UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`PEAG LLC (d/b/a JLab Audio), Audio Partnership LLC and
`Audio Partnership PLC (d/b/a Cambridge Audio)
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`VARTA Microbattery GmbH,
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case No. IPR2020-01212
`U.S. Patent No. 9,153,835
`____________
`
`SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF
`MARTIN C. PECKERAR, PH.D.
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 1 of 43
`PEAG/Audio Partnership v. VARTA
`IPR2020-01212
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`Table of Contents
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 
`I. 
`QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................................................ 1 
`II. 
`III.  MATERIALS CONSIDERED ........................................................................ 1 
`IV.  OVERVIEW OF NEW PRIOR ART .............................................................. 2 
`V. 
`RESPONSE TO MR. GARDNER’S NEW OPINIONS ................................. 4 
`A.  Mr. Gardner’s New Declaration Testimony Concerning A POSA’s
`Motivation To Combine Kaun and Kobayashi .......................................... 4 
`1.  Mr. Gardner’s New Theory of Dendrite Growth Is Incorrect .................... 4 
`2.  Mr. Gardner’s New Theory That Kaun’s Teachings Regarding Short
`Current Paths Are Only Relevant To “High Powered Batteries” Is
`Incorrect ................................................................................................. 7 
`B.  Mr. Gardner’s New Testimony Concerning A POSA’s Expectation of
`Success In Combining Kaun And Kobayashi ............................................ 9 
`1.  Mr. Gardner’s New Contention That Kaun Does Not Require a Central
`Fastener Is Incorrect .............................................................................. 9 
`2.  Mr. Gardner’s New Explanation Of How A POSA Would Modify
`Kobayashi To Include A Center Fastener Is At Odds With The
`Disclosure Of Kobayashi .................................................................... 13 
`VI.  SUBJECT MATTER RECITED BY THE REVISED SUBSTITUTE
`CLAIMS IS DESCRIBED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE
`CHALLENGED PATENTS .......................................................................... 16 
`VII.  THE SUBSTITUTE CLAIMS OF THE CHALLENGED PATENTS ARE
`PATENTABLE .............................................................................................. 26 
`A.  Kaun, Kobayashi, Ryou, Kwon, Kannou, and Kawamura Fail To
`Disclose A Button Cell Housing Formed By A Housing Cup And A
`Housing Top With Overlapping Casing Areas Closed By A Force-Fitting
`Connection ................................................................................................ 26 
`Kaun, Kobayashi, Ryou, Kwon, Kannou, And Kawamura Fail To
`Disclose A Button Cell Housing With A Cup Casing Having A First Part
`Proximal To The Flat Bottom Area And Disposed Radially Inward Of A
`Second Part That Overlaps The Top Casing ............................................ 31 
`
`B. 
`
`ii
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 2 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`C. 
`
`Kaun, Kobayashi, Ryou, Kwon, Kannou, and Kawamura Fail To
`Disclose A Button Cell Housing With A Housing Half, A Metal Foil
`Conductor, And An Insulator That Form A Sequence Of Three Flat
`Layers In Direct Contact With One Another ........................................... 34 
`VIII.  CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 40 
`
`
`iii
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 3 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`
`I, Martin C. Peckerar, Ph.D., declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`I, Martin C. Peckerar, Ph.D., am currently a Professor Emeritus of
`
`Microelectronic Engineering at the University of Maryland. I have been retained
`
`by Patent Owner VARTA Microbattery GmbH (“VARTA” or “Patent Owner”) as
`
`an expert in the relevant art.
`
`2.
`
`I made a First Declaration in this proceeding on March 31, 2021,
`
`which was submitted to the Board as Patent Owner’s Exhibit 2043.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`3. My qualifications for forming the opinions given herein were
`
`summarized in the First Declaration and are addressed more fully in my curriculum
`
`vitae, which was previously submitted to the Board as Patent Owner’s Exhibit
`
`2044.
`
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`4.
