`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`HP INC., MICROSOFT CORPORATION, DELL INC.,
`DELL PRODUCTS LP, LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC., MOTOROLA
`MOBILITY LLC
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`NEODRON LTD.
`Patent Owner
`
`Case IPR2020-00459
`Patent No. 8,946,574
`
`DECLARATION OF VIVEK SUBRAMANIAN, PH.D.
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,946,574
`
`1
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`Introduction .................................................................................................. 11
`I.
`Background and Qualifications ................................................................... 12
`II.
`III. Understanding of the Law ........................................................................... 14
`IV. Materials Considered for this Declaration ................................................... 19
`V.
`Summary of Opinions .................................................................................. 19
`VI. Overview of the ’574 Patent ........................................................................ 20
`VII. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Pertinent Art ................................................ 22
`VIII. State of the ART .......................................................................................... 22
`A. Mutual Capacitance Touch Screens ...................................................22
`B. Mesh Electrodes .................................................................................24
`IX. Claim consTruction ..................................................................................... 26
`A.
`“cover sheet” (claims 1, 8, 15) ...........................................................26
`B.
`“mesh” (claims 1, 8, 15) .....................................................................26
`Detailed Invalidity Analysis ........................................................................ 27
`A.
`Ground 1: Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 13-15
`Are Obvious Over Hsu and Mozdzyn ................................................27
`1.
`Summary of Hsu ......................................................................27
`2.
`Summary of Mozdzyn ..............................................................28
`3.
`Detailed Claim Analysis ..........................................................30
`a.
`1.pre: “An apparatus comprising”
`
`X.
`
`8.pre: “A device comprising”
`
`2
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`b.
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`15.pre: “An apparatus comprising” ................................ 30
`8.a: “a first cover sheet” ................................................. 30
`1.a: “a first optically clear adhesive (OCA) layer between
`a first cover sheet and a substrate”
`
`8.b: “a first optically clear adhesive layer (OCA) between
`the first cover sheet and a substrate”
`
`15.a “a first optically clear adhesive (OCA) layer
`between a first cover sheet and a substrate” ................... 31
`1.b: “the substrate, with drive or sense electrodes of a
`touch sensor disposed on a first surface and a second
`surface of the substrate, the first surface being opposite
`the second surface, the drive or sense electrodes being
`made of a conductive mesh conductive material
`comprising metal”
`
`8.c: “the substrate, with drive or sense electrodes of a
`touch sensor disposed on a first surface and a second
`surface of the substrate, the first surface being opposite
`the second surface, the drive or sense electrodes being
`made of a conductive mesh conductive material
`comprising metal”
`
`15.b: “the substrate, with sense electrodes of a touch
`sensor disposed on a first surface and drive electrodes of
`the touch sensor disposed on a second surface of the
`substrate, the first surface being opposite the second
`surface, the drive and sense electrodes being made of a
`conductive mesh of conductive material comprising
`metal” .............................................................................. 33
`1.c: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display”
`
`3
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`8.d: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display”
`
`15.c: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display” .............................................................. 43
`8.e: “one or more computer-readable non-transitory
`storage media embodying logic that is configured when
`executed to control the touch sensor” ............................. 45
`2.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`material is copper, silver, gold, aluminum, or tin.”
`
`9.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the conductive
`material is copper, silver, gold, aluminum, or tin.” ........ 46
`3.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`mesh comprises a plurality of mesh segments, each of the
`mesh segments having a width of approximately 10 μm.”
`
`10.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the conductive mesh
`comprises a plurality of mesh segments, each of the mesh
`segments having a width of approximately 10 μm.” ...... 47
`4.: “The apparatus of claim 3, wherein approximately 5%
`of an active area of the touch sensor is covered by the
`one or more mesh segments.”
`
`11.: “The device of claim 10, wherein approximately 5%
`of an active area of the touch sensor is covered by the
`mesh segments.” ............................................................. 48
`6.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`meshes have an optical transmissivity of approximately
`90%.”
