Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` _________________________
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` _________________________
` SAMSUNG DISPLAY CO., LTD. AND DELL INC.,
` Petitioner,
` v.
` SOLAS OLED, LTD.,
` Patent Owner.
` _________________________
` Case IPR2020-00140
` U.S. Patent No. 6,072,450
`
` ZOOM DEPOSITION OF ADAM FONTECCHIO, Ph.D.
`(Reported Remotely via Video & Web Videoconference)
` Downington, Pennsylvania (Deponent's location)
` Thursday, September 10, 2020
`
`
`REPORTED BY:
`REBECCA L. ROMANO, RPR, CSR No. 12546
`JOB NO. 28413
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
`
`Solas Ex. 2005 - 1 of 43
`Samsung v. Solas - IPR2020-00140
`
`

`

`1
` I N D E X
`2 DEPONENT EXAMINATION
`3 ADAM FONTECCHIO, Ph.D. PAGE
`
`Page 4
`
` MR. RUBIN 8
` MR. GARR 103
`
`Exhibit 1003 US Patent No. 5,670,792; 12
`
`Exhibit 1004 Patent Application 12
` Disclosure H05-3079;
`
`Exhibit 1005 International Application 12
` No. WO96/25020;
`
`Exhibit 1007 Declaration of 12
` Adam Fontecchio, Ph.D.
`
`45
`
`6
`
`78
`
`Page 2
` DEPOSITION OF ADAM FONTECCHIO, Ph.D.,
` taken on behalf of the Patent Owner, with the
` deponent located in Downington, Pennsylvania,
` commencing at 10:38 a.m., Thursday,
` September 10, 2020, remotely reported via
` video & web videoconference before
` Rebecca L. Romano, Stenographic California
` Certified Shorthand Reporter, No. 12546, RPR.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` E X H I B I T S
`9 NUMBER PAGE
`10
` DESCRIPTION
`11
`Exhibit 1001 US Patent No. 6,072,450; 12
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`/////
`
`Page 3
`
`Page 5
`
` Downington, Pennsylvania;
` Thursday, September 10 2020
` 10:38 a.m.
` ---o0o---
`
` (Exhibits were previously marked.)
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are now on the
`record. Today's date is September 10th, 2020, and
`the time is 10:38 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.
` This is the video deposition of
`Dr. Adam Fontecchio in the matter of
`Solas OLED, Ltd., versus Samsung Display Co., Ltd.,
`Case No. IPR 2020-00140.
` This deposition is taking place video Web
`videoconference, with all participants attending
`remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
` My name is Kevin Johnson. I'm the
`videographer representing TransPerfect Deposition
`Services.
` Would counsel please identify yourself
`and state whom you represent, beginning with the
`questioning attorney.
` MR. RUBIN: This is Neil Rubin of
`Russ August & Kabat, and I represent the Patent
`2 (Pages 2 to 5)
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`56
`
`78
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
`(All parties appearing via web videoconference)
`
`1
`2
`
`34
`
`For the Petitioner:
` COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
` BY: DAVID A. GARR
` Attorney at Law
` One CityCenter
` 850 Tenth Street, NW
` Washington, DC 20001-4956
` (202) 662-5250
` dgarr@cov.com
`
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`For the Patent Owner:
`15
` RUSS, AUGUST & KABAT
`16
` BY: NEIL A. RUBIN
`17
` Attorney at Law
`18
` 12424 Wilshire Boulevard
`19
` 12th Floor
`20
` Los Angeles, California 90025
`21
` (310) 826-7474
`22
` nrubin@raklaw.com
`23
`24 ALSO PRESENT:
`25
` Kevin Johnson, Videographer
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
`
`Solas Ex. 2005 - 2 of 43
`Samsung v. Solas - IPR2020-00140
`
`

