my time at
`
`Brown University, I performed research on optoelectronic and display devices
`
`including flexible electronics, conformable displays, encapsulated liquid crystal
`
`devices, and touch sensors.
`
`7.
`
`At West Virginia University my research focused on the fabrication of
`
`flexible electronic devices. My work was funded by both federal agencies,
`
`including the National Science Foundation, NASA, the Air Force Office of
`
`Sponsored Research, and the Department of Energy, and private companies,
`
`including EuropTec USA, Grote Industries, Kopp Glass, Eastman Chemical and
`
`1628997.1
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`Articulated Technologies. I have worked closely with engineers at each of these
`
`companies and assisted them in developing and commercializing electronic devices
`
`including electronic lighting for automotive use; and flexible backlights for
`
`displays.
`
`8.
`
`In my own research program, I am developing patented technologies
`
`on functional coatings for electronic and energy applications. I am a named
`
`inventor on 11 issued U.S. patents in the field of touch sensors, displays, and liquid
`
`crystal materials.
`
`9.
`
`Prior to joining the faculty at West Virginia University, I worked for
`
`five years as a Research Specialist at 3M Touch Systems. My research there
`
`focused on capacitive touchscreen applications. My work at 3M included the
`
`development of patented and proprietary technologies on capacitive touch sensors.
`
`10.
`
`I am a member of the Society of Information Display (SID), the
`
`Institute of Physics (IOP) and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
`
`11. My students have been awarded prestigious fellowships for work
`
`performed in my laboratory including NSF Graduate Fellowships (3 students),
`
`NDSEG Fellowship (1 student) and the RUBY graduate Fellowship (1 student).
`
`12. My curriculum vitae documents more than 79 scientific publications
`
`in journals, books, and peer-reviewed conferences, as well as invited presentations
`
`1628997.1
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`on my work in polymer materials for electronic devices and surfaces, and is
`
`attached as Appendix 1.
`
`II. MATERIALS REVIEWED
`
`13.
`
`I have reviewed the following materials for the purpose of preparing
`
`this declaration: Petition of Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,796,183;
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,796,183 including the Reexamination Certificates issued on
`
`April 29, 2013 and June 27, 2014 (Ex. 1001); the declaration of Dr. Phillip Wright
`
`(Ex. 1003); excerpts from the Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`(Ex. 1002); Prosecution History of Reexamination Control No. 90/012,439 (Ex.
`
`1006); Prosecution History of Reexamination Control No. 90/012,439 (Ex. 1007);
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,561,002 to Chiu (“Chiu”) (Ex. 1005); U.S. Patent No. 4,418,333
`
`to Schwarzbach (“Schwarzbach”) (Ex. 1014); U.S. Patent No. 4,731,548 to
`
`Ingraham (Ingraham ’548) (Ex. 1016); and, U.S. Patent No. 4,922,061 to
`
`Meadows (“Meadows”) (Ex. 1013); and U.S. Patent No. 5,463,388 to Boie et al.
`
`(“Boie”). I have also reviewed the other patents cited in the IPR Petition, including
`
`Exhibits 1004, 1006-1012, 1015, 1017-1032.
`
`III. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`14.
`
`I have been informed that factors relevant to determining the level of
`
`ordinary skill may include: the educational level of the inventor; the type of
`
`problems encountered in the art; the prior art solutions to those problems; the
`
`1628997.1
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`rapidity with which innovations are made; the sophistication of the technology; and
`
`the educational level of the active workers in the field. On this basis, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art of capacitive touch sensors would have had at least a
`
`bachelor’s degree in physics or electrical engineering or equivalent industry
`
`experience in the field.
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE ’183 PATENT
`
`15.
`
`The ’183 Patent, issued in 1998, is exemplary of the efforts Nartron
`
`undertook as a pioneer in touchscreen technology. The ’183 Patent builds upon
`
`and provides significant improvements over prior Nartron patents invented by
`
`Ronald D. Ingraham, including Ingraham ’735 and Ingraham ’548, which Apple
`
`asserts in its IPR Petitions. Filed over 20 years ago, the ’183 Patent provides the
`
`foundation upon which today’s touch screen technology is built. Samsung v.
`
`UUSI, IPR2016-00908, Ex. 1014 at 1.
`
`16.