`In addition to the materials I considered in forming the opinions set
`
`forth in my First Declaration, I have reviewed and/or considered the following
`
`materials—as well as any other material or information referenced herein:
`
` The Supplemental Declaration of William H. Gardner (Ex. 1041);
`
` JP Patent Publication No. 2003-31266 to Kannou, et al. (“Kannou,”
`
`Ex. 1039);
`
`1
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 4 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
` U.S. Patent No. 7,575,830 to Kawamura et al. (“Kawamura,” Ex.
`
`1040);
`
` Each of Petitioners’ Replies: Petitioners’ Reply for the ‘581 Patent,
`
`IPR2020-01211, Paper 24; Petitioners’ Reply for the ‘835 Patent,
`
`IPR2020-01212, Paper 23; Petitioners’ Reply for the ‘858 Patent,
`
`IPR2020-01213, Paper 24; Petitioners’ Reply for the ‘913 Patent,
`
`IPR2020-01214, Paper 23;
`
` Each of Petitioners’ Oppositions to Patent Owner’s Motions to
`
`Amend: Petitioners’ Opposition to Patent Owner’s Contingent
`
`Motion to Amend for the ‘581 Patent, IPR2020-01211, Paper 23;
`
`Petitioners’ Opposition to Patent Owner’s Contingent Motion to
`
`Amend for the ‘835 Patent, IPR2020-01212, Paper 22; Petitioners’
`
`Opposition to Patent Owner’s Contingent Motion to Amend for the
`
`‘858 Patent, IPR2020-01213, Paper 23; Petitioners’ Opposition to
`
`Patent Owner’s Contingent Motion to Amend for the ‘913 Patent,
`
`IPR2020-01214, Paper 22; and
`
` The Transcript of Mr. Gardner’s July 28, 2021 Deposition (Ex. 2051).
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF NEW PRIOR ART
`5.
`Kannou discloses “a flat-type non-aqueous secondary battery with
`
`improved discharge capacity.” Ex. 1039 at ¶ 7. The battery of Kannou includes an
`
`2
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 5 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`electrode array 4 in a housing formed by attaching a negative electrode housing
`
`part (cap 2) to a positive electrode housing part (outer can 1) with an insulating
`
`gasket 3 therebetween. Id. at ¶ 39. The electrode array 4 includes a positive
`
`electrode with a positive electrode current collector 7 that protrudes from one
`
`wound surface of the electrode array 4 to contact the outer can 1, and a negative
`
`electrode with a negative electrode current collector 6 that protrudes from an
`
`opposite wound surface of the electrode array 4 to contact the cap 2. The various
`
`components of Kannou’s battery are illustrated in Fig. 1 of Kannou—reproduced
`
`and annotated below.
`
`6.
`
`Kannou teaches that button cells with wound electrodes in which turns
`
`of the winding are connected in parallel, via an edge of an offset electrode current
`
`collector, to a corresponding housing part will exhibit decreased internal resistance
`
`
`
`3
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 6 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`and higher discharge capacities. Id. at ¶¶ [0045]-[0067]. Kannou further teaches
`
`that, in a button cell where turns of an electrode winding are connected in series,
`
`via a separate output conductor, to a corresponding housing part, “high discharge
`
`capacity cannot be obtained.” Id. at ¶ [0006].
`
`V. RESPONSE TO MR. GARDNER’S NEW OPINIONS
`7.
`In his Supplemental Declaration dated June 22, 2021, Mr. Gardner has
`
`espoused multiple new theories and expressed new opinions concerning the
`
`motivation a POSA would have had for modifying Kaun and Kobayashi as well as
`
`the reasonable expectation of success a POSA would have had in doing so. I
`
`address Mr. Gardner’s new theories and opinions.
`
`A. Mr. Gardner’s New Declaration Testimony Concerning A
`POSA’s Motivation To Combine Kaun and Kobayashi
`1. Mr. Gardner’s New Theory of Dendrite Growth Is Incorrect
`8. Mr. Gardner now contends that “the creation of dendrites or other
`
`conductive materials generated through normal operation of a cell” would render
`
`Kaun’s separator butt joints “not practicable for actual commercial systems” and
`
`would motivate a POSA to modify Kaun. Ex. 1041 at ¶¶ 14 and 16.