`

`Page 6
`
`Page 8
`
` ADAM FONTECCHIO, Ph.D.,
`having been administered an oath, was examined and
`testified as follows:
`
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. RUBIN:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Fontecchio.
` A. Good morning, Mr. Rubin.
` Q. Is there any reason today that you cannot
`give full and complete testimony?
` A. There is not.
` Q. So, in particular, is there any medical
`reason, any illness you are suffering or medication
`that you're taking that would affect your ability
`to understand or answer questions?
` A. I don't think so. I am recovering from
`COVID, but I'm -- I'm feeling pretty good today. I
`did take some Advil earlier. I don't think that
`will impact my ability to answer the questions.
` Q. Great. Glad to hear that your recovery
`continues to go well.
` A. Thank you.
` Q. And you have been deposed before; is that
`correct?
` A. I have, yes.
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`45
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1 Owner, Solas OLED, Ltd.
`2
` MR. GARR: Hi, and this is David Garr
`3 with Covington & Burling. I represent the
`4
`petitioner.
`5
` And just for the record, the caption in
`6
`this case, because it's the IPR, is
`7
`Samsung Display Co., Ltd., and Dell Inc.,
`8
`Petitioner, versus Solas OLED, Ltd., Patent Owner.
`9 And I am here on behalf of Petitioner,
`10
`Samsung Display Co., Ltd. and Dell Inc.
`11
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Our court reporter
`12
`today is Rebecca Romano, representing TransPerfect
`13
`Deposition Services.
`14
` You may now swear in the witness.
`15
` THE COURT REPORTER: And before I swear
`16
`in the deponent, I will ask Counsel to stipulate on
`17
`the record that due to the current national
`18
`emergency pandemic, the Court Reporter may swear in
`19
`the deponent even though she is not in the physical
`20
`presence of the deponent and that there will be no
`21
`objection to that at this time, nor will there be
`22
`an objection to it at a future date.
`23
` Counsel?
`24
` MR. RUBIN: The Patent Owner agrees.
`25
` MR. GARR: No objections for Petitioner.
`Page 7
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Thank you.
` THE COURT REPORTER: If you could raise
`your right hand for me, please.
` THE DEPONENT: (Complies.)
` THE COURT REPORTER: You do solemnly
`state, under penalty of perjury, that the testimony
`you are about to give in this deposition shall be
`the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
`truth?
` THE DEPONENT: I do.
`
`/////
`
`Page 9
`1
` Q. And have you been deposed before in IPR
`2
`proceedings?
`3
` A. No, I haven't.
`4
` Q. Okay.
`5
` A. As an expert, but I haven't been deposed.
`6
` Q. I'm sorry. Could you say that again?
`7
` A. I have participated in them before, but I
`8
`haven't been deposed.
`9
` Q. Understood.
`10
` So the process should be familiar from
`11 District Court cases. If at any time a question of
`12 mine is -- is unclear, please ask me to clarify the
`13
`question, and if you answer the question, we can
`14
`assume that you feel that the -- that you
`15
`understood the question that was asked.
`16
` Is that fair?
`17
` A. Yes.
`18
` Q. And you understand that counsel may
`19
`object to one of my questions, but unless you are
`20
`instructed not to answer, you still have to answer
`21
`the question notwithstanding the objection?
`22
` A. Yes, I understand.
`23
` Q. And do you understand that there's a rule
`24
`that applies specifically in IPR proceedings that,
`25
`during -- pardon me -- during breaks in my
`3 (Pages 6 to 9)
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
`
`Solas Ex. 2005 - 3 of 43
`Samsung v. Solas - IPR2020-00140
`
`

