UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.; AND
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`NEODRON LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case No. IPR2020-00267
`U.S. Patent No. 8,432,173
`
`DECLARATION OF RICHARD A. FLASCK
`
`1
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 1 of 29
`
`
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.; AND
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`NEODRON LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case No. IPR2020-00267
`U.S. Patent No. 8,432,173
`
`DECLARATION OF RICHARD A. FLASCK
`
`1
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 1 of 29
`
`
`
`I.
`
`1.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`I have been retained as an expert in this case by Neodron Ltd. (“Neodron”). I
`
`have been asked to consider and opine on issues of validity regarding U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,432,173 (“’173 Patent”).
`
`2.
`
`In forming my opinions, I have reviewed, considered, and had access to the
`
`patent specifications and claims, their prosecution histories, the parties’
`
`proposed claim constructions, and the extrinsic evidence cited by the parties
`
`in connection with those proposed constructions. I have also relied on my
`
`professional and academic experience in the fields of thin film devices, flat
`
`panel displays, active matrix, LED, OLED, touchscreens, and touch panels. I
`
`reserve the right to consider additional materials as I become aware of them
`
`and to revise my opinions accordingly.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`
`3. My qualifications for forming the opinions set forth in this Declaration are
`
`summarized here and explained in more detail in my curriculum vitae, which
`
`is attached as Exhibit 2002.
`
`4.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Physics from the University of
`
`Michigan, Ann Arbor, in 1970. I thereafter received a Master of Science
`
`degree in Physics from Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan, in 1976.
`
`I am the founder and CEO of RAF Electronics Corp., where I developed and
`
`
`
`2
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 2 of 29
`
`
`
`patented Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCOS) microdisplay projection
`
`technology using active matrix transistor arrays as well as developed
`
`proprietary LED-based Solid State Lighting (SSL) products.
`
`5.
`
`After receiving my bachelor’s degree, I was employed as a scientist and a
`
`manager by Energy Conversion Devices, Inc., from 1970 through 1982. My
`
`work at Energy Conversion Devices concerned the development of
`
`electroluminescent displays, thin film photovoltaics, ablative imaging films,
`
`non-volatile memory, multi-chip modules, and superconducting materials.
`
`After leaving Energy Conversion Devices, I founded and served as CEO of
`
`Alphasil, Inc., where I developed amorphous silicon thin film transistor (TFT)
`
`active matrix liquid crystal displays (AMLCDs). My work at Alphasil
`
`included thin film transistor array substrate process and circuit design, data
`
`driver and gate driver design, scalers, video circuits, gamma correction
`
`circuits, backlighting, and inverter design. At Alphasil I also designed and
`
`incorporated touch panel screens into active matrix display devices. The touch
`
`panel technologies included surface acoustic wave and capacitive sensing. I
`
`worked at Alphasil from 1982 through 1989.
`
`6.
`
`After leaving Alphasil, I founded RAF Electronics Corp., described above. I
`
`have served as CEO of RAF Electronics since that time. At RAF I developed
`
`HDTV projection technology including transistor array substrates for LCOS
`
`
`
`3
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 3 of 29
`
`
`
`devices and the associated optical systems. My activities at RAF have
`
`included developments in lighting systems using both traditional LED and
`
`OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode) technologies. In 2016 I was granted
`
`US Patent 9,328,898 which includes OLED and LED technology and lighting
`
`systems. In 2019 RAF received a CalSEED grant from the California Energy
`
`Commission to develop ultra-efficient lighting products and explore
`
`establishing a Central Valley manufacturing facility.
`
`7.
`
`In 1997, I took the position of President and COO at Alien Technology
`
`Corporation, where I was responsible for completing a Defense Advanced
`
`Research Projects Agency (DARPA) contract, and for implementing MEM
`
`fluidic self-assembly (FSA) technology. I left that position in 1999.
`
`8.