`
`The ‘183 Patent has been cited at least 161 times by patents and patent
`
`applications. See https://patents.google.com/patent/US5796183A/en#citedBy.
`
`Many of these patents are assigned to companies such as Cypress Semiconductor,
`
`Samsung Electronics, Touchscreen Technologies Inc., Microsoft, Nokia and Intel.
`
`See Samsung v. UUSI, IPR 2016-00908, Ex. 2004.
`
`17.
`
`The ’183 Patent issued on August 18, 1998 from an application filed
`
`on January 31, 1996. The ’183 Patent has been reexamined twice. Ex. 1006-1007.
`
`1628997.1
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`Three of the challenged claims, Claims 37, 38 and 39, were added during the first
`
`reexamination. See Ex. 1001, Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate C1. The
`
`remainder of the challenged claims were added during the second reexamination.
`
`See Ex. 1001, Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate C2. The ’183 Patent generally
`
`relates to a capacitive responsive electronic switching circuit including an
`
`oscillator providing a periodic output signal, an input touch terminal defining an
`
`area for an operator to provide an input by proximity and touch, and a detector
`
`circuit coupled to the oscillator for receiving the periodic output signal from the
`
`oscillator, and coupled to the input touch terminal. Ex. 1001 (Abstract).
`
`18. Capacitive sensors at the time of the invention (including the prior art
`
`cited in the Petition) were largely limited to use in kitchen appliances such as
`
`stoves and microwaves. Indeed, the filing date of the application (January 1996)
`
`predates the release of the widely used Palm Pilot 1000 in March 1996. The touch
`
`screen interface for the Palm Pilot was a relatively crude resistive touch sensor that
`
`was not capable of multi touch input.
`
`19.
`
`In early 1996 when the application from which the ‘183 Patent issued
`
`was filed, due to physical space constraints, there was a drive to make capacitive
`
`touch keypads smaller and smaller while increasing the number of touch terminals
`
`on the keypad. Yet, a substantial barrier existed in that the more densely the touch
`
`terminals were spaced and the smaller the touch terminals became, the greater the
`
`1628997.1
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`risk of coupling adjacent touch terminals, resulting in multiple actuations of touch
`
`terminals or keys where only a single one is desired. This problem is described in
`
`the specification of the ‘183 Patent. See Ex. 1001 (3:64-4:8).
`
`20. At the time, the only way that was known to put touch pads as closely
`
`together as possible was to use physical structures to prevent inadvertent actuation
`
`of adjacent touch pads or cross talk. These physical structures included guard
`
`rings, guard bands, or a combination of electrodes with opposing electric fields
`
`(collectively referred to as “guard rings”) included as a part of each touch terminal.
`
`Id. However, guard rings presented a barrier to developing a truly compact device
`
`because they require additional space and therefore limit the proximity and size of
`
`the touch terminals. There was no known way to overcome this problem until the
`
`invention disclosed and claimed in the ’183 Patent.
`
`21.
`
`Today’s cell phones and tablets offer a rich user input interface in
`
`very large part due to the innovations taught in the ’183 Patent. These devices
`
`require a very closely spaced array of sensitive small-sized multi-touch input
`
`sensors that can be rapidly controlled using a microprocessor. In addition, these
`
`devices must be able to recognize multi-touch gestures and differentiate these
`
`gestures from noise, contamination and unintentional touches. The ’183 Patent
`
`was the first to teach the combination of all these things.
`
`1628997.1
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`22.
`
`In particular, the teachings of the ’183 Patent were crucial to the
`
`elimination of the physical structures used in the prior art to prevent crosstalk
`
`between adjacent input touch terminals and an increase in sensitivity that allowed
`
`for the reduction in the size of individual input touch terminals. In addition, I
`
`understand that the ’183 Patent also teaches how to minimize noise due to
`
`contaminants and how to select oscillator frequencies. This is another critical
`
`contribution that is widely used in today’s cell phones and tablets. The ability to
`
`differentiate between a touch and a partial touch and reject unintentional touches is
`
`essential to the ability to recognize the multi-touch gestures, which led to the rich-
`
`user interface that has driven the rapid adaptation of smart phones and cell phones
`
`utilizing multi-touch capacitive sensors. The ’183 Patent enabled this innovation.