`

`Page 12
`
`1 withdrawn.
`2
` Are you able to read Japanese?
`3
` A. No, I am not.
`4
` Q. All right. So your -- your opinions were
`5
`based on the translations and not on reviewing
`6
`the -- or not on attempting to understand the --
`7
`the Japanese originals; is that right?
`8
` A. That's correct. I did not attempt to
`9
`understand the Japanese language. I probably
`10
`looked at the original Japanese ones for figures,
`11
`just to correlate them. I usually do. But I don't
`12
`have a copy here because they weren't an exhibit.
`13
` Q. Okay. I think they -- they were,
`14
`actually, exhibits submitted in -- with the
`15
`petition, but I think that's neither here nor
`16
`there. Just wanted to make sure that I understood
`17 what was in front of you.
`18
` So, then, for the -- so for the '450
`19
`patent, which is Exhibit 1001, for the Utsugi and
`20
`translated Manabe and Eida references, which are
`21
`1003 through 1005, and for your declaration, which
`22
`is 1007, I won't plan to distribute copies of those
`23
`through Zoom. Although, if -- if you do need me to
`24
`provide electronic copies, let me know.
`25
` Fair?
`
`Page 10
`1
`questioning, you are not permitted to discuss
`2
`the -- the substance of your testimony with -- with
`3
`Petitioner's counsel?
`4
` A. I do.
`5
` Q. And so I -- I take it that you will
`6
`follow that rule and not discuss the substance of
`7
`your testimony during breaks?
`8
` A. I will, yes.
`9
` Q. Okay. Tell me: Do you have any printed
`10
`documents with you in the room that you are
`11
`testifying from?
`12
` A. I do, yes.
`13
` Well, of course, there's other things in
`14
`the other side of my office that are not within my
`15
`reach, but for this deposition, I brought some hard
`16
`copies of the exhibits. So I have a copy of my
`17
`declaration. It's a clean copy. I have clean copy
`18
`of the '450 patent. I have a clean copy of the
`19 Manabe copy. The only edit -- alteration I made
`20 was I highlighted Manabe so I could figure out
`21 which document it was, sitting here in the pile. I
`22
`have a copy of the Utsugi patent. Once again, I
`23
`simply highlighted Utsugi's name so I could see
`24 which patent it was. And I have a hard copy of the
`25
`Eida patent, where I also highlighted the -- sorry,
`Page 11
`1
`backwards on the screen -- highlighted his name so
`2
`I could find it. There's no other markings in
`3
`these copies.
`4
` Q. Okay. And anything else?
`5
` A. No.
`6
` I do like Post-Its in case I need to mark
`7
`a section, as we have done in previous depositions.
`8
` Q. Okay. So, then, each of the -- well,
`9
`actually, let me -- let me ask a clarifying
`10
`question.
`11
` So for both Manabe and Eida, do you
`12
`understand that the actual published references
`13
`are -- were written in a -- a language other than
`14
`English and then there were translations to English
`15
`that were prepared for this case?
`16
` A. I do understand, and these are the
`17
`English translations that I have printed out. They
`18
`are -- for Eida, it's Exhibit 1005. And for
`19 Manabe, it's Exhibit 1004. I was provided copies
`20
`of the exhibits, and those are the ones I printed.
`21
` Q. Okay. So you have the English
`22
`translations, but not the -- the -- the references
`23
`in their original language?
`24
` A. That's correct.
`25
` Q. And I take it that you -- well,
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 13
` A. Yes, and I also have electronic copies
`here if I need them as well.
` Q. Okay. And when you say you have
`electronic copies -- so do you have a laptop
`that -- that has -- do you all of the exhibits in
`the case on -- well, I'm sorry.
` Do you have -- are those electronic
`copies on a -- a laptop?
` A. My counselor provided me a folder that
`has --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- these exhibits in it. They sent it by
`email, I think it was, or Dropbox, and I downloaded
`it to a folder on my desktop that I am using here
`to -- for Zoom.
` Q. Okay. And that folder is -- is just
`those five exhibits that you mentioned, or does
`this --
` A. Yes.
` Q. -- have others?
` A. No, just those five files in a separate
`folder on my desktop.
` Q. Okay. So, then, there is another
`exhibit, 1008, that is your CV.
` Do I understand correctly that you don't
`4 (Pages 10 to 13)
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
`
`Solas Ex. 2005 - 4 of 43
`Samsung v. Solas - IPR2020-00140
`
`