`
`9. Mr. Gardner is of the opinion that (i) using an adhesive material to
`
`join together the separator edges of Kaun would necessarily entail the formation of
`
`gaps between adjacent separator edges (Id. at ¶ 14), (ii) that dendrite buildup across
`
`such gaps—even if the gaps were filled with an electrolyte or an adhesive material
`
`4
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 7 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`(such as that taught by Kaun—see Ex. 1005 at [0108])—would cause an
`
`unacceptable risk of a short between electrode layers (Ex. 1041 at ¶¶ 16-17), and
`
`(iii) that a POSA would therefore be forced to overlap the separator layers to
`
`prevent a dendrite buildup through the gap from causing a short between electrode
`
`layers (Id. at ¶ 17). I disagree.
`
`10. Mr. Gardner has not provided any support for his theory that dendrites
`
`would build up across a gap between separator edges of Kaun. Mr. Gardner has
`
`not identified any technical paper nor conducted any experiment or analysis to
`
`support his new theory of dendrite formation across an electrolyte- or adhesive-
`
`filled gap between adjacent separator layers.
`
`11. Although dendrite formation is indeed a major failure mechanism of
`
`rechargeable batteries, Mr. Gardner is simply incorrect when he asserts that a
`
`POSA would have avoided gaps between separator edges due to the prospect that
`
`dendrite build up in such gaps would cause a short. Instead, a POSA would have
`
`understood that, to the extent dendrites would build up in sufficient quantity to
`
`cause a short in the Kaun cell, such build up would occur within the separator
`
`material itself1 and not in the electrolyte- or adhesive-filled gaps between separator
`
`edges. In particular, A POSA would have understood that, if the organic solution
`
`
`1 See, e.g., Wu, H., Zhuo, D., Kong, D. & Cui, Y. Improving battery safety by early detection of internal shorting
`with a bifunctional separator. Nat. Commun. 5:5193 doi: 10.1038/ncomms6193 (2014).
`
`5
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 8 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`of polyvinylidene fluoride, e.g. KYNAR®, that is described in Kaun (see Ex. 1005
`
`at ¶ [0103]) were to be used as an adhesive to glue adjacent separator edges
`
`together, dendrites would not build up and cause a short in gaps filled with such a
`
`material because the material is too dense to provide a sufficient quantity of
`
`nucleating sites. A POSA would also have understood that a gap filled with
`
`electrolyte would also lack a sufficient quantity of nucleating sites.
`
`12. The formation of dendrites is a complex electrochemical process in
`
`which materials that ultimately form dendrites “nucleate” on sites of local atomic
`
`inhomogeneities in order to lower their free energy. Such sites are known as
`
`nucleating sites. The number of nucleating sites on which dendrites can form is
`
`proportional to the effective surface area of material on which nucleation can
`
`occur. For a given volume of material, the effective surface area provided by a
`
`porous microstructure of a separator would far exceed the effective surface area
`
`provided by an adhesive- or electrolyte-filled gap. Accordingly, dendrite
`
`formation would be less likely to occur in an electrolyte- or adhesive-filled gap
`
`than in a microporous separator.
`
`13. Accordingly, as I noted in my First Declaration, any relatively small
`
`gaps between edges of adjacent separator layers in Kaun, if they existed at all,
`
`would simply form a void to be filled by electrolyte, adhesive, or by separator
`
`material squeezed and compressed into the gap. Ex. 2043 at ¶ 202. A POSA
`
`6
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 9 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`would not have expected that such gaps would have any appreciable impact on the
`
`operation of the Kaun cell.