`
`23. By eliminating the need for guard rings in a multi touch pad
`
`configuration, the ’183 Patent offers improvements in detection sensitivity that
`
`allow and enable employment of a multiplicity of small sized touch terminals in a
`
`physically close array such as a keyboard. Id. (5:53-57). This increased sensitivity
`
`is accomplished by using an oscillator circuit in combination with a floating
`
`common operating at a voltage 5V different from the output of the oscillator and
`
`used as a reference for the touch input circuitry and by using high frequency
`
`signals (preferably greater than 800 kHz) to drastically reduce the impact of supply
`
`noise and noise due to contaminants on the screen. Thus, the combination of the
`
`1628997.1
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`innovative sensor design combining an oscillator and floating common with the
`
`implementation of a microprocessor to selectively provide output frequencies to a
`
`closely spaced array of touch input points opened up the development and
`
`commercialization of today’s multi touch capacitive sensors in cell-phones and
`
`tablets that replaced crude resistive sensors for mobile devices. This innovative
`
`touch sensor design allows for input touch terminals to be very small and densely
`
`arranged together. With the use of a microprocessor to send the oscillator signal to
`
`each of these small, closely spaced input touch terminals, it was possible to create
`
`for the first time a keypad we now see in cell phones and tablets.
`
`24. Accordingly, the ’183 Patent paved the way for today’s touch screen
`
`devices. The ’183 Patent achieves detection sensitivity without the need for guard
`
`rings in several ways described below.
`
`25.
`
`First, the ’183 Patent offers “enhanced sensitivity” because it
`
`minimizes “susceptibility to variations in supply voltage and noise” by use of high
`
`oscillator frequencies and by “use of a floating common and supply that follow the
`
`oscillator signal to power the detection circuit.” Id. (6:1-22; 18:66-19:6). The
`
`floating common provides a reference that is only 5V away from the high-
`
`frequency oscillator output signal, enabling the system to compare the signals that
`
`are only 5V apart. This 5V differential thus minimizes noise that otherwise would
`
`1628997.1
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`be generated due to the presence of contaminants on the touch pad, such as liquids
`
`or skin oils. Id. (4:18-20; 5:48-53; 16:12-24).
`
`26.
`
`Second, the ’183 Patent discloses that this “enhanced sensitivity” of
`
`the detection circuit also uses an oscillator that outputs a signal with a voltage that
`
`is as high as possible, for example a 26V peak square wave, while at the same time
`
`is low enough to obviate the need for expensive components and testing to
`
`alleviate safety concerns. Id. (6:6-13; 12:6-23).
`
`27.
`
`Third, the ’183 Patent’s detection circuit “operates at a higher
`
`frequency than prior art touch sensing circuits” which “is not a benign choice”
`
`relative to the prior art detection circuits. Id. (8:9-14). The ’183 Patent discloses
`
`extensive testing that was performed in order to determine the required frequency
`
`ranges. With reference to Figure 3A, the ’183 Patent discloses that the tests were
`
`designed to find the ideal frequency ranges that would provide a substantial
`
`enough “impedance difference between the paths to ground of the touched pad 57
`
`and adjacent pads 59.” Id. (11:1-9). “This . . . result[s] in a much lower incidence
`
`of inadvertent actuation of adjacent touch pads to that of the touched pad.” Id.; see
`
`also id. (11:19-25).
`
`28.
`
`Thus, the ’183 Patent discloses a circuit with very high frequencies, a
`
`floating common generator, and as high an oscillator voltage as possible so as to
`
`bring the input touch terminals in closer proximity and make them smaller, while
`
`1628997.1
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`still providing enhanced detection sensitivity, without the need for physical
`
`structures like guard rings to isolate the touch terminals, which therefore permits
`
`touch terminals to be spaced extremely close together and yet avoid inadvertent
`
`actuations. Id. (8:9-11:60). A schematic of the essential elements of the invention
`
`is shown in Figure 11 reproduced below:
`
`29.
`
`The inventions of the ‘183 Patent therefore made a groundbreaking
`
`contribution to the art as it existed at the time the application was filed. To my
`
`knowledge, no other device existed that allowed for the combination of smaller
`
`input terminals with enhanced detection sensitivity. To the contrary, the
`
`developments in the art at that time were focused on the use of physical structures,
`
`1628997.1
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`such as guard rings to reduce noise and crosstalk. Thus, the invention of the ‘183
`
`Patent represented a marked departure from the prevailing approach at the time.