`

`Page 14
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`have a printed copy of that?
` A. That is correct.
` Q. Okay.
` A. I don't have a digital copy of that
`either, not -- not labeled as Exhibit 1008.
` Q. Okay. Understood.
` So Exhibit 1007, which you have a copy
`of, do you recognize that as the declaration that
`you submitted in this case?
` A. I do, yes.
` Q. Are there any errors that you are aware
`of in the declaration, sitting here today?
` A. Not that I'm aware of.
` Q. Okay. Anything you would like to change
`in the declaration?
` A. Not at this time.
` Q. Okay. Can you tell me: Have you ever
`designed or fabricated an electroluminescent
`display?
` A. I have, yes.
` Q. Have you ever designed or fabricated an
`organic electroluminescent display?
` A. Yes, but not in the traditional sense.
` So in my own research activities, I have
`been working on fabricated embedded displays,
`Page 15
`1
`primarily electroluminescent, and this includes
`2 working with organic LED materials, OLED materials.
`3
` So the -- the work that I have done has
`4
`been to try and integrate a display into woven
`5
`fabric in a sleeve, so I have been working on that
`6
`for several years, and my work has crossed over
`7
`because, of course, it relies upon OLED technology.
`8
` I have also worked rather extensively in
`9
`liquid crystal technology for -- for decades.
`10
`On -- a lot of underlying technologies are the
`11
`same, such as active matrix back-planes and the
`12
`concept of color -- color filtration, so a lot of
`13
`the technology I work with overlaps with OLED
`14
`technology.
`15
` Q. I'd like to ask you to turn in your
`16
`report to -- well, actually, let me change that.
`17
` If you could please turn to Exhibit 1003
`18
`[sic], the Utsugi patent?
`19
` A. Okay. Yes, I have that here.
`20
` Q. And claim 4 of the '450 patent requires,
`21
`among other things, a selection transistor and a
`22
`driver transistor.
`23
` Do you recall that?
`24
` A. I do.
`25
` Q. And you've offered the opinion that
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
`
`Page 16
`1 Utsugi anticipates claim 4 or, in the alternative,
`2
`renders claim 4 obvious; is that right?
`3
` A. Yes, I have.
`4
` MR. GARR: Objection --
`5
` Q (By Mr. Rubin) So --
`6
` MR. GARR: -- form.
`7
` Q. (By Mr. Rubin) So as you've applied
`8
`claim 4 to the Utsugi prior art reference, what, in
`9 Utsugi, is the selection transistor?
`10
` A. The selection transistor is the switching
`11
`transistor. I think he calls it "QS."
`12
` Q. And as you have applied the -- as you've
`13
`applied claim 4 to the Utsugi reference, what, in
`14 Utsugi, is the drive transistor?
`15
` A. The current controlling transistor. I
`16
`think they -- I think it's "QI"? Yes, QI.
`17
` Q. And I would like to take a look at the
`18
`figures at Utsugi.
`19
` In figure 1 of Utsugi, would you agree
`20
`that the -- that neither the driving transistor
`21
`or -- well, I'm sorry. Withdrawn.
`22
` Would you agree that figure 1 of Utsugi
`23
`does not have a selection transistor or a driver
`24
`transistor?
`25
` MR. GARR: Objection. Form.
`
`Page 17
`1
` THE DEPONENT: I would agree that
`2
`figure 1 doesn't show those; that is correct.
`3
` Q. (By Mr. Rubin) Okay. And figure 1 of
`4 Utsugi is a passive matrix display; is that right?
`5
` A. I believe so. Let me verify with the
`6
`figure description just to make sure we are
`7
`accurate.
`8
` That's correct. They call it a
`9
`"conventional symbol matrix-type display," but it's
`10
`passive matrix display.
`11
` Q. So in a passive matrix display, you would
`12
`not have a selection transistor, and you would not
`13
`have a drive transistor; is that right?
`14
` A. Yes, that's correct. Passive matrix
`15
`displays don't use transistors -- well, they may
`16
`use transistors for driving schemes or for control
`17
`systems, but not within the display matrix itself.
`18
` Q. And -- withdrawn.
`19
` Now, figure 2 of Utsugi shows a -- shows
`20
`a transistor QS and then shows a transistor QI.
`21
` Do you see that?
`22
` A. I do, yes, in the left-hand -- lower left
`23
`corner.
`24
` Q. You would agree that figure 2 of Utsugi
`25
`does not show an insulating layer?
`5 (Pages 14 to 17)
`
`Solas Ex. 2005 - 5 of 43
`Samsung v. Solas - IPR2020-00140
`
`