`
`13.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the conductive
`4
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`k.
`
`meshes have an optical transmissivity of approximately
`90%.” .............................................................................. 50
`7.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the sense
`electrodes being disposed on the first surface of the
`substrate and the drive electrodes being disposed on the
`second surface of the substrate.”
`
`B.
`
`14.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the sense electrodes
`being disposed on the first surface of the substrate and
`the drive electrodes being disposed on the second surface
`of the substrate.” ............................................................. 53
`Ground 2: Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 13-15
`Are Obvious Over Hsu and Philipp ...................................................54
`1.
`Summary of Philipp .................................................................54
`2.
`Detailed Claim Analysis ..........................................................56
`a.
`1.pre: “An apparatus comprising”
`
`b.
`c.
`
`d.
`
`8.pre: “A device comprising”
`
`15.pre: “An apparatus comprising” ................................ 56
`8.a: “a first cover sheet” ................................................. 57
`1.a: “a first optically clear adhesive (OCA) layer between
`a first cover sheet and a substrate”
`
`8.b: “a first optically clear adhesive layer (OCA) between
`the first cover sheet and a substrate”
`
`15.a “a first optically clear adhesive (OCA) layer
`between a first cover sheet and a substrate” ................... 57
`1.b: “the substrate, with drive or sense electrodes of a
`touch sensor disposed on a first surface and a second
`surface of the substrate, the first surface being opposite
`the second surface, the drive or sense electrodes being
`made of a conductive mesh conductive material
`comprising metal”
`
`5
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`8.c: “the substrate, with drive or sense electrodes of a
`touch sensor disposed on a first surface and a second
`surface of the substrate, the first surface being opposite
`the second surface, the drive or sense electrodes being
`made of a conductive mesh conductive material
`comprising metal”
`
`15.b: “the substrate, with sense electrodes of a touch
`sensor disposed on a first surface and drive electrodes of
`the touch sensor disposed on a second surface of the
`substrate, the first surface being opposite the second
`surface, the drive and sense electrodes being made of a
`conductive mesh of conductive material comprising
`metal” .............................................................................. 57
`1.c: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display”
`
`8.d: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display”
`
`15.c: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display” .............................................................. 62
`8.e: “one or more computer-readable non-transitory
`storage media embodying logic that is configured when
`executed to control the touch sensor” ............................. 63
`2.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`material is copper, silver, gold, aluminum, or tin.”
`
`6
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`9.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the conductive
`material is copper, silver, gold, aluminum, or tin.” ........ 63
`3.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`mesh comprises a plurality of mesh segments, each of the
`mesh segments having a width of approximately 10 μm.”
`
`10.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the conductive mesh
`comprises a plurality of mesh segments, each of the mesh
`segments having a width of approximately 10 μm.” ...... 63
`4.: “The apparatus of claim 3, wherein approximately 5%
`of an active area of the touch sensor is covered by the
`one or more mesh segments.”
`
`11.: “The device of claim 10, wherein approximately 5%
`of an active area of the touch sensor is covered by the
`mesh segments.” ............................................................. 64
`6.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`meshes have an optical transmissivity of approximately
`90%.”
`
`13.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the conductive
`meshes have an optical transmissivity of approximately
`90%.” .............................................................................. 66
`7.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the sense
`electrodes being disposed on the first surface of the
`substrate and the drive electrodes being disposed on the
`second surface of the substrate.”
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`k.
`
`C.
`
`14.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the sense electrodes
`being disposed on the first surface of the substrate and
`the drive electrodes being disposed on the second surface
`of the substrate.” ............................................................. 68
`Ground 3: Claims 1-3, 7-10, and 14-15
`Are Obvious Over Hsu and Chang .....................................................70
`1.
`Summary of Chang ..................................................................70
`2.
`Detailed Claim Analysis ..........................................................72
`
`7
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`a.