`
`V.
`
`REFERENCES RELIED ON BY PETITIONER
`A.
`Chiu
`30. Chiu relates to a capacitive switch arrangement useful as a control
`
`panel for devices requiring control inputs from human users, such as major home
`
`appliances, where the switch cells can be relatively closely spaced. Ex. 1005
`
`(1:65-2:2). Chiu explains that when a large number of touch pads are desired in a
`
`relatively small panel area, the minimum electrode and touch pad areas required to
`
`provide the minimum capacitance needed to detect human touch operations
`
`presents a design limitation for then-conventional capacitive attenuator type switch
`
`cells. Id. (6:3-8). In the then-conventional techniques upon which Chiu seeks to
`
`improve, the receiver and transmitter electrodes must share the touch pad, so the
`
`touch pad area required to provide the minimum capacitance for each of the series
`
`capacitances CT and CR (i.e., the capacitance between the touch pad 16/16’ and
`
`the transmitter electrode 20/20’, and the capacitance between the touch pad 16/16’
`
`and the receiver electrode 22/22’, respectively) must be more than twice that
`
`required for the transmitting or receiving electrode alone. Id. (6:9-14).
`
`31. Chiu purportedly is able to reduce the touch pad size by more than
`
`50% without sacrificing coupling capacitance and while also eliminating problems
`
`1628997.1
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`presented by the cross-coupling capacitance between transmitter and receiver
`
`electrodes, by removing the transmitter electrode from a substrate and replacing it
`
`with a discrete capacitor separate from the touch pad and the receiver electrode.
`
`This arrangement allows the touch pad area to be reduced to the area of the
`
`receiver electrode alone without reducing the capacitance of the resulting receiver
`
`capacitance. Id. (6:15-30). Figs. 5A-5B schematically illustrate the outer face of a
`
`dielectric substrate 44 according to this arrangement.
`
`32.
`
`Each touch pad 42 has an associated conductive path 56, extending
`
`substantially parallel to the horizontal rows of touch pads to an associated terminal
`
`point 60. Separate discrete capacitors 52 are provided such that one is associated
`
`with each touch pad. On the opposite side of the substrate 44, receiver electrodes/
`
`pads 48 are provided, with one for each touch pad. Each of the receiver electrodes
`
`is placed in an area overlying and bounded by the area of its associated touch pad
`
`42. The receiver electrodes 48 in each column are serially connected by a
`
`1628997.1
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`conductive path 49, with each column of receiver electrodes being coupled to the
`
`signal detection circuitry 58. Id. (7:1-35).
`
`33.
`
`To help prevent erroneous operation that might result from touching
`
`multiple conductive paths, a second plurality of conductive paths 70 are formed on
`
`the outer surface of the substrate 44 so that respective first and second paths are
`
`closely adjacent to one another, e.g., such that a human touch to one path
`
`ordinarily would involve touch to the other in the pair. Each of the paths 70 is
`
`connected to a terminal point 72, which is electrically connected through the
`
`substrate to terminal points 71. The terminal points 71, in turn, are connected to a
`
`capacitor network 74 via conductive runs 73, and paths 70 thus can function as a
`
`“pseudo-touch pad.” Id. (7:36-67). Detection circuitry 58 ensures that detection of
`
`an attenuated signal at output terminal 84 of capacitor network 74 takes priority
`
`over any other input thereto. And because the relative positioning of conductive
`
`paths 56 and 70 is such that touching of one of runs 56 ordinarily would be
`
`accompanied by the touching one of the runs 70 as well, the control system does
`
`not respond to inadvertent touching of any other panel except the touch pads.
`
`34.
`
`Fig. 6A shows Chiu’s control circuit:
`
`1628997.1
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`Microprocessor 90 sequentially generates a scan pulse for the rows shown in Figs.
`
`5A-5B and a separate test signal is generated simultaneously with each scan pulse
`
`for the capacitive network to address the erroneous signal detection issue discussed
`
`above. Id. (8:45-55). Signal detection circuitry 58 senses the scan signal coupled
`
`by each of the touch cells in the row being scanned to their respective output lines
`
`49 to detect an attenuation of the column output line signal, signifying a touch. Id.