`
`In 2002, I co-founded and served as COO of Diablo Optics, Inc., where I
`
`developed, produced, and commercialized key optical components for HDTV
`
`projectors, such as polarization optics, condenser lenses, projection lenses,
`
`and ultra-high performance optical interference filters using thin film stacks
`
`in conjunction with LED and thin film transistor arrays and devices. I left
`
`Diablo in 2007.
`
`9.
`
`I am listed as an inventor on twenty-six patents issued in the United States and
`
`foreign countries, including one United States design patent. My inventions
`
`concern technologies including LED devices, semiconductor materials, glass
`
`
`
`4
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 4 of 29
`
`
`
`materials, non-volatile memory cells, thin film transistors, flat panel
`
`backplanes and displays, and wafer based active matrices, and various
`
`transistor array substrates.
`
`10.
`
`I have authored or co-authored
`
`twenty-five articles or conference
`
`presentations, including numerous papers and presentations concerning
`
`lighting and display technologies. My curriculum vitae (Exhibit A) lists these
`
`articles, conference presentations, and patents.
`
`11.
`
`I am also a member of several professional organizations, including the OSA,
`
`SPIE, AES, SID, and the IEEE.
`
`12.
`
`In summary, I have almost 50 years of experience in the field of high tech
`
`product development including flat panel displays, transistor array substrates,
`
`touchscreens and touch panels, and OLED and LED devices.
`
`13.
`
`In the past twelve years, I have served as an expert witness for patent
`
`infringement litigation (or arbitrations) or PTAB proceedings in the following
`
`cases:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Nichia Corporation v. Seoul Semiconductor, 3:06-cv-0162 (NDCA), on
`
`behalf of Seoul Semiconductor Company, Inc.
`
`Hewlett Packard v. Acer Incorporated et al., U.S. ITC Investigation No.
`
`337-TA-606, on behalf of Acer Incorporated et al.
`
`
`
`5
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 5 of 29
`
`
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Samsung v. Sharp, U.S. ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-631, on behalf
`
`of Samsung.
`
`Sharp v. Samsung, U.S. ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-634, on behalf
`
`of Samsung.
`
`O2Micro v. Monolithic Power Systems et al., U. S. ITC Investigation
`
`No. 337-TA-666, on behalf of O2Micro.
`
`IPR No. IPR2014-0168 of U.S. 7,612,843, on behalf of Petitioner Sony,
`
`Corp.
`
`Ushijima v. Samsung, 1:12-cv-00318-LY (WDTX), on behalf of
`
`Ushijima.
`
`Delaware Display Group LLC and Innovative Display Technologies
`
`LLC v. Sony Corp. et al., Case No. 1:13-cv-02111-UNA DDEL, on
`
`behalf of Sony Corp.
`
`Funai v. Gold Charm Limited, Case No. IPR2015-01468, on behalf of
`
`Petitioner Funai.
`
`Phoenix, LLC v. Exar et al., Case No. 6:15-CV-00436-JRG-KNM., on
`
`behalf of Exar et al.
`
`MiiC v. Funai, Case No. 14-804-RGA, on behalf of Funai.
`
`Delaware Display Group LLC v. Vizio, Case No. 13-cv-02112-RGA,
`
`on behalf of Vizio.
`
`6
`
`
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 6 of 29
`
`
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`ARRIS v. Sony, U.S. ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1060, on behalf of
`
`Sony.
`
`BlueHouse Global, LTD. v. Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co.
`
`LTD., IPRs on behalf of BlueHouse Global, LTD.
`
`Phoenix, LLC v. Wistron Corp., Case No. 2:17-cv-00711-RWS, on
`
`behalf of Wistron Corp.
`
`Ultravision v. Absen et al., ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1114, on
`
`behalf of Absen et al.
`
`Viavi Solutions Inc. v. Materion Corp., PGR2019-00017, on behalf of
`
`Viavi Solutions, Inc.
`
`NEC v. Ultravision, IPR2019-01123 and IPR2019-01117, on behalf of
`
`NEC.
`
`Solas OLED Ltd. v. Samsung Display Co., Ltd., et al., Case No. 2:19-
`
`cv-00152-JRG, on behalf of Solas.