`
`1.pre: “An apparatus comprising”
`
`8.pre: “A device comprising”
`
`b.
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`15.pre: “An apparatus comprising” ................................ 72
`8.a: “a first cover sheet” ................................................. 72
`1.a: “a first optically clear adhesive (OCA) layer between
`a first cover sheet and a substrate”
`
`8.b: “a first optically clear adhesive layer (OCA) between
`the first cover sheet and a substrate”
`
`15.a “a first optically clear adhesive (OCA) layer
`between a first cover sheet and a substrate” ................... 72
`1.b: “the substrate, with drive or sense electrodes of a
`touch sensor disposed on a first surface and a second
`surface of the substrate, the first surface being opposite
`the second surface, the drive or sense electrodes being
`made of a conductive mesh conductive material
`comprising metal”
`
`8.c: “the substrate, with drive or sense electrodes of a
`touch sensor disposed on a first surface and a second
`surface of the substrate, the first surface being opposite
`the second surface, the drive or sense electrodes being
`made of a conductive mesh conductive material
`comprising metal”
`
`15.b: “the substrate, with sense electrodes of a touch
`sensor disposed on a first surface and drive electrodes of
`the touch sensor disposed on a second surface of the
`substrate, the first surface being opposite the second
`surface, the drive and sense electrodes being made of a
`conductive mesh of conductive material comprising
`metal” .............................................................................. 73
`1.c: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`8
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display”
`
`8.d: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display”
`
`15.c: “a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet
`such that at least a portion of the second cover sheet is
`positioned between the second surface of the substrate
`and the display” .............................................................. 78
`8.e: “one or more computer-readable non-transitory
`storage media embodying logic that is configured when
`executed to control the touch sensor” ............................. 79
`2.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`material is copper, silver, gold, aluminum, or tin.”
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`i.
`
`h.
`
`9.: “The device of claim 8, wherein the conductive
`material is copper, silver, gold, aluminum, or tin.” ........ 79
`3.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`mesh comprises a plurality of mesh segments, each of the
`mesh segments having a width of approximately 10
`μm. .................................................................................. 80
`7.: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the sense
`electrodes being disposed on the first surface of the
`substrate and the drive electrodes being disposed on the
`second surface of the substrate.” .................................... 81
`Ground 4: Claims 4, 6, 11, and 13 Are Obvious Over Hsu in
`view of Chang and Frey. ....................................................................83
`1.
`Summary of Frey .....................................................................83
`2.
`Detailed Claim Analysis ..........................................................84
`
`D.
`
`9
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`4: “The apparatus of claim 3, wherein approximately 5%
`of an active area of the touch sensor is covered by the
`one or more mesh segments.”
`
`11: “The device of claim 10, wherein approximately 5%
`of an active area of the touch sensor is covered by the
`mesh segments.” ............................................................. 84
`6: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive
`meshes have an optical transmissivity of approximately
`90%.”
`
`13: “The device of claim 8, wherein the conductive
`meshes have an optical transmissivity of approximately
`90%.” .............................................................................. 86
`Secondary Considerations ........................................................................... 88
`XI.
`XII. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 88
`
`10
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`I, Vivek Subramanian, hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`I have been retained as an expert witness on behalf of HP Inc.,
`
`Microsoft Corporation, Dell Inc., Dell Products LP, , Lenovo (United States) Inc.,
`
`and Motorola Mobility LLC for the above-captioned Petition for Inter Partes
`
`Review (“IPR”) of claims 1-4, 6-11, and 13-15 (the “challenged claims) of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,946,574 (“the ’574 patent”). I am being compensated for my time in
`
`connection with this IPR at my standard consulting rate of $650 per hour. My
`
`compensation is in no way dependent on the outcome of this matter.
`
`2.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinions regarding whether the
`
`challenged claims of the ’574 patent are invalid as obvious. In preparing this
`
`declaration, I have reviewed the ’574 patent, the file history of the ’574 patent, and
`
`the documents identified in the Petition for this IPR.