`
`(8:63 – 9:6).
`
`1628997.1
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`B.
`35.
`
`Schwarzbach
`Schwarzbach discloses an improved appliance control system for
`
`providing communication between a central control unit and remote slave units
`
`over common power lines such as a building’s power supply. Ex. 1014 (1:7-13,
`
`2:3-6). The appliance control system includes a central control unit and a number
`
`of slave units each including a user-programmable microprocessor. Appliances
`
`and light fixtures are plugged into a respective slave unit, which is plugged into
`
`outlet sockets of a power main in a building. This permits manual or automatic
`
`transmission of command signals and status request signals from the central
`
`control unit to individually addressed slave units, and transmission of status signals
`
`from the slave units to the central control unit. Id. (Abstract).
`
`36.
`
`The central control unit includes a display panel, which is coupled to a
`
`microprocessor, and a keyboard. Id. (4:28-29, 4:50-51). The keyboard is
`
`connected as a 3×8 matrix, with its row pins 1 through 8 connected to
`
`corresponding microprocessor output terminals. Key depresses are detected by
`
`driving output terminals and scanning for closed keys. Specifically, the
`
`microprocessor sequentially drives its output terminals to a high level for a set
`
`interval. All keyboard pins are scanned once during each cycle of AC line voltage
`
`for simultaneously driving the keyboard rows and the displaying the panel
`
`character terminals. During the time that a keyboard row pin is held high, the
`
`1628997.1
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`microprocessor looks at its input wires to determine whether a key is closed.
`
`When the key closure is detected, the microprocessor takes the appropriate action
`
`after the end of that keyboard scan. Id. (4:55 to 5:1).
`
`C. Meadows
`37. Meadows discloses a capacitive touch panel system of the type used
`
`with a pen or stylus. Ex. 1013 (1:12-15). The Meadows patent addresses
`
`electromagnetic interference caused by the conductive coating on the faceplate and
`
`the touch panel system, which generates electromagnetic noise that can make it
`
`difficult to determine a touch location. Id. (1:51-63). As disclosed, Meadows
`
`reduces susceptibility to electromagnetic noise by using a “lock-in type” signal
`
`demodulator and low-pass filter. Id. (2:61-68). The signal demodulator, in
`
`response to a pseudo-random number signal, employs a random frequency
`
`measurement signal with a frequency between 150 kHz and 250 kHz as reference
`
`for demodulating the positive and negative differential output signal. Id. (2:61-64,
`
`4:28-32). This signal is fed into the low pass filter, which provides from the
`
`demodulated signal a substantially steady-state address signal that corresponds to
`
`an average of the magnitude of the current drawn through a bar electrode. Id.
`
`(2:64-68).
`
`1628997.1
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`Ingraham ’548
`D.
`38. Apple’s six petitions for IPR cite three patents granted in the name of
`
`Ingraham: U.S. Patent Nos. 4,731,548 (Ex. 1016); 4,758,735 (Ex. 1017); and
`
`5,087,825 (Ex. 1025). Each of these three Ingraham patents was invented by a
`
`Nartron engineer and considered during prosecution of the ’183 Patent. The latter
`
`two Ingraham patents—namely, Ingraham ’735 and Ingraham ’825 (Ex. 1017 and
`
`1025, respectively)—are extensively discussed in the ’183 Patent. Ex. 1001 (3:44-
`
`50; 4:3-8; 5:43-50; 6:6-16; 8:11-18; 18:1-10). And both Ingraham ’548 and
`
`Ingraham ’825 were cited in and relied upon in the Samsung IPR.
`
`39.
`
`Like the later Ingraham patents, Ingraham ’548—the earliest of these
`
`three Ingraham patents, and the particular Ingraham relied upon in Apple’s
`
`Petition—discloses a touch control switch circuit. Ex. 1016 (Abstract). Ingraham
`
`’548 in particular improves reliability of touch-controlled switching circuits since
`
`it does not rely upon induced voltage for its operation. Rather, the body
`
`capacitance of the person actuating the switch is coupled in a voltage dividing
`
`circuit used to provide a logic output signal for controlling a DC trigger level
`
`applied to a Triac or other bilateral solid-state switch coupled between the line
`
`voltage source and a load to be controlled. By utilizing a direct current control
`
`signal for the solid-state switch, the switch is rendered conductive near the
`
`beginning of each half-cycle of operation and remains conductive during each half-
`
`1628997.1
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`cycle of each cycle of operation. Thus, through a DC gate signal, inductive loads
`
`such as fluorescent lights and motors, may be controlled. Id. (1:38-66).