`

`Page 18
`
`1
` Let me withdraw the question.
`2
` You agree that figure 2 of Utsugi does
`3
`not show an insulating layer that covers either of
`4
`those transistors, QS or QI?
`5
` A. I would agree that, in figure 2, there's
`6
`no insulating layer labeled in the figure.
`7
` Q. Would you agree that, in figure 3 of
`8 Utsugi, there's no insulating layer that's depicted
`9
`covering QS or QI?
`10
` MR. GARR: Objection. Form.
`11
` THE DEPONENT: I'm going to read the
`12
`description just to make sure that the figure
`13
`description doesn't say anything additional.
`14
` I agree regarding figure 3. It doesn't
`15
`show a insulating -- well, it doesn't have one
`16
`labeled.
`17
` Q. (By Mr. Rubin) Well, when you say it
`18
`doesn't have one labeled, is there any marking on
`19
`the -- on the figure that -- that represents an
`20
`insulating layer that covers QS or QI?
`21
` A. There's nothing that is labeled
`22
`"insulating layer." There is this selection
`23
`labeled "PICTURE ELEMENT," and I don't recall if
`24
`the picture element describes the additional layers
`25 when it is -- when the -- when it's described in
`Page 19
`
`1
`the spec.
`2
` Would you -- would you like me to look at
`3
`the picture element description? It's labeled. I
`4
`just don't recall how that's defined -- what layers
`5
`are defined from this spec.
`6
` Q. To -- well, let me ask you this: I mean,
`7
`to one skilled in the art, does "picture element"
`8 mean "insulating layer"?
`9
` MR. GARR: Objection. Form.
`10
` THE DEPONENT: "Picture element" is not
`11
`the same thing as "insulating layer." Picture
`12
`element may mean all of the additional layers, or
`13
`this is the region that is described when the
`14
`picture element is described how it has been
`15 manufactured.
`16
` MR. RUBIN: Okay.
`17
` THE DEPONENT: I can look if you want.
`18
` MR. RUBIN: Sure.
`19
` THE DEPONENT: I don't see it in the
`20
`electronic copy. Search for it quickly, if that's
`21
`okay.
`22
` MR. RUBIN: Okay.
`23
` THE DEPONENT: So, no, they're defining
`24
`the picture element 130 as the region. That
`25
`basically is a pixel.
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
`
`Page 20
`1
` Q (By Mr. Rubin) So would you agree that
`2
`there's nothing in figure 3 that depicts a
`3
`insulating layer that covers QS or QI?
`4
` A. In figure 3, there's nothing labeled as
`5
`an "insulating layer" in the figure. The
`6
`insulating layer doesn't appear to be shown in this
`7
`figure.
`8
` Q. Now, let's turn to figure 4 of Utsugi.
`9
` Is there anything in figure 4 of Utsugi
`10
`that depicts an insulating layer covering
`11
`transistor QS or transistor QI?
`12
` A. So you have additional layers that are
`13
`protected by the insulating layer. You have the
`14
`electron injection electrode, for example, and
`15
`these must be separated by the insulating layer.
`16
` Q. So my question was whether the insulating
`17
`layer itself is depicted.
`18
` Is there anything that you can point to
`19 me on this figure that is the insulating layer?
`20 And I'm referring to figure 4 of Utsugi.
`21
` A. No. I -- it has to be there. Otherwise,
`22
`they would short out under the electron injection
`23
`electrode and the electronic layers.
`24
` Q. So your opinion is that there -- an
`25
`insulating layer has to be there, but you would
`Page 21
`agree that it's not actually shown in figure 4,
`correct?
` A. I would agree it's not labeled in
`figure 4.
` Q. Well, I think there's a difference
`between -- or, potentially, a difference between
`being shown and being labeled.
` So, for example, figure 3 of the patent
`shows a number of transistors that aren't
`individually labeled.
` So my question wasn't whether there was
`something that was labeled as "insulating layer."
` My question is: In figure 4 of Utsugi,
`is there anything that actually depicts an
`insulating layer that covers either QI or QS?
` A. There -- there is not any kind of label
`for the insulating layer, I think, shown separately
`because it's -- it has to be there between the
`transistors and the electron injection layers;
`otherwise, they would short out. It just has to be
`there.
` In addition, you have this line, a
`capital letter A to A, which is the cross-section
`figure 4, which goes to -- which then leads to
`figure 5, which shows you the insulating layer.
`6 (Pages 18 to 21)
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Solas Ex. 2005 - 6 of 43
`Samsung v. Solas - IPR2020-00140
`
`