`
`Solas OLED Ltd. v. LG Display Co., Ltd., et al., Case No. 6:19-cv-
`
`00236-ADA, on behalf of Solas.
`
`Neodron v Lenovo / Motorola, Case No. 3:19-cv-05644-SI, on behalf
`
`of Neodron
`
`Neodron v Dell, Case No. 1:19-cv-00819-ADA, on behalf of Neodron
`
`Neodron v HP, Case No. 1:19-cv-00873-ADA, on behalf of Neodron
`
`
`
`7
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 7 of 29
`
`
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Neodron v Microsoft, Case No. 1:19-cv-00874-ADA, on behalf of
`
`Neodron
`
`Neodron v Amazon, Case No. 1:19-cv-00898-ADA, on behalf of
`
`Neodron
`
`Neodron v Samsung, Case No. 1:19-cv-00903-ADA, on behalf of
`
`Neodron
`
`Solas OLED Ltd. v Dell, Case No. 6:19-cv-00514-ADA, on behalf of
`
`Solas
`
`Solas OLED Ltd. v Google, Case No. 6:19-cv-00515-ADA, on behalf
`
`of Solas
`
`Solas OLED Ltd. v Apple, Case No. 6:19-cv-00537-ADA, on behalf of
`
`Solas
`
`Solas OLED Ltd. v HP, Case No. 6:19-cv-00631-ADA, on behalf of
`
`Solas
`
`LGD v Solas OLED Ltd., Case IPR2020-00177, on behalf of Solas
`
`Samsung v. Neodron, Case IPR2020-00192, on behalf of Neodron
`
`Samsung v. Neodron, Case IPR2020-00234, on behalf of Neodron
`
`Samsung v. Neodron, Case IPR2020-00225, on behalf of Neodron
`
`
`
`8
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 8 of 29
`
`
`
`III. TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND
`
`14. The ’173 Patent generally relates to devices containing a touch-sensitive
`
`display (which may be referred to as a “touchscreen”) that allows a user to
`
`interact with an electronic device with a finger or stylus. This display may
`
`include a touch sensor overlaid on or incorporated into a display screen.
`
`15. A capacitive touch system can be designed to detect and report a two-
`
`dimensional coordinate (e.g., x, y position) identifying the location of the
`
`user’s finger or stylus. When a finger touches a capacitive touch sensor, it
`
`interacts with electrical fields projected from the sensor. In particular, the
`
`finger creates a capacitive coupling between the user’s body and the portion
`
`of the sensor near the touch. This effect is commonly referred to as a change
`
`in capacitance within the touchscreen at the location of the touch. A touch
`
`controller, microprocessor, or other related application specific integrated
`
`circuit (“ASIC”) may be employed to measure this electrical effect and
`
`process information from that measurement to determine the touch’s position
`
`on the screen.
`
`
`
`9
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 9 of 29
`
`
`
`16. The most common type of capacitive touch sensing is “mutual capacitance”
`
`sensing. Mutual capacitance refers to the capacitance between a drive
`
`electrode (or “drive line”) and a sense electrode (or “sense line”).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 10 of 29
`
`
`
`17.
`
`In a common mutual-capacitance implementation, the touch sensor includes
`
`an array of electrodes that are arranged along x- and y-axes to form capacitive
`
`nodes where the electrodes intersect, as depicted above. By convention, the
`
`transmit or “drive” electrodes are commonly referred to as the X axis, and the
`
`receive or “sense” electrodes are referred to as the Y axis. Mutual capacitive
`
`sensing “uses a transmit-receive process to induce charge across the gap
`
`between an emitting electrode and a collecting electrode (the transmitter and
`
`the receiver respectively, also referred to as X and Y). … As a finger touch
`
`interacts with the resulting electric field between the transmitter and receiver
`
`electrodes, the amount of charge coupled from transmitter to receiver is
`
`changed.” ’784 patent at 1:16-39. Conceptually, when a finger comes near a
`
`capacitive node, it effectively “steals” charge from the drive electrode, which
`
`reduces the capacitance of the node in a measurable way, as depicted below:
`
`
`18. The electrodes used for mutual capacitive sensing may be formed in numerous
`
`ways. Some electrodes are formed from a transparent conductive material
`
`
`
`11
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 11 of 29
`
`
`
`called Indium Tin Oxide (“ITO”). Other electrodes are formed from opaque
`
`metallic conductors such as silver or copper. For opaque metals to be usable
`
`as touch screen electrodes, they need to be formed into fine mesh patterns that
`
`allow light from the underlying display to pass through. In each case, the
`
`conductive material is patterned to form electrodes.
`
`19.
`
`In order to form the X-Y array of electrodes typically used for mutual
`
`capacitive sensing, in which one set of electrodes runs vertically and another
`
`runs horizontally, some provision must be made to prevent the two sets of
`
`electrodes from making direct electrical contact with each other. One way to
`
`accomplish that is by putting the vertical electrodes and horizontal electrodes
`
`on separate layers, one above the other.
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`20.
`
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) for the ’173
`
`patent would be a person with a bachelor’s degree in physics, electrical
`
`engineering, or a related field, and at least two years of experience in the
`
`research, design, development, and/or testing of touch sensors, touchscreens
`
`and display stacks, human-machine interaction and interfaces, and/or
`
`graphical user interfaces, and related firmware and software. A person with
`
`less education but more relevant practical experience, or vice versa, may also
`
`meet this standard.
`
`
`
`12
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 12 of 29
`
`
`
`21.
`
`I further note that I am at least a POSITA and that for 50 years I have worked
`
`with colleagues who are POSITAs. Thus, I am well qualified to give technical
`
`opinions from the perspective of a POSITA.
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`22.
`
`I understand that the Administrative Law Judge in a separate proceeding has
`
`adopted certain claim constructions regarding the ’173 Patent, but that the
`
`Board has, so far, only adopted one of these constructions. Therefore I have
`
`applied the following construction of “displacement”: “distance and direction
`
`of movement.”
`
`23. The Petition mentions several additional claim constructions that have not
`
`been adopted by the Board. The Petition and Dr. Bederson state that these
`
`constructions are not relevant to their obviousness arguments. The additional
`
`constructions are as follows:
`
`Term
`
`“object”
`
`“sensing element”
`
`“sensing path”
`
`ALJ’s Construction (not addressed by the
`Board)
`“either an inanimate object, such as a wiper,
`pointer, or stylus, or alternatively a human finger
`or other appendage any of whose presence
`adjacent the element will create a localized
`capacitive coupling from a region of the element
`back to a circuit reference via any circuitous path,
`whether galvanically or nongalvanically”
`“physical electrical sensing element made of
`conductive substances”
`“a path for sensing that is determined for each
`use”
`
`
`
`13
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 13 of 29
`
`
`
`Term
`
`“a sensing element that
`comprises a sensing path
`that comprises a length”
`
`“the range of parameter
`values being associated
`with the length of the
`sensing path”
`“the sensing path
`comprises a closed loop”
`
`ALJ’s Construction (not addressed by the
`Board)
`“a physical electrical sensing element made of
`conductive substances that comprises a path for
`sensing that is determined for each use that
`comprises a length.”
`Plain and ordinary meaning; “the range of
`parameter values being associated with the length
`of the sensing path”
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning: “the sensing path
`comprises a closed loop”
`
`
`VI. THE TRENT REFERENCE
`
`24.
`
`I have reviewed the Trent reference, U.S. Patent Application Publication No.
`
`2004/0252109 A1, Ex. 1005. In my opinion, Trent does not render obvious
`
`any claim of the ’173 Patent.
`
`25. Trent teaches specific designs for touch sensors, as well as processing
`
`techniques to allow such sensors to be made with relatively few distinct
`
`sensing channels. Each sensor design disclosed in Trent is circular; or, as
`
`Trent describes them, “closed-loop.”
`
`26. Trent includes two distinct embodiments of physical sensing elements. In one
`
`embodiment, the sensor determines the absolute position of a user’s finger. In
`
`the other embodiment, the sensor is only capable of determining the relative
`
`motion of a user’s finger.
`
`
`
`14
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 14 of 29
`
`
`
`27. Paragraph 25 of Trent provides an example of the absolute position sensing
`
`embodiment. As Trent explains, that embodiment is “configured to sense a
`
`first position of an object.” Ex. 1005 ¶ 25. The absolute position sensing
`
`embodiment in Trent “generate[s] at least one action in response to the first
`
`position.” Id. This embodiment can be seen in Figure 28 of Trent, which is
`
`annotated with coloring here:
`
`Ex. 1005 Fig. 28
`
`28. As the coloring here illustrates, the absolute position sensing embodiment of
`
`
`
`Trent is illustrated here with eight individual touch sensing electrodes 91. Id.
`
`Fig. 28; see also id. ¶ 105. There are eight electrical leads 94 connecting each
`
`
`
`15
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 15 of 29
`
`
`
`individual electrode to the touch sensing circuitry. Id. From this figure, a
`
`POSITA would readily understand that the absolute position sensing
`
`embodiment is able to determine in absolute terms where on the closed-loop
`
`sensor a user is touching. For example, if a user touches the 12 o’clock
`
`position of the sensor, the capacitance of the two electrodes colored in red and
`
`pink here will be altered. The system can detect that and determine
`
`unambiguously that the user’s touch is at the top of the closed-loop sensor.
`
`29. Figure 31 of Trent likewise illustrates an absolute position sensing
`
`embodiment; each of the two closed-loop sensors depicted there has eight
`
`sensing electrodes, each of which is separately coupled to the touch sensor,
`
`just as in Figure 28.
`
`
`
`16
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 16 of 29
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005 Fig. 31
`
`30. Paragraph 23 of Trent, on the other hand, provides an example of the relative
`
`
`
`motion sensing embodiment. As Trent explains, that embodiment is
`
`“configured to sense motion of an object.” Ex. 1005 ¶ 23. In turn, the relative
`
`motion sensing embodiment is configured to “generate an action in response
`
`
`
`17
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 17 of 29
`
`
`
`to the motion on the touch sensor.” Id. This embodiment can be seen in Figure
`
`30 of Trent, which is annotated with coloring here:
`
`Ex. 1005 Fig. 30
`
`31. As can be seen by the colored annotations, the relative motion sensing
`
`
`
`embodiment of Trent has twelve individual touch sensing electrodes, but they
`
`are connected together in a particular pattern such that only three signal lines
`
`connect to the rest of the sensing circuit. As Trent describes it, “if absolute
`
`position information is not necessary, and only relative motion is needed, the
`
`electrodes of the closed-loop sensor can be laid out as repeating patterns of
`
`subsets of three or more sensor electrodes.” Id. ¶ 107. In this embodiment, it
`
`
`
`18
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 18 of 29
`
`
`
`is impossible to unambiguously determine the position of a user’s touch. For
`
`example, if a user touches the 12 o’clock position of the closed-loop sensor,
`
`the electrodes highlighted here in red and green will detect a touch. But there
`
`is no way for the circuit to determine from that signal whether the user is
`
`touching 12 o’clock, 3 o’clock, 6 o’clock, or 9 o’clock. As Trent explains it:
`
`“When the same subsets are repeated multiple times in each closed-loop
`
`sensor, the sensor signals cannot be used to determine which of the subsets is
`
`interacting with the input object.” Id.
`
`32. However, the relative motion sensing embodiment is capable of determining
`
`relative motions of a user’s finger. For example, if the user’s finger moves
`
`from 12 o’clock to 1 o’clock, the green electrode will no longer register a
`
`touch; instead, the red and blue electrodes will register a touch. From this, the
`
`circuit can determine that a clockwise rotation has been made. It does not
`
`know whether it is 12 to 1 o’clock or, for example, 3 to 4 o’clock, but it can
`
`determine the relative motion. In Trent’s explanation: “However, the position
`
`of the input object can be determined within the subset and, if the subset is
`
`large enough such that the input object will not move beyond the subset before
`
`the next data sample is taken, relative position of the input object can be
`
`determined between consecutive positions and compared to calculate motion
`
`of the input object.” Id.
`
`
`
`19
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 19 of 29
`
`
`
`33. These two embodiments are distinct and cannot readily be combined. Trent’s
`
`teachings regarding one do not necessary apply to the other. In light of those
`
`facts, it is troubling that Dr. Bederson does not distinguish between the two
`
`embodiments. To the contrary, he interchanges the embodiments without
`
`explanation, which calls his conclusions into doubt.
`
`34. For example, the first three primary limitations of each independent claim
`
`(1[a]-[c], 10[a]-[c], 19[c]-[e]) require capacitive couplings and first signals
`
`sufficient to “determin[e]… the first position of the object along the sensing
`
`path” (emphasis added). Trent is explicit that the signals received by the
`
`relative motion embodiment cannot be used to determine a first position. See,
`
`e.g., Ex. 1005 ¶ 107 and Fig. 30. Accordingly, for these limitations, Dr.
`
`Bederson relies on the absolute position sensing embodiment. Ex. 1002 ¶¶ 79-
`
`94. For example, Dr. Bederson quotes the sentence in paragraph 92 of Trent
`
`which refers to the absolute position sensing embodiment as an alternative
`
`that “may occasionally be useful,” in other words that is less preferable than
`
`the relative motion sensing electrode described elsewhere in Trent. Id. ¶ 90
`
`(quoting Ex. 1005 ¶ 92). Likewise, Dr. Bederson points to the description of
`
`Figure 31, which is an example of the absolute position sensing embodiment,
`
`as I describe above. Id. ¶ 85 (quoting Ex. 1005 ¶ 112).
`
`
`
`20
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 20 of 29
`
`
`
`35. However, the other primary limitations of each independent claim (1[d]-[e],
`
`10[d]-[f], 19[f]-[h]) do not require determining a second position, but rather
`
`second capacitive couplings, second signals, and a determination of “the
`
`displacement of the object along the sensing path from the first position.” For
`
`these limitations, Dr. Bederson relies on the relative motion sensing
`
`embodiment of Trent. For example, he quotes a discussion in paragraph 73 of
`
`Trent regarding the relative motion sensor, which is “designed to sense
`
`motions along a substantially closed loop.” Ex. 1002 ¶ 97 (quoting Ex. 1005
`
`¶ 73) (emphasis added). As Dr. Bederson emphasizes, this embodiment of
`
`Trent is responsive to motions along the loop, not to positions.
`
`36. This embodiment, in short, functions differently than the relative motion
`
`sensing embodiment that Dr. Bederson relies on for the other claim limitations.
`
`Dr. Bederson does not explain why it would be obvious, or even possible, to
`
`combine the two embodiments. The claims of the ’173 Patent require a
`
`particular combination of determining a first position, on the one hand, and a
`
`displacement from that first position, on the other. Dr. Bederson has not
`
`shown that Trent discloses or renders obvious that combination.
`
`37. Accordingly, I do not agree that Trent renders obvious any claim of the ’173
`
`Patent.
`
`
`
`21
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 21 of 29
`
`
`
`VII. THE ENGHOLM REFERENCE
`
`38.
`
`I have reviewed the Engholm reference, U.S. Patent No. 6,229,456, Ex. 1006.
`
`In my opinion, the combination of Trent and Engholm does not render obvious
`
`any claim of the ’173 Patent.
`
`39. Engholm teaches methods and apparatuses specific to one particular
`
`application: measurement instruments. A POSITA would recognize this from
`
`Engholm’s express statement that it is about measurement instruments, from
`
`Engholm’s repeated illustrations of a generic measurement instrument; and
`
`from the name of the initial assignee on the cover page of the patent, Tektronix,
`
`Inc., a famous maker of measurement instruments.
`
`40.
`
`In particular, Engholm teaches displaying an indicator with a particular design,
`
`including a partial circle that Engholm calls the “drag area,” along with
`
`increment and decrement buttons below it. See Ex. 1006, Figs. 4a-4e; 5:36-
`
`51.
`
`41. There is no sufficient explanation why a POSITA would combine Trent with
`
`Engholm. Trent is not about measurement instruments; it is about capacitive,
`
`resistive, or inductive sensing. Engholm, on the other hand, does not refer to
`
`capacitive, resistive, or inductive touch sensing at all.
`
`42. Trent exclusively teaches fully circular sensors, which it describes as “closed-
`
`loop” sensors. Engholm does not disclose circular or closed-loop sensors at
`
`
`
`22
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 22 of 29
`
`
`
`all; it discloses certain “partially circular” patterns to display on a touch screen.
`
`Ex. 1006 at 2:19-54, 5:36-51, 7:61-8:11; 8:29-34, Figs. 4a-4e. This is
`
`important within the disclosure of Engholm in order to accommodate the
`
`increment and decrement buttons that Engholm also teaches. Ex. 1006 at 7:61-
`
`8:11; 8:29-34.
`
`43. A POSITA consulting either Trent or Engholm would not be motivated to also
`
`consider the other reference. For example, a POSITA designing a touch
`
`sensitive measurement instrument according to Engholm, which specifically
`
`discloses using a conventional input method (mouse, touchscreen, trackpad)
`
`to support its increment and decrement buttons and partially circular drag area,
`
`would not be motivated to use the special-purpose circular touch sensor
`
`disclosed by Trent, which does not support that functionality. Likewise, a
`
`POSITA designing a circular touch sensor according to Trent’s disclosure
`
`would not be motivated to consider Engholm, which specifically relates to
`
`measurement instruments and improvements in the particular “partially
`
`circular” knob functionality disclosed there, which is different from the
`
`particular circular sensor functionality disclosed in Trent.
`
`44. Dr. Bederson states that Engholm would provide a benefit over Trent but gives
`
`no explanation why a POSITA would seek that benefit. In fact, Trent is
`
`concerned with making precise, fine adjustments, and the introduction of a
`
`
`
`23
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 23 of 29
`
`
`
`debounce threshold would not be a benefit there, because it would become
`
`impossible or awkward to make a very small adjustment below the threshold.
`
`45. Accordingly, I do not agree that the postulated combination of Trent and
`
`Engholm renders obvious any claim of the ’173 Patent.
`
`VIII. THE BRYAN REFERENCE
`
`46.
`
`I have reviewed the Bryan reference, U.S. Patent No. 5,559,301, Ex. 1007. In
`
`my opinion, the combination of Bryan, Trent and Engholm does not render
`
`obvious any claim of the ’173 Patent.
`
`47. Bryan does not disclose an invention that discloses a capacitive touch or a
`
`capacitive coupling. In fact, Bryan does not use the term “capacitive” or
`
`“capacitance” anywhere in its description. Bryan’s disclosure includes touch-
`
`sensitive pads; however, Bryan does not disclose an indication corresponding
`
`to the first capacitive coupling of an object and the touch-sensitive pads. For
`
`example, there is no mention of capacitive touch sensors/touchscreens,
`
`capacitive signals, capacitive technology, or otherwise any indication in
`
`Bryan that the disclosed device has or uses “capacitive couplings of an object
`
`with a sensing element.”
`
`48. Dr. Bederson concedes that Bryan does not disclose “set[ting] a parameter to
`
`an initial value based on the first position of the object along the sensing path,”
`
`as required by each independent claim. Instead, Bryan discloses setting a
`
`
`
`24
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 24 of 29
`
`
`
`parameter “equal to a slider.” Ex. 1002 ¶ 176 (quoting Ex. 1007 8:3-9). Dr.
`
`Bederson posits that it would be “a trivial variation” for a POSITA to replace
`
`Bryan’s functionality with the step of “set[ting] a parameter to an initial value
`
`based on the first position of the object along the sensing path” claimed in
`
`the ’173 Patent. Whether or not the variation would be “trivial,” Dr. Bederson
`
`is not correct to suggest that a POSITA would be motivated to modify Bryan
`
`as he describes. In particular, Dr. Bederson’s modification would seriously
`
`impair or even destroy the functionality and usability of Bryan’s described
`
`system.
`
`49. To understand why, it is important to put Bryan’s “pop-up slider”
`
`functionality in context. Although Dr. Bederson focuses almost entirely on the
`
`slider functionality illustrated in Figures 7 and 8, he glosses over the critical
`
`“pop-up” functionality that defines the operation of Bryan’s system. In
`
`particular, Bryan explains that the slider is normally not visible; instead, the
`
`screen displays “a large number of icons 55”. Ex. 1007 at 5:37. Figure 3 of
`
`Bryan is somewhat misleading, in that the icon 55 is depicted as a slider,
`
`tempting the reader to think that a user can adjust a parameter by manipulating
`
`icons 55 directly. But Bryan emphasizes that this is not how the system works;
`
`because of the small size of the touchscreen, the mini-sliders depicted in icons
`
`55 are too small to manipulate directly. Ex. 1007 at 38-41 (“Thus, the value
`
`
`
`25
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 25 of 29
`
`
`
`of these parameters could not be readily adjusted using a finger as the touch
`
`device over a significant range, or with significant accuracy.”).
`
`50.
`
`Instead, Bryan teaches that touching icon 55 causes a distinct slider to appear
`
`on the screen, potentially covering icon 55 or covering other parts of the
`
`screen. Ex. 1007 at 5:44-54 and Fig. 4A. As Bryan specifically notes, when
`
`that happens the user’s finger is still located at the position of the icon, not the
`
`position of the pop-up slider or the slider bar 63. Id. at 5:55-62. This is
`
`illustrated in Figure 4B:
`
`
`Ex. 1007 Fig. 4B
`51. As Bryan actually discloses, at this point the system sets a parameter equal to
`
`a slider. Ex. 1007 at 8:3-9 and Fig 8. The parameter does not change until and
`
`unless the user’s finger moves to select the slider bar 63. Ex. 1007 at 5:55-
`
`6:36 and Figs. 4A-4E. This allows the user to make a controlled adjustment
`
`of the parameter. Furthermore and just as importantly, if the user then lifts the
`
`
`
`26
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 26 of 29
`
`
`
`finger without selecting the slider bar 63, “the pop-up slider disappears and
`
`uncovers the interface display without changing the value.” Id. at 6:26-28.
`
`This is important to prevent spurious or accidental changes in the value. Bear
`
`in mind that Bryan is an interface to a musical instrument that must be suited
`
`for live performance where sudden or unintentional changes to instrument
`
`parameters might cause unpleasant effects or noise.
`
`52. But in Dr. Bederson’s postulated modification of Bryan, the system would
`
`instead set the parameter to a value corresponding to the touched location at
`
`the moment when the pop-up slider appears. Ex. 1002 ¶ 177. As Figure 4B
`
`illustrates, this would tend to cause a sudden and extreme change in the value
`
`of the parameter. As shown in the figure, the slider was previously set to
`
`approximately the middle position. Bryan is designed to preserve that setting
`
`until and unless the user deliberately moves the finger over the slider bar 63
`
`and moves it. But in Dr. Bederson’s modification, the parameter would
`
`immediately jump to an arbitrary value, in this case to the extreme low
`
`position. Because the position of the icon 55 is fundamentally unrelated to the
`
`position of the pop-up slider, the user will not be able to predict the sudden
`
`and jarring effect of this jumping. In the context of a live musical performance,
`
`the properties of the musical instrument would change suddenly and perhaps
`
`dramatically, which a POSITA would consider unacceptable.
`
`
`
`27
`
`Neodron Ltd.
`Exhibit 2001
`IPR2020-00267
`
`Page 27 of 29
`
`
`
`53. Furthermore, the user’s ability to make fine adjustments to the value would
`
`be significantly impaired, because the previous setting would be removed
`
`from display. As actually disclosed in Bryan, a user can see the current setting,
`
`select it, drag it slightly up or down, and release the finger to ef
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