`
`2. Mr. Gardner’s New Theory That Kaun’s Teachings
`Regarding Short Current Paths Are Only Relevant To “High
`Powered Batteries” Is Incorrect
`14. Mr. Gardner contends that problems of internal cell resistance, which
`
`“the short current paths of Kaun are intended to solve,” “simply do not exist on a
`
`scale” that would be relevant “in the cells of Kobayashi.” Ex. 1041 at ¶ 19. I
`
`disagree. Reducing internal resistance increases the power available for delivery to
`
`external loads irrespective of the amount of power generated by the battery.
`
`15. Mr. Gardner has failed to provide any support for his new theory that
`
`reducing resistance would not be relevant for cells on the scale of Kobayashi’s cell.
`
`Instead, Mr. Gardner identifies a prior art reference (Kannou – Ex. 1039) that
`
`contradicts his new theory.
`
`16. Kannou teaches that a POSA would indeed be concerned with
`
`differences in internal resistance attributable to the manner in which button cell
`
`electrodes are electrically connected to corresponding button cell housing parts.
`
`Kannou teaches that low power button cells (e.g., discharge current of 10 mA) in
`
`which multiple turns of a wound electrode are connected, in series, to
`
`corresponding housing halves via separate output conductors have high internal
`
`resistance and low discharge capacities. Kannou also teaches that low power
`
`7
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 10 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`button cells in which multiple turns of a wound electrode are connected, in parallel,
`
`to corresponding housing halves via edges of offset electrode current collectors
`
`exhibit significantly decreased internal resistance and higher discharge capacities.
`
`Ex. 1039 at ¶¶ [0045]-[0067].
`
`17.
`
`I disagree that a POSA would ever combine Kaun with Kobayashi for
`
`the reasons stated in my First Declaration. Nevertheless, even assuming a POSA
`
`were to attempt to combine Kaun with Kobayashi, Kannou confirms that a POSA
`
`would not disregard Kaun’s teaching that a parallel connection between multiple
`
`turns of a wound electrode and a housing half would provide, as compared to a
`
`series connection, decreased internal resistance and improved performance.
`
`18. Kannou further teaches that, in a button cell where an electrical
`
`connection between an electrode and a corresponding container part is made with a
`
`separate output conductor, “high discharge capacity cannot be obtained because the
`
`electrical connection is made by contact between the tab and the container.” Id. at
`
`¶ [0006]. For the same reasons discussed above, a POSA would consider such
`
`teachings to apply to smaller cells such as Kobayashi—which has as its object
`
`“improv[ing] heavy load characteristics[, i.e. higher discharge capacity at higher
`
`current,] of small batteries such as button cells and coin cells without impairing
`
`productivity.” Ex. 1006 at ¶ [0008].
`
`8
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 11 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`B. Mr. Gardner’s New Testimony Concerning A POSA’s
`Expectation of Success In Combining Kaun And Kobayashi
`1. Mr. Gardner’s New Contention That Kaun Does Not
`Require a Central Fastener Is Incorrect
`In his Supplemental Declaration dated June 22, 2021, Mr. Gardner
`
`19.
`
`contends that Kaun’s housing does not require a center fastener and that the cell
`
`housing is held together without a center fastener. Ex. 1041 at ¶¶ 23 and 25. In
`
`support of his assertion, Mr. Gardner reproduces only FIG. 7A of Kaun (which is
`
`an external view of the housing depicted in FIGS. 7A-7D of Kaun), and then omits
`
`the language “[a]s can be seen in FIGS. 7A-7D” from a quoted portion of
`
`paragraph [0109] of Kaun. Id. at ¶¶ 23-24; Ex. 1005 at ¶¶ [0069] and [0109]. Mr.
`
`Gardner then states that “as seen in Figure 7A of Kaun . . . no fastener need be
`
`included in the cell” and that “[c]learly, in this embodiment, a central fastener is
`
`not required, and . . . the cell housing is held together without a central fastener.”
`
`Ex. 1041 at ¶¶ 23 and 25.