`

`Page 22
`1
` Q. Okay. So you would agree that figure 5
`2
`shows an insulating layer, but figure 4 does not
`3
`itself show an insulating layer?
`4
` A. No, I would not agree with that. I'm
`5
`telling you, figure 4 leads to figure 5. They are
`6 meant to be looked at hand in hand by anyone
`7
`reading the patent. There is cross-section A,
`8 which shows you the cross-section analysis in
`9
`figure 5, and it shows an insulating layer, so the
`10
`insulating layer is there; it's just not labeled.
`11
` Q. All right. So let's -- withdrawn.
`12
` So taking your point that figure 4 and
`13
`figure 5 should be considered together.
`14
` A. Okay.
`15
` Q. Let's consider them together. Let's look
`16
`at figure 4 and figure 5.
`17
` Now, those are on two different pages of
`18
`the patent, correct?
`19
` A. They are.
`20
` Q. Okay. So would you agree that the page
`21
`of the patent that shows figure 5 -- or that
`22
`contains figure 5 shows the insulating layer, and
`23
`the page of the patent that contains figure 4 does
`24
`not show the insulating layer?
`25
` A. No. I -- once again, it's simply not
`
`Page 23
`1
`labeled in figure 4, just like the glass base isn't
`2
`labeled. The glass base is labeled in figure 5.
`3
`That's the substrate. But, of course, it has to be
`4
`there in figure 4 because the elements aren't just
`5
`floating in space. They have to built on
`6
`something. So it's there; it's just not labeled.
`7
` Q. I want to make sure that I -- that I
`8
`understand clearly what you mean when you say
`9
`something is not labeled.
`10
` So one could understand the word
`11
`"labeled" to mean -- to be referring to the actual
`12 words and lines connecting those words to parts of
`13
`the drawing on figure 4.
`14
` When you say that it's not labeled --
`15
`that the insulating layer is not labeled on
`16
`figure 4, are you simply saying that there are not
`17
`the words "insulating layer" on figure 4, or do you
`18
`also agree that there's no drawing on figure 4 that
`19
`is the insulating layer?
`20
` MR. GARR: Object to form.
`21
` THE DEPONENT: Let me take that in two
`22
`parts. The first part is that there's no words for
`23
`"insulating layer" in figure 4. I agree with you
`24
`on that. And then there is no specific call-out
`25
`drawing for the insulation layer; however, it
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
`
`Page 24
`
`1
`doesn't mean that it's not there, just like the
`2
`glass substrate is there. When you use figure 4
`3 with figure 5, it shows you the additional layers
`4
`that must be there from figure 4 in that
`5
`cross-section.
`6
` Q. (By Mr. Rubin) So you would agree that
`7
`figure 4 expressly shows some aspects of this
`8
`structure and does not expressly show other aspects
`9
`of this structure -- would you agree?
`10
` A. Figure 4 expressly shows some aspects of
`11
`the structure, but you need to use figure 5 to see
`12
`all of the aspects of the structure.
`13
` Q. Would you agree that the glass base
`14
`element 50 shown on figure 5 is not expressly shown
`15
`in figure 4?
`16
` A. I would, yes.
`17
` Q. All right. And would you agree that the
`18
`hole injection electrode 54 that is shown in
`19
`figure 5 is not expressly shown in figure 4?
`20
` A. I would agree, yes, but it's there.
`21
` Q. Okay. And would you agree that the
`22
`various organic thin-film layers element 52 that
`23
`are shown in figure 5 are not expressly shown in
`24
`figure 4?
`25
` A. I would agree they're not expressly
`
`Page 25
`1
`shown, which is why figure 4 and figure 5 need to
`2
`be used together.
`3
` Q. And you would agree that figure 5 --
`4 withdrawn.
`5
` You would agree that the electron
`6
`injection electrode element 55 is expressly shown
`7
`on figure -- in figure 5 and is also expressly
`8
`shown in figure 4, would you?
`9
` A. I agree. 55 electron injection electrode
`10
`is shown expressly in figure 4.
`11
` Q. Okay. And would you agree that the
`12
`insulating layer shown as being made of silicon
`13
`dioxide and being in the layer above the electrodes
`14
`of transistor QI in figure 5 is not expressly shown
`15
`in figure 4?
`16
` A. I agree that it's not labeled or
`17
`expressly shown, but that is why it connects with
`18
`figure 5, where it is expressly shown and labeled.
`19
`It's meant to be used hand in hand, figure 4 and
`20
`figure 5.
`21
` Q. Okay. Now turning to figure 5, would you
`22
`agree that figure 5 does not show the transistor
`23 QS?
`24
` A. I would agree that it doesn't -- it's not
`25
`shown in figure 5 -- QS is not shown in figure 5.
`7 (Pages 22 to 25)
`
`Solas Ex. 2005 - 7 of 43
`Samsung v. Solas - IPR2020-00140
`
`