`
`VI. PROPER CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`A.
`Legal Standard
`40.
`I understand that ’183 Patent is expired. Accordingly, I understand
`
`that the claim terms should be construed according to Federal Circuit’s decision in
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp. Below I discuss the meaning of “selectively providing
`
`signal output frequencies” under that standard. I do not address the meaning of
`
`other claim terms at this time, but may do so in the event the Petition is instituted.
`
`B.
`
`41.
`
`“selectively providing signal output frequencies”
`
`It is my opinion that “selectively providing signal output frequencies”
`
`should be construed as meaning selectively sending signals selected from various
`
`frequencies available from a microcontroller to the input touch terminals. My
`
`reasons are as follows.
`
`42.
`
`The ‘183 Patent selectively provides signal output frequencies to the
`
`input touch terminals using a “dedicated microprocessor referenced to the floating
`
`supply and floating common of the detection circuit maybe [sic] used to cost
`
`effectively multiplex a number of touch terminal output signals over a two line
`
`optical bus to a dedicated microprocessor referenced to a fixed supply and
`
`ground.” Ex. 1001 (6:16-22). The floating common generator receives the
`
`1628997.1
`
`19
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`oscillator output signal and “outputs a regulated floating common that is 5 volts
`
`below the square wave output from the oscillator and has the same phase and
`
`frequency as the received square wave.” Id. (12:13-18).
`
`43. With reference to Figure 11, the floating common output is, in turn,
`
`supplied to both the microcontroller 500 and the touch circuits (labeled as 9001 to
`
`900nm in Figure 11 and labeled as 400 in Figure 4) via line 301. Id. (12:17-22;
`
`18:39-49). With reference to Figures 4 and 11, “[t]ouch circuit 400 senses
`
`capacitance from a touch pad 450 via line 451 and outputs a signal to
`
`microcontroller 500 via line 401 upon detecting a capacitance to ground at touch
`
`pad 450 that exceeds a threshold value.” Id. (12:24-33).
`
`44. Notably, with reference to the multiple touch pad embodiment of
`
`Figure 11 at issue here:
`
`Microcontroller 500 selects each row of the touch circuits 9001 to 900nm
`by providing the signal from oscillator 200 to selected rows of touch
`circuits. In this manner, microcontroller 500 can sequentially activate
`the touch circuit rows and associate the received inputs from the
`columns of the array with the activated touch circuit(s).
`
`Id. (18:34-59) (emphasis added). The ‘183 Patent’s ability to provide signal output
`
`frequencies to selected rows of the input touch terminals provides an “expanded
`
`ability to detect faults” and can “distinguish desired multiple touch pad touches.”
`
`Id. (6:22-43).
`
`1628997.1
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case IPR2019-00360
`Patent No. 5,796,183
`
`45.
`
`The ’183 Patent claims also require that the microcontroller
`
`selectively provide frequencies, not merely one set frequency, to selected rows of
`
`input touch terminals. As explained in the ’183 Patent, the oscillator circuit can
`
`generate a range of frequencies: “Although the preferred frequency is at or above
`
`100kHz, and more preferably at or above 800 kHz, it is conceivable that
`
`frequencies as low as 50 kHz could be used provided the frequency creates a
`
`difference in the impedance paths of adjacent pads that is sufficient enough to
`
`accurately distinguish between an intended touch and the touch of an adjacent
`
`pad,” (Ex. 1001 at 11:19-25) and “[a]s will be apparent to those skilled in the art,
`
`the values of the resistors and capacitors utilized in oscillator 200 may be varied to
`
`from those disclosed above to provide for different oscillator output frequencies”
`
`Id. (14:22-25). Because the oscillator can generate a range of frequencies to send
`
`to the microcontroller, the microcontroller, in turn can send the selected
`
`frequencies to the input touch terminals.
`
`46.
`
`Thus, consistent with