`
`20. FIGS. 7A-7D of Kaun all depict the same housing. Ex. 1005 at ¶
`
`[0109] (“As can be seen in FIGS. 7A-7D, the housing includes two cups 28p and
`
`28n joined together . . . .”); Id. at ¶ [0069] (“FIG. 7A depicts the housing for the
`
`electrochemical device in accordance with an exemplary embodiment; FIG. 7B
`
`depicts a cross-sectional view of the peripheral seal area . . . ; FIG. 7C depicts the
`
`outer pan of the housing for the electrochemical device including the center
`
`9
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 12 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`fastener . . . ; FIG. 7D depicts a cross-sectional view of the housing.” (emphasis
`
`added)). FIGS. 7A-7D of Kaun are reproduced below, showing the center fastener
`
`60.
`
`21. As is shown in FIGS. 7A-7D of Kaun, the containment housing 28,
`
`formed of cups 28p and 28n, includes a center fastener 60. Accordingly, the
`
`embodiment corresponding to FIG. 7A of Kaun does indeed include a center
`
`fastener—contrary to Mr. Gardner’s new assertions.
`
`
`
`10
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 13 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`22. Petitioners also cite paragraphs [0108]-[0109] and [0120] of Kaun in
`
`contending that Kaun’s cell does not require a center fastener. See, e.g.,
`
`Petitioners’ Reply for the ‘835 Patent, Paper 23 at P. 14. However, none of the
`
`paragraphs cited by Petitioners would indicate or suggest that a center fastener is
`
`not required. Nor would a POSA have understood, based on the disclosure
`
`provided by those paragraphs, that Kaun’s cell does not require a center fastener—
`
`especially in the absence of a secondary compression housing (see Ex. 1005 at
`
`FIGS. 12A-12C), as Mr. Gardner appears to presuppose.
`
`23. As I noted in my first declaration (Ex. 2043 at ¶ 244), an essential
`
`feature of Kaun is “a fastener that aligns the first and second cups during assembly
`
`and maintains electrode contact with the appropriate cup independent of external
`
`pressure on the housing, helping to eliminate the possibility of an open circuit state
`
`for a cell.” Ex. 1005 at ¶ [0086]. Kaun specifically notes that “the present
`
`invention provides a housing for an electrochemical device comprising a first cup,
`
`a second cup, a fastener, and a gasket.” Id. ¶ [0024].
`
`24. Mr. Gardner does not provide any support for his contentions that the
`
`Kaun cell is held together without a center fastener or that a center fastener is not
`
`required. Ex. 1041 at ¶¶ 23, 25.
`
`25. Without a center fastener, Kaun’s housing cups 28p and 28n would
`
`not be prevented from undergoing vertical displacement with respect to one
`
`11
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 14 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`another. The peripheral gasket 32, which is designed to relax and thereby vent an
`
`internal cell overpressure (Ex. 1005 at ¶¶ [0109] and [0130]), could not provide
`
`sufficient force to hold housing cups 28p and 28n together during normal battery
`
`operation over an extended period of time. Meanwhile, as I stated in my First
`
`Declaration, Kobayashi requires a housing closure that provides a positive lock in a
`
`manner that prevents vertical displacement of the housing bottom from the housing
`
`top and that sufficiently closes at the side seals to prevent leakage. Ex. 2043 at ¶¶
`
`248-251.
`
`26. Mr. Gardner’s contention that “the housing halves of Kaun could
`
`simply be added around the electrode assembly [of Kobayashi] . . . [with] only
`
`minimal adjustments to the size of the cups” and without a center fastener (Ex.
`
`1041 at ¶ 25) is therefore incorrect. A POSA would have appreciated that, because
`
`the peripheral gasket 32 could not provide sufficient force to hold the housing cups
`
`28p and 28n together, Mr. Gardner’s proposed inclusion of Kaun’s housing halves
`
`around Kobayashi’s electrode assembly would not provide a viable
`
`electrochemical cell. Specifically, a POSA would appreciate that the lack of an
`
`adequate fastening mechanism between the housing cups would give rise to short-
`
`lived and inconsistent electrical contact between the housing cups 28n, 28p and
`
`Kobayashi’s terminal plates 4a, 5a—which would result in an open circuit state for
`
`the cell. Accordingly, a POSA would have understood that Kaun’s housing halves
`
`12
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 15 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`could not simply be placed around Kobayashi’s electrode assembly without a
`
`center fastener.