`

`Page 26
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Q. And figure 5 does not itself show an
`insulating layer that's formed above or that covers
`QS, correct?
` MR. GARR: Object to form.
` THE DEPONENT: Can you ask me that again?
`I'm sorry. I'm looking at the figure while you are
`asking. I am trying to understand your question.
` MR. RUBIN: Okay. All right. I will
`withdraw the question.
` Q. (By Mr. Rubin) Let's turn to figure 6.
` You would agree that figure 6 does not
`depict an insulating layer that covers either
`transistor QS or transistor QI, correct?
` A. Figure 6 is more of a circuit diagram. I
`don't think it's depicting the layers. Of course,
`an insulating layer would be covering everything so
`it doesn't short out to the end though, but it's
`not labeled or depicted here in this figure -- or
`the insulating layer is not labeled in this figure.
` Q. So the only figure that expressly depicts
`the insulating layer -- withdrawn.
` The only figure in Utsugi that expressly
`depicts the insulating layer is figure 5; would you
`agree?
` A. I would agree that figure 5 is the one
`
`Page 27
`1
`that expressly depicts the insulating layer, the
`2
`cross-section -- the cross-section figure. I'm
`3
`sorry.
`4
` Q. And figure 5 is also the only figure that
`5
`depicts the glass base; would you agree?
`6
` A. No. So, first of all, the glass base
`7 must be there for figure 4. As I said, it's
`8
`supposed to use 4 and 5 in a cross-section. It's
`9
`not labeled in figure 4, and, also, figure 1 has
`10
`glass base label that is the prior art figure for
`11
`the passive matrix display.
`12
` Q. So in figure 4, where is the -- what --
`13 what is the -- what -- withdrawn.
`14
` In figure 4, is the glass base labeled?
`15
` A. I'm sorry. I didn't hear the end of your
`16
`question. It -- it cut off for a second.
`17
` Q. Let me restate it.
`18
` In figure 4 of Utsugi, is the glass base
`19
`labeled?
`20
` A. In figure 4, the glass base is not
`21
`labeled. Once again, figure 4 is meant to be used
`22 with figure 5.
`23
` Q. And in figure 4, are there any lines or
`24
`other markings that depict a glass base?
`25
` A. There's no lines or markings for a glass
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
`
`Page 28
`1
`base in figure 4. But in figure 5, it is depicted,
`2
`and figure 4 and figure 5 are meant to be used
`3
`together.
`4
` Q. So you would agree that the only figure
`5
`in Utsugi that contains lines or markings or text
`6
`that depicts an insulating layer is -- withdrawn.
`7
` Setting aside the -- the figure 1 prior
`8
`art figure, you would agree that the only figure in
`9 Utsugi that contains any lines or markings or text
`10
`depicting the insulating layer is figure 5,
`11
`correct?
`12
` A. I agree that the only figure that has
`13
`lines or markings or text relating to the
`14
`insulating layer and the glass base is figure 5,
`15
`but there is additional description in the spec and
`16
`throughout the patent doc- -- document itself.
`17
` Q. Let me ask you to turn to paragraph 68 of
`18
`Exhibit 1007, your declaration.
`19
` A. Paragraph 68?
`20
` Q. Uh-huh. It's on page 36.
`21
` A. Okay. Regarding Eida?
`22
` Q. Yes.
`23
` A. Okay.
`24
` Q. So you say in the last sentence there
`25
`that, "Notably, at the time of the rejection" --
`Page 29
`
`1 well, withdrawn.
`2
` So here you -- and in this paragraph, in
`3
`paragraph 68, you indicate that the U.S.
`4
`counterpart to Eida was cited during prosecution of
`5
`the '450 patent; is that right?
`6
` A. Yes, that's partly what this paragraph is
`7
`talking about.
`8
` Q. And when you say "U.S. counterpart to
`9
`Eida," what does that -- what does it mean for this
`10
`other patent to be the U.S. counterpart of Eida?
`11
` A. So the Eida that we previously discussed
`12
`is not a U.S. Patent. It is -- sorry. I have to
`13
`look up exactly what it is. This is a
`14
`international patent from the World -- it's a PCT,
`15 World Intellectual Property organization. But then
`16
`there is a U.S. Patent 5,909,081 which is connected
`17
`to the World Intellectual Property patent.
`18
` Q. And would you agree that the -- the U.S.
`19
`counterpart -- is Eida '081 patent -- has the same
`20
`specification as the -- the Eida patent that you
`21
`rely on?
`22
` MR. GARR: Objection.
`23
` Q. (By Mr. Rubin) Or, I mean, that the --
`24
`that the specification of the U.S. counterpart
`25
`is -- is simply a translation of the Japanese
`8 (Pages 26 to 29)
`
`Solas Ex. 2005 - 8 of 43
`Samsung v. Solas - IPR2020-00140
`
`