`
`3.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed in this declaration, I relied upon my
`
`education and experience in the relevant field of the art, and have considered the
`
`viewpoint of a person having ordinary skill in the relevant art, as of 2011. My
`
`opinions directed to the invalidity of the challenged claims are based, at least in
`
`part, on the publications identified in the Petition and discussed further below,
`
`which I have been instructed by Petitioner’s counsel constitute prior art.
`
`11
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`4.
`My background and expertise that qualify me as an expert in the
`
`II.
`
`technical issues in this case are as follows:
`
`5.
`
`As indicated on my Curriculum Vitae attached as Exhibit A, I am
`
`currently a Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences at the
`
`University of California, Berkeley. I am also a Professor of Microengineering at
`
`Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland. I am also a
`
`founder of Locix, Inc., of San Bruno, California, a privately-held company that
`
`develops wireless sensors for industrial and commercial applications.
`
`6.
`
`I received a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Stanford University
`
`in 1998. I received my MS, also in electrical engineering from Stanford in 1996,
`
`and my BS in Electrical engineering from Louisiana State University, Baton
`
`Rouge, in 1994.
`
`7.
`
`After completing my PhD, I held multiple jobs simultaneously. First,
`
`I was a founder and member of technical staff of Matrix Semiconductor, which
`
`developed high density memories. We founded Matrix in 1997, and I maintained a
`
`full-time role through 2000, at which point I transitioned to an advisory role.
`
`Matrix was acquired by Sandisk in 2005, at which point my affiliation with Matrix
`
`ended. Between 1998 and 2000, I was also a visiting research engineer at the
`
`University of California, Berkeley, where I performed research on high-
`
`12
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`performance transistors. In that same period, I was also a consulting assistant
`
`professor at Stanford University, where I performed research on large area and flat
`
`panel electronics, among other topics. In 2000, I was offered a professorship at
`
`Berkeley, and moved there full time. I received tenure in 2005, and became a full
`
`professor in 2011. In 2018, I was awarded with a Chancellor’s professorship. In
`
`2018, I also accepted a position at EPFL. I currently live in Switzerland and am on
`
`partial leave from Berkeley during the transition.
`
`8.
`
`My professional career has been focused largely on semiconductor
`
`technology and technology for large area electronics. Of particular relevance to
`
`this matter, I have maintained continuous research activities related to touch
`
`screens and touch sensor technology for much of my professional career. As a
`
`graduate student, I developed materials and processes for implementation of large
`
`area touch screens and displays. Once I became a professor, I continued and
`
`expanded these activities. I performed research on technology for flexible touch
`
`screens, developed low cost processes for fabrication of touch screens, and
`
`developed and taught the main undergraduate and graduate courses at Berkeley
`
`dealing with touch screen technology, including all aspects including materials,
`
`physics of operation, design of circuits for operation, and the underlying
`
`manufacturing technology. This specifically included capacitive touch screen
`
`13
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`technology, including design of the electrodes, underlying materials and
`
`fabrication technology, and design of the associated sensing circuitry.
`
`9.
`
`I have authored or co-authored more than 200 publications in journals
`
`and major international conference proceedings. A list of my publications is
`
`included in my CV, which is attached as Exhibit A.
`
`10.
`
`I have previously offered testimony as an expert witness. A list of my
`
`prior engagements in which I testified as an expert at trial or by deposition is also
`
`included in my CV.
`
`11. Based on my background and experience, as set forth more fully in
`
`my CV, I am familiar with the state of the art in the field of touch sensors,
`
`including capacitive touch sensors, at least in the mid 2000’s to mid 2010’s. I am a
`
`technical expert in the fields relating to the asserted patents and other related fields,
`
`and I remain an active researcher in these fields.
`
`12. Based on my professional experience, I believe I am qualified to
`
`testify as an expert on matters related to the patent at issue.
`
`III. UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW
`13.
`I am not a legal expert and therefore I offer no opinions on the law.
`
`However, I have been informed and am aware of legal standards that are relevant
`
`to my analysis, as summarized below.
`
`14
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`I have been informed and understand that an issued patent claim is
`
`14.
`
`presumed valid and establishing a patent claim to be unpatentable requires proof
`
`by “preponderance of the evidence,” which I understand means proof that it is
`
`more likely than not that the claim is unpatentable.
`
`15.
`
`I have been informed and understand that the first step in an
`
`unpatentability analysis involves construing claims, as necessary, to determine
`
`their scope. Second, the construed claim language is then compared to the
`
`disclosures of the prior art.
`
`16.
`
`I have been informed and understand that claims are generally given
`
`their ordinary and customary meaning as understood by a POSITA at the time of
`
`the alleged invention, in light of the patent specification and prosecution history. I
`
`have been informed that claim construction is a matter of law and that the final
`
`claim constructions for this proceeding will be determined by the Patent Trial and
`
`Appeal Board.
`
`17.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a patent claim may be
`
`declared unpatentable if it is anticipated by, or rendered obvious in view of, prior
`
`art.
`
`18.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a patent is to be understood
`
`from the perspective of a POSITA. Such an individual is considered to possess
`
`normal skills and knowledge in a particular technical field (as opposed to being a
`
`15
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`genius). I have been informed and understand that in considering what the claims
`
`of a patent require, what was known prior to that patent, what a prior art reference
`
`discloses, and whether an invention is obvious or not, one must use the perspective
`
`of such a person of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`19.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a patent claim is obvious
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and therefore unpatentable, if the claimed subject matter, as
`
`a whole, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art as of the
`
`priority date of the patent based on one or more prior art references and/or the
`
`knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`20.
`
`I have been informed and understand that an obviousness analysis
`
`must consider (1) the scope and content of the prior art, (2) the differences between
`
`the claims and the prior art, (3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, and
`
`(4) secondary considerations, if any, of non-obviousness (such as unexpected
`
`results, commercial success, long felt but unmet need, failure of others, copying by
`
`others, and skepticism of experts).
`
`21.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a single prior art reference
`
`can render a patent claim obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 if any differences
`
`between that reference and the claims would have been obvious to a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art. Alternatively, I have been informed and understand that a
`
`prior art reference may be combined with other references to disclose each
`
`16
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`element of the invention under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Thus, the teachings of two or
`
`more references may be combined in the same way as disclosed in the claims, if
`
`such a combination would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the
`
`art. I have been informed and understand that a reference may also be combined
`
`with the knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art, and that this knowledge
`
`may be used to combine multiple references. I have further been informed and
`
`understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is presumed to know the
`
`relevant prior art. I have been informed and understand that the obviousness
`
`analysis may take into account the inferences and creative steps that a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would employ.
`
`22.
`
`In determining whether a prior art reference would have been
`
`combined with other prior art or other information known to a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art, I have been informed and understand that the following principles
`
`may be considered:
`
`a. whether the references to be combined involve non-analogous art;
`
`b. whether the references to be combined are in different fields of endeavor
`
`than the alleged invention in the Patent;
`
`c. whether the references to be combined are reasonably pertinent to the
`
`problems to which the inventions of the Patent are directed;
`
`17
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`d. whether the combination is of familiar elements according to known
`
`methods that yields predictable results;
`
`e. whether a combination involves the substitution of one known element for
`
`another that yields predictable results;
`
`f. whether the combination involves the use of a known technique to
`
`improve similar items or methods in the same way that yields predictable
`
`results;
`
`g. whether the combination involves the application of a known technique to
`
`a prior art reference that is ready for improvement, to yield predictable
`
`results; h. whether the combination is “obvious to try”;
`
`i. whether the combination involves the known work in one field of
`
`endeavor prompting variations of it for use in either the same field or a
`
`different one based on design incentives or other market forces, where the
`
`variations are predictable to a person of ordinary skill in the art;
`
`j. whether there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art
`
`that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the prior art
`
`reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed
`
`invention;
`
`k. whether the combination requires modifications that render the prior art
`
`unsatisfactory for its intended use;
`
`18
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`l. whether the combination requires modifications that change the principle
`
`of operation of the reference;
`
`m. whether the combination is reasonably expected to be a success; and
`
`n. whether the combination possesses the requisite degree of predictability at
`
`the time the invention was made.
`
`23.
`
`I have been informed and understand that in determining whether a
`
`combination of prior art references renders a claim obvious, it is helpful to
`
`consider whether there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the
`
`references and a reasonable expectation of success in doing so. I understand,
`
`however, that a teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine is not required.
`
`IV. MATERIALS CONSIDERED FOR THIS DECLARATION
`24.
`In addition to my general knowledge, education, and experience, I
`
`considered the ’574 patent, its file history, the references cited by the ’574 patent,
`
`and the materials discussed in this declaration and the materials listed as exhibits in
`
`this IPR, in forming my opinions.
`
`V.
`
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS
`25. Based on my review of the ’574 patent and its prosecution history, the
`
`other materials I have considered, and my knowledge and experience, my opinions
`
`are as follows:
`
`19
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
` Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 13-15 of the ’574 patent are obvious over the
`
`combination of Hsu and Mozdzyn
`
` Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 13-15 of the ’574 patent are obvious over the
`
`combination of Hsu and Philipp
`
` Claims 1-3, 7-10, and 14-15 of the ’574 patent are obvious over the
`
`combination of Hsu and Chang
`
` Claims 4, 6, 11, and 13 of the ’574 patent are obvious over the combination
`
`of Hsu, Chang and Frey
`
`VI. OVERVIEW OF THE ’574 PATENT
`26.
`The ’574 patent generally relates to touch sensors. EX1001, 1:10.
`
`The title of the ’574 patent is “Two Layer Sensor Stack,” but as indicated in
`
`the’574 patent’s “Background” section, touch screens in mutual-capacitance
`
`configurations with two layers of overlapping electrodes separated by a dielectric
`
`layer were well known. EX1001, 1:37-42.
`
`27. As discussed above, the independent claims of the ’574 patent are
`
`directed to general features of a touchscreen in a mutual capacitance configuration
`
`whereby the distinguishing feature advocated by the Applicant in the prosecution
`
`history was that “a portion of the second cover sheet is positioned between the
`
`second surface of the substrate and the display” as recited in the independent
`
`20
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`claims. EX1001, 15:10-26 and 16:14-27, EX1003, 56-59. Representative
`
`independent claim 8 is as follows:
`
`[8.pre] A device comprising:
`[8.a] a first cover sheet;
`[8.b] a first optically clear adhesive layer (OCA) between the
`first cover sheet and a substrate;
`[8.c] the substrate, with drive or sense electrodes of a touch
`sensor disposed on a first surface and a second surface of the
`substrate, the first surface being opposite the second surface, the drive
`or sense electrodes being made of a conductive mesh conductive
`material comprising metal;
`[8.d] a display separated from the second surface of the
`substrate by a second OCA and a second cover sheet such that at
`least a portion of the second cover sheet is positioned between the
`second surface of the substrate and the display; and
`[8.e] one or more computer-readable non-transitory storage
`media embodying logic that is configured when executed to control
`the touch sensor.
`
`Annotated Figure 1 is illustrated below and mapped to representative
`
`independent claim 8:
`
`21
`
`PETITIONERS - Exhibit 1002
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00459
`Declaration of Vivek Subramanian
`VII. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE PERTINENT ART
`28. A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the ’574 patent’s
`
`earliest claimed priority date (a “POSITA”) would have had a bachelor’s degree in
`
`electrical engineering, computer engineering,