`
`2. Mr. Gardner’s New Explanation Of How A POSA Would
`Modify Kobayashi To Include A Center Fastener Is At Odds
`With The Disclosure Of Kobayashi
`27. Mr. Gardner has now provided a new explanation of how a POSA
`
`would have modified Kobayashi to include a center fastener within the winding
`
`axis core 7.
`
`28. Mr. Gardner contends that, in order to combine Kobayashi and Kaun,
`
`a POSA would have provided a through hole extending through the terminal
`
`components 4a and 5a (which, as a result of Mr. Gardner’s other proposed
`
`modifications, i.e. reducing the thickness of plates until they become foils (Ex.
`
`1041 at ¶ 85), would be thin, flexible components) and the winding axis core 7.
`
`Ex. 1041 at ¶ 28. Although Mr. Gardner does not explicitly say so, the through
`
`hole depicted in the annotated FIGS. 7 and 8 of Kobayashi (see Id.) additionally
`
`extends through the insulating plates 8 and 9. Mr. Gardner then contends that a
`
`POSA would have scaled the housing of Kaun to fit the modified Kobayshi
`
`structure that includes the through hole. Id. at ¶ 29.
`
`29. Mr. Gardener’s new explanation of how a POSA would have
`
`modified Kobayashi ignores the evidence provided by Kobayashi itself that
`
`miniaturization of Kaun is extremely difficult, if possible at all. As I noted in my
`
`13
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 16 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`First Declaration, “Kobayashi states that, with respect to rechargeable batteries
`
`providing power and current on levels required by small mobile devices (i.e.
`
`devices with significantly lower power requirements than the electric vehicles
`
`contemplated by Kaun), ‘size reduction is extremely difficult . . . and the limit has
`
`currently substantially been reached.’” Ex. 2043at ¶ 232, quoting Ex. 1006 at ¶
`
`[0007].
`
`30. A POSA attempting to use a “through hole” in Kobayashi’s winding
`
`axis core, per Mr. Gardner’s suggestion, would have recognized, as I stated in my
`
`First Declaration, that a center fastener disposed through the cell is not a viable
`
`closure mechanism for a button cell due to its small size, for example, on the order
`
`of 12 mm. Ex. 2043 at ¶ 277. The holding force exerted by the center fastener is a
`
`type of frictional force, which is proportional to the surface area of the fastener.
`
`Therefore, as the radius of a fastener becomes smaller, the force it can exert to hold
`
`two components together is reduced. In the volume allotted by a button cell, a
`
`center fastener such as described by Kaun would only be able to exert a minimal
`
`holding force on the housing components. Id. at ¶ 358. Moreover, a POSA
`
`attempting to use a “through hole” in Kobayashi’s winding axis core, per Mr.
`
`Gardner’s suggestion, would have risked weakening the core—which is critical to
`
`Kobayashi’s battery structure.
`
`14
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 17 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`31. Due to the lack of holding force capable of being exerted by a center
`
`faster having a radius small enough to fit through Kobayashi’s winding core, and
`
`additionally due to the weakening of the winding core that would necessarily result
`
`from placing a through-hole therein, a POSA would have understood that the
`
`winding core of Kobayashi would need to be widened to accommodate a center
`
`fastener as described by Kaun. A POSA would also have understood that, in order
`
`to exert a sufficiently large force to ensure adequate sealing of the cell, the center
`
`fastener would need to occupy a considerable volume at the center of the cell and
`
`the winding core would need to be widened considerably. Accordingly, a POSA
`
`would have understood that incorporating the center fastener of Kaun into the
`
`winding core of Kobayashi would entail a significant reduction in the internal cell
`
`volume available for active electrode material.
`
`32. A POSA would further have understood that Mr. Gardner’s proposed
`
`modifications of Kobayashi to incorporate a center fastener would introduce
`
`additional points of ingress for moisture, e.g. at the interface between the through
`
`hole in Kobayashi’s winding core and the terminal components 4a, 5a. As I
`
`explained in my First Declaration, lithium is highly reactive with water vapor and
`
`even very small amounts of moisture can, if allowed to enter the cell housing,
`
`significantly hamper performance and lead to potentially hazardous conditions. Id.
`
`at ¶ 250. Accordingly, a POSA would have understood that incorporating the
`
`15
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 18 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`center fastener of Kaun into the winding core of Kobayashi as proposed by Mr.
`
`Gardner would increase the risk of cell destruction through the ingress of moisture.
`
`33. A POSA would also have understood that Mr. Gardner’s proposed
`
`modification of Kobayashi to incorporate a center fastener would significantly
`
`increase the complexity of the manufacturing process. As I noted in my First
`
`Declaration, Kobayashi is concerned with manufacturing complexity and aims to
`
`reduce it. See, e.g., Id. at ¶¶ 128, 130, and 134.
`
`34. APOSA would not have had a reasonable expectation of success in
`
`modifying Kobayashi’s electrode assembly to include a through-hole and then
`
`miniaturizing Kaun’s housing to fit around the modified electrode assembly of
`
`Kobayashi. As explained above, incorporating the center fastener of Kaun into the
`
`winding core of Kobayashi would reduce the internal cell volume available for
`
`active electrode material, increase the risk of cell destruction through the ingress of
`
`moisture, and increase manufacturing complexity without providing any
`
`appreciable advantages as compared with the unmodified Kobayashi cell.
`
`VI. SUBJECT MATTER RECITED BY THE REVISED SUBSTITUTE
`CLAIMS IS DESCRIBED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE
`CHALLENGED PATENTS
`35. Certain substitute claims submitted by VARTA recite the features of
`
`“the cup casing partially overlaps the top casing in an overlapping area” and “the
`
`housing cup and the housing top are held together by a force-fitting connection,”
`
`16
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 19 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`and “the cup casing includes a first part proximal to the flat bottom area and a
`
`second part disposed in the overlapping area, the first part of the cup casing being
`
`disposed radially inward with respect to the second part.” See, e.g., Substitute
`
`Claim 14 of the ‘581 Patent, Substitute Claim 14 of the ‘835 Patent, and Substitute
`
`Claims 9, 12, and 14 of the ‘913 Patent.
`
`36. The ‘669 Application describes the features identified in the preceding
`
`paragraph. Specifically, the ‘669 Application describes button cells in which the
`
`casing area of the cell cup is, during manufacture, pressed against the casing area
`
`of the cell top with the result that the button cell has a “force-fitting connection
`
`between the housing components comprising the cell cup, the cell top, and the
`
`seal.” Ex. 2032 at PP. 68-70 ¶¶ [0050]-[0052]. The ‘669 Application also
`
`describes that a part of the casing area of the cell cup, and in particular a part of the
`
`casing area proximal to the flat bottom area of the cell cup, can be disposed
`
`radially inward of a second part of the casing area of the cell cup, i.e. a part that
`
`overlaps with the casing area of the cell top. Ex. 2032 at P. 72 ¶ [0062]. The ‘669
`
`Application additionally describes that, as a result of the first part of the casing
`
`area of the cell cup being disposed radially inward of the second part of the casing
`
`area of the cell cup, the sealing characteristics of the force-fitting connection
`
`between the cell cup and the cell top can be improved. Id. at P. 72 ¶ [0063].
`
`17
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 20 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`37. Furthermore, the ‘669 Application illustrates, in FIG. 4—which has
`
`been reproduced below and annotated, a button cell 400 with a cup part 401 having
`
`a casing with a first part proximal to a flat bottom area of the cup part 401 and a
`
`second part that overlaps with a casing area of top part 402, the first part being
`
`disposed radially inward with respect to the second part.
`
`‘669 Application—FIG. 4 (Annotated)
`
`
`
`Accordingly, a POSA would have understood that, at the time the ‘669 Application
`
`was made, the inventors possessed the features identified in paragraph 35 above.
`
`38. Certain substitute claims submitted by VARTA recite the features of
`
`“two metal housing halves, each including a generally round end surface joined to
`
`a lateral surface region, the lateral surface regions of the housing halves at least
`
`18
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 21 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`partially overlapping each other and being separated from one another by an
`
`electrically insulating seal, the lateral surface regions providing a force-fit
`
`connection therebetween to form a leak-tight, button cell housing having a plane
`
`bottom region and a plane top region parallel thereto.” See Substitute Claim 10 of
`
`the ‘858 Patent.
`
`39. The ‘117 Application describes the features identified in the preceding
`
`paragraph. Specifically, the ‘117 Application describes a button cell having “two
`
`metal housing halves separated from one another by an electrically insulating seal
`
`and having a plane bottom region and a plane top region parallel thereto,” and
`
`further describes that the button cell can have “a circular plane bottom region and a
`
`circular plane top region” or “an oval configuration.” Ex. 2035 at P. 44 ¶ [0016],
`
`P. 47 ¶ [0029]. The ‘117 Application further describes that the button cell has a
`
`“force-fit connection between the housing halves.” Id. at P. 49 ¶ [0036].
`
`The ‘117 Application also illustrates, in FIG. 1A (reproduced below) a button cell
`
`100 having metal housing halves (i.e. metal cup part 101 and metal top part 102),
`
`in which lateral surface regions thereof overlap (in overlap region 106) with a seal
`
`103 disposed therebetween such that the two parts are connected together in a
`
`leaktight fashion. Id. at P. 51 ¶ [0047].
`
`19
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 22 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`‘117 Application—FIG. 1A (Annotated)
`
`
`
`A POSA would have understood that the force-fit connection described in the ‘117
`
`Application would refer, for example, to the connection formed between the
`
`overlapping lateral surface regions of the metal cup part 101 and the metal top part
`
`102 in FIG. 1. Furthermore, based on the description provided by the ‘117
`
`Application, i.e. of housing halves in the form of a cup part and a top part with
`
`overlapping lateral surface regions and of a force-fit connection between said
`
`housing halves, and also based on the illustration of the button cell 100 in FIG. 1 of
`
`the ‘117 Application, a POSA would have understood that the inventors possessed
`
`the features described in the preceding paragraph at the time the ‘117 Application
`
`was made.
`
`20
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 23 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`40. Certain substitute claims submitted by VARTA recite the features of
`
`“the first metal conductor and the second metal conductor are respectively shielded
`
`from the lateral end sides of the spiral winding by a first insulating element and a
`
`second insulating element.” See Substitute Claim 10 of the ‘858 Patent.
`
`41. The ‘117 Application describes the features identified in the preceding
`
`paragraph. Specifically, the ‘117 Application describes a button cell that includes
`
`an “insulating means which prevents direct electrical contact between the end sides
`
`of the winding and the conductors, in particular a subsection of the conductor or
`
`conductors which bears flat on the inner side of the housing halves.” Ex. 2035 at
`
`P. 48 ¶ [0033]. The ‘117 Application also illustrates, in FIG. 1B (reproduced
`
`below), a button cell 100 that includes insulating elements 112, 113 in the form of
`
`thin plastic films that shield metal foils 110, 111 from end sides of an electrode
`
`separator assembly winding. Id. at P. 52 ¶ [0048]. Furthermore, in addition to the
`
`insulating elements 112, 113 illustrated in FIG. 1, the ‘117 Application also
`
`illustrates insulating tapes—referred to by reference numerals 207, 208 in FIG. 2
`
`and by reference numerals 305, 306 in FIG. 3B (reproduced below)—that function
`
`as separate insulating elements. Id. at P. 53 ¶¶ [0051]-[0052].
`
`21
`
`VARTA Ex. 2050 Page 24 of 43
`
`

`

`Exhibit No. 2050
`
`
`
`
`
`‘117 Applicat