`

`Page 30
`
`Page 32
`
`1
`original?
`2
` A. I have not looked at the U.S. '081 patent
`3
`recently. I -- I believe what you are saying is
`4
`correct, but I would have to look at it and compare
`5
`the two patents to be absolutely certain there was
`6
`no difference between the two.
`7
` Q. Did you do any analysis to determine
`8 whether there was any difference between the Eida
`9
`patent that you are relying on in your declaration
`10
`and this Eida U.S. Patent No. 5,909,081?
`11
` A. Well, I -- I read both of them. I don't
`12
`recall there being any differences between them.
`13
`But like I said, it's been a while since I read
`14
`them, so I can't say with absolute certainty there
`15
`isn't any difference whatsoever.
`16
` Q. Okay.
`17
` A. I don't recall any substantive
`18
`difference.
`19
` Q. Now, you say in the last sentence of
`20
`paragraph 68 that, at the time of the rejection,
`21
`issued claims 17 and 18 were not present in the
`22
`application.
`23
` You do understand that claims 17 and 18
`24 were allowed after the examiner issued a rejection
`25
`based on the U.S. Eida application -- or U.S. Eida
`Page 31
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`patent, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So at the time that the patent -- patent
`examiner allowed claims 17 and 18, the examiner had
`seen and read the U.S. Eida patent, correct?
` A. I -- I can't speak to what the examiner
`had and hadn't done. What you're describing makes
`sense as a process, but, of course, I don't know
`the examiner. I can't speak for them.
` Q. Well, the examiner used -- had used --
`withdrawn.
` Prior to the time that the examiner
`allowed claims 17 and 18, the examiner had already
`used the U.S. Eida patent as the basis for a
`rejection of other claims in the patent, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And when I say "